Recording styles - quality - old and new

[PJPJ]

Am I correct in thinking that Decca used to master 'Ace of Clubs' lps to suit the low fi quality of the record players they were probably going to played on?

I don't think that is generally true, from what I've read written by those in the know and who transfer from LP to digital. There are still a few LXTs and ACLs here at home and comparison reveals little difference when I play them on my HIP turntable and arm (Garrard 301 and SME/Shure combo).

[gradus]

Decca used to launch their their most prestigious recordings at public 'premieres' held at the Wigmore Hall attended by the recording producers/engineers, so proud were they of their recording prowess. The first I attended was the Solti/LSO Mahler 2their first dolby processed classical recording ie no tape hiss and very wide dynamic range, demonstrated using very large Tannoy enclosures (GRF?) and replayed using their own ffss pickup heads and the sound was superb. Similar lauches heralded the 3 later Ring recordings (not Rheingold)and the Solti Gounod Faust.
EMI occasionally made similar presentations eg the Klemperer Missa Solemnis recording.
I think that the Gramophone was used to advertise these presentations.

[cloughie]

I remember many a good bargain purchase on Ace of Diamonds in the 60s, SDD144 Bizet/Ibert/Saint-Saens PCO Martinon was al;ways a favourite demo for Hi-fi equipment at Audio fairs!

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

Advertising new releases seemed to have much more punch in the 60s & 70s. As time has passed by, in an attempt to cram as many CDs on to 1 page, the adverts have lost their impact. My reaction is generally "why bother?"

On the question of Ace of Clubs levels of Hi-Fi, I suspect they sound less impressive because they were
(a) mono
(b) older recordings

[Ferretfancy]

Am I correct in thinking that Decca used to master 'Ace of Clubs' lps to suit the low fi quality of the record players they were probably going to played on?

Decca did make some adjustments when cutting discs for RCA in America, by boosting the upper mid range, apparently just to suit American tastes. However, I don't think that this was their general approach. What does make a big difference is monitoring level, and I remember James Lock saying that they always checked while recording by listening to passages at what they called 'granny's level" on smaller speakers. I wasn't a music mixer, but when working on documentaries it was very important not to have the speakers too loud, as this could affect the subjective balance between voices and backgrounds.What is quite wrong is to assume that the listener at home on modest equipment probably won't notice, that's a very slippery slope to go down.

[PJPJ]

Something not mentioned so far is that the engineers in the early days of stereo had more time at their disposal .........

Indeed FF, that is true a lot of recording companies of the day, more time and well-known locations. However, the teams who record BBC orchestras, RCO and LSO stick to the one venue, too. The Barbican may be a difficult location, but give me an LSO Live recording any day over many a Mercury. LSO Live, especially auditioned on SACD via five channels sound pretty good to me.

A recording quality comparison I made involved all of Boult's tapings of Elgar's Second symphony. If you have access to two of these, the Wilkie Lyrita and the later EMI the difference is an ear-opener.

FF, the one recording we've both heard in recent months is Chandos's first MediaCity product, the Falla/Bavouzet/Mena. After years in Studio 7 Manchester, they'll not have got used to MCity overnight. Unlike you, I found the imaging in stereo (possibly via a fair few mikes) almost entirely believable. There are a couple of moments of unwanted wall reflection (possibly due to the new venue) and that aside I think as a recording it's technically very good indeed.


[In case some of you wish to pigeon-hole my taste, I have to add that I do still listen to acoustic recordings as well. Try British Masterpieces:

http://www.jolyon.com/orchestral.htm]

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

Decca Phase Four was possibly the worst label ever, with its multi-miking and compressed dynamics giving an utterly unconvincing sound-stage - Dansett quality sound only.
Fortunately, it died out.

[Ferretfancy]

PJPJ

It used to be a joke in BBC Television circles that Radio 3 guaranteed to bring you the sound from the worst seat in the hall!

Of course, engineers in the TV studio rarely had to cope with the peculiarities of concert halls,I used to be impressed by the sound that the regular team managed to achieve at the Proms, although I think that recent efforts have fallen short. perhaps because broadcasts from the RAH are no longer made by in house staff, and long term expertise has been lost.

I was interested to read your comments about the Chandos Falla. What did you think of the performances ? Perhaps my disappointment with the sound was partly influenced by what seemed to be very routine accounts of the music. Listen to Soriano / Burgos in Nights, or Ansermet in the Tricorne and everything comes to life in a way which the Chandos misses.

I've no doubt that five channel SACD must be impressive. Unfortunately my own five channel Meridian system does not accept SACD, but it does synthesise rear channel information pretty convincingly from two channels depending on the source without compromising separation in the way the old quadrophonic matrixes used to do.

[PJPJ]

FF you've made an excellent point about the Falla - despite Bavouzet's involvement, I don't think this is going to achieve classic status. It's very disciplined, tight playing, but the performance doesn't displace the two you mention, of which I know Ansermet's far better.

I have to confess I forked out a bit for the Esoteric SACD of this, the sound quality a substantial improvement over the last CD. Limited edition, OOP already.

http://esoteric.teac.com/esoteric_remasters/

Amazon Japan has a copy for 45000 Yen (not 4500)! Universal may yet make it available as a 24 bit download.

I did treat myself to Barbirolli's Mahler 5 from Esoteric recently, too.

I agree with you about the Proms technicalities as well. Experience has been lost and I cannot tell sometimes if it's the Albert Hall they're playing in. It is a matter of compromise - if you use a few microphones you will get a more natural balance at live events, but I suspect you pick up much more audience noise which some do not like. That doesn't include the applause which some really do hate.

[cloughie]

Decca Phase Four was possibly the worst label ever, with its multi-miking and compressed dynamics giving an utterly unconvincing sound-stage - Dansett quality sound only.
Fortunately, it died out.

Yes but some were fun to listen to - Stokowski's Marche Slave - the combination of his excesses and the recording were irresistible.

[HighlandDougie]

I have to confess I forked out a bit for the Esoteric SACD of this, the sound quality a substantial improvement over the last CD. Limited edition, OOP already.

Universal in Japan have been releasing a number of SACD-only (and, as single layer, unplayable on ordinary CD players) titles in the past few months, including the Ansermet Falla being discussed, Mravinsky's Tchaikovsky Symphonies and Monteux's Daphnis and Chloe among others. Like PJPJ's Esoteric remaster of the Falla, they cost (gulp) 4500 yen each, i.e. about £37 - and on top of that there would be HMV Japan's not-cheap postage. I'm almost tempted by the Ansermet Falla as it's a performance I don't think I have ever heard bettered. In its incarnation in the big Decca box, it sounds pretty wonderful so I wonder whether shelling out what I guess might be getting near to £50 is really worth it.

[PJPJ]

The Esoterics were less, £32 including post, so under the circumstances a relative bargain. I really would like the Monteux Daphnis but will wait for a 24 bit download - it's a stunningly good performance and deserves to heard in the best possible sound (in my opinion).

[Ariosto]

PJPJ

It used to be a joke in BBC Television circles that Radio 3 guaranteed to bring you the sound from the worst seat in the hall!

Of course, engineers in the TV studio rarely had to cope with the peculiarities of concert halls,I used to be impressed by the sound that the regular team managed to achieve at the Proms, although I think that recent efforts have fallen short. perhaps because broadcasts from the RAH are no longer made by in house staff, and long term expertise has been lost.

I was interested to read your comments about the Chandos Falla. What did you think of the performances ? Perhaps my disappointment with the sound was partly influenced by what seemed to be very routine accounts of the music. Listen to Soriano / Burgos in Nights, or Ansermet in the Tricorne and everything comes to life in a way which the Chandos misses.

I've no doubt that five channel SACD must be impressive. Unfortunately my own five channel Meridian system does not accept SACD, but it does synthesise rear channel information pretty convincingly from two channels depending on the source without compromising separation in the way the old quadrophonic matrixes used to do.

It was also a joke in BBC radio circles when I worked there a long time ago that BBC TV only knew a bit about the pictures and had no idea that there was any sound attached!! (Sorry Ferret, I know you worked in the TV sound area, so there must have been a few who knew the ropes!!)

[Dave2002]

We've mentioned EMI, Decca and a few others. Were there different techniques used by other companies, such as Philips, DG and Supraphon? Supraphon I think were said to use MS rcording - and some of their recordings were/are excellent. What about recording in the Soviet Union - Melodiya etc?

Different companies did seem to produce recordings which sounded different

[Ariosto]

We've mentioned EMI, Decca and a few others. Were there different techniques used by other companies, such as Philips, DG and Supraphon? Supraphon I think were said to use MS rcording - and some of their recordings were/are excellent. What about recording in the Soviet Union - Melodiya etc?

Different companies did seem to produce recordings which sounded different

Microphones have changed somewhat over the last 20 years or more with a lot of emphasis and use of condenser mics with extended top ends. These mics aren't cheap and they tend to be good for some things (singers like large diagphram mics which sometimes flatter their voices). Some mics have mid range boosts which singers like too.

Personally for my purposes I find that condenser mics have a slightly brittle top end and lack somewhat depth in the lower end, but then some of the omnidirectional condensers are better at recording a good bass response whilst still brittle higher up. Mics have very complicated amplifying circuits now and can vary a lot.

This is why I have opted for ribbon mics which have now benefited from recent developments - particularly in America.