|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
64.231.115.201
Last evening I played the Ashkenazy/Previn/London Symphony Rachmaninov Piano Concerto No. 3 on LP that I finally managed to find. This particular performance of the Rach 3 has an almost transcendental importance for me as my idea of beating Hades would be having this thing repeat for an eternity in my brain.I first got it on CD and have enjoyed it many many times on my Arcam CD92. So naturally having gotten my Roksan Xerxes/Artemis (w/Denon DL103) going I've wondered how the LP would stack up.
Unfortunately the LP is hardly mint with many scratches but thankfully little grove damaged (notes don't break up and no fizz on loud sections). My first impression was that the sound was very 'shut in' in comparison to the the CD, clearly inferior ... until I turned to side 2 that is. The second side sounds completely difference having that clear dynamic sound I'm familiar with on the CD. What gives? Perhaps the first side has been played to death?
Conclusion (based on side 2) ... I found that from the high mids up the CD is better, yet the LP wins from the low mids down being more articulate yet paradoxically softer. Also in the area of transient attack the LP wins but the Xerxes has always been world class in this area; I have a particular version of the Tchaikovsky 6th where the dynamic attacks in the first movement practically make me jump out of my skin ... every singe time even thought I know exactly when its going to happen! Still, perhaps the story would change with a mint copy. I'll keep looking.
Follow Ups:
I have a couple of Londons where the optimal SRA setting is notably different for the two sides. It seems likely those lacquers were cut on different machines or at least after some adjustment or change between sides.Try fiddling with arm height on side 1. At a guess I'd try moving the arm a touch higher.
__________
"Do not meddle in the affairs of wizards, for they are subtle and quick to anger." - JRRT
.
The Londons were pressed in the UK but were never the same quality as the Deccas. There's been a ton of discussion on Phonogram about this.Presumably the CD was produced from the original Decca masters
the mastering choices between CD and vinyl alone make it hard to perform meaningful comparisons.Like Fred says, the toe tapping factor seems to be the most meaningful.
Randy
This summer I swam in a public place and a reservoir to boot,
At the latter I was informal,
At the former I wore my suit,
I wore my swimming suit.
--- L. Wainwright III
Side 1: ZAL-11225-11G
Side 2: ZAL-11226-12GLooks like it's back to the drawing board to explain this one, but I wouldn't put it down to equipment warmup that's for sure! - were're not talking subtle change!
No. it is dramatic to me, like a grade C system becoming grade A.
Enjoy
That side 2 sounds better than side 1 is definitely natural and almost always so because when playing side 1 the cartridge and phono amp (even you never turn off the preamp and power amp) are not warmed-up yet. In my experience,almost in every session, I have to wait for about 30 minutes to attain the "rightful" sound, and when it comes it is on side 2. Hope this helps.
Enjoy
The sound difference you speak of is most likely either a close to worn stamper on side 1 or a stamper that is a couple of generations farther away than side 2's plate for one of many possible reasons..It is highly unlikely each side would be cut by a different master house but more than likely side 1 was farther along in life than side when pressing..Although I have noticed this difference in some used lps i have purchased its fairly easy to tell now by looking at the end of the matrix codes, whether its 1 or 8 or 3, 1 usually always sounds the best, typically I will get records where side one may be a 3, and side 2 a 1 and side 2 always sounds better whether subtle or night and day..Also I am not surprised by what you find with CD's in the mids, I have been enjoying many cd's lately and have to say, with even my modest Rotel cdp a well done CD tends to out perform its vinyl counterpart in more ways than one dynamics wise, transparency etc.. But as I have learned, its all music dependent, like Kevin Gray says and I agree with, is that vinyl was not engineered with todays music in mind..Although I would easily
give up spinning records if it werent for the many I have that completely out perform cd and laugh at its very existence..
Colin
I can't really recall records where the sound is radically different side/side (aside from a few obvious things like live/studio recordings), except where one side had been played TO DEATH and the other side might be almost unplayed. The contrast of VG--- to MINT jumps out at you! I thought of someone falling asleep with a dreadful cheap record changer set to repeat and that side playing all night long! The highs that you might be perciving as the "openness" are the first things to be ground down by such abuse it seems.
I have many albums where the sound on one side does not match the sound on the other. Because records are made from two stampers, their quality can vary widely; they do not necessarily have to be cut by the same person or even come from the same source. If there is a usable existing stamper for one side available, record companies will use it and just cut one for the other side.
Sounds like you need to source an excellent copy of that recording,
you might try checking sites that sell japanese pressings they're around $50 typically but in cases like this well worth it, and they are generally superb as the japanese put the A in anal retentive ;-)
I have several LP's that are far from perfect and the SACD I have of the same recording is superior audibly as far as range and lack of distorsion, but I find the LP's generally initiate involantary toe tappingRegards FredJ
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: