add to wish list | library


10 of 10 recommend this,
would you recommend it?

yes | no

Support this site by purchasing from these vendors using the paid links below. As an Amazon Associate SA-CD.net earns from qualifying purchases.
 
amazon.ca
amazon.co.uk
amazon.com
amazon.de
 
amazon.fr
amazon.it
 
jpc

Discussion: Atterberg: Orchestral Works Vol. 1 - Järvi

Posts: 14
Page: 1 2 next

Post by hiredfox May 21, 2013 (1 of 14)
An excellent review by Castor. Atterberg's most famous work beautifully played and a near essential purchase for a modern collection.

Alas, recorded at only 48kHz and it shows but if you can ignore all the high frequency metallic screeches and think of them as violins or flutes you'll be OK.

Post by Chris May 21, 2013 (2 of 14)
hiredfox said:

An excellent review by Castor. Atterberg's most famous work beautifully played and a near essential purchase for a modern collection.

Alas, recorded at only 48kHz and it shows but if you can ignore all the high frequency metallic screeches and think of them as violins or flutes you'll be OK.

While I too lament the fact that some teams unfortunately still insist on recording at 44. or 48khz sampling rates. Correct me if I am wrong,but didn't you quite recently mistake a 24/44.1 recording as DSD?
You hailed the SQ of a recording that I strongly suspected was and which also later turned out to be made in lowly 24/44.1. In this case you say it "shows". But would you really have been able to HEAR it if it hadn't been revealed.
You hear "metallic screeches" on this higher sampling rate recording,but miss them on an even lower sampling rate recording from the Philharmonie?
Are you really sure that you can consistently hear any difference betwen higher and lower sampling rates and DSD?
Or can you only hear it when you already know it beforehand?

Post by wehecht May 21, 2013 (3 of 14)
Regardless of the recording technology employed John is right about the metallic quality of exposed upper strings as when, for example, the folk-like fiddling finds its way into the rhapsody at various points (about the 1'15" mark of track 4 would be indicative). I'm one who believes that these matters relate more to the quality of the venue (in this case excellent) and the engineer's art than the techology employed. I've heard both fabulous and awful recordings in every level of pcm from 24/44.1 to dxd and the same holds true of dsd. Come to think of it I've never heard an awful recording in dxd, but the Nielsen 3rd on Nielsen: Symphonies Nos. 2 & 3 - Gilbert pretty well demonstrates that a poor venue can compromise the almost preternatural clarity of which dxd is capable.

Post by Euell Neverno May 21, 2013 (4 of 14)
hiredfox said:

. . . if you can ignore all the high frequency metallic screeches and think of them as violins or flutes you'll be OK.

But, but, but Castor's review says ". . . an open, clear and quite ravishing sound quality on this Chandos 5.0 channel, 24-bit / 48kHz recording that perfectly captures the airy acoustic of the venue." Ravishing sound normally does not include "high frequency metallic screeches," which even the hard-of-hearing should be able to detect and are not merely a matter of taste. How to explain this disconnect??

Post by tream May 21, 2013 (5 of 14)
I started collecting the CPO series of Atterberg's symphonies a number of years ago and stopped after a few volumes when I realized that the music made no lasting impression on me. Does Jarvi bring these to life in a way that those recordings didn't?

Post by wehecht May 21, 2013 (6 of 14)
Euell Neverno said:

But, but, but Castor's review says ". . . an open, clear and quite ravishing sound quality on this Chandos 5.0 channel, 24-bit / 48kHz recording that perfectly captures the airy acoustic of the venue." Ravishing sound normally does not include "high frequency metallic screeches," which even the hard-of-hearing should be able to detect and are not merely a matter of taste. How to explain this disconnect??

Different gear, different rooms, different ears.

Post by akiralx May 21, 2013 (7 of 14)
wehecht said:

Different gear, different rooms, different ears.

Which suggests that reviews/comments about sound quality generally are a waste of time, if one acknowledges that 'this recording sounds wonderful - but on your equipment it may sound metallic and screechy'...

Post by Euell Neverno May 21, 2013 (8 of 14)
tream said:

I started collecting the CPO series of Atterberg's symphonies a number of years ago and stopped after a few volumes when I realized that the music made no lasting impression on me. Does Jarvi bring these to life in a way that those recordings didn't?

Can't answer that question, but agree, after also acquiring some of the CPO series, that a little Atterberg goes a long way.

Post by Euell Neverno May 21, 2013 (9 of 14)
akiralx said:

Which suggests that reviews/comments about sound quality generally are a waste of time, if one acknowledges that 'this recording sounds wonderful - but on your equipment it may sound metallic and screechy'...

Maybe he prefers metallic and screechy?

Post by steviev May 21, 2013 (10 of 14)
hiredfox said:

Alas, recorded at only 48kHz and it shows but if you can ignore all the high frequency metallic screeches and think of them as violins or flutes you'll be OK.

That's why God invented EQ: just cut the high treble and all should be good in the 'hood.

Page: 1 2 next

Closed