Post by brenda May 25, 2007 (21 of 36)
|
|
tommwi said:
a) ....well-I’d guess the simple answer is you're more interested in sound than music, that many here want to read about it....
b) Brenda – I find your logic in explaining the need to get rid of the unhelpful button pressers preposterously funny.
Tommwi
a) wrong, but Terence has already explained why. The sound of these releases gets special attention because of the unusual nature of the technique, but for you to assume that that must preclude appreciation of the performance is both simplistic and insulting
b) I'm glad I gave you a chuckle, but couldn't "I disagree" have substituted for "preposterously funny"? Or is the uncivilised and insulting simply your preferred response to everything? By the way, I disagree with your comment, but wont insult you for it.
B
|
|
|
|
|
|
terence said:
As I said above, your views on my review don't bother me in the slightest. It's the DISC I'm enthusiastic about, not responses to what I've written about it.
What I do strongly object to is you telling me in your original comments that I had overrated the quality of the performance, on the grounds that in your view my detailed comments on the engineering mean my assessment of the performance must automatically be in some way defective.
That, I'm afraid, is just arrogant prejudice. LISTEN to the thing, for goodness sake, THEN tell me your opinions on it, and my judgement of it. That would be a lot more interesting, and might lead to a more meaningful discussion than this one.
For the last time (I hope), I think these PERFORMANCES are outstanding, and I say that clearly in the review. So is the engineering.
If the interpretations were poor, good sound would be an immaterial consideration. I'm sure at least we can agree on that proposition?!
What I am telling you is that I feel your review doesn't tell me enough about the performance because I sense your extreme fascination with sound clouds your judgement when it comes to performance. Hence, my view that your review was unhelpful. I will have to watch for other reviewers here or elsewhere who can comment more succinctly on the performance before I go out and spend close to $35 for a single recording.
|
|
|
Post by fafnir May 25, 2007 (23 of 36)
|
|
Why do music lovers spend their hard-earned money on recordings? Probably the best answer is that they optimistically believe that playing the recording will provide them with musical pleasure, which is an important aspect of their lives. The amount of musical pleasure provided depends not just on the music and the quality of performance, but is also inextricably bound with its presentation in recorded sound.
Prior to the advent of "high fidelity" in the early 1950s, sound quality was so poor that one had to make a conscious effort to ignore it in order to enjoy listening. Later, with the advent of vinyl stereo and the RBCDs recording quality
improved, but still was far short of accurately representing a live performance. Indeed, to claim that stereo of any technology can provide anything that can be mistaken for a concert hall sound requires a break from reality worthy of a politician. This is not to say that they can't sound truly excellent and give enormous pleasure; only they don't sound anything like the real thing.
With SACDs the situation has changed. The mch technology has the capability of capturing the ambiance of the recording studio and creates the possibility of moving much closer to the goal of recreating the sound of a live performance in the living room, and thereby enhancing our real objective, which is musical pleasure. Note that I used the term "possibility." Too often, IMO, this goal is not met, but I do tend to be somewhat opinionated and supercritical of sound quality.
This leads (finally!) to the technology of these Tacet recordings. The question with the Tacet Beethoven recordings becomes, what degree of musical pleasure do they provide? This is, after all, our real objective. They do not provide the illusion of anything resembling a performance in a concert hall. But neither does stereo, and we have willingly accepted its limitations because of the musical enjoyment. And I think that Mozart might have some difficulty recognizing the sound of the modern piano.
The answer, for me, is that these recordings provide an immersion in the music that is thrilling. The warmth and clarity of the music in an ideally resonant space has to be heard to be believed. This has been combined with a quality of performance by a chamber group that is second to none and equaled by only a few in these scores.
There are those for whom the Tacet recording concept is repellent. When it is stated that they don't sound like a live performance, I can only wholeheartedly agree. But the real goal is the presentation of music and the pleasure it provides in your listening room.
|
|
|
Post by aoqd22 May 27, 2007 (24 of 36)
|
|
Have been tempted to order this disc or the previously issued 7 & 8 disc. However, have hesitated because although my rear speaker speakers are of reasonable quality they are bookshelf type speakers. I have the excellent 2L disc of Mozart Violin concertos played by Marianne Thorsen which makes much more use of the rears than other SACDs I have. With this disc I experience no problems with instrument placing, balance, or sound quality it is sheer joy all the way!
Could someone with the same 2L disc and either the two TACET Beethoven discs now issued or the 'Tube Only Night Music' disc come up with some comparisons/comments as I think this will help me assess if I should pass these interesting TACET discs by.
Much thanks .....
|
|
|
Post by terence June 6, 2007 (25 of 36)
|
|
For those who, like myself, are avidly following this TACET Beethoven series, the next recording (with the same orchestra/conductor) will apparently be in July 2007, of the 5th and 6th symphonies, for release, I assume, sometime in the first half of 2008.
|
|
|
Post by fafnir June 6, 2007 (26 of 36)
|
|
terence said:
For those who, like myself, are avidly following this TACET Beethoven series, the next recording (with the same orchestra/conductor) will apparently be in July 2007, of the 5th and 6th symphonies, for release, I assume, sometime in the first half of 2008.
Terence,
Thanks for the information. This is terrific news.
|
|
|
|
|
|
I have not heard the recording discussed here, but would like to remark the following concerning Tacet's special surround technique: Placing the two violin sections opposite of each other is not their invention but follows the common performance practice that was completely abandoned only in the 20th century. Most composers intentionally wrote antiphonally with this orchestral setup in mind, and consequently all orchestras following historically informed principles have returned to this. Same goes for the positioning of the trumpets and timpani. It enhances the transparency of a performance considerably.
|
|
|
Post by hanser June 11, 2007 (28 of 36)
|
|
miguelito54 said:
I have not heard the recording discussed here, but would like to remark the following concerning Tacet's special surround technique: Placing the two violin sections opposite of each other is not their invention but follows the common performance practice that was completely abandoned only in the 20th century. Most composers intentionally wrote antiphonally with this orchestral setup in mind, and consequently all orchestras following historically informed principles have returned to this. Same goes for the positioning of the trumpets and timpani. It enhances the transparency of a performance considerably.
Yes, but you miss the point: Tacet positions the players all around you in the surround setup, so you have the violins in the left surround, the celli in the right surroung, the flutes in the right front etc.
|
|
|
Post by terence June 11, 2007 (29 of 36)
|
|
hanser said:
Yes, but you miss the point: Tacet positions the players all around you in the surround setup, so you have the violins in the left surround, the celli in the right surroung, the flutes in the right front etc.
It isn't quite that clear cut - the instruments aren't confined to a single speaker as you suggest. The overall mix creates a homogeneous, integrated sound-picture which is not isolationist in the way you describe it.
|
|
|
Post by brenda June 11, 2007 (30 of 36)
|
|
terence said:
It isn't quite that clear cut - the instruments aren't confined to a single speaker as you suggest. The overall mix creates a homogeneous, integrated sound-picture which is not isolationist in the way you describe it.
Absolutely, Terence, - only those who havent listened would cast aspersions. Whilst you would expect the music to be very directional or fragmented, it comes together beautifully in an overall sound picture with light, space and detail. Non-purists I play my Tacet discs to always praise the sound as being revelatory of both detail and whole. B
|
|
