Quantcast

BluRay Music Video Poll Jero, Alexander - MUSSORGSKY STOKWSKI Symphonic Transcriptions [Blu-Ray]

Help Support QuadraphonicQuad:

Rate the Blu-Ray Surround Disc of Alexander Jero - MUSSORGSKY STOKOWSKI Symphonic....

  • 10: Great Audio, Great Surround, Great Content

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 9:

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 7:

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 6:

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 5:

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 4:

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 3:

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 2:

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 1: Poor Audio, Poor Surround, Poor Content

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    1

JonUrban

Forum Curmudgeon
Staff member
Admin
Moderator
Since 2002/2003
Joined
Mar 2, 2002
Messages
16,709
Location
Connecticut
Please post your thoughts and comments on this Blu-Ray release from Alexander Jero's SURROUND RECORDS. (y):phones(n)
 

Attachments

filper

1K Club - QQ Shooting Star
Joined
Mar 24, 2007
Messages
1,351
Location
Wasaga Beach, ON
Jon,

Could you move this from this section.

I'll be reviewing it tonight, but there is no video content.

It's an audio only like an SA-CD.
 

JonUrban

Forum Curmudgeon
Staff member
Admin
Moderator
Since 2002/2003
Joined
Mar 2, 2002
Messages
16,709
Location
Connecticut
Jon,

Could you move this from this section.

I'll be reviewing it tonight, but there is no video content.

It's an audio only like an SA-CD.
Actually, this is where it belongs. I renamed the section to be a bit clearer in the future. :smokin
 

filper

1K Club - QQ Shooting Star
Joined
Mar 24, 2007
Messages
1,351
Location
Wasaga Beach, ON
Well..

Up front, I do not have an HDMI 1.3 enabled receiver yet, but the 1509 kbps dts 'core' soundtrack rivals most of the SA-CD Classical titles I own.

The compositions were unfamiliar to me at first but the true test (to me for classical music) is the visual images the music portrays. Excellent.

The sound quality is clean and clear, the surround mix is mostly subtle but aggressive when necessary.

What a perfect inaugural dts-HD Master Audio audio disc for me to win.

Thank you again Alexander, it is quite insightful (and hopefully rewarding) for you to be a pioneer in this new 'unifying format' and to the QQF crew for surrounding my ears.

Based on this disc, I think dts-HD Master Audio may be the format to rekindle surround sound productions and maybe some re-releases by the major record companies.

Phil
 

Kal Rubinson

2K Club - QQ Super Nova
Joined
Jul 22, 2004
Messages
2,030
Location
NYC/CT
The sound quality is clean and clear, the surround mix is mostly subtle but aggressive when necessary.
I do not understand this. What portions or characteristics of the music make an aggressive mix necessary? Why would one want the surround mix to vary?

Kal
 

filper

1K Club - QQ Shooting Star
Joined
Mar 24, 2007
Messages
1,351
Location
Wasaga Beach, ON
I do not understand this. What portions or characteristics of the music make an aggressive mix necessary? Why would one want the surround mix to vary?

Kal
During the audition listen I found that as the composition became more aggressive the surround mix became more active to compliment it.

I find a varying degree of surround mix to be more interest keeping.
 

alexander J

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
213
Dear Kal,

I think this is not just a great question but also a need subject to discuss for us as a surround sound activists in music community:

This is from the article written by Jose Serebrier who I am talking allot about this and future surround recordings written about Stokowski transcriptions:

----------------------------------------------------------

Stokowski’s Sound

The sound of the orchestra would change within moments of the first encounter with Stokowski. There was nothing that he had said or done to make such an obvious change, other than to start rehearsing after a minimal greeting. One explanation could be that Stokowski had a special sound in his mind, and his gestures and facial expressions had the ability to communicate this sound to any orchestra. This was not a talent unique to Stokowski. It is not unusual for the sound of a professional ensemble to acquire some of the characteristics of a student group when working under the direction of a school orchestra conductor. This has nothing to do with the technical aspects of performance. It has to do with the sound the conductor has imprinted in his ear, and the conductor’s ability to produce that same sound from any orchestra. Almost every conductor has that ability. The degree to which that produces a dramatic influence is related, partially, to the sound that has become imprinted in the conductor’s memory. It seems logical that if a conductor who has spent years directing the Vienna Philharmonic has an encounter with a school orchestra, this group will soon sound smooth and refined. While it can be argued that the students would sit up, concentrate, and do their best when confronted with a known personality, the change in the actual sound quality they produce would be involuntary. It would be a natural reaction to the conductor’s idea of sound, acquired after years of listening to a specific quality of sound. This theory works in both extremes and also in the present reality of music-making around the world. There was a time when orchestras had a distinctive quality that set them easily apart. These differences were partially the result of conductors spending long decades with their orchestras. But conductors were not the only decisive factors. Some ensembles, such as the Philadelphia Orchestra, had very few changes in personnel, and a vast majority of the musicians had been trained by the same teachers, in the same school. Sadly, most orchestras today have acquired a similarity of sound. While technique and performance standards seem to have improved, there is a world-wide unanimity of approach that makes many performances copies of each other. What has happened? Do performers listen to each other’s recordings and unconsciously imitate one another? Are today’s performers afraid to take chances, and want to be literal to the point of excluding personal approach? Why has the sound quality of many orchestras become so similar?

Stokowski’s idea of sound was unmistakable and special, and it remained with the Philadelphia Orchestra for many decades after Stokowski’s departure. It became known as the “Philadelphia sound”. In fact, with Eugene Ormandy, this sound continued in the same tradition, but naturally acquired some changes over the years. Part of what Stokowski did to obtain his kind of sound must have been unconscious, a reflection of his gestures and approach. But he also made conscious efforts to request specific playing from his orchestras. One of his most famous habits was to demand that the strings play with free bowings. When guest-conducting, this request caused orchestras much grief and displeasure. I remember Stokowski’s rehearsals in the U.S. and in Europe, and the resistance he encountered when requesting each stand of strings to play with opposite bowings. Orchestras such as the Philadelphia, and later on the Houston and the American Symphony, which played all the time with Stokowski, understood the principle and learned to use this technique to advantage. Stokowski’s explanation was rather simpler than the fact, but it helped the string musicians to realize there was a method at work. Because bows naturally lose in power as they descend, and similarly gain in power as they ascend, combining bows simultaneously in both directions would in principle produce a more even sound. In my opinion, Stokowski carried this good idea too far, using it in every instance rather than for specific effects or particular passages. In any case, it did play a great part in obtaining a lush and unmistakable string tone. Balancing the woodwinds was another Stokowski landmark. As Rimsky-Korsakov had noted in his orchestration book, a flute or an oboe have a hard time competing against sixty strings. Stokowski experimented with changing the traditional placement of woodwinds to try to enhance their volume. He felt that having to play behind the large body of strings, the winds were hidden to the audience, and their sound had to pass across the string barrier. For a while Stokowski experimented by placing the woodwinds to his right, in place of the cellos or violas. This drastically changed their sound, and the over-all balance. Sometimes Stokowski lined up the basses in back of the stage on high podiums, with the horns directly in front, to produce a soundboard for the horns and for the entire orchestra. It also gave the basses an organ-like quality. Stokowski would often make the brass softer than indicated in the score, to balance the strings and winds. This, added to his specification not to use podiums for the brass, contributed to form the smooth “Philadelphia sound”, with a glorious string tone and audible woodwinds. Stokowski made sure that the sound had beauty, sometimes by smoothing the edges. There was logic to everything he did to obtain a rounded, warm tone from the orchestra. Some of it can be explained, but much of it can only be called magic.

--------------------------------------------------------------


I do not understand this. What portions or characteristics of the music make an aggressive mix necessary? Why would one want the surround mix to vary?

Kal
 

Kal Rubinson

2K Club - QQ Super Nova
Joined
Jul 22, 2004
Messages
2,030
Location
NYC/CT
Thanks for that information. Stokowski's experimental tendencies are well-known and, if he were alive today, he would be having a field-day with surround recording. That said, my concern in asking was about the statement that the nature of the mix changed in the course of the music. This, if true, is a bit surprising. I have no trouble with experimenting with the mix and the use of aggressive surround, if artistically justified, but the idea of modifying the acoustic perspective in the course of the music would be disturbing to me.

Kal
 

alexander J

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
213
Thanks for that information. Stokowski's experimental tendencies are well-known and, if he were alive today, he would be having a field-day with surround recording. That said, my concern in asking was about the statement that the nature of the mix changed in the course of the music. This, if true, is a bit surprising. I have no trouble with experimenting with the mix and the use of aggressive surround, if artistically justified, but the idea of modifying the acoustic perspective in the course of the music would be disturbing to me.

Kal

In my work I am using 2 main approaches:

In my Electronic Music compositions as well as my transcriptions for virtual instruments and synthesis of classical works I am creating virtual surround environment where each individual sound can be placed around the listener and have a unique location in 3-dimensional space.

However "Acoustic Reality Experience" series produce to underscore natural acoustic environment where performance took place, here my goal is to showcase the power of now 7.1 surround sound and lossless audio technology
To present natural acoustic environment.

More later,

Alexander
 

filper

1K Club - QQ Shooting Star
Joined
Mar 24, 2007
Messages
1,351
Location
Wasaga Beach, ON
Kal,

Would you like to borrow my copy and hear it for yourself ?

I will require a security deposit and two pieces of ID though. :)
 

Kal Rubinson

2K Club - QQ Super Nova
Joined
Jul 22, 2004
Messages
2,030
Location
NYC/CT
Kal,

Would you like to borrow my copy and hear it for yourself ?

I will require a security deposit and two pieces of ID though. :)
I am not set up for 7.1, only 5.1, and AJ has indicated that his remastering of the Naxos originals was limited to the enhancement to 7.1. So, (1) it would not help to lend me the disc and (2) I can drag out the Naxos SACD when I get a chance. Thanks.
 

alexander J

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
213
I am not set up for 7.1, only 5.1, and AJ has indicated that his remastering of the Naxos originals was limited to the enhancement to 7.1. So, (1) it would not help to lend me the disc and (2) I can drag out the Naxos SACD when I get a chance. Thanks.
The "enhancement" is not that I meant in my reply to you.
There is no synthetic delivery from 5.1 to 7.1 in our releases.
Our "Acoustic Reality Experience" Classical titles reproducing stage in front channels and natural ambience in all surround channels delivering better perception of Acoustic environment compare to 5.1 mixes that is especially making big difference in medium and large Home Theater rooms.
 

Kal Rubinson

2K Club - QQ Super Nova
Joined
Jul 22, 2004
Messages
2,030
Location
NYC/CT
I did not mean, nor did I understand, the term "enhancement" to mean something artificial but, rather, something in addition to or beyond 5.1.
 
Top