|
|
|
Fitzcaraldo215 said:
Some of the later ones like Honeck's Pittsburgh Heldenleben are rather good. Kal, didn't you highly recommend Honecks' Alpensymphonie? Unfortunately, that's a work I am not fond of. It reminds me too much of Grofe's trite Grand Canyon Suite.
Yes, I did recommend Honeck's Alpensymphonie but the Heldenleben is an entirely different entity. The performance is soggy and the sound insipid, by itself or in comparison to the Heldenleben. Same conductor, orchestra, hall and composer but a different recording team.
Will try 'em tonight in the other system.
Kal
|
|
|
|
|
|
I have both the Stravinsky/van Zweden discs, and I find the sound on these to be above average, although the recording of Apollon Musagete is a bit too close for my liking.
I also have the Bruckner Symphony #2 on Exton (again with van Zweden), and that recording is less than satisfactory, being to my ears rather congested.
|
|
|
Post by Alice April 6, 2010 (13 of 23)
|
|
I have found Extons to be all over the map with respect to sound but on a down ward trajectory in recent years. Some of the initial releases (they were two channel), I believe, set some sonic standards for the time but now have been equaled or displaced.
I, too, highly recommend "Church Windows". See my comments at "Reviews". I note as do others that the middle channel is "underutilized" (at best). And I have found this to be more of the norm (although not always) with Exton recordings.
Otherwise there is no undo relationship to sound quality with respect to two channel vs. multi-channel content. It is what you most often find. If it is good in two channel the experience will be better in multi-channel. If it is average in two channel it will be just as average in multi-channel.
The performances, too, are all over the map. While I find the performances of the Ashkenazy Sibelius series to be fine, the recordings are just OK, being far too dry for my taste. I found the Tchaikovsky "Manfred" performance to be *very* compelling (and not just because there is a paucity of this composition on SACD) and explosive. BUT I cannot recommend it (even though I love it) because the podium stomps, baton pounding, and mating call like grunts of Kobayashi are way out of line. You would think that Kobayshi had his own personal lapel mic. But I thought the Czech Philharmonic did a great job.
Robert C. Lang
|
|
|
Post by tream April 6, 2010 (14 of 23)
|
|
"Alice"? What happened to "Oakland"?
|
|
|
|
|
|
I recently purchased the Exton Mozart Piano Concerti disc with Ashkenazy and I was very, very pleased with it both sonically and artistically, so I am a little surprised by the reaction of those who don't like it.
I compared the Azhkenazy Mozart disc to the Brendel Mozart disc on Philips (which I also recently purchased).
I found the Ashkenazy clear and sparkling with very realistic instrumental tone while the Brendel sounded murky and opaque almost as if it were recorded underwater. The Exton disc stood out as a particularly clean and nicely executed recording and allowed the beauty of the playing to really come out whereas Brendel's recording seemed to obscure his (excellent) performance. I prefer the Exton disc.
|
|
|
Post by nickc April 7, 2010 (16 of 23)
|
|
Perhaps he went to the movies on the weekend and couldn't get the 3D glasses off?
|
|
|
Post by tream April 7, 2010 (17 of 23)
|
|
That's a great possible explanation...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Has anyone had any luck locating the 15 disc Exton Anniversary Boxed Set (as opposed to the 11 disc one issued last year which I have)? I remember paying $11 per disc (US) from cdJapan and although not all were multi-channel and the 11th disc was a RBCD, it did make for some compelling listening.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Celebidache2000 said:
I recently purchased the Exton Mozart Piano Concerti disc with Ashkenazy and I was very, very pleased with it both sonically and artistically, so I am a little surprised by the reaction of those who don't like it.
I compared the Azhkenazy Mozart disc to the Brendel Mozart disc on Philips (which I also recently purchased).
I found the Ashkenazy clear and sparkling with very realistic instrumental tone while the Brendel sounded murky and opaque almost as if it were recorded underwater. The Exton disc stood out as a particularly clean and nicely executed recording and allowed the beauty of the playing to really come out whereas Brendel's recording seemed to obscure his (excellent) performance. I prefer the Exton disc.
If you are talking about the Brendel Disk with the Mozart Concerto #25, you might want to compare it to the Surround Records Blu-ray release of #25 coupled with some solo works from another Brendel SACD, both licensed from Decca, which owned the rights to the Philips catalog. This is assuming you have a Mch setup. Everyone who has heard both the SACD and the BR thinks the BR sounds much better. This of couse flies in the face of "pure DSD" believers, since the BR is a conversion to DTS 7.1, which is, of course, PCM. I did not find problems with the sound of the SACD. It's just that the BR was much, much better: about the finest piano reproduction I have heard.
|
|
|
Post by Oakland April 8, 2010 (20 of 23)
|
|
Were you listening in 7.1? If so what is the placement of the other two speakers.?
Robert C. Lang
|
|
