DSD to Vinyl Versus Analog Tape to Vinyl

[astrotoy]

The Solti Beethoven Eroica with the VPO was produced and engineered with two different teams, one mono and one stereo. Christopher Raeburn and Gordon Parry for the mono and John Culshaw and James Brown for stereo. Decca engineer John Dunkerley told me that in the early days of stereo, they would usually assign the A team to the mono and the B team to the stereo, since the mono would be the version most people bought. This was recorded in May, 1959, only a year after Decca started releasing stereo records, but five years after they started recording in stereo (along with mono). So I am not too sure which was the A team. Wilkie did not do many recordings in Vienna, with Gordon Parry and Jimmy Brown (who moved to Vienna after marrying an Austrian woman) doing most of the engineering. Wilkie did do some. Dunkerley also told me that when there were two different teams doing the mono and stereo versions, they would often choose different takes and make different edits, so that the two recordings, mono and stereo could actually be significantly different performances.

BTW, at the same session, Decca recorded an album of Suppe Overtures (SXL2174) with the same performers and recording teams. The records may have been mastered and cut differently. My copies of both are wb groove ED1 pressings, with the Beethoven 3ED stamper, and the Suppe 57E stamper. I need to take a listen to see whether my copies have the same issues that Adrian mentions. I also have a 15ips 2 track tape dub of a master copy of the Beethoven. I've never listened to the vinyl and tape back to back to compare. Will need to do that.

Larry

 

[adrianywu]

The Solti Beethoven Eroica with the VPO was produced and engineered with two different teams, one mono and one stereo. Christopher Raeburn and Gordon Parry for the mono and John Culshaw and James Brown for stereo. Decca engineer John Dunkerley told me that in the early days of stereo, they would usually assign the A team to the mono and the B team to the stereo, since the mono would be the version most people bought. This was recorded in May, 1959, only a year after Decca started releasing stereo records, but five years after they started recording in stereo (along with mono). So I am not too sure which was the A team. Wilkie did not do many recordings in Vienna, with Gordon Parry and Jimmy Brown (who moved to Vienna after marrying an Austrian woman) doing most of the engineering. Wilkie did do some. Dunkerley also told me that when there were two different teams doing the mono and stereo versions, they would often choose different takes and make different edits, so that the two recordings, mono and stereo could actually be significantly different performances.

BTW, at the same session, Decca recorded an album of Suppe Overtures (SXL2174) with the same performers and recording teams. The records may have been mastered and cut differently. My copies of both are wb groove ED1 pressings, with the Beethoven 3ED stamper, and the Suppe 57E stamper. I need to take a listen to see whether my copies have the same issues that Adrian mentions. I also have a 15ips 2 track tape dub of a master copy of the Beethoven. I've never listened to the vinyl and tape back to back to compare. Will need to do that.

Larry

Thanks Larry. Very useful info. It is usually easy to find info on the Decca recording sessions, but somehow, I could not find the info on this one. In 1959, Parry and Wilkie were still experimenting with their stereo set up. I don't know when they finally settled on the M50 microphone without baffles. Some of the early stereo recordings used mics with a wider response separated by baffles.

 

[astrotoy]

Thanks Larry. Very useful info. It is usually easy to find info on the Decca recording sessions, but somehow, I could not find the info on this one. In 1959, Parry and Wilkie were still experimenting with their stereo set up. I don't know when they finally settled on the M50 microphone without baffles. Some of the early stereo recordings used mics with a wider response separated by baffles.

Yes, the Decca engineer who first developed the Decca Tree, Roy Wallace, used different mics than Wilkie did. Over time, Wilkie's tree became the standard for Decca classical recordings. Wallace continued to use his version of the Decca Tree, but was eventually moved over from recording engineer to designing equipment, including some of the best Decca mixers. I have been told that Wallace had some health issues. He did the majority of the early Ansermet stereo recordings starting in 1954 in Geneva, with Jimmy Walker producing (Walker was also a pretty talented conductor who appeared in some Decca recordings). These were considered experimental by Decca, but when they figured out how to make stereo records, they were mostly released beginning in 1958. Some found there way into the Decca bargain labels in the 1970's.

Larry

 

[acousticsguru]

Yes, the Decca engineer who first developed the Decca Tree, Roy Wallace, used different mics than Wilkie did. Over time, Wilkie's tree became the standard for Decca classical recordings. Wallace continued to use his version of the Decca Tree, but was eventually moved over from recording engineer to designing equipment, including some of the best Decca mixers. I have been told that Wallace had some health issues. He did the majority of the early Ansermet stereo recordings starting in 1954 in Geneva, with Jimmy Walker producing (Walker was also a pretty talented conductor who appeared in some Decca recordings). These were considered experimental by Decca, but when they figured out how to make stereo records, they were mostly released beginning in 1958. Some found there way into the Decca bargain labels in the 1970's.

Larry

I'm a huge fan of Kenneth E. Wilkinson recordings (what we jokingly refer to as the shoe-box soundstage, that mid-hall seat perspective), but those early Roy Wallace recordings are really something, a marvel to behold - so direct, sometimes close or up-front from a concert hall perspective, lifelike, with a tactile quality. I may be partial also because I'm Swiss, but I don't think that's the reason, I hear the same strengths and weakness in the playing of the OSR as anyone, but that relative lack of technical perfection is irrelevant in view of the interpretations and the emotionally infectious music-making. Another recording I feel portrays this up-front "perspective" is the 1955 live Bayreuth Ring by Joseph Keilberth, the first ever in stereo (available on Testament, also worth hearing because many of the famous Wagner singers from the golden era were a bit younger and vocally in better shape than in the later Solti studio recording).

Greetings from Switzerland, David.

 

[marty]

Ken Wilkinson and Lewis Layton are at the top of the recording engineer's Mt. Rushmore. Where the hell did we go wrong since they left us with so many fantastic recordings?

 

[adrianywu]

I'm a huge fan of Kenneth E. Wilkinson recordings (what we jokingly refer to as the shoe-box soundstage, that mid-hall seat perspective), but those early Roy Wallace recordings are really something, a marvel to behold - so direct, sometimes close or up-front from a concert hall perspective, lifelike, with a tactile quality. I may be partial also because I'm Swiss, but I don't think that's the reason, I hear the same strengths and weakness in the playing of the OSR as anyone, but that relative lack of technical perfection is irrelevant in view of the interpretations and the emotionally infectious music-making. Another recording I feel portrays this up-front "perspective" is the 1955 live Bayreuth Ring by Joseph Keilberth, the first ever in stereo (available on Testament, also worth hearing because many of the famous Wagner singers from the golden era were a bit younger and vocally in better shape than in the later Solti studio recording).

Greetings from Switzerland, David.

Yes, the early OSR Ansermet Decca recordings made in Victoria Hall are marvels. Fortunately, the hall is still there (even though the engineers are not !), unlike Kingsway. All the Stravinsky ballet recordings are superb, as are the Beethoven symphonies. If you like an upfront perspective, try the Phase 4 recordings. There were made with up to 20 microphones, which Wilkie did not like (they were all done by Arthur Lilley with input from Stokowski). I think they just maxed out on everything; dynamic range, frequency response, perspective etc. The mastering engineers must have had a hard time trying to cut that onto lacquer, and many of the LPs have problems. The master tapes were wonders to behold though.....

 

[acousticsguru]

Yes, the early OSR Ansermet Decca recordings made in Victoria Hall are marvels. Fortunately, the hall is still there (even though the engineers are not !), unlike Kingsway. All the Stravinsky ballet recordings are superb, as are the Beethoven symphonies. If you like an upfront perspective, try the Phase 4 recordings. There were made with up to 20 microphones, which Wilkie did not like (they were all done by Arthur Lilley with input from Stokowski). I think they just maxed out on everything; dynamic range, frequency response, perspective etc. The mastering engineers must have had a hard time trying to cut that onto lacquer, and many of the LPs have problems. The master tapes were wonders to behold though.....

Not sure if this was directed at me, but personally, being a classical music aficionado, I prefer the mid-hall perspective Kenneth E. Wilkinson favored in his recordings. I know Phase 4 quite well, e.g. Stokowski recordings from the era, and they do not appeal to me at all, sounding very unrealistic from a concert-goer's perspective. What I meant to say, those experimental early stereo recordings by Roy Wallace are an exception in this respect, e.g. the live Bayreuth Ring, or the Ansermet Debussy etc., which sound as though one heard the orchestra from the conductor's podium, a unique and different sense of realism matched in the modern era by some (not all) of the Denon and (same team) Exton One-Point recordings, for example. Phase 4 to me is early, and somewhat misguided multi-microphone technology, made to impress, an attempt at making everything heard simultaneously, resulting more often than not in recordings that sound as though dynamically compressed (which they technically speaking may or may not be). Phase 4 may have sounded "spectacular" on the average equipment of the era, but on modern high-end equipment, fun depending on one's taste, if inherently unnatural.

Greetings from Switzerland, David.

 

[astrotoy]

David, thanks for your comments. The Keilberth Ring from 1955 (he actually conducted 2 cycles that year - I have most of the second one on the pirated Melodram records with Martha Modl as Brunnhilde) has become one of my favorite Rings. Wallace did the stereo version engineering while Wilke did the mono. Unfortunately, Walter Legge of EMI blocked the release of the Decca recordings, and by the time Legge was gone, Decca had released the Solti Ring. The recording is quite fine, especially since it apparently wasn't so easy to do the set ups for recording in stereo at Bayreuth, with the position of the orchestra below the stage, etc. However to have Hotter and particularly Windgassen in their prime as well as the amazing Astrid Varney as Brunhilde make the Testament LP's very special. I was checking my database and it shows that Testament did issue Walkure and Gotterdammerung from the second cycle on CD. Martha Modl is Brunnhilde and Varnay is Sieglinde in that performance - the males are the same, except that Hans Hotter sings Gunther in the second Gotterdammerung. I always liked Martha Modl, but when I did a direct comparison with Varnay back when I got the Testment records (now 15 years ago?) I fell for Varnay.

In 1955 Decca would put the A team (Wilkie in this case) in the mono recordings, since that would be released right away and the stereo version was put away until Decca (and the other record companies) could figure out how to do stereo recordings. I have mentioned before that when I interviewed John Dunkerley (Wilkie's protege at Decca) for my Decca book, he told me when they had two different teams (like in Espana recorded over New Year's Eve and Day in 1956-7) each team would do their own choice of takes and edits, so the mono Espana, engineered by Wilkie, would be a slightly different recording than the stereo Espana, engineered by Gordon Parry. Of course for the Bayreuth recordings, there was only one take and both mono and stereo were produced by Peter Andry.

Larry

 

[adrianywu]

Not sure if this was directed at me, but personally, being a classical music aficionado, I prefer the mid-hall perspective Kenneth E. Wilkinson favored in his recordings. I know Phase 4 quite well, e.g. Stokowski recordings from the era, and they do not appeal to me at all, sounding very unrealistic from a concert-goer's perspective. What I meant to say, those experimental early stereo recordings by Roy Wallace are an exception in this respect, e.g. the live Bayreuth Ring, or the Ansermet Debussy etc., which sound as though one heard the orchestra from the conductor's podium, a unique and different sense of realism matched in the modern era by some (not all) of the Denon and (same team) Exton One-Point recordings, for example. Phase 4 to me is early, and somewhat misguided multi-microphone technology, made to impress, an attempt at making everything heard simultaneously, resulting more often than not in recordings that sound as though dynamically compressed (which they technically speaking may or may not be). Phase 4 may have sounded "spectacular" on the average equipment of the era, but on modern high-end equipment, fun depending on one's taste, if inherently unnatural.

Greetings from Switzerland, David.

Yes, the Phase 4 recordings do not approximate a concert hall sound, nor were they meant to. I think of it as like a photographer deliberately increasing the colour saturation to bring about an artistic effect or emotional response to the image. With the Phase 4 recordings, this sometimes works, especially with music like Tchaikovsky. Stokowski supposedly programmed the Tchaikovsky's 5th symphony more often than any other work during his long career (someone actually keeps track of such things), and I love his Phase 4 recording. There is such an intensity, especially the second movement, that it is mesmerising. It is one of the rare moments when I am so completely absorbed by the music that there is just nothing else in my mind.
I just listened to couple of tapes of Ruggiero Ricci, first his Symphonie Espagnole with the OSR and Ansermet, recorded by Roy Wallace at Victoria Hall in 1959, then his Sibelius violin concerto with Fjeldstad recorded by Gordon Parry at Kingsway the year before. The tone of the violin is quite different in the two recordings, and I would expect Ricci to be playing the same violin. The Wallace recording has a more upfront placement of the soloist, and the violin has more body. The Parry recording has more ambiance overall, and the violin sounds more radiant, with a more ethereal quality. I don't know whether it comes down to the difference in the hall, the recording technique or the microphones. Maybe a combination of all three. The Kingsway sound reminds me of the Grosser Saal of the Musikverein, where the string instruments seem to be spot lit with a glow around them.

 

[acousticsguru]

Yes, the Phase 4 recordings do not approximate a concert hall sound, nor were they meant to. I think of it as like a photographer deliberately increasing the colour saturation to bring about an artistic effect or emotional response to the image. With the Phase 4 recordings, this sometimes works, especially with music like Tchaikovsky. Stokowski supposedly programmed the Tchaikovsky's 5th symphony more often than any other work during his long career (someone actually keeps track of such things), and I love his Phase 4 recording. There is such an intensity, especially the second movement, that it is mesmerising. It is one of the rare moments when I am so completely absorbed by the music that there is just nothing else in my mind.
I just listened to couple of tapes of Ruggiero Ricci, first his Symphonie Espagnole with the OSR and Ansermet, recorded by Roy Wallace at Victoria Hall in 1959, then his Sibelius violin concerto with Fjeldstad recorded by Gordon Parry at Kingsway the year before. The tone of the violin is quite different in the two recordings, and I would expect Ricci to be playing the same violin. The Wallace recording has a more upfront placement of the soloist, and the violin has more body. The Parry recording has more ambiance overall, and the violin sounds more radiant, with a more ethereal quality. I don't know whether it comes down to the difference in the hall, the recording technique or the microphones. Maybe a combination of all three. The Kingsway sound reminds me of the Grosser Saal of the Musikverein, where the string instruments seem to be spot lit with a glow around them.

I agree wholeheartedly, but you're bringing up an interesting question to which I certainly do not have the answer, but perhaps someone does: did Ruggiero Ricci use the same violin in these (and other) recordings? What I do know is he was quite a collector, more so than most famous violinists (there were other avid collectors, obviously, like Nathan Milstein), so if there was anyone who may have played with a different one on a regular basis, I suspect he may have.

Greetings from Switzerland, David.