[ Post a Response | The MusicWeb Message Board ]
|
I do "just enjoy the music." I can listen with pleasure to very old--and old-sounding--recordings of great performances. I have a 2-CD set of Alexander Kipnis, and the magnificence of his voice can be heard through the fuzz and fog of the ancient recording. I enjoy the Busch Quartet's beethoven, sonic limitations and all. But if I can obtain versions of such performances in what my ear tells me is a closer approximation of a live performance, why not? I'll enjoy them even more. No recording, even if engineered by the best standards of today and heard through state-of-the-art equipment in an acoustically ideal listening room, can do more than approximate a live performance in an acoustically appropriate space. But some approximations are, to my ears at least, closer than others, so I prefer the best approximation available, even though it may have been achieved by altering the source.  Previous MessageWell Mike, as this thread isn't exactly going viral, that's maybe what we should do! Previous MessageDoes anyone here just want to enjoy the music? Previous MessagePrevious MessageIn my second post, I indicated my preference for studio originals rather than some re-hash because, frankly, having been in the game myself I can hear all the restorers' sonic ruses and that greatly detracts from my listening pleasure. Agree 100%, especially when attempting to create artificial stereo from mono recordings. IMHO, the Brahms first example above, like most of Paul Howard's (RA's) work, is more an example of removing patina than artificial enhancement. Along those lines, I also personally favor the Pristine Mark Obert Thorne restorations, because similar to the RA restorations, they attempt to preserve the unique sonic characteristics of the original recording venues. Just my two cents! :) |
   |
Thank you for taking part in the MusicWeb International Forum. Len Mullenger - Founder of MusicWeb
