Recording quality effect on listening pleasure ...


I love jazz but admittedly I have a problem listening to early gems (say 40s through the early 50s) because the performances typically weren't recorded as well as during 50s and 60s. Now, I fully realize there were some terrible recordings during that time but for the most part I feel the quality of the recording improved substantialy in the later years. The disturbing part is that these wonderful performances are going unlistened to (at least for me) because I can't get past the quality of the recording. Is this just me or does anyone else feel the same way?

Many thanks,

JP
jpstereo

Showing 1 response by audiotomb

JP

I side with you on that end

Charlie Parker recordings don't do it for me
too murky - yes there's something going on but I can't feel the emotional end when it's so condensed and buried in poor sonics

Lester Young from the same period sounds much better and I'm more inclined to listen to him. Some of the old early Duke Ellington is moving and can nearly overcome the sonic end - but why not hear a later period piece or live reworking in all it's sonic glory

The period of jazz I most enjoy is late 50's early 60's Miles, Coltrane, Mingus, Bill Evans, Horace Silver, Blue Note etc
the sonics really unlock the performance magic
Rudy Van Gelder was one to really get the right recording studio sound early

Albert's Blue Note 45 series suggestion is dead on

if you like this period might I suggest the following dvd series - jazz icons

dvds from late 50' to early 60's some stellar sound from mostly european venues who taped these for tv
it's like being a fly on the wall
really great stuff

the coltrane and art blakely ones are my faves
and sound surprisingly good