I believe Pristine "sort of" admitted that they used the British RLS series transfers as their basis. Generally I shy away from Pristine transfers done by Andrew Rose. He achieves wonders in terms of frequency and dynamic range extension as well as ambiance and noise reduction. As a result, I find he often completely destroys the natural timbre of the recordings.
Sent from my iPad
[log in to unmask]
> On Dec 16, 2016, at 8:07 AM, Gary A. Galo <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> The original 78s don't have wow and flutter. If Pristine used Capstan, that tells me that they used an old transfer that needed it, rather than working from the original records.
> Gary Galo
> Audio Engineer Emeritus
> The Crane School of Music
> SUNY at Potsdam, NY 13676
> "Great art presupposes the alert mind of the educated listener."
> Arnold Schoenberg
> "A true artist doesn't want to be admired, he wants to be believed."
> Igor Markevitch
> From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List <[log in to unmask]> on behalf of L. Hunter Kevil <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Thursday, December 15, 2016 9:30:51 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Schnabel re-issue recommendations
> I surprised no one has mentioned the Pristine Classical transfers. I had a
> few & they can sound astonishingly well. Mr Rose used the then new Capstan
> software to tame the wow & flutter.
>> On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 3:06 PM, Gary A. Galo <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> Those Schnabel transfers from the 1950s that Dennis referred to are
>> plagued with pitch flutter. Those are the ones that first appeared on RCA
>> Victor Red Seal, then on EMI/Angel's COLH Great Recordings of the Century
>> LPs, and then on Seraphim LPs. No matter how good that original source may
>> have been, the transfer was worse than indifferent - it was awful, badly
>> over-filtered in addition to the pitch instability. I believe Charles
>> Gerhardt was responsible for it - Dennis can probably confirm this.
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List [mailto:
>> [log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Ted Kendall
>> Sent: Thursday, December 15, 2016 3:45 PM
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Schnabel re-issue recommendations
>> Many record companies dubbed metals to tape in the 1950s and 60s,
>> declicked them with garden shears and then junked the metals. So, you have
>> the choice of an indifferent dub of an excellent source with gulps and a
>> corrupted timebase or a modern transfer of a commercial presssing.
>> Not an enviable choice...I once did a set of the Calvet Quartet from
>> metals in excellent condition. One review took me to task for
>> over-processing. Very little was actually required...what was I supposed to
>> do - add surface noise?
>>> On 15/12/2016 21:06, Don Cox wrote:
>>>> On 08/12/2016, Gary A. Galo wrote:
>>>> Hi Jim,
>>>> Seth Winner did them for Pearl many years ago - they do turn up on
>>>> Amazon. I have the Naxos Historical CDs that Mark Obert Thorn did,
>>>> and they sound very good. Although "Not for Sale in the US", Amazon
>>>> 3rd-party vendors have them. There are a total of 11 volumes. Try
>>>> searching for " schnabel beethoven naxos" as well as " schnabel
>>>> beethoven naxos historical" to come up with all of the available
>>>> choices. Some dealers are charging over-the-top prices for them.
>>>> There's a new set from Warner/EMI that claims to be new 96/24
>>>> You can't beat the price. The old EMI set sounded like crap - avoid
>>>> it. The newer transfers done by EMI at Abbey Road have been much
>>>> better than their work from the 1980s and 90s. If I had to do it, I
>>>> think I'd take a chance on that new Warner/EMI set.
>>> I bought the new Warner set. It is a dsisaster. Somebody turned the
>>> noise reduction up to 11, and the remaining sound does not resemble a
>>> piano. It is more like a cheap 1980s electronic keyboard.
>>> I think the Naxos set is the best. There is still noise, but it does
>>> sound like a piano.
>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.