Post by terence June 2, 2006 (1 of 19)
|
|
review on amazon.com says - "The sheer wide-open-prairie sound that SACD multichannel now allows ... now how did those old CBS stereo master tapes become multi?"
i have the same question - given the date of these recordings how HAVE they become MC? are they 4.0 quad or just electronically reprocessed?
|
|
|
Post by Claude June 2, 2006 (2 of 19)
|
|
(Deleted)
|
|
|
Post by Peter June 2, 2006 (3 of 19)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post by Claude June 2, 2006 (4 of 19)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post by Castor June 2, 2006 (5 of 19)
|
|
terence said:
review on amazon.com says - "The sheer wide-open-prairie sound that SACD multichannel now allows ... now how did those old CBS stereo master tapes become multi?"
i have the same question - given the date of these recordings how HAVE they become MC? are they 4.0 quad or just electronically reprocessed?
Whether they are quad or reprocessed sound, they (Copland and Tchaikovsky) are superb in MC. The ambience sounds completely natural. If you want these performances don't hesitate.
|
|
|
Post by ramesh June 2, 2006 (6 of 19)
|
|
The Absolute Sound, Oct-Nov 2003 page 137: 'Columbia, now Sony, has gone through three 'periods' of recording. First, a three-track era from 1957 to the late 1960s; then in the early 1970s it was four-track quadraphonic; and after, and until now, multitracks, starting with eight channels. In this instance, the Copland and Tchaikovsky come from three-channel originals, the others from either four-channel quadraphonics or multitracks. On the quad recordings, where there was no center channel, de la Fuente and King derived a center by using a bit of left- and right-channel information. Understand that, these kind words about McClure aside, few of his recordings of Bernstein are anywhere near the state-of-the-art, but because Bernstein was a creature of intense personal loyalties, he stuck with McClure, despite McClure's string of mediocrities.... It was that traffic noise outside the Center in lower Manhattan that sometimes tempted the engineers to whack off the bottom end of the bass spectrum.'
|
|
|
Post by seth June 2, 2006 (7 of 19)
|
|
ramesh said:
The Absolute Sound, Oct-Nov 2003 page 137: 'Columbia, now Sony, has gone through three 'periods' of recording. First, a three-track era from 1957 to the late 1960s; then in the early 1970s it was four-track quadraphonic; and after, and until now, multitracks, starting with eight channels. In this instance, the Copland and Tchaikovsky come from three-channel originals, the others from either four-channel quadraphonics or multitracks. On the quad recordings, where there was no center channel, de la Fuente and King derived a center by using a bit of left- and right-channel information. Understand that, these kind words about McClure aside, few of his recordings of Bernstein are anywhere near the state-of-the-art, but because Bernstein was a creature of intense personal loyalties, he stuck with McClure, despite McClure's string of mediocrities.... It was that traffic noise outside the Center in lower Manhattan that sometimes tempted the engineers to whack off the bottom end of the bass spectrum.'
The stereo sound on on this disc is superb. Easily 4.5 stars.
As for the surround sound questions, if you look at photos of late 50s/early 60's Columbia/CBS recording sessions, you can clearly see that they're using about a dozen mics, some of them placed behind the conductor. So I suppose for the surround sound mix they used what the mics placed behind the conductor captured for the rear channels.
|
|
|
Post by Johnno June 2, 2006 (8 of 19)
|
|
Castor said:
Whether they are quad or reprocessed sound, they (Copland and Tchaikovsky) are superb in MC. The ambience sounds completely natural. If you want these performances don't hesitate.
I agree entirely. The Copland performances are virtually definitive and the multichannel sound I heard through a friend's setup was superbly natural. It sounds great through my stereo-only systems too.
|
|
|
Post by terence June 3, 2006 (9 of 19)
|
|
seth said:
if you look at photos of late 50s/early 60's Columbia/CBS recording sessions, you can clearly see that they're using about a dozen mics, some of them placed behind the conductor. So I suppose for the surround sound mix they used what the mics placed behind the conductor captured for the rear channels.
very interesting. i wonder why they were using mikes in this way though, given that they could only mix to 2 channels?
did they mix some ambience into the two channel master from rear mikes to provide the stereo pressing?
|
|
|
Post by seth June 3, 2006 (10 of 19)
|
|
terence said:
very interesting. i wonder why they were using mikes in this way though, given that they could only mix to 2 channels?
did they mix some ambience into the two channel master from rear mikes to provide the stereo pressing?
The must have been down-mixing originally, but the photos show they must have been anticipating multi-track mixing -- you can see in the photos that certain sections and instruments are being specifically mic'd (like a mic placed right in front of the timpani).
|
|
