Jazz for aficionados

frogmanConcerning the article you posted on  Rudy van gelder's engineering output. Correct me if I'm wrong. Because I didn't read the entire article But it seemed that the author was saying big name Studios had better equipment  and more advantageous Studio space and so were able to create better sounding recordings than Van Gelder.Honestly I consider that premise  a crock of bull. It doesn't add up for me. There's a lot more that goes into engineering ( microphone choices, placement of microphones, etc.) than just having the best equipment. And Studio space.
For example a small company such as contemporary Made some of the best recordings of the 50s( examples Rollins Way Out West, Shelly Mannes trios , Art Pepper) due to  excellent engineering by none other than  the legendary Roy DuNann.I have been collecting. Vinyl and CDs for four decades and many of them. Engineered buy Van Gelder with excellent sound. For that author to dismiss Rudy's contribution as volume only  And give him no credit for sound quality is ridiculous.
Just my 2 cents

frogmanI have those direct to disc recordings. You mentioned by Rob McConnell. I need to dig them out and give them a listen.

That’s not exactly correct. The article on Rudy Van Gelder included the observation that when he moved from Hackensack NJ to the new location in 1959 the sound quality improved because the space was a larger “professional” space. The alleged problems with RVG recordings prior to 1959 was apparently due to the relatively poor hand built space in his parents home. Of the early Savoy recordings pre 1959 on the Japanese Savoy Jazz label I’ve listened to the non-RVG CDs sound more musical and engaging than the RVG, but I’m just getting started listening to a bunch of the Savoy Jazz CDs which included recordings from 1940s and 50s many by RVG in Hackensack NJ. I have not listened to any post 1959 RVG CDs. 

Rok, Unfortunately for us, as we age we don’t hear as well. We might be wise not to purchase expensive stuff that we can’t hear. A lot of what he’s saying makes good sense; especially in regard to stuff that’s "chip" based.

I noticed that he didn’t get into turntables. High end turntables are expensive. The turntables we used before CD were very cheap in comparison. I had one  ( 200.TT) and everybody I knew had TT’s in that price range in the 70’s. They spun at 33 1/3 and sounded good to us, but there was no comparison to CD; that’s why we ditched them in a hurry for CD’s and players.

You hardly hear record noise on a high end rig. Recently, I bought a used record that had wear; the noise would have been too much on my old record player; as a matter of fact, I was always replacing records, not realizing the record player was the problem.

When these new people by cheap record players, that sound good with new records, but when the record gets the least bit of wear, you can hear the noise, and they don’t understand that a more expensive set up is required (much more expensive) to reduce the noise to music ratio. And what makes that even worse, when they complain, others that know what the problem is, respond with bewilderment.

Good analog is expensive, and there is no way to get around it.

Nsp, he was right, they (movie people for one) had the equipment that made better recordings, while Rudy had the musicians who made better music. What do you want, the best  recording or the best music, jazz fans couldn't have both.