Searching for God in Classical Music

To be more specific, Vic? Let's see this time.

The cheap material throughout the production of a CD affects its details in quality reproduction and somehow the longevity (if you play it too often or the general handling is not the appropriate one). Like in any other product, you might get the "original" or a good copy, which might sound the same, look the same, but it's different. You may even notice some difference, if you check some expensive CDs of your collection with the "bargain" ones. The latter ones are slightly lighter.

In any case, having both the original Signum and the Brilliant Tallis box, I can notice the difference, which, of course relies a lot on the equipment you use. My high-end equipment reveals a great deal of "bad" details as well as the good ones.

Quite a few companies (not all) recycle their products for several reasons. Sometimes to improve the original, sometimes to sell the original to a wider audience at a very friendly price, sometimes because the item was discontinued and it has to be brought back to market, etc. Brilliant recycles mostly for selling products that fail to succeed in their original release. To that end, it uses the cheapest material along the production process (slipcases, small boxes, Cd rom instead of printed original info, etc.) In their original productions, they use unknown to lesser known and middle of the road artists, in average to almost poor performances. However, they fill a huge gap of releasing works that, otherwise, you may not easily find them.

To give a very specific example: I have Beethoven's 5 and 7 with Kleiber in all the forms, released by DG. They don't sound the same! The SACD is far superior in sound reproduction, ambience and image (in Stereo SACD) than the one in the mid-price "originals", which, in turn sounds better than the first release. The same applies to Bernstein's series in the cheapest versions, Karajan's Beethoven Symphonies of 1962 and the catalogue may go on .

Finally, I told you to give a try to one of the boxes of Ricercar or Archiv (only as an example), in order to see yourself the difference in the end product: Immaculate big box, the CDs placed in a very unique and original case, very well protected, a whole printed book of more than 200 pages in colour with any possible information you may need, first rate recordings and performances from the best artists from the francophones countries as well as the Netherlands. All these at a price around twice (or twice and half than the Tallis Box (The "Reformation" now costs, in Fnac, around 37 Euro and the "Flemish Polyphony" 49 Euro).

Anyway, Vic, as I said almost in all my posts, if you are happy with the end product of Brilliant, it's absolutely fine and understandable. As you clarified yourself, you care only about good recordings and fine performances, not the product itself (in all its aspects and the production values). Most listeners do the same. I just believe that CDs or SACDs are mere products and, as any other product, sould be treated as such.

Parla

O.K., Vic. If you cannot be convinced, it's fine with me. I told you that from the very start of these exchanges. You don't see any difference; I see them. Of course, you might have to wonder why so many reissues, "recycling", and all kind of reproductions : simply to repeat themselves and the same product? I gave you specific examples of specific CDs how they sound on the different versions they have been reissued (Kleiber's 5 & 7 and maybe the most striking Solti's Ring, which varies from bargain box on Decca to the Esoteric SACD version; and they do not sound the same and they are different products.

Briefly, to reply to the questions you need more clarifications:

-I have noticed that whatever I have played for more than 15-20 times starts being gradually less bright as far the dynamics and focus on detail.

-The "weight" means better quality materials in the manufacturing of the CD. The "lighter" the more vulnerable. It might sound "wonderful", because simply the original was a first rate recording, but it is not a quite solid product. At this point, I wish to inform you that one of the main reasons why a CD is more expensive is the factory the label chooses to use, since, depending on the quality manufacturing process and the materials used, the product gets a different value. (Quite often, in far away countries, they use "piracy" products, reproduced on local factories; they sound like the originals, but are they solid, trustworthy products?).

-About the difference on how the original and the reissue sound, I gave you some examples so far (Kleiber's Beethoven, Solti's Ring). Of course, the differences might be slight or indifferent to quite a few people and the result may vary from equipment to equipment. However, there are some striking differences, if the reissue is in a superior form (SACD or with better definition technic, etc), resulting in better dynamics, better definition, better image, clearer details, etc.

-The "huge differences" refer to the different finished products between Ricercar and Brilliant and not to "the original and reissue".

-The "bad details" accordingly have to do with how natural is the sound, how the details of the score come to the fore or not, how the ambience is recreated how striking and fast the dynamics are and so on. By all means, if you don't follow or you don't know the score and you don't have comparative performances, you will never notice any difference.

To finish these exchanges, we don't need a consensus here, since the listening experience is a very personal situation, depending on quite different circumastances and various factors. The only thing I tried to say, in so many ways, was that CD is a product and like all kind of products has its own limitations and production features. Accordingly, it has its own value based on these facts.

Parla

I've noticed exactly the same thing. Simultaneously, and at about the same pace, policemen have been getting younger, newspaper print has been getting smaller, they've taken the taste and smell out of foods that used to be spicy and pungent, more people are mumbling, I know they've made the lengths at our local swimming pool longer, my wife is starting to hide things I'm sure I put in their usual place, and people are giving things names that are ridiculously difficult to remember.

Something is going on.

You’re right, Tagalie, something is indeed going on and in a
far more sinister way than the examples you quote, all of which I can readily
empathise with. ‘They’ are deliberately keeping us in the dark over what is a
plot to build in undetectable obsolescence in every form of music storage and
reproduction. This is an industry ‘secret’, revealed only to those insiders
like the former record company executive and music professor I talked to in the
pub the other night. He told me that to ensure continued CD sales, companies
were secretly manufacturing discs out of recycled potato crisps. Undetectable
to the naked eye of the average collector, these sinister fakes are betrayed by
the fact that after only 353 playings, a thin film of cheese and onion powder
is deposited in the CD player and then escapes down the speaker wires and
corrodes one’s tweeters.  The effect on
the music’s brightness and focus on detail that ensues can only be imagined.

I did ask him to write all this down so that I had some hard
evidence with which to confront the record giants. Unfortunately his carer was
coming back from the bar at that moment, and in any case, said the professor,
he was not allowed crayons where he was and in any case found writing a
struggle now that he had his new jacket with the sleeves that fastened at the
back.

Before he left, Vic, he did whisper that there was no escape
even for people like us who now rip to FLAC for streaming. A secret virus has
apparently been inserted in each FLAC file which automatically activates after
it has been played a mere 237 times and which emits a paralysing death-ray directed
at the listener through the cheese-and-onion damaged tweeters of even the
highest-end system.

We’re all doomed....................

JKH

Parla,

Asking rhetorical questions rather than answering requests for clarification of a stated claim suggests an inability to do so.

So let me press you.

My position is:

In my experience [...] I can detect no consistent inferiority in
sound quality between original and reissued CDs.  Sound quality
is a variable unrelated, as far as I can see, to original and
reissued discs.

Your response:

I have noticed that
whatever I have played for more than 15-20 times starts being
gradually less bright as far the dynamics and focus on detail.

How many times, and with how many samples, and in what time-frame could it be possible for such a claim to have validity?  (This question is rhetorical.)

If you played a disc fifteen time in a row, aural memory alone would be unable to detect a change, I suggest.  To do it with one reissue and one original in order to claim one deteriorated more quickly than another, vanishingly improbable, I again suggest.  But further: to do it with enough samples of each (to eliminate exceptions) in order to establish a consistent trend, absolutely impossible.

So on what basis do you make this specific claim?  (This one is not rhetorical.)

Vic.

To start with Troyen1's "slip", I have simply to respond: "You said it".

As for you, Vic, what's all this passion on such a secondary matter? What's the big deal, if you don't see any "consistent inferiority" and I see it. Do we really need a consensus. The only way to try to get any sort of convergence of views would be if we listen together, all the time, under the exact same conditions.

Anyway, since you challenge me, I will keep on replying, even if it is in vain:

-The questions were not meant to reply, but to make you wonder whether you may have some room for some "doubts".

-I never tried to establish any theory of "consistent inferiority". I said, depending on manufacturing limitations (including the crucial financial factor), you may notice differences in reissues. Sometimes, it's for improvements in the reproduction, leading even to higher prices (why the new Tallis box from the same label costs 25% higher than the first?) or to reduction of price (with potential inferior sound or longevity of the actual product).

-The "sound quality" is a variable matter related to different factors that may change how the "original" sounds compared to the "reissue". So, there is no pattern for all the reissues and from all labels. Each case should be judged ad hoc. (e.g. I have all the Solti's Rings from the very first edition to the last one; none sounds the same, sometimes the difference is really striking).

-"Aural memory" has nothing to do with the recognition of dynamics, the details of image,etc., particularly when you know very well the work (and in quite a few cases, even the score). As I told you before, I know exactly what I hear and what it is actually played.

Allow me to bring to your attention, also, that you use twice the verb "suggest" (and "again suggest"). So, we are not that sure, anyway. But, even if you have the strongest convictions on this question, I won't contest them. You hear what you hear, you happy with what you have; so, I guess that's enough.

On a final note, I wish to reiterate that for decades I have dealt with all kind of labels, manufacturing companies, producers, musicians and people who love music with passion. In all these years, I have had a great variety of listening experiences leading to my sensitivity on the product(s) quality factor. It doesn't mean that any sort of "collector" has to experience the "same thing" and, much more to respond the same way.

So, my suggestion: be happy with what you have. Ignore (or keep somewhere in your memory) my unconvincing findings, remarks, etc. and let's focus on something we may find more "tangible" for substantive discussion: music itself! So, to challenge you (in the best possible sense of the word): do you listen to Chamber Music? If yes, to what extent (do you need any "suggestion" for further exploration)? If not, what is your main interests in Classical Music (or even beyond)?

Let's see if this deviation may lead us to some more interesting pathways.

Parla

I think, Vic, either you read my posts as you like or you are "obsessed" with my views on such a side issue.

Anyway, if you wish to waste your and my energy on that, so be it: I never said "all" the reissues deteriorate faster than the "originals". On the contrary, I said, based on each case, we might have an inferior or superior product, based on what the label wishes to pursue. The possible deterioration of a reissue (and not only; there are also poorly manifactured "originals") may take place due to cheap materials and poorer manufacturing process. (I gave the example of "pirate" products that sound as identical to the original, but, sooner than later, they expire...).

So, the ball back to you, Vic,

Parla