My Essential Classical Albums.

[AnotherSpin]

6 minutes ago, austinpop said:

My favorites for Mahler are:

1. The full cycle by Michael Tilson Thomas and the San Francisco Symphony 

2. The partial cycle by Benjamin Zander and the Philharmonia Orchestra 

 

Both are excellent modern recordings. Zander's bonus discs explaining the pieces are icing on the cake.

 

+1 for Zander

[sphinxsix]

On 31.08.2017 at 10:31 PM, AnotherSpin said:

Jarvi

 

On 1.09.2017 at 0:09 AM, Musicophile said:

Järvi

I've managed to check out today some parts that I really like of his Beethoven symphonies. Sound like honey to my ears. Will definitely order the whole set. The two complete SACD sets I have are Haitink (LSO) and Karajan (DG 60's recordings). Going to check out more of your recommendations, guys but it will probably take a week or two.

 

On 1.09.2017 at 11:25 AM, AnotherSpin said:

Furtwangler wartime recordings

I usually avoid recordings from the 50's and earlier times but actually have three Beethoven symphonies conducted by Furtwangler from 1950-54 and I think they're great (the sound is let's say acceptable for me). Haven't heard his wartime performances though.

 

On 31.08.2017 at 10:31 PM, AnotherSpin said:

Mahler sets - Kubelik (Audite), Bernstein (Sony), Haitink.

 

On 1.09.2017 at 0:09 AM, Musicophile said:

For Mahler, Kubelik and Abbado are pretty safe bets, but I also like Zinman

I'm glad Bernstein and Haitink are quite well represented in my Mahler selection. The other performances you recommend - to be checked out. That's lots of 'work' again.. Which is great.

 

On 1.09.2017 at 0:09 AM, Musicophile said:

Ivan Fischer on Channel Classics

Got three Fischer Mahler SACDs and I agree - the sound is truely audiophile. I like the performances too although there are movements in which I happen to prefer eg slightly heavier, darker Bernstein's interpretation . Anyway probably will be tempted to get some more Fischer sooner or later.

 

Thanks for your response, guys. I really appreciate it.

 

And BTW - how about Mahler's 'Das Lied von der Erde'.? (I have Bernstein - Israel Philharmonic and that's the only version I know in its entirety).

 

[AnotherSpin]

21 minutes ago, sphinxsix said:

And BTW - how about Mahler's 'Das Lied von der Erde'.? (I have Bernstein - Israel Philharmonic and that's the only version I know in its entirety).

 

 

I mentioned several DLvdE performances above, Klemperer is impeccable, Walter is very, very good, but the sq is modest, and Horenstein is awesome - you may want to google the story of this recording. Horenstein was great Mahler conductor. And any one interesting in Mahler should listen to Barbirolli's versions of 5th and 6th - they are absolutely outstanding.

 

Kubelik - there are well-known DG set and almost complete live performances from Audite. I recommend latter.

[austinpop]

For Mahler's 2nd, my absolute favorite is Gilbert Kaplan's recording on DG with the Vienna Philharmonic.

 

Kaplan's involvement with this piece is worth reading about. People tend to have strong views for and against him. 

 

The SACD recording quality is outstanding - atypical of DG, to be honest! - and I love the performance too.

[AnotherSpin]

2 minutes ago, austinpop said:

For Mahler's 2nd, my absolute favorite is Gilbert Kaplan's recording on DG with the Vienna Philharmonic.

 

Kaplan's involvement with this piece is worth reading about. People tend to have strong views for and against him. 

 

The story of Gilbert Kaplan and Mahler's Second Symphony worth a book or a good film.

[sphinxsix]

As for Mahler and movies - I think I will finally see this:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0071797/?ref_=nv_sr_2

 

As for Beethoven I can recommend (Gary Oldman is great as usual):

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0110116/?ref_=nv_sr_3

 

 

[sphinxsix]

 

2 hours ago, austinpop said:

1. The full cycle by Michael Tilson Thomas and the San Francisco Symphony 

2. The partial cycle by Benjamin Zander and the Philharmonia Orchestra 

MTT - one of my versions of 1st.

BZ - one of the 6ths of my choice.

Both - IMO very convincing. Thanks for the suggestion, I think I'll check their other symphonies.

 

 

2 hours ago, AnotherSpin said:

And any one interesting in Mahler should listen to Barbirolli's versions of 5th and 6th - they are absolutely outstanding.

Two of my favorite Mahler symphonies. I will certainly check Barbirolli's versions, thanks.

[rando]

3 hours ago, sphinxsix said:

I usually avoid recordings from the 50's and earlier times but actually have three Beethoven symphonies conducted by Furtwangler from 1950-54 and I think they're great (the sound is let's say acceptable for me). Haven't heard his wartime performances though.

 

Suppose one has to draw the line somewhere or keep going down the road any digitized mastering of older recordings like this have already cut.  By which I mean all the click and pop reducing that leaves holes synthetically filled in.  Among the better, and certainly the most studiously informed, efforts that can be found currently are the Pristine Classical XR remasters of archival performances.  It might be worth your time to listen to one of their samples like this FURTWÄNGLER Beethoven: Symphony No. 3; Coriolan Overture (1943/44)

 

 

[AnotherSpin]

1 hour ago, rando said:

 

Suppose one has to draw the line somewhere or keep going down the road any digitized mastering of older recordings like this have already cut.  By which I mean all the click and pop reducing that leaves holes synthetically filled in.  Among the better, and certainly the most studiously informed, efforts that can be found currently are the Pristine Classical XR remasters of archival performances.  It might be worth your time to listen to one of their samples like this FURTWÄNGLER Beethoven: Symphony No. 3; Coriolan Overture (1943/44)

 

 

 

There are labels that follow quite opposite philosophy by keeping original recording intact, because, as they believe, you can not separate "noise" from the useful sound information during mastering process, if you remove noises at least part of the sound will be lost as well. For example, Opus Kura label from Japan makes masterings of historic recordings which sound very convincingly, even though they have all accompanying noises. Our mind is a funky mechanism – if we are willing and ready to ignore the noises they go away, if we focus our attention on noise we will hear it only. Among numerous great recordings (such as non-sterilized Bach's Cello Suites with Pablo Casals) Opus Kura published grandiose Beethoven's 9th with Furtwangler, recorded live in Berlin in 1942, in a presence of ober Nazis. 

 

I tend to believe Opus Kura follows basic aesthetic principle of Japanese culture, wabi-sabi - the beauty of imperfection and transience.

[mansr]

14 minutes ago, AnotherSpin said:

There are labels that follow quite opposite philosophy by keeping original recording intact, because, as they believe, you can not separate "noise" from the useful sound information during mastering process, if you remove noises at least part of the sound will be lost as well.

That's one way of looking at it. In a recording, the difference between the true signal and the actual signal is noise. If removing a click reduces this difference, that's generally a good thing. Adding to the sound and removing from it are the same thing, noise.

[AnotherSpin]

7 hours ago, mansr said:

That's one way of looking at it. In a recording, the difference between the true signal and the actual signal is noise. If removing a click reduces this difference, that's generally a good thing. Adding to the sound and removing from it are the same thing, noise.

 

Is it possible to reduce most part of the noises and keep true signal in its entirety?

[sphinxsix]

22 hours ago, mansr said:

That's one way of looking at it. In a recording, the difference between the true signal and the actual signal is noise. If removing a click reduces this difference, that's generally a good thing. Adding to the sound and removing from it are the same thing, noise.

 

15 hours ago, AnotherSpin said:

Is it possible to reduce most part of the noises and keep true signal in its entirety?

In my experience - no. Eg early Miles Davis CD editions with filtered (removed) noise didn't sound that good. The later remasters with clearly audible tape hiss had much more musical detail and nuance. Just check out 'Kind of Blue', 'Bitches Brew' or the original Sony masterings of 'Agharta' and 'Pangaea' versus later Japanese remasters (I put quite lots of effort and money to get these two, unfortunately they haven't been issued in hi-res yet).

So in genaral I'm against such 'improvements'. I prefer to hear tape hiss

However.. I checked out Furtwangler's Beethoven 9th from Lucerne Festival 1954 https://www.pristineclassical.com/products/pasc261 (mono 24bit) from Pristine Classical recommended by @rando (thanks!) and IMO it sounds just fantastic in comparison to Tahra 2008 SACD (the original 1994 CD edition received Gramophone Award for best historic non-vocal recording!) I have. The SACD sounds very brittle and dry with very little reverberation. The Pristine Classical XR remaster is IMO much more realistic timbrally - warmer and fuller has more realistic (added!) reverb and bass extension which makes timpani sound like ..well timpani. Really well done, just check it out for yourselves, guys. I'd personally highly recommend their XR remasters (https://www.pristineclassical.com/pages/xr-remastering) of historic recordings based on the above mentioned albums comparison.

I've never heard Opus Kura remasters though.

[mansr]

13 minutes ago, sphinxsix said:

In my experience - no. Eg early Miles Davis CD editions with filtered (removed) noise didn't sound that good. The later remasters with clearly audible tape hiss had much more musical detail and nuance. Just check out 'Kind of Blue', 'Bitches Brew' or the original Sony masterings of 'Agharta' and 'Pangaea' versus later Japanese remasters (I put quite lots of effort and money to get these two, unfortunately they haven't been issued in hi-res yet).

So in genaral I'm against such 'improvements'. I prefer to hear tape hiss

Filtering continuous noise like hiss is very different from click removal. The former is difficult to do without damaging the sound while the latter only affects the samples making up the click, and the music information in these was already destroyed.

[sphinxsix]

3 minutes ago, mansr said:

Filtering continuous noise like hiss is very different from click removal. The former is difficult to do without damaging the sound while the latter only affects the samples making up the click, and the music information in these was already destroyed.

Definitely makes sense.

[Bob Stern]

1 hour ago, sphinxsix said:

early Miles Davis CD editions with filtered (removed) noise didn't sound that good. The later remasters with clearly audible tape hiss had much more musical detail and nuance. Just check out 'Kind of Blue', 'Bitches Brew' or the original Sony masterings of 'Agharta' and 'Pangaea' versus later Japanese remasters

 

I enjoy the Pristine Classical remaster of Kind of Blue.  I haven’t heard the Japanese remasters, but I think Pristine does a perfect job of eliminating noise and notching out screechy treble while preserving detail and nuance.  But others have complained that Pristine reduced the treble too much.

 

Incidentally, when I apply parametric EQ during playback of screechy recordings, I usually use a notch at about 3.5 to 4 KHz to reduce screechiness without sacrificing "air", in contrast with a high frequency shelf or low pass filter.

[rando]

@sphinxsix   Glad you found the XR processed files rewarding.  In my own listening a manageable amount of tape hiss or live background noise has always been viewed as a nonissue given a stellar performance folds out above it.  If anything the slight strain to capture all that existed moment by moment in that long past time is an enjoyable heightening of the senses. 

[AnotherSpin]

9 hours ago, sphinxsix said:

 

In my experience - no. Eg early Miles Davis CD editions with filtered (removed) noise didn't sound that good. The later remasters with clearly audible tape hiss had much more musical detail and nuance. Just check out 'Kind of Blue', 'Bitches Brew' or the original Sony masterings of 'Agharta' and 'Pangaea' versus later Japanese remasters (I put quite lots of effort and money to get these two, unfortunately they haven't been issued in hi-res yet).

 

My question was rhetorical.

 

I was grown up with Miles Davis LPs (my first were Get Up With It and Agharta, later Kind of Blue, Bitches Brew, In a Silent Way and so on) The original LPs sound engraved in my mind very well, and, generally speaking, no modern file is able to reproduce it with enough fidelity, I tried tens and tens of modern era masterings.

 

About reconstruction of historic recordings with current technology tricks – I could imagine someone will adore Venus de Milo statue with hands reimagined and reattached nicely, as for myself, I am happy enough with it as it is now.

[rando]

7 hours ago, AnotherSpin said:

About reconstruction of historic recordings with current technology tricks – I could imagine someone will adore Venus de Milo statue with hands reimagined and reattached nicely, as for myself, I am happy enough with it as it is now.

 

You do understand how that is applied to modern recordings though?  That the same studio tricks used to make some drugged out new rock band sound good are the same applied to the 6 live performances of any given track a new BSO album is comprised of.    

[AnotherSpin]

1 hour ago, rando said:

 

You do understand how that is applied to modern recordings though?  That the same studio tricks used to make some drugged out new rock band sound good are the same applied to the 6 live performances of any given track a new BSO album is comprised of.    

 

We were speaking about adding sound information synthetically to historic recordings, isn't it? Let me be more specific. I am comparing Artur Schnabel recordings of Beethoven sonatas published by Dante, Pearl, Membran, and Pristine. Well, Pristine went fourth, the sound is too artificial, processed and lifeless. I should admit I didn't compare it with recordings of drugged rock bands, so I accept any critic you will have.

 

P.S.: I like both Membran and Dante editions of Schnabel, even they are quite different, they do not try to improve or mend archive sound.

 

[rando]

So you have no interest in what is done or how widely the tools it is done with are used.  Just so long as it meets your criteria for good sound quality when it comes out of your speakers.  Believe it or not this is a sticking point for many people.  For sure a large factor in the widespread consumer interest in vinyl from days past

[AnotherSpin]

40 minutes ago, rando said:

So you have no interest in what is done or how widely the tools it is done with are used.  Just so long as it meets your criteria for good sound quality when it comes out of your speakers.  Believe it or not this is a sticking point for many people.  For sure a large factor in the widespread consumer interest in vinyl from days past

 

Of course I do have interest in good quality of the sound. I do not have interest in synthetic reconstructions, if you could grasp what I mean.

[highEnd]

21 hours ago, sphinxsix said:

However.. I checked out Furtwangler's Beethoven 9th from Lucerne Festival 1954 https://www.pristineclassical.com/products/pasc261 (mono 24bit) from Pristine Classical recommended by @rando (thanks!) and IMO it sounds just fantastic in comparison to Tahra 2008 SACD (the original 1994 CD edition received Gramophone Award for best historic non-vocal recording!) I have. The SACD sounds very brittle and dry with very little reverberation. The Pristine Classical XR remaster is IMO much more realistic timbrally - warmer and fuller has more realistic (added!) reverb and bass extension which makes timpani sound like ..well timpani. Really well done, just check it out for yourselves, guys. I'd personally highly recommend their XR remasters (https://www.pristineclassical.com/pages/xr-remastering) of historic recordings based on the above mentioned albums comparison.

I've never heard Opus Kura remasters though.

I am new to this forum, so I don't know whether or not anyone else has mentioned this, but there is another source of Furtwangler remasterings at http://furtwanglersound.com/. Henry Fogel favorably reviewed these in Fanfare magazine in 2007 and 2011, and stated that he preferred these even over Pristine's remasterings. They are also available on High Definition Tape Transfers's web site, which has a 20% off sale at the moment. Here is the link:
https://www.highdeftapetransfers.com/collections/furtwanglersound-com
You can download the PDF booklet and a sample before you purchase the downloads. I have 6 of these downloads, and am very impressed with the concert hall's sense of depth, as well as the orchestra.

[EuroChamp]

For the Beethoven symphonies, I would like to recommend Josef Krips from 1960, a 35mm recording available in 24/192 und of course I really like Carlos Kleiber. A new one where Giovanni Antonini together with the Basel orchestra.

[sphinxsix]

21 hours ago, Bob Stern said:

I enjoy the Pristine Classical remaster of Kind of Blue.  I haven’t heard the Japanese remasters

Thanks for the information. I'm slightly addicted to getting a new version of 'KoB' every now and then so I will probably check it out sooner or later  My favorite is 2007 Japanese SACD remix (although in general I'm not a fan of remixing old stuff).

13 hours ago, AnotherSpin said:

My question was rhetorical.

I guessed it.

 

13 hours ago, AnotherSpin said:

About reconstruction of historic recordings with current technology tricks – I could imagine someone will adore Venus de Milo statue with hands reimagined and reattached nicely, as for myself, I am happy enough with it as it is now.

I think that this analogy is wrong. I'd compare a bad old recording full of analog clicks to a statue of a woman (meaning the original music itself in this analogy) damaged so badly that for many it's quite difficult to appreciate its beauty. If we have the artist's sketches an we know what female body looks like (we know what an orchestra in a venue with good acousitics sounds like) and recreate the sculpture according to them (apply eg equalisation to counteract very uneven frequency characteristic of an old microphone, even use convolution to make 'dry' acoustics of many old recordings sound more like in a real, good concert hall, fix wow and flutter which make in particular piano sound awful, etc) so that the final effect is a harmonious, beautiful statue of a woman (more realistic and enjoyable sound in comparison to the original noisy, distorted recording) - it's absolutely ok with me. But I obviously don't mind somebody having the opposite opinion on this. BTW I don't mind the original old delta bluesmen recordings from the 20's-30's at all. But it's usually just a vocal and an acoustic guitar not a whole orchestra (much more complex music material) which in addition should be recorded in an appropriate acoustic space to make it sound realistic.

2 hours ago, highEnd said:

there is another source of Furtwangler remasterings at http://furtwanglersound.com/....

Thanks for the information. It's interesting.

[AnotherSpin]

39 minutes ago, sphinxsix said:

 

I think that this analogy is wrong. I'd compare a bad old recording full of analog clicks to a statue of a woman (meaning the original music itself in this analogy) damaged so badly that for many it's quite difficult to appreciate its beauty. If we have the artist's sketches an we know what female body looks like (we know what an orchestra in a venue with good acousitics sounds like) and recreate the sculpture according to them (apply eg equalisation to counteract very uneven frequency characteristic of an old microphone, even use convolution to make 'dry' acoustics of many old recordings sound more like in a real, good concert hall, fix wow and flutter which make in particular piano sound awful, etc) so that the final effect is a harmonious, beautiful statue of a woman (more realistic and enjoyable sound in comparison to the original noisy, distorted recording) - it's absolutely ok with me.

 

It sounds so inspiring, I am truly at loss why nobody reconstructed Venus so far, with all accumulated knowledge of female body? She would look much nicer with both hands available for more fulfilling adoration.