ptss, I wish more companies put a polarity reversal switch on their pre-amp(s). Ralph at Atma-Sphere is one of the few. And a mode switch (stereo/reverse/mono/left/right) too.
When will there be decent classical music recordings?
With "pop" music the recordings are such that you can hear the rasp of the guitar string, the echo of the piano, the tingle of the percussion ... and so on .... and in surround sound.
Surround sound is brilliant in picking out different instruments that would otherwise have been "lost" or merged with the other sounds.
Someone will say well that is not how you listen at a concert, but that is just archaic. As a friend said many years ago to me ... whats wrong with mono?!
I am sure Beethoven or whomever would have been excited if they could have presented their music in effectively another dimension.
I have yet to come across any classical recording that grabs me in the way it should, or could. Do they operate in a parallel universe musicwise?
I used to play in an orchestra so I am always looking out for the "extra" presence in music ... in amongst it, not just watching and listening from a distance
Surround sound is brilliant in picking out different instruments that would otherwise have been "lost" or merged with the other sounds.
Someone will say well that is not how you listen at a concert, but that is just archaic. As a friend said many years ago to me ... whats wrong with mono?!
I am sure Beethoven or whomever would have been excited if they could have presented their music in effectively another dimension.
I have yet to come across any classical recording that grabs me in the way it should, or could. Do they operate in a parallel universe musicwise?
I used to play in an orchestra so I am always looking out for the "extra" presence in music ... in amongst it, not just watching and listening from a distance
65 responses Add your response
Great effort is put into the recording of much/most classical music as it's an expensive proposition and conductors are notoriously fussy. If you have a great system -with a "phase reverse" switch-most classical recordings are very enjoyable. It just takes good equipment,knowledge and effort to get the most out these recordings. |
Surround processing in music is not random division of sound, it keep the natural front imaging but extracts from the general noise certain aspects. A drum beat may be set at the right of me, and maybe a trumpet at my left ear. What this does, apart from allowing the individual sounds to be heard that are usually "lost", is have less mash of sound coming from two speakers if in stereo - and, in stereo, if you have a lot going on at any time it can confuse the speaker. I listen to my vinyl too in surround sound and love the ability to hear lots of "stuff" that is submerged in stereo. My second system is of less quality but seems to have more "old fashioned atmosphere" - so it is a question of satisfying itches at any time. I hope some of the recommendations placed on this thread will help me find quality recordings that will present the actual music better than usual, and revitalise my interest in classical music. |
Interesting thread! When I first read in "music in the round" that with SACDs there is an option to opt for a surround which puts you inside of an orchestra, I just laughed! TATYANA69, as I understand the original post, is actually looking for this, go figure! Lets post the photos of our "big rigs" so that the thread could get more meaningful and less anonymous. I will try to post mine today... Flying Gilmore guitar maybe a dud, but that was the "original intention" of the guys, and I would like to hear it. Until then I have no idea what that is and if it works for me, all I know is that I cannot afford surround at the same quality as my present stereo. |
That's why I have a second system. I listen to a lot of historical recordings and I cannot listen to them on my primary system. Too revealing. Box sets I love: The Reiner, Westminster Legacy and the Archive Analogue. All good examples of exemplary sound. And artistry. And we're not talking digital sound here. A disc I use for testing (read about it by a reviewer) is by Trondheimsolistene 'in folk style.' Grieg and some wonderful contemporary composers. Of course if I had mono blocks each with their own power conditioners and 70k speakers with a reel to reel playback system and a large room there would be no end to the possibilities of great sound.
|
I understand what you are saying by a blob of sound. But the better your equipment becomes(which can take a heckuva lot of money) the more impactful and transparent it becomes. You can listen to Paray's on Mercury Saint Saen 3rd in its most recent cd incarnation and find it overwhelming. I can't stop listening to it. I recently got an outrageously expensive great cartridge and even 70s vinyl pressings of Reiner's Lt. Keiji and Ansermet's Pulcinella are tremendously moving to almost bring tears to your eyes. I know that with more space and more money it is capable of sounding better and then there is reel to reel... But most of us have space and money limitations. And there are those who are into original acoustics on victrolas and find them unearthly in their presence. True time machines. If you want anything better you'd have to hire Dutoit and Montreal to play in your back yard. |
Wow, I feel just the opposite! I wish more popular music was recorded with the approach more typical of classical music recordings. The most irksome thing about most contemporary popular music recordings is the squashing of dynamic range, followed by having the musicians sounding as though they're playing in different rooms. I do have to admit that, perhaps due to the microphones being placed above the strings, and piano, rather than in front, I often hear these instruments as being overly bright. Also, I would on some level expect to hear chamber music differently than symphonic music. With chamber music I tend to prefer the musicians in my room perspective a bit more, and with symphonic music I tend to prefer the perspective of being transported to the concert hall. |
@tatyana69 thank you for bringing it up! Based on the responses here the idea of bringing an extra dimension into classical music bothers a lot of a'goners! I totally agree with the sentiment of Alex Ross from his book "The Rest is Noise" that segregating music into Music and Classical Music is WRONG... (a disclaimer, that is one of just two books I had read about music in my entire life! The other one was about Pink Floyd, the band Alex Ross referred to as "sounding like Mahler"). Most of us (myself included!) take this distinction a bit too serious... Once this segregation is disregarded as moot, I will be thrilled to hear DSOTM in surround with Gilmour guitar flying around me as much as "classical" recording from the perspective of being inside the orchestra. Totally agree with the guys that this has nothing to do with the original "intent" of the composer, but listening to Tchaikovsky under late Celibidache no one can pretend that they are listening to the "original intent" of the composer!... Beautiful, transcendent, but Definitely not the original intent!!! |
tatyana69, with all due respect I think you are getting hung up in conceptual quandaries and "missing the (music) forest for the trees". You can’t have it both ways. You are correct, a "composer’s fertile mind" would, in fact, "leap at the opportunities today". However, you seem to be missing some key points: First, the composers you seem to be referring to DID NOT live today. The tools that you are referring to were not available when they composed. So, the artistic integrity of their works is inextricably linked to what was available to them. Moreover, those very composers would be the first to point out that this reality needs to be respected and that for anyone besides the composer to try and alter how that artistic vision is presented after the fact is to not respect the music and belies a lack of understanding or appreciation of values that are an integral part of quality art; values which emphasize nuance and subtlety ("blob music"?!) and not just the hyper-stimulation that our modern electronically "advanced" culture and it’s music listeners have become accustomed to. |
That is a very naughty thing to say Vindanpar. People look for different things in music. The main thrust of my argument is that little has progressed in presentation of classical music for many many years. Maybe a few people here and there think about what can be achieved, but generally they are shameful in sticking to old rut fomulae. Maybe there are enough old skool people out there listening happily to combined sounds for a blob of music, but I doubt it. You will of course disagree, and so be it. Hail mono. So many old composers loved to push sensitivity and listening experiences, and were often getting into trouble. As I have written before, I would imagine that their fertile minds would leap at the opportunities today. Probably most of the marketplace is pretty conservative, so any reaching out would generally be self indulgent and pointless and will pretty well almost die in due course. I hate jazz, but was caught up in listening to Box Biedebecke. I kept on wondering how many were in the group. After listening more specifically I realised it was the same number, but they kept on swapping instruments. Why? Well apart from being impressive it lent different textures to basically the same refrains. They understood this concept nearly 100 years ago - but it has meandered nowhere since - especially of you want to listen to the blob of music from 20 yards away without the detail. You look at the score of any symphony and I would take huge sums of money off you betting you could not hear more than 30% of what was going on. Did composers write so you only heard an impression of what they wrote? Of course not. They wrote all the extra bits you just will not hear because they knew they were writing to satisfy their own mind. You can hear the blob music on Itunes and so many people are clearly happy at all the limitations of that. As a young girl who worked for me once said "Who are the Beatles?" |
"I have yet to come across any classical recording that grabs me in the way it should, or could." Clearly you have done very very little listening to classical music in recordings where even in boxy mono a Toscanini, Furtwangler, or Mengelberg could grab you by the throat let alone all the way up to the Mercury and Living stereo recordings which are astonishing and jaw dropping. |
While "enhancing" instrumental balances and spatial effects may improve the "ear candy" appeal of some Classical music recordings, it will rarely improve the musical intent of the composer or the performers; and will most likely detract from it. It is a well established idea that composers did and do consider the audience’s perspective in a concert hall when composing and scoring. This consideration affects how they score the composition and partly determines which instruments or combination of instruments are assigned to specific musical lines. Some instruments, besides having their own unique tonal color, are capable of "projecting" more than others and this is taken into account. Additionally, good orchestral performers take great pains to blend with their musical colleagues in a way that serves the composer’s intent as indicated by dynamic markings in the score and by established performance values. In an orchestral (and chamber) performance setting this attention to balance and blend is one of the things that creates an environment condusive to really good music making. A good Classical music recording is one that does not interfere with the composer’s or performers’ musical intent. It takes a truly musically astute producer/engineer to not destroy those balances and who will "enhance" only when the limitations of the recording process and venue do not serve the composer’s and performers’ vision. Usually, less is more. |
Let me respectfully disagree re. Herbert von Karajan legacy, his Beethoven and Bruckner cycles will outlive all of us and our great-grandkids! Just because he embraced digital and DG used skewed RIAA does not make him inherently Evil! True, his Tchaikovsky sounds wrong to the slavic ears, but how could he (or anyone) present the 4th the "right way" if he'd never been immersed into "the birch in the meadow" Russian folk song playing nonstop from almost everywhere?!? True, unlike Bernstein he did not waste his life on interpreting Mahler, he (or anyone outside Mama Russia) had never had a chance to present Tchaikovsky the way Mravinsky did, so what?!?! I still choose Monteaux for the simple beauty of the music, without those extras of "Russian Soul" anguish. Let me clarify, Karajan is Not my all-time favorite (I dont have any) but to dismiss him as lifeless and digital Evil seems absolutely wrong to my slavic ears... @tatyana69 check "music in the round" column of Stereophile mag, I cannot afford decent surround but if I could I would have started there. Love your point that given a chance more composers would have used surround-sound effects. Stockhausen with his three orchestras comes to mind but, again, where are the recordings, and where is my surround B&W 800-series speakers :-( Until then I am going old-school |
@rcprince. Very interesting and accurate comments on mic'ing techniques. And thanks for sharing your mixing experience. As for Karajan, look how many of his DG recordings were later remixed and remastered due to his insistence on overseeing the engineering process. I far prefer a slightly more distant perspective so I can hear the blend of voices and instruments called for by the composer.Well said; that is my preference as well. I attend the symphony each season and enjoy a mid-hall sound experience. |
Actually, I wouldn't overrate the engineers, it's the producers who have the most say in the final mix, along with the artists. I would rate most Harmonia Mundi recordings, particularly those produced by Robina Young, as among the best I have heard on a consistent basis. Take any recording of Nicholas McGegan and the Philharmonia Baroque, for example, those might satisfy your craving for both musical values and recordings with texture to the instruments (they're a small enough ensemble for that to work, I think). That they had Peter McGrath and Tony Faulkner as recording engineers was a plus as well. Also, Craig Dory's recordings of the Baltimore Consort on Dorian also might be worth your time. Finally, as a rule I have felt Decca recordings, particularly where the recording engineer was Kenneth Wilkinson, seem to strike a reasonable balance between a broad picture of the orchestra and adding a little presence through some spot miking. |
Many thanks for those excellent comments. Yes Deutsche Gramafon recordings are ruined by Von Karajan lifeless presentation. I could bash a tin can with more feeling than all his recordings put together.And there were FAR to many of them. I wonder how I can search a catalogue for specifics of recording techniques, as you have mentioned? It is very dispiriting. For example I must have 7 or 8 recordings of Schubert Impromptus and also of Tchaikowsky Violin Concerto (No 1 ha ..ha) yet only one of each is half decent. Strangely the best recording (sound and interpretation) of the Tchaikowsky was my cheapest - a vinyl lp at 99p. Quality seems to have no correlation with price, but we all know that ! . And recordings of the most well known orchestras are often disappointing when compared with those lower down the hierarchy And don't get me started on overrated engineers. Most of them couldn't tell a trumpet from a cornet, or a violin from a viola. How do I track down the good ones???? |
As I mentioned, if you want recordings with mikes throughout the orchestra, check out the Deutsche Gramophone catalog. They place mikes throughout the orchestra (almost in the laps of the musicians, in the early years), run everything through a mixer, and let their tonmeister, together with the artist, decide on the final balances. Ironic that you call out a DG artist (HVK) who used the very technique you're calling for. There are also plenty of mikes throughout the orchestra used by most recording engineers--Decca, EMI, Reference Recordings and most labels, in addition to their arrays in front of the orchestra, liberally use spot mikes in various sections, especially over the woodwinds or a soloist, to add presence to those instruments, depending on the particular piece being recorded. I found it illuminating when I listened to master recording files of the NJ Symphony Orchestra and other artists (such as the Kissin recital at Carnegie Hall) with Tim Martyn, their recording engineer, on my system running through his mixing console. We were able to play with the levels of all of the many spot mikes throughout the orchestra, as well as the Decca tree with outriggers in front of the orchestra and the spaced omnis out in the hall used for picking up the hall ambience. I found that I'm not a purist by any means--if I were, I'd prefer just the omnis for the sound I heard in the hall, but that sounded way too vague and distant, and not at all what I'd heard in the hall. This was especially true with the Kissin concert, where adding the mikes placed over the piano to the omnis out in the hall gave the performance life and presence that the omnis by themselves lacked. Tim, as do many of today's classical recording engineers in conjunction with the artists, will use the spot mikes judiciously to add that presence and life to the music. You would call for more of that, I guess, but as an amateur performer (singer in a number of choruses and vocal ensembles) and member of the audience I far prefer a slightly more distant perspective so I can hear the blend of voices and instruments called for by the composer. To each his own. |
"The power of a string quartet is not hearing the body cavity resonances of each instrument (though if captured realistically it could be an enhancement), but the music itself."" |
I think Tatyana69 is focusing on listening to the sound, texture, and detail of each instrument. If taken to an extreme, most music lovers would consider this secondary enhancement or detraction from a musical experience. To me this emphasis is the tail wagging the dog. The power of a string quartet is not hearing the body cavity resonances of each instrument (though if captured realisticly it could be an enhancement), but the music itself. |
I have several uniquely recorded albums (LP's) on the "Repeat" label. They were recorded without using microphones in producing the master tapes. According to the liner notes, "all musical instruments employed being equipped with specially-designed transducing systems which convert the energy of the original sound source into a corresponding electrical signal. This output is then fed directly through the recording mixer and onto tape." These recordings have the most "presence" of individual instruments in my entire collection, including any of the so-called audiophile recordings I own. Do they sound "better?" Well, yes, from a "presence" standpoint ... but there is something that is just not right. Oh yes, they have the "wow" factor, but as a steady diet? No way. Totally interesting though. Here's the titles if your intersted in tracking them down: 1. Western Swing - Noel Boggs on steel guitar along with fiddles, guitar, drums and bass. 2. Rural Rythm - Fiddle, fife guitar and bass. 3. Borodin string quartet #2 in D Major. The Da Sallo String Quartet. 4. Dvorak Quintet in G, Opus 77. Two violins, Viola, Cello and bass. Anyone of these LP's will satisfy the most detail and presence audiophile freak on the planet. Really fun to listen to ... for the first few times. Great for demonstrating your stereo to friends. Lot's of "wow" factor. So, all of that "extra presence" the OP is seeking is/was available, but a steady diet of it? I don't think so. Jump on this one, guys: http://www.ebay.com/itm/Norman-Whistler-Ted-Nash-Rural-Rhythm-Repeat-Records-RS-300-4-Dee-Ford-/1219... http://www.ebay.com/itm/NORMAN-WHISTLER-THE-RURAL-RYTHM-MASTERS-RURAL-RYTHM-VINYL-LP-REPEAT-RECORDS-... Frank |
I saw an quite interesting musical presentation several years back at Inhotim Museum and Botanical Gardens in Minas Gerais Brazil. It consisted of 40 B&W monitor speakers setting up an oval with the listener in the middle. of this quite large space. The musical selection was a Bach piece. Each speaker represented a voice or instrument. Each instrument/voice made an individual entry as is often typical in Baroque music but I must say there was nothing at all typical about the presentation. By the time all voices/instruments were playing one was surrounded by all these individual voices/instruments clear and discernable. The ultimate surround sound, maybe better than live? :) |
No matter how good and big the room is, it will not make a average recording come alive. I believe the COST of making records sound great from big scale works or orchestra are the primary contraint. The venue from where the music are recorded plays a key factor here. Many were recorded in large studio instead of stage hall. The equipments used in recording directly from a hall cost a lot more and the manpower involved multiplies. Experienced recording engineers aren't cheap too. As mentioned earlier, many records sound compressed or smeared perhaps due to poor recording environment and modest equipments used in the first place. There's a limit on how much a mixing engineer can do to replicate that event if the original master tape are poorly done. I've heard great records done by Japanese labels, their CDs don't come cheap even today. Try YouTube for Joe Hisaishi, he's the top composer, conductor and pianist himself. His productions on CDs and DVDs are always great. From the beginning to the end of making a CD, it takes a lot of effort, time and money for an orchestra to sound good. |
That there is technology capable of reproducing live music as well as it does is essentially a miracle that everyone should be thankful for. When hifi first hit the mainstream it was a big deal and resulted in many very high quality recordings in short time because there was appreciation for such things. Now it’s taken for granted or deemed not good enough like so many things these days. How jaded we all are! |
You might try omnidirectional speakers or something along those lines in order to be able to get multiple perspectives similar to the concert hall based on where you listen from. Stand in between them and you might get something llike what you would hear if one were in the orchestra. My OHM Walsh speakers work that way for example. mbl would as well. Or to be surrounded as one would be sitting in middle of an orchestra, maybe there is a modern Blue Ray or DVD with surround sound that might take a crack assuming all surround speakers are all equally up to the task as one would expect only mains to be normally. But with only two speakers in front of you chances are you will at best get a perspective similar to sitting in the audience with your room and its acoustics your concert hall experience. No two channel recording will change that |
I agree that a larger room may be helpful to the OP, but not for the reasons that seem to be implied in the recent posts. The OP is looking for more detail than most classical recordings provide, corresponding to a very close-up perspective on the instruments. An increase in ambience would seem to work in the opposite direction. Everything else being equal, a larger room will tend to lessen the effects of room reflections, that may tend to smear the detail the OP is looking for. That potential benefit will occur due to a reduction in the amplitude of room reflections as perceived at the listening position, and also as a result of the increase in delay time between the arrivals of direct and reflected sound. Also, the lessened effects of a larger room would presumably tend to allow the ambience that has been captured on the recording to be more accurately revealed. Although in general hall ambience can be expected to be captured to the greatest degree and with the most accuracy on recordings that are produced with a minimal number of microphones and with minimal post-processing. Which as has been said by me and others will tend to result in the most realistic reproduction of a concert hall experience, but is not what the OP is looking for. Regards, -- Al |
I also have two ears, but I can listen to 360 degrees. When I walk down the road I can hear maybe the car to my side, the plane above, the dog barking to my left etc etc. I have 7 surround speakers all playing nice separated sounds as far as recordings can facilitate. I am not interested in recreating the sound in a concert - that is my point - it is pretty one dimensional. It is a matter of taste and habit, but we are still listening to old habits of centuries. A bit old hat now methinks - time to move on. As I have written earlier, I am sure the composers would have revelled in breaking away from a strict concert format if they knew how. I am sure there are enough old recordings out there to satiate all old school wishes. |
The difficulty in recording and reproducing large orchestras is why old-timers like J. Gordon Holt considered reproducing such recordings the ultimate challenge and test of a music system's capabilities. For the exact reason Al just explained, getting the high frequencies right, so that playback on speakers sounds like what listeners in the concert hall hear, is the hardest to accomplish. Should speakers be designed to sound "right" with recordings made using only a stereo pair of mics (some audiophile labels), a trio (as were the Mercury and RCA's of the 50's and early 60's), or many "mono" mics placed close to the instrument(s)? Each style of micing requires a different loudspeaker high frequency balance to produce the kind of sound audience members hear. Pop/Rock recordings are entirely different, a reference to live audience sound being non-existent. |
I find that most classical recordings deliver more detail, particularly for higher frequencies, than I hear in actual concerts.... Most recordings are made to sound vibrant and alive by kicking up the top end just a little bit more than natural, but, I sort of like this when I am listening at home.As you most likely realize, Larry, that will happen to a significant degree even if no electronic equalization is applied during the engineering of the recording, since even if just two or three mics are utilized those mics will usually be positioned closer to the performers than most of the seats in a concert hall. And as distance increases treble frequencies attenuate more rapidly in air than lower frequencies. Best regards, -- Al |
I find that most classical recordings deliver more detail, particularly for higher frequencies, than I hear in actual concerts. Yes, someone on stage, like the OP has a different perspective, but, the records are meant to sound somewhat like what the audience hears. Most recordings are made to sound vibrant and alive by kicking up the top end just a little bit more than natural, but, I sort of like this when I am listening at home. As for dynamic range of recordings, this is deliberately compressed for most classical recordings of large orchestral pieces. I have a few supposedly uncompressed recordings that come with a big warning on the front of the CD about how loud it can get. The extreme range makes it quite hard to play the recording with any kind of noise in the room whatsoever, and at full volume one has to worry a bit about how hard the speakers are being pushed. I know someone who blew out a tweeter on such a recording and he swears it was not playing that loudly at that time. I can see why recording companies don't make uncompressed orchestral music on a regular basis. |
"mic every instrument individually, and then have the conductor work with audio engineers to bring the piece back to life." it's not a nightmare, it can be done. the best solution is to store the individual instrument recordings as master. Then have the different recording engineers /studios to "mix" the different instruments recordings according to their "taste" then market under their on labels . Since each audiophile have their different perception on the correctness & presentation of complex works, i guess this way we could have higher chance of getting the music style we each prefers. -philip |
