Discussion:
Best sounding mono recordings?
Add Reply
kirkmc
2014-01-09 13:52:02 UTC
Reply
Permalink
I've been writing something about listening to mono recordings, focusing on those recordings that were mixed first in mono, then in stereo, back in the early days of stereo: artists like Miles Davis, Bob Dylan and The Beatles, for whom recent releases of re-mastered mono recordings sound very nice.

Does anyone know about specific classical recordings that fit the same conditions? Recorded in any manner - most of the above used at least three-track tape - but where the mix was to mono first, with the stereo mix considered less important.

Also, what are the best sounding mono recordings you know, of any type of classical music? I'm finding that listening to good-quality mono recordings really is relaxing...

Kirk
O
2014-01-09 14:12:40 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by kirkmc
I've been writing something about listening to mono recordings, focusing on
those recordings that were mixed first in mono, then in stereo, back in the
early days of stereo: artists like Miles Davis, Bob Dylan and The Beatles,
for whom recent releases of re-mastered mono recordings sound very nice.
Does anyone know about specific classical recordings that fit the same
conditions? Recorded in any manner - most of the above used at least
three-track tape - but where the mix was to mono first, with the stereo mix
considered less important.
Also, what are the best sounding mono recordings you know, of any type of
classical music? I'm finding that listening to good-quality mono recordings
really is relaxing...
This Artur Rubenstein mono disk immediately comes to mind as great mono
sound. The piano sound in Funerailles is amazing:

http://www.amazon.com/Plays-Liszt-Rubinstein/dp/B000003FL3/ref=sr_1_1?ie
=UTF8&qid=1389276627&sr=8-1&keywords=artur+rubinstein+funerailles

The used price is pretty good, too! :-)

-Owen
Salmonella typhimurium
2014-01-10 19:59:28 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by O
Post by kirkmc
I've been writing something about listening to mono recordings, focusing on
those recordings that were mixed first in mono, then in stereo, back in the
early days of stereo: artists like Miles Davis, Bob Dylan and The Beatles,
for whom recent releases of re-mastered mono recordings sound very nice.
Does anyone know about specific classical recordings that fit the same
conditions? Recorded in any manner - most of the above used at least
three-track tape - but where the mix was to mono first, with the stereo mix
considered less important.
Also, what are the best sounding mono recordings you know, of any type of
classical music? I'm finding that listening to good-quality mono recordings
really is relaxing...
This Artur Rubenstein mono disk immediately comes to mind as great mono
http://www.amazon.com/Plays-Liszt-Rubinstein/dp/B000003FL3/ref=sr_1_1?ie
=UTF8&qid=1389276627&sr=8-1&keywords=artur+rubinstein+funerailles
The used price is pretty good, too! :-)
-Owen
I usually find mono recordings to be dull (boring) sounding and resort
listening to them only when there is no stereo version of some otherwise
outstanding performance. Rubinstein's mono Funerailles falls into that
category. In the Rubinstein box there is a stereo recording (Vol. 1,
Highlights from Carnegie Hall) of this work which I find more satisfying.
(Not being a pianist nor musician, I'm easily satisfied.)
wkasimer
2014-01-09 14:44:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Fricsay's first recording of the Verdi Requiem.

Bill
frankwm
2014-01-09 15:03:38 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Apparently mono is crap ('mostly'), according to a redneck yankee.
http://www.audioasylum.com/cgi/vt.mpl?f=music&m=204538
(Comment appears after several linear-yards of yankee flannel)

Anyhow; is this lark 'mono LP' - or 'mono CD'; as Franky Fricsay's VAD Reck Whim was first mastered All-Fool's' Day, 1954 - so may not always have sounded 'quite so stunning'.
kirkmc
2014-01-09 15:19:27 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by frankwm
Apparently mono is crap ('mostly'), according to a redneck yankee.
http://www.audioasylum.com/cgi/vt.mpl?f=music&m=204538
(Comment appears after several linear-yards of yankee flannel)
Anyhow; is this lark 'mono LP' - or 'mono CD'; as Franky Fricsay's VAD Reck Whim was first mastered All-Fool's' Day, 1954 - so may not always have sounded 'quite so stunning'.
To be fair, listening to mono recordings on a stereo doesn't sound great. But if you listen on a single speaker, and it's well recorded, it sounds glorious.

Kirk
Christopher Webber
2014-01-09 15:26:37 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by kirkmc
listening to mono recordings on a stereo doesn't sound great. But if you listen on a single speaker, and it's well recorded, it sounds glorious.
I don't understand. Surely, if you have your stereo speakers correctly
positioned, you produce a perfect mono image in the middle, where nature
(and possibly God) intended it?
William Sommerwerck
2014-01-09 16:19:06 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Christopher Webber
I don't understand. Surely, if you have your stereo speakers correctly
positioned, you produce a perfect mono image in the middle, where
nature (and possibly God) intended it?
"God's intent" is that we hear reflected sounds from the sides.

And don't call me Shirley.
kirkmc
2014-01-09 16:25:40 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Christopher Webber
Post by kirkmc
listening to mono recordings on a stereo doesn't sound great. But if you listen on a single speaker, and it's well recorded, it sounds glorious.
I don't understand. Surely, if you have your stereo speakers correctly
positioned, you produce a perfect mono image in the middle, where nature
(and possibly God) intended it?
Actually, no. It makes a sweet spot between the speakers, which you don't get with a single speaker.

Kirk
Christopher Webber
2014-01-09 16:31:09 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by kirkmc
Post by Christopher Webber
I don't understand. Surely, if you have your stereo speakers correctly
positioned, you produce a perfect mono image in the middle, where nature
(and possibly God) intended it?
Actually, no. It makes a sweet spot between the speakers, which you don't get with a single speaker.
"Sweet spot" sounds good to me!
Lionel Tacchini
2014-01-10 06:57:39 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Christopher Webber
Post by kirkmc
Post by Christopher Webber
Post by Christopher Webber
I don't understand. Surely, if you have your stereo speakers correctly
positioned, you produce a perfect mono image in the middle, where
nature
Post by Christopher Webber
(and possibly God) intended it?
Actually, no. It makes a sweet spot between the speakers, which you
don't get with a single speaker.
"Sweet spot" sounds good to me!
But it's no diet hi-fi.
--
Lionel Tacchini
David Fox
2014-01-09 16:33:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by kirkmc
Post by Christopher Webber
Post by kirkmc
listening to mono recordings on a stereo doesn't sound great. But if you listen on a single speaker, and it's well recorded, it sounds glorious.
I don't understand. Surely, if you have your stereo speakers correctly
positioned, you produce a perfect mono image in the middle, where nature
(and possibly God) intended it?
Actually, no. It makes a sweet spot between the speakers, which you don't get with a single speaker.
Kirk
Actually, setting up two speakers to yield a pristine mono image is one
of the important steps in proper speaker placement and calibration. If
two speakers can't project a solid, coherent mono image between them
then they will never properly convey stereo. Depending on the room, it
often involves fiddling with the balance control. Some people believe
that it needs to be set at 12 o'clock regardless of circumstances, but
this is not true.

DF
Bob Lombard
2014-01-09 17:08:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by David Fox
Actually, setting up two speakers to yield a pristine mono image is
one of the important steps in proper speaker placement and
calibration. If two speakers can't project a solid, coherent mono
image between them then they will never properly convey stereo.
Depending on the room, it often involves fiddling with the balance
control. Some people believe that it needs to be set at 12 o'clock
regardless of circumstances, but this is not true.
DF
I'll buy this story. Aside from that, the 'sweet spot' is not single
point, as the sound from a single speaker must be. At least in my mind
there is a 'sound stage' of sorts. No matter what Samir thinks, I think
it can be of piano width, if not string quartet width. [I've never heard
a single Maggy or Quad, don't know how that presentation changes the
illusion.]

bl

---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com
kirkmc
2014-01-09 17:39:14 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Bob Lombard
Post by David Fox
Actually, setting up two speakers to yield a pristine mono image is
one of the important steps in proper speaker placement and
calibration. If two speakers can't project a solid, coherent mono
image between them then they will never properly convey stereo.
Depending on the room, it often involves fiddling with the balance
control. Some people believe that it needs to be set at 12 o'clock
regardless of circumstances, but this is not true.
DF
I'll buy this story. Aside from that, the 'sweet spot' is not single
point, as the sound from a single speaker must be. At least in my mind
there is a 'sound stage' of sorts. No matter what Samir thinks, I think
it can be of piano width, if not string quartet width. [I've never heard
a single Maggy or Quad, don't know how that presentation changes the
illusion.]
I find that with two speakers, it's reductive; if you move, you're not in the sweet spot any more. With one speaker, it's expansive; you can move a bit, and still hear it fine. From a single speaker, it radiates a fairly large sweet spot; from two speakers, there's much less room to listen comfortably.

Kirk
David Fox
2014-01-09 17:54:14 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by kirkmc
Post by Bob Lombard
Post by David Fox
Actually, setting up two speakers to yield a pristine mono image is
one of the important steps in proper speaker placement and
calibration. If two speakers can't project a solid, coherent mono
image between them then they will never properly convey stereo.
Depending on the room, it often involves fiddling with the balance
control. Some people believe that it needs to be set at 12 o'clock
regardless of circumstances, but this is not true.
DF
I'll buy this story. Aside from that, the 'sweet spot' is not single
point, as the sound from a single speaker must be. At least in my mind
there is a 'sound stage' of sorts. No matter what Samir thinks, I think
it can be of piano width, if not string quartet width. [I've never heard
a single Maggy or Quad, don't know how that presentation changes the
illusion.]
I find that with two speakers, it's reductive; if you move, you're not in the sweet spot any more. With one speaker, it's expansive; you can move a bit, and still hear it fine. From a single speaker, it radiates a fairly large sweet spot; from two speakers, there's much less room to listen comfortably.
Kirk
Well, it certainly solves the setup/balance problems of setting up two
speakers. Covering one ear may yield similar benefits :)

DF
Norman Schwartz
2014-01-10 19:17:44 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by David Fox
Well, it certainly solves the setup/balance problems of setting up two
speakers. Covering one ear may yield similar benefits :)
That's a good idea for more than that single reason. Since the hearing in
one ear doesn't exactly match the other's (any more than the vision in both
eyes is exactly the same) the listener doesn't hear true 'mono' even if the
signal is mono.
Post by David Fox
DF
frankwm
2014-01-09 15:37:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
A mono variant (classical/discretely taped) would, mostly, have a more 'forward' balance compared to the stereo taping of the same sessions...especially orchestra with solo vocal.

Combined with the general superiority of mono LP transfers (of the above dual-inventory era) then there are numerous examples where the stereo LP seems a very poor relation (except its 'collectors value').

As for CD's: well, I guess they are 'mostly crap'!!

(I think you are referring to 'point-source' imaging?? - as Decca, et al, stated mono's sounded better played via stereo equipment/speakers..
William Sommerwerck
2014-01-09 16:10:46 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by kirkmc
To be fair, listening to mono recordings on a stereo doesn't
sound great. But if you listen on a single speaker, and it's
well recorded, it sounds glorious.
Or if you use a hall synthesizer, running through separate speakers.
RLane
2014-01-09 15:47:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Probably a great question for Tom Fine, of the Mercury family fame.

Join the ARSC listserv and you could post your question there. I'm sure he would have some great examples for you from teh Mercury catalog.

http://www.arsc-audio.org/index.php
Post by kirkmc
I've been writing something about listening to mono recordings, focusing on those recordings that were mixed first in mono, then in stereo, back in the early days of stereo: artists like Miles Davis, Bob Dylan and The Beatles, for whom recent releases of re-mastered mono recordings sound very nice.
Does anyone know about specific classical recordings that fit the same conditions? Recorded in any manner - most of the above used at least three-track tape - but where the mix was to mono first, with the stereo mix considered less important.
Also, what are the best sounding mono recordings you know, of any type of classical music? I'm finding that listening to good-quality mono recordings really is relaxing...
Kirk
--
Android Usenet Reader
http://android.newsgroupstats.hk
Mort
2014-01-13 02:58:15 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by kirkmc
I've been writing something about listening to mono recordings,
focusing on those recordings that were mixed first in mono, then in
stereo, back in the early days of stereo: artists like Miles Davis,
Bob Dylan and The Beatles, for whom recent releases of re-mastered
mono recordings sound very nice.
Does anyone know about specific classical recordings that fit the same
conditions? Recorded in any manner - most of the above used at least
three-track tape - but where the mix was to mono first, with the
stereo mix considered less important.
Also, what are the best sounding mono recordings you know, of any type
of classical music? I'm finding that listening to good-quality mono
recordings really is relaxing...
Kirk
In the early days of stereo, many recordings were made with separate
setups and separate tape recorders and microphones for mono and for
stereo. That yielded better results than mixing one from the other. Of
course, that was before digital recording. Some record sets, e.g. Ella
Fitzgerald sings the Gershwin Songbook, include both the mono and the
stereo versions of some songs; and in Ella's case, for some reason the
mono songs sound clearer and richer than the stereo versions. I am a
music lover and not an audio engineer, so I offer no good explanation
for this. A partial explanation in this Ella set is that in some cases
the original stereo tapes are lost, so those stereo versions are from
copy tapes.

Mort Linder
William Sommerwerck
2014-01-09 16:21:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
I remember hearing a Buddy Holly mono recording that had a superb sense of
"depth".
David Fox
2014-01-09 16:47:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by kirkmc
I've been writing something about listening to mono recordings, focusing on those recordings that were mixed first in mono, then in stereo, back in the early days of stereo: artists like Miles Davis, Bob Dylan and The Beatles, for whom recent releases of re-mastered mono recordings sound very nice.
Does anyone know about specific classical recordings that fit the same conditions? Recorded in any manner - most of the above used at least three-track tape - but where the mix was to mono first, with the stereo mix considered less important.
Also, what are the best sounding mono recordings you know, of any type of classical music? I'm finding that listening to good-quality mono recordings really is relaxing...
Kirk
Some of my nominees are:

"Swan Lake" - Dorati, Minneapolis MLP 1954. This was included in the
recent "MLP 2" box. I was floored when I heard this and thought it
might be the best-sounding mono classical recording I've ever heard. I
could also name several other mono MLP's, including Kubelik's "Pictures
at an Exhibition" which caused a reviewer to coin the phrase "Living
Presence."

Not classical, but since you brought up mono-vs-stereo:

"Only the Lonely" - Frank Sinatra (1958). Mobile Fidelity recently
reissued the mono mix of this album on CD and LP. The difference
between the mono and stereo is astounding, much in favor of the mono.
For that matter, many of Sinatra's early stereo Capitol recordings sound
better in their mono incarnations.

Also - just about anything recorded by Blue Note and/or Rudy van Gellar
in the mid-1950's. Many of Norman Granz's mid-50's Verve/Clef/Norgan
mono recordings are spectacular as well, including "Ella and Louis",
Ella Fitzgerald's early songbook releases, Anita O'Day's early albuums,
Billie Holiday's 1950's releases, the Art Tatum / Lionel Hampton / Buddy
Rich sessions, and many, many others.

And - no mono-vs-stereo conversation would be complete without bringing
up The Beatles. There have been terabytes written about the virtues and
variants of The Beatles' mono mixes vs their stereo counterparts and I
won't rehash any of it here. Suffice it to say if you've never heard
any of The Beatles in true mono - whether it be from the recent Mono Box
or original UK LP releases - you are in for a treat.

DF
kirkmc
2014-01-09 20:02:26 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by David Fox
Post by kirkmc
I've been writing something about listening to mono recordings, focusing on those recordings that were mixed first in mono, then in stereo, back in the early days of stereo: artists like Miles Davis, Bob Dylan and The Beatles, for whom recent releases of re-mastered mono recordings sound very nice.
Does anyone know about specific classical recordings that fit the same conditions? Recorded in any manner - most of the above used at least three-track tape - but where the mix was to mono first, with the stereo mix considered less important.
Also, what are the best sounding mono recordings you know, of any type of classical music? I'm finding that listening to good-quality mono recordings really is relaxing...
Kirk
"Swan Lake" - Dorati, Minneapolis MLP 1954. This was included in the
recent "MLP 2" box. I was floored when I heard this and thought it
might be the best-sounding mono classical recording I've ever heard. I
could also name several other mono MLP's, including Kubelik's "Pictures
at an Exhibition" which caused a reviewer to coin the phrase "Living
Presence."
"Only the Lonely" - Frank Sinatra (1958). Mobile Fidelity recently
reissued the mono mix of this album on CD and LP. The difference
between the mono and stereo is astounding, much in favor of the mono.
For that matter, many of Sinatra's early stereo Capitol recordings sound
better in their mono incarnations.
Also - just about anything recorded by Blue Note and/or Rudy van Gellar
in the mid-1950's. Many of Norman Granz's mid-50's Verve/Clef/Norgan
mono recordings are spectacular as well, including "Ella and Louis",
Ella Fitzgerald's early songbook releases, Anita O'Day's early albuums,
Billie Holiday's 1950's releases, the Art Tatum / Lionel Hampton / Buddy
Rich sessions, and many, many others.
And - no mono-vs-stereo conversation would be complete without bringing
up The Beatles. There have been terabytes written about the virtues and
variants of The Beatles' mono mixes vs their stereo counterparts and I
won't rehash any of it here. Suffice it to say if you've never heard
any of The Beatles in true mono - whether it be from the recent Mono Box
or original UK LP releases - you are in for a treat.
DF
Yes, The Beatles and Dylan were what got me to pay attention. The recent Miles Davis released confirmed just how good mono mixes can be compared to stereo mixes.

Yes, Blue Note is something I've been checking out lately. And I do like Sinatra; I'll have to look for some of his early recordings. I think there's a German company (Membran?) that has a big box of Sinatra fairly cheap.

Kirk
David Fox
2014-01-09 21:22:14 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by kirkmc
Post by David Fox
Post by kirkmc
I've been writing something about listening to mono recordings, focusing on those recordings that were mixed first in mono, then in stereo, back in the early days of stereo: artists like Miles Davis, Bob Dylan and The Beatles, for whom recent releases of re-mastered mono recordings sound very nice.
Does anyone know about specific classical recordings that fit the same conditions? Recorded in any manner - most of the above used at least three-track tape - but where the mix was to mono first, with the stereo mix considered less important.
Also, what are the best sounding mono recordings you know, of any type of classical music? I'm finding that listening to good-quality mono recordings really is relaxing...
Kirk
"Swan Lake" - Dorati, Minneapolis MLP 1954. This was included in the
recent "MLP 2" box. I was floored when I heard this and thought it
might be the best-sounding mono classical recording I've ever heard. I
could also name several other mono MLP's, including Kubelik's "Pictures
at an Exhibition" which caused a reviewer to coin the phrase "Living
Presence."
"Only the Lonely" - Frank Sinatra (1958). Mobile Fidelity recently
reissued the mono mix of this album on CD and LP. The difference
between the mono and stereo is astounding, much in favor of the mono.
For that matter, many of Sinatra's early stereo Capitol recordings sound
better in their mono incarnations.
Also - just about anything recorded by Blue Note and/or Rudy van Gellar
in the mid-1950's. Many of Norman Granz's mid-50's Verve/Clef/Norgan
mono recordings are spectacular as well, including "Ella and Louis",
Ella Fitzgerald's early songbook releases, Anita O'Day's early albuums,
Billie Holiday's 1950's releases, the Art Tatum / Lionel Hampton / Buddy
Rich sessions, and many, many others.
And - no mono-vs-stereo conversation would be complete without bringing
up The Beatles. There have been terabytes written about the virtues and
variants of The Beatles' mono mixes vs their stereo counterparts and I
won't rehash any of it here. Suffice it to say if you've never heard
any of The Beatles in true mono - whether it be from the recent Mono Box
or original UK LP releases - you are in for a treat.
DF
Yes, The Beatles and Dylan were what got me to pay attention. The recent Miles Davis released confirmed just how good mono mixes can be compared to stereo mixes.
Yes, Blue Note is something I've been checking out lately. And I do like Sinatra; I'll have to look for some of his early recordings. I think there's a German company (Membran?) that has a big box of Sinatra fairly cheap.
The bad news is that the Membran release is most probably comprised of
"needle drop" transfers. The good news is that if they utilized
original-issue Capitol LP's, they have a decent chance of sounding
better than the CD remasters put out by EMI.

DF
Post by kirkmc
Kirk
kirkmc
2014-01-09 23:12:18 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by David Fox
Post by kirkmc
Post by David Fox
Post by kirkmc
I've been writing something about listening to mono recordings, focusing on those recordings that were mixed first in mono, then in stereo, back in the early days of stereo: artists like Miles Davis, Bob Dylan and The Beatles, for whom recent releases of re-mastered mono recordings sound very nice.
Does anyone know about specific classical recordings that fit the same conditions? Recorded in any manner - most of the above used at least three-track tape - but where the mix was to mono first, with the stereo mix considered less important.
Also, what are the best sounding mono recordings you know, of any type of classical music? I'm finding that listening to good-quality mono recordings really is relaxing...
Kirk
"Swan Lake" - Dorati, Minneapolis MLP 1954. This was included in the
recent "MLP 2" box. I was floored when I heard this and thought it
might be the best-sounding mono classical recording I've ever heard. I
could also name several other mono MLP's, including Kubelik's "Pictures
at an Exhibition" which caused a reviewer to coin the phrase "Living
Presence."
"Only the Lonely" - Frank Sinatra (1958). Mobile Fidelity recently
reissued the mono mix of this album on CD and LP. The difference
between the mono and stereo is astounding, much in favor of the mono.
For that matter, many of Sinatra's early stereo Capitol recordings sound
better in their mono incarnations.
Also - just about anything recorded by Blue Note and/or Rudy van Gellar
in the mid-1950's. Many of Norman Granz's mid-50's Verve/Clef/Norgan
mono recordings are spectacular as well, including "Ella and Louis",
Ella Fitzgerald's early songbook releases, Anita O'Day's early albuums,
Billie Holiday's 1950's releases, the Art Tatum / Lionel Hampton / Buddy
Rich sessions, and many, many others.
And - no mono-vs-stereo conversation would be complete without bringing
up The Beatles. There have been terabytes written about the virtues and
variants of The Beatles' mono mixes vs their stereo counterparts and I
won't rehash any of it here. Suffice it to say if you've never heard
any of The Beatles in true mono - whether it be from the recent Mono Box
or original UK LP releases - you are in for a treat.
DF
Yes, The Beatles and Dylan were what got me to pay attention. The recent Miles Davis released confirmed just how good mono mixes can be compared to stereo mixes.
Yes, Blue Note is something I've been checking out lately. And I do like Sinatra; I'll have to look for some of his early recordings. I think there's a German company (Membran?) that has a big box of Sinatra fairly cheap.
The bad news is that the Membran release is most probably comprised of
"needle drop" transfers. The good news is that if they utilized
original-issue Capitol LP's, they have a decent chance of sounding
better than the CD remasters put out by EMI.
DF
I have their Helmut Walcha organ CD set, and they're not needle drops. They are probably just blatant copies of CDs, which are in the public domain in the EU.

Kirk
Christopher Webber
2014-01-09 23:38:38 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by kirkmc
They are probably just blatant copies of CDs, which are in the public domain in the EU.
No CD could possibly be PD in EU, as the first remasterings only
appeared c.1983.

Copyright subsists in a CD remastering of any older recording, no matter
how old the original LP, and it will for at least forty years to come
(at least, here in the EU).

If they were ripping off a published CD (I say "if") then they would be
breaking the law.
kirkmc
2014-01-10 10:19:57 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Christopher Webber
Post by kirkmc
They are probably just blatant copies of CDs, which are in the public domain in the EU.
No CD could possibly be PD in EU, as the first remasterings only
appeared c.1983.
Copyright subsists in a CD remastering of any older recording, no matter
how old the original LP, and it will for at least forty years to come
(at least, here in the EU).
If they were ripping off a published CD (I say "if") then they would be
breaking the law.
It's not the CD itself that's copyright, it's the original performance. There are tons of public domain jazz recordings reissued here, and none sound like they're needle drops.

Kirk
William Sommerwerck
2014-01-10 14:25:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by kirkmc
It's not the CD itself that's copyright, it's the original performance.
There are tons of public domain jazz recordings reissued here, and
none sound like they're needle drops.
If that's so... why do you see copyright notices for a specific compilation?
kirkmc
2014-01-10 19:00:12 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by William Sommerwerck
Post by kirkmc
It's not the CD itself that's copyright, it's the original performance.
There are tons of public domain jazz recordings reissued here, and
none sound like they're needle drops.
If that's so... why do you see copyright notices for a specific compilation?
Copyright dates are different in the US and the EU. For example, Gould's 55 Goldbergs are in the public domain in the EU, but not the US. So you'll see compilations that are intended to be sold in the US that have copyrights.

Remember a few years ago the Naxos Historical releases that couldn't be sold in the US, but were legal in the EU?

Kirk
O
2014-01-10 15:43:58 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by kirkmc
Post by Christopher Webber
Post by kirkmc
They are probably just blatant copies of CDs, which are in the public
domain in the EU.
No CD could possibly be PD in EU, as the first remasterings only
appeared c.1983.
Copyright subsists in a CD remastering of any older recording, no matter
how old the original LP, and it will for at least forty years to come
(at least, here in the EU).
If they were ripping off a published CD (I say "if") then they would be
breaking the law.
It's not the CD itself that's copyright, it's the original performance. There
are tons of public domain jazz recordings reissued here, and none sound like they're needle drops.
Actually, it's the inverse. The CD is copyright. The original
performance is public domain. In order to legally copy the
performance, it would be necessary to use source material (i.e. LP's)
published originally.

-Owen
Christopher Webber
2014-01-10 16:14:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by O
Actually, it's the inverse. The CD is copyright. The original
performance is public domain. In order to legally copy the
performance, it would be necessary to use source material (i.e. LP's)
published originally.
Pithily put. I hope that clears up KM's confusion. If you do an edited
remastering from an original Public Domain LP to CD, you have copyright
in your work for the full legal period. Beware though that you are not
doing it from a reissued, in-copyright LP.

I would think that not many respectable commercial outfits do crude
"needle drops" these days, although Regis give me pause for thought even
as I type that. Even at home - with a few pains taken - it is very
possible using good editing software to achieve results which do not
sound as if they had been LP-based at all.

Organ music, by the way, has been in my experience particularly easy to
transfer from LP seamlessly. I rather fancy that is what Membran (or
whoever) did with the Walcha set. Some of their opera transfers (such as
the Krips 'Don Giovanni') have sounded a bit murky but others (the
Monteux 'Manon') have proved good. Though I can tell they are from LP,
not CD "rip offs".
O
2014-01-11 22:53:18 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Christopher Webber
Post by O
Actually, it's the inverse. The CD is copyright. The original
performance is public domain. In order to legally copy the
performance, it would be necessary to use source material (i.e. LP's)
published originally.
Pithily put. I hope that clears up KM's confusion. If you do an edited
remastering from an original Public Domain LP to CD, you have copyright
in your work for the full legal period. Beware though that you are not
doing it from a reissued, in-copyright LP.
That's not entirely correct either, although mostly so. A court may
rule that any changes you've made (if any) have not substantially
changed from the original public domain source, and thus your copyright
is not valid. Unfortunately, there's little of copyright law that's
cut and dried, and not subject to vagaries of courts and lawyers. A
copyright on an already public domain work is more tenuous then one on
a recent in-copyright one.

-Owen, not a lawyer, not legal advise - consult a real lawyer for same.
Christopher Webber
2014-01-11 23:28:47 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by O
A court may
rule that any changes you've made (if any) have not substantially
changed from the original public domain source, and thus your copyright
is not valid.
That is perfectly true. But as far as I know no genuine remastering has
ever even been challenged on those grounds. Plain "rip offs" of course
have been, and are.

The problem is with the definition of "substantial", and the clause was
there to stop the straight "needle drop" rip-off merchants in the last
century.

When one regularly smooths upwards of 50,000 clicks, bumps and scratches
(let alone other artefacts) on a single LP I think that counts as
substantial!
themusicparlour
2014-01-12 00:13:41 UTC
Reply
Permalink
When one regularly smooths upwards of 50,000 clicks, bumps and scratches (let alone other artefacts) on a single LP I think that counts as substantial!
Peculiar comment!
Even on near-lowest settings, an auto de-click program could reach that figure** with a mint LP; so it requires no 'skill or ability'.

Even less so for such frauds who surreptitiously copy CD's; whilst alluding to 'first issues'..

**not least because it 'reads' transient/fine detail as 'clicks' - hence the debasement.
Precious Roy
2014-01-12 16:16:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Scheherazade, the Philharmonia under Dobrowen (1952) has just been reissued on Opus Kura -- a really fine transfer from vinyl and reveals a wonderful mono recording. And what playing! The mono sound is in some ways better than early EMI stereo. Coupled with Tsar Saltan.
wade
2014-01-12 16:41:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Precious Roy
Scheherazade, the Philharmonia under Dobrowen (1952) has just been reissued on Opus Kura -- a really fine transfer from vinyl and reveals a wonderful mono recording. And what playing! The mono sound is in some ways better than early EMI stereo. Coupled with Tsar Saltan.
Early EMI stereo definitely had a distinctive sound. Maybe it was just tied to the recording hall, as I havent checked everything to see when Kingsway was used and when Abbey Road Studio #1 was used. The same is true of the early Decca/London Vienna Mozart Opera recordings. Different again are all the Ansermet Geneva stereo recordings (to my hearing, much better sounding overall).
themusicparlour
2014-01-12 16:46:15 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Bet you enjoyed listening to Mr.Pegge-Legge wandering around the studio @ the start of Scheherazade!!

Sounds like a crummy transfer (the treble has been boosted BTW)..and, unless they have an XLP recut (if made) of Tsar Sultan, then the sound sadly deteriorates well before the side-end in that, also, 1953 transfer.
Precious Roy
2014-01-13 00:42:50 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Hmm. Musicparlour, you make it sound like "boosting the treble" was somehow illicit. But transfer engineers are allowed to apply equalization. I gather you have something against Walter Legge too, which sure seems silly.
themusicparlour
2014-01-13 01:31:07 UTC
Reply
Permalink
The 'busy background' sounds as if surface-grunge has been noise-reduced away (sic): so the treble gets boosted to 'compensate' (sic)...'an old trick'.

Mr Pegge-Legge refers to the 'cyclic thumps' that the 'sample' also discloses: BTW: the producer was quite likely Walter Jellinek, as that was a 'plum-label' thrift-release..

Anyway: I could easily do a superior transfer - from mint LP's...in fact intended to a year or so back..LOL!!!
Precious Roy
2014-01-13 06:44:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by themusicparlour
The 'busy background' sounds as if surface-grunge has been noise-reduced away (sic): so the treble gets boosted to 'compensate' (sic)...'an old trick'.
What sample? I'm not listening to any sample. Are you going by the mp3 on their website?

Opus Kura, as you no doubt know, could be described as a label dedicated to the under-use of noise reduction techniques. They don't use much on 78s and I doubt they would use very much on an LP.
Alan Cooper
2014-01-12 17:12:28 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Precious Roy
Scheherazade, the Philharmonia under Dobrowen (1952) has just been
reissued on Opus Kura -- a really fine transfer from vinyl and reveals
a wonderful mono recording. And what playing! The mono sound is in
some ways better than early EMI stereo. Coupled with Tsar Saltan.
Neal, whose blog has gone private, offered nice transfers of several
Dobrowen recordings, including his great Scheherezade, a few years ago.
See http://nealshistorical.wordpress.com/category/dobrowen/ for the
listings, no longer downloadable there, however. It's a good thing the
conductor changed his name, saving us the trouble of having to write out
(not to mention pronounce) "Itschok Zorachovitch Barabeitchik."

AC
Christopher Webber
2014-01-12 17:27:32 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Precious Roy
Scheherazade, the Philharmonia under Dobrowen (1952) has just been reissued on Opus Kura -- a really fine transfer from vinyl and reveals a wonderful mono recording. And what playing! The mono sound is in some ways better than early EMI stereo. Coupled with Tsar Saltan.
I've never heard this Dobrowen performance, and am intrigued. Is the
Tsar Saltan suite the usual three movements, or has it been bumble-beed?
themusicparlour
2014-01-12 17:38:37 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Christopher Webber
I've never heard this Dobrowen performance, and am intrigued. Is the
Right old train-spotter!

EMG Oct.1953 review: ".....The playing at times is brilliant yet both works appear to run drearily on under this conductor. The recording is fairly good except for the ends of sides where there is distortion..."

Columbia SX 1010: 3 parts Sultan + 5 parts Cock = 8 parts dreary (as is the Scheherazade).
David Fox
2014-01-10 00:48:45 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by kirkmc
Post by David Fox
Post by kirkmc
Post by David Fox
Post by kirkmc
I've been writing something about listening to mono recordings, focusing on those recordings that were mixed first in mono, then in stereo, back in the early days of stereo: artists like Miles Davis, Bob Dylan and The Beatles, for whom recent releases of re-mastered mono recordings sound very nice.
Does anyone know about specific classical recordings that fit the same conditions? Recorded in any manner - most of the above used at least three-track tape - but where the mix was to mono first, with the stereo mix considered less important.
Also, what are the best sounding mono recordings you know, of any type of classical music? I'm finding that listening to good-quality mono recordings really is relaxing...
Kirk
"Swan Lake" - Dorati, Minneapolis MLP 1954. This was included in the
recent "MLP 2" box. I was floored when I heard this and thought it
might be the best-sounding mono classical recording I've ever heard. I
could also name several other mono MLP's, including Kubelik's "Pictures
at an Exhibition" which caused a reviewer to coin the phrase "Living
Presence."
"Only the Lonely" - Frank Sinatra (1958). Mobile Fidelity recently
reissued the mono mix of this album on CD and LP. The difference
between the mono and stereo is astounding, much in favor of the mono.
For that matter, many of Sinatra's early stereo Capitol recordings sound
better in their mono incarnations.
Also - just about anything recorded by Blue Note and/or Rudy van Gellar
in the mid-1950's. Many of Norman Granz's mid-50's Verve/Clef/Norgan
mono recordings are spectacular as well, including "Ella and Louis",
Ella Fitzgerald's early songbook releases, Anita O'Day's early albuums,
Billie Holiday's 1950's releases, the Art Tatum / Lionel Hampton / Buddy
Rich sessions, and many, many others.
And - no mono-vs-stereo conversation would be complete without bringing
up The Beatles. There have been terabytes written about the virtues and
variants of The Beatles' mono mixes vs their stereo counterparts and I
won't rehash any of it here. Suffice it to say if you've never heard
any of The Beatles in true mono - whether it be from the recent Mono Box
or original UK LP releases - you are in for a treat.
DF
Yes, The Beatles and Dylan were what got me to pay attention. The recent Miles Davis released confirmed just how good mono mixes can be compared to stereo mixes.
Yes, Blue Note is something I've been checking out lately. And I do like Sinatra; I'll have to look for some of his early recordings. I think there's a German company (Membran?) that has a big box of Sinatra fairly cheap.
The bad news is that the Membran release is most probably comprised of
"needle drop" transfers. The good news is that if they utilized
original-issue Capitol LP's, they have a decent chance of sounding
better than the CD remasters put out by EMI.
DF
I have their Helmut Walcha organ CD set, and they're not needle drops. They are probably just blatant copies of CDs, which are in the public domain in the EU.
Kirk
I have their 10 CD set of classic Mozart Opera recordings (E. Kleiber
"Figaro", Fricsay "Magic Flute", Bohm's first "Cosi", Krips' "Don
Giovanni"). They do sound like CD ripoffs rather than needle drops.
That said, you'd be better off if the Sinatra box contains needle drops.

DF
wade
2014-01-10 21:04:06 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by David Fox
Post by kirkmc
Post by David Fox
Post by kirkmc
Post by David Fox
Post by kirkmc
I've been writing something about listening to mono recordings, focusing on those recordings that were mixed first in mono, then in stereo, back in the early days of stereo: artists like Miles Davis, Bob Dylan and The Beatles, for whom recent releases of re-mastered mono recordings sound very nice.
Does anyone know about specific classical recordings that fit the same conditions? Recorded in any manner - most of the above used at least three-track tape - but where the mix was to mono first, with the stereo mix considered less important.
Also, what are the best sounding mono recordings you know, of any type of classical music? I'm finding that listening to good-quality mono recordings really is relaxing...
Kirk
"Swan Lake" - Dorati, Minneapolis MLP 1954. This was included in the
recent "MLP 2" box. I was floored when I heard this and thought it
might be the best-sounding mono classical recording I've ever heard. I
could also name several other mono MLP's, including Kubelik's "Pictures
at an Exhibition" which caused a reviewer to coin the phrase "Living
Presence."
"Only the Lonely" - Frank Sinatra (1958). Mobile Fidelity recently
reissued the mono mix of this album on CD and LP. The difference
between the mono and stereo is astounding, much in favor of the mono.
For that matter, many of Sinatra's early stereo Capitol recordings sound
better in their mono incarnations.
Also - just about anything recorded by Blue Note and/or Rudy van Gellar
in the mid-1950's. Many of Norman Granz's mid-50's Verve/Clef/Norgan
mono recordings are spectacular as well, including "Ella and Louis",
Ella Fitzgerald's early songbook releases, Anita O'Day's early albuums,
Billie Holiday's 1950's releases, the Art Tatum / Lionel Hampton / Buddy
Rich sessions, and many, many others.
And - no mono-vs-stereo conversation would be complete without bringing
up The Beatles. There have been terabytes written about the virtues and
variants of The Beatles' mono mixes vs their stereo counterparts and I
won't rehash any of it here. Suffice it to say if you've never heard
any of The Beatles in true mono - whether it be from the recent Mono Box
or original UK LP releases - you are in for a treat.
DF
Yes, The Beatles and Dylan were what got me to pay attention. The recent Miles Davis released confirmed just how good mono mixes can be compared to stereo mixes.
Yes, Blue Note is something I've been checking out lately. And I do like Sinatra; I'll have to look for some of his early recordings. I think there's a German company (Membran?) that has a big box of Sinatra fairly cheap.
The bad news is that the Membran release is most probably comprised of
"needle drop" transfers. The good news is that if they utilized
original-issue Capitol LP's, they have a decent chance of sounding
better than the CD remasters put out by EMI.
DF
I have their Helmut Walcha organ CD set, and they're not needle drops. They are probably just blatant copies of CDs, which are in the public domain in the EU.
Kirk
I have their 10 CD set of classic Mozart Opera recordings (E. Kleiber
"Figaro", Fricsay "Magic Flute", Bohm's first "Cosi", Krips' "Don
Giovanni"). They do sound like CD ripoffs rather than needle drops.
That said, you'd be better off if the Sinatra box contains needle drops.
DF
beware though, some "tracks" were omitted from the special Mozart opera compilations based on the mid-50s Decca/London Mozart completes. Rather haphazard omissions I might add.
Steve de Mena
2014-01-10 06:45:14 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by kirkmc
I have their Helmut Walcha organ CD set, and they're not needle drops. They are probably just blatant copies of CDs, which are in the public domain in the EU.
Kirk
Did you rip them in iTunes and did it identify the record label?

Steve
kirkmc
2014-01-10 10:20:34 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Steve de Mena
Post by kirkmc
I have their Helmut Walcha organ CD set, and they're not needle drops. They are probably just blatant copies of CDs, which are in the public domain in the EU.
Kirk
Did you rip them in iTunes and did it identify the record label?
Steve
It identified the tracks; iTunes never tells you labels.

Kirk
Steve de Mena
2014-01-11 01:35:46 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by kirkmc
Post by Steve de Mena
Did you rip them in iTunes and did it identify the record label?
Steve
It identified the tracks; iTunes never tells you labels.
Kirk
It might have said "Original Masters" or something in the Album Field
to tie it to the Archiv set. iTunes is showing me "The 1947-52 Bach
Recordings [Disc x]", which is the title of the Archiv set and not of
the Membran set.

Steve
td
2014-01-18 01:21:18 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by kirkmc
I have their Helmut Walcha organ CD set, and they're not needle drops. They are probably just blatant copies of CDs, which are in the public domain in the EU.
Actually not.

At least not according to many. The original recording is the Long Playing record, not the digital encoding of the tape that produced that LP.

So, if any of the companies wanted to - they may with the Beatles and Presley - they could fight such theft of digital masters.

Not sure what the outcome would be, but it would be interesting to have that clarified.

TD
kirkmc
2014-01-18 11:03:44 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by td
Post by kirkmc
I have their Helmut Walcha organ CD set, and they're not needle drops. They are probably just blatant copies of CDs, which are in the public domain in the EU.
Actually not.
At least not according to many. The original recording is the Long Playing record, not the digital encoding of the tape that produced that LP.
So, if any of the companies wanted to - they may with the Beatles and Presley - they could fight such theft of digital masters.
Not sure what the outcome would be, but it would be interesting to have that clarified.
TD
I don't see why it's any different than scanning a book that's in the public domain. But I would be interested to know exactly how all that works.

Kirk
3Bs
2014-01-10 02:46:37 UTC
Reply
Permalink
"Stereo is an invention of the Fakers!"
- Otto Klemperer -

That wonderful quote aside, Kirk, I think your premise doesn't map perfectly well to classical music. When you think of the Beatles and Motown, two examples where the mono recordings often sound better than the stereo releases, there were technological reasons that the stereo versions lacked dynamic punch and seemed glassy. The mono recordings sound quite impressive for their age, and-forgetting the lack of stereo- are quite good sounding even by modern standards. It is true that some very early stereo classical recordings fail to sound as good as their mono predecessors- look at Kempe's Brahms set on Testament. But the mono recordings weren't that wonderful to begin with, and it didn't take long for the recording companies to improve the stereo product to exceed where they had been with mono. There are people that will point to mono Mercuries (and this is the best example I can think of), but stereo Mercuries were quite good, too; Many of the famous Mercuries sounded great because of the venues (Symphony Hall, for example), but RCA got wonderful sound there as well- in stereo (at least until the first renovation).

Ironically, your question is better applied to the transition to digital, since many classical recording companies took a huge step back in terms of sound quality for a number of years before figuring out how to make digital sound as warm and full as analogue. But that's got nothing do do with mono-stereo.
William Sommerwerck
2014-01-10 08:13:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by 3Bs
Ironically, your question is better applied to the transition to digital,
since many classical recording companies took a huge step back in
terms of sound quality for a number of years before figuring out how
to make digital sound as warm and full as analogue. But that's got
nothing do do with mono-stereo.
The "warmth" and "fullness" of analog sound are frauds, colorations that are
part of most analog recording technologies -- phonograph records, in
particular. //Digital sounds more like live sound.//

In the early days of digital recording, Larry Archibald (who owned
"Stereophile" at that time) griped about the sound. With one exception. He
didn't object to Gordon's recordings, which were made with a Sony PCM-F1 --
not exactly a perfect digital processor.

One of the reasons early CDs didn't sound so good is that they were mastered
from the analog tapes used to master LPs. These apparently often had HF boost
to compensate for LP loss.
3Bs
2014-01-10 22:07:46 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by William Sommerwerck
The "warmth" and "fullness" of analog sound are frauds, colorations that are
part of most analog recording technologies -- phonograph records, in
particular. //Digital sounds more like live sound.//
Perhaps so, but at the dawn of digital recording some got it more right than others, don't you think? Blomstedt's '79 Bruckner 7 in Dresden sounds fine to me, bot other digital recordings from the same time sound glassy and thin.

You can always say "that's the way it is". In my defense I've never been too concerned with the imitation parroting reality if it could be improved in a good way.
Christopher Webber
2014-01-10 23:10:39 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by 3Bs
You can always say "that's the way it is". In my defense I've never been too concerned with the imitation parroting reality if it could be improved in a good way.
Hear hear.

Most of don't live in a large concert hall, so parroting reality in the
case of (say) Havergal Brian's 'Gothic Symphony' would be a curiously
sterile exercise.

And our neighbours would not tolerate it.
Herman
2014-01-18 09:17:28 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Christopher Webber
Post by 3Bs
You can always say "that's the way it is". In my defense I've never been too concerned with the imitation parroting reality if it could be improved in a good way.
Hear hear.
Most of don't live in a large concert hall, so parroting reality in the
case of (say) Havergal Brian's 'Gothic Symphony' would be a curiously
sterile exercise.
And our neighbours would not tolerate it.
Also, often those "experts" pontificating about which technique come closest to live sound, when you inquire, it turns out they haven't been to a orchestral concert in decades, so it's all fantasy.
William Sommerwerck
2014-01-11 00:24:29 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by 3Bs
Post by William Sommerwerck
The "warmth" and "fullness" of analog sound are frauds, colorations
that are part of most analog recording technologies -- phonograph
records, in particular. //Digital sounds more like live sound.//
Perhaps so, but at the dawn of digital recording some got it more right
than others, don't you think? Blomstedt's '79 Bruckner 7 in Dresden
sounds fine to me, bot other digital recordings from the same time
sound glassy and thin.
But that's not the point. The same criticism could be directed at thousands of
analog recordings. Some are good, some are bad, some are mediocre. LIVE SOUND
is the reference, NOT analog or digital recording.
Post by 3Bs
You can always say "that's the way it is". In my defense I've never been
too concerned with the imitation parroting reality if it could be improved
in a good way.
This is why so many recordings are lousy -- the producer and engineer are
trying to "improve" on what would better be left alone.
g***@gmail.com
2014-05-05 21:48:29 UTC
Reply
Permalink
"3Bs" wrote in message
Post by 3Bs
Post by William Sommerwerck
The "warmth" and "fullness" of analog sound are frauds, colorations
that are part of most analog recording technologies -- phonograph
records, in particular. //Digital sounds more like live sound.//
Perhaps so, but at the dawn of digital recording some got it more right
than others, don't you think? Blomstedt's '79 Bruckner 7 in Dresden
sounds fine to me, bot other digital recordings from the same time
sound glassy and thin.
But that's not the point. The same criticism could be directed at thousands of
analog recordings. Some are good, some are bad, some are mediocre. LIVE SOUND
is the reference, NOT analog or digital recording.
Post by 3Bs
You can always say "that's the way it is". In my defense I've never been
too concerned with the imitation parroting reality if it could be improved
in a good way.
This is why so many recordings are lousy -- the producer and engineer are
trying to "improve" on what would better be left alone.
Wouldn't Haggin have agreed with your observation?:

https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!topicsearchin/rec.music.classical.recordings/haggin%7Csort:date%7Cspell:true/rec.music.classical.recordings/z7AzKuLArOY
k***@gmail.com
2014-01-10 01:25:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
kubelik/chicago - mussorgsky, bartok (mercury living presence)
v.beinum/rco - bruckner 7, 8 & 9
Bob Harper
2014-01-10 02:58:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by k***@gmail.com
kubelik/chicago - mussorgsky, bartok (mercury living presence)
v.beinum/rco - bruckner 7, 8& 9
My father had the LP of the Mussorgsky, obtained at the Audio Show in
Chicago the year it was released. I remember him telling me that
practically all the exhibitors had it playing away at the Show. By the
time it was finally put out to pasture, it was practically playing the
grooves from both sides, so often had it been played :)

And yes, the Van Beinum Bruckner recordings are excellent, as sound
*and* performance..

Another I would recommend is the DG Jochum/BPO Brahms set as an
excellent example of successful mono, especially the Third from that
set. It's from 1956, so one wonders why they hadn't yet gone to stereo.
Perhaps they tried but weren't satisfied with the result.

Bob Harper
David Fox
2014-01-10 03:35:14 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Bob Harper
Post by k***@gmail.com
kubelik/chicago - mussorgsky, bartok (mercury living presence)
v.beinum/rco - bruckner 7, 8& 9
My father had the LP of the Mussorgsky, obtained at the Audio Show in
Chicago the year it was released. I remember him telling me that
practically all the exhibitors had it playing away at the Show. By the
time it was finally put out to pasture, it was practically playing the
grooves from both sides, so often had it been played :)
And yes, the Van Beinum Bruckner recordings are excellent, as sound
*and* performance..
Another I would recommend is the DG Jochum/BPO Brahms set as an
excellent example of successful mono, especially the Third from that
set. It's from 1956, so one wonders why they hadn't yet gone to stereo.
Perhaps they tried but weren't satisfied with the result.
Bob Harper
I think some of these responses are drifting into great mono
performances, but I'm not sure all of these represent truly great
recorded sound. Most are fine recordings of excellent performances, but
few rise to the level of recording excellence that to use my example the
Mercury Dorati Swan Lake does. The Furtwangler 1954 Lucerne Beethoven
9th is a great example. It is probably the best-sounding recording in
the Furtwangler discography (the 1951 NDR Brahms 1st is a close second),
but I wouldn't hold it up as an exemplar of the mono recording process.
I feel similarly about most of the recordings mentioned.

DF
kirkmc
2014-01-10 10:21:45 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by David Fox
Post by Bob Harper
Post by k***@gmail.com
kubelik/chicago - mussorgsky, bartok (mercury living presence)
v.beinum/rco - bruckner 7, 8& 9
My father had the LP of the Mussorgsky, obtained at the Audio Show in
Chicago the year it was released. I remember him telling me that
practically all the exhibitors had it playing away at the Show. By the
time it was finally put out to pasture, it was practically playing the
grooves from both sides, so often had it been played :)
And yes, the Van Beinum Bruckner recordings are excellent, as sound
*and* performance..
Another I would recommend is the DG Jochum/BPO Brahms set as an
excellent example of successful mono, especially the Third from that
set. It's from 1956, so one wonders why they hadn't yet gone to stereo.
Perhaps they tried but weren't satisfied with the result.
Bob Harper
I think some of these responses are drifting into great mono
performances, but I'm not sure all of these represent truly great
recorded sound. Most are fine recordings of excellent performances, but
few rise to the level of recording excellence that to use my example the
Mercury Dorati Swan Lake does. The Furtwangler 1954 Lucerne Beethoven
9th is a great example. It is probably the best-sounding recording in
the Furtwangler discography (the 1951 NDR Brahms 1st is a close second),
but I wouldn't hold it up as an exemplar of the mono recording process.
I feel similarly about most of the recordings mentioned.
DF
Yes, I was asking about sound, not just performances.

Kirk
MiNe109
2014-01-10 05:11:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Bob Harper
Post by k***@gmail.com
kubelik/chicago - mussorgsky, bartok (mercury living presence)
v.beinum/rco - bruckner 7, 8& 9
My father had the LP of the Mussorgsky, obtained at the Audio Show in
Chicago the year it was released. I remember him telling me that
practically all the exhibitors had it playing away at the Show. By the
time it was finally put out to pasture, it was practically playing the
grooves from both sides, so often had it been played :)
There's a coincidence: I just ripped the MLP cd of the Kubelik
mentioned. Lots of cyrillic.


Stephen
David Fox
2014-01-10 05:55:09 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by MiNe109
Post by Bob Harper
Post by k***@gmail.com
kubelik/chicago - mussorgsky, bartok (mercury living presence)
v.beinum/rco - bruckner 7, 8& 9
My father had the LP of the Mussorgsky, obtained at the Audio Show in
Chicago the year it was released. I remember him telling me that
practically all the exhibitors had it playing away at the Show. By the
time it was finally put out to pasture, it was practically playing the
grooves from both sides, so often had it been played :)
There's a coincidence: I just ripped the MLP cd of the Kubelik
mentioned. Lots of cyrillic.
I often get back Cyrillic in the tags of recordings of Russian
composers. Cyrillic used to cause Squeezebox to misbehave, but it's
since gotten more robust. Still, I remove all Cyrillic characters from
tags if I have the time/patience.

DF
f***@yahoo.com
2014-01-10 01:36:37 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by kirkmc
I've been writing something about listening to mono recordings, focusing on those recordings that were mixed first in mono, then in stereo, back in the early days of stereo: artists like Miles Davis, Bob Dylan and The Beatles, for whom recent releases of re-mastered mono recordings sound very nice.
Does anyone know about specific classical recordings that fit the same conditions? Recorded in any manner - most of the above used at least three-track tape - but where the mix was to mono first, with the stereo mix considered less important.
Also, what are the best sounding mono recordings you know, of any type of classical music? I'm finding that listening to good-quality mono recordings really is relaxing...
Kirk
Furtwangler's Beethoven Ninth from 1954 on Tahra
RLane
2014-01-10 03:19:45 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Bruno Walter's 1956 NYPO Mahler 1st
Post by f***@yahoo.com
Post by kirkmc
I've been writing something about listening to mono recordings, focusing on those recordings that were mixed first in mono, then in stereo, back in the early days of stereo: artists like Miles Davis, Bob Dylan and The Beatles, for whom recent releases of re-mastered mono recordings sound very nice.
Does anyone know about specific classical recordings that fit the same conditions? Recorded in any manner - most of the above used at least three-track tape - but where the mix was to mono first, with the stereo mix considered less important.
Also, what are the best sounding mono recordings you know, of any type of classical music? I'm finding that listening to good-quality mono recordings really is relaxing...
Kirk
Furtwangler's Beethoven Ninth from 1954 on Tahra
--
Android Usenet Reader
http://android.newsgroupstats.hk
RLane
2014-01-10 03:21:38 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Mske that 1954 (the Walter Mahler 1)
Post by RLane
Bruno Walter's 1956 NYPO Mahler 1st
Post by f***@yahoo.com
Post by kirkmc
I've been writing something about listening to mono recordings, focusing on those recordings that were mixed first in mono, then in stereo, back in the early days of stereo: artists like Miles Davis, Bob Dylan and The Beatles, for whom recent releases of re-mastered mono recordings sound very nice.
Does anyone know about specific classical recordings that fit the same conditions? Recorded in any manner - most of the above used at least three-track tape - but where the mix was to mono first, with the stereo mix considered less important.
Also, what are the best sounding mono recordings you know, of any type of classical music? I'm finding that listening to good-quality mono recordings really is relaxing...
Kirk
Furtwangler's Beethoven Ninth from 1954 on Tahra
--
Android Usenet Reader
http://android.newsgroupstats.hk
--
Android Usenet Reader
http://android.newsgroupstats.hk
Bob Harper
2014-01-11 02:02:18 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by RLane
Bruno Walter's 1956 NYPO Mahler 1st
The 1947 Walter/NYPSO Schubert 9 once available on United Archives has
remarkably good sound for its era, though I'm not sure I could
justifiably include it in a 'best-sounding' list I couldn't say. dthe
performance is outstanding.

Bob Harper
Post by RLane
Post by kirkmc
Post by kirkmc
I've been writing something about listening to mono recordings,
focusing on those recordings that were mixed first in mono, then in
stereo, back in the early days of stereo: artists like Miles Davis,
Bob Dylan and The Beatles, for whom recent releases of re-mastered
mono recordings sound very nice.
Post by kirkmc
Post by kirkmc
Does anyone know about specific classical recordings that fit
the same conditions? Recorded in any manner - most of the above used
at least three-track tape - but where the mix was to mono first, with
the stereo mix considered less important.
Post by kirkmc
Post by kirkmc
Also, what are the best sounding mono recordings you know, of
any type of classical music? I'm finding that listening to
good-quality mono recordings really is relaxing...
Post by kirkmc
Post by kirkmc
Kirk
Furtwangler's Beethoven Ninth from 1954 on Tahra
RLane
2014-01-10 03:24:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Another one I find the mono sound fine on is the 1956 DG Shosty Dym. #10 with Ancerl/CPO.
Post by f***@yahoo.com
Post by kirkmc
I've been writing something about listening to mono recordings, focusing on those recordings that were mixed first in mono, then in stereo, back in the early days of stereo: artists like Miles Davis, Bob Dylan and The Beatles, for whom recent releases of re-mastered mono recordings sound very nice.
Does anyone know about specific classical recordings that fit the same conditions? Recorded in any manner - most of the above used at least three-track tape - but where the mix was to mono first, with the stereo mix considered less important.
Also, what are the best sounding mono recordings you know, of any type of classical music? I'm finding that listening to good-quality mono recordings really is relaxing...
Kirk
Furtwangler's Beethoven Ninth from 1954 on Tahra
--
Android Usenet Reader
http://android.newsgroupstats.hk
Steve de Mena
2014-01-10 04:41:47 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by kirkmc
Also, what are the best sounding mono recordings you know, of any type of classical music? I'm finding that listening to good-quality mono recordings really is relaxing...
Kirk
Schumann Symphony No.4 - Wilhelm Furtwängler-BPO (DG 1954 Studio)

Steve
Alan Cooper
2014-01-10 14:00:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by kirkmc
Also, what are the best sounding mono recordings you know, of any type
of classical music? I'm finding that listening to good-quality mono
recordings really is relaxing...
I'm sure you know them, but you might enjoy revisiting Karajan's
EMI/Philharmonia monos, esp. the less hackneyed repertoire (Stravinsky Jeu
de cartes; Roussel Sym #4; Balakirev Sym #1; Britten Bridge Variations,
etc.). Consistently excellent in both sound and performance, imo.

AC
g***@gmail.com
2014-01-17 23:15:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by kirkmc
I've been writing something about listening to mono recordings, focusing on those recordings that were mixed first in mono, then in stereo, back in the early days of stereo: artists like Miles Davis, Bob Dylan and The Beatles, for whom recent releases of re-mastered mono recordings sound very nice.
Does anyone know about specific classical recordings that fit the same conditions? Recorded in any manner - most of the above used at least three-track tape - but where the mix was to mono first, with the stereo mix considered less important.
Also, what are the best sounding mono recordings you know, of any type of classical music? I'm finding that listening to good-quality mono recordings really is relaxing...
Kirk
In 1968(?), didn't HIFI/STEREO REVIEW publish an article of outstanding mono recordings as a reaction to the phasing out of mono recordings at the time?

Didn't that article include mention of Schwarzkopf's Coffee Cantata, Dennis Brain's recordings and Toscanini's OTELLO?
Willem Orange
2014-01-17 23:44:04 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by g***@gmail.com
Post by kirkmc
I've been writing something about listening to mono recordings, focusing on those recordings that were mixed first in mono, then in stereo, back in the early days of stereo: artists like Miles Davis, Bob Dylan and The Beatles, for whom recent releases of re-mastered mono recordings sound very nice.
Does anyone know about specific classical recordings that fit the same conditions? Recorded in any manner - most of the above used at least three-track tape - but where the mix was to mono first, with the stereo mix considered less important.
Also, what are the best sounding mono recordings you know, of any type of classical music? I'm finding that listening to good-quality mono recordings really is relaxing...
Kirk
In 1968(?), didn't HIFI/STEREO REVIEW publish an article of outstanding mono recordings as a reaction to the phasing out of mono recordings at the time?
Didn't that article include mention of Schwarzkopf's Coffee Cantata, Dennis Brain's recordings and Toscanini's OTELLO?
Yes the fear was that a large number of mono recordings would be lost forever due to he success of stereo. Back then recordings had been issued in both mono and stereo versions but here was a big sell off of the mono sets in the sixties, No Schwarzkopf Coffee cantata was mentioned (is there one???) but the Brain Mozart Concerti and the Toscanini Otello among others were rightly mentioned as great recordings which should always be available. It may be an interesting exercise to go over the list to see if they all are indeed still readily around - I think they are.
g***@gmail.com
2014-01-18 08:20:22 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by g***@gmail.com
Post by kirkmc
I've been writing something about listening to mono recordings, focusing on those recordings that were mixed first in mono, then in stereo, back in the early days of stereo: artists like Miles Davis, Bob Dylan and The Beatles, for whom recent releases of re-mastered mono recordings sound very nice.
Does anyone know about specific classical recordings that fit the same conditions? Recorded in any manner - most of the above used at least three-track tape - but where the mix was to mono first, with the stereo mix considered less important.
Also, what are the best sounding mono recordings you know, of any type of classical music? I'm finding that listening to good-quality mono recordings really is relaxing...
Kirk
In 1968(?), didn't HIFI/STEREO REVIEW publish an article of outstanding mono recordings as a reaction to the phasing out of mono recordings at the time?
Didn't that article include mention of Schwarzkopf's Coffee Cantata, Dennis Brain's recordings and Toscanini's OTELLO?
Yes the fear was that a large number of mono recordings would be lost forever due to he success of stereo. Back then recordings had been issued in both mono and stereo versions but here was a big sell off of the mono sets in the sixties, No Schwarzkopf Coffee cantata was mentioned (is there one???)...
Was this the Schwarzkopf Bach lp that was mentioned in that 1968 article?:

Loading Image...
Willem Orange
2014-01-18 09:39:45 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by g***@gmail.com
Post by g***@gmail.com
Post by kirkmc
I've been writing something about listening to mono recordings, focusing on those recordings that were mixed first in mono, then in stereo, back in the early days of stereo: artists like Miles Davis, Bob Dylan and The Beatles, for whom recent releases of re-mastered mono recordings sound very nice.
Does anyone know about specific classical recordings that fit the same conditions? Recorded in any manner - most of the above used at least three-track tape - but where the mix was to mono first, with the stereo mix considered less important.
Also, what are the best sounding mono recordings you know, of any type of classical music? I'm finding that listening to good-quality mono recordings really is relaxing...
Kirk
In 1968(?), didn't HIFI/STEREO REVIEW publish an article of outstanding mono recordings as a reaction to the phasing out of mono recordings at the time?
Didn't that article include mention of Schwarzkopf's Coffee Cantata, Dennis Brain's recordings and Toscanini's OTELLO?
Yes the fear was that a large number of mono recordings would be lost forever due to he success of stereo. Back then recordings had been issued in both mono and stereo versions but here was a big sell off of the mono sets in the sixties, No Schwarzkopf Coffee cantata was mentioned (is there one???)...
http://www.offtherecord.ie/images/classical%20%20lot%20%20972%20(35).JPG
No the only Schwarzkopf disc mentioned is the duet LP she did with Irmgard Seefried of Dvorak and Monteverdi
Willem Orange
2014-01-18 09:42:07 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Willem Orange
Post by g***@gmail.com
Post by g***@gmail.com
Post by kirkmc
I've been writing something about listening to mono recordings, focusing on those recordings that were mixed first in mono, then in stereo, back in the early days of stereo: artists like Miles Davis, Bob Dylan and The Beatles, for whom recent releases of re-mastered mono recordings sound very nice.
Does anyone know about specific classical recordings that fit the same conditions? Recorded in any manner - most of the above used at least three-track tape - but where the mix was to mono first, with the stereo mix considered less important.
Also, what are the best sounding mono recordings you know, of any type of classical music? I'm finding that listening to good-quality mono recordings really is relaxing...
Kirk
In 1968(?), didn't HIFI/STEREO REVIEW publish an article of outstanding mono recordings as a reaction to the phasing out of mono recordings at the time?
Didn't that article include mention of Schwarzkopf's Coffee Cantata, Dennis Brain's recordings and Toscanini's OTELLO?
Yes the fear was that a large number of mono recordings would be lost forever due to he success of stereo. Back then recordings had been issued in both mono and stereo versions but here was a big sell off of the mono sets in the sixties, No Schwarzkopf Coffee cantata was mentioned (is there one???)...
http://www.offtherecord.ie/images/classical%20%20lot%20%20972%20(35).JPG
No the only Schwarzkopf disc mentioned is the duet LP she did with Irmgard Seefried of Dvorak and Monteverdi
Also in opera the Schwarzkopf Cosi she did with Karajan in 1954 is listed
g***@gmail.com
2014-02-22 09:57:18 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Willem Orange
Post by g***@gmail.com
Post by kirkmc
I've been writing something about listening to mono recordings, focusing on those recordings that were mixed first in mono, then in stereo, back in the early days of stereo: artists like Miles Davis, Bob Dylan and The Beatles, for whom recent releases of re-mastered mono recordings sound very nice.
Does anyone know about specific classical recordings that fit the same conditions? Recorded in any manner - most of the above used at least three-track tape - but where the mix was to mono first, with the stereo mix considered less important.
Also, what are the best sounding mono recordings you know, of any type of classical music? I'm finding that listening to good-quality mono recordings really is relaxing...
Kirk
In 1968(?), didn't HIFI/STEREO REVIEW publish an article of outstanding mono recordings as a reaction to the phasing out of mono recordings at the time?
Didn't that article include mention of Schwarzkopf's Coffee Cantata, Dennis Brain's recordings and Toscanini's OTELLO?
Yes the fear was that a large number of mono recordings would be lost forever due to he success of stereo. Back then recordings had been issued in both mono and stereo versions but here was a big sell off of the mono sets in the sixties, No Schwarzkopf Coffee cantata was mentioned (is there one???) but the Brain Mozart Concerti and the Toscanini Otello among others were rightly mentioned as great recordings which should always be available. It may be an interesting exercise to go over the list to see if they all are indeed still readily around - I think they are.
Concerning Brain, do you know that his bio was published in 2012?:

http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/dennis-brain-stephen-pettitt/1008095956?ean=9780571287475
graham
2014-02-22 14:19:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
The paperback was published in 2009 in the UK. The hardback much earlier,
IIRC.
td
2014-02-22 14:42:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by graham
The paperback was published in 2009 in the UK. The hardback much earlier,
IIRC.
How about 1976?

TD
graham
2014-02-22 17:13:55 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by td
Post by graham
The paperback was published in 2009 in the UK. The hardback much earlier,
IIRC.
Post by td
How about 1976?
I remember reading it when it first came out but not when! Time passes too
bloody quickly!
Graham
J
2014-02-23 14:58:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Has anybody mentioned the Steber "Nuits d'Ete"? I was very impressed by the sound when I first heard it (Masterworks Heritage), and had to double-check the booklet to assure myself it was mono...
themusicparlour
2014-01-17 23:55:04 UTC
Reply
Permalink
...you can download (for free) complete scans of Audio / High Fidelity / HiFi Stereo Review - for the period 1952-1962 from:
http://vintagevacuumaudio.com/magazines-1952-1962
O
2014-01-23 15:08:26 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by themusicparlour
...you can download (for free) complete scans of Audio / High Fidelity / HiFi
http://vintagevacuumaudio.com/magazines-1952-1962
For any of my fellow old timers in here, this is truly a trip down
memory lane.

-Owen
Willem Orange
2014-01-23 15:14:42 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by O
Post by themusicparlour
...you can download (for free) complete scans of Audio / High Fidelity / HiFi
http://vintagevacuumaudio.com/magazines-1952-1962
For any of my fellow old timers in here, this is truly a trip down
memory lane.
-Owen
Wonderful resource and the kind of quality coverage we don't get anymore
Mr. Mike
2014-01-23 15:50:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by O
Post by themusicparlour
...you can download (for free) complete scans of Audio / High Fidelity / HiFi
http://vintagevacuumaudio.com/magazines-1952-1962
For any of my fellow old timers in here, this is truly a trip down
memory lane.
I agree, though the resolution of a couple of PDFs of High Fidelity
issues I downloaded was kind of low-res.
O
2014-01-23 18:02:13 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Mr. Mike
Post by O
Post by themusicparlour
...you can download (for free) complete scans of Audio / High Fidelity / HiFi
http://vintagevacuumaudio.com/magazines-1952-1962
For any of my fellow old timers in here, this is truly a trip down
memory lane.
I agree, though the resolution of a couple of PDFs of High Fidelity
issues I downloaded was kind of low-res.
I opened up the May 1960 issue of High Fidelity, and just reveled in
the ads, a puff-piece/interview with Arthur Fiedler, then in the
reviews of recordings I know all so well:

"One signal omission from Rubinstein's Chopin discography has been the
set of Ballades, among the composer's greatest works. Now he produces
the best complete recording available (not, however, difficult, in view
of the competition)...Here his playing is freer, more introspective,
with a higher incidence of rubatos. An almost discursive air hovers
over the performances, but this is as it should be, considering the
nature of the works; and it is Rubinstein's genius that, while letting
the music flow now this way, now that, he holds it together."

On Richter playing Tchaik 1 with Ancerl:

"Muffled, echoing sound shrouds much of Richter's playing on this
recording, and the orchestra on occasion plays soggily and out of
tune...But there are great merits: in the powerful urgency of the
opening chords; in steady, deliberate tempos, where other pianists
rush; in an octave run almost as steely as Horowitz's; in the
first-movement cadenza, with its clinging tones, feathery runs, clear
lines and shapes."

It's a world where the ads were for amplifiers and radio tuners built
from kits; where an ad pitched a "diamond shaped" stylus instead of the
common conical because it better fit the nooks and crannies of the
groove; where many people bought raw speakers and built their own
wooden enclosures; where the phonograph was king, and there was doubt
that a vinyl record could be compatible with both stereo and monoral
phonographs; and where a 30 watt amplifier would cost $129.00.

-Owen
Willem Orange
2014-01-23 18:13:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by O
Post by Mr. Mike
Post by O
Post by themusicparlour
...you can download (for free) complete scans of Audio / High Fidelity /
HiFi
http://vintagevacuumaudio.com/magazines-1952-1962
For any of my fellow old timers in here, this is truly a trip down
memory lane.
I agree, though the resolution of a couple of PDFs of High Fidelity
issues I downloaded was kind of low-res.
I opened up the May 1960 issue of High Fidelity, and just reveled in
the ads, a puff-piece/interview with Arthur Fiedler, then in the
"One signal omission from Rubinstein's Chopin discography has been the
set of Ballades, among the composer's greatest works. Now he produces
the best complete recording available (not, however, difficult, in view
of the competition)...Here his playing is freer, more introspective,
with a higher incidence of rubatos. An almost discursive air hovers
over the performances, but this is as it should be, considering the
nature of the works; and it is Rubinstein's genius that, while letting
the music flow now this way, now that, he holds it together."
"Muffled, echoing sound shrouds much of Richter's playing on this
recording, and the orchestra on occasion plays soggily and out of
tune...But there are great merits: in the powerful urgency of the
opening chords; in steady, deliberate tempos, where other pianists
rush; in an octave run almost as steely as Horowitz's; in the
first-movement cadenza, with its clinging tones, feathery runs, clear
lines and shapes."
It's a world where the ads were for amplifiers and radio tuners built
from kits; where an ad pitched a "diamond shaped" stylus instead of the
common conical because it better fit the nooks and crannies of the
groove; where many people bought raw speakers and built their own
wooden enclosures; where the phonograph was king, and there was doubt
that a vinyl record could be compatible with both stereo and monoral
phonographs; and where a 30 watt amplifier would cost $129.00.
-Owen
It is fun - I have a complete hard bound collection of High Fidelity from its inception in the early fifties through the 80s and its fun to open up those issues and read what was happening - along with the equipment reports.
g***@gmail.com
2014-01-20 07:58:06 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by g***@gmail.com
Post by kirkmc
I've been writing something about listening to mono recordings, focusing on those recordings that were mixed first in mono, then in stereo, back in the early days of stereo: artists like Miles Davis, Bob Dylan and The Beatles, for whom recent releases of re-mastered mono recordings sound very nice.
Does anyone know about specific classical recordings that fit the same conditions? Recorded in any manner - most of the above used at least three-track tape - but where the mix was to mono first, with the stereo mix considered less important.
Also, what are the best sounding mono recordings you know, of any type of classical music? I'm finding that listening to good-quality mono recordings really is relaxing...
Kirk
In 1968(?), didn't HIFI/STEREO REVIEW publish an article of outstanding mono recordings as a reaction to the phasing out of mono recordings at the time?
Didn't that article include mention of Schwarzkopf's Coffee Cantata, Dennis Brain's recordings and Toscanini's OTELLO?
Didn't that article also mention the lp of Dinu Lipatti's Besancon recital which was his last?:

Loading Image...
Willem Orange
2014-01-20 10:15:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by g***@gmail.com
Post by g***@gmail.com
Post by kirkmc
I've been writing something about listening to mono recordings, focusing on those recordings that were mixed first in mono, then in stereo, back in the early days of stereo: artists like Miles Davis, Bob Dylan and The Beatles, for whom recent releases of re-mastered mono recordings sound very nice.
Does anyone know about specific classical recordings that fit the same conditions? Recorded in any manner - most of the above used at least three-track tape - but where the mix was to mono first, with the stereo mix considered less important.
Also, what are the best sounding mono recordings you know, of any type of classical music? I'm finding that listening to good-quality mono recordings really is relaxing...
Kirk
In 1968(?), didn't HIFI/STEREO REVIEW publish an article of outstanding mono recordings as a reaction to the phasing out of mono recordings at the time?
Didn't that article include mention of Schwarzkopf's Coffee Cantata, Dennis Brain's recordings and Toscanini's OTELLO?
http://ring.cdandlp.com/safir/photo_grande/114738630.jpg
Yes it did
g***@gmail.com
2014-01-23 19:08:21 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by g***@gmail.com
Post by g***@gmail.com
Post by kirkmc
I've been writing something about listening to mono recordings, focusing on those recordings that were mixed first in mono, then in stereo, back in the early days of stereo: artists like Miles Davis, Bob Dylan and The Beatles, for whom recent releases of re-mastered mono recordings sound very nice.
Does anyone know about specific classical recordings that fit the same conditions? Recorded in any manner - most of the above used at least three-track tape - but where the mix was to mono first, with the stereo mix considered less important.
Also, what are the best sounding mono recordings you know, of any type of classical music? I'm finding that listening to good-quality mono recordings really is relaxing...
Kirk
In 1968(?), didn't HIFI/STEREO REVIEW publish an article of outstanding mono recordings as a reaction to the phasing out of mono recordings at the time?
Didn't that article include mention of Schwarzkopf's Coffee Cantata, Dennis Brain's recordings and Toscanini's OTELLO?
http://ring.cdandlp.com/safir/photo_grande/114738630.jpg
Did that article also mention the first act of Walkure conducted by Walter and sung by Melchior and Lehmannn?
Willem Orange
2014-01-23 19:35:12 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by g***@gmail.com
Post by g***@gmail.com
Post by g***@gmail.com
Post by kirkmc
I've been writing something about listening to mono recordings, focusing on those recordings that were mixed first in mono, then in stereo, back in the early days of stereo: artists like Miles Davis, Bob Dylan and The Beatles, for whom recent releases of re-mastered mono recordings sound very nice.
Does anyone know about specific classical recordings that fit the same conditions? Recorded in any manner - most of the above used at least three-track tape - but where the mix was to mono first, with the stereo mix considered less important.
Also, what are the best sounding mono recordings you know, of any type of classical music? I'm finding that listening to good-quality mono recordings really is relaxing...
Kirk
In 1968(?), didn't HIFI/STEREO REVIEW publish an article of outstanding mono recordings as a reaction to the phasing out of mono recordings at the time?
Didn't that article include mention of Schwarzkopf's Coffee Cantata, Dennis Brain's recordings and Toscanini's OTELLO?
http://ring.cdandlp.com/safir/photo_grande/114738630.jpg
Did that article also mention the first act of Walkure conducted by Walter and sung by Melchior and Lehmannn?
No Osborne says that he omitted "historical" recordings from the list since he firmly believed they would always be available in some way. Other critics mentioned the 33 Rosenkavalier excerpts with Lehmann.
g***@gmail.com
2014-01-18 05:40:02 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by kirkmc
I've been writing something about listening to mono recordings, focusing on those recordings that were mixed first in mono, then in stereo, back in the early days of stereo: artists like Miles Davis, Bob Dylan and The Beatles, for whom recent releases of re-mastered mono recordings sound very nice.
Does anyone know about specific classical recordings that fit the same conditions? Recorded in any manner - most of the above used at least three-track tape - but where the mix was to mono first, with the stereo mix considered less important.
Also, what are the best sounding mono recordings you know, of any type of classical music? I'm finding that listening to good-quality mono recordings really is relaxing...
Kirk
The following blog entry may be of interest:

http://soon.cocoplastic.com/page/Top-100-Mono-Recording.aspx
MELMOTH
2014-01-20 11:25:27 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Ce cher mammifère du nom de kirkmc nous susurrait, le jeudi 09/01/2014,
dans nos oreilles grandes ouvertes mais un peu sales tout de même, et
dans le message
Post by kirkmc
Does anyone know about specific classical recordings that fit the same
conditions? Recorded in any manner - most of the above used at least
three-track tape - but where the mix was to mono first, with the stereo mix
considered less important.
*Mercury*...
*Westminster*...

'1950...
--
Car avec beaucoup de science, il y a beaucoup de chagrin ; et celui qui
accroît sa science accroît sa douleur.
[Ecclésiaste, 1-18]
MELMOTH - souffrant
dk
2014-01-23 07:43:33 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by kirkmc
Also, what are the best sounding mono recordings you know, of any type of classical music? I'm finding that listening to good-quality mono recordings really is relaxing...
The best sounding mono recording is 4'33".
So perfect in fact that one cannot tell
any difference compared to the stereo
version.

dk
td
2014-01-23 13:38:45 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by dk
Post by kirkmc
Also, what are the best sounding mono recordings you know, of any type of classical music? I'm finding that listening to good-quality mono recordings really is relaxing...
The best sounding mono recording is 4'33".
So perfect in fact that one cannot tell
any difference compared to the stereo
version.
It sounds much better if the musician is naked, don't you agree?

TD
John Wiser
2014-01-23 18:22:13 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by td
Post by dk
Post by kirkmc
Also, what are the best sounding mono recordings you know, of any type of classical music? I'm
finding that listening to good-quality mono recordings really is relaxing...
The best sounding mono recording is 4'33".
So perfect in fact that one cannot tell
any difference compared to the stereo
version.
It sounds much better if the musician is naked, don't you agree?
That would depend *very* much on the player, don't you think?

jdw
g***@gmail.com
2014-02-22 10:11:28 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by kirkmc
I've been writing something about listening to mono recordings, focusing on those recordings that were mixed first in mono, then in stereo, back in the early days of stereo: artists like Miles Davis, Bob Dylan and The Beatles, for whom recent releases of re-mastered mono recordings sound very nice.
Does anyone know about specific classical recordings that fit the same conditions? Recorded in any manner - most of the above used at least three-track tape - but where the mix was to mono first, with the stereo mix considered less important.
Also, what are the best sounding mono recordings you know, of any type of classical music? I'm finding that listening to good-quality mono recordings really is relaxing...
Kirk
Wasn't this Crespin's debut recital album? Didn't it come out in 1958 and only in mono?

I think I had a French pressing of it and the orchestral sound simply leapt out of the speakers:

Loading Image...
g***@gmail.com
2014-05-05 21:26:28 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by kirkmc
I've been writing something about listening to mono recordings, focusing on those recordings that were mixed first in mono, then in stereo, back in the early days of stereo: artists like Miles Davis, Bob Dylan and The Beatles, for whom recent releases of re-mastered mono recordings sound very nice.
Does anyone know about specific classical recordings that fit the same conditions? Recorded in any manner - most of the above used at least three-track tape - but where the mix was to mono first, with the stereo mix considered less important.
Also, what are the best sounding mono recordings you know, of any type of classical music? I'm finding that listening to good-quality mono recordings really is relaxing...
Kirk
Do audiophiles ever seek out mono discs?
Dave Cook
2014-05-11 11:05:38 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by g***@gmail.com
Do audiophiles ever seek out mono discs?
Mostly older Jazz and pop recordings where the mono mix is considered
superior because of the unnatural sounding pan-potting of the stereo
mix.

Dave Cook
GMS
2014-05-11 16:30:38 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Haven't heard it for a number of years, but I remember being quite stunned by the sound of the 1954 Reiner/CSO "Don Juan" in its mono incarnation. IMHO, the stereo spread in the two track LP version bleached out a lot of the color that the mono version had in abundance!! (At the time, I understand that RCA used separate machines for their stereo and mono versions. The mono Don Juan is a clear winner to my ears.)

Gary Stucka
g***@gmail.com
2014-07-02 09:57:58 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by kirkmc
I've been writing something about listening to mono recordings, focusing on those recordings that were mixed first in mono, then in stereo, back in the early days of stereo: artists like Miles Davis, Bob Dylan and The Beatles, for whom recent releases of re-mastered mono recordings sound very nice.
Does anyone know about specific classical recordings that fit the same conditions? Recorded in any manner - most of the above used at least three-track tape - but where the mix was to mono first, with the stereo mix considered less important.
Also, what are the best sounding mono recordings you know, of any type of classical music? I'm finding that listening to good-quality mono recordings really is relaxing...
Kirk
Concerning Ansermet's DAPHNIS..., the following says:

- A final marvel is the exquisite sharpness and sonic detail of the recording itself, which serves as an object lesson for those who sadly think of the monaural format as incapable of conveying the "realism" of stereo (or quad or surround, for that matter).

http://www.classicalnotes.net/classics4/daphnis.html

(By the way, it's on YOUTUBE.)

Loading...