John Smyth ([log in to unmask]) wrote:

>>Regarding Mahler Symphony recommendations, I notice many people suggesting
>>older recordings. Live performance aside, can a listener really get the
>>full impact of a Mahler symphony on a recording before 1970? (Well, 1960)
>>Wouldn't this be like trying to appreciate the visual arts through dirty
>>glass?

That all depends on what you mean by "full impact".  If your only
criteria for "full impact" is volume, or frequency range, or dynamic range,
or clarity of parts, or all of those combined, then you may have a point.
Though even then it's by no means the case that recordings post 1970 are
superior to those pre 1970 in those areas.  There are recordings made today
that doon't stand comparison with those from longer ago.  A lot depends on
producer and engineer using what is available to them.

However, "full impact" must also surely take into account the way that
the music is conveyed in the interpretation.  I get "the full impact" of
Mahler's Ninth in the 1938 recording by Walter but only in that area of
interpretation, certainly not in terms of sound, I'm more than prepared to
admit.

>While historical recordings provide education and enlightenment, their
>technical limitations just don't make the performance come alive for
>me.

This is where personal preference plays such a large part.  I have a
very high tolerance for "poor" recording quality, one that is not shared
by many, perhaps.  Others have a very low tolerance indeed and they must
therefore steer clear of some of the recordings that I wouldn't be without.
I think that's a pity.  They are missing out on a lot.

I have never worshipped at the shrine of hi-fi, maybe because I have
never been able to afford to.  I learned classical music from a mono record
player and a mono radio, so when I eventually could afford modest stereo
equipment back in 1982 I was already used to "filling in the gaps." (It may
interest you to know that I am, so far as amplifier, speakers and tuner are
concerned still using the same equipment.)

I think the ideal situation is to have a range of recordings to suit your
taste and one that reflects sound also.  I have "reference" versions that
are in what *I* consider to be top quality sound but which I might not
consider top of my preference for performance.  Sometimes the two can
coincide, though.  A case in point would be, as Deryk mentions, the Kletzki
Mahler Fourth.

Tony Duggan
Staffordshire,
United Kingdom.