Your favorite mono recordings

[Florestan]

Dynamic range is emotion

Maybe, but if a recording forces you to adjust the volume every two minutes or so, the only emotion it gives you is frustration, or anger, or maybe both --- and I believe this is what Spotted Horses had in mind.

[Spotted Horses]

Yes, but the brain may have a hard time in the case of much mixing or microphones which are placed too close to the musical instrument(s). Both situations are frequently met in stereo recordings.

I don't disagree with that. These covers seem to typify the DG approach in the late analog and early digital era. A string quartet with a microphone closely covering each instrument, a small orchestra with  microphones plopped right in front of string players. 





On the other had, the Barbirolli session at Kingsway hall isn't exactly purist, but a reasonably small array of microphones covering the various sections.

(I assume with 100% certainty that these microphone setups were what were actually used, record labels used to keep their technique as a closely guarded secret.)

But I would say the virtue you allude to is minimal miking vs multichannel taken to the limit, rather than mono vs stereo.

[Atriod]

Maybe, but if a recording forces you to adjust the volume every two minutes or so, the only emotion it gives you is frustration, or anger, or maybe both --- and I believe this is what Spotted Horses had in mind.

How do you adjust the volume at a concert? If I'm going to be doing eyes closed, focused listening I always use a digital SPL meter to make sure I'm not listening at unsafe levels. Big dynamic bursts or loudness at these levels for short moments is not unsafe.

[Spotted Horses]

How do you adjust the volume at a concert? If I'm going to be doing eyes closed, focused listening I always use a digital SPL meter to make sure I'm not listening at unsafe levels. Big dynamic bursts or loudness at these levels for short moments is not unsafe.

That's my point. I don't take for granted that performers create the same performance at a concert and in a recording session. Sometimes I hear an "audiophile" recording and it seems obvious to me that if the music was played like that from a concert stage no one would hear anything. On the other hand, Mercury Living Presence advertised that no dynamic compression was used, but they used a small stable of conductors who were educated by the producers that music softer than a certain level would simply not be audible on tape. They did not do gain riding because the conductors knew to create a suitable performance.

[Florestan]

How do you adjust the volume at a concert?

We are discussing recordings here, not live concerts. How often does it happen in a live concert that the loudest passages are beyond the pain threshold whereas the quietest ones are basically inaudible --- which is what Spotted Horses talked about?

[Pohjolas Daughter]

I absolutely love massive dynamic range. With the weak Yen/strong USD I've been buying tons of symphony recordings from Japan on Exton, Fontec, Denon, etc and the dynamic range on some of these recordings is just bone crushing. Like DR numbers as high as 20 in some movements. I wrongly put these down to "audiophile music," the Japanese have recorded some incredible interpretations and seem to have a real love of romantic era music.

Dynamic range is emotion, Inbal's Mahler cycle on Exton is now up there with my absolute favorites, aside from his hyper romantic approach to Mahler the dynamic range takes these recordings to another level. I was just listening to Battistoni conduct Tchaikovsky Symphony 5 and I never heard a more moving account of that symphony (Eschenbach gets close) and the dynamic range definitely played a part along with Battistoni's very passionate interpretation. Danielle Gatti's modern day Mravinsky style interpretations of 4-6 easily go to head to head with Mravinsky, it would have been a real shame if they reduced the dynamic range on these.

For another extreme I was listening to Monteux's 1930s recording of Symphonie Fantastique and the dynamic range is so limited that it's just not that enjoyable though you can sort of make out that it's a fine performance (

).

Interesting that you mentioned Denon as the few CDs that I have purchased of theirs, I found the dynamics were compressed.  I believe that these were ones from either the late '80's or early '90's?  I'd have to dig around.  I stopped buying them.   

When are yours from Atriod?

PD

[Spotted Horses]

Interesting that you mentioned Denon as the few CDs that I have purchased of theirs, I found the dynamics were compressed.  I believe that these were ones from either the late '80's or early '90's?  I'd have to dig around.  I stopped buying them.   

When are yours from Atriod?

PD

FWIW, I have a few Denon recordings, mostly chamber music from the 80's, and I thought they were a bit better than average in terms of sound (not particularly compressed). Then the label more-or-less fell off the radar.

[Jo498]

The cover says mono, but some of the works are in stereo sound. Did the producer think that a mono recording would appear to be more valuable and sell more? Overall, both the stereo and mono tracks sound wonderful. I just don't like the cover with the tilted original cover.

Stuff from 3 LPs on one CD. DG LP covers at that time had "Stereo" in red in that little box that says "mono" because it was still special. The stupid CD reissue producer not only opted for the least interesting cover but replaced the stereo with mono because the pieces taken from different LPs are mono.

[Atriod]

That's my point. I don't take for granted that performers create the same performance at a concert and in a recording session. Sometimes I hear an "audiophile" recording and it seems obvious to me that if the music was played like that from a concert stage no one would hear anything. On the other hand, Mercury Living Presence advertised that no dynamic compression was used, but they used a small stable of conductors who were educated by the producers that music softer than a certain level would simply not be audible on tape. They did not do gain riding because the conductors knew to create a suitable performance.

What I hear on these slightly more dynamic recordings sounds pretty close to what I've heard live in Boston, NY, Vienna, Liverpool or Singapore with a variety of conductors.

I don't hear anything special about Mercury recordings, the dynamic range on them is fairly typical of classical recordings including great ones from Decca or RCA Living Stereo. I don't have the MLP boxes ripped at this house but here is Byron Janis in Rachmaninoff's two middle concerti.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Analyzed: Byron Janis / Piano Concertos Nos. 2, 3 / Preludes (SACD)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

DR         Peak         RMS     Duration Track
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DR13       0.00 dB   -18.71 dB     14:48 01-Piano Concerto No. 3 in D minor, Op. 30: I. Allegro ma non troppo
DR13       0.00 dB   -18.76 dB     10:08 02-Piano Concerto No. 3 in D minor, Op. 30: II. Intermezzo. Adagio
DR12       0.00 dB   -16.31 dB     12:50 03-Piano Concerto No. 3 in D minor, Op. 30: III. Finale. Alla breve
DR11       0.00 dB   -15.99 dB     10:15 04-Piano Concerto No. 2 in C minor, Op. 18: I. Moderato
DR14       0.00 dB   -21.72 dB      9:55 05-Piano Concerto No. 2 in C minor, Op. 18: II. Adagio sostenuto
DR13       0.00 dB   -18.12 dB     10:43 06-Piano Concerto No. 2 in C minor, Op. 18: III. Allegro scherzando
DR13      -5.11 dB   -23.73 dB      2:50 07-Prelude in E-flat major, Op. 23 No. 6
DR13      -1.27 dB   -20.41 dB      3:51 08-Prelude in C-sharp minor, Op. 3 No. 2
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Number of tracks:  8
Official DR value: DR13

Samplerate:        44100 Hz
Channels:          2
Bits per sample:   16
Bitrate:           575 kbps
Codec:             FLAC

If Mercury conductors were being told to compromise recordings then I assume the same was being told to those at RCA, Decca, etc.

What seems more realistic is simply a limitation of recording technology. I spoke to a recording engineer that had a client request him use tube microphones and he said it took him nearly half a day to alter how he normally recorded piano and still didn't think it was optimal. I imagine those kind of microphones that saturate were used in these goldern era recordings. And I can't recall a single current classical recording engineer tell me they ever used compression when I asked.

[Atriod]

We are discussing recordings here, not live concerts. How often does it happen in a live concert that the loudest passages are beyond the pain threshold whereas the quietest ones are basically inaudible --- which is what Spotted Horses talked about?

Taking the word pain literally, something definitely is not right.

1) Presbycusis, tinnitus or some other form of hearing loss aggravated by loud sounds or certain frequencies (typically upper midrange or higher). I know 78 surface noise in particular which occurs at a lower frequency than LPs can aggravate certain types of hearing loss. I've also read of some cranial nerve VIII hypersensitivities where loud sounds cause the tympanic membrane to involuntary move a large amount, which can be felt as a sensation in the person with this affliction.

2) Headphone listening - problematic for sure, I find headphone listening just sucks in general unless I want to verify some artifact I heard on speakers. Another issue with headphones which might lead into bullet point one is when I was going to Headfi meets I was astounded how loud people listen to headphones, not even specific to a certain age, this was from 18 to AARP. Even smaller meets where people had setups in individual rooms with no outside noise. Fletcher Munson curves explain why people do this, headphones just do not do bass well leading people to listen loud. Unless one is absolutely diligent about their volume levels headphone listening is just not safe.

3) Compromised listening circumstances where you can't have the louder sections playing at an appropriate A weighted level on speakers because of others.

Solutions to most of those issues - open up Audacity,  effect - amplify or compress. Audacity won't clip the signal unless you tell it to. If it's still too dynamic highlight the soft parts and amplify those.

I simply can not fathom not desiring maximum fidelity from a recording. For those that want compressed recordings you can always do it yourself, if a recording comes out compressed there is no way to undo it for those of us that want the full dynamic range.

Here is Karajan's Berlin performance of Bruckner's Symphony 4 scherzo. That highlights the full roughly 11 minutes, it appears even more dynamic when zoomed in.

So it's not just these Japanese conductors and European numpties that couldn't get a gig conducting in the west that know the power of dynamic range  Depressing thought that the power of Karajan conducting that movement could be blunted by compression. 



The new forum software automatically resizes the image without giving the option to expand it, here is the full size image which makes it slightly easier to see how dynamic it is: https://i.imgur.com/jgkaWIu.jpg

[Atriod]

Interesting that you mentioned Denon as the few CDs that I have purchased of theirs, I found the dynamics were compressed.  I believe that these were ones from either the late '80's or early '90's?  I'd have to dig around.  I stopped buying them.   

When are yours from Atriod?

PD

All the ones I bought in the last couple of years are recordings from roughly 2010 onwards. I have several 1980s and 90s Denon CDs and I've never heard compression on any of them. Do you have any examples? I generally associate the label with good sound.

[Pohjolas Daughter]

All the ones I bought in the last couple of years are recordings from roughly 2010 onwards. I have several 1980s and 90s Denon CDs and I've never heard compression on any of them. Do you have any examples? I generally associate the label with good sound.

I'll check--hopefully tomorrow as my stomach has been bothering me all day [I just tried eating two Saltines with some water to see if they will stay down.] 

PD

[atardecer]

The bigger issue with the dynamic range for me on some recordings are the quiet sections more so than the loud ones. I can't say I equate dynamic range with emotion when I can't hear the sounds. I equate things like harmony, melody, counterpoint and the over all musical logic with an emotional response more so than dynamics. The latter is often more related to adrenaline I suspect rather than emotion exactly.

[Florestan]

If Mercury conductors were being told to compromise recordings then I assume the same was being told to those at RCA, Decca, etc.

Telling conductors that "music softer than a certain level would simply not be audible on tape" and asking them to adjust their dynamic levels accordingly is not "telling them to compromise recordings" at all; on the contrary, it's telling them to cooperate in delivering quality recordings.

Be it as it may, too much and too frequent dynamic contrast can become fatiguing to the ear even if kept within reasonable sonic levels. I know of no great composer who abuses it.

[Florestan]

when I was going to Headfi meets I was astounded how loud people listen to headphones,

There is a simple rule of thumb here: if people around you can hear sound coming from your headphones, the volume is definitely set dangerously high. And if they can even distinguish what music is being played, you're on your way to deafness.

[Pohjolas Daughter]

Interesting that you mentioned Denon as the few CDs that I have purchased of theirs, I found the dynamics were compressed.  I believe that these were ones from either the late '80's or early '90's?  I'd have to dig around.  I stopped buying them.   

When are yours from Atriod?

PD

All the ones I bought in the last couple of years are recordings from roughly 2010 onwards. I have several 1980s and 90s Denon CDs and I've never heard compression on any of them. Do you have any examples? I generally associate the label with good sound.

The one that I did find was with the Smetana Quartet from 1985 (of Janacek's two string quartets).  I suspect that the one that I did notice the reduction of the dynamic range was of a symphonic work.

PD

[Atriod]

The bigger issue with the dynamic range for me on some recordings are the quiet sections more so than the loud ones. I can't say I equate dynamic range with emotion when I can't hear the sounds. I equate things like harmony, melody, counterpoint and the over all musical logic with an emotional response more so than dynamics. The latter is often more related to adrenaline I suspect rather than emotion exactly.

"Harmony, melody, counterpoint" I agree with you and all very true. But these are qualities of what the composer wrote. How much to play dynamic markings is a result of the conductor and recording people.

I don't have much interest in excitement in classical music. I don't even find much exciting in things like film. I get my excitement or rush bombing down technical hills on my mountain bike, taking jumps or enjoying spirited driving in my cars. I like my preferred genres of classical because they're emotionally moving.

I disagree that dynamics are not part of emotional involvement. The first time I heard the end of the fourth movement of Mahler's second by Inbal/TMSO going into that massively dynamic opening of the last movement I immediately had to click back and hear it again it was so moving. Pines of Rome was one of the earliest symphonic works I heard that made me fall in love with classical and Catacombs is my favorite piece from the trilogy. There are plenty of middle of the road interpretations of Catacombs, but when a conductor perfectly balances the horn solo, the orchestral levels and the large dynamic swells that is also an example of incredibly moving moments. I could think of hundreds of examples.

edit: I have to add I am speaking all things being equal, only discussing what I consider great performances. The top tier recording in the world won't save even an average performance.

[Dry Brett Kavanaugh]

Stuff from 3 LPs on one CD. DG LP covers at that time had "Stereo" in red in that little box that says "mono" because it was still special. The stupid CD reissue producer not only opted for the least interesting cover but replaced the stereo with mono because the pieces taken from different LPs are mono.

Thank you for the explanation and nice photos. Yes, Janos Suite is stereo while other tracks are mono. All the tracks sound great, but the mono track of Galanta Dance sounds wild and exceptional.

[Atriod]

Telling conductors that "music softer than a certain level would simply not be audible on tape" and asking them to adjust their dynamic levels accordingly is not "telling them to compromise recordings" at all; on the contrary, it's telling them to cooperate in delivering quality recordings.

Be it as it may, too much and too frequent dynamic contrast can become fatiguing to the ear even if kept within reasonable sonic levels.

I addressed that above, that is either a "you" issue or some other compromise in your circumstance. Recordings shouldn't be made to suit some compromise. Should we go even further and start compressing classical music like pop music because I can't listen to classical music over the sound of a NA flat 6 engine when I'm almost red lining? Listening to music in a car might be one of the ways that music is most often enjoyed.

The dynamic ranges I indicated above of roughly 10 to 15 db in those analog tape era recordings spanned pretty much every classical label. Now we get to the modern digital era with BIS, Channel Classics, Mariinsky, Harmonia Mundi, etc and suddenly there is a change of heart on what to tell conductors?

I simply don't buy it. What we have now are microphones, preamps, etc that have less limitations.

That 20 db dynamic range I gave was a rather extreme example. Typically it's on average 2 db more dynamic range than those analog tape era recordings or not even much of a difference at all.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Analyzed: Denis Matsuev / Rachmaninov: Piano Concerto No. 2; Prokofiev: Piano Concerto No. 2 (SACD)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

DR         Peak         RMS     Duration Track
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DR12      -1.46 dB   -19.61 dB      9:52 01-Piano Concerto No. 2 in C minor, Op. 18: 1. Moderato
DR16      -2.11 dB   -23.90 dB      9:52 02-Piano Concerto No. 2 in C minor, Op. 18: 2. Adagio sostenuto
DR12      -1.56 dB   -19.17 dB     11:21 03-Piano Concerto No. 2 in C minor, Op. 18: 3. Allegro scherzando
DR11      -1.46 dB   -17.72 dB     11:22 04-Piano Concerto No. 2 in G minor, Op. 16: 1. Andantino
DR13      -1.89 dB   -19.78 dB      2:21 05-Piano Concerto No. 2 in G minor, Op. 16: 2. Scherzo. Vivace
DR11      -1.87 dB   -17.73 dB      6:31 06-Piano Concerto No. 2 in G minor, Op. 16: 3. Intermezzo. Allegro moderato
DR11      -1.43 dB   -18.09 dB     11:39 07-Piano Concerto No. 2 in G minor, Op. 16: 4. Finale. Allegro tempestoso
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Number of tracks:  7
Official DR value: DR12

Samplerate:        44100 Hz
Channels:          2
Bits per sample:   16
Bitrate:           514 kbps
Codec:             FLAC
================================================================================


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Analyzed: Daniele Gatti / Tchaikovsky: Symphony No. 5; Romeo and Juliet [SACD]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

DR         Peak         RMS     Duration Track
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DR15      -0.25 dB   -21.08 dB     12:46 01-Symphony No. 5 in E minor, Op. 64: I. Andante - Allegro con anima
DR14      -4.58 dB   -24.80 dB     13:54 02-Symphony No. 5 in E minor, Op. 64: II. Andante cantabile, con alcuna licenza - Moderato con anima
DR15      -5.28 dB   -27.46 dB      5:56 03-Symphony No. 5 in E minor, Op. 64: III. Valse: Allegro moderato
DR13      -0.29 dB   -17.86 dB     12:40 04-Symphony No. 5 in E minor, Op. 64: IV. Finale: Andante maestoso - Allegro vivace - Molto vivace
DR16      -2.16 dB   -24.51 dB     20:38 05-Romeo and Juliet, fantasy-overture for orchestra in B minor (3 versions)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Number of tracks:  5
Official DR value: DR15

Samplerate:        44100 Hz
Channels:          2
Bits per sample:   16
Bitrate:           499 kbps
Codec:             FLAC
================================================================================

I know of no great composer who abuses it.

That goes without saying.

[Atriod]

There is a simple rule of thumb here: if people around you can hear sound coming from your headphones, the volume is definitely set dangerously high. And if they can even distinguish what music is being played, you're on your way to deafness.

It depends on the headphones. Most hifi headphones are open back, they'll leak a ton of sound. I can measure listening to Sennheiser HD650 at 65 db and it can be heard around me.