Best Orchestral Sound Quality Recordings

[larry7995]

I was wondering, I have this dvd from Netflix Beethoven: Symphony No. 9: Piano Concerto No. 2: Berlin Philharmonic - Claudio Abbado -2000, and its a very impressive performance however I find that it lacks crispness, is that just the way an orchestra comes across when its recorded? I find myself cranking the volume up to capture what I perceive as missing. I am a new to classical music.

 

[highfigh]

I was wondering, I have this dvd from Netflix Beethoven: Symphony No. 9: Piano Concerto No. 2: Berlin Philharmonic - Claudio Abbado -2000, and its a very impressive performance however I find that it lacks crispness, is that just the way an orchestra comes across when its recorded? I find myself cranking the volume up to capture what I perceive as missing. I am a new to classical music.

Not necessarily how they come across but how they're mic'd, mixed and EQ'd. Classical recordings often use very simple mic techniques instead of close mic'ing and using baffles, goboes and total isolation, like rock and pop recordings. They sometimes use a stereo pair at the center and other overhead mics for the rest of the orchestra and then mix/EQ accordingly.

 

[DD66000]

I think the best classical recording is the 1812 Overture, pick it up and see what you think. I have 3 versions of it; LP, CD and SACD. I prefer the SACD, then the LP

 

[jostenmeat]

I was wondering, I have this dvd from Netflix Beethoven: Symphony No. 9: Piano Concerto No. 2: Berlin Philharmonic - Claudio Abbado -2000, and its a very impressive performance however I find that it lacks crispness, is that just the way an orchestra comes across when its recorded? I find myself cranking the volume up to capture what I perceive as missing. I am a new to classical music.

As for Beethoven symphonies, I own the cycle performed by Gardiner. The SQ is tops. However, certain mvmts/works might be too fast for some persons' tastes, and as they use period instruments, particular passages might sound a bit strange in fact, particularly with the winds. I believe about half of them are recorded live, not too sure.

Here is recent thread started by someone who was trying to discover some new classical stuff for the first time. Not sure how much it might help.

 

[no1maestro]

Recorded classical music

You might be new to classical but you are probably a knowledgable listener to other types. As those before me have said, there are different ways to record orchestral music and each listener has to decide which recording approach sounds right to the listener. Telarc has a particular style to which I appreciate; others may differ. The older RCA Living Stereo and Mercury Living Presence recordings come from the "golden age" of classical recordings from the late fifties through the sixties.
Today, there are many techniques in use by the many producers and you just have to do your listening and compare that to what you hear in live performances. There is no recording that can really compare to a live performance but there are a good many excellent recordings out there to be found.
Do as much listening on your own and talk to other classical listeners with whom you come into contact. You will find your favorite orchestras, conductors and labels and that will add to your listening pleasure!!

 

[soundhound]

no1maestro is right on the mark. It's as much if not more about label than conductor/orch. You have to do some listening to different recordings to start to find out what you like. the production standards will typically (but not always) be fairly consistent across the label for that genre.

 

[Pat D]

I was wondering, I have this dvd from Netflix Beethoven: Symphony No. 9: Piano Concerto No. 2: Berlin Philharmonic - Claudio Abbado -2000, and its a very impressive performance however I find that it lacks crispness, is that just the way an orchestra comes across when its recorded? I find myself cranking the volume up to capture what I perceive as missing. I am a new to classical music.

Large classical works are usually heard in largish places and from some distance. This works against crispness, which is usually the result of close microphone placement and peaks in the frequency response in the highs. I tend think that crisp, sharp edges are generally unrealistic as we usually hear live classical music. Transients are still there, but there is some sound reflected from near and far places in the hall, so they don't sound as sharp edged as many recordings do.

The Holst Band Suites on Telarc with Frederick Fennel conducting the Cleveland Symphonic Winds is an excellent recording. The performances are great and the recording shows some pretty sharp edges.

Other early Telarc recordings are Stravinsky's Firebird Suite, etc. and another is the Brahms Requiem, both with Robert Shaw and the Atlantic Symphony, but the latter, as a large choral is not 'crisp.' There is also a fine recording of Mussorgsky's Pictures at an Exhibition (the usual orchestration by Ravel) with Lorin Maazel conducting.

I generally like recordings with some reverberant hall sound, so I am not much in a position to suggest a lot of crisp classical recordings.

If you like large choral works besides Beethoven's 9th Symphony, there is there is the aforementioned Brahms Requiem, and other works such as the Mozart Requiem, Handel's Messiah, and Bach's Magnificat.

 

[walter duque]

I was wondering, I have this dvd from Netflix Beethoven: Symphony No. 9: Piano Concerto No. 2: Berlin Philharmonic - Claudio Abbado -2000, and its a very impressive performance however I find that it lacks crispness, is that just the way an orchestra comes across when its recorded? I find myself cranking the volume up to capture what I perceive as missing. I am a new to classical music.

Maybe you should buy the DVD. DVD's from Netflix are not the same as store bought, maybe that's why it's lacking sound quality. These DVD's are made for Netflix. Not one that I got from them plays DTS.

 

[bandphan]

http://www.sr.se/cgi-bin/mall/artikel.asp?ProgramID=2446&Artikel=740607

some nice dts dowloads---free

 

[TLS Guy]

I was wondering, I have this dvd from Netflix Beethoven: Symphony No. 9: Piano Concerto No. 2: Berlin Philharmonic - Claudio Abbado -2000, and its a very impressive performance however I find that it lacks crispness, is that just the way an orchestra comes across when its recorded? I find myself cranking the volume up to capture what I perceive as missing. I am a new to classical music.

If you want classical music, I would advise CD purchases. The lossy ACC3 compression on DVDs, is not adequate for classical music playback.

Quite a few classical CDs, and almost all opera have an uncompressed loss less two channel PCM track, that can be accessed from the disc menu, under audio usually. If there is a tow channel PCM track use that.

There are millions of good classical recordings. Very few duds. Archiv Music is your best source.

Classical music makes much greater demands on the reproducing chain than other genres, some scores more than others.

Only very good reproducers can do a decent job of reproducing a large choral and orchestral work, or an opera employing huge forces.

However very fine and well engineered systems can get very close to being there, especially a superior properly set up system with a well recorded multichannel SACD.

 

[Tod]

Other early Telarc recordings are Stravinsky's Firebird Suite, etc. and another is the Brahms Requiem, both with Robert Shaw and the Atlantic Symphony, but the latter, as a large choral is not 'crisp.' There is also a fine recording of Mussorgsky's Pictures at an Exhibition (the usual orchestration by Ravel) with Lorin Maazel conducting.

Atlanta's Symphony Hall has very warm acoustics, which can create a lush sound some people like. For me, all of the Telarc recordings there (choral or not) with rare exceptions sound muddy and fuzzy. And this is from an engineering team famous for clarity. I just don't buy any more of them recorded in Atlanta. They are working on planning or building a new hall though.

 

[TLS Guy]

Atlanta's Symphony Hall has very warm acoustics, which can create a lush sound some people like. For me, all of the Telarc recordings there (choral or not) with rare exceptions sound muddy and fuzzy. And this is from an engineering team famous for clarity. I just don't buy any more of them recorded in Atlanta. They are working on planning or building a new hall though.

Actually, I find the Telarc recording very good. They use a minimalist mic technique and use spaced omnis. This is known as the intensity difference technique. The advantage, is wide smooth frequency response and a particularly good bass response, which Telarc recording have.

The other minimalist technique, is the phase difference technique. There are various version of this, crossed cardioid mics, crossed figure of 8, the Decca cluster and matrix (X + Y) (X - Y) techniques.

I have used both, techniques and preferred the phase difference techniques, especially crossed figure of 8 and matrix. The reason, is that I felt that approach gave a better overall acoustic perspective.

In a minimalist technique, you use spot microphones not at all, or very sparingly, such as to slightly re balance a solo singer, especially amateur ones.

Now what I did notice, is that these minimalist techniques really sort out speakers. Speakers with a lot of phase shift in the crossover regions, give a poor account of themselves with this approach, superior ones shine.

One of the reasons I got into recording, and did a lot of work as a public service for the public radio system on ND, was to evaluate my speaker designs.

These days, most classical recordings are made by pretty small firms run by enthusiasts, with very good and expensive monitor speakers, and more than a few home grown ones. Minimalist mic techniques are the order of the day with those enthusiasts, and I agree. It does mean however, if you are not to get what you complain of, then very accurate speakers in terms of frequency response, with minimal infractions in phase and time domain are required.

 

[jostenmeat]

Atlanta's Symphony Hall has very warm acoustics, which can create a lush sound some people like. For me, all of the Telarc recordings there (choral or not) with rare exceptions sound muddy and fuzzy. And this is from an engineering team famous for clarity. I just don't buy any more of them recorded in Atlanta. They are working on planning or building a new hall though.

I have one single recording with Shaw/Atlanta that I bought for Symanowski's Stabat Mater. I wasn't all that impressed with the SQ. Hm.

OTOH, sometimes a recording that is too "crisp" (if I'm understanding this correctly) does not sound very real, particularly in large ensemble settings where the listener is typically not sitting among the musicians. I can more easily appreciate close mic'ing with small ensembles or soloists. Or so is my impression so far.

I have a Brahms Piano Concerto #2 with Abbado, and IIRC, the SQ is tops, but the sound might be the slightest tad "too crisp", as far as my personal tastes. Still, SQ is very, very good.

 

[Tod]

Actually, I find the Telarc recording very good. They use a minimalist mic technique and use spaced omnis. This is known as the intensity difference technique. The advantage, is wide smooth frequency response and a particularly good bass response, which Telarc recording have.

The other minimalist technique, is the phase difference technique. There are various version of this, crossed cardioid mics, crossed figure of 8, the Decca cluster and matrix (X + Y) (X - Y) techniques.

I have used both, techniques and preferred the phase difference techniques, especially crossed figure of 8 and matrix. The reason, is that I felt that approach gave a better overall acoustic perspective.

In a minimalist technique, you use spot microphones not at all, or very sparingly, such as to slightly re balance a solo singer, especially amateur ones.

Now what I did notice, is that these minimalist techniques really sort out speakers. Speakers with a lot of phase shift in the crossover regions, give a poor account of themselves with this approach, superior ones shine.

One of the reasons I got into recording, and did a lot of work as a public service for the public radio system on ND, was to evaluate my speaker designs.

These days, most classical recordings are made by pretty small firms run by enthusiasts, with very good and expensive monitor speakers, and more than a few home grown ones. Minimalist mic techniques are the order of the day with those enthusiasts, and I agree. It does mean however, if you are not to get what you complain of, then very accurate speakers in terms of frequency response, with minimal infractions in phase and time domain are required.

Don't get me wrong - Telarc is one of my favorite companies. I'm criticizing the hall in Atlanta, that's it. No doubt Telarc's engineers accurately reproduced the fuzziness of the hall, it's just that's where their big-name signed artists work.

Their Cincinnati recordings on the other hand can be amazing!

 

[TLS Guy]

I have one single recording with Shaw/Atlanta that I bought for Symanowski's Stabat Mater. I wasn't all that impressed with the SQ. Hm.

OTOH, sometimes a recording that is too "crisp" (if I'm understanding this correctly) does not sound very real, particularly in large ensemble settings where the listener is typically not sitting among the musicians. I can more easily appreciate close mic'ing with small ensembles or soloists. Or so is my impression so far.

I have a Brahms Piano Concerto #2 with Abbado, and IIRC, the SQ is tops, but the sound might be the slightest tad "too crisp", as far as my personal tastes. Still, SQ is very, very good.

The problem is that once you throw up a bunch of mics and place them in every section of the orchestra, even very good speakers can no longer reproduce a great sense of space and perspective, that "close to being there" effect. With good minimalist techniques very good speakers will.

The problem is that mediocre speakers will not, and unless everything is close miked they will sound "fuzzy" as it has been put. In essence they produce a bland disembodied type of sound when confronted with a good minimalist miked recording.

Good speakers can resolve good detail and provide a sense of space and perspective at the same time. Actually good minimalist recordings, especially if you recorded them yourself and heard the sound in the space, are one of the best ways to evaluate speakers.

There are precious few speakers around that have that ability, even today it is rare.

 

[jostenmeat]

The problem is that once you throw up a bunch of mics and place them in every section of the orchestra, even very good speakers can no longer reproduce a great sense of space and perspective, that "close to being there" effect. With good minimalist techniques very good speakers will.

Now that you mention it, I think this might be the root cause of the complaint I had with the Brahms recording.

Good speakers can resolve good detail and provide a sense of space and perspective at the same time. Actually good minimalist recordings, especially if you recorded them yourself and heard the sound in the space, are one of the best ways to evaluate speakers.

There are precious few speakers around that have that ability, even today it is rare.

I love the "sense of space and perspective", but I must admit that I could simply be used to the prevalence of closed mic'ing. The Gardiner series I mentioned earlier has both excellent resolution, AND sense of space.

 

[TLS Guy]

Now that you mention it, I think this might be the root cause of the complaint I had with the Brahms recording.



I love the "sense of space and perspective", but I must admit that I could simply be used to the prevalence of closed mic'ing. The Gardiner series I mentioned earlier has both excellent resolution, AND sense of space.

That is interesting you mention the Gardner. I have quite a few of his recordings but no the Beethoven. Archiv have been using a multi mic technique, but using a digital system to correct the phase and time problems between the microphones.

I have found those recordings to be a significant improvement over standard multi mic recordings, but not as good minimalist ones.

The actual object in view was to improve the results from typical speakers and still keep guys like me happy. I vote it a partial success.

The real answer is improvement in speakers at the bulk of the sales price point. The problem is that over all the classical market is small. If you play the average pop recording on a good set of speakers in the $1000.00 to $2000.00 per pair range and a B & W 800 D, there won't be a chasm in the sound quality. If you play a good classical recording, especially a large forces work with chorus and orchestra, or even a very well recorded piano, on the two there will be a chasm of difference.

The funny thing is that B & W put together a CD of the most awful poorly recorded garbage to show off the 800 D. It would not matter much what you played that CD on!

I did have an interesting experience here though, a couple of weeks ago. An engineer who has mixed a lot of CDs for the rich and famous, is retiring here and has cleared a lot on Kabekona Lake three miles from here. We were introduced by Vince, who owns and runs the local Fort Benedict store. He thought we might have something in common.

He was excited and came in in two or three days. I played him some of my masters, and I think one commercial SACD. Of course what is in my library, is not what he worked with! However he was very excited about what he heard, and said he wanted to come back next time he visited and bring a collection of his mixes. In a few weeks he was back. He brought a lot of his mixes, and some CDs to show how the mastering engineers would destroy his work.

I have to say quite a few of the tracks were most impressive, even though the music was not what I would purchase or record. Some down frequency shifted bass guitars were quite impressive.

He was over the moon at what he heard, and his wife even more so. They were here into the wee hours of the morning. Anyhow I found out that a good set of speakers designed for classical music of all types can impress people form the pop world.

He thought that these were quite the best speakers he had ever heard, and would love to be able to master with them. He had his own studio, for some years, and did freelance work all over the country also. He sold his studio a few years ago for $3.6 million dollars. It had toys I had never heard of or imagined. He showed me the studio equipment list, which ran into pages. I had no idea of what the majority of it was for. His custom speaker system he told me cost over $100,000!

His comment about this system were, the relaxed feel to it, the clarity and naturalness of the voices reproduced without hurting your ears.

He thought the bass detail and performance was particularly outstanding. He like most people had never heard TLS speakers of the type I'm into.

I have found the universal comment from experienced listeners, that one of the things that really sets this system apart, is the quality and detail of the bass, as well as its reach. So needless to say I was happy with his critique. This was the first demo of this system to someone whose interests were outside the classical realm.

 

[allargon]

If you want classical music, I would advise CD purchases. The lossy ACC3 compression on DVDs, is not adequate for classical music playback.

Quite a few classical CDs, and almost all opera have an uncompressed loss less two channel PCM track, that can be accessed from the disc menu, under audio usually. If there is a tow channel PCM track use that.

There are millions of good classical recordings. Very few duds. Archiv Music is your best source.

Classical music makes much greater demands on the reproducing chain than other genres, some scores more than others.

Only very good reproducers can do a decent job of reproducing a large choral and orchestral work, or an opera employing huge forces.

However very fine and well engineered systems can get very close to being there, especially a superior properly set up system with a well recorded multichannel SACD.

No love for DVD-A, HD DVD or Blu-Ray? Yes, all 3 use PCM not DSD as a base, but still. They do a pretty good job if the source material is there.

I have to take aim at the DVD comment. Quite a few classical DVD's of late use full bitrate DTS or 2 channel PCM. There are some with 384/448Kbps DD. However, there are others with the good stuff.

 

[jostenmeat]

That is interesting you mention the Gardner. I have quite a few of his recordings but no the Beethoven. Archiv have been using a multi mic technique, but using a digital system to correct the phase and time problems between the microphones.

I have found those recordings to be a significant improvement over standard multi mic recordings, but not as good minimalist ones.

The actual object in view was to improve the results from typical speakers and still keep guys like me happy. I vote it a partial success.

Very interesting. Stuff I know nothing about. My professors earlier in life mentioned using Neumann mics in the studio as a norm. Is this an extremely common choice do you find?

The real answer is improvement in speakers at the bulk of the sales price point. The problem is that over all the classical market is small. If you play the average pop recording on a good set of speakers in the $1000.00 to $2000.00 per pair range and a B & W 800 D, there won't be a chasm in the sound quality. If you play a good classical recording, especially a large forces work with chorus and orchestra, or even a very well recorded piano, on the two there will be a chasm of difference.

Don't I know it. I knew of a few stores dedicated to classical music in the US, and they have long since disappeared. I had a summer college job working in a large store, with large dedicated rooms respectively to jazz and classical as well, and the latter represented less than 1% of sales, no doubt. (Same with the jazz section, for that matter).

. . .He thought that these were quite the best speakers he had ever heard, and would love to be able to master with them. He had his own studio, for some years, and did freelance work all over the country also. He sold his studio a few years ago for $3.6 million dollars. It had toys I had never heard of or imagined. He showed me the studio equipment list, which ran into pages. I had no idea of what the majority of it was for. His custom speaker system he told me cost over $100,000!

NuTz. If you didn't know what most of it was, I can only imagine it must've been some seriously esoteric stuff.

This was the first demo of this system to someone whose interests were outside the classical realm.

I'm sure it must sound amazing indeed. With all your background no less. Although TBH, I think many an audioholic must have a set of speakers that will blow most people away. Even I myself had NO IDEA how good speakers could sound. For most of my life I thought people who spent much on this stuff were insane, and possibly stupid. My first visit to any kind of high-end store had my jaw drop. I have since found it pretty comfortable in the looney bin, however.

No love for DVD-A, HD DVD or Blu-Ray? Yes, all 3 use PCM not DSD as a base, but still. They do a pretty good job if the source material is there.

How much selection is there in HD-DVD or Bluray, outside of opera, and without scenic backdrops for video, but rather having all of the video be on the performance itself?

I am not sure which category the "Acoustic Reality" series fits into. I do have a couple of Medici titles, and I thoroughly enjoy both.

I have to take aim at the DVD comment. Quite a few classical DVD's of late use full bitrate DTS or 2 channel PCM. There are some with 384/448Kbps DD. However, there are others with the good stuff.

Its really nice to have a lossless m-ch track for this stuff. Becase with DVD, I always set it 2ch PCM, there was never any contest between that and the mch track.

FWIW, TLS did already mention 2ch PCM. I, however, doubt that full bitrate DTS of 1.5mps would cut it for either TLS or myself. Just a guess, as I haven't heard it. 1.5mps could sound great as 2ch, or great for mch HT, but I sorta doubt it for m-ch classical recordings on a resolving system. Cheers.

 

[TLS Guy]

Very interesting. Stuff I know nothing about. My professors earlier in life mentioned using Neumann mics in the studio as a norm. Is this an extremely common choice do you find?

Yes Neumann is a vey common choice.

This is the stereo Neumann mic I used and still have it. It is the Neumann SM 69FET.

For those that like the intensity method with spaced omnos, the weapon of choice if th B & K omni. MPR uses those and they guard them jealously, as they are NLA. They have been copied by Earthworks.