NAT "KING" COLE - Year by Year - Part 2

Thanks again!

 

I'm listening right now to the DCC Love is the Thing. I got this as a kind and generous gift from a fellow NKC fan. It's the vinyl, but transferred to CD. What a beautiful album. And it really takes Steve's mastering to appreciate it. It's so rich, mellow, woody, and smoky. Our 7 year old daughter just started her bath, and said, "Daddy, please leave the music on! I want to hear it while I take a bath!" She's a Nat King Cole fan now too...

I love both versions of Stardust. The dry version was a revelation to me when I first heard it on this album. Amazing stuff.

Maybe we discussed this before, but where does Love is the Thing rank for you among Nat King Cole's albums? It's in my top 5, I think, and even maybe the top 3. I'm not sure I'd rate it first, but maybe I would. It's so consistently strong. A classic concept album to be sure. I don't even know how I'd go about ranking a top ten. Maybe giving it a grade would be easier for an old prof. like me. It's an A to an A+ for sure. I pretty much like every NKC album. I'd rate the 2001 Night Lights as an A-, and even Lazy Crazy is probably a B- for me.

 

I like the DCC 'Love Is The Thing'. It is amazing the fidelity that is on the three track.

I find it kind of difficult to listen to though, particularly in the car. Mainly because his vocal is mixed way too high in the overall mix. All I hear is his vocal in a very forward way and very little orchestra. It gives the illusion of the vocal being mixed bright, although it really is not.

While I like the fidelity of the DCC remix, I prefer the original stereo mix for overall balance.

This is a comparison of 'When I Fall In Love' from the Groove Note LP release from a couple years ago from the stereo master vs the DCC remix LP. You can really hear the difference. If you look at the waveform in Cool Edit you can see the orchestra is much higher in the original mix and the beginning of the song:

When I Fall In Love Comp

 

That's my thinking, as well. The clarity of Steve's DCC disc is really astounding and that's the version I always play for what I'd call "critical listening" -- sitting in front of the home stereo with the volume cranked up a bit.

But when I'm listening at lower volumes, or in the car, or multi-tasking at home, I have to play the Bear Family / Capitol mixes if I want to hear the musical backing behind Nat. The same is true with regard to the "Just One Of Those Things" LP that Steve worked on. Nat's voice is waaay out in front of the band, so to hear those instruments I have to really crank it up.

To me, the DCC material doesn't sound like a record; it sounds like Nat & Co. are right there in my living room. Which is fabulous, of course. But for me there is a downside, and it's that this "live sound" isn't conducive to casual listening. (Granted, it's probably not meant to be...)

At any rate, I ain't complaining, and I hope we get a lot more Nat King Cole material into Steve's hands for remastering...

 

It's an early Capitol stereo vs. mono thing too.

The mono version - any of you playing that one? - was miked & balanced to be more "right" for general listening, meant to be used in most contexts including radio etc. There were no stereo records or radio, they were mono. On the other hand stereo in '56 & '57 was for the rare audiophile with open-reel decks and expensive home stereos. That offered some expectation of a more dynamic home audiophile kind of playback. The early stereo sessions like Love Is The Thing were still kinda experimental, at that time grasping for a different concept: a more literal capture of the in-studio sound, albeit trying to reconcile that with the (understandable) fashion of the era in having the featured soloist (Nat here) well up front and center.

The original stereo release was on (very expensive) open-reel in a mix closer to Steve's in being for audiophile playback. All other releases of the stereo version from the original stereo LP to the Bear set have tried to compromise it (rebalance, compress, filter, canyon of echo etc) to sound less awkward in low dynamic playback. But compromise is the key word.

In my own opinion, what should be done for most general releases of the relevant sessions is to use the mono version. The mono is a producer-approved mix designed for a wide range of listening environments, whereas I suggest that stereo releases "adjusted" after the fact for casual listening are not an ideal compromise. They'll always end up a bit off. The stereo, when mastered for and listened to in wide-range audiophile enviroments, offers a fantastic alternative sonic window into the studio. We're blessed that we could have both. Let the listener choose which to play.

*apileocole steps off soap box

 

i like it when you're on that box!

 

so what is the mix and tape used in the Bear Family box set for the Love Is The Thing tracks?

What happened to the original master tape?

 

Steve,

Do we have any idea who did the original mixes, both the open reel and the 1959 Lp mix? Could it have been John Kraus?

Thanks.

 

I simply want to thank everyone one who has so far contributed to this wonderful thread! It's getting to be one of my favorite so far.

 

Here is what I posted about the sound of Love Is The Thing back on June 24, 2008:

I have the original grey label and a mono rainbow label. There may be slight differences there, but I am not sure enough of those differences yet to describe them. Anyone?, did Capitol tweak anything when they went from issuing the grey label to the next version in Mono?
Now, we are waiting to hear what EMI did for the initial UK version of Love Is The Thing.

Dale

 

Steve, I did not know that was a remix. Just goes to show 'from the original tapes' can mean many things!

I just like the balance of the mix of the Groove Note release for this particular title. It travels from the living room to the car very well.

I love the clarity of your remixes (all of them) and the sound of his voice straight up. There is an amazing amount of information on those 3 tracks. Plus the bonus tracks.

I have the DCC LP so I have not ever heard the 'dry' version of Stardust.

 

I ran across this as a CD reissue. Has anyone here ever heard this or have comments? Is it worthwhile? It was evidently also reissued several times in the 50s and 60s with various LP titles. How was his recorded work after he left the King Cole Trio in 1947?

OSCAR MOORE QUARTET WITH CARL PERKINS

V.S.O.P. 34/22
OSCAR MOORE
Roulette - 4:30
The Nearness of You - 2:55
Love for Sale - 1:49
Body and Soul - 2:38
Kenya - 5:20
Blues in B Flat - 2:28
Up Tempo - 5:03
Buddy Can You Spare a Dime - 2:38
There'll Never Be Another You - 2:33
April in Paris - 2:40
Samson and Delilah Theme - 3:17
Moonlight in Vermont - 2:09
Kiss Me Again - 1:29
Dinner for One - 2:32
Walkin' Home - 5:46
Warm Up - 2:50
Oscar Moore - Guitar, Mike Pacheco - Bongos, Carl Perkins - Piano, Joe Comfort - Bass, Leonidas Raymond "Lee" Young - Drums, Robert Scherman - Producer, Val Valentin - Engineer. Recorded at Radio Recorders, Hollywood, California in 1954.

 

From the Tavis Smiley show on PBS:

I just enjoyed a clip of Natalie Cole singing "Walking My Baby Back Home,"
a duet with Nat from her new CD.

Also, she said that a compilation album featuring duets between Nat and contemporary artists (including rap artists) is forthcoming. Now, that should be be interesting.

--Russ

 

It is apparently going to be called RE:GENERATIONS, and is due for release by Capitol on March 10 of next year. It is currently the top news story at www.natkingcole.com. I won't post the entire announcement as it is quite lengthy, but here is the posted tracklist:

NAT KING COLE RE:GENERATIONS (CD, Digital Album, Vinyl LP)
(not final track sequence)
TRACK - FEATURING
1. Lush Life - Cee-Lo
2. Straighten Up and Fly Right - will.i.am & Natalie Cole
3. Day In Day Out - Cut Chemist
4. Brazilian Love Song - Michaelangelo L’Acqua & Bebel Gilberto
5. The Game of Love - Nas & Salaam Remi
6. Walkin’ My Baby Back Home - The Roots
7. Hit That Jive, Jack - Souldiggaz & Izza Kizza
8. Calypso Blues - Stephen & Damian Marley
9. More and More of Your Amour - Bitter:Sweet
10. El Choclo - Brazilian Girls
11. Pick-up - Just Blaze
12. Anytime Anyday Anywhere - Amp Fiddler
13. Nature Boy - TV On The Radio

 

i dont know, for me i hate these sorts of "craftedcollaborations". I will not be going out of my way to hear this one.

 

Re:generations

There's a quote on this video about how they're taking something iconic and making it contemporary. But, as far as I'm concerned (and forgive me for pointing out the obvious), something that is iconic and timeless, as Cole's body of work is, is precisely the thing that need not be refashioned and made temporally relevant. It is for all times.

This was the same logic that was used by Capitol Records some 43 years ago when they started overdubbing his catalog, another attempt to re:introduce Nat and bridge the musical generations.

Nat's work can stand on it's own.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sddw4fcp6_c

 

While browsing through some photographs from a Leonard Feather collection at the Lionel Hampton School of Music at a local university, I realized there were quite a few listed as unidentified. To be fair, I think they are listing, so far, whatever is written on the back.

Here are a couple of nice unidentified ones:



Gee, didn't he write STARDUST that appears in our current discussion of Love is the Thing? Yes, it is Hoagy Carmichael.

And below is now a favorite music picture for me. An unidentified bassist --- that's a very young Ray Brown.

 

Haven't posted in this thread for a bit, so thought I'd pop in to say that I'm still at work writing stuff Nat, in this case at my Nat website. The main course updates wise is that the sessionography is now available up through 1962.

Oscar Moore is such a fine guitarist there's no doubts in my mind on that front, but as to the quality of the recorded projects he worked on I've no idea. Do look forwards to hearing that and anything else out there someday.

Speaking only for myself, I'm glad that I discovered Nat as I did rather than as manipulated vocals used for the projects of others. In all honesty some so-called Frankenstien projects strike me as an attempt for instant cred by association with a famed past by folks who otherwise would have nothing to do with it. Whatever the case may be with this "duets" project, hopefully some will enjoy it and maybe even come to discover and enjoy Nat's own work someday. But I suspect a song in the soundtrack of Sleepless In Seattle, for example, may end up having done more for Nat's legacy and sales of his own work. My admittedly ticklish feelings on all this are consoled, however, by the generousity of and intelligent management by the Cole estate, EMI and associated licensees in making Nat's own recordings more comprehensively available in the present era. Heartfelt thanks go to all involved there.

Well said.

Love it, Dale. Lovely photos there too.

 

Happy Thanksgiving, everyone!

I just got a wonderful gift--the DCC greatest hits of Nat King Cole. It has the slightly different and less well known versions of Unforgettable and Smile. As much as I like the original versions and the originally released remakes, I think these unreleased remakes are even better and represent my favorite versions of these songs now. All of the different versions of the songs over the years are beginning to make my head spin. How many versions are there of Sweet L?

Anyone, the sound quality of the DCC greatest hits is wonderful. It's rich, warm, woody, and natural. If only all NKC CDs could sound this good. Many thanks for this kind gift.

Best wishes everyone....
Ben

 

Let's see... off the top of my head I count 6. Transcription, 1939. Decca, 1940. Capitol, 1944. Live at the Circle Room, 1946. After Midnight, 1956. NKC Story, 1961. Since he did it in his live set quite a bit, I can't imagine how many times he performed it.

Indeed. While more recent recordings can and do distinctly benefit from Steve's quality mastering, for lack of a better term they do "translate" better through today's "industry standard" techniques and equipment than those of Nat. The engineering sensibilities and equipment prior to the mid-'60s are further removed from today. Steve's work is more sympatico, more finely tailored to the given task. As a result recordings such as Nat have often thrown a spotlight on the most telling differences between his work and the industry's general "state of the art." One doesn't even need a particularly great stereo to sense any difference. The subtle differences add up and more of the beauty still sitting on those tapes comes to life, making for an experience that much richer.

Bet you'll enjoy the heck out of it, Ben.

 

Ben,

Is the version of "Smile" on the DCC an alternate, the same as the one on AT THE MOVIES? I don't have my DCC here to check, but don't recall it being different. Either way, I love the "new" SMILE as well.

Happy Holidays to everybody...no luck finding any turkey over here!