Post by Ernani71 July 5, 2011 (31 of 38)
|
|
jdaniel said:
His Beethoven, Brahms, and Bruckner contain stretches I I often prefer above all others, most specifically for the "innate musicality." (Listen, for instance, to the nigh-on perfect pacing of the 2nd mov't of his Brahms' 3rd). Bohm (like Ormandy), IMHO often comes across as efficient, but never probing, (though still better than certain modern conductors who often substitute fussiness, absurdly slow tempi and micro-management for "depth."
Bohm's Brahms Symphonies 3 & 4 on DG are excellent, even probing.
|
|
|
Post by Ernani71 July 18, 2011 (32 of 38)
|
|
Sorry to continue off topic, but actually jdaniel's right. I don't know what got into me when I posted that last comment. Again and again, I find Bohm rarely -- if ever -- probing. The second movement of the Brahms No. 3 is wonderful, but I think the Bohm cycle can be safely skipped when there's much better out there. For now, I've come to prefer the Abaddo Brahms Symphony cycle the best overall. (Thanks PN!) I think it was that second movement of the 3rd that briefly got me excited about Bohm.
|
|
|
Post by hiredfox July 20, 2011 (33 of 38)
|
|
Ernani71 said:
Sorry to continue off topic, but actually jdaniel's right. I don't know what got into me when I posted that last comment. Again and again, I find Bohm rarely -- if ever -- probing. The second movement of the Brahms No. 3 is wonderful, but I think the Bohm cycle can be safely skipped when there's much better out there. For now, I've come to prefer the Abaddo Brahms Symphony cycle the best overall. (Thanks PN!) I think it was that second movement of the 3rd that briefly got me excited about Bohm.
+1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Gramophone review has to be taken with at least a small grain of salt, given Richard Osborne's rather sycophantic devotion to von Karajan.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Chris said:
Agree indeed,
PRICES from both Universal Japan and Estoteric are SIMPLY RIDICULOUS!!!
I, too, agree...
Unless I win a Mega Millions Jackpot or perhaps Bill Gates/Warren Buffet leave me serious $$$$, all of the Japanese SACDs that have been flooding the site are verboten, no matter how great the sound...c'est la vie....
Cheers,
|
|
|
|
|
|
52 dollars. This price makes me reconsider the recording's classic status. Is this the best it can be? I find myself saying "no" to most Universal SACDs. I may end up buying some Rolling Stones SACDs instead. :-D
|
|
|
Post by Claude April 13, 2012 (38 of 38)
|
|
The appearance of the SHM-SACD format has lead to a considerable price hike in japanese SACDs, SHM-SACD being sold at a 50% higher price than regular SACD (4500 Yen instead of 2500-3000 Yen).
It looks like the labels offering those $60 SACDs think the market for reissue SACDs is dominated by rich audiophiles who are willing to pay almost any price to get the best sounding version of their favourite vintage recordings.
I don't think SHM-SACD cost 50% more to make (mastering, packaging and distribution costs are the same), so they must generate a much higher profit.
The new series of EMI UK SACDs is the opposite to this. They are cheap, they are hybrid, so they appeal to a much larger crowd, including non-audiophiles. It will be interesting to see how the sales turn out.
As previously with Living Stereo and Mercury SACDs, I've been ordering some EMI SACDs of recordings that I am not that terribly interested in, because they are so affordable. With SHM-SACDs it's completely different, I'm not buying most of the titles I would like to have because paying over $50 for an album which also exists on a $8 CD that sounds almost as good is beyond reasonable. It's different from buying expensive audio equipment, whose benefits I hear every day
|
|
