|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
73.222.105.47
In Reply to: RE: Bychkov posted by srl1 on April 01, 2016 at 18:15:34
Some listeners have said that they want to hear a balance more in favor of the winds, but for others (including me), Bychkov has it exactly right. The Macal/CzPO set on Exton also seemed good, but I've only heard parts of it on Spotify, so I didn't hear its audio quality at full resolution.
BTW, I assume your question was with respect to hi-rez recordings - otherwise, there are zillions of possible recommendations! ;-)
Follow Ups:
No slouch at Brahms, and a great recording as well.
while four are up for streaming on TIDAL.Brahms is 'four', right?
Who can remember?
Anyway, listening to 'two' on TIDAL right now and no surprises. Yes, EXTON does a good job. Lots of lower strings, no screechy violins, all is good.
Edits: 04/02/16 04/02/16
Brahms Symphoy choices on SACD. I assume this is based primarily on performance. Performance aside, how are the sonics? Second question: are their better cycles where the sonics are superior?
Thanks, Pete
Not the one to ask as I am very biased in favor of just about every thing he's recorded, which IMNSHO is not nearly enough.
That said, comparing the Bychkov with the Zdenek Macal version of Brahms 4th and I'd say you can't go wrong with either and MAYBE the EXTON recording MIGHT have the edge but that's only QOBUZ in 44.1 Lossless FLAC (albeit local playback not live streaming).
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: