Rudy van Gelder - Jazz albums from 60s compared to the 70s - What went wrong?

[I.R.Baboon]

As a big jazz fan, I constantly baffled by the difference in sound of many jazz albums from 60's compared with the 70's.

Rudy van Gelder is a good case in point. Compare, for instance:

Larry Young's "Unity" or Wayne Shorter's "Speak No Evil" (both from the 60's)

to

Freddie Hubbards "Skydive" or Hubert Laws' "In The Beginning" from the 70's

The two 60's albums sound amazing, while the two 70's albums sound horrible (over-compressed, thin, distant)

But both engineered by RVG! What the hell went wrong? Did the gear change significantly in the 70's? Or was CTI's budgets so low that this was the best RVG could come up with?

Any insight into this baffling questions would be welcome!

[doorknocker]

Are you talking about the original vinyl releases or the various CD reissues?

[I.R.Baboon]

Both!

[doorknocker]

I think a lot has to do with the music itself. A lot of the CTI stuff was maybe too overtly 'smooth' and 'commercial' despite the presence of incredible players. There's no doubt that Van Gelder was a genius at capturing acoustic instruments but maybe (and this is a total guess because my knowledge of CTI records is limited) he wasn't that interested in electric instruments and maybe there was more emphasis on overdubs? Also take in account the general changes towards drier sounds and more isolation that happened from the early 70ies on (.....and maybe also the increase in cocaine use, )
But judging from the few CTI records that I know, I agree about the over-compression.

But since we surely agree about the early to mid 60ies Blue Note recordings being the golden age of RVG it's also interesting to see what happened earlier. The Prestige records that were also done by RVG generally are sonically vastly inferior to the Blue Note stuff.

I read a quote somewhere that said 'The difference between a Blue Note and a Prestige session is 2 days of rehearsals' and this theory is surely supported when listening to say Coltrane's work on Prestige and then comparing it to 'Blue Train'. All these sessions were done live to tape so the difference wasn't the equipment but the time spent on getting the sound right and rehearsing the tunes. Given how incredible fast these records were done I guess that half a day of setup time could make a huge difference, even with somebody as great as RVG behind the board. But obviously these records are still great because of the incredible musicianship.

The CD reissues are a whole other matter, the early reissues were horrible and shoddily done .......there was a thread about the more recent RVG Blue Note Re-Masters that were issued a few years ago, please do a search. I agree that a few of these are overly bright sounding but then again I have 'Speak No Evil' and 'Empyrian Isles' from the 'RVG Edition' series and I think that these sound incredible. Naturally it helps that these are also some of the best jazz records ever IMO, which brings me back to the original point.......

[allphourus]

Years ago I read an article on Rudy somewhere,can't remember where or most of the details. He's definitely one of my hero's.I love the sound of his early recordings.I love the music of that era needless to say or I wouldn't know him from jack.The information in that article relevant here was the early recordings were done in his parents living room I think, The later ones in a studio he designed and built to sound like the original environment but it did not.That living Room with a large stone Fireplace on one wall had a certain acoustic ambiance that was never later duplicated.Technical Advances took their toll too I would imagine.It's that "if we did this good on this just think how much better it will be when we get that" kind of thinking.I think the same thing/thinking/chain of events befuddled Sam Phillips.

I don't think the magic happened behind the board, I think it was the music,the room,then Mic placement in that order.

[Bob Olhsson]

The musicians started demanding the ability to go back and punch in their mistakes. This required acoustic separation between instruments and the use of headphones by the musicians. This completely screwed up the dynamic balance of the music but everybody was thrilled that they could go back and fix bad notes.

Most recordings made before the late '60s were done live to mono or stereo tape with no headphones and fewer than 12 microphones with 6 to 8 being typical. Studios were designed to blend sounds together and musicians were placed really close to each other so any bleed would be clean and usable as part of the overall "sound."

Was it worth losing the magical sound of an ensemble playing to an acoustic balance? I think it's a question that's long overdue for reexamination.

[themaidsroom]

Originally Posted by Bob Olhsson

TWas it worth losing the magical sound of an ensemble playing to an acoustic balance? I think it's a question that's long overdue for reexamination.

i had never been to "the stone" performance space in the lower east side of
manhattan. i went last night. it is a simple elegant room that is the creation
of nyc composer john zorn. there is no bar. 100% of the door goes to the
musicians. benefits and cd sales pay its rent. it is not for profit.

it was inspiring to me.

magic is the only thing that lasts
the rest is landfill

magic is so palpable when present, yet
impossible to map or navigate

only discipline,
values , standards, and the courage
to be ambitious in an abstract sense.....

"a dream that is not for sale"


be well


- jack

[I.R.Baboon]

Thanks for the interesting responses.

Doorknocker, i think you're right about RVG not "feeling" the funkier, more electric jazz of the 70's.

I also think that CTI had some crappy arrangers - witness the change in George Benson's music after he left CTI, both in terms of arrangement and sound quality.

Bob O, very interesting post! It's all makes sense. What you said about the headphones / seperation thing especially! That's right, those 70's CTI recordings sound really un-natural.

Ok Bob (or anyone else with knowledge of 60's techniques), I'm going to try and tie you down to some specifics. Could you go into as much detail as you have time for to talk about the mic placements that you suspect were used in the RVG 60's recordings - techniques - gear (although we're all agreeing it wasn't first and foremost a gear thing).

Thanks in advance!

[Jerry Tubb]

Originally Posted by doorknocker

I think a lot has to do with the music itself. A lot of the CTI stuff was maybe too overtly 'smooth' and 'commercial' despite the presence of incredible players.

I still really dig all the CTI records, and I bought the vinyl LP's back when they were new in the early '70s. I also had a fair number of them on 8-track cartridge which are long gone, but the vinyl remains.

Glossy covers, great players, concept records, a somewhat successful attempt to bring jazz to a wider audience at the time.

Perhaps the CD remasters suffered from harsh early digital conversion, haven't heard any of those, find the LPs if you can.

...and yes RVG was a genius.

JT

[soundbarnfool]

Originally Posted by Bob Olhsson

The musicians started demanding the ability to go back and punch in their mistakes. This required acoustic separation between instruments and the use of headphones by the musicians. This completely screwed up the dynamic balance of the music but everybody was thrilled that they could go back and fix bad notes.

Most recordings made before the late '60s were done live to mono or stereo tape with no headphones and fewer than 12 microphones with 6 to 8 being typical. Studios were designed to blend sounds together and musicians were placed really close to each other so any bleed would be clean and usable as part of the overall "sound."

Was it worth losing the magical sound of an ensemble playing to an acoustic balance? I think it's a question that's long overdue for reexamination.

Indeed! Back in the early 90's I spoke briefly to RVG to see if he'd be interested in recording my folky-bluesy trio (having just been signed to Polydor in NYC) live to 2 track. He wasn't at all interested. We ended up recording at Sear Sound - no mixdown, no overdubs direct to stereo. It's a good way to go! Of course the record didn't sell too well... this was at the time when CDs started replacing vinyl big time. The beginning of the end? Well, I hope not... Too much technology being used for it's own sake these days.

[balanceman]

Is he still alive? I think so. He should come over and do a Q&A

[acorneau]

Originally Posted by I.R.Baboon

Ok Bob (or anyone else with knowledge of 60's techniques), I'm going to try and tie you down to some specifics. Could you go into as much detail as you have time for to talk about the mic placements that you suspect were used in the RVG 60's recordings - techniques - gear (although we're all agreeing it wasn't first and foremost a gear thing).

As far as I've heard/read, RVG was EXTREMELY secretive about his gear and techniques. I remember things such as mixer/EQ panels painted over so you can't read any settings, and people being forced to leave the room while he set up mic's.

Anyone else?

[Bob Olhsson]

Tom Dowd had his panels painted over at Atlantic but I've never heard of Rudy doing that.

My understanding is that Rudy's mystique was largely created by the musicians. Most of them earned their living as session musicians. They really enjoyed taking an afternoon off, going over to Rudy's house in New Jersey, kicking back and blowing a jazz date. There was a lot of pressure on them to fit jazz dates around their schedule of advertising sessions in Manhattan.

Rudy's secret sound made a great excuse for turning down gigs that would have needed to have been done under the pressure of both the musicians union and their advertising clients breathing down their necks in Manhattan.

[acorneau]

Originally Posted by Bob Olhsson

Tom Dowd had his panels painted over at Atlantic but I've never heard of Rudy doing that.

Oops, I guess I got my legends mixed up.

[Mike O]

Originally Posted by Jerry Tubb

I still really dig all the CTI records, and I bought the vinyl LP's back when they were new in the early '70s. I also had a fair number of them on 8-track cartridge which are long gone, but the vinyl remains.

Glossy covers, great players, concept records, a somewhat successful attempt to bring jazz to a wider audience at the time.

Perhaps the CD remasters suffered from harsh early digital conversion, haven't heard any of those, find the LPs if you can.

...and yes RVG was a genius.

JT

I have two copies of Milt Jackson's "Sunflowers" on vinyl. Jackson, Hancock, Hubbard, Cobham (back when he played jazz). Wonderful - some overdubs, but MUCH wonderful interaction. Maybe a little heavy on the Sebesky strings at times, but suits a particular mood.

Bought the CD recently for convenience and it sounds just HORRIBLE. I really do think that whoever did it (not in front of me) was contracted to convert a catalog and just put it on and hit play. A great example of the difference mastering can make. Or maybe even re-mixed? No attempt to adjust for the digital medium. Even though the origninal was somewhat compressed, the CD job just destroys the music that was there. No bottom, NO dynamics.......

I probably am going to have to go with maidsroom and buy a turntable just to enjoy some of the old stuff that gets very poor treatment. Probably because it never sold that great to start with (in relation to pop).