First Pressing-"Kind of Blue"
markfromsf
indicators of a first pressing of "Kind of Blue? I believe the first
three are :1) Cannonball Adderly's (sic) name is mis-spelled on the
cover; 2) All Blues and Flemenco Sketches are reversed on the vinyls'
paper center; 3)There are "typos" in Bill Evans' liner notes; What
I'm fishing for is the number/letter combination on the trailing
groove on side one of the vinyl that positively distiguishes a first
pressing from a second.
PA4 17
darcy walker
pa...@aol.com (PA4 17) wrote:
> 4get all this crap....and just enjoy the music........bb
what a stupid, aol kind of response to a totally legitimate question. i
myself am fascinated with this kind of info, and it is entirely
appropriate to this board. many here are vinyl enthusiasts, myself
included.
so why not keep your gaping cake-hole shut until you have something of
substance to publish for the world to see.
you embarrass me.
Jack Woker
Let me straighten you out on these three "indicators" before I continue.
These are not characteristics of a first pressing, as they were prevalent on
all pressings of KOB well into the 1970's. The titles on side two are listed
on the jacket as (1) Flamenco Sketches and (2) All Blues. They are reversed
on the label. Evans' notes describe them as they are listed on the jacket,
even though we have now come to know that the label gives the correct
playing order. I can only assume that these tunes were not titled until
after Evans had written his notes, and Evans went with what he heard. Other
than this, I can find no typos in his notes.
The quickest way to identify an original is to look at the label (I never
heard it called a paper center before!). The design is the 6-eye format
that Columbia utilized from about 1956 until about 1962. Later pressings
will feature the "360 Sound" label with black lettering (1962-65), or with
white lettering (1965-70), or the label with the word "Columbia" repeated in
a circle all around the label (1970 -1980's).
The numbers in the runoff grooves on my 6-eye stereo copy are XSM47326-1BH
(on side 1) and XSM-47327-1BK (on side 2). The numbers before the hyphen
indicate the master number, the number after the hyphen indicates the
stamper number. In subsequent pressings, the master number will remain the
same, but as stampers wear out and are discarded, new ones will be used, and
so a second pressing would be 2, a third one 3, etc.
I believe any "6-eye" pressing can be considered an original, even if it not
an actual "first pressing".
And by the way, I happen to love and enjoy the music a lot :-).
jack
Abjorn
Isn't it the music that is important - and that should be the same whatever
edition!
Abjorn
"Jack Woker" <ste...@attbi.com> skrev i meddelandet
news:jXIza.250047$pa5.2...@rwcrnsc52.ops.asp.att.net...
Martin S. Milgrim
Martin
markfromsf
and letters as yours but mine are on opposite sides. I was emailed a
piece of information that indicated that 1st pressings have this
number and ONLY this number on the trailing groove....XSM 474327-1A.
Anything not ending in 1A is not a first pressing.
"Jack Woker" <ste...@attbi.com> wrote in message news:<jXIza.250047$pa5.2...@rwcrnsc52.ops.asp.att.net>...
Abjorn
"Martin S. Milgrim" <mmil...@gate.net> skrev i meddelandet news:3ECFCD43...@gate.net...
You miss the point. There are collectors who revel in obtaining first editions. Certainly, this is not new to records, book collectors having been known to pay a substantial premium, for example, Dickens' GREAT EXPECTATIONS, which reads exactly the same be it a first edition or a paperback edition. (Indeed the cheaper paperback may contain scholarly annotations that can ironically enhance the reading experience). I myself have sold quite a few original edition Blue Notes, Prestiges, etc., LPs to dealers who, in turn, resell them to a predominantly Japanese market who pay many multiples over what the CD (which may contain more music, e.g., unreleased tracks or extra takes) costs. When you add the fact that a first edition may have aesthetic value, in terms of a different cover, e.g., the original cover of MILES AHEAD, then it's not so difficult to contemplate a market that places value over and above the music itself.
Martin
Yes, it is a crazy world! The musicians do their best to create a musical moment to remember and keep. Then some people buy it - and some even put in their safe - because of the cover.Indeed a weird world!Abjorn
Ted Lesher
late 1950s. The actual sequence as pressed on side 2 is All Blues followed
by Flamenco Sketches (I believe this sequence is preserved in all subsequent
pressings). The jacket has these backwards, both in the track listing and
in Bill Evans' notes. The label (6-eye) has them in the correct order, but
I have a dim recollection that some labels were also backwards -- can anyone
corroborate that? The runoff grooves (mono version) have XLP 47324-1D and
XLP 47325-1AD stamped on them (side 1 and 2 respectively). The letters TA
are also stamped on the runoff grooves, followed with what appears to be
hand-scribed vertical hash marks, 7 of them on side 1, 2 on side 2.
Ashley Kahn's book Kind Of Blue, page 150, has copies of several Columbia
memo made during production. All Blues and Flamenco Sketches were
originally untitled, identified simply as African and Spanish. Then
Flamenco Sketches got a name but inadvertantly got assigned to the wrong
track. In Oct 1959 Teo Macero wrote a memo correcting the order on the
label, jacket, and jacket notes.
Ted Lesher
"markfromsf" <markf...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:284f6ebd.03052...@posting.google.com...
JAZZCORNER
"Abjorn" <abj...@telia.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:XkQza.11209$dP1....@newsc.telia.net...
MusicMax
news:lGPza.11206$dP1....@newsc.telia.net:
> What's the big fuzz about? First or last edition - does it really
> matter? Isn't it the music that is important - and that should be the
> same whatever edition!
Well, unless you're trying to play along, since every copy of KoB was
offkey until the most recent CD release.
Dan Given
news:jXIza.250047$pa5.2...@rwcrnsc52.ops.asp.att.net...
> The numbers in the runoff grooves on my 6-eye stereo copy are XSM47326-1BH
> (on side 1) and XSM-47327-1BK (on side 2). The numbers before the hyphen
> indicate the master number, the number after the hyphen indicates the
> stamper number. In subsequent pressings, the master number will remain the
> same, but as stampers wear out and are discarded, new ones will be used,
and
> so a second pressing would be 2, a third one 3, etc.
>
> I believe any "6-eye" pressing can be considered an original, even if it
not
> an actual "first pressing".
How does this affect the sound quality - and I'm not just thinking about
Kind of Blue here, but any record? Wouldn't it be best to get an early copy
of any pressing to get the best quality? As the stamper wears out, I assume
the quality of the record goes downhill, until it is replaced with a new
one. I remember reading something about this several years ago with some
record that was a huge hit (probably one of Michael Jackson's 80s records),
about how they were low quality because the company didn't have time to make
a new stamper, and just kept pressing them anyway.
Martin S. Milgrim
Martin
Jack Woker
> > I believe any "6-eye" pressing can be considered an original, even if it
> not
> > an actual "first pressing".
>
> How does this affect the sound quality - and I'm not just thinking about
> Kind of Blue here, but any record? Wouldn't it be best to get an early
copy
> of any pressing to get the best quality? As the stamper wears out, I
assume
> the quality of the record goes downhill, until it is replaced with a new
> one. I remember reading something about this several years ago with some
> record that was a huge hit (probably one of Michael Jackson's 80s
records),
> about how they were low quality because the company didn't have time to
make
> a new stamper, and just kept pressing them anyway.
It was not uncommon towards the end of the LP era for stampers to be used
longer than they should have been, resulting in inferior sounding pressings
made from worn stampers. However, it's impossible to tell by looking
whether the pressing was made at the beginning or the end of a stamper's
life. It is for this reason, at least in part, that audiophiles search for
the earliest pressings possible. It's assumed that the first pressing run
would be relatively small, and if the record became a hit, more pressings
would have been made later to meet the demand, and at least some of them
might be from worn stampers. Also, subsequent stampers made from the
original mother may reflect wear on that mother, whereas the earliest
stampers were cut when the mother was fresh and new.
Many audiophiles insist that the earliest pressings usually have the best
sound. These differences may be minor, but who are we to say that they are
wrong? Of course, sound quality is very subjective. Some claim to hear a
difference where others don't.
And those of you who pooh-pooh the people who have a taste for high end
sound, you probably don't have the equipment on which the difference can be
heard, so what the hell do you really know? All you have in an uninformed
opinion, a relatively cheap commodity around here.
jack
J Bongo Zed
news:lGPza.11206$dP1....@newsc.telia.net
> What's the big fuzz about? First or last edition - does it really matter?
> Isn't it the music that is important - and that should be the same whatever
> edition!
>
> Abjorn
Abjorn
You have to remember that not everyone is into jazz for the music; for
some it is just another fashion accessory. These are the sort of people
that you will hear praise avant-garde "jazz" over Basie, See, when they
go to
chardonnay-and-cheese gatherings at the local Museum for Modern Art, it
is mandatory that they show they are "in" on the cutting-edge. Such
people will, invariably, never actual play their "first-pressing",
because that would wear it out, and one of the most important bragging
points is to be able to say that one's LP is in "mint condition".
Lesser people like you and me might find it strange, but there it is.
Zed
--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG
MusicMax
> What's the big fuzz about? First or last edition - does it really
> matter?
Ummm... regarding this album it does.
> Isn't it the music that is important - and that should be the same
> whatever edition!
Too bad the mastering department at Columbia/Sony took over thirty years
to figure that out.
ric
> Many audiophiles insist that the earliest pressings usually have the best
> sound. These differences may be minor, but who are we to say that they are
> wrong? Of course, sound quality is very subjective. Some claim to hear a
> difference where others don't.
>
> And those of you who pooh-pooh the people who have a taste for high end
> sound, you probably don't have the equipment on which the difference can be
> heard, so what the hell do you really know? All you have in an uninformed
> opinion, a relatively cheap commodity around here.
Companies such as http://www.amusicdirect.com thrive because of a market
for audiophile pressings of LPs and CDs. I used to be on a search for the
"holy grail" with a monthly purchase of a new (better?) tonearm cartridge.
markfromsf
http://servercc.oakton.edu/~larry/miles/main/covers%5Ccolumbia%5Ckindofblue.html
"Ted Lesher" <t...@sonnet.com> wrote in message news:<neQza.10467$nU4....@fe01.atl2.webusenet.com>...
Ted Lesher
Ted Lesher
"markfromsf" <markf...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:284f6ebd.03052...@posting.google.com...
Jeeves2nd
>> sound. These differences may be minor, but who are we to say that they are
>> wrong? Of course, sound quality is very subjective. Some claim to hear a
>> difference where others don't.
>>
With the Columbia Jazz releases of the late 50's and early 60's another reason
for seeking out early pressing is that they were mastered on tubed electronics
which imparts an amazing sense of "you are there" when played back on a really
good stereo. After 1964, remastering was done on transistor equipment which
imparted a harshness to trumpet and the saxes and a "tinniness" to the piano.
For music loving audiophiles the equipment and the pressings are a means to an
ends- that being one of emotional involvement with the music.I've played KOB
for jazz lovers in my darkened music room and found them emotionally overcome,
actually feeling that Miles and the boys had been transported over time and
space to my music room.
Michael Fitzgerald
>With the Columbia Jazz releases of the late 50's and early 60's another reason
>for seeking out early pressing is that they were mastered on tubed electronics
>which imparts an amazing sense of "you are there" when played back on a really
>good stereo. After 1964, remastering was done on transistor equipment which
>imparted a harshness to trumpet and the saxes and a "tinniness" to the piano.
Was anything actually remastered before the big CD boom? I thought
everyone was using the same LP master tapes made for the original
release, so the same mastering survived through decades. Are you
saying that every subsequent pressing had its own remastering?
Mike
fitz...@eclipse.net
http://www.eclipse.net/~fitzgera - Gigi Gryce book - ARSC award finalist!
JC Martin
> What's the big fuzz about? First or last edition - does it really >matter?
Sure. Unless sound quality doesn't matter to you.
-JC
JC Martin
"Abjorn" <abj...@telia.com> wrote in message
Martin
Yes, it is a crazy world! The musicians do their best to create a musical moment to remember and keep. Then some people buy it - and some even put in their safe - because of the cover.Indeed a weird world!
----------------------------Yeah, indeed a weird world that 1st or 2nd pressing would be saved to preserve history. Guess what? Sometimes masters are lost or were never saved in the first place. How about those Hot 5's and 7's?Use you mind for once Ulf me boy. Those obsessive collectors preserve music for your enjoyment. Why not be thankful for such people instead of making them out to be crazies.-JC
Mike C.
"JC Martin" <jcma...@sonic.net> wrote in message news:H16Aa.16805$JX2.1...@typhoon.sonic.net...
darcy walker
amos:
name for me in numerical order, if you will, the elements required for
a music to be called 'jazz'.... beyond the mandatory inclusion of the
tradition of improvisation and the understanding that the playing must
be honest and come from the heart.
lastly, when the first American improvisors began to 'make up' ad-lib
melodies over the changes to existing popular songs, did they have in
mind a set of prerequisites which _must_ be observed in order for the
music to be considered legitimate in your sense of the word?
waiting for your epiphany with an unshakable feeling of impending and
irreversible tragedy...
-x
In article
<97c388bfef7667da1bb...@mygate.mailgate.org>,
Mr Zed
> to preserve history. Guess what? Sometimes masters are lost or were
> never saved in the first place. How about those Hot 5's and 7's?
That only makes a case for things that have not been remastered. By,
the way, whas KIND OF BLUE ever in any danger of disappearing in such
manner? Is it, in 2003?
These guys are like those who collect wine. They keep paying
ever-increasing prices for stuff they do not intend to ever drink, on
the grounds that someone once drank it and it was good. They will
even put such wine on display, under bright light, in a place they
keep very warm in winter and very coool in summer!
Ira Chineson
"Jeeves2nd" <jeev...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20030525104318...@mb-m25.aol.com...
.I've played KOB
> for jazz lovers in my darkened music room and found them emotionally
overcome,
> actually feeling that Miles and the boys had been transported over time
and
> space to my music room.
"Miles and the boys"? It sounds like Symphony Sid has been transported to
your music room.
Jeeves2nd
>your music room.
>
Actually it was Pee Wee Marquette who lives under my listening chair and does
live intros for all my "Live at Birdland" LP's. It imparts a quaint sense of
"you are there" to the albums. Steve
David Weiner
>The numbers in the runoff grooves on my 6-eye stereo copy are XSM47326-1BH
>(on side 1) and XSM-47327-1BK (on side 2). The numbers before the hyphen
>indicate the master number, the number after the hyphen indicates the
>stamper number. In subsequent pressings, the master number will remain the
>same, but as stampers wear out and are discarded, new ones will be used, and
>so a second pressing would be 2, a third one 3, etc.
>
>I believe any "6-eye" pressing can be considered an original, even if it not
>an actual "first pressing".
>
>
A Columbia actual "true" first pressing would have the master numbers
followed by a -1A, meaning the first stamper used, as in XSM-47326-1A.
I think that stamper -1BH on your copy would mean they ran through the
alphabet of stampers A-Z and then added another letter to continue the
run, so 1-BH would mean it was pressed from at least the 34th set of
stampers used on Side 1. A big seller indeed!
Dave W.
