A reason to buy a Beethoven disc

[head-case]

I think it is pretty obvious why every new Beethoven symphony cycle elicits a groan of "why do we need another Beethoven cycle when all of the great conductors have given us their interpretations and left virtually nothing to say on the subject."   I was of this camp until I used a coupon to get Haitinks cycle on LSO live, released on surround sound SACD's.  I don't know if there are any audio buffs left out there, but when you play a well recorded SACD on a good system there is a vibrancy and smoothness of sound that I have not heard from a CD.  The high resolution is part of it, and the surround channels give a subtle feeling of being enveloped in the music.  Not the least important, Haitink conducts with more gusto live than he ever did in those old studio recordings with the Concertgebouw.  I'm not going to throw away my old Karajan cycle (or any of the others) but this is really something special.

[Mark]

I have this cycle (though not on SACD), and even attended the recordings of the First and Ninth Symphonies. Taking the cycle as a whole, I'd say it has something to offer, but better can be had. If it has a weak link, then for me, this is the Sixth. It sounds as though Haitink was in a hurry to finish it and didn't feel particularly 'connected' with it. That's just my impression, however.

[head-case]

I have this cycle (though not on SACD), and even attended the recordings of the First and Ninth Symphonies. Taking the cycle as a whole, I'd say it has something to offer, but better can be had. If it has a weak link, then for me, this is the Sixth. It sounds as though Haitink was in a hurry to finish it and didn't feel particularly 'connected' with it. That's just my impression, however.

I wouldn'd necessarily disagree.  If I had a time machine I'd put that DSD recording rig on a time machine and sneak it into the room when Karajan was recording his '63 cycle.  But Haitink's efforts are pretty good and it is nice to have something closer to hearing a symphony orchestra in your living room.

[Harry]

I wouldn'd necessarily disagree.  If I had a time machine I'd put that DSD recording rig on a time machine and sneak it into the room when Karajan was recording his '63 cycle.  But Haitink's efforts are pretty good and it is nice to have something closer to hearing a symphony orchestra in your living room.

You seem to be more concerned with absolute audio quality than interpretation.
No music lover would say, I throw my Karajan set away merely because it is not recorded in SACD.

[Bonehelm]

Here's a brilliant reason/excuse: It's Beethoven! 

[Que]

Unlike earlier performers, today's musicians have to compete (on record) with the giants of the past.
And that's hard. In recordings of the "Iron Repertoire" I think there is only room for two categories: performers that indeed are of a quality and individuality that can favourably be compared with the giants of the past, and performers that offer something truly new in general approach - the whole HIP movement is a good example. As far as I'm concerned all new LvB symphony cycles would be HIP - I have plenty of "traditional" cycles already!

As for Haitink. I haven't heard his LSO LvB recordings, but he never was a natural in Beethoven symphonies (Brahms, Bruckner and Mahler are his fortes), so I don't expect something remarkable. However Haitink was an excellent accompanist in the LvB concertos: the piano concertos with Perahia and the violin concerto with Krebbers.

Q

[head-case]

You seem to be more concerned with absolute audio quality than interpretation.
No music lover would say, I throw my Karajan set away merely because it is not recorded in SACD.

Your reading comprehension is quite low.  To quote myself directly "I'm not going to throw away my old Karajan cycle (or any of the others) but this is really something special."

[Mark]

Your reading comprehension is quite low.  To quote myself directly "I'm not going to throw away my old Karajan cycle (or any of the others) but this is really something special."

I was going to point this out earlier, but thought I'd let you.

[DavidW]

You seem to be more concerned with absolute audio quality than interpretation.
No music lover would say, I throw my Karajan set away merely because it is not recorded in SACD.

I thought that the sixties Karajan cycle was available on sacd.   So what if it was remastered from analog, the SQ from recordings in the sixties are usually great.

[head-case]

I thought that the sixties Karajan cycle was available on sacd.   So what if it was remastered from analog, the SQ from recordings in the sixties are usually great.

The capacity of the CD exceeds 60's analog by a significant margin.  I think I ended up getting one of the old recordings on SACD just to see if they managed to do a better job, but didn't notice any improvement.  I believe those old 60's recording were mixed live to a small number of channels (2 or 3) so any "surround" would be artificially generated.  In a new recording the microphones are connected directly to the DSD encoder, so everything that can be capture is captured.

[head-case]

I was going to point this out earlier, but thought I'd let you.

Ever courteous, thanks.

[DavidW]

The capacity of the CD exceeds 60's analog by a significant margin.

Yeah that's what I think too.

I think I ended up getting one of the old recordings on SACD just to see if they managed to do a better job, but didn't notice any improvement.  I believe those old 60's recording were mixed live to a small number of channels (2 or 3) so any "surround" would be artificially generated.  In a new recording the microphones are connected directly to the DSD encoder, so everything that can be capture is captured.

Oh that's too bad.

[Bach Man]

Some of the new SACD reissues of the old RCA Living Stereo recordings far exceed many modern recordings in terms of sound quality, especially dynamics and soundstage (and artistic quality too btw). They were two or three microphone recordings that are perfectly suited for a simple transfer to stereo replay, unlike the modern arrays of microphones that require extensive prosessing, often with somewhat artificial results. The RCA engineers didn't fall for the temptation to issue five channel disks either, their all either two- or three-channel.

[head-case]

Some of the new SACD reissues of the old RCA Living Stereo recordings far exceed many modern recordings in terms of sound quality, especially dynamics and soundstage (and artistic quality too btw). They were two or three microphone recordings that are perfectly suited for a simple transfer to stereo replay, unlike the modern arrays of microphones that require extensive prosessing, often with somewhat artificial results. The RCA engineers didn't fall for the temptation to issue five channel disks either, their all either two- or three-channel.

I certainly am a big fan of the minimal 3 microphone setup, although Mercury Living Presence is my personal favorite.  I have felt a certain curiosity to hear one of the SACD releases of a Merc just to hear what the 3 channel sounds like.  But given the amount of hiss and distortion that is evident on the CD releases of those old records, it is hard to imagine that the high resolution will do anything but portray the hiss and distortion with even greater fidelity. Someone gave me a few of the RCA Living Stereo SACDs and I didn't find them to noticeably surpass the CD versions.

[Bach Man]

There is more noise on the old recordings, yes, just as vinyl has inherent hiss, yet many audio enthusiasts prefer the sound of vinyl. I cannot speak for the various cd reissues, however DSD is arguablly superior to PCM for digitizing analog recordings. I find that the SACDs, when played through a good player, offer a listening experience that are in many ways convey the concert hall experience better than many modern recordings. Reiner's Bartok disk, recorded in 1955, for instance puts 90% of modern disks to shame if you disregard some superficial hiss.