In Reply to: RE: LOL! - The SQ was great! I loved it! [nt] ;-) posted by ahendler on July 13, 2017 at 14:19:55:
. . . the dynamics and hall ambience. I'm sure that at least part of this impression is accounted for by the two-channel vs. five-channel systems each of us is experiencing the performances through. Was the Mercury Stravinsky recording you listened to the Dorati/LSO Firebird? The general consensus is that that's one of the best recordings Mercury ever made. (BTW, I think I have about 75% of all the Mercury recordings which were issued on CD or SACD, plus a couple of the Plangent-process hi-rez downloads which derived from the later volumes of the big Mercury boxes, such as the Tchaikovsky Suites with Dorati and the New Philharmonia Orchestra, the Paray/Detroit Organ Symphony, etc.)
All other things being equal however, yes, I do prefer more minimally microphoned recordings, and in that sense I agree with you. Minimally microphoned multi-channel recordings, such as the ones on the Nishimura label (NLA unfortunately), have been produced - but even here, not all of these recordings hit the sonic bulll's eye! OTOH, I have to say that multi-microphoned recordings have gotten better and better over the years, and I generally find the ones made in the last decade or so to be quite enjoyable.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- I agree with you about the presence, not so much about. . . - Chris from Lafayette 15:46:27 07/13/17 (0)