Summer CD Rev 10.8.13

[PJPJ]

You can listen here:

http://www.pristineclassical.com/paco048.html

It may be better to use headphones/earspeakers......

I notice the accidental stereo version is a separate release.

The earlier recording of Verdi's Requiem is here:

http://www.pristineclassical.com/paco038.html

and has the usual choice of the original mono, or the ambient stereo. Having compared mono with ambient stereo releases, I found listening to the latter via headphones gave a marked improvement in listening pleasure. Then again, I listen via headphones once in a blue moon. Via normal speakers, the differences are subtle, I think.

Some feel ambient stereo is a continuation of the old electronic stereo technique and it couldn't be more different. This new technique or one similar to it is also used for a few releases by ICA and Testament on CDs and DVDs.

[umslopogaas]

Vodkadilc, I know full well what a can of worms this is. To clarify, I dont think there can be much dispute that CDs are superior to digitally recorded LPs, which of course they were by the time CDs took over. I dont think there is much difference in sound quality, providing the cartridge is up to tracking the vinyl, the superiority lies in the greater music capacity and greater robustness. The great debate is about the earlier, "valve recorded" LPs. Their supporters talk enthusiastically about the "warmth" and "mellowness" of the old valve LPs. Their detractors just sniff and say, for warmth, read muddiness and mellowness, read distortion. I dont have strong feelings either way, I have quite a lot of LPs from the valve era and they sound fine to me. I do remember though, how sharp and clear the sound was when the first digitally recorded LPs came out.

[BBMmk2]

I hope that downloads and cd's can live side by side, because for better or worse, I always prefer the physical holding and touch of the cd, like I did with the LP(which for me felt quite personal, whereas the cd rather clinical but still rather better than a download!)

[VodkaDilc]

I hope that downloads and cd's can live side by side, because for better or worse, I always prefer the physical holding and touch of the cd, like I did with the LP(which for me felt quite personal, whereas the cd rather clinical but still rather better than a download!)

As CD booklet notes get smaller and my eyesight (even with reading glasses) gets less reliable, I long for the luxury of LP sleeves. I suppose that with downloads you get nothing.

[PJPJ]

I suppose that with downloads you get nothing.

Not necessarily. Here's a forthcoming Hyperion note as played on this morning's prog, which I will buy as a 24 bit download rather than the CD.

http://www.hyperion-records.co.uk/notes/67967-B.pdf

Resonus booklets are also fine examples of digital wares:

http://www.resonusclassics.com/composing-without-picture

click on download the booklet etc....... or open with this link

http://www.resonusclassics.com/freedownload/RES10121_booklet_300dpi.pdf

If you save the booklets you can open in Adobe Reader etc in increasingly larger sizes to get bigger print.

[johnb]

I mostly listen to CDs which have been transferred to my hard drive, rarely playing the actual CD. However I still prefer to buy the physical CD because it is satisfying to own and the FLAC downloads are usually more expensive (sometimes much more expensive) or the saving is so small that there is no point in not getting the CD.

I know that companies have to recoup the investment in the download websites and behind the scenes infrastructure but it still puzzles me why "CD quality" downloads are often more expensive than the cost of the physical item, say, on Amazon.

[johnb]

By the way, Andrew MacGregor made a rather curious remark at the end of the section devoted to downloads, etc:

... and by the way, if your listen to Radio 3 online these days, it's now in uncompressed HD sound - I thought you ought to know.

I suppose it depends on what he meant by "uncompressed".

Uncompressed as in not using a lossy format: this would have been factually wrong.

Uncompressed as in not having Optimod dynamic range compression: Optimod has only been applied to FM and iPlayer has been free of this type of compression way before the introduction of "HD" sound.

Odd

[richardfinegold]

I'm not sure if this is limited to Pristine Classical, but I once heard a recording they had revived and bought it from them as a CD. Andrew Rose (I THINK I've got the name right) was wonderfully helpful. Do other 'downloaders' offer the same service?

Amazon will burn your mp3s to a disc.

[richardfinegold]

There is so much great material out on CD now. I don't think that High res downloads will be able to approach them for variety and price and ease of use. mp3s will, but while they can sound great on a portable player through ear buds, on the big rig they sound terrible

[DracoM]

johnb

I thought McGregor gave an actual figure after that remark? Can't remember what and can't be bothered to go back and trace.

[johnb]

johnb

I thought McGregor gave an actual figure after that remark? Can't remember what and can't be bothered to go back and trace.

What I posted was a transcript of the comments made by AM about R3 iPlayer. After that he thanked James Jolly and moved onto other matters. There was no mention of bitrates, etc.

(It was only a throw away comment of AM's and I don't want to blow it up out of proportion. Curious, nevertheless.)

[PJPJ]

I assumed AM was referring to dynamic compression - of R3 presenters he is one who appreciates high definition / high resolution sound quality (SACD and so on) so knows the difference.

I'd be interested to use the Beethoven app, though it sounds as though it's a similar bit of tech to the interactive CD-ROMs which had some uptake a few years ago.

[PJPJ]

There is so much great material out on CD now. I don't think that High res downloads will be able to approach them for variety and price and ease of use. mp3s will, but while they can sound great on a portable player through ear buds, on the big rig they sound terrible

There are a few portable players which play 24 bit material - I haven't gone down that road as I'm not that keen on headphone listening, and I don't need anything portable.

I buy hi-res downloads only if the label doesn't issue an SACD as well. Download prices are very high in my opinion - it's difficult to justify spending £18 at Linn or £15 at Chandos for a stereo download when SACDs usually with all three formats, hi-res stereo, hi-res surround and 16 bit CD quality can be had as the physical product sometimes at discount prices approaching half of that. Hyperion price their hi-res downloads at roughly the cost of their CDs, and their 24 bit downloads are not that much more pricey than 16 bit ones.

[HighlandDougie]

Download prices are very high in my opinion

I strongly agree (I've never bought anything from Linn for that reason) but there are a few honourable exceptions, notably eclassical.com with its weekly discount deal, usually of BIS material (sometimes CPO). I've just bought and downloaded (seamlessly) the second disc in the Emperor Quartet's Britten cycle as a 24 bit FLAC file which has cost me about £6.00 and with the booklet included too. Qobuz, for those who can access it, also has special deals on what it calls 'Studio Masters' from time to time which are often well worth buying. And the sound from 24 bit files is, simply, better. I've just acquired a portable player which plays files up to 24/192 resolution and, with good headphones, produces great sounding music. I'm prepared to forgive it its antediluvian 'user interface' just for the pleasure of allowing, say, Sawallisch's Schumann symphonies to drown out the usual din you get on EasyJet flights from Nice.