Fresh OOP product but considering the particular recordings not too surprising. Do have a deeper understanding though for why many of these fetch the prices they do with most of them being around 50 years old.
Great interview! Thanks do much for posting the link. I loved the all the stories and also liked what he said about how any recording medium, whether it be analog or digital, alters sound.
Here: http://www.soundfountain.com/amb/mercury.html Forgive me if it's on someone else's quote, but I thought it was yours. Very cool in-depth site re: Mercury/35mm film audio recording.
Today I happened to score the SACD of Janis/Dorati's Pictures at an Exhibition which finally completed my Living Presence SACD collection! Took a long time to fill in the missing pieces.
By the way, if you want to hear a "modern" version of the Mercury approach, with a genuine-Mercury pedigree, you might want to check out the Delos digital recordings made in the early 80s with the Philadelphia Orchestra playing Tchaikowsky symphonies, produced by Harold Lawrence and engineered by Bob Eberenz, both formerly with Mercury in the good ol' days. Three omni mics were used. Mr. Lawrence's comments about the experience can be read here (NSFW): http://ronpenndorf.com/journalofrecordedmusic10.html Matt
Wow, I am interested. It should be a very different sound than John Eargle's ORTF method in the later Delos discs although many of those are outstanding as well. Thanks for the info and link.
Yes, I have all these Delos LP Versions that were available over the time (except those few I did't want musicwise), they are sounding very nice for digital recordings, very silky strings. I wouldn't have brought them in connection to the Mercury's myself however...
I'm looking forward to hearing the Mercury approach with B&K mikes. Also a Soundstream digital recorder - I've heard an inordinately large number of good digital recordings captured on this machine.
The ProArte Digital recordings were also made with the Soundstream recorder. Not bad either for digital ones especially of that era.
From Fennell/Eastman Winds Screamers CD reissue (1991): Love the Fennell/Eastman Winds recordings. These circus marches are a bit shrill-sounding and fatiguing, I must say. Question is, is it on account of the 35mm tape or the house Fine sound?
For what it's worth, the original Everest issues on lp and two track reel to rel tape explain exactly what was done to produce them. In both cases, they were made from a two track mixdown of the three track original parts. I have a few titles that overlap between the two track tapes and the lp's. In all cases, there's a little bit of tape flutter at the very beginning and end of each recorded segment. THe flutter is exactly identical for the lp and the tape. Perhaps the same tape was used, with the roll off applied during the lp cutting. The lp's are rolled off in the bass and treble, but otherwise they sound very much like the two track tapes. The two tracks are easily among the best recordings I have. Some of them were not recorded on 35mm while others were.
And I thought my new turntable was suffering a catastrophic motor or bearing failure when playing these Classic Records reissues. Except: 1. Pitch stability test of my new RPM 5.1 turntable (sine wav from the Ultimate Test LP): http://www.sendspace.com/file/jgaw2h OK, so it does not have the precision of an atomic clock, but this is perfectly acceptable for a decent quality turntable and I would defy the vast majority of the human population to be able to hear this specific level of wow when playing normal music as opposed to a sine wave (official spec for my RPM 5.1 is 0.07% wow and flutter). 2. Extract from last seconds of Pines of Rome - CD remastering on Classic Records. Wow is very annoying. This is already well beyond what I am able to tolerate: http://www.sendspace.com/file/b0rnom 3. Same extract from the LP version. Absolutely heart-breaking. The cumulative combination of the source, lathe, turntable and less than absolutely perfectly flat and centred pressing produces a catastrophic result. I have heard wind-up grammophones with more speed precision than this: http://www.sendspace.com/file/sluc7e I wonder whether the vinyl was even remastered on the same "pass" as the digital versions. Can't help wondering if the vinyl was remastered after the digital versions and the tape drag and wow were even worse the second time around. If it were not for their historical value, I wouldn't have even bothered with some of these 35mm recordings. I've been comparing my Speaker's Corner classical LP reissues (standard tape sources) with my CD equivalents and the subjectively detectable wow is pretty much the same for both CD and vinyl, so I know the turntable is fine, as evidenced also by the test LP result. I also can't help wondering if the pitch stability of the lathe used to cut these LPs is in question (I hate to even speculate that this might be the case, but objectively it now seems to me to be a valid question). The massive increase in wow on the vinyl versions compared to the digital versions seems to me to be much more than what my turntable could contribute given the very good sine wave result. I know wow is cumulative, but I think my turntable is honestly the least of the equipment to blame here. And others who have also complained have far, far better turntables than I do. John Sunier said some of these releases were unlistenable due to the wow, and he was reviewing the HDAD versions! I recently ordered the full set of the Classic Records Everest Beethoven Symphonies (I desperately wanted it on HDAD but it was never to be), but that was before I heard the terrible wow on the Classic Records vinyl. I am starting to wish I had ordered the Speaker's Corner Karajan set instead.
So....35mm session tracks recorded with Dolby A on the mag film???? Recorded May, 1967, so I think this may be pre-Dolby. Maybe just a compander of some sort? By the way, this was issued by MCA Classics in the 1980s, and even though it's mastered from a dupe tape, the sound is really something to behold.
I thought I had this recording, but instead Omega released an earlier one recorded in the late '50s. I've just order the MCA disc. Overall I've had very good experiences from the MCA discs from this time period. Their covers are understated.
Not to rain on anyone's parade but what is the chance, if this is anything other than Dolby A, that these Copland Steinberg master tapes will be decoded correctly for CD? Perhaps the dupe tape was decoded already?
The CD sounds gorgeous. My copy was sent to me directly by Robert Fine's son, with his full stamp of approval.
Well, that's the question. May of 1967 would have, I think, predated Dolby A. I'll try to find out. This is an interesting sounding recording because it was not done in Syria Mosque, their usual home, but at Soldiers and Sailors Memorial Hall: which has a wide, shallow stage, and open space to the side of the stage, rather than a typical proscenium situation. This allowed for more mics and more-widely-spaced miking than usual, and the soundstage on this recording is as vast as the great outdoors. Too bad the 35mm mag elements are long, long gone, but even from dubs, it's impressive. (Billy the Kid and Appalachian Spring are from this session. The other tracks were recorded in Utah, i.e., different orchestra and venue.) It's rare to see an understated statement regarding understatement, but you are correct!
Wow! I just listened to a copy that just arrived. What a large soundstage!!! Did you say more microphones, Matt? Bob Fine? I thought he was a three-mic purist!!! It sounds great, although if I am v-e-r-y critical, there is perhaps one short bit of imperfect intonation. I assume this is due to the wide but shallow soundstage. It could have been hard of the musicians to hear each other. But it's a passionate performance of an American favorite classic in beautiful sound. Probably walked past it before.
