[khanhnhatle]

Rostropovich's with Karajan was good, but in my opinion, his best recording of the concerto was with Vaclav Talich. The sound is mediocre, though.
Dvorak's B minor concerto is one of my favourite, and of all the recordings that I had, Fournier's, with Szell conducting the Berliner Philharmoniker, has to be the best. Among the modern recording, Jean-Guihen Queyras's is great, too.

 

[bigshot]

I agree. Talich is the best. I was going to recommend that, but I think the original request for recommendation wanted "good sound"

 

[RRod]

  I agree. Talich is the best. I was going to recommend that, but I think the original request for recommendation wanted "good sound"

 
Heaven forbid

 

[Wildcatsare1]

As you all know, just really beginning to re-explore classical music after a long lull, so your input is appreciated.

Listening to Karajan, Berlin Dvorak/Smetana, really enjoying the recording but the points above on Szell/Clevelanders shrill brass brought a question to mind. Not to generalize, but the DG Strings have a "steely" sound. What Labels, Orchestras, Conductors tend to tie together the entire sonic package?

 

[bigshot]

What does the entire sonic package consist of? Orchestras (at least the best ones) tend to have their own sound.

 

[Wildcatsare1]

Truer, subjective, my list is included tonal accuracy, three dimensional soundstage (ok height is tough), dynamics and most importantly a musically intriguing performance (again subjective, but I am still developing "taste", from thunderous to mathematically precise).

 

[SunTanScanMan]

As you all know, just really beginning to re-explore classical music after a long lull, so your input is appreciated.

Listening to Karajan, Berlin Dvorak/Smetana, really enjoying the recording but the points above on Szell/Clevelanders shrill brass brought a question to mind. Not to generalize, but the DG Strings have a "steely" sound. What Labels, Orchestras, Conductors tend to tie together the entire sonic package?

I wouldn't dare generalise. But I do like Dorati and LSO or Minneapolis, at least the ones I've heard... which are basically the Living Mercury recordings and I tend to like any of those. Not sure if it's all down to the orchestra sound, there's the choice of music, tempo, romance of an older recording, sq ... a mixture of those.
 
Regarding Dvořák, I'm not as enamoured with his work outside his chamber string compositions. But that's just what I'm into nowadays.
 
------------------
 
Currently enjoying Tchaikovsky's string quartets which are truly gorgeous. Read about Shostakovich's admiration for his and Borodin's string quartets so I'm exploring those.
 

 

[Wildcatsare1]

I wouldn't dare generalise. But I do like Dorati and LSO or Minneapolis, at least the ones I've heard... which are basically the Living Mercury recordings and I tend to like any of those. Not sure if it's all down to the orchestra sound, there's the choice of music, tempo, romance of an older recording, sq ... a mixture of those.

Regarding Dvořák, I'm not as enamoured with his work outside his chamber string compositions. But that's just what I'm into nowadays.

------------------

Currently enjoying Tchaikovsky's string quartets which are truly gorgeous. Read about Shostakovich's admiration for the his and Borodin's string quartets so I'm exploring those.

I have several Mercury Living Presence on vinyl along with various RCA's from my first time around in this venture. Do love their sound, so I guess that would be what I am looking for sonically. Though, I really am not sure that beautiful, rich tone can be repeated digitally. Not trying to open a debate, but I have yet to hear a digital rig, perhaps my own ignorance, that can deliver that magic sound.

 

[bigshot]

The quality of the sound in Living Stereo and Mercury Living Presence were due to very careful and simple miking and really good tape machines, not the release format. The CD releases of these in the box sets show how much of a compromise the LPs were. No question, the CDs are MUCH better, particularly the Mercuries where they often had problems on vinyl with overdriving distortion.

 

[SunTanScanMan]

I have several Mercury Living Presence on vinyl along with various RCA's from my first time around in this venture. Do love their sound, so I guess that would be what I am looking for sonically. Though, I really am not sure that beautiful, rich tone can be repeated digitally. Not trying to open a debate, but I have yet to hear a digital rig, perhaps my own ignorance, that can deliver that magic sound.

I've not had the pleasure of hearing those recordings on vinyl. My dad had a decent stereo system when I was very young, but he sold it yonks ago.
I've been using my desktop speakers more often after moving as I don't have neighbours to bother where my room is. They're decent but modest speakers but after listening to them and then going back to my headphones I realise how limited and small they can sound. Perhaps this is shown most vividly with orchestral works. So I can't imagine what a half decent speaker system (whether digital or analogue) will provide.

At the same time, I have a crappy radio in my kitchen which doesn't even have an antennae as it snapped off years ago. If I put the kettle on or stand near it gets static or loses reception. Sonically it doesn't hold a candle to what I have in my room, but when I'm sat at the breakfast table, it manages to play classic fm and if a performance I like comes on, it has no trouble mesmerising or moving me - and this happens all the time.
 
It may be just me, but I'm convinced that the threshold of audio quality and the enjoyment one can gain from it is MUCH lower than these forums can lead one to believe.

 

[perhapss]

  A lot of modern headphones and speakers today emphasize the extreme ends of the frequency spectrum. That wasn't true back then. Lining Stereo recordings are almost always the most balanced recordings you can get. DGG can tend to sound a bit thicker with less high frequency, as if the mikes are further back in the hall.

 
Good points.
I agree.

 

[bigshot]

  It may be just me, but I'm convinced that the threshold of audio quality and the enjoyment one can gain from it is MUCH lower than these forums can lead one to believe.

 
Music is what matters. I have records that are over 100 years old and were recorded without microphones or electricity... and they still grab me

 

[Clear Water]

Well, there are different kinds of listening I guess.  Sometimes it's thrilling to listen to some old recordings, sonic warts and all.  I love the 20's and 30's recordings of Stokowski and Philadelphia, for example.  Has the faux-stereo Roman Carnival been mentioned in this thread yet?  But other times it's too exhausting, and it's easier to just listen to a digital recording.  I find that even with the good analog stuff the treble extremes can be grating.  As much as I love the Reiner/CSO I always wince at the cymbal crashes (4th movement Scheherazade comes to mind) and sometimes even at beloved Bud.  The Reiner set with CSO has huge sonic variations, to my ear.

 

[bigshot]

I have the Reiner CD box set, and all of the stereo recordings are very consistent when it comes to sound quality. But perhaps rather than frequency response, it's the dynamics that are causing problems for you. A big cymbal crash at high volume can overdrive some speakers and headphones. I can guarantee you it isn't the recording though. Reiner's R-K is one of the most perfectly recorded CDs of all time. It puts an awful lot of digital recordings to shame.
 
The thing about Living Stereo is RCA had plenty of time to experiment with microphone placement at the halls in Boston, Chicago and Philadelphia in the mono era. By the time stereo came around, they just put the mikes in the exact same places every time and rolled. The sound from recording to recording within the same hall is almost identical. (Boston sounds the best to me.)

 

[HPiper]

  The quality of the sound in Living Stereo and Mercury Living Presence were due to very careful and simple miking and really good tape machines, not the release format. The CD releases of these in the box sets show how much of a compromise the LPs were. No question, the CDs are MUCH better, particularly the Mercuries where they often had problems on vinyl with overdriving distortion.

That was the major problem with vinyl, if you had a performance with a lot of dynamic range you couldn't capture it without dialing down the levels until they were inaudible or getting overdrive distortion. CD's are not as bad as all that in spite of the fact they are not analog. I frequently think of getting a turntable and heading back down that vinyl road but then I think back to all the work (cleaning) and pitfalls (scratches, overdrive, levels) and I quickly throw on a CD and get over it.