Started by Dry Brett Kavanaugh, September 11, 2022, 08:51:33 PM
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Quote from: Dry Brett Kavanaugh on September 11, 2022, 08:51:33 PMWhat are your favorite mono recordings? Do you like them because of the performance or sound? Any recording that surpasses stereo sound?
Quote from: Jo498 on September 12, 2022, 03:11:26 AMI have been told that especially acoustic recordings from before 1928 (or whenever electrical recordings started)
Quote from: Todd on September 12, 2022, 05:39:45 AMFirst, there are no advantages to mono sound.
QuoteI now have the best room I ever heard ESLs in, and using just one as a mono speaker really does alleviate many problems in small spaces, while in the past I used a pair either side of a fireplace, which was not splendid, but still good. Then I used a pair and latterly a single speaker in a smaller room. The improvement brought by optimising one speaker in a small space really brought things up in quality. Now with an almost large room, about 17 by 19 feet, I have the speaker firing not quite diagonally. Minimum of five feet behind the speaker to the wall and six feet behind me. Still quite close to the speaker from the listening position. Amazing naturalness results.
QuoteI do think the non-pin-point presentation of the old ESL 57 may actually be better for mono than the "idealised point source" concentric ring design of the 63, which after all was designed as a stereo pair speaker set. The 57 was designed as single speaker mono studio monitor first and foremost and the fact that it still made a good stereo speaker was more or less good luck.
Quote from: Mandryka on September 12, 2022, 08:30:12 AMWell, I know someone who would nuance that. He runs a single Quad ESL 57 with a Leak mono valve amp, he's interested in hi fi. This is what he said
Quote from: Jo498 on September 12, 2022, 12:04:55 AMI am usually not bothered too much by mono qua mono but sometimes by the other sonic restrictions (distortions, very "dry" sound) of "typical" mono era recordings, so I don't think I ever preferred a historical recording because of the sound. Like someone said in the other thread, the window for "good mono" is fairly small, basically late 1940s until late 1950s, with a little longer for broadcast or live recordings (but in these latter cases I am usually slightly angry that the broadcasters didn't record in stereo even in the mid-60s...). While I prefer some mono recording to bad stereo recordings, this is not the case for good stereo and this could be achieved already in the mid/late 1950s, e.g. by Living stereo or Living presence.Probably the most amazing mono recording I have is the 1950s Verdi Requiem with Fricsay (DG, there is another later live recordings, also mono but IIRC that live one does not sound as good). To me this does sound better balanced and more "natural" than his Fidelio a few years later that was among DGs first stereo recordings. Many of Fricsay's mono recordings sound quite good and I am not bothered by their sound at all; IIRC the earliest of the Tchaikovsky symphonies recorded (#5) and some of the Bartok (Music for.../Divertimento/Concert for orchestra) are not as good, neither is Martin's Petite symphonie concertante. Strangely these mainly string orchestra don't sound as good in my recollection that full orchestra recordings. Like the Hindemith shown above, many early-mid 1950s DG recordings sound quite good to my ears. Another recording with extraordinarily vivid mono sound is the Porgy and Bess on CBS Masterworks heritage, dir. Engel[asin]B000001GQU[/asin] [asin]B000001H01[/asin] [asin]B000007QCJ[/asin]
Quote from: Mandryka on September 12, 2022, 03:00:09 AMBut when you think about it there are going to be too many -- think . . . Hotter's two Winterreise, all those Mengelberg and Furtwangler recordings, Pears, early Klemperer. Gieseking. Cortot. Sofro. Too many. I'm out of here.
Quote from: Dry Brett Kavanaugh on September 12, 2022, 09:43:30 AMNice list ! Would you please explain about Pears?
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on September 12, 2022, 10:50:19 AMAs I think it was Todd (who beat me to it) had mentioned, the Beethoven mono recordings with Kempff are particularly wonderful. He recorded them three times but not in totality.
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on September 12, 2022, 10:50:19 AMDon't try and listen to them on a very current, super-high detailed system which shows everything. I find that I enjoy them better on a "less-than-perfect" system.
Quote from: Daverz on September 12, 2022, 11:11:46 AMIn general, I don't find stereo that necessary in solo piano music.Prokofiev: Violin Concerto No. 1 - Szigeti/BeechamShostakovich: Symphony No. 10 - Ancerl/Czech Philharmonic
Quote from: Mandryka on September 12, 2022, 10:16:00 AMExplain what? The recordings I was thinking of? Well, this sort of thinghttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SsmXYLRNzis&t=79s&ab_channel=incontrariomotu
Quote from: Todd on September 12, 2022, 12:21:18 PMSlight correction, he did record three complete cycles, but one was recorded live in Japan and is a Japanese market only release on King International. He recorded an almost complete cycle in the 30s-40s as well. The DG complete mono cycle is the one to have if one can have only one.I'm the opposite. I prefer to listen to older recordings, all the way back to Josef Hofmann's 1903 recordings or Artur Nikisch's 1913 Beethoven Fifth, on the best system I have, to eke out every last bit of instrumental sound. That written, I care less now about sound than I did a decade ago and will happily listen to wireless earbuds if that is what I have available.
Page created in 0.070 seconds with 23 queries.