The A&M CTi Records

That's the version I got also--the newer label. A bit disappointed as I prefer the original tan label, but I'm not complaining since it was sealed. "Day-O" is a bit strange, but probably because the Belafonte version is burned into my genetic code. (I played the heck out of Calypso when I was a kid.)

I ordered a Richard Barbary LP last night--it should be here within the week. To add another title to the order, I found some rare Mancini soundtrack on MCA ('W.C. Fields and Me'), sealed, for only $2.99.

I have a Tamiko Jones in my cart but can't seem to press the Checkout button just yet...what little I've heard I don't really care for, but given its rarity and a shot at completing the set, I'm thinking I should get one. And who knows? It might grow on me.

The original version of "Trust in Me" from the soundtrack has a flute shadowing Sterling Holloway's vocals on that part. So before I heard the Soul Flutes record, I was hoping it was the same tune--in fact, I thought it probably would be.

 
I looked at the discogs site often I noticed almost all the CTI/A&Ms got at least one Silver tan reissue which leads me to believe they were available until the mid to late 70s at the latest just a guess on my part
That's actually good since if there are more reissues of a record, that makes it easier to find today, especially sealed. I've had good luck so far in that my two recent additions were both sealed when I bought them.

I'm debating finding LPs of the titles I already have on CD or download. They would be nice to have but I'm concentrating on the titles that never had a digital release.
 
Who has You, Baby? Me, baby! It arrived today. Looks a bit dirty (couldn't find a sealed AM+ but found a NM copy), but plays cleanly, far as I can tell. Listening to it, it's yet another album using the Varitone, this time on Nat's cornet. Same oddball sound that I have on the Chico O'Farrill Married Well LP via the sax section. One feature I hear being used is the sub-octave feature that creates an additional tone one octave below the fundamental.

The Varitone was a woodwind pickup and effects unit, allowing direct amplification of the instrument (i.e. without a standard microphone) and the introduction of various electronic effects. It was marketed in 1967 by the Selmer Company, which developed units for flute, saxophone, and clarinet. The system included an integrated pickup microphone and a control box which allowed the player to use effects such as tremolo, basic EQ ("bright" and "dark"), simultaneous sub-octaves and echo in conjunction with a purpose built amplifier. The ceramic microphone was developed to withstand high sound pressure and moisture levels, and built into the head joint of the flute, the neck-joint of the saxophone, and the barrel joint of the clarinet. The pickup was wired to a preamplifier and control box which was either mounted to the bottom key guard, clipped to the player's belt, or hung on a cord around the players neck.

Similar products included the Hammond Condor, the Conn Multi-vider and the Maestro series of analogue effects boxes marketed by Chicago Musical Instruments.

Notable Varitone players were Eddie Harris,[1] Lou Donaldson, Moe Koffman, and Sonny Stitt. Michael Brecker also used a Varitone extensively during his time in the Brecker Bros. Band.

The Varitone could also be used with brass instruments by soldering a pick-up onto the lead pipe. Jazz trumpeter Clark Terry used it to good effect on a 1967 recording for Impulse! called "It's What Happenin' The Varitone Sound Of Clark Terry" (Terry was a Selmer endorser at the time).

Varitone is also the name of a device used for changing the sounds of an electric guitar, featured on Gibson's BB King "Lucille" signature ES-355.

One thing that sometimes bothers me is how muddy some of these recordings are. Nat's cornet is buried beneath the muck here, even on the tunes without the Varitone.
 
I was working on CALLING OUT LOUD by Nat about a week ago. I want one more pass through for final manual cleanup. I think this one's less muddy than YOU, BABY.

No, for the record, I wasn't calling you muddy, just the record...well, you know what I mean...
 
I'll make my way down to that record soon, I'm sure--I have a couple more headed my way at the moment.

I'm listening to the Burtie Antler Artie Butler at the moment, and I realized what bothers me a little about it. I got to the last track of side one and realized that the tracks are about the same tempo with the same rhythm. There's no variation in tempo, rhythm or mood between the tunes, and with the instrumentation being essentially the same on all of them, none of the tracks really stand out. On top of it, one can only listen to a flute/vibraphone (or flute/ondioline?) melody a few times in a row before it gets old.

Side two fares much better as it has variety from track to track. If the rest of the album were like side two it would have been a more engaging listen.
 
Speaking of Artie Butler, I find that album quite a fun listen. It's light in spirit and is reminiscent of the feel I get from a Tijuana Brass record - or Baja Marimba which it's often compared to. So the fact that it's a little "samey" doesn't really bother me.

Just yesterday, I received another copy of the LP in the mail. This one was one of the WLP mono issues. I'm not certain if the mix is dedicated or a folddown, but it's a bit brighter in sound than the stereo mix. It's in a standard stereo gatefold jacket with a "MonauralStickerGray.jpg" (monaural) sticker attached to it.

This is the second A&M/CTi where I've gotten a mono version. The first was a copy of Tamba 4's SAMBA BLIM that I found without a cover. It was just housed in a plain cardboard jacket.
 
This arrived two days ago:

1607652495386.png

Not sealed, but other than a scuff on side one which doesn't affect play, it looks as though the record was hardly ever played. A trip through the record cleaning ritual and it'll be in good shape.

It's not a long-lost groundbreaking record but it's a rather nice soul album. A nice companion to the Tamiko Jones record, which was sealed.

I found a Japanese pressing of Nat Adderley's Calling Out Loud, and it's on the way to me. That one is hard to come by, and the US copies I saw were not offered in the best condition. It was released on CD in 1987 (Digipak) and 1992 (Pony Canyon mini-LP), but good luck ever finding one unless you were lucky enough to get one in Japan. These might have reproduced the original foil jackets.

DigiPak (not sure what's up with the terrible scan):

1607653282178.png

Mini LP:

1607653312568.png

The album was also called Comin' Out of the Shadows in a few non-US markets like UK, France and South Africa. The France release, though, does not give an album title.

UK/South Africa:

1607653144562.png

France:

1607653202784.png
 
DigiPak (not sure what's up with the terrible scan):

1607653282178.png
Ah, I think I know. The diagonal watermarks say "VueScan", which is a scanner software company. I had to deal with them when I borrowed my neighbor's Nikon slide and film scanner. Nikon stopped making and supporting their own scanners as they just wanted out of the film business as quickly as possible. The scanner itself was a wonderful product and still does a great job - IF you can get it to work. It was last supported on Windows XP and the software to run the scanner no longer works on Windows 10 or other modern OS'es.

VueScan was a company that claimed to work with the old scanners - and it does, but it costs a one-time license fee. My neighbor, the owner of the scanner decided to buy the software and let me in as one of the licensees while I was scanning my slides and negatives. In the "trial phase", VueScan puts that watermark on your results. I guess whoever owned the Adderley album needed to use a trial version of VueScan. (?)
 
I couldn't see the watermark good enough to read what it said, but it did remind me of something a trial version would produce. It's such a poor quality scan though--that's why I'm thinking it might have had the foil treatment.

I've used VueScan for a long time and it works as advertised, plus it fixed an issue with my film/slide scanner that I thought was a mechanical problem. It also levels of adjustment and cleanup in advanced mode that no standard scanner drivers can accomplish.
 
Who has You, Baby? Me, baby! It arrived today. Looks a bit dirty (couldn't find a sealed AM+ but found a NM copy), but plays cleanly, far as I can tell. Listening to it, it's yet another album using the Varitone, this time on Nat's cornet. Same oddball sound that I have on the Chico O'Farrill Married Well LP via the sax section. One feature I hear being used is the sub-octave feature that creates an additional tone one octave below the fundamental.



One thing that sometimes bothers me is how muddy some of these recordings are. Nat's cornet is buried beneath the muck here, even on the tunes without the Varitone.
Hello Rudy! I was lucky enough to find a sealed copy of one of those early '80s AM+ pressings ($19) a few months back. Haven't yet played it as I'm a bit behind with auditioning / cataloguing at this time, but should be able to finally get a good listen in during the coming week. I bought it replace my vintage copy, which was a radio station copy; it was OK (visual = VG+), but had the usual surface noise common to '60s DJ LPs. In any event, I'm hoping it's not as muddy as my original '68 copy (notwithstanding that muddiness was a hallmark of "the Van Gelder sound").
-James
 
Hello Rudy! I was lucky enough to find a sealed copy of one of those early '80s AM+ pressings ($19) a few months back. Haven't yet played it as I'm a bit behind with auditioning / cataloguing at this time, but should be able to finally get a good listen in during the coming week. I bought it replace my vintage copy, which was a radio station copy; it was OK (visual = VG+), but had the usual surface noise common to '60s DJ LPs. In any event, I'm hoping it's not as muddy as my original '68 copy (notwithstanding that muddiness was a hallmark of "the Van Gelder sound").
-James
cV9sWKl.jpg
 
That's a great score, @JOv2! I'm always watching for sealed LPs in that series. You, Baby is still somewhat muddy, and that's not helped by the Varitone that Nat Adderley uses on his cornet...but it certainly would sound a little clearer than the stock A&M LP, and if the vinyl was properly stored, it should be flat and quiet. My only noisy copies were the ones I purchased used, and most of that noise cleaned up in the record vacuum.
 
That's a great score, @JOv2! I'm always watching for sealed LPs in that series. You, Baby is still somewhat muddy, and that's not helped by the Varitone that Nat Adderley uses on his cornet...but it certainly would sound a little clearer than the stock A&M LP, and if the vinyl was properly stored, it should be flat and quiet. My only noisy copies were the ones I purchased used, and most of that noise cleaned up in the record vacuum.
Here's another recent AM+ score to replace a stock LP. Advertised as M ($16) but not SS (which is always a dubious circumstance; once the seal is broken the LP should be downgraded to NM). Nevertheless, it's a winner: not as much as a fingerprint noticed!

378-A40-F4-BE33-4673-8-BB9-954-B97251528.jpg


I know nothing of the features of the Varitone attachment, but given Nat had the attachment playing an octave below him surely contributed to the overall muddiness (he also used it on the follow-up, Calling Out Loud). Regarding the Varitone attachment, do you fancy Eddie Harris? A few of his Atlantic LPs from the '67-'69 period utilized the Varitione attachment as well.
 
One last find that I'd like to share...well, two actually. I've had three copies of Soul Machine: the requisite late '70s (what is this thing?) find priced at 50-cents in a used LP store in the far back mixed in with a bunch of Conniff and Billy Vaughn (you know -- in a water-damaged box and where half the overhead lights are burnt out...). The LP wasn't too worn, but exhibited a dull sound. I replaced it in the mid '90s with a nicer looking LP, but the sound was still below average -- I chalked it up to a less-than-optimal pressing. This past summer I decided that before I die, I best get my A&M house in order so that I have something of value to pass on to the next carrier of the flame (the avatar). In any event, I broke down and bought an SS Soul Machine (reasonably priced to boot!). Though an improvement -- not as muddy as the others -- the pressing was again below average. Just my luck. In addition, I found a promo copy of Richard on e-bay, as well. (Quite a photogenic fella -- if only his LP performance matched his good looks!)

DSC01383.jpg
DSC01385.jpg
 
The Barbary LP I found was used, but in NM condition. I have yet to run it through the cleaner, but it sounded fairly average and about the same as other from that period. I did notice when comparing the From The Hot Afternoon LP my mother owned to my AM+ version, the original was a bit veiled in comparison (a little stuffy on top, and slightly more muddy down lower). I didn't want to do a needle drop until I clean this and the others I have, but I might do a temporary one just so I can have something to listen to while working.

One thing I noticed many years ago is that if I used a parametric equalizer to nudge the mid-bass down by only -1.5dB or so, it really helps clean up the "mud" that many of these records have. It's a very subtle change, but you notice it over more long-term listening. After some earlier mishaps, I've always followed two classic rules of applying EQ that many engineers follow--subtract (never add) EQ, and once settled on the values, cut the amount of EQ in half. (So above, I'd probably had a -3dB level change, and revised it to -1.5dB before committing it to disc.)

As for Van Gelder's, I've been listening to an excellent album as of late: Horace Silver's Song For My Father. I find the sound of it to be lacking, though--there is a lot of pitch wavering on the first track, and the piano always sounds like it's buried in the background. Horace's piano has that same subdued quality throughout, which is curious since it's his own album. The wavering pitch could be a problem with the unit the album was recorded on, or tape stretch (unlikely, as it's not at the ends of the song). I have the hi-res version I'm listening to now, but a Blue Note reissue series LP is being released in mid January and I have one on preorder. I may see if someone has a first pressing and can verify if these issues are present there.

As another Blue Note example, I followed this up with Jimmy Smith's Prayer Meetin' which features Stanley Turrentine. It's more forward sounding (brighter), yet there's some weirdness in the bass. Smith plays the bass on this recording with the bass pedals on the Hammond, and while the fundamental bass notes are not strong, the lowest notes (down around 32Hz, which is low C) are a bit overbearing and come across more as a rumble than a solid note.

I feel that Van Gelder's work is usually good, but it can be inconsistent at times.
 
That's a great score, @JOv2! I'm always watching for sealed LPs in that series. You, Baby is still somewhat muddy, and that's not helped by the Varitone that Nat Adderley uses on his cornet...but it certainly would sound a little clearer than the stock A&M LP, and if the vinyl was properly stored, it should be flat and quiet. My only noisy copies were the ones I purchased used, and most of that noise cleaned up in the record vacuum.
Finally auditioned this AM+ version. Definitely a sonic improvement; but you're absolutely correct in that the Varitone running 8vb muddies the waters -- in addition to all those brooding bass flutes, but which is a cornerstone of the A&M/CTi sound. I forgot how straight he played it on By the Time I Get to Phoenix.
 
The Barbary LP I found was used, but in NM condition. I have yet to run it through the cleaner, but it sounded fairly average and about the same as other from that period. I did notice when comparing the From The Hot Afternoon LP my mother owned to my AM+ version, the original was a bit veiled in comparison (a little stuffy on top, and slightly more muddy down lower). I didn't want to do a needle drop until I clean this and the others I have, but I might do a temporary one just so I can have something to listen to while working.

One thing I noticed many years ago is that if I used a parametric equalizer to nudge the mid-bass down by only -1.5dB or so, it really helps clean up the "mud" that many of these records have. It's a very subtle change, but you notice it over more long-term listening. After some earlier mishaps, I've always followed two classic rules of applying EQ that many engineers follow--subtract (never add) EQ, and once settled on the values, cut the amount of EQ in half. (So above, I'd probably had a -3dB level change, and revised it to -1.5dB before committing it to disc.)

As for Van Gelder's, I've been listening to an excellent album as of late: Horace Silver's Song For My Father. I find the sound of it to be lacking, though--there is a lot of pitch wavering on the first track, and the piano always sounds like it's buried in the background. Horace's piano has that same subdued quality throughout, which is curious since it's his own album. The wavering pitch could be a problem with the unit the album was recorded on, or tape stretch (unlikely, as it's not at the ends of the song). I have the hi-res version I'm listening to now, but a Blue Note reissue series LP is being released in mid January and I have one on preorder. I may see if someone has a first pressing and can verify if these issues are present there.

As another Blue Note example, I followed this up with Jimmy Smith's Prayer Meetin' which features Stanley Turrentine. It's more forward sounding (brighter), yet there's some weirdness in the bass. Smith plays the bass on this recording with the bass pedals on the Hammond, and while the fundamental bass notes are not strong, the lowest notes (down around 32Hz, which is low C) are a bit overbearing and come across more as a rumble than a solid note.

I feel that Van Gelder's work is usually good, but it can be inconsistent at times.
Thank you for the EQ info. Down the road, I'll dump it into Logic Pro and employ your suggestions.

As for Song For My Father -- Have you ever heard the 1964 LP? I'm not sure what the source material is for the contemporary releases, but I'll hazard a guess that despite of the RVG shorcomings, those initially issued Blue Note LPs (and RtRs) were probably the best sounding of the lot.
 
I just got in a copy of Calling Out Loud, but it wasn't as described (it wasn't sealed, like I usually buy). But I have to give it a spin and see if I'll keep it--the seller agreed to take it back. It was supposed to be a Japanese pressing, but this is a stock A&M. The plus side is that the front foil cover is in excellent shape for its age.
 
Thank you for the EQ info. Down the road, I'll dump it into Logic Pro and employ your suggestions.

As for Song For My Father -- Have you ever heard the 1964 LP? I'm not sure what the source material is for the contemporary releases, but I'll hazard a guess that despite of the RVG shorcomings, those initially issued Blue Note LPs (and RtRs) were probably the best sounding of the lot.
I doubt I could find a clean 1964 copy for a reasonable price at this point--some of those fetch a high price these days. But the upcoming Classic Vinyl series reissue, due out on the 15th, was mastered from the original analog tapes by Kevin Gray, so I'll see how that one sounds. This current version I'm playing at the moment is a hi-res download, so it shouldn't be too far off the mark. (Or, at least I'd hope they would have used the original tape for this version.)

It's kind of a secondary issue with this album, though--the music's so good on it that I kind of put it out of my mind after a minute or two.
 
I just got in a copy of Calling Out Loud, but it wasn't as described (it wasn't sealed, like I usually buy). But I have to give it a spin and see if I'll keep it--the seller agreed to take it back. It was supposed to be a Japanese pressing, but this is a stock A&M. The plus side is that the front foil cover is in excellent shape for its age.
Good going on the cover find!

(I've given up on ever finding an affordable NM cover for this one. Once an SS came into the store I worked at in the late '80s -- so by this time it was 20 years old. Although it was sealed, it still exhibited abrasions and scratching, which makes me think the exterior surface must be quite fragile (or it was re-sealed). In any event, I have a fine LP (NM) and my jacket is OK (VG+); I'm just going to have to be satisfied with that...for now ~.)
 
I doubt I could find a clean 1964 copy for a reasonable price at this point--some of those fetch a high price these days. But the upcoming Classic Vinyl series reissue, due out on the 15th, was mastered from the original analog tapes by Kevin Gray, so I'll see how that one sounds. This current version I'm playing at the moment is a hi-res download, so it shouldn't be too far off the mark. (Or, at least I'd hope they would have used the original tape for this version.)

It's kind of a secondary issue with this album, though--the music's so good on it that I kind of put it out of my mind after a minute or two.
I have a few Kevin Grey CDs; for example, he did all the Steve Wonder '70s CDs for Audio Fidelity years ago. Based on those, I like his work.

(I have the same approach with essentially all the Blue Notes... The first few notes -- Yup, it's an RVG Blue Note -- then Wayne Shorter or Jackie McLean or Blue Kenny Dorham play a few notes and nothing else matters...)
 
This one is queued up, once I'm done listening to John Klemmer's Involvement.

Uv5AZ9t.png
 
Good going on the cover find!
Turns out the cover was the only good part of it. First examination, the vinyl didn't quite look NM...but upon playing it, I would barely give it a VG-. Going right back to the seller. And I'm off to try to find another.
 
What a time I've had with CALLING OUT LOUD by Nat Adderley. Like James, my copy was pretty well VG++ and didn't need much in the way of clean-up. The cover was a little sadder - the silvering was showing signs of wear, but not as bad as some I've seen pictures of on the web. The worst part was that the cover's title and artist (black printing) was fading into the silvering. I don't know if it was that way from the factory or just wearing that way. But that wasn't the biggest problem for me. In fact, to make the CD-R artwork, I copied the picture only and made my own white background that looks more in line with most of the A&M CTi's.

NatAdderleyCallingCover.jpg
What confounded me was the track timings and where to break the sides into "songs". The whole of both sides run completely together with no breaks, and the track timings have some anomalies that make it near-impossible to know where the dividing line should be.

Example, Side One.

"Biafra" is listed in the gatefold at 6:30, and my digital rip comes in at 6:31. No problem.
"Haifa" is listed at 4:50. but to my ears, the break would put it at 4:56. Again, I can live with that.
"St. M" and "Grey Moss" are the two that gave me fits. "St. M" is listed at 3:30, but my senses tell me that it's longer, going to 3:48.
"Grey Moss" though is the worst, listing itself as 5:00, when there just isn't that much material left on the side. Even the banding on the record tells me that. So it came in at 3:33, if my identification of the break is where it should be.

Side two was a little better, but the first track sounded like it should be 6:10 instead of the listed 6:00.

Too OCD?
 
I'd just find the rare CD at that point. 😁

I found a sealed US copy for half of what I paid for the turd I received, and that'll be on the way to me today or tomorrow. It's a promo so, unfortunately, it will have the sticker on the front, but at least it will be an early pressing.

For the lettering, it could be that it is fading. With the copy I have here, in the right light, the background looks white and the letters are crisp. But it is a tough one to photograph. I took this one with Night Sight enabled but was too lazy to get up and turn on more lights, so it's a bit blurry from holding the phone steady:

PXL_20210104_035748187.NIGHT-01.jpeg

And it looks horrible with flash, as expected:

PXL_20210104_035602339-02.jpeg

I'd get out the DSLR but, again, I'm too lazy and I don't have any other motivation to get a photo of it.
 
Back
Top Bottom