Post by Julien May 1, 2008 (1 of 7)
|
|
On the stereo mix the sound is awfully compressed and after many tries I just cannot listen through it. Not only is the sound compressed (nearly every creshendo is stopped at some point in the middle, if it was compressed in a less obvious way it would be better), but the sound quality itself is worse than a well made mp3 I'm not exagerating. Such a shame given the outstanding quality of most Living Stereo releases. I just hope the three channel version is completely different!
|
|
|
Post by fafnir May 1, 2008 (2 of 7)
|
|
Julien said:
On the stereo mix the sound is awfully compressed and after many tries I just cannot listen through it. Not only is the sound compressed (nearly every creshendo is stopped at some point in the middle, if it was compressed in a less obvious way it would be better), but the sound quality itself is worse than a well made mp3 I'm not exagerating. Such a shame given the outstanding quality of most Living Stereo releases. I just hope the three channel version is completely different!
Regrettably,there is no three channel version. These were Reiner's first CSO recordings in 1954 and they were done in 2-channel only. The sound is, as you state, not good. This recording is of historic interest only - the performances are quite magnificent, and this recording despite its faults is adequate to convey that. It still sounds better than any issue of these recordings I have ever heard, going back to the initial mono vinyl release in 1954.
|
|
|
Post by Julien May 1, 2008 (3 of 7)
|
|
fafnir said:
It still sounds better than any issue of these recordings I have ever heard, going back to the initial mono vinyl release in 1954.
Ok thank you.
|
|
|
Post by Claude May 2, 2008 (4 of 7)
|
|
Hearing the recording after having read the raving 5 star reviews on this site must come as a huge disappointment. I don't agree that the SACD sounds "worse than a well made mp3" (not sure what that means exactly), but this very early Living Stereo recording clearly shows technical limitations, while still being acceptable and very enjoyable.
|
|
|
Post by Peter May 2, 2008 (5 of 7)
|
|
I think it sounds wonderful provided you keep your expectations realistic for 1954! Are there better sounding recordings from that date?
Terrific performances, though I still like Krauss's ASZ a lot, on Testament in pretty awful sound (1950).
Peter
|
|
|
|
|
I will be reviewing this soon. I think the sound is very good given the vintage. There are of course other RCA LS recordings with better sound.
|
|
|
Post by Julien May 2, 2008 (7 of 7)
|
|
Claude said:
I don't agree that the SACD sounds "worse than a well made mp3" (not sure what that means exactly)
We are psychologically indulgent with old recordings, but if you make a "high rez" mp3 from a recent say Pentatone recording, you still should have a greater dynamic range than this SACD. And the sound quality might even be closer to the real thing.
|
|