Best Modern Brahms Symphony Cycle in Digital Sound

[Thropplenoggin]

Karafan, Parry and Barbirollians, is this the one you meant?



p.s. B, you got a bit carried away - I was only looking for modern digital cycles.

[Karafan]

Karafan, Parry and Barbirollians, is this the one you meant?



p.s. B, you got a bit carried away - I was only looking for modern digital cycles.

Correct Thropple - I very much doubt you'd ever regret buying the set!

K.

[cloughie]

Maybe it's my age or my ears but Kempe, Klemperer and any of Barbirollian's choices sound more appealing than the modern digital choices mentioned. Is modern digital sound really that much better?

[jayne lee wilson]

I have the Klemperer set in the EMI GROCs and the Toshiba-EMI, neither of which is exactly easy-on-the-ears... the Manze is warm, and detailed, the strings smooth but pefectly clear and inner-textured, so... yes! (Interpretatively Manze is of the highest interest, easily as compelling as the past masters).
Later recordings can (or should) be better. I'd forgotten to mention the Ondine Berglund/COE too, one of the best things Berglund's done and again beautifully recorded in Baden-Baden.

Older analogue cycles do put much more pressure on a system's (or ears') ability to cope with high frequencies, but of course recent remastering has helped. A feature of the Manze (24-bit especially) and Berglund is that they're easier to play at higher volumes, for me at least..
.

[Thropplenoggin]

Correct Thropple - I very much doubt you'd ever regret buying the set!

K.

It's available to stream on Qobuz. From what I've heard of the First Symphony, it lives up to your praise both in performance and sonics. Alas, as an investment, present prices seem a tad on the exorbitant side. Amazon has it for £40.39 and even the cheapest marketplace reseller is a whopping £32. One for the wishlist, then.

[Thropplenoggin]

Maybe it's my age or my ears but Kempe, Klemperer and any of Barbirollian's choices sound more appealing than the modern digital choices mentioned. Is modern digital sound really that much better?

In a word, oui. Très oui. Do a side-by-side comparison on any streaming site and hear the difference in string sound alone! I agree you cannot fault Klemperer for, oh what's that tired metaphor every radio disc jockey falls back on - a granite performance, but there's no reason why the instruments can't sound a little nice/more realistic.

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

Maybe it's my age or my ears but Kempe, Klemperer and any of Barbirollian's choices sound more appealing than the modern digital choices mentioned. Is modern digital sound really that much better?

How does one define "modern"?
Stereo? Digital? SACD? Post 2000?

But to answer the question, I would say that anything from around 1963 onwards is every bit as good as most digital recordings.

[jayne lee wilson]

Come on, don't be stick-in-the-muds. Make it new! Try Berglund or Manze, you won't regret it. And 24-bit might light up you ears a bit too!

[cloughie]

In a word, oui. Très oui. Do a side-by-side comparison on any streaming site and hear the difference in string sound alone! I agree you can fault Klemperer for, oh what's that tired metaphor every radio disc jockey falls back on - a granite performance, but there's no reason why the instruments can't sound a little nice/more realistic.

I use a good old fashioned amplifier and pair of good old fashioned speakers....my BPO Kempe no2 sounds fine!

[Thropplenoggin]

I use a good old fashioned amplifier and pair of good old fashioned speakers....my BPO Kempe no2 sounds fine!

Luddite!

[Thropplenoggin]

Come on, don't be stick-in-the-muds. Make it new! Try Berglund or Manze, you won't regret it. And 24-bit might light up you ears a bit too!

I have read you eulogizing the Berglund cycle elsewhere on these boards, Jayne. I suppose the chamber orchestra takes away some of the oomph but reveals more detail, does it not?

[cloughie]

Luddite!

No, I just can't see the point in fixing what isn't broken.

[Thropplenoggin]

No, I just can't see the point in fixing what isn't broken.

Most people find the two co-exist rather nicely, serving separate needs.

[Mr Pee]

How does one define "modern"?
Stereo? Digital? SACD? Post 2000?

But to answer the question, I would say that anything from around 1963 onwards is every bit as good as most digital recordings.

"Anything"? I think that's pushing it a bit. A few recordings, maybe. But not all, not by a long way.

[Parry1912]

Try ... Manze, you won't regret it.

I think Richard Osbourne might not agree.