advertisement


Verve Acoustic Sounds Series Reissues

Seanm said:
My only problems with the AS stuff has been split seams. I think. Might have had a stitching issue with one - would need to check back on this thread, I’ll definitely have moaned about it.

I’ll resist the Alice as the ‘90s reissue I have is very good. Unless someone with that version (@Elephantears?) gets the AS and reports that it’s much better.
Click to expand...

90s Satchidananda vs AS. The big difference is that Ryan Smith has equalised the volume on 'Isis and Osiris'. On the 90s pressing and the digital versions available, the live track is quieter. (The studio tracks are all more compressed and I once played this album to a mastering engineer friend to ask him about this. He was very particular about which compressors he believed they must have used; good ones, essentially.) On an initial comparison, it seems like the AS version is giving you loads more acoustic space and liveness, but a lot of that effect is simply because it's louder. At the same time, I do think it's also an improvement.

I think generally Side 2 is better on the AS: Something about John Coltrane sounds delightful. With the first side, I think it's less clearcut. I think anyone with the 90s pressing who feels they are missing out could tweak their VTA very slightly tail up and get the sound to be pretty much the same as the AS pressing. It's just slightly tipped in comparison, which means you get more of the bells, and very slightly less of Cecil McBee. On my first listening I remembered a speaker comparison from some years ago that involved a pair of B&W stand-mounts. Where was the treble peak, I wondered? Ah yes, 10Khz, I discovered when I got home. Now I listened to Satchidananda on that comparison, so I know what the 10Khz peak sounds like. I don't think the AS pressing has anything that obvious, but it is just slightly brighter than the 90s. In other words, I think overall the differences are more quantitative than qualitative. But I also think Isis and Osiris might be an exception to that. I'll update if I have further impressions.
 
Cheers @Elephantears, I’ve already succumbed as it happens, since I was in Honest Jons at the weekend. My initial impressions match your own.

Mine has a minor ripple warp. Cover photo’s really nice - better than the ‘90s reissue. The grid effect on the inside cover photos is pretty poor: such a basic, easily avoided error.
 
I have played my vinyl copy of the Wynton Kelly Trio with Wes Montgomery- Smoking at the Half Note now and I’m glad to have it as I don’t have much Was Montgomery on vinyl as this is one of his best. Sound quality is fine and a flat and quiet pressing, the Ryan Smith mastering lacks sparkle and ‘air’ of the best Kevin Gray masters although that may down to the original recording or tape age.

Why O’ why can’t ORP press a right size and clean centre hole? Although the positioning was correct was yet another one I had to carefully ream out before it would fit my turntable spindle that is the standard 7.25mm size. Hole was also full of loose swarth again.
 
I find I need to nudge about 50% of centre holes. I guess the TD-124 must be at the wider end of tolerance as records in my collection that played fine on my old Linn, Spacedeck, 301 etc need a little tweak. I use the tapered conical handle of the white plastic stylus brush that I think comes with Denon DL-103s as it doesn’t leave even the slightest visual hint anything has been tampered with (routing with anything sharp that leaves evidence on the label will drop a grade or two).
 
7.25 mm has no rational equivalence in inches. I would be very surprised if QRP was metric so they perhaps punch to 9/32, which will be around 2% small. I'm surprised that the standard is really a metric measurement anyway while I think about it, it probably should be 9/32s for RIAA. 7.25 mm is slightly too large for a spindle!
 
I've been wondering about spindle hole size recently too (I know... I need to get out more). I don't recall ever having to enlarge a hole but some records are quite a snug fit on my Lenco. More so than the more modern direct drives I previously used.

I also never have this problem with records from the 1950s/60s or with 78s. In fact 78s and early LPs often have a little bit of play where the whole is very slightly larger then the spindle. Have spindle holes got smaller over the decades?

Some interesting discussion on correct spindle hole sizing and the origins of the standard here: https://www.lathetrolls.com/viewtopic.php?t=1343
 
Paul,
That was my source for the info as well:

Supposed to be as set by the RIAA in 1961. 0.286 = 7.2644 mm by my calculation. So my turntable 7.25 mm is in theory slightly under, but doubt I could measure to 0.001”. I can only recall perhaps a couple of pressings over the years other than these QRP ones that have given me this problem. Those seem mainly down to the swarth around the hole from the poor cutout. Clearly not using the RTI accuracy method that was in the video of their plant that I posted a while back.

R. I. A. A. DIMENSIONAL CHARACTERISTICS
33 1/3 RPM PHONOGRAPH RECORDS FOR HOME USE
7" Records 10" Records 12" Records
Outside Diameter 6 7/8" + 1/32" 9 7/8" + 1/32" 11 7/8" + 1/32"
Thickness
a. Flush Design .075" + .010" -.015" .075" + .010" .075 + .010"
b. Contour Design
(See drawings) Fig. 2; Fig. 3 Figure 1 Figure 1
Center Hole Diameter (Same as 10") 0.286" + 0.001" -0.002" (Same as 10")
This is a short version of the standard as published in 1961
Well lets be realistic Indeed a 9/32" drill bit would cut a hole around that size indeed, as they do wonder while drilling
Record labels are either kiss and cut or drilled to that size 9/32" which is some 5 odd thou smaller in diameter so they hang on to the pins on the dies when you press records
In so far as standard metric sizes are concerned
7.20 mm is .2835"
7.30 mm is .2874"

I have tried to find the German DIN metric standard, but so far I have only found the dimensions, not the hole standard. I sure there must be one.
 
Ryan Smith's done great job again on the Stan Getz :) There would seem to be a change to the schedule here...
 
A first spin of Jazz Samba , it’s a little noisy on A2 at one point but only a moment and not enough to bother perhaps mike overload or tape ?

I did have to ream out the spindle hole which it seems I have to with every one of these , but not any of the Blue Notes nor OJCs , the record is flattish just a slight warp nothing to bother about and apart from the 1 point noted seems flawless , it has a lot more going for it than when I streamed .. all of this music is new to me so nothing else to compare to.. definitely a keeper …the Jacket is glossy and good although I find the same photo repeated 3 times progressively getting fainter in the gatefold rather odd but perhaps that’s original artwork ?

overall another great album cheers Verve, Chad, AS and QRP :D
 
Swann36 said:
A first spin of Jazz Samba , it’s a little noisy on A2 at one point but only a moment and not enough to bother perhaps mike overload or tape ?

I did have to ream out the spindle hole which it seems I have to with every one of these , but not any of the Blue Notes nor OJCs , the record is flattish just a slight warp nothing to bother about and apart from the 1 point noted seems flawless , it has a lot more going for it than when I streamed .. all of this music is new to me so nothing else to compare to.. definitely a keeper …the Jacket is glossy and good although I find the same photo repeated 3 times progressively getting fainter in the gatefold rather odd but perhaps that’s original artwork ?

overall another great album cheers Verve, Chad, AS and QRP :D
Click to expand...

A beautiful warm sound on this one...
 
I’m passing this one as I’ve got a pretty decent US mono original. Ideally I’d prefer stereo, but I think I’d only swap it for a similar US original. It is certainly a good sounding record.
 
Just flung the mono on out of curiosity as I’ve not played it for ages. It’s great! A surprising amount of bite and presence, far more ‘up’ than I remember this record. Very mid-centric in that classic Van Gelder way, even though it isn’t one of his cuts. I’m prepared to bet Acoustic Sounds will have made more warm, creamy and lush. I’ve got their Getz Gilberto and I really like it, but I’ve never had the chance to compare it to an original.
 
Tony L said:
Just flung the mono on out of curiosity as I’ve not played it for ages. It’s great! A surprising amount of bite and presence, far more ‘up’ than I remember this record. Very mid-centric in that classic Van Gelder way, even though it isn’t one of his cuts. I’m prepared to bet Acoustic Sounds will have made more warm, creamy and lush. I’ve got their Getz Gilberto and I really like it, but I’ve never had the chance to compare it to an original.
Click to expand...

These Ryan Smith masters are a bit different from the usual Acoustic Sounds fare, more similar to Kevin Gray rather than Grundman I think...
 
gavreid said:
These Ryan Smith masters are a bit different from the usual Acoustic Sounds fare, more similar to Kevin Gray rather than Grundman I think...
Click to expand...

His Pharoah Sanders Karma is just staggeringly good IMO, that’s right up there with the best sounding jazz I have. That may well be my favourite of this era of audiophile reissues, it sounds huge and powerful, nothing overly polite about it. If the Jazz Samba is that good it should be something very special.
 
Just about to return my 2nd Jazz Samba, both dished. I don`t know whether to order from somewhere else, i will leave amazon alone on this one.
 
wezzywest said:
Just about to return my 2nd Jazz Samba, both dished. I don`t know whether to order from somewhere else, i will leave amazon alone on this one.
Click to expand...

I've not had a genuinely flat 180 g pressing from anywhere for a while now, other than the Optimal Classic Series funnily enough. The plants seeming to be slipping up on QC with the volume these days. Perhaps they're being pushed through pressing/cooling more quickly?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top