Thread: SACD without the Big Players?!?

Posts: 41
Page: prev 1 2 3 4 5 next

Post by Fitzcaraldo215 June 17, 2010 (21 of 41)
RE: Ondine SACD's w. Eschenbach

I am a Philadelphia Orchestra subscriber to the tune of about 15 or so concerts/year. I was there for several of the live concerts in the Ondine series. The Bartok: Concerto for Orchestra was the first in the Ondine/Philorch series, and by far the weakest sonically. Fortunately, I did not choose this disk as my inaugural listen to SACD on my new Mch system. I chose instead the Mahler: Symphony #6, and had been there when it was recorded. It changed my life as an audiophile, and I have been a devoted hi rez Mch SACD afficionado ever since. These excellent Ondine recordings engineered by the justly famous Polyhymnia team are top-notch and reference quality, except for the Bartok, for some reason.

I have the whole series, except for the stereo RBCD Mahler #2, since I no longer buy or listen to stereo. So, I encourage others not to judge the entire series based just on the Bartok. IMHO, the rest of them set very high sonic standards, indeed, and are excellent documents of the sound of that orchestra in that hall, at least in Mch.

Opinions about Eschenbach's interpretations vary widely. Some may like it, some not. I generally do. My personal favorite in this series, aside from the Mahler, is the Tchaikovsky Symphony #5. Eschenbach managed to change my mind about this symphony, which I used to dislike.

Sonically, it seems the sound was tweaked and improved slightly as the series developed. By a narrow margin, I find the Tchaikovsky Pathetique to be the best sounding of the bunch.

Post by zeus June 17, 2010 (22 of 41)
Cherubino said:

If you could spare a few moments to post your impression of Baltic Runes - Hillier it would be much appreciated.

John has already provided a detailed review:

/showreviews/6340

I just played this again, previously I'd only had time for a casual listen. It's a very fine disc ... though I don't warm to the Bergman piece. These "chamber" performances selected by HM USA (and beautifully recorded in DSD) make much more sense to me for issue on the format than the large scale (and I suggest overcooked) productions like the Jacobs operas etc. I buy pretty well everything HM now puts out on SA-CD and I'm rarely disappointed.

Post by Cherubino June 17, 2010 (23 of 41)
Thanks.

Post by Cicero June 17, 2010 (24 of 41)
zeus said:

... These "chamber" performances selected by HM USA (and beautifully recorded in DSD) make much more sense to me for issue on the format than the large scale (and I suggest overcooked) productions like the Jacobs operas etc. I buy pretty well everything HM now puts out on SA-CD and I'm rarely disappointed.

Well, I'd happily buy more SACD productions from Harmonia mundi France, i.e. Europe, overcooked or not, if they existed.

Post by wehecht June 18, 2010 (25 of 41)
Operabuff said:

Sure there are new artists to discover, but there are so many great analogue recordings out there, which would make phenomenal scad's.

There is nothing better than having legendary recordings sounding as if they had been recorded yesterday.

With all the back catalogue, every piece must have been recorded at least 50 times, I see no reason to buy new recordings wit second rate orchestras and decent artists - there are exceptions.

Welcome aboard.

There's no question that if opera is your passion the sacd pickings are pretty slim, but in the broader repertoire the idea that most new sacd recordings are produced by "second rate orchestras and decent artists" is just plain wrong.

I'm just scratching the surface here, but for example: we have two very fine Beethoven symphony cycles on BIS and LSO Live, and some think a third almost complete under Paavo Jarvi on RCA is even better; two outstanding Beethoven sonata cycles, one now complete on BIS and the other in process on Caro Mitis; a controversial but vital series of the late Mozart symphonies under Charles Mackerras; excellent Mahler recordings abound with those conducted by Tilson Thomas, Zander, Nott, and Ivan Fischer being particularly impressive; Fischer's Dvorak symphonies are excellent; and a far different Fischer, Julia, produced an extraordinary body of work during her time with Pentatone. None of these artists and orchestras are "second rate", and while some of them are younger and newer, others are grizzled veterans (Mackerras first recorded on 78's for Pete's sake), and all of them have enriched the catalog with superb recordings.

There's so much more out there to enjoy!

Post by Operabuff June 18, 2010 (26 of 41)
Thanks for the warm welcome!
Today my Munch - Daphnis arrived, just finished listening to it and ( pardon my English) had a sonic orgasm, I am truly blown away. It sounded phantastic and what a great performance.
Up to now I had cherished my Monteux rbcd recording of it, but with these sonics, ok all I can write is Wow!

Post by sibelius2 June 19, 2010 (27 of 41)
Operabuff said:

I see no reason to buy new recordings with second rate orchestras and decent artists - there are exceptions.

More exceptions than you might realize!

Across the board, in my experience, orchestras are simply better than they used to be. There are several factors involved in this development, but the recorded evidence is available for all to hear to back up my assertions. Even the latest generation of solo artists tend to have (again, on average) better technique than their predecessors (although this does not necessarily make them more interesting to listen to.)

One might argue that improved orchestras are nice, but what they're really interested in are the legendary conductors for whom there is no substitute. Fair enough, I suppose. But one would have a hard time naming a legendary conductor who is not without controversy. Bernstein, Karajan, Solti - each has nearly as many detractors as supporters. A listener who disliked a particular recording in the past for sound quality reasons might be willing to give it a second chance on an audiophile format. But a listener who has rejected a recording on interpretive grounds would never put money down on a reissue of a recording they already know they don't like.

It saddens me to know that some LP-era recordings which would benefit tremendously from a SACD reissue will never be made available as such. But when, for instance, Paavo Jarvi and Osmo Vanska have both made such exciting records of the Beethoven symphonies, I don't mind so much that I'll never hear many 'legendary' Beethoven recordings on SACD. These two conductors and their respective orchestras will likely never be as famous as the Karajan/Berlin or Solti/Chicago partnerships, but so what? Whether the Minnesota Orchestra would have made such fine recordings back in the 60's is a purely academic question, because now, today, they have made world-class recordings of the Beethoven symphony cycle which no person should regret purchasing. There's simply nothing second-rate about them.

Post by canonical June 20, 2010 (28 of 41)
sibelius2 said:

There's simply nothing second-rate about them.

Other than the sound quality.

Post by Operabuff June 20, 2010 (29 of 41)
sibelius2 said:

More exceptions than you might realize!

Across the board, in my experience, orchestras are simply better than they used to be. ...
But one would have a hard time naming a legendary conductor who is not without controversy. Bernstein, Karajan, Solti - each has nearly as many detractors as supporters.

My statement was somewhat controversial, but I wanted to make a point - obviously there are many shades of grey out there.


I remember when I used to study in vienna in the 80s, I was lucky enough to hear many legendary and outstanding artists.

I guess what most of them had was an outstanding personality, often giving the audience the feeling they just invented what they were performing and also taking risks not always technically perfect, but thrilling and special.

Karajan at the time was still overbearing and one had the feeling every CD that came out was with him and also many concerts. I used to think - oh no do not feel like going to another Karajan concert this evening. Not knowing how much I would give these days to be able to part of such an experience.
Today (generalizing) I am often bored by performances, listening to new "stars".
I nearly fell into a coma at a Dresden philharmonic Alpensinfonie conducted by Luisi, something I would have thought being impossible.

I live now and live performances cannot resurrect the dead - but CDs etc. can, I simply enjoy classic performances more. Not saying that I dislike everything new - do not get me wrong. But since I do not have unlimited funds, I would rather buy something that I know I would enjoy.

Often I feel like the boy in "Sixth Sense" - I hear dead people. ;)

Post by tailspn June 20, 2010 (30 of 41)
canonical said:

Other than the sound quality.

Which, the Vanska, or Jarvi, or both?

Page: prev 1 2 3 4 5 next

Closed