[Search for users] [Overall Top Noters] [List of all Conferences] [Download this site]

Conference cookie::notes$archive:cd_v1

Title:	Welcome to the CD Notes Conference
Notice:	Welcome to COOKIE
Moderator:	COOKIE::ROLLOW

Created:	Mon Feb 17 1986
Last Modified:	Fri Mar 03 1989
Last Successful Update:	Fri Jun 06 1997
Number of topics:	1517
Total number of notes:	13349

690.0. "Technology Over Substance?" by CASV07::MWRESINSKI () Thu Mar 26 1987 10:52

    I had a disconcerting experience last night and the damned CDs are
    to blame!
    
    I ( and many critics ) have always held the Reiner/Chicago Symphony
    version of Bartok's Concerto for Orchestra to be the definitive
    version ( from the 60s? ).  I hadn't listened to it in many years.
    
    Last night, I heard the new Dorati CD and was blown away!  All that
    clarity -- hey, I never heard that triangle before -- and where
    did that counter melody come from?!  I had to listen to the old
    Reiner again (until 1 AM) to verify that it was as great as I had
    remembered.  The difference was astounding and I wondered why I
    ever liked the piece so much (I'm speaking strictly of performance
    and not the frustrating hiss and crackle of the LP).
    
    Now I'm not certain whether I like the new version because of the
    restored detail or because it really *is* a better performance.
    I have to change my entire way of evaluating performances.  Yes,
    I know that you can rate a performance one way and the recording
    another, but the Dorati sounded so vastly superior that I wondered
    if the better technology can improve a mediocre performance.  It's
    like comparing a mediocre photograph which is in focus to a better
    composed and exposed photo which has been printed out of focus.
    If I had been comparing the CD to a mediocre LP performance it would 
    have been one thing, but, as I said, the Reiner is considered to be 
    the performance against which all others are measured.
    
    Has anyone had a similar experience or had a chance to compare an
    old LP with a remastered CD of the _same_ recording?
    
    (and is the Reiner available on CD?)
    
    > R.Michael

T.R	Title	User	Personal Name	Date	Lines
690.1	Bartok by Reiner on CD	BAVIKI::GOOD	Michael Good	`Thu Mar 26 1987 12:27`	5
	Yes, the Reiner is available on CD, paired with Music for Strings, Percussion, and Celeste for a 60+ recording. It's on my list of CD's to get. Michael
690.2		SATYR::GOODWIN	Send lawyers, guns, and money...	`Thu Mar 26 1987 12:51`	16
	I had a similar experience last week. I have listened to the CD of solti/chicago symphony recording of mahlers fifth for many years. I have found it to be an execelent recording, the sonic detail is incredible. I upgraded my amplifier last week(actually modified it with the musical concepts mods for a hafler DH-200. see note 942 in dssdev::audio). The difference was overwhelming. There was so much more to the recording than I had been able to hear through the old(un-modified) amp. My point being If you had upgraded your turntable/tonearm/cartridge you probable would notice the same definition on the vinyl(Note: I do not want to start a CD vs. vinyl debate over this) or for that matter upgrading any part of your system. This does not mean that Reiner is less than you thought. In fact there is more than likely a lot more on that vinyl then you have ever heard and you just have to change your point of reference.
690.3	Dorati and Detroit good on other Bartok	MAGES::BURR		`Thu Mar 26 1987 13:22`	8
	re .0 The Dorati/Detroit recording of Bartok's Miraculous Mandarin and Music for Percussion, Strings and Celeste is quite good, so I am willing to believe that the Concerto for Orchestra by this combination is also an excellent one, but haven't actually heard it. Rod Burr
690.4		AKOV68::BOYAJIAN	Canis Nervous Rex	`Fri Mar 27 1987 01:24`	6
	re:.3 The CONCERTO FOR ORCHESTRA with Dorati features the Concertgebouw Orchestra, not Detroit. --- jerry
690.5	musicianship <> technical quality	NATASH::WEIGL	Turboferrets - racing for answers	`Mon Mar 30 1987 15:58`	13
	re: .0 If a recording is known to be the standard for comparison, I'd be willing to bet that it's on the basis of MUSICAL performance and interpretation, and not just on the basis of recording excellence. You didn't mention what you thought of the actual PERFOMANCE of the MUSIC, but mostly along the lines of what a better technical recording might highlight in an otherwise OK performance of the score. I've not heard any of the recordings mentioned thus far, so this is just food for thought. It's easy to get wowed by the clarity and quality of the media and stop listening to the musical qualities. I know - I've been guilty of it myself on several occasions!
690.6	Can POOR sound be better?	AQUA::ROST	Who could imagine?	`Tue Apr 07 1987 16:26`	15
	What about recordings where the POOR quality of the sound adds to the performance? This pertains mostly to pop music, but certainly many blues and rock recordings owe some of their appeal to the sonic murk. "Louie Louie" and "Satisfaction" come to mind immediately. Even when remastered most of these recordings will still sound awful because they were recorded under primitive conditions (at least relative to the technology available for classical recordings from the same period). Another example is when you pick up a distant radio station while driving and hear something which sounds absolutely fantstic to you, so you go buy the record and when you can hear it clearly on your home system it sounds dull and lifeless. This brings to mind the retro-technical approach of pop svengali Phil Spector who hated stereo and monitored his mixdowns over a 6 by 9 inch speaker from the back deck of a Chevy because he wanted his records to sound great in the car.