Started by Dry Brett Kavanaugh, September 11, 2022, 08:51:33 PM
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on September 12, 2022, 12:37:16 PMWhen was it (they) recorded? And I'm guessing, from all live performances?
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on September 12, 2022, 10:50:19 AMHi DBK,There are so many wonderful recordings that were released either only in mono or mono AND stereo.As 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. The set that I have (and love) is this one: Gieseking playing Debussy...to die for. Will have to double-check what else I have of his...Several of Cortot's recordings are very special to me; in particular, his recording of Chopin's PC No. 2 with Barbirolli (the one that I have is on Naxos). His Franck, Saint-Saens, Ravel album (also on Naxos) is wonderful. I grew so enamored of Cortot that I bought an EMI boxed set of his...trying to remember the name of the series....Icons, I believe.There are so many great recordings out there.By the way, one theory that I have re sound quality: Don'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. That, and just be willing and able to let any dated recording ways just go to the wayside and immerse yourself in the performance. That said, in some cases, I'm pleasantly surprised how good some of the later ones sound on my better system. I'm curious as to what others think of my comments?PD
Quote from: Dry Brett Kavanaugh on September 12, 2022, 12:33:03 PMYes what recordings do you particularly like? I will check the yt video shortly.
Quote from: Irons on September 13, 2022, 07:38:41 AMWhat is often not realised is that during the period when both mono and stereo recordings were released onto the market record companies used two sound engineer teams, one mono the other stereo. I have a Mercury LP which lists the two engineers, but can't find it! Instead I looked up the Decca discography and the first recording made by them with two engineers in tandem was in October 1956, a Joseph Krips recording of Schumann's "Spring" Symphony. Kenneth Wilkinson, Decca's top engineer, recorded mono LXT 5347 and Gordon Parry stereo SXL 2223. Weirdly this double team method came to an end in May 1958 with also a Krips recording, Schubert's 9th. Now stereo took precedence with "Wilkie" engineering stereo SXL 2045 and Peter van Biere mono.With that long preamble I'm making the point that mono recordings of the period can and often do sound better then stereo of the same recording. Stereo was seen as a gimmick that would not catch on so resources were channelled to mono.I picked up a mono copy of the famous Michelangeli recording of Ravel's PC in G. Later, I located a stereo copy. Foolishly I sold my "inferior" mono copy only to find the stereo lacked the dynamics and focus of the mono.It irks me when mono recordings are treated as poor relations of stereo. They are not inferior just different.
Quote from: Lisztianwagner on September 14, 2022, 08:49:51 AMTwo recordings in particular:Furtwängler/Philharmonia Orchestra Wagner's Tristan und Isolde. Absolutely stunning, for its passionate intensity, harmonic richness and orchestral colour.
Quote from: Dry Brett Kavanaugh on September 11, 2022, 08:51:33 PM
Quote from: springrite on September 14, 2022, 10:10:21 AMYes, this is one of the first to come up in my head!Also, the Grainger recording of Grieg Piano Concerto.
Quote from: MusicTurner on September 14, 2022, 10:37:04 AMYes, there are several Grainger versions, but the Stokowski recording comes to mind, besides Grainger on a piano roll + a modern stereo orchestra, of which there at least two versions.
Quote from: Todd on September 12, 2022, 09:29:50 AMWhat you describe is the obsession of a (presumably) elderly man who appears to allow intense nostalgia to severely color his judgment of reproduced sound, which is perfectly fine. I've heard newer Quads, and they are fine for people who prefer that style of presentation. I do not. I realize that the legendary Quad ESL 57 is supposed to border on the magical, but dipole electrostats just don't sound good. I prefer ribbon tweeters combined with dynamic drivers, but I know some/many/most people do not. My preference does not mean there is an advantage to ribbon tweeters combined with dynamic drivers.
QuoteThat is different from mono offering an advantage over stereo. Depending on playback gear - or ripping options in the digital realm - one has the option to listen to any recording as a mono recording, whereas synthesizing stereo sound from a mono source always sounds atrocious. There are no advantages to mono sound
Quote from: Todd on September 12, 2022, 12:21:18 PMI'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.
Quote from: hvbias on September 15, 2022, 11:22:02 AMat the time the ESL57 were the only ones that had the most realistic presentation for unamplified instruments, particularly in the midrange.
Quote from: hvbias on September 15, 2022, 11:22:02 AMI'd never trust anything DIY as these kind of designs require state of the art measuring tools starting at six figures to do properly.
Quote from: hvbias on September 15, 2022, 11:22:02 AMThe blind testing shows that the best sounding speakers adhere to certain measurement parameters which might be able to be achieved with any number of topologies given good design.
Quote from: hvbias on September 15, 2022, 11:22:02 AMThe ESL57 doesn't sound like any of the newer Quads which while also limited in dynamics like the ESL57 just don't sound particularly interesting, which puts them at a major losing position all around; there is just no point in putting up with Quad limitations if they don't do something right. No nostalgia for me, as I'm in my late 30s. They just wound up being the speakers I ended up with after owning a little over a half dozen speakers plus 15 years of outside auditions, at the time the ESL57 were the only ones that had the most realistic presentation for unamplified instruments, particularly in the midrange. That was old me. Now I don't think things like driver topology or whatever really matter, ie being able to see the fancy high priced Serbian ribbons or Scandanavian dynamic drivers will probably determine what you think of the sound quality far more than it matters. The blind testing shows that the best sounding speakers adhere to certain measurement parameters which might be able to be achieved with any number of topologies given good design. I'd never trust anything DIY as these kind of designs require state of the art measuring tools starting at six figures to do properly. New me - after hearing them, Kii Three can very easily keep up with the ESL57 and much more. Agree. If anyone is mentioning a mono mix sounding superior then the stereo mix was not done properly or the person just like the way the mono sounds. +1 to everything you've written, particular the bold since my post was primarily on speakers.
Page created in 0.043 seconds with 23 queries.