In Reply to: Not all XRCD's sound good... posted by Audio Pharaoh on May 21, 2004 at 11:12:42:
I agree. I have xrcd's of Beethoven's 3rd and of his 6th and they both suck (sound-wise). Chesky has nice sounding (better sounding) versions of both...
I have also found that Chesky Classical recordings are top notch in general. Chesky's recordings have almost always been consistent with their good recording qualities. My only quible with them is the 'low' recording levels..If they could just increase the gain a bit:-)
As for XRCD's, recording quality can also vary from track to track even on the same disc..But when done right XRCD's are GREAT, IMO.
> > My only quible with them is the 'low' recording levels..If they could just increase the gain a bit:-) < <
Chesky recordings have a average lower recording level because the engineer made the choice - and that choice is to use as little limiting and compression as possible. I for one wish that more engineers would make the same decisions since the problem with most cds today is the amount of compression used at 0 db. However radio demands compression.
The low average recording level allows for a much greater dynamic capability - less compression is required as the recording nears 0 db - the sound is more natural and open - more usable bandwidth is realized - and the result is more natural dynamics at the freq extemes during complex passages.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: