The Classical Download Thread

[flyingdutchman]

Teresa deletes BIS because she found out that she was fooled by the recording techniques of BIS.  She raved about BIS for ages, then found out that they don't release in "hi-rez" and has since been made to look ridiculous because she was fooled so badly.  No she won't have anything to do with BIS

[Teresa]

Teresa deletes BIS because she found out that she was fooled by the recording techniques of BIS.  She raved about BIS for ages, then found out that they don't release in "hi-rez" and has since been made to look ridiculous because she was fooled so badly.  No she won't have anything to do with BIS

I have ALWAYS raved about DSD recorded SACDs, I've raved about Telarc, Channel Classics, PentaTone and Exton among others but I never raved about any BIS recordings in ANY format.   However I do like the first three Grieg BIS DSD recorded SACDs, and two 24 Bit 44.1kHz recorded SACDs "American Spectrum" and "Shilkret: Trombone Concerto".  My opinion of these two SACDs did not change after I found out they were 44.1kHz instead of 88.2kHz.  THEY STILL SOUND EXACTLY THE SAME AS THEY ALWAYS DID!  It is the really bad sounding BIS SACDs and bad sounding BIS MP3s I don't like.

Recently I deleted over 20 BIS MP3 tracks for poor sound that I downloaded from my eMusic subscription.  Problems include weak bass, shrillness and unrealistic sound, BIS are among the worst MP3s I've tried.   I like Telarc MP3s better than ANY BIS recording in any format.

So you explain to me why BIS MP3s sound so much worse than MP3s from better recording companies as all MP3s are lossy 44.1kHz, so in a way MP3 takes the recorded resolution OUT of the equation?  TO MY EARS IT IS THEIR LESS THAN PERFECT TO POOR ENGINEERING PURE AND SIMPLE!  BIS is sometimes good in DSD, not as good in PCM.  For PCM I choose good recordings such as Telarc and Reference Recordings. 

I will say this BIS MP3s overall are better than Naxos and Deutsche Gramaphon MP3s but not by much.   BTW I was defending Robert von Bahr against a poster accusing him of recording at 44.1kHz, I said there was no way he would do that,  I was wrong!  I should have never STOOD UP FOR HIM, as he came out and admitted that indeed he was releasing in 24 Bit 44.1kHz PCM recorded SACDs.

BIS SACDs

The History of BIS' departure from DSD recording to 24 Bit 44.1kHz PCM recording

Listening with EARS not eyes.

Telarc SACD Sampler 1 - DSD vs. PCM

A Tale of two SACDs - DSD versus 24 Bit PCM

[flyingdutchman]

Teresa,

You were defending Robert because to your ears, before the revelation by Robert, BIS were great.  You were fooled, you feel burned, and now you rail against a label that has received accolades by thousands, including reviewers much more qualified than you.

[Fëanor]

Teresa,

You were defending Robert because to your ears, before the revelation by Robert, BIS were great.  You were fooled, you feel burned, and now you rail against a label that has received accolades by thousands, including reviewers much more qualified than you.

Do we really need to beat this further?

Theresa has a long history of "I love vinyl and DSD-recorded SACD" and "I hate CD and all things PCM".  In that, after all, she is perfectly consistent.

(Although she seems allow that Reference Recordings (HDCD) and Telarc (RBCD) can sound OK.)

[Scarpia]

I find the criticism of BIS quite puzzling.  To my ears their sound is not flashy, but strikingly realistic and natural. 

[Teresa]

Teresa,

You were defending Robert because to your ears, before the revelation by Robert, BIS were great.  You were fooled, you feel burned, and now you rail against a label that has received accolades by thousands, including reviewers much more qualified than you.

Your statement is not true at all.  Before the revelation I liked a handful of BIS SACDs, I still do by the way.  The two 24 Bit 44.1kHz SACDs actually sounded better than their resolution would indicate, this is a compliment to BIS and a bit of a shock.  Read my comments about American Spectrum before and after the revelation http://www.sa-cd.net/showthread/34896//y?page=first I avoided the subject of sound quality before the revelation as I was excited because of the music, as some of my favorite modern composers were making it to SACD.  Contrast that to my reviews of Telarc SACDs where I fall all over myself describing their sonic attributes.

I only gradually tried BIS again after being let down in 2005 by the complete Peer Gynt which sounded PCM'ish to me and other BIS SACDs that sounded terrible, at the time I blamed the engineering as according to Robert's email of 2005 I believed that he switched from DSD to 88.2kHz PCM.  The fact that after a couple of dozen or so PCM SACDs from BIS I found two that I liked does not justify your statement. 

BIS SACDs were never great all around, even the three DSD recorded Grieg SACDs were not perfect but they are world's better than the PCM BIS SACDs at any resolution.  Did you not read my review of the comparison of BIS DSD and PCM SACDs? A Tale of two SACDs - DSD versus 24 Bit PCM

"In my system playing the high resolution 2 channel stereo program, the PCM recording has muffled high frequencies, and is congested on climaxes and the climax of "In the Hall of the Mountain King" actually has audible digital distortion of the type I usually only hear on Redbook CDs, as if the recording is running out of steam, or perhaps bits?

The climaxes on the earlier DSD recording are clean, powerful with no congestion or closed-in feeling and not even a hint of distortion. DSD also affords the percussion instruments more umph! There is more ambiance on the DSD recorded SACD along with more beautiful and relaxing sound.

Both SACDs lack deep bass and bass warmth but that could be due to the hall or the choice of or placement of the microphones. In short these two SACDs prove why all recordings, especially orchestral recordings should ONLY be recorded DSD."

Since the early days of SACDs, ten years ago I have always sought out and purchased DSD or analog recorded SACDs.  I seldom purchase PCM recorded SACDs of any resolution unless it was music I could not get in DSD or analog recorded SACDs.  That is why my moniker is DSD at sa-cd.net!   I love DSD recordings.

BIS is one such company that was a goto for hard to find music not offered by other labels, where you get the idea I ever said they were sonically great is beyond me.  As I have even stated that I like Telarc's  16 Bit 50kHz Soundstream recordings much better than even the best BIS DSD recorded SACD, however nothing in the entire world equals a Telarc DSD recorded SACD, nothing not even 200 Gram LPs IMHO!!!

Perhaps you should read all of the links I provided before you make false accusations again.

[Teresa]

I find the criticism of BIS quite puzzling.  To my ears their sound is not flashy, but strikingly realistic and natural.

What recordings one loves and dislikes are highly personal and I never would want to distract anyone from enjoying the music they love, I am just offering my experiences with MP3s and their success rate in staying on my hard-drive. 

I am happy you find BIS enjoyable and even realistic.  Not sure about your comment about not being flashy, do you consider deep bass and bass warmth flashy?  I consider both as an important part of the sonic picture I cannot live without.  I understand equating percussive impact as flashy but I wouldn't want to live without this type of realism either.  To me most BIS recordings are too compromised to be sonically pleasing, they are not alone as I find this problem with many major labels including Naxos and Deutsche Gramaphon.  This is why I usually prefer the audiophile labels. 

While there are 100's of recording companies that offer the sonic realism I crave, even in lowly MP3, no one has reached the sonic heights of Telarc yet but I keep trying new labels as they appear, so in time perhaps?

[Scarpia]

What recordings one loves and dislikes are highly personal and I never would want to distract anyone from enjoying the music they love, I am just offering my experiences with MP3s and their success rate in staying on my hard-drive. 

I am happy you find BIS enjoyable and even realistic.  Not sure about your comment about not being flashy, do you consider deep bass and bass warmth flashy?  I consider both as an important part of the sonic picture I cannot live without.  I understand equating percussive impact as flashy but I wouldn't want to live without this type of realism either.  To me most BIS recordings are too compromised to be sonically pleasing, they are not alone as I find this problem with many major labels including Naxos and Deutsche Gramaphon.  This is why I usually prefer the audiophile labels. 

While there are 100's of recording companies that offer the sonic realism I crave, even in lowly MP3, no one has reached the sonic heights of Telarc yet but I keep trying new labels as they appear, so in time perhaps?

BIS recordings are made by putting the a small number of the very finest microphones available in front of the orchestra and recording what transpires, without any external manipulation of the signal.  No spotlight microphones, readjustment of balances, equalization, etc.  It is the sound of the orchestra and the hall, to the extent that the equipment can capture it.  The bass response in their recordings strike me as very extended and natural (i.e., if there is a bass drum in the orchestra I sometimes find myself worried that my low frequency drivers will be blown out).   They don't manipulate the recording to compensate for the supposed limitations of the medium, which is why I prize their recording over those made by most other companies.  Recently I listened to their recording of Holmboe symphony no 6, and the result was stunning, in my opinion.

[Teresa]

BIS recordings are made by putting the a small number of the very finest microphones available in front of the orchestra and recording what transpires, without any external manipulation of the signal.  No spotlight microphones, readjustment of balances, equalization, etc.  It is the sound of the orchestra and the hall, to the extent that the equipment can capture it.  The bass response in their recordings strike me as very extended and natural (i.e., if there is a bass drum in the orchestra I sometimes find myself worried that my low frequency drivers will be blown out).   They don't manipulate the recording to compensate for the supposed limitations of the medium, which is why I prize their recording over those made by most other companies.  Recently I listened to their recording of Holmboe symphony no 6, and the result was stunning, in my opinion.

Like I said I never try to tell anyone else what to enjoy, I just share my own experiences.

However you are closer to describing how Telarc records than how BIS records.  Robert von Bahr has said just the opposite on sa-cd.net.  He switched from DSD to PCM because at the time DSD did not offer him the tools he needed to edit in the DSD domain.  He says he edits, uses equalization, reverb, readjust balances, etc.  He also uses spotlight microphones.  The one natural thing he does is not restrict the dynamic range.

By contrast here is how Telarc records, they really use NO EQ, they edit as little as is possible, they use 3-4 microphones for Stereo and 7 for Multichannel.  All balancing is done prior to recording and they never adjust balances or levels afterword.  Indeed from their earliest days they have NEVER believed in "fixing it in the mix"! 

The basic Telarc recording technique is a modern day version of the legendary Mercury Living Presence recordings.  Jack Renner loved C. Robert Fine's natural sounding three omni microphone recordings and these served as his sonic role models.  Renner experimented and further honed his own "minimal miking" approach, which is still the primary model for the Telarc's engineering practices today.

Telarc Records - The Living Legends

"For the record, we have never worked to emphasize the basses, low frequencies, or bass drums on Telarc recordings. We simply record with excellent FLAT omni mics, keep the recording path wide open and FLAT, and do nothing to take away low-end. The low-end on the recordings is representative of what was there AT THE SESSION and ON-STAGE. Many, many orchestral recordings have had the low-frequencies attenuated, especially the older classics originally released on LP. If one's system has been tuned for playback of the oldies, then playback of a current flat response recording will sound as if the low-end is overblown. Which one is correct? Since I'm there at the inception - and can compare to what is hitting the mics live on-stage - the FLAT RESPONSE recording is by far the closest."
Michael Bishop
Recording Engineer

Natural realistic bass response is a hallmark of Telarc recordings

About Telarc

Telarc, masters of the Art and Science of recording

I have one final question, if bass-shy recordings such as BIS have extended bass response in your system, how do recordings that retain the full low frequency energy and impact of the original event sound?  Such as those from from Telarc, Reference Recordings, Mercury Living Presence and Delos?  Or do you avoid these and just stick with bass-shy recordings such as those from BIS, Naxos or DG?

[Scarpia]

Like I said I never try to tell anyone else what to enjoy, I just share my own experiences.

However you are closer to describing how Telarc records than how BIS records.  Robert von Bahr has said just the opposite on sa-cd.net.  He switched from DSD to PCM because at the time DSD did not offer him the tools he needed to edit in the DSD domain.  He says he edits, uses equalization, reverb, readjust balances, etc.  He also uses spotlight microphones.  The one natural thing he does is not restrict the dynamic range.

By contrast here is how Telarc records, they really use NO EQ, they edit as little as is possible, they use 3-4 microphones for Stereo and 7 for Multichannel.  All balancing is done prior to recording and they never adjust balances or levels afterword.  Indeed from their earliest days they have NEVER believed in "fixing it in the mix"! 

The basic Telarc recording technique is a modern day version of the legendary Mercury Living Presence recordings.  Jack Renner loved C. Robert Fine's natural sounding three omni microphone recordings and these served as his sonic role models.  Renner experimented and further honed his own "minimal miking" approach, which is still the primary model for the Telarc's engineering practices today.

Telarc Records - The Living Legends

"For the record, we have never worked to emphasize the basses, low frequencies, or bass drums on Telarc recordings. We simply record with excellent FLAT omni mics, keep the recording path wide open and FLAT, and do nothing to take away low-end. The low-end on the recordings is representative of what was there AT THE SESSION and ON-STAGE. Many, many orchestral recordings have had the low-frequencies attenuated, especially the older classics originally released on LP. If one's system has been tuned for playback of the oldies, then playback of a current flat response recording will sound as if the low-end is overblown. Which one is correct? Since I'm there at the inception - and can compare to what is hitting the mics live on-stage - the FLAT RESPONSE recording is by far the closest."
Michael Bishop
Recording Engineer

Natural realistic bass response is a hallmark of Telarc recordings

About Telarc

Telarc, masters of the Art and Science of recording

I have one final question, if bass-shy recordings such as BIS have extended bass response in your system, how do recordings that retain the full low frequency energy and impact of the original event sound?  Such as those from from Telarc, Reference Recordings, Mercury Living Presence and Delos?  Or do you avoid these and just stick with bass-shy recordings such as those from BIS, Naxos or DG?

I also regard Telarc highly, at least for engineering quality.   The tragedy of Telarc is they often did not record first rate ensembles or performances, and too often the result was superb recordings of medicre performances of mostly very standard repetoire.   I don't find BIS's recording style to be much different, and they do a fantastic job of finding superb performers.  I ask myself the following question.  What is more important, hearing a compelling music performance, or experiencing what it would sound like for someone to strike a 48 inch bass drum in my living room?

[Teresa]

Moved to the new Non-Classical Download Thread

[stingo]

Are there any great recordings that are available ONLY via download? Asking about amazon in particular. Thanks for the help.

[Scarpia]

Are there any great recordings that are available ONLY via download? Asking about amazon in particular. Thanks for the help.

I don't know if there is a list of recordings only available as downloads, but DG currently has downloads available on their own web site for many recordings for which the CD issue has been deleted from the catalog.

[Teresa]

Discovered a great new exciting mostly tonal modern work at Amazon.   Mauricio Kagel's Les Idees Fixes - Rondo for Orchestra and it was only 89 cents for a 22 minute work.  It's the first selection from the album Mauricio Kagel: Les Idees Fixes I only downloaded the first track as the samples of the other two compositions were too atonal for me.  But if you like them, the entire album is only $2.67

I've listened to it twice, the sound quality is excellent for MP3, the high percussion was very realistic with great impact, and the strings smooth.  The bit rate is 225 kbps (VBR) and it was encoded with LAME 3.97

[George]

Not the best transfer, but for $7.99 (in MP3 format) it's a good way to sample the composers performances of his own works.

[Opus106]

In connection with the 150th anniversary of Gustav Mahler's birth, as well as Christoph Eschenbach's 70th anniversary in 2010, christoph-eschenbach.com, in collaboration with the websites of the Orchestre de Paris and Medici TV will each offer a unique free streaming experience of all of Gustav Mahler's Symphonies.

Each month, starting on February 19, 2010 and then on the 15th of each month thereafter, a new symphony of Gustav Mahler will be put online for free streaming. Each symphony was recorded with the Orchestre de Paris under the direction of Christoph Eschenbach and filmed by the director François Goetghebeur. By October 15, 2010 the complete symphonies will be online for streaming and remain accessible until at least July 2011.

http://mahler.christoph-eschenbach.com/

[stingo]

In connection with the 150th anniversary of Gustav Mahler's birth, as well as Christoph Eschenbach's 70th anniversary in 2010, christoph-eschenbach.com, in collaboration with the websites of the Orchestre de Paris and Medici TV will each offer a unique free streaming experience of all of Gustav Mahler's Symphonies.

Each month, starting on February 19, 2010 and then on the 15th of each month thereafter, a new symphony of Gustav Mahler will be put online for free streaming. Each symphony was recorded with the Orchestre de Paris under the direction of Christoph Eschenbach and filmed by the director François Goetghebeur. By October 15, 2010 the complete symphonies will be online for streaming and remain accessible until at least July 2011.

http://mahler.christoph-eschenbach.com/

Great find - thanks!

[MN Dave]

I notice many operas can be had at Amazon's MP3 department for chump change.

[mahler10th]

Each month, starting on February 19, 2010 and then on the 15th of each month thereafter, a new symphony of Gustav Mahler will be put online for free streaming. Each symphony was recorded with the Orchestre de Paris under the direction of Christoph Eschenbach and filmed by the director François Goetghebeur. By October 15, 2010 the complete symphonies will be online for streaming and remain accessible until at least July 2011.

http://mahler.christoph-eschenbach.com/

Thanks for this!
I listened to and watched Mahler 1 this morning.
Eschenbach is a right handed conductor, with somewhat scary features during critical passages.  But he knows Mahler well, and brings out everything that shines.  Like Bernstein, he plays with the pauses in a way which make the music both beautiful and dangerous and essential listening.

[PaulSC]

Woodwind quintet fans please note, an archive of (mostly live) recordings featuring the Soni Ventorum quintet (in full, in smaller configurations, and with guests) can be found at

http://soniventorum.com/soniventorum_archives.html

and everything there is free to download. I'd estimate maybe 100 items, ranging from Bach through Babbitt and including most of the standard quintet repertoire along the way. Ten Reicha quintets! Nine Danzi quintets! Nielsen! Schoenberg! Ligeti!