A LOT of those so called "audiophile" specialty label recordings SUCK!!!!
The have very good, realistic sound.. but what that sound gives, emotionally... SUCKS! big time.
Classical records are not included it this opinion. Most of the audiophile classic are pretty good. Just the so-called Jazz are the WORST!
I'll take a badly recorded great performance, over a well recorded bland performance any day!
I have to agree with you Elizabeth with many of the so called Jazz recordings on Audiophile lables. Just back to the Kenny Rankin Chesky cd listen to him sing "I could write a book" or "Alway" he has no idea what the words mean or even how to a fraise a sentence, or how to caress a lyric.Then you listen to a singer like Arthur Prysock and now you can hear what a brillent singer can do. I would rather many audiophile record companys looking for new talent on the NYC subway platform during rush hour.
Hello, yes, that is correct Elizabeth.
I grade my LPs on four different factors;
1) studio/production, includes engineer and musicians,room, recording technique etc
2) pressing, includes vinyl and the pressing
3 condition, ie groove wear and physical condition
4) music, if you ain't got da groove, you aint got da move. This, though, is the most open for interpetation. Though never any Montovani, Readers Digest "light classical recordings" or Kenny G as these are always out.
A seperate category for "anomilies" such as pre echo, good bass, drums, vocal recording, piano etc; whatever that is found on recordings that can make it of interest to hear on other systems or as your system evolves.
Any LP that is seriously lacking in any of these areas, the LP is worthless.
Readers Digest "light classical recordings I would not say that these are bad recordings , first they were not made for the attention of being audiophile recordings at all. Most were made to give many people just the taste of the classics and depending on your taste go out and take a larger bite. Many were conducted by Arthur Fiedler who I consider an exceptional showman and musician. But many of the new musicians that are paned off as new talent is just well like Antonio Salieri said in Amadeus "mediocrity everywhere"
The only one I have is a Chesky Audiophile Gold cd "New York Reunion." It's well recorded but seems somehow lacking in emotional involvement. I had high hopes for it before purchase. At least it cost little or nothing.
Spent a bundle on Chesky SACD of Christy Baron at the Montreal audio show. Good sound: uninvolving signing. I feel cheated out of my hard-earned cash. C'est la vie!
Anyone remember those late 70's direct-to-disc japanese recordings of 10 minutes of drum solo?
Had one, played it once, that was that, don't remember what happened to it.
Hi Schipo, Allright lets agree on Montovani and change the Readers Digest "festival of light classical music" to Longines Symphonette Society wonderful recording to the "Family library of beautiful listening". I hate to offend anyone so Kenny G is now audiophile approved!
Seriously, dont recordings have to have to meet a certain criteria? You can not have it both ways Schipo, you started the thread with Kenny G sucks but then go on to defend a lousy recording, pressing and music. Well which is it? I am sure that there are people who love KG just as much as you like light classical recordings, perhaps KG is their stepping stone to Ornette Coleman.
Ana Caram, Rio After Dark on Chesky CD. Great sound, but she couldn't carry a tune with a wheelbarrow. Taught me finally to buy music I like and do the best I can with my system to make it sound good. Buying music because of the sound qualities has often proved disappointing.
Honorable mention: Byrds Greatest Hits on SACD. My 35+ year old vinyl copy from college, with scratches and all, sounds better.
In classical, the Reference Recordings recording of Respighi's Church Windows is the finest recording of the worst performance I've heard of that piece. Also, the Water Lily Acoustics recordings of the Dvorak overtures with the Philadelphia Orchestra is an excellent recording of fine performances that accurately depicts the driest acoustical venue this side of an anecholic chamber--really not that much fun to listen to it. And some of the early Telarcs featured some lackluster or, to be charitable, "unusual" performances from what you would have hoped would be top-flight orchestras and conductors, as well as the overly-ripe bass drum in their early years.
J. Gordon Holt used to have a rule that the better the recording, the worse the performance. In classical recordings, that was probably true for a while, but the last decadse or so the audiophile labels have been coming up with some fine conductors and orchestras with decent performances (a benefit of the major labels scaling back), so I don't think that holds true anymore, at least as a generalization.
Hello, Well, I guess, what the in the world do I know? Johnnyb52 (in the thread "Spelunking for old vinyl in thrift shops") just picked up the Readers Digest of Light classical and loves it! There's hope for Kenny G afterall. No offence JB52.
I have a mint copy of it also, if anybody wants it, it is free, just pay shipping!
Anything by Pat Barber, effete, mannered, vapid and badly recorded to boot. And for more white folks jazz lite the horrible Diana Krall and marginal Holly Cole spring easily to mind. All touted as audiophile favorites.
I am going to be very honest I really don't take to kindly to your statement "white folks jazz" hey Imus see it works both ways.
Viridian, "white folks jazz" as opposed to what other "kind" of jazz?
Schipo, my appologies, there was no intent to offend. But the correct quote would be "white folks jazz lite". Audphile 1, as opposed to mainstream jazz, modal jazz, fusion, latin jazz, free jazz or any other category of jazz.
Viridian, so "white folks jazz lite" is a category of jazz?
Is this like Eminem vs Dr.Dre or Eminem and Dr.Dre vs Coolio?
Sorry if I'm a pain, but I am just trying to picture what this category of jazz is all about.
Over the years I have fallen prey to many recordings that deliver less than inspiring music with stellar sonics. I agree with others that this happens most frequently with the Jazz and pop offerings from audiophile record companies. This supports the notion that putting together a great recording involves more than mere technical proficiency at either the performance or production levels. It seems to involve a variety of aesthetic decisions during performance and recording that are most effective at presenting the soul of the music. To make an analogy, I would rather behold a tarnished piece of silver than a highly polished buffalo chip.
My dirty half dozen would be:
1. Reference Recordings: Blazing Redheads
2. Sheffield Recordings: Growing Up in Hollwood Town
3. Crystal Clear: San Francisco Ltd.
4. Proprius: Jazz at the Pawnshop
5. Chesky: New York Reunion
6. Mapleshade: Sunny
None of these recordings is terrible, just way less than the sum of their parts.
Thats ok Viridian, I accept your apology and have a great evening. I know in my own life that I have spoken out wrongly myself.
Schipo , I have the Kenny Rankin cd also and agree its not the best recording but there is one song you might sit down and listen to again .. Its track 9 "This old man" . Its an emotional song that comes from Kenny's heart. Let me know what you think .
I will listen to it tonight. Maybe I judged him and the contents of this cd much to quickly.
Seems like the Classic label is problematic. Had a couple of bad ones in a row- some kind of nasty pressing gremlins.
Schipo wrote "almost like listening to bad Kenny G not that I believe there is any good Kenny G"
Kenny G with- Jeff Lorber Fusion- Album-Wizard Island -Great!!
I just find listening to Kenny G is like eating rice cakes you want something more but you know thats it.
For a while I was furious that Sony was releasing ancient recordings on SACD. I got burned buying a that, I don't recall all the details off the top of my head, was remastered from a 1952 mono recording. I failed to notice that as the time, as I made an impulsive purchase. The SACD "remaster" sounded like it was recorded through two tin cans and a piece of twine.
Contrast that with many of Deutsche Grammophone's new DVD-A recordings in the studio they built a couple of years ago that sound tremendous.
The lesson here, is if you buy your discs new at a store, patronize a record store that lets you listen first.
A friend of mine just purchased an audiophile copy of "Welcome to Boomtown" by david and david and he called me all bummed out cause it didn't sound as good as my original pressings. I told him he might have to adjust the vta for the optimum benifit and he tells me thats a hassle. Then he says it's MY FAULT cause I wouldn't sell him one of my three promo copies and I just started laughing and told him remember 10 years ago when i was scarfing them up at 3.99 a pop and that it was an Absolute Sound AND Stereophile Record To Die For and I told you to look for one and you said?
God bless the child thats got his own.
The correct name of the album is "Boomtown" and original pressings, as mentioned, are indeed wonderful.
You are correct sir,I got caught with the phrase in the song
Welcome to this Boomtown
Welcome to THE (not THIS) Boomtown.
It's been a while since I've heard it,in fact I prefer side two to one.
I listen to it frequently; it's in my first tier rotation.
I prefer side one to side two.
I find it unlistinable. Anyone want it?
Proprius: Jazz at the Pawnshop
Chesky: New York Reunion
Have to agree on these. I can forgive Pawnshop as they are just some smoes, but New York Reunion is a true bummer as on paper it should absolutely kill. It's still good, but damn chesky needed to have some coffee or booze on hand to get things going.