Recent reviews

Mendelssohn inspired by Bach - Karl-Andreas Kolly

Strauss: Salome - Gardner

Strauss 200 - Capella Musica Dresden

Mozart: Symphonies 34-36 - Collins

Review by Mark Werlin - February 9, 2019

NOTE: The text of this review has been edited to include information provided by the mastering engineer.

Miles Smiles, the second studio album by the quintet of Miles Davis, Wayne Shorter, Herbie Hancock, Ron Carter and Tony Williams, has been issued by Mobile Fidelity Sound Lab on SACD, with mastering by Rob Loverde assisted by Shawn R. Britton.

The liner notes on the inside of the SACD cover contain this short statement: "Remixed from the Original 4-Track Tapes by Mark Wilder, Sony Music Studios, NYC"

What kind of master was created in the remix, and when was it done? A phone call from Mobile Fidelity's Rob LoVerde answered my questions about the provenance of the source.

Miles Smiles was remixed by Mark Wilder in 1998 from original four-track session tapes. Wilder created a new analogue stereo master tape directly in the analogue domain. Wilder did the same process with Kind of Blue; a remix from the three-track session tapes to a new stereo analogue master tape. Mobile Fidelity's Rob LoVerde and Shawn R. Britton transferred those recreated stereo analogue masters to SACD for the current set of releases, except where original master tapes were available. MoFi clearly segregates ESP and My Funny Valentine, for which original master tapes either could not be located or were deemed unusable, from the rest of the series by designating them "Mobile Fidelity Sound Lab" rather than "Original Master Recording".

This review differs from my other reviews of MoFi SACDs. Normally, I don't place much emphasis on comparisons between the various reissues, but comments by site users about the difference in sound quality between the Japanese SACD and the MoFi SACD of Miles Smiles aroused my curiosity. An offer from a site member to send me a copy of SME-SRGS4538 provided the opportunity for comparing the JSACD, the MoFi SACD, and a clean 2-eye Columbia LP pressing.

Based on listening to the SACDs and LP through loudspeakers and through planar headphones with a dedicated headphone amp, I can say that the JSACD sounds similar to the LP, but with a curious emphasis in the middle-high frequencies, the effect of which could be described as lively and bright if you like the way it sounds, or harsh and exaggerated if you don't. The MoFi SACD sounds noticeably different from the Columbia LP and the JSACD. Davis' trumpet and Shorter's saxophone sound less "forward" especially compared to the JSACD. But the piano, bass and drums on the MoFi release sound more detailed, and except for some peaks in Tony Williams' loudest drum passages, much less distorted. That shouldn't be surprising, since the MoFi SACD was sourced (as Rob LoVerde confirmed) from an analogue master remixed from the original four-channel session tapes.

Something that Mark Wilder posted to Audio Asylum in 2003 was reflected in Rob LoVerde's remarks:

"…our general rule for mastering Redbook or SACD is to use the best available source, period. The tapes are in excellent shape, kept in climate controlled vaults. Tape condition is very rarely an issue."

The MoFi SACD was intended to represent the sound of the instruments as they were originally recorded as accurately and transparently as possible. "We try to be a clearer pane of glass, we want the original master tape to speak for itself," LoVerde explained. Whether they are working with Mark Wilder's newer analogue masters, or the masters created at the time of the original recording dates, Mobile Fidelity strives to provide the best experience for the listener.

Mark Wilder's contribution to the MoFi projects shouldn't be overlooked. Wilder has over two decades of experience working with the extant master tapes and the original studio work tapes of the Columbia Miles Davis recordings. In Paul Tingen's interview with Wilder about The Complete Jack Johnson set:

https://www.mixonline.com/recording/miles-davis-365364

Wilder cited the outboard devices he used to recreate the sound of Teo Macero's original stereo mixes, and described his own approach to remixing session multichannel tapes. Since the original stereo master of Miles Davis: A Tribute to Jack Johnson was in excellent condition, Wilder didn't have to remix it for the CD box set, and MoFi was able to issue it on SACD—with outstanding results. That was apparently not the case with Miles Smiles, and the interview provides a glimpse into Wilder's methods.

Wilder has acknowledged that it is not possible to reproduce the original mixes of Miles Davis' albums exactly, certainly not Bitches Brew, which had a myriad of tape edits and post-production signal processing. My impression, both from the Paul Tingen interview and from listening to Wilder's work, is that he exercises his best judgment and technical ability to convey the nuances and impact of the original performance. He's not remixing to draw attention to himself or to make our audio systems sound impressive, but to focus attention on the music.

THE SESSION

The October 1966 recordings that appear on Miles Smiles are extensively documented in Keith Waters' book "The Studio Recordings of the Miles Davis Quintet, 1965-68" (New York: Oxford University Press, 2011). Waters sets the sessions in the context of Miles' absence from the jazz scene, and his sidemen's growing reputations, during the interim between the January 1965 ESP sessions and the October 1966 Miles Smiles dates.

During that year and a half, Davis was sidelined by serious illness. He'd recovered sufficiently from hip surgery to perform the December 1965 Plugged Nickel engagement, but then succumbed to a liver ailment related to sickle-cell anemia and alcohol abuse. During that same 15-month period, Hancock and Shorter recorded sessions of their compositions for Blue Note Records that established them as eminent composer-soloists and maturing bandleaders.

When the Quintet regrouped at Columbia's 30th Street studios with producer Teo Macero, Davis selected three Wayne Shorter compositions: "Orbits", "Dolores" and "Footprints", Jimmy Heath's "Gingerbread Boy" and Eddie Harris' "Freedom Jazz Dance", and one tune, "Circle", credited to Davis.

Six years after Ornette Coleman had demonstrated the viability of allowing the soloists to improvise over shifting tonal centers rather than the conventional structures of a 32-bar song or a 12-bar blues chord progression, Miles, who had repudiated Coleman's approach, had come to a point in his own musical development when he was willing to attempt something similar.

"Orbits" opens with a brief head statement and launches straight into the harmonic stratosphere, ungrounded from the strictures of a chord progression. Responsibility for keeping the band tethered falls to Ron Carter, who supports the soloists with close listening and impeccable time. Miles is thoroughly prepared to play over the shifting bass lines — he's a master of melodic invention — and abetted by Tony Williams' aggressive fills, he plays with fierce spontaneity. Shorter, at the beginning of his own solo, is almost hesitant by comparison. Hancock, both in this piece and in "Dolores" and "Gingerbread Boy", plays only with his right hand, which prevents him from harmonizing his single-note lines. It was another daring choice, but necessary to Miles' project of reducing the role of the piano and deemphasizing chord progressions, a goal he would achieve in the performances by his electric bands only a few years later.

Keith Waters notes that Miles either intentionally or inadvertently loses his place soloing on Shorter's unusual 38-bar form in "Dolores". When Miles realizes that he's played past the end of the form, he abruptly pulls the horn from his lips and turns away from the microphone. Shorter is forced to enter somewhere in the middle of the form, which could have led to an abandoned take. But Tony Williams drops down into quieter fills and straighter time, and he and Carter lead Shorter back into the form so that he can solo over his own changes.

While the Wayne Shorter composition "Footprints" has attained jazz standard status, "Circle" takes its place alongside "Blue in Green" as works credited to Miles Davis' authorship that can't be detached from the pianist at the date. Bill Evans didn't receive publication credit or royalties as the co-composer of "Blue in Green" during his lifetime; the most generous interpretation is that Miles was unwilling to fund Evans' heroin addiction. It's debatable if the exquisite "Circle" could have been composed without the presence of Herbie Hancock in the Quintet. Since Miles didn't use any Hancock compositions on the album, "Circle" will have to suffice as an indication of his conflict with the role of the piano, the tension that was pulling him both towards and away from dense, keyboard-based harmonies.

It was a very encouraging to hear directly from Rob LoVerde, who was more than willing to clarify the provenance of the tape used in creating the Miles Smiles SACD. This review has been edited to incorporate the information he shared in our conversation.

TAPE SOURCE

Stereo analogue master tape. 1998 remix by Mark Wilder from the original 1966 four-track session tapes, in the analogue domain, to two-channel tape.

Copyright © 2019 Mark Werlin and HRAudio.net

Performance:

Sonics:

Comments (13)

Comment by Downunderman - January 15, 2019 (1 of 13)

Another typically excellent OMR SACD mastering by Rob Loverde, with Shawn Britton assisting.

You just can't go wrong with this run of Miles Davis MoFi releases. Long may it continue.

Comment by Longjohns and Wifebeaters - February 14, 2019 (2 of 13)

This is curious. It's the first one in the MoFi Miles series that's not an improvement over what was already there. Did something happen to the tapes in the meantime? Compared to Miles Davis: Miles Smiles (I have the SRGS-4538), everything sounds foggy/veiled, quite imprecise, softer, and less defined, altogether quite a lot less real and life-like and really a lot less vivid. Now that's as far as the impression of the acoustic space is concerned, too, but it especially applies to the individual instruments, in particular the bass and the drums. (It doesn't damage the impression as much if Miles's trumpet is a little less shrill, for this vintage.) Nothing shimmers, nothing cuts through, nothing jumps out of the mix, the drum skins sound mushy, the bass notes are less well delineated and lack center, the sounds don't ring in the recoding room the same way (the acoustics sound more stuffy and "airless"), the dynamics feel muffled, and the kind of physical impact that can so excite in the previous SACD conversion (especially with Shorter and Williams) is lacking. The bass also sounds like it doesn't go as deep (this is just the resulting subjective impression, not of course anything corresponding to measurable reality). I don't recognize anything of MoFi's sales talk that "this analog version also puts a premium on tonality and preservation of individual notes, which arc and decay with uncanny realism". I hear clearly more of all that, whatever it actually refers to, in the older SACD version (tonality, Individual notes, realism).

I love what they (MoFi) have done to all the other Miles efforts I have heard (I have all the 2nd-quartet and later recordings) -- to me they all are a clear improvement both for the analytically minded and from the sheer enjoyment perspective, at the same time more clear and more natural-sounding, which indeed is quite a feat -- but this one is different. This time that typical freshness is lacking, with the older SACD release representing clearly the more successful result. If there was an issue with the source material, why risk MoFi's good name? Maybe people just kept impatiently asking for this for so long (I know I did, in my mind). Or what is it?

(The listening equipment consists of big-dog dCS & Musikelectronic Geithain gear with appropriate paraphernalia, so it's not that.)

Comment by Downunderman - February 15, 2019 (3 of 13)

Howdy L&W,

Most interesting as you say. I too run a DCS Spinner + outboard clock, but have not heard the other SACD versions of the title. I do agree though that the MoFi does not have quite the sparkle of some of the other Miles MoFi efforts. I put that down to the quality of the tape that MoFi were given to use. I'm agnostic on the flat transfer thing myself, but MoFi makes a thing of it.

The disc you refer to (SRGS-4538) was issued out of Japan in 2000 on SME Records. It is a single layer disc. - Unfortunately it is not logged here on HR Audio. There is also the earlier 1998 Columbia SACD. It would be interesting to know if these two discs used the same remaster.

I'm also supposing the SRGS disc has that signature clean Japanese sound?

One things for sure and that is that the tapes MoFi used are going to be almost 20 years older.

Hopefully Mark's foreshadowed review will be able to compare all three discs.

Nb. My disc is #1,000...….which may, or may not be relevant :)

Comment by SteelyTom - February 15, 2019 (4 of 13)

My understanding is that ESP and Miles Smiles both feature less-than-ideal engineering, so MoFi perhaps is at a disadvantage with those titles. Based on Mark Wilder's excellent track record, I'm sure he did the best he could in remixing Smiles (his remix is featured on MoFi's reissue).

Comment by Longjohns and Wifebeaters - February 15, 2019 (5 of 13)

I don't know about the possible similarity between the US SACD and the Japanese SRGS 4538 that I have; often they (the early JPN and US/Euro releases) were the same, but here the only indication I can decipher is: "SACD produced by Moto Uehara (SMEJ)" with special thanks to some SME New York luminaries.

The early Japanese Sony SACDs are often on the bright, even a bit sharp side, to my ears, although typically very vivid and immediate, a bit in-your-face, compared to later re-workings of the same tapes, as for instance by MoFi. In Sony's classical SACDs this might be attributable to the fact that many, if not all, of them (the early ones, that is) were based on a digital copy of the master tapes, no the tapes themselves. I don't know if the same is true about their releases in other genres. But here the difference really is so audible (OK, I don't want to exaggerate, but it's tangible enough for me not to want to sit through the MoFi "Smiles" again) that I think it must be a matter of tape deterioration or some such thing. But that would be very odd; how could anyone let them go bad in the storage?? The question here is about humanity's treasured cultural heritage…

I love all the other MoFi Miles releases, even when recognizing the inferior quality of the original recording in the ESP (which Steely Tom correctly points out; but the MoFi was still an improvement over the previous remasterings). This one, however, is originally in a different class compared to it, nothing like the somewhat muffled and vague ESP sonics here, and it should not really sound like that, then.

So I'd be keen to hear what's up with this, if anyone pops by here who's in the know.

Comment by Mark Werlin - February 16, 2019 (6 of 13)

L&W, Downunderman and Steely Tom: Lacking a copy of the JSACD (SRGS 4538), I can't compare the audio quality to the MoFi SACD, but I'll take L&W's word for the sonic differences between them -- the dCs player is much more revealing than my Marantz.

I have no further information about why MoFi (presumably) used Mark Wilder's 192/24 transfer of his new remix of Miles Smiles, rather than the original stereo master tape. The 1966 stereo tape might have been lost or determined to be in seriously deteriorated condition. Since MoFi chose to source their SACD of Bitches Brew from the original stereo tape rather than Wilder's remix, I think it's safe to assume that the original master of Miles Smiles was unavailable or unusable.

There is another SACD of Miles Smiles that hasn't been mentioned yet in this thread, one of the discs in the Miles Davis: Great 5 set. What source did Esoteric use? The same as SRGS 4538? or the Wilder 192/24, or some other transfer?

The MoFi SACD of Miles Smiles doesn't sound as open and transparent as Miles Davis: Nefertiti, though both were recorded at Columbia's 30th Street studio. Miles Smiles was engineered by Frank Laico; Nefertiti was engineered by Fred Plaut and Stan Tonkel just weeks after the recording sessions for Sorceror, whereas Miles Smiles was recorded after a long break from the studio. On Miles Smiles, Frank Laico mixed Tony Williams somewhat back and hard right; on Nefertiti, Plaut and Tonkel mixed Williams forward, left and spread into the center, using better microphones as far as I can tell. There also seems to be more reverb on the trumpet in Nefertiti than in Miles Smiles.

Even with sonic drawbacks, the MoFi SACD is very listenable, and the performance has artistic significance that transcends the recording quality.

Comment by SteelyTom - February 17, 2019 (7 of 13)

Thanks for the comment, Mark. No doubt about the artistic merits of the album, one of Miles' peak achievements.

Comment by Mark Werlin - March 2, 2019 (8 of 13)

Thanks to the generosity of a fellow site member, I now have a copy of the Japanese SACD of Miles Smiles SRGS-4538 for comparison to the new MoFi SACD. Not surprisingly, the two versions sound very different, as other commenters have posted. I'll listen closely to both SACDs and A/B them to my 2-eye stereo Columbia LP (CS 9401).

Comment by Mark Werlin - April 2, 2019 (9 of 13)

A full review of the MoFi SACD is now posted, including a comparison between the MoFi release and the JSACD (SME SRGS 4538). Thanks again to the site member who provided the JSACD, and to the commenters who pointed out the differences between the two discs.

Several weeks ago, I sent a query to MoFi asking for further details about the source of the new SACD. I'll update the review if MoFi responds.

Comment by SteelyTom - April 4, 2019 (10 of 13)

Excellent and thorough review, Mark. I find myself torn between admiration for MoFi's work generally, and frustration with MoFi's lack of transparency about source materials. If Sony was willing only to license the Wilder remix of Smiles to MoFi, which in turn used its proprietary equipment/technique to do the best available stereo mastering of the album, why not say so?

Comment by Mark Werlin - April 4, 2019 (11 of 13)

Thanks, SteelyTom, much appreciated.

There was one other listening test I tried but didn't include in the review. Rip the CD layer of the MoFi SACD and run the signal through digital EQ to emphasize the highs. I moved the center of the parametric EQ boost back and forth, widened and narrowed the slope, raised and lowered the level, and still couldn't get the MoFi version to sound like the JSACD or LP. It's not that I'm trying to second-guess Wilder's or LoVerde's choices; I'm just frustrated by the lack of transparency from Sony.

My guess is that Sony will soon reissue the Miles Davis catalogue. This recent article in Rolling Stone mentions that Sony Music is launching a streaming service for the Japan market:

https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-features/every-music-company-is-morphing-into-the-same-thing-811329/

Comment by Mark Werlin - May 7, 2019 (12 of 13)

Rob LoVerde from Mobile Fidelity and I had a lively and informative phone call today. He cleared up the provenance of the Miles Smiles and Kind of Blue SACD sources. The text of my review of Miles Smiles is now edited to reflect the information he shared.

In brief: Mark Wilder remixed the original four-track session tapes in the analogue domain, and created a new analogue stereo tape in 1998. That 1998 analogue tape was the source of the Miles Smiles MoFi SACD. LoVerde did not know what source was used for the JSACD, but he suspects it was sourced from a copy of the earlier stereo master.

It was a very rewarding to hear this information directly from the person who handled the tape! I'm grateful to Mr. LoVerde for taking the time to answer my questions, and for caring about getting the correct information out to the music listeners.

Comment by SteelyTom - May 14, 2019 (13 of 13)

Thanks for the very helpful additional info, Mark. Your review is now the best outline I've seen of MoFi's methods in selecting source material for the Davis series. And I agree, Mark Wilder has served the Miles catalog very well over the past decade-plus.

Related (16)