Jump to content

What percentage of time do you spend listening to "audiophile" worthy content?


Recommended Posts

I just realised that I spend the majority of time listening to good, but not true "audiophile" musical content.

 

Of course I will totally discount the time I spend listening to old 78s :) 

 

However, for example, yesterday I listened to 4 LPs, all with wonderfully enjoyable music, but  2 were RCA Red seal mono, one was a CBS purple mono, and one was a Record Society Melbourne mono - all 120g vinyl, guessing from 50s, maybe one from the 60s.  The quality is excellent, don't get me wrong.  The labels produced well recorded and engineered stuff, but it's not  modern pressing,remastered,  half speed mastered, direct to disc, direct metal master, 45 rpm, 180g vinyl, or any of the things we pay more and more money for in seeking audio nirvana.

 

and I don't care :)    Played on my old Rek-o-kut 16" TT using a lowly AT3600L cartridge with elliptical stylus upgrade.  Valve amplification (preamp, and SET power amp) with class D  biamping to my Osborn  Eclipse speakers, the music just sings throughout my house.

  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 111
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

The last thing I do is buy music for its " audiophile cred ".  I would quickly off myself if all I played was Diana Krall and alike music.😉     I buy lots of new releases on vinyl and never

Hello, I’ve never been a big fan of the term ‘audiophile’ either for people or vinyl albums for that matter, so I guess it comes down to your definition of ‘audiophile’. I still have a lot of vin

I just realised that I spend the majority of time listening to good, but not true "audiophile" musical content.   Of course I will totally discount the time I spend listening to old 78s  

Interesting, my post went to "pending" mode, and I now see that's normal for a post in this section.  All the time I spent here, and never realised as I obviously mostly post in the speacialised sections.  Some posts, however, just seem general to me.

 

So just to add a bit to what I was talking about.  I am not putting down the quality of the non-audiophile sources and equipment.  In fact, I am saying it is very high quality anyway, hence I see less need to always just play the "best" stuff.    Just as well, as it would get very limiting.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The last thing I do is buy music for its " audiophile cred ".  I would quickly off myself if all I played was Diana Krall and alike music.😉

 

  I buy lots of new releases on vinyl and never have I had a 2nd thought about buying it due to the fact that it may not be audiophile approved or sound shitty.   In fact in my big rig I love listening to lofi music -

 

 If only a small % of your music is enjoyable on your system, time to get a new system imo.

 

  That said, most of new stuff sounds excellent, although some of it sounds naff as well.  Doesn't really stop my enjoyment of it thou.  

 

what have I bought in the last couple of weeks

 

L'épée ‎– Diabolique - sounds pretty thin and undynamic - music has a 60's psych and pretty cool

 

Bob Moses – Days Gone By  - sounds open dynamic and pretty amazing tbh  - very good downtempo electronic

 

Darkstar  ‎– Civic Jams - new album and sounds rich and thick, but in a good way for this leftfield electronic band.

 

Jason Molina ‎– Eight Gates - this won't set any audiophile backflips, but sounds direct, dark and totally emotionally overwhelming.

 

Fontaines D.C. ‎– A Hero's Death - new Indie rock and sounds lively, sharp with plenty attack in the guitar - excellent recording - but definitely not audiophile approved.

 

Frank Sinatra ‎– Frank Sinatra Sings For Only The Lonely (60th Anniversary Edition) - sounds really clean and audiophile approved

 

Ride ‎– This Is Not A Safe Place - cut @ 45rpm for supposed better sound quality, however sounds a bit of a mess sonically lacking top end extension - music is excellent thou and no issue spinning it.

 

Grant Green ‎– Nigeria - new remastered Blue Note album sounds amazing, great music and audiophile approved.

 

 

Personally I think its important you voice your system to be able to play and enjoy almost all your albums so you can continue to be encouraged to listen to and find new music

 

cheers

 

 

Edited by metal beat
  • Like 13
  • Love 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I do have a preference for good recordings, and the real abysmal recordings don't stay with me, but they don't need to be certified 'audiophile' by any means :)

Link to post
Share on other sites


None mate. Did a bit back in the 80's but even Windham Hill was above Audiophile Music content.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, metal beat said:

The last thing I do is buy music for its " audiophile cred ". 

 

I can be tempted, but the price makes me think twice.   Then I go and play the original, or whatever pressing I have, and no longer have the urge to buy the Mofi release, or whatever.

 

34 minutes ago, metal beat said:

Personally I think its important you voice your system to be able to play and enjoy almost all your albums so you can continue to be encouraged to listen to and find new music

 

That's a good thought.    The only variation I would add is that you may have a separate system for specialist needs (like my mono system).  Mostly though, yes, the main system has to deal with the bulk of what I throw at it.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, muon* said:

I do have a preference for good recordings, and the real abysmal recordings don't stay with me, but they don't need to be certified 'audiophile' by any means :)

 

Yes,  terrible recordings can happen.  Maybe being "audiophile" release increases the chance of it being good.  I mean, would they bother doing an audiophile version of a bad thing to start with?

 

In a way, it's more satisfying to find a good recording accidentally.  I am thinking of a mono RCA Heifetz recording I played this morning.   Just him and a piano, and that violin just sang.

Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Wimbo said:

None mate. Did a bit back in the 80's but even Windham Hill was above Audiophile Music content.

 

I do have a couple of Windham Hill.    I put them in a category like Chesky.  Well done recordings, but some of the content is, well, less entertaining. :) 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites


1 minute ago, aussievintage said:

 

I can be tempted, but the price makes me think twice.   Then I go and play the original, or whatever pressing I have, and no longer have the urge to buy the Mofi release, or whatever.

 

 

That's a good thought.    The only variation I would add is that you may have a separate system for specialist needs (like my mono system).  Mostly though, yes, the main system has to deal with the bulk of what I throw at it.

 

Yes, those audiophile reissues that seem to be released time and time again can be tempting, but they are getting more and more expensive.    If you don't already have the album, I can totally understand buying them  - however

 

  These days I look to see if I am happy with my existing copy,  I don't buy a reissue - unless its for some band/artist you really really dig.

 

  Yes different front ends for different recordings is very handy and pleasurable - variety is the spice  - I have 4 turntables running, so I am luck to sort of have this covered.

 

cheers

Link to post
Share on other sites

'The better the performance the worse the recording' is one of those humorous mock-axioms.

 

Yes, I will listen to poor recordings of artists I love, but at a much lower rotation than if those were well-recorded, no doubt.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, tripitaka said:

'The better the performance the worse the recording' is one of those humorous mock-axioms.

 

 

It has truth in it.  That is why I love live albums.  Yes, nearly always the sound is not as good as a studio album, but the performance is nearly always much better.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Since the advent of high quality highres classical music downloads, I had to replace almost my entire collection of music over the last decade but my percentage of audiophile quality audio listening has shifted to almost 100%.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites


7 minutes ago, Ittaku said:

Since the advent of high quality highres classical music downloads, I had to replace almost my entire collection of music over the last decade but my percentage of audiophile quality audio listening has shifted to almost 100%.

 

I am very different.  Back when CDs came out, I started down the road of replacing my collection, but called a halt soon enough.  Vowed never to do it again, so I went back and improved my vinyl system, cleaned up the old records, and expanded my library of vinyl. 

 

Now we have downloads to purchase, and even streaming, which I see as a type of very convenient rental system.   I am happy with my commitment to vinyl, and very rarely - maybe twice, have I purchased a download album.  I have indulged in cheap $1 and $2 CDs at the charity shops however.  These get ripped to storage.

 

After going full hi-res, do you find you now can't listen to old-tech stuff like Redbook standard digital?  What about ordinary vinyl?   

Link to post
Share on other sites

I just love listening to vinyl, whether audiophile or "standard". Most of my real hi-end records were acquired years ago. For example I got a stack of Supercuts back when they became available through Hifi Now for sensible prices. Discogs would tend to suggest that today, my copy of Sergeant Peppers is worth a small fortune. I don't listen to my audiophile stuff any differently though - they're just enjoyable music. I am perturbed by the ever increasing cost of vinyl both new and used. IMO, Discogs is unwittingly predicating the 2nd hand vinyl market. Typically, I am finding record stores in Adelaide selling albums for exactly the Discogs best listed sale price, regardless of the specific record's condition.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, aussievintage said:

 

I am very different.  Back when CDs came out, I started down the road of replacing my collection, but called a halt soon enough.  Vowed never to do it again, so I went back and improved my vinyl system, cleaned up the old records, and expanded my library of vinyl. 

 

Now we have downloads to purchase, and even streaming, which I see as a type of very convenient rental system.   I am happy with my commitment to vinyl, and very rarely - maybe twice, have I purchased a download album.  I have indulged in cheap $1 and $2 CDs at the charity shops however.  These get ripped to storage.

 

After going full hi-res, do you find you now can't listen to old-tech stuff like Redbook standard digital?  What about ordinary vinyl?   

 

I have a few hundred CDs on the shelf that I never listen to any more. The good ones I ripped to my storage but it's only about a dozen of them. I don't listen to vinyl. I'm not against 44kHz recordings either, as even they've matured in the classical world. It's rare to get a truly bad recording even from a major label nowadays. At worst I may not like the balance chosen in volume mixing of the instruments, but they never screw with tonality or dynamics.

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Bisguittin said:

I am perturbed by the ever increasing cost of vinyl both new and used.

 

I may well be convincing myself I don't need Audiophile records, just because of those prices. 👍

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites


24 minutes ago, Ittaku said:

It's rare to get a truly bad recording even from a major label nowadays. At worst I may not like the balance chosen in volume mixing of the instruments, but they never screw with tonality or dynamics.

Interesting.   Nice to hear in fact.   

 

I once had a conversation with someone who insisted performance was much more important than quality of recording (with reference to classical performances).  I find that I need a certain fairly good level of  recording quality before I can get involved with the music.  I think a bad sound can be distracting.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I buy music that I like. 

 

If it is 'not perfect' quality on a technical sounding level, then oh well, I'll deal with it.  So long as it is not actually bad, in which case, yeah that sucks.

 

Sure, there are times I play albums because they sound good on my system because they are very well recorded, but I still like the music.

 

As much as I like toys, and fiddling with things, the end game of this is listening to music that I enjoy.  

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, aussievintage said:

 

 

It has truth in it.  That is why I love live albums.  Yes, nearly always the sound is not as good as a studio album, but the performance is nearly always much better.

Get Ya Ya Ya's out. Average recording but God damn, what a recording!!

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that if you take this rather manic hobby seriously, then there is nothing for it but to listen to seriously good ‘high quality’ recordings. Anything less does not satisfy or comes across as pointless to the hobby and the par excellence equipment that we pursue.

 

I personally cannot listen to sh_te or even average recordings, the performance comes across in an unrealistic way ...it spoils the illusion of good stereo replay, like its coming out of electronic equipment or man-made boxes. Are we not after all, trying to recreate a live performance in our lounge rooms with our expensive and well thought out audio systems? What is the point of playing crap recordings through such a system, surely that will definitely spoil the suspension of disbelief that we are trying so hard to achieve.

 

Cheers,
 

Steve.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have great memories of listening to tapes on my Walkman. I really enjoy some music on the car radio, then I hear the same song on CD and I am amazed by how much more I enjoy it, and then I later hear it on car radio again and I still enjoy it. 
 

I find that it's more about the music then the quality: to a point. There is a limit where something sounds so bad (based on poor quality recording or radio noise, etc) that I would rather turn off the stereo as my ears and brain hurts when something sounds really bad to me :) 

 

These days I tend to prefer digital recordings. But overall it's not the medium but the content that matters. As long as it's above a certain quality threshold. That threshold is not 'audiophile' for me, it's much lower!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Went thru a phase of buying direct to disks, like the Sheffield Lab series, and half speed masters some 35 or so years ago and they got well played on my Thorens 125 with Supex MC. A couple of years ago got the Sacd binge for a while but realised quite a mixed bag.  The good is really good, the rest .. not so.  Also acquired a collection of MFSL's CD's. 

 

More recently Invested in digital and mainly listen to Tidal nowadays, and enjoy good MQA recordings.  Need to invest some time and $$$ in getting my vinyl gear to an equivalent state.  But the ease and quality digital content available is very attractive and gets a serious workout most days.  5 days a week at least 2 hours.

Edited by Rosco8
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Rosco8 said:

But the ease and quality digital content available is very attractive and gets a serious workout most days.

I am glad to see some of us admitting to this disgusting behaviour.

I am constantly battling dust am at a point where I am contemplating the D world, but not yet.😟

  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I buy records/CDs for the music, and I play it for the music.  Have bought a few "audiophile" disks because they were available and I was curious about the sound quality, but haven't played them after one or two spins because they were not to my taste.  Don't get me wrong, I will always enjoy my music more if the audio quality is better, and will celebrate when these two coincide on a disk.  But also really enjoy recordings from 78s and bootlegs where the quality may not be the best, but if that's the only way to enjoy the music, all the better. 

 

Not that I will accept anything, there have been some CDs of recordings sourced from 78's that have been so processed by No-Noise/Cedar/etc that I couldn't listen to them.  And I'm sure I would struggle with an audiophile release of a modern recording with the vocalist heavily auto-tuned.  It's such a turn-off.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Rosco8 said:

 

 

More recently Invested in digital and mainly listen to Tidal nowadays, and enjoy good MQA recordings.  ........

.

 

 But the ease and quality digital content available is very attractive and gets a serious workout most days.  5 days a week at least 2 hours.

 

That is soo me-high consumption ,5Days/2 hours.

 

Because of this always on the look out for new(even if its old) music that ticks my mostly critical ,but not fully understood preferences.

 

So not SQ dependant nowadays but I get those people that are .

 

Bob ludwig Masterdisk.

 

I have chased the Dragon 🙂

 

I have a system that has  some components that were around for the golden dawn of LP with its up and down Audio quality

and feel this allows long periods of listening to music without the dreaded Fatigue setting in.

 

Tone is everything.

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, aussievintage said:

I just realised that I spend the majority of time listening to good, but not true "audiophile" musical content.

 

Of course I will totally discount the time I spend listening to old 78s :) 

 

However, for example, yesterday I listened to 4 LPs, all with wonderfully enjoyable music, but  2 were RCA Red seal mono, one was a CBS purple mono, and one was a Record Society Melbourne mono - all 120g vinyl, guessing from 50s, maybe one from the 60s.  The quality is excellent, don't get me wrong.  The labels produced well recorded and engineered stuff, but it's not  modern pressing,remastered,  half speed mastered, direct to disc, direct metal master, 45 rpm, 180g vinyl, or any of the things we pay more and more money for in seeking audio nirvana.

 

and I don't care :)    Played on my old Rek-o-kut 16" TT using a lowly AT3600L cartridge with elliptical stylus upgrade.  Valve amplification (preamp, and SET power amp) with class D  biamping to my Osborn  Eclipse speakers, the music just sings throughout my house.


 

Hello, I’ve never been a big fan of the term ‘audiophile’ either for people or vinyl albums for that matter, so I guess it comes down to your definition of ‘audiophile’.

I still have a lot of vinyl around 120 - 130g I bought back in the early ‘70s and these nearly all sound dead quiet,  are dynamic, sound great and they’re all flat!!😄...........unlike most of the 180 or 200g vinyl that is associated with the so called ‘audiophile’ pressings you can buy today.

There are several very good labels that consistently turn out better pressings and these labels just spend more time on their QA and it really shows, but I wouldn’t be calling them ‘audiophile’ pressings. You should be getting a great sound from pretty much all your vinyl albums, not just the ‘audiophile’ pressings👍
 

Cheers,

 

Keith

Edited by cheekyboy
  • Like 9
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, audiofeline said:

Not that I will accept anything, there have been some CDs of recordings sourced from 78's that have been so processed by No-Noise/Cedar/etc that I couldn't listen to them. 

 

Yes, I can't understand why they do it.  I have a lot of experience myself now, reproducing old 78s and tweaking them using my 'Cockie' digital phono,  and it just isn't necessary. A couple of filters and tweaking the eq gets you a very nice sounding recording.

7 hours ago, audiofeline said:

And I'm sure I would struggle with an audiophile release of a modern recording with the vocalist heavily auto-tuned.  It's such a turn-off.

 

and how.    I hate that yodel they get as the auto-tune tries to decide which note to shift to.  Heard it being used live the other night, and it actually sounded like a modern CD instead of a live performance.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, cheekyboy said:

Hello, I’ve never been a big fan of the term ‘audiophile’ either for people or vinyl albums for that matter, so I guess it comes down to your definition of ‘audiophile’.

I still have a lot of vinyl around 120 - 130g I bought back in the early ‘70s and these nearly all sound dead quiet,  are dynamic, sound great and they’re all flat!!😄...........unlike most of the 180 or 200g vinyl that is associated with the so called ‘audiophile’ pressings you can buy today.

 

Agree.   I see no real value in 180g pressing.  Definitely do not sound any better.

 

33 minutes ago, cheekyboy said:

There are several very good labels that consistently turn out better pressings and these labels just spend more time on their QA and it really shows, but I wouldn’t be calling them ‘audiophile’ pressings. You should be getting a great sound from pretty much all your vinyl albums, not just the ‘audiophile’ pressings👍

 

Agree again.     The special techniques I listed, like D2D, DMM, half speed master, 45 rpm, etc, and high price, pretty much defines what I meant by audiophile.      But there are definitely lots of recordings with superb sound.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, aussievintage said:

 

Agree.   I see no real value in 180g pressing.  Definitely do not sound any better.

 Yep, a marketing ****/ploy that makes no real sense SQ wise. Very hard to buy new vinyl these days though that is not pressed on 180g vinyl. 

 

Quote

Agree again.     The special techniques I listed, like D2D, DMM, half speed master, 45 rpm, etc, and high price, pretty much defines what I meant by audiophile.      But there are definitely lots of recordings with superb sound.

Didn't audiophile start out meaning a lover of music? It has come to mean widely these days to mean an audio enthusiast who is very discerning about how the music is reproduced...............correct me if I'm wrong please?:lol: I think the marketing has gone way too far and many of these labels will claim 'audiophile quality' purely to try and sell more copies. I find that nearly all the albums I have sound good and are reproduced well, but there are pressings from many different labels that are obviously better pressings and these will jump from good/very good to simply stunning:winky:........................these latter albums I would prefer to refer to them as simply exceptionally good pressings.:thumb:

 

The alternative of course, is to take a step backward in SQ and just listen to only CD or digital.:lol:

 

Cheers,

 

Keith

Edited by cheekyboy
Link to post
Share on other sites

A good example of something borderline is spinning here this morning.

 

I am playing a copy of Van Cliburn's Tchaikovsky Concerto No.1 from 1958,  on RCA Living Stereo no less SL16142 (aussie pressing).    A few problems.  I would rate the copy as VG+ only - mostly due to some surface noise mostly near the start.  It has a worse problem though.  Some slight eccentricity of the grooves - but only audible on a few occasions.

 

Not a good start, but it is a recording at a point in history where he won the Tchaikovsky International Piano Competition in Moscow.  So interesting historically, and I think I like his playing :) 

 

The general sound of the recording though, is a bit flat and unexciting.  Not sure why.  Anyway, here we have an example of something borderline in audiophileness.  Some might say, not at all audiophile, but Living Stereo recordings are generally well respected.

Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, aussievintage said:

 

Wouldn't that be a musicophile? :) 

 

 

 

Yep, I guess technically that would be correct, but I've always thought 'audiophile' was a 'wanky' term anyway and perhaps it's a generational thing too, so I just pulled out a handful of old Sheffield Lab D2D albums and had a quick browse through the jackets of these albums and I can't find one reference to the term 'audiophile' in any of them. These were Dave Gruisin 'Discoverd Again', Larry McNeely 'Confederation', Rosie Grady's Good Time Dixie Band, Lincoln Mayorga Vol III, Charlie Bird [ST], Thelma Houston 'I've Got The Music In Me and Harry James 'Coming From A Good Place'.

 

I always thought the suffix 'phile' meant lover of, or someone who was at least very fond of something or someone. and if that was what 'audiophile' still meant these days, I could probably live with that, but I think it has come to mean something completely different and is a term that I'm pretty sure wasn't in common use for at least the first couple of decades that I've been involved in the hobby/addiction!:lol:

 

Cheers,

 

Keith

Edited by cheekyboy
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, cheekyboy said:

These were Dave Gruisin 'Discoverd Again', Larry McNeely 'Confederation', Rosie Grady's Good Time Dixie Band, Lincoln Mayorga Vol III, Charlie Bird [ST], Thelma Houston 'I've Got The Music In Me and Harry James 'Coming From A Good Place'.

 

I have the last three of them, another one with Amanda Broome, and a 3 record set - not D2D, but just as nice sounding) from Sheffield, The Moscow Sessions.  So, yeah, I do buy some "audiophile" records from time to time.

 

12 minutes ago, cheekyboy said:

I always thought the suffix 'phile' meant lover of, or someone who was at least very fond of something or someone. and if that was what 'audiophile' still meant these days, I could probably live with that, but I think it has come to mean something completely different

 

Yeah, it now seems to add the rider  "to the point of near insanity" :) 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, aussievintage said:

 

I have the last three of them, another one with Amanda Broome, and a 3 record set - not D2D, but just as nice sounding) from Sheffield, The Moscow Sessions.  So, yeah, I do buy some "audiophile" records from time to time.

 

Yep, those D2D albums were just the first 5 or 6 that I got hold of but they'll do as a sample of those albums that were mostly pressed in the late '60s to mid '70s. You say that you do buy some 'audiophile' records, but that is exactly the point I was trying to make, that with regard to these D2D albums, I would certainly put them in the very good pressings category, but I wouldn't call them 'audiophile' records. I could not find that term written anywhere on the inside and back cover of the album jackets and I think if I pulled out all those old D2D albums that I have here and read through those jackets too, I don't think I would find the term 'audiophile' in any of them.:ohmy: If you're saying these D2D albums I mentioned are 'audiophile' records, than over 90% of my my record collection would be 'audiophile' records..................but I know that's not the case.:lol:

 

Cheers,

 

Keith

Edited by cheekyboy
Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, cheekyboy said:

but I wouldn't call them 'audiophile' records.

Fair enough, and I sympathise with the dislike of the new uses for the term.  I was just browsing an online musician's store and found this with the word "Audiophile" on it  :) 

 

 

Behringer Tube Ultragain MIC500USB Audiophile Vacuum Tube Preamplifier 

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, aussievintage said:

Fair enough, and I sympathise with the dislike of the new uses for the term.  I was just browsing an online musician's store and found this with the word "Audiophile" on it  :) 

 

 

Behringer Tube Ultragain MIC500USB Audiophile Vacuum Tube Preamplifier 

 

I rest my case!!........................what a wankk!:lol: Trouble is though, that so many in this hobby will buy on brand and the 'bragging rights' that entails and I guess calling it an audiophile preamplifier, sets it apart or above other preamplifiers that are not 'audiophile'. I'm in trouble too, because not one component I own in the couple of systems I have here are branded 'audiophile.:ohmy:

 

Cheers,

 

Keith

Edited by cheekyboy
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, aussievintage said:

A good example of something borderline is spinning here this morning.

 

I am playing a copy of Van Cliburn's Tchaikovsky Concerto No.1 from 1958,  on RCA Living Stereo no less SL16142 (aussie pressing).    A few problems.  I would rate the copy as VG+ only - mostly due to some surface noise mostly near the start.  It has a worse problem though.  Some slight eccentricity of the grooves - but only audible on a few occasions.

 

Not a good start, but it is a recording at a point in history where he won the Tchaikovsky International Piano Competition in Moscow.  So interesting historically, and I think I like his playing :) 

 

The general sound of the recording though, is a bit flat and unexciting.  Not sure why.  Anyway, here we have an example of something borderline in audiophileness.  Some might say, not at all audiophile, but Living Stereo recordings are generally well respected.

The RCA Living Stereo (like the contemporary Mercury Living Presence) records are very highly regarded by audiophiles.  They were very carefully recorded live using two (or three) microphones, which is why they are regarded as having good imaging.  Classical music recording later moved to close-microphone multi-track techniques, which gives a very different sound.  So the Living Stereo recordings are a representation of being in the concert hall audience, which is why you might feel it's a bit unexciting in comparison to the more modern technique which is more of a representation of sitting on the stage with the conductor. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm, define audiophile. 
 

I only listen to music which appeals to my personal tastes. If it’s well recorded stuff I just don’t like, I don’t waste my time. I’d rather be listening to music than equipment. 

Edited by Winno
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...