Post by hiredfox April 18, 2012 (1 of 24)
|
|
Judging by the recording dates (1980) this looks like one to miss as originals likely to have been 44/16.
|
|
|
Post by chenzl April 18, 2012 (2 of 24)
|
|
hiredfox said:
Judging by the recording dates (1980) this looks like one to miss as originals likely to have been 44/16.
Yes, it was an early 80s DDD recordings. I don't have the original CD, but this latest Esoteric SACD mastering sounds very analog-like to my ears. No trace of early digital harshness. Besides the playing time of 80'41'' is 'good' value if you are able to swallow the usual price tag.
My favourite for Mozart 40 & 41 is the Blomstedt/Staatskapelle Dresden (also early 80s digital) on Denon label. But this Kubelik's version is perfectly fine with me.
|
|
|
Post by Claude April 18, 2012 (3 of 24)
|
|
This should have been reissued on a $8 Membran SACD
|
|
|
|
|
|
It should never have been issued.
|
|
|
Post by LivyII April 18, 2012 (5 of 24)
|
|
No way! This is a great choice by Esoteric, just like the Karajan Sibelius 2nd.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Why don't you just buy the CD? If it was recorded originally at CD resolution (44.1 kHz, 16 bit), then that is as good as it gets. What do you possibly expect to gain from moving it to SACD? Magic??? The best it can be is a CD.
It is what it is: if it is a 1980s CD recording, then moving it to SACD is pointless (other perhaps than suggesting Esoteric are clueless).
|
|
|
Post by seth April 18, 2012 (7 of 24)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post by raffells April 19, 2012 (8 of 24)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post by LivyII April 19, 2012 (9 of 24)
|
|
canonical said:
Why don't you just buy the CD?....The best it can be is a CD.
Because I enjoy listening to SA-CD's. And I believe that the care and equipment used for this transfer will allow me to hear the full potential of 16/44.1 as opposed to an ordinary transfer from a secondary source to a normal CD.
Doesn't everyone believe there is a difference here?
|
|
|
Post by DSD April 19, 2012 (10 of 24)
|
|
LivyII you may be onto something, I remember a reply in either Stereophile or the Absolute Sound magazine from Bob Katz of Chesky back at the beginning of SACD (around 1999) to a reader who asked what was to become of all the 16/44.1kHz masters if SACD replaces CD? Mr. Katz said something like 16/44.1kHz masters would sound better on SACD since commercial CDs don't offer the full 16 bit resolution the format is capable of, instead it is closer 13 or 14 bits, thus one could finally hear 16 bit masters in their full resolution.
|
|
