Post by trntbl March 30, 2009 (11 of 74)
|
|
Polly Nomial said:
Nobody can honestly say what an electric guitar should sound like (cf a piano) as one has no idea* of what was placed on disc and whether it sounds remotely like what actually took place in the studio. One cannot even compare to concert presentations since the bands (or their techies) seem more concerned about volume rather than purity of sound. That anybody uses such artificial (and thus unknown) musical sources to rate or demonstrate hi-fi equipment is a constant source of amusement and frustration to me and I suspect other acoustical music listeners.
Indeed, but then again, if audiophile doesn't listen to acoustic music, he should choose components that sounds good to his ears, and achieve more pleasure from listening by doing this. While I listen to mostly classical music, and my reference is always real concert and real instruments, I understand that realism isn't enjoyable at all within some audiophile circles. Of course this doesn't stop them to nominate their gear as most neutral, revealing or transparent of all things.
kristian
|
|
|
Post by Arthur March 30, 2009 (12 of 74)
|
|
16 out of 50 titles is 32%. Do you really believe that classical music represents 32% of the music sales in all formats?
|
|
|
Post by mahlerei March 30, 2009 (13 of 74)
|
|
hanser said:
Exactly. I do not own a single SACD from the listed top 10 and will never. Would I start listing my library here, the list would be dramatically different.
Mine would be too. :)
|
|
|
Post by Claude March 30, 2009 (14 of 74)
|
|
Some other factors which have not been mentionned yet:
- Most classical labels releasing SACDs are small companies, for which selling a few thousand copies of a title is a success. They can also stick to single inventory items for that reason.
Major pop labels would consider that selling a few thousand copies of a SACD version is a commercial failure. Given that most buyers don't care about sound quality, they will also prefer to sell a seperate CD and hybrid SACD version, because it would not make sense to manufacture more expensive SACDs for the majority of customers who are content with a CD.
- Except for Naxos which constantly explores new musical terrirory, most classical labels record the same warhorses all over again. Releasing SACDs gives buyers who are interested in better sound quality a motivation to buy new hi-rez and surround recordings of compositions they already have on CD.
Labels such as Universal or Sony have a different strategy, they mainly concentrate on big names to sell new CDs with often recorded works.
|
|
|
|
|
|
DSD said:
Did you notice not a single classical title in the Top 10? The highest classical was at number 11 and it was a budget RCA Living Stereo that can be purchased new for $10 or less. The first full priced classical SACD was number 28. There are only 16 Classical SACDs in the top 50!
It doesn't explain how SACD became a niche for classical music but it makes some sense as to why the top 10 is dominated by pop music:
Pop music enthusiasts have only a few hundred (at best) titles to choose from while classical music lovers have thousands to choose from. No wonder the latter sell in relatively smaller volumes...
|
|
|
|
|
|
DSD said:
Well since selling my RCA Living Stereo and Mercury Living Presence SACDs which I have been gradually replacing with newer interpretations on SACD in DSD or high resolution PCM, I have nothing in the top 200!
Oh, good grief. Forsaking quality of performance for sound again, I see Teresa. There is absolutely no new performance I would take over the quality RCA and MLP provide right now. You will probably buy them again in the future just like you had to after you sold off your SACDs before...twice. You have previously offered glowing reviews of Stokowski's Thomson recordings. You will probably replace those too if Jarvi somehow records them, right?
|
|
|
Post by maac59 March 30, 2009 (17 of 74)
|
|
- Classical music recording has never been about getting into the top ten; it has always been the recording industry's "long tail", selling less volume on a lot more titles - just think of the diversity of tastes among classical buffs.
- Classical music attracts audiophiles for the most part who feel left out in today's lossy format download world where 128kbps is plenty 'nuff for a 99 cents song someone's going to play to death for exactly 2.5 days until the next throw-away hit comes along. The SACD concept sounds (literally) very good to classical fans - it's a format they can call their own - and they sure don't care about the top ten list.
- Pink Floyd's SACD being no. 1 is no surprise to me: a lot of people buying it don't even realize it's an SACD because most often it sells for the same price as the regular edition.
|
|
|
Post by DSD March 30, 2009 (18 of 74)
|
|
flyingdutchman said:
Oh, good grief. Forsaking quality of performance for sound again, I see Teresa. There is absolutely no new performance I would take over the quality RCA and MLP provide right now. You will probably buy them again in the future just like you had to after you sold off your SACDs before...twice. You have previously offered glowing reviews of Stokowski's Thomson recordings. You will probably replace those too if Jarvi somehow records them, right?
The Stokowski's Thomson is on Vanguard I kept that, mainly because no one else has done the music on SACD and it sounds great! The analog recordings from the Vanguard and Everest don't have a lot of the analog artifacts that bother me especially in many of the RCA Living Stereo SACDs. The Thomson "The River" and "The Plow that broke the Plains" are so important to me I would have to hear the Jarvi version first before selling this SACD. It is doubtful Jarvi will record it and with Concord's acquisition of Telarc and the firing of most of it's personal I have a sad feeling after what is already prepared for SACD is released there will be no more Telarc SACDs.
Here are the analog SACDs I kept:
Gershwin: An American in Paris, Russo - Ozawa
Gottschalk: A Night in the Tropics etc - Utah/Abravanel
La Folia de la Spagna - Gregorio Paniagua
Nature's Realm - Philadelphia Orchestra/Sawallisch
Thomson: The Plow That Broke the Plains/The River - Stokowski
Die Röhre, The Tube - Stuttgarter Kammerorchester
My dissatisfaction with the sound quality of RCA Living Stereo and Mercury Living Presence on both SACD and LP has been growing over the years thanks to all the wonderful DSD recorded SACDs from Telarc, PentaTone, Channel Classics and others. And it was this SACD that made me rethink my "Golden Age" strategy: Mussorgsky: Pictures at an Exhibition etc. - Järvi , it totally blew away my Reiner version in both performance and sound quality. Same thing with one of Philips' last DSD recorded SACDs: Bartok: Concerto for Orchestra - Ozawa also blew away my Reiner version and the Music for Strings Percussion and Celesta not only bet Reiner but my favorite version by Ansermet I had on 7 1/2 IPS reel to reel.
A lot of great music in great performances are being captured in DSD, it will be a shame if Concord Music doesn't release any new Telarc recordings on SACD. I still feel the best is yet to come and if Telarc disappears other companies will fill the void.
|
|
|
|
|
|
I always thought the dunderheads who ran the record companies were all cokeheads and their questionable choices when launching SACD and DVD-A were irrational and misplaced opportunities to stunt whatever chances these formats had of succeeding.Classical music was NEVER a big seller, except among those who appreciated the audiophile potential (and exquisite beauty) the classics had to offer. I first bought into DVD-A because of the seductive titles which the record companies (especially WARNER) had to offer and because I had the Meridian 800 to play them on. Then I started to collect SACDs in the waning days of DVD-A because the titles were even more seductive. I have a perfectly good turntable but refuse to backtrack into VINYL because (1) it is NOT an archival format; (2) cannot play surround and (3) the asking prices are outrageous for 180g pressings (which are not always what they are cracked up to be).I have been buying more classical music because I am simply frustrated that more classic rock/pop albums are NOT even being considered for re-release onto SACD. And I will state that some of my very favorite albums have and will never see the light of Hi-Rez DVD-As and SACDs until 24/96 downloads are more plentiful. Will someone please pass the bong?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Claude said:
- Except for Naxos which constantly explores new musical terrirory, most classical labels record the same warhorses all over again. Releasing SACDs gives buyers who are interested in better sound quality a motivation to buy new hi-rez and surround recordings of compositions they already have on CD.
s.
Really? You would really say that BIS, Channel, Albany, Chandos (especially what they release on SACD), MD&G, Ondine, and Harmonia Mundi are really releasing the 'same old warhorses'?
|
|
