|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
71.187.40.191
In Reply to: RE: A fantastic Fantastique posted by rbolaw on December 03, 2014 at 15:11:51
Its now common to extoll the virtues of original mono LP's as well as reissues of 'em, and have a second arm with a mono cart on it and/or an entire second tt setup for mono - to say nothing about 78's. They'd probably sound better with a good mono cart, but I do have a number of mono jazz albums that sound pretty damn good to me even with my stereo cart. Jeez, rbolaw, try to keep abreast of current trends in audiophilia, will ya?
Anyway, Symphony Fantastique ain't all that fantastic IMO.
Follow Ups:
I know mono is considered better for many early jazz records and the Beatles, for example, but isn't that mainly because such a crappy job was done with the stereo versions?
And the Fantastique isn't my favorite Berlioz piece, either. But it is interesting to hear Monteux do it as he's only one remove from the composer.
My understanding is that many jazz and classical recordings from the mid 50 by small companies were cut in mono as a result of costs, marketing and related logistical factors. Some engineers, like Rudy Van Gelder (who recorded jazz for Prestige AND many classical LPs for Vox etc...) were set up with mono equipment and did location recording. In addition, I'm guessing that many if not most consumers didn't jump on the stereo bandwagon right away and had hifi setups with one speaker, one mono integrated amp and a turntable wired for mono, with a mono cartridge. Pretty expensive back them to buy whole new sets of equipment to accommodate newfangled technolgy. Moreover, mono stuff can sound better than stereo, especially early jazz and small group classical recordings (ie... the great Blue Note and Westminster classical LPs), just as good master tape still beats most other formats the majority of the time, all things being equal, provided that the hardware is working properly and the stars are aligned just so:)
Having been an audio enthusiast for 30+ years, my experience-- for what it's worth-- is that each generation and change in both recordings and hardward brings advancements AND setbacks. To wit, triode tubes can sound more unto the real thing than pentodes, and again with modern, state of the art solid state. Likewise the best early horns, high efficiency drivers and early electrostatic speakers-- despite their size and technical limitations-- are quite remarkable and satisfying.
It seems to me that the same is true for pressings of recordings. While SACDs and high rez digital can sound marvelous, each generation of stereo LPs and tapes is usually inferior to the originals (whereas the reverse is usually the norm for CD). First pressing Deccas, Blue Notes, RCAs, Mercurys, Westminsters and Everests (among others) are usually better sounding than later pressings, and the market reflects this.
Harry
Good observations..RVG was technical genius and have many of his Blue Note recordings.....Have not heard the WESTMINSTER CD box . The pressings in old red covers bought at Sam Goody's in the bargain bins ,had many flaws(copies from the English pressings). some magnificent performances ,however.
Might be true for the Beatles, not for jazz LP's. Lottsa great older jazz recordings were mono and never released in stereo. Many of the ones I own have pretty good sound.
Gotta admit, I don't own any mono recordings of symphonic music. One I had and loved - Lt. Kije/Scythian Suite w/Hermann Scherchen - got too beat up.
I have a number of mono classical LPs. Many sound narrow and band-limited, but some sound great. I have the Reiner/CSO Scheherezade for example and it sounds fantastic in mono.
While we're talking about Westminster, I have some good Mono's but their earliest stereos are among my best sounding LPs, notably (this time of year) The Nutcracker.
Dave
Is that the old Rodzinski performance? If so, I am with you entirely. A magnificent recording!
Harry
Is that the old Rodzinski performance? If so, I am with you entirely. A magnificent recording!
Harry
Funny, the mono LP you mention with Scherchen is on the Westminster label. They released many outstanding classical mono LPs in the 1950s, some of the best for both performance and sound, and not hard to find or expensive.
What I was trying to say about stereo is that it wasn't well executed in a lot of the earliest stereo LPs. Do you know But Not For Me by the Ahmad Jamal Trio live at the Pershing Lounge from 1958? (Of course you do.) I have the original stereo LP. Great record, terrible stereo.
Plays The Russians yesterday. Westminster, cover says Mono/Stereo but the records say stereo. All the usual suspects: Polovtsian Dances, Scheherazade. Couldn't stop listening til I had gone through all six sides. I would swear I had never listened to it before, but it had rice paper innersleeves.
Actually the Jamal "But Not For Me" I have is on a double LP reissue, with some tunes live at the Pershing, some studio, and some live at the Blackhawk. BNFM is from the Blackhawk on this set. Sound varies cut to cut, but I love Jamal and his great playing/concept outweighs sound quality for me. Its a helluva lot easier for me to get past bad or mediocre sound with a piano trio than a symphony orchestra.Sure, I have a number of early stereo jazz LP's with the hard left/right pan that are not really good recordings. But if the sound is not ridiculously bright/thin - as it is on some bad recordings - the music still comes thru.
From what I've heard (and I certainly don't claim to be an expert) either the equipment or the engineers in the mono era did not do a good job with massed strings and brass sections - both usually sound bright/pinched. I've yet to hear a mono symphonic recording that had what I'd call good sound. Part of the reason I loved that Scherchen was because it was a record given to me by an uncle who introduced me to "classical" music in general, that piece in particular, and hifi.
I do like Scherchen. But Jeez, the sound on the stereo Classic Records reissue of Reiner/CSO playing Lt. Kije and Strav's Song Of The Nightingale that I own is worlds better (in fact its fantastic), and the performance is absolutely great IMO.
Edits: 12/04/14
Right you are. Most of the best sounding 50s classical mono LPs are chamber music or solo instrumental imho. There are a few pretty decent sounding orchestral ones, mainly from Mercury and London/Decca. Also, Leopold Stokowski did some great stuff with "his" symphony orchestra (mainly a combination of top NY Philharmonic and NBC Symphony players) on RCA, but the sq will not thrill you.
Agree re Ahmad Jamal. Brilliant guy.
That was just a bad recording, stereo or not.
"If people don't want to come, nothing will stop them" - Sol Hurok
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: