Post by MaxP January 18, 2010 (31 of 36)
|
|
I found that the Esoteric SACD transfer of this Kleiber Brahms 4th (I'm one of those who is a great fan of the performance itself) is considerably "softened" in timbre compared with previous CD issues. It's almost like listening to a different performance; I had gotten used to the harshness of the string tone and overall glare as part of the excitement of the performance. The first CD issue was, on my equipment, extremely hard, bright and tended to be shrill. Apparently, others (including DGG) felt the same, as each subsequent remake (the "Originals" version, most recently the SHM-CD version, now this Esoteric SACD) has gone further in the direction of darkening and softening the sound. I also notice that this, and other Esoteric SACD's, seem to use an extremely low base level setting requiring me to crank up the volume on my preamp well above what I do for other CD's or SACD's.
|
|
|
Post by canonical September 28, 2010 (32 of 36)
|
|
mwgfrg wrote (in a review):
"... but for me this is the recording and transfer to have"
That's nice ... but what has any of this to do with SACD?
This is a 16 bit (or 14 bit) early digital CD resolution recording ... so .... it's a CD. You have bought a CD. It might come in a fancy box, it might have been 're-mastered', but all it can ever be is what it is ... just an old really low res CD recording ... and that's as good as it gets on the upside, not to mention a whole lot of downside.
|
|
|
Post by armenian September 28, 2010 (33 of 36)
|
|
chenzl said:
For Klieber Beethoven 5, the 'Originals' CD version sounds better than the SACD.
Last week I received an E-mail from Eastwind Import announcing some new SHM-SACD's in stereo only, scheduled to be released in Japan about the end of November, mostly Jazz & Rock/Pop titles, there were three classical titles including Carlo Kleiber Beethoven 5 & 7 for about $54.00
Vahe
|
|
|
Post by porpielee September 29, 2010 (34 of 36)
|
|
This is a 16 bit (or 14 bit) early digital CD resolution recording ... so ....
This is what I keep hearing from this forum. Early digital recordings were mostly higher resolution than CD standard (therefore SACD should be an improve from RBCD). Decca:18bit/48kHz, Telarc & EMI :16bit/50kHz, etc. I don't know about DGG though. If this Kleiber's Brahms 4th was indeed recorded in 16bit/44.1kHz, then my apologies.
|
|
|
Post by lennyw April 12, 2011 (35 of 36)
|
|
Claude said:
This is not a great recording technically, but the SACD mastering sounds much more natural than the "Originals" mastering, which has a thinner, edgier strings sound. This is also the case with several other "Originals" CDs.
Concerning the Brahms release, I think that Esoteric chose this title mainly because of it's cult status, irrespective of the sound quality. That is of course debatable, given the premium price asked for such an "audiophile" reissue.
I too have struggled with various Originals remasterings, finding them often dryer than the discs they were replacing (this, the Bohm Figaro and the Schubert Trout with Gilels spring to mind). From an aesthetic point of view, I don't like the covers of the Originals series either.
As this Brahms recording is one of my favourites, I decided to go for it on a whim. I have to say that although some bits sound a bit warmer/richer, I'm not sure there's enough of an improvement over the original CD issue to warrant the €40. I'll keep it as a curio, but would recommend avoiding unless you're a nutcase like me!
|
|
|
Post by seth April 12, 2011 (36 of 36)
|
|
lennyw said:
I too have struggled with various Originals remasterings, finding them often dryer than the discs they were replacing (this, the Bohm Figaro and the Schubert Trout with Gilels spring to mind). From an aesthetic point of view, I don't like the covers of the Originals series either.
A lot of early CD reissues of analog recordings added reverb. For these particular releases, the reverb was probably scaled back or not added.
|
|
