[Harry Lavo]

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.









Gotcha!

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz?

Not really. Too much good music to snooze. Let's talk music, acoustics,
and recording, shall we?

First up, the Bis recording of the Mendelssohn String Quintets. These are
obviously recorded in what the pros call "a good room". Hard to tell if it
is a studio or not, but I suspect it is. Very little ambiance per se (or of
short enough duration that one is not aware of the "room" per se). But a
very warm, natural sounding recording. The string sound, particularly of
the violas and cello on ths recording are outstanding, as are the dynamics.
Bis is noted for the quality of sound in its SACD's, and this one does not
disappoint. The Quintet #2, which is the better known of the two, ranks
right up there with Brahms, Beethoven, Schuman, and Schubert for
classical-romantic chamber music for this type ensemble. It is in B flat
major and has a "dark" quality it...a formal, serious piece of music. The
lesser known and earlier Qunitet #1 is the airier, more tuneful work. It
has a beautiful Intermezzo as a second movement, the third is a scherzo, and
the fourth, marked "allegro vivace" is just that. In the Scherzo,
Mendelssohn writes a section that literally sounds like a machine gun, with
such explosive and rapid bowing of the cello that it feels like their is
fire aimed in your direction. The Bis recording captures that in glorious
sound...the strings, particularly as I said of the cello and violas, have a
depth, luster, and bite to them that is completely natural to them, without
any of the "edge" that often creeps into digital recording of strings. I've
been privy to listening to and often recording literally dozens upon dozens
of string trios, quartets, and quintets (even a few sextets) and this is as
good as it gets in a commercial medium.

Now we turn to the Channel Classics recording of piano-cello Sonatas. Many
folk think Channel Classics right now to be doing the best job of recording
chamber music of any company...I don't agree as a general statement. I find
many of their recordings have too much "room sound" and they tend to record
in overly bright, live venues. The same is true of this recording of the
Shastokovich-Prokofiev-Britten Sonatoas...but not to the same degree. Of
all the Channel Classics I own, this IMO is the best sounding. Both piano
and cello are beautifully captured with a natural acoustic and ambience
surrounding them...obviously recorded on location in a church, as Channel
Classics tend to be. The piano in particular has the upper end "clang" of a
large Steinway with none of the shrillness or grating edge that many
recordings have. My friend Barbara plays a nine-foot Steinway at home as
well as in concert, and I know the sound well in a variety of settings.
This is a really good recording of a Steinway in concert. The Shastakovich
and Prokofiev are wonderful pieces, IMO. In fact, Shatakovich's chamber
music is my absolute favorite of all composers...and I like his chamber
works even more than his symphonies and larger scale work. The D Minor
Sonata on this disk is a moving, urgent, inventive piece and draws a
wonderful performance from these two young men. The Prokofiev Sonata in C
Major is a mellow piece...one of Prokofiev's quietest chamber works....but
full of his usual invention. I admit an undue fondness for Prokofiev...his
Love for Three Oranges Suite (Pittsurgh Symphony, Steinberg) was one of the
first two classical recordings I bought for myself as a teenager (Strauss's
Der Rosenkavelier was the other). And I have a fairly decent selection of
this works both large scale and small at this point in my life. And then
there is the Britten. Enough said.

In my estimation, chamber music is an even greater "fit" to multichannel
sound than orchestral music. The very best orchestral recordings tend to
knock down the walls, but five channels is barely enough to really simulate
a large venue. On the other hand, five speakers and the intimacy of a
living room or listening room are a much more natural environment for
chamber music, and the "gap" between recorded sound and room sound is
narrower, so the recordings develop a "they are here" inimacy when well
recorded that is really captivating. The "holographic" sound stage that is
so difficult to create in a multi-purpose listening environment with stereo
is relatively easy to create with multichannel.

So, last night I had a concert....

I agree with Shhhh! and Arny that everything else being equal, a live
performance of chamber music in a wonderful setting really is "something
better". But short of that, being able to recreate that environment in the
home, when the opportunity and mood are right, as happened for me last
night, is a wonderful thing. When I think back to the very beginning of the
Hi-Fi Era (and I was there in the early '50's) it amazes and delights me
that now, within one man's lifetime, I can be treated to music that is so
close to "being there".

I'm not sure it really does get better than this.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Feb 24, 2:09 pm, "Harry Lavo" wrote:

I agree with Shhhh! and Arny that everything else being equal, a live
performance of chamber music in a wonderful setting really is "something
better". But short of that, being able to recreate that environment in the
home, when the opportunity and mood are right, as happened for me last
night, is a wonderful thing. When I think back to the very beginning of the
Hi-Fi Era (and I was there in the early '50's) it amazes and delights me
that now, within one man's lifetime, I can be treated to music that is so
close to "being there".

Personally, I think the biggest debate in high-end audio is the "High-
fidelity means (and only means) absolute accuracy to the original
recording" versus "I try to get a small sense of a live experience in
my listening area."

I go for the latter.

I'm not sure it really does get better than this.

If you can glean the essence of a live experience in your home, it
probably doesn't.

[Harry Lavo]

"Soundhaspriority" wrote in message
...
This is the best piece on the high end listening experience I have ever
read in this forum. I'm annotating simply to keep the discussion going.


I'm flattered, thanks.


"Harry Lavo" wrote in message
. ..
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.
[snip]
The Bis recording captures that in glorious sound...the strings,
particularly as I said of the cello and violas, have a depth, luster, and
bite to them that is completely natural to them, without any of the
"edge" that often creeps into digital recording of strings. I've been
privy to listening to and often recording literally dozens upon dozens of
string trios, quartets, and quintets (even a few sextets) and this is as
good as it gets in a commercial medium.

Now we turn to the Channel Classics recording of piano-cello Sonatas.
Many folk think Channel Classics right now to be doing the best job of
recording chamber music of any company...I don't agree as a general
statement. I find many of their recordings have too much "room sound"
and they tend to record in overly bright, live venues.
[snip]

In my estimation, chamber music is an even greater "fit" to multichannel
sound than orchestral music. The very best orchestral recordings tend to
knock down the walls, but five channels is barely enough to really
simulate a large venue. On the other hand, five speakers and the
intimacy of a living room or listening room are a much more natural
environment for chamber music, and the "gap" between recorded sound and
room sound is narrower, so the recordings develop a "they are here"
inimacy when well recorded that is really captivating. The "holographic"
sound stage that is so difficult to create in a multi-purpose listening
environment with stereo is relatively easy to create with multichannel.

I was an "early adopter" of synthesized surround, but I have shied away
from SACD/DVD-A, because of the cost, and because early indications were
that the commercial offerings were not acoustically well thought out. But
with recent reports from you and Kalman Rubinson, I should rethink that.

Having 1500 disks, most of the obtained from bargain bins, I was in no
mood to repurchase. On philosophical grounds, I prefer not to hem in my
taste by a technical requirement. If I were to develop a strong preference
for the advanced formats, the diversity of choice would lessen, and that
could diminish my personal aesthetic sense.

Back in the mid-seventies during the brief quad era, I had a Dynopter and
two small ADC speakers supplementing the main speaker pair. Despite the
crudeness of the setup, I received as much pleasure from matrix setting on
many recordings (especially jazz and folk) as I did from the quad gear I
also used.

The one thing my current system doesn't have, because I use three audio-only
preamps, is some form of synthesized surround. I expect that it could add
to the listening pleasure on many stereo-only jazz recordings.


I have three synthesizers in my system: a Sony TA-E1000ESD, a Sony EP9ES,
and a Yamaha RXV1. My original argument in favor of synthesized surround
was that delay time, which varies with speaker setup, was not adjustable,
at least with early SACD/DVD-A systems, and that the speaker arrangement
was unnaturally constrained to one geometry. Perhaps part or all of this
is now invalid; certainly, the positive reports cannot be ignored.

I used to natter JA about the absence of inclusion of synthesized
multichannel. Ironically, my interest in multichannel has been somewhat
displaced by the acquisition and placement of four pairs of main speakers.
To my surprise, I found that there was a way to place each set so as to
mimick or evoke the sound of a particular hall:
Thiel 2.3: Carnegie Hall
Polk LSi15: Verizon Hall at Kimmel Center, Philadelphia
NEAR 50m: I recently discovered these to mimick Merkin Hall in NYC.
Kef Reference III: unknown.

The NEARs are placed on a diagonal with a very large 120 degree spread.
Unlike any other speaker I've experienced, there is no hole in the center,
perhaps due to the rather small 3 inch metal midrange. If the angle spread
is reduced, tonality suffers, perhaps due to interaural crosstalk from the
wide dispersion.

The diagional placement sometimes works very well...I've used it at times in
the past. Never had speakers at 120 degrees, however.

Sitting close to a pair of speakers with a 120 degree sound stage angle,
and no hole, provides an experience I thought was the province of
multichannel surround. The Thiels are flatter, but are better at 90
degrees, and the Polks less than that, perhaps 60 degrees. The Kefs are
stuffed into the corners, and are part of a rectangular IEC 5.1 array.

What is the cost of these disks? What are the prospects for continued
production? Wasn't the continued support of Sony in question?

The disks can be very expensive bought from specialty retailers, and
especially if you buy Japanese or Hong Kong imports I don't. I buy mostly
from CDNow, occassionally from Amazon and other places. They generally
discount off 10-20% and so I end up paying $13.00-17.00 per disk. However,
sometimes you can get specials at places like J&R Music World, or closeouts
at the Bershire Music Outlet that are down in the "under $10" range. Then
there is eBay, which a lot of folk use....


So, last night I had a concert....

I agree with Shhhh! and Arny that everything else being equal, a live
performance of chamber music in a wonderful setting really is "something
better". But short of that, being able to recreate that environment in
the home, when the opportunity and mood are right, as happened for me
last night, is a wonderful thing. When I think back to the very
beginning of the Hi-Fi Era (and I was there in the early '50's) it amazes
and delights me that now, within one man's lifetime, I can be treated to
music that is so close to "being there".

I'm not sure it really does get better than this.
Only once have I heard live acoustics with enthusiasm that rivals yours.
The Philadelphia Chamber Music Society used to have the use of a hall in
the new Convention Center, seating about a thousand. The stage had a
little curved shell of hard wood behind the ensemble, the Skampa String
Quartet. The sound I heard from a not particularly favorable seat was far
superior to the CD I bought on the way out the door.

BTW, with respect to our possible future collaboration, I have now wired
up the listening room to the DAW, so that the IEC array with the Kefs as
mains may now be used for multichannel mastering. It involved a 48 foot
FireWire run, a 64 foot USB run, and 75 feet of video cable.

Wow, that's a feat. I too can go quad to the main system from either my
4-track MTR-12 or from the DAW in the basement, but for me that is simply a
through-the-floor passthrough of four analog cables.

[Jenn]

In article ,
"Harry Lavo" wrote:

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.









Gotcha!

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz?

Not really. Too much good music to snooze. Let's talk music, acoustics,
and recording, shall we?

First up, the Bis recording of the Mendelssohn String Quintets. These are
obviously recorded in what the pros call "a good room". Hard to tell if it
is a studio or not, but I suspect it is. Very little ambiance per se (or of
short enough duration that one is not aware of the "room" per se). But a
very warm, natural sounding recording. The string sound, particularly of
the violas and cello on ths recording are outstanding, as are the dynamics.
Bis is noted for the quality of sound in its SACD's, and this one does not
disappoint. The Quintet #2, which is the better known of the two, ranks
right up there with Brahms, Beethoven, Schuman, and Schubert for
classical-romantic chamber music for this type ensemble. It is in B flat
major and has a "dark" quality it...a formal, serious piece of music. The
lesser known and earlier Qunitet #1 is the airier, more tuneful work. It
has a beautiful Intermezzo as a second movement, the third is a scherzo, and
the fourth, marked "allegro vivace" is just that. In the Scherzo,
Mendelssohn writes a section that literally sounds like a machine gun, with
such explosive and rapid bowing of the cello that it feels like their is
fire aimed in your direction. The Bis recording captures that in glorious
sound...the strings, particularly as I said of the cello and violas, have a
depth, luster, and bite to them that is completely natural to them, without
any of the "edge" that often creeps into digital recording of strings. I've
been privy to listening to and often recording literally dozens upon dozens
of string trios, quartets, and quintets (even a few sextets) and this is as
good as it gets in a commercial medium.

Now we turn to the Channel Classics recording of piano-cello Sonatas. Many
folk think Channel Classics right now to be doing the best job of recording
chamber music of any company...I don't agree as a general statement. I find
many of their recordings have too much "room sound" and they tend to record
in overly bright, live venues. The same is true of this recording of the
Shastokovich-Prokofiev-Britten Sonatoas...but not to the same degree. Of
all the Channel Classics I own, this IMO is the best sounding. Both piano
and cello are beautifully captured with a natural acoustic and ambience
surrounding them...obviously recorded on location in a church, as Channel
Classics tend to be. The piano in particular has the upper end "clang" of a
large Steinway with none of the shrillness or grating edge that many
recordings have. My friend Barbara plays a nine-foot Steinway at home as
well as in concert, and I know the sound well in a variety of settings.
This is a really good recording of a Steinway in concert. The Shastakovich
and Prokofiev are wonderful pieces, IMO. In fact, Shatakovich's chamber
music is my absolute favorite of all composers...and I like his chamber
works even more than his symphonies and larger scale work. The D Minor
Sonata on this disk is a moving, urgent, inventive piece and draws a
wonderful performance from these two young men. The Prokofiev Sonata in C
Major is a mellow piece...one of Prokofiev's quietest chamber works....but
full of his usual invention. I admit an undue fondness for Prokofiev...his
Love for Three Oranges Suite (Pittsurgh Symphony, Steinberg) was one of the
first two classical recordings I bought for myself as a teenager (Strauss's
Der Rosenkavelier was the other). And I have a fairly decent selection of
this works both large scale and small at this point in my life. And then
there is the Britten. Enough said.

In my estimation, chamber music is an even greater "fit" to multichannel
sound than orchestral music. The very best orchestral recordings tend to
knock down the walls, but five channels is barely enough to really simulate
a large venue. On the other hand, five speakers and the intimacy of a
living room or listening room are a much more natural environment for
chamber music, and the "gap" between recorded sound and room sound is
narrower, so the recordings develop a "they are here" inimacy when well
recorded that is really captivating. The "holographic" sound stage that is
so difficult to create in a multi-purpose listening environment with stereo
is relatively easy to create with multichannel.

So, last night I had a concert....

I agree with Shhhh! and Arny that everything else being equal, a live
performance of chamber music in a wonderful setting really is "something
better". But short of that, being able to recreate that environment in the
home, when the opportunity and mood are right, as happened for me last
night, is a wonderful thing. When I think back to the very beginning of the
Hi-Fi Era (and I was there in the early '50's) it amazes and delights me
that now, within one man's lifetime, I can be treated to music that is so
close to "being there".

I'm not sure it really does get better than this.

Great; thanks for this, Harry.

For my part, I drove 4 hours each way to Orange County (CA) to hear my
friends acoustic finger-style guitarists Mark Hanson and Doug Smith at a
small church. Just beautiful.

While passing through L.A. I dropped by the two largest remaining CD
stores in town, Virgin and Amoeba. I was stunned at how few people were
at Virgin on a Saturday afternoon (compared to the past) and most of the
people at Amoeba seemed to be in the used CD and LP sections. The bell
is truly tolling, it seems. Anyway, I bought the SFS/MTT Mahler 6
(thereby catching up on this series), another in the Gardiner Bach
Cantata series (I'm collecting all of the cantatas by various
performers), and the SFS/MTT video on Stravinsky. BTW, for anyone
interested in classical music, that series, called "Keeping Score" is a
MUST, IMV. It's also a great series on how classical music works, how
orchestras and conductors operate, etc. Contemporary; not stuffy.
There are 4 in the series now. Just fantastic.