goldkette remasters

goldkette remasters

stu mandel
stu mandel

April 16th, 2012, 11:55 pm #1

hello all -

i noted in an earlier post that "clementine" appears on my "best of bix" list.

i currently own "the art of bix beiderbecke" CD set. all of the bix & tram and bix & his gang cuts appear to have been remastered, and the quality is excellent. however, on "clementine", there is somewhat of a background hiss and an overall "thinner" sound. it's not terribly troubling, but it stands out when contrasted to the other cuts i mentioned.

does anyone know if this reflects something about the way in which the goldkette work was originally recorded ? has anyone found a truly superior remaster of "clementine" ?

thanks as always,

stu mandel
new haven, CT
Quote
Share

Joined: January 1st, 1970, 12:00 am

April 17th, 2012, 11:43 am #2


An excellent CD set is "Bix Restored." Carefully remastered.

http://www.originjazz.com/buy_online1.cfm

See additional information in http://ms.cc.sunysb.edu/~alhaim/recordi ... lation.htm

If you have a good set of computer speakers, I recommend Emrah's transfers to youtube. For Clementine,visit

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2rvokzr0YBo and use 480p.

Albert

 
Quote
Like
Share

stu mandel
stu mandel

April 17th, 2012, 1:29 pm #3

thanks albert.

i had already heard of the quality of the "bix restored" set and will probably go there next.

best, stu
Quote
Share

Emrah Erken
Emrah Erken

April 17th, 2012, 3:06 pm #4

hello all -

i noted in an earlier post that "clementine" appears on my "best of bix" list.

i currently own "the art of bix beiderbecke" CD set. all of the bix & tram and bix & his gang cuts appear to have been remastered, and the quality is excellent. however, on "clementine", there is somewhat of a background hiss and an overall "thinner" sound. it's not terribly troubling, but it stands out when contrasted to the other cuts i mentioned.

does anyone know if this reflects something about the way in which the goldkette work was originally recorded ? has anyone found a truly superior remaster of "clementine" ?

thanks as always,

stu mandel
new haven, CT
Dear Stu,

The reason why the other recordings you like have a superior sound quality is because they were recorded on the OKeh label. The sound of OKeh records recorded after 1926 (electrically recorded) is generally spoken the best you can get from the 1920s. We are very lucky that some of the most important recordings with Bix were waxed on OKeh. We are also very lucky that the Louis Armstrong's Hot Five and Hot Seven records were also waxed on OKeh by the way.

Clementine was recorded on Victor. Victor isn't a bad label but the sound quality is not as good as on the OKeh label. Furthermore, not every cut on a label is as good as the others. There are better sounding Bix records on Victor than Clementine. Proud Of A Baby Like You is such an example. I have both records in superb condition but they don't have the same sound quality...

If you want to become a Bix fan I would suggest to buy the Bix Restored set as Albert told you. There, you'll find also rare alternate takes, which you can't find elsewhere. The sound quality is generally spoken very good. The Gennetts however (the very first recordings of Bix) are not as good as they could be. However, there is a brand new CD with the Gennetts. I don't have it yet but I'm pretty sure that the sound quality is better than on previous releases.

As to my channel... First of all, thank you Albert for the nice compliments... You'll find most of Bix's recordings (issued on phonograph records) there. Nevertheless, you should know that my recordings were compressed by youtube and don't have the sound quality of my original sound files.

BIX LIVES!


Emrah

Quote
Share

stu mandel
stu mandel

April 17th, 2012, 3:47 pm #5

emrah -

thanks for the very informative response. you have confirmed my initial intuition...that the original recording source (victor) for the goldkette stuff was just not up to the same standard as the okeh cuts. i had already observed that for the gennett, as you point out.

let me assure you. i don't "want to become a bix fan". i already am !

regards,

stu
Quote
Share

Glenda Childress
Glenda Childress

April 17th, 2012, 10:59 pm #6

Stu, Emrah's advice is right on. A few years ago I re-discovered Bix and all his music that is now available, but not really knowing much, I bought first the songs I had once known from vinyl reissues. If I had had Emrah's advice and known what I do now, I would have gone straight to the <em>Bix Remastered</em> set.

The full set is comparatively pricey, but if you go through Amazon they are usually available at lower pricss through third sellers. But whatever you do, it pays to get them all, with all alternate takes that you may not get from any other source and very good notes and discography (although there will always be discussions <em>vis a vis</em> same) along with the CDs.

I agree with you on the acoustic recordings. They seem harsh and/or muffled (Bix is reported to have said they sounded like the band was playing under a rug), but some are better than others, ("Fidgety Feet" has good sound; "Tiger Rag" not so much) so listen to a few at a time and let them soak in, as they are well worth that attention.

You are in for a lot of joy!

BIX LIVES!
Quote
Share

stu mandel
stu mandel

April 18th, 2012, 12:48 am #7

thanks again, glenda.

actually, i went back and looked at my original message in the string, and i realized that i had mischaracterized the sound of the clementine cut. your description..."muffled"...is way better, and bix's "playing under a rug" is spot-on and made me smile.

as does all of his music.

best, stu
Quote
Share

Glenda Childress
Glenda Childress

April 18th, 2012, 12:36 pm #8

Stu, I didn't intend the descriptors "harsh" and "muffled (under a rug)" to apply to the Goldkette electronic recordings in 1927. They are models of clarity compared to the Richmond, Indiana, Gennetts recorded acoustically, to which Bix allegedly referred.

The two takes of "Clementine" were done in Liederkranz Hall in New York, generally considered a very good venue for recording, used by Columbia and Victor and by the NY Philharmonic for sessions. We might speculate that some sound problems might have occurred from using one microphone to record a medium-sized group in such a large space, but still there is a great difference in fidelity over the Wolverine recordings. If Bix is too far back on the Goldkettes, we can blame it on the recording director, who was probably shooting for "blend" over spotlighting soloists, a pity since the recording also features Steve Brown, Eddie Lang, Joe Venuti, and Tram, all worthy of featured attention.

On some songs I often wish that Bix had been placed closer to the mike instead of way back in his section. (It seems to me that Louis Armstrong apparently made certain that he was always front and center of the mike in his recordings; that's the thing about Louis: you're sure to know it's all about him.) In the Gang recordings, where Bix is closer, the microphone seems to have picked up more of that complex tone.

Still, Bix's sound shines through.
Quote
Share

stu mandel
stu mandel

April 18th, 2012, 1:28 pm #9

i understand your comments, glenda.

clearly, the victor/goldkettes are far superior to the gennett/wolverines, i agree.

however, the okeh tram and gang cuts are much better than everything else.

thanks, stu
Quote
Share

Laura Demilio
Laura Demilio

April 18th, 2012, 2:50 pm #10

What's wonderful about "I'm coming, Virginia," is that the listener knows just when Bix steps closer to the mike during his solo -- it lends a sense of immediacy, of "being there" in that studio.

And "Blue River" -- the Okeh one with Segar Ellis' tepid singing (who else rhymes "canoe" with "adieu"? It's hilarious)--well, that is marvelous Bix -- there's something so hot and brash and sexy as well as melancholy about his cornet, whether as muted backup or leading or solo.

Laura
Quote
Share