greg@olivej.UUCP (Greg Paley) (09/26/84)
Those who argue the superiority of the CD should post the actual names of the recordings which demonstrate their point rather than dealing in rash generalizations. Those of us who have been disappointed with the apparent inferiority of the newer recordings to better samples of analogue recording would love to be proven wrong. I, for one, hate dealing with LP's, having to scrupulously avoid dust and fingerprints, having to spend hours getting the azimuth, overhang and VTA just right on a cartridge, and knowing that no matter what I do the things will deteriorate. How about a "reference list" of CD's which can beat the analogue recordings, particularly with regard to those aspects that people like me have claimed to be superior on LP: (1) Reproduction of depth and perspective. On good associated equipment you should be able to not only tell, right to left, the lateral seating arrangment of a symphony orchestra, but be able to hear the front-to-back placement. Multi-miked recordings, whether analogue or digital, will generally fail this, but the RCA Reiner series, the Mercury "Living Presence" series, and the Culshaw-produced London Wagner recordings preserve this depth. I haven't yet heard it on ANY digitally mastered recording, whether reproduced on LP or CD, and regardless of whether the system used was PCM, 3M, or Soundstream. There must be some. Yes, I have already heard some of the Telarc series CD's. If you want to recommend specific ones, please mention them by name rather than just a blanket recommendation for Telarc. (2) Proper tonal balance. The vast majority of CD's I've heard have had an overemphasis of the upper midrange which distorts the timbre of instruments and voice. This is what makes violins sound as though the strings were made of steel. This also renders operatic voices I've heard live (and which have been reproduced recognizably on analogue recordings) with an edge and stridency that one does not hear in an opera house or concert hall. If this is really due to mismanagement of the miking, there must be, by now, CD's which have overcome the problem. So far I've heard only one which was reasonably free of this - the Mackerras recording of Janacek's "Jenufa" on London. The worst examples are the Leontyne Price/Marilyn Horne joint recital on RCA and the Sutherland/Pavarotti "Traviata" on London. (3) Ambience. This is not merely reverb, nor can it be random noise and distortion since it can, on a GOOD analogue recording distinctively identify the hall in which a recording was made. In addition to the Reiner/RCA and Mercury recordings mentioned, the entire analogue Philips series of Haitink and the Concertgebouw Orchestra are excellent examples. The LACK of ambience has been a problem with even the best analogue DGG recordings. I've heard a start in this direction with some of the (London Records) Chicago Symphony CD's made in Orchestra Hall, but nothing yet as consistent and specific as the analogue examples. Again, if this is due to the poor miking, there must, by now, be examples which indicate it is not a general failure of the digital recording and reproducing technology. These are essentially the points that have troubled me with digital recordings and CD's. A good list of CD's, which proves their competence in these regards would serve, not only to convert some of us who are presently doubtful, but be of use to those who have invested in CD equipment and would like to know of a good selection of recordings to buy. The value would go well beyond the context of the analogue vs. digital argument which is, understandably, beginning to bore everyone. How about it? - Greg Paley