I too have found many rock recordings to be grating and fatiguing. It all depends upon the recording quality.
Re. the DCS Bartok comment: After owning a DCS Rossini, I’m sure that the Bartok isn't a problem, except for someone who prefers something else.
Most stacked Marshall rock concerts were too loud and distorted to sound good. But man -- including the audience and the experience -- did they ROCK!!
I've found that a symphonic orchestra is more difficult to reproduce than most any other music. The soft to loud dynamic ranges provide the difficulty. Undestorted/uncongested crescendos with instrument separation and differentiation, divide the wannabes from the capable.
As far as recording age is concerned, there obviously is a correlation, but there doesn’t necessarily need to be. For example, of the several 1812 Overture recordings I own, this late 1950’s one is the best: Tchaikovsky: 1812 Festival Overture; Capriccio Italien; Beethoven: Wellington's Victory Antal Doráti / Minneapolis Symphony Orchestra Also, many Jazz recordings from the 50’s and 60’s still hold up well.
As far as rock and hard rock go, non-fatiguing listenability all has to do with the recording quality.
Off the top of my head, a few rock recordings I find well done are Emerson Lake and Palmer’s: Lucky Man and In the Beginning; Sabbath's Iron Man; YES: Roundabout; Pink Floyd: DSOM et al.; Chicago; Blood Sweet and Tears; America’s: Sandman; Edgar Winter’s: Frankenstein; some of The Who’s tracks, especially those recorded at the New York Plant Sessions etc…
