Started by Irons, November 22, 2018, 11:40:48 PM
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Quote from: Irons on November 22, 2018, 11:40:48 PMThis may have been tried in the past and sunk without trace.Is there any enthusiasm with forum members for a thread on not only the LP record but the music of the era they were produced? A platform to express all views, even if you cannot stand them (an understandable view).
Quote from: vandermolen on November 26, 2018, 12:54:39 AMI have kept some of my most treasured vinyls (Boult's EMI Vaughan Williams symphonies box for example) and occasionally buy an LP which meant a lot to me (Karajan's DGG recording of Honegger's 'Liturgique' Symphony for example). However, I need a new turntable as my daughter purloined my old one.
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on November 26, 2018, 01:07:21 PMI'm guessing that you're (secretly?) proud of her? PD
Quote from: Ghost of Baron Scarpia on November 26, 2018, 08:00:35 AMMercury has a special place in my heart. My father had the famous Mercury Living Presence recording of Tchaikovsky's 1812 Overture by Dorati (the stereo one). The LP had a peculiar sound that in not quite duplicated in the CD release. Probably the characteristics of the LP cutter and related electronics. But of course the CD brings more detail, and was prepared by the original record producer.For years I only knew what was written in the CD notes about the production technique, three omni directional microphones suspended over the orchestra, fed directly into a 3 channel tape deck. No modification of the recording rig or tinkering with the volume settings in the course of a performance. But in those days the dynamic range of the LP, and of the tape deck, was not sufficient to capture the dynamic range of an orchestra. Other labels, such as Decca, resorted to gain-riding. I recently came across an article by Richard Fine's son (I forget where) in which he describes more of the Mercury way. Apparently they worked with the conductor to create a performance that would conform the the limitations of the recording. If there was a quiet passage they would take care not to make it so quiet that it would be inaudible on the LP. They way they could get the recording on tape without engineering interference. You can say this is an interference with the conductor's art, but it seems more honest to me and I prefer it to the engineering solution of adjusting the recording volume to get the signal that they need.So maybe I've come up with something for your thread after all, and no vinyl was harmed in the creation of this post.
Quote from: Ghost of Baron Scarpia on November 27, 2018, 06:28:05 AMHere's a nice write-up of Mercuryhttps://www.stereophile.com/content/fine-art-mercury-living-presence-recordings
Quote from: david johnson on November 28, 2018, 12:20:51 AMThe lp brands I enjoyed back then (and now, occasionally) were London, Angel, DGG, some Mercury.
Quote from: Irons on November 28, 2018, 06:54:11 AMI'm guessing you are based in the US. London/Decca; are they the same quality (both pressed at the Decca factory at New Malden) argument has been going on for decades. Pretty obvious to me they are.
QuoteAmerican collectors are very critical of Angel, the US arm of EMI. I have not listened to an Angel pressing so cannot comment.
Quote from: Irons on November 28, 2018, 06:54:11 AMI'm guessing you are based in the US. London/Decca; are they the same quality (both pressed at the Decca factory at New Malden) argument has been going on for decades. Pretty obvious to me they are. American collectors are very critical of Angel, the US arm of EMI. I have not listened to an Angel pressing so cannot comment. In the 1990's thanks to TAS there was a massive surge of interest in Mercury "Living Presence" and RCA "Living Stereo" I got caught up in this myself. Not only US, but UK too, Reiner, Dorati and other conductors on their roster were superstars. After the death of Harry Pearson, interest waned. I still retain a great affection for both labels.
Quote from: Ghost of Baron Scarpia on November 28, 2018, 09:53:32 AMYou are not aware of the STS apocalypse. I don't know if it had the same name in the UK, but old Decca releases were sold in the US as "Stereo Treasury Series." They had covers on white background (a bit like Naxos art work) and they seemed to be the original Decca pressings, rebranded as bargain releases. They sounded fine, although they were probably a little dull because the pressing masters were so old. But around 1978 "London" started manufacturing them in the US, and the US pressings were horrible.
Quote from: Irons on November 29, 2018, 12:06:01 AMThanks. I didn't know that. As I mentioned earlier any history of a record company is a tangled mess that defies logic. What I know of the US market is sketchy at best. By your description STS could be the US version of "Ace of Diamonds" I would not describe them as dull though. In some cases the "Ace of Diamonds" reissues are better sonically then the SXL originals. One thing I have heard loud and clear across the Atlantic is that gold label Decca pressings are horrible. American Decca had no connection (historically they did) with the UK company and due to naming rights Decca were called "London" in the US. 1978 sounds about the time that the Decca factory in New Malden on the outskirts of London closed down. Production for the UK was switched to Holland.
Quote from: Daverz on November 29, 2018, 12:33:54 PMGlad to not have to worry about that sort of thing anymore.
Quote from: aligreto on December 01, 2018, 02:09:37 AMTwo well written posts, guys, with many sentiments echoing my own experiences; selling off the vinyl collection and equipment, investing in the new technology and ultimately reverting back many years later. I also still inhabit both media worlds and I only know of one friend who operates exclusively in vinyl.
Page created in 0.037 seconds with 23 queries.