Originally posted by ferneyhoughgeliebte
View Post
Deutsche Grammophon.
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by ferneyhoughgeliebte View PostMost of the Decca "World of ... " series had SPA numberings, too. SPA 1 was "The World of Mantovani", released in 1968, but there was also Mahler, Tommy Steele, Bach, John Mayall (two volumes), Edmondo Ross ...
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by Bryn View PostTo me, what DGG (not the same without the Gesellschaft) has become is personified by:
A bit unfair, I think, as Mr. McManus has proved himself to be a considerable polymath where music is concerned and has operated in the jazz and classical arenas. His other DG album that I know of (North) is supposedly a straight jazz record, though it's not judged to be one of his best.
He also reads and writes music and his work is his own: he doesn't get the ample helping hand that Paul McCartney (a non-reader) got from Carl Davis and whose much lesser classical work was supported by EMI.
I always preferred Decca soundwise (there's nothing like a vintage Culshaw analogue production) but DG put out some wonderful stuff and probably still does.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by Conchis View PostA bit unfair, I think, as Mr. McManus has proved himself to be a considerable polymath where music is concerned and has operated in the jazz and classical arenas. His other DG album that I know of (North) is supposedly a straight jazz record, though it's not judged to be one of his best.
He also reads and writes music and his work is his own: he doesn't get the ample helping hand that Paul McCartney (a non-reader) got from Carl Davis and whose much lesser classical work was supported by EMI.
I always preferred Decca soundwise (there's nothing like a vintage Culshaw analogue production) but DG put out some wonderful stuff and probably still does.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by cloughie View PostSee #53 -there were some really good Classical issues in this series.[FONT=Comic Sans MS][I][B]Numquam Satis![/B][/I][/FONT]
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by ferneyhoughgeliebte View PostApologies - I've amended my post to correct my oversight. You're right - there were, indeed, a lot of excellent recordings in that series and I had several in my early collection.[FONT=Comic Sans MS][I][B]Numquam Satis![/B][/I][/FONT]
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by Conchis View PostHe also reads and writes music and his work is his own: he doesn't get the ample helping hand that Paul McCartney (a non-reader) got from Carl Davis and whose much lesser classical work was supported by EMI.
I always preferred Decca soundwise (there's nothing like a vintage Culshaw analogue production) but DG put out some wonderful stuff and probably still does.
Re Decca - in the days of LP I wasn't always too keen on Decca, and I actually quite liked (shock horror) some CBS recordings and quite a lot of EMI recordings. However, see msg xxx. One day I went to hear some Decca LPs played on kit which was much better than mine, and indeed they did sound very good. In that era many master tapes (even the CBS ones) generally sounded much better than LPs which were available to buy, but few people realised that.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by Conchis View PostHe also reads and writes music and his work is his own: he doesn't get the ample helping hand that Paul McCartney (a non-reader) got from Carl Davis and whose much lesser classical work was supported by EMI.
I always preferred Decca soundwise (there's nothing like a vintage Culshaw analogue production) but DG put out some wonderful stuff and probably still does.
Re Decca - in the days of LP I wasn't always too keen on Decca, and I actually quite liked (shock horror) some CBS recordings and quite a lot of EMI recordings. However, see msg 12 above. Possibly my views were coloured by the equipment I used - which of course was all that I could afford. One day I went to hear some Decca LPs played on kit which was much better than mine, and indeed they did sound very good. In that era many master tapes (even the CBS ones) generally sounded much better than LPs which were available to buy, but few people realised that.
A complication re trying to characterise the sound of a "label" is that even 40-50 years ago, despite labels belonging to different organisations, on occasions they would I believe sub contract engineers and kit from other companies to make recordings.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by Dave2002 View PostI wouldn't put money on PM not being able to read music. Perhaps he can, but prefers media people to think otherwise.
Re Decca - in the days of LP I wasn't always too keen on Decca, and I actually quite liked (shock horror) some CBS recordings and quite a lot of EMI recordings. However, see msg xxx. One day I went to hear some Decca LPs played on kit which was much better than mine, and indeed they did sound very good. In that era many master tapes (even the CBS ones) generally sounded much better than LPs which were available to buy, but few people realised that.
the cutting
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by cloughie View PostSee #53 -there were some really good Classical issues in this series.Originally posted by Barbirollians View PostAnd not forgetting The World of Kathleen Ferrier.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by cloughie View PostThe sound came from the ‘cut’ from the mastertape! The digital transfer to CD has refined sounds and taken the labour and maybe the skills out of cutting the masters.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by cloughie View PostSee #53 -there were some really good Classical issues in this series.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by Heldenleben View PostWorld of Kathleen Ferrier. - the greatest single disc from one vocalist in gramophone history ?- - -
John W
Comment
-
Comment