I've found lots of the poorly produced post-1965 classical records sound
very good on the contemporary R2R tapes (not the record club issues).
They're a gamble, but some of the RCAs and Columbia R2R sound exponentially
better than the vinyl. The Dynagroove process was added at vinyl mastering.
The very weird EQ of the Columbia classical LPs are not present on the
tapes. Even better are the CD reissues (sadly too few). What was really
and ear-opener was finding a couple British Dynagrooves. Well, they sound
nothing like the American pressings. Several sound fabulous, the equal to
the "golden age" stuff. The Brits just cued up the tape and mastered the
record. NO special EQ or pre-distortion.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Roger and Allison Kulp" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Saturday, July 15, 2006 5:53 PM
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Classical Radio, was [ARSCLIST] Mercury co-founder
Irving Green passes
> Tom,Very interesting stuff,but I would say you are placing far too much
> blame,with FM rock radio.(I seem to be the only serious rock
> collector/listener here.)I would argue, that much of the blame can be
> placed,on the shoulders of the big corporate record companies,in the 70s
> and 80s,and the fact,that most classical radio stations,stick to mostly
> newer recordings.Classical recording,began to die,a slow death,about the
> time Dynagroove came in.Solid state recording equipmment,RCA's dreaded
> DynaFloppies, Quadraphonic,overmiking,and other factors,made even digital
> sound promising.Admit it.Other than the Wilkinson-produced Solti/CSOs,and
> the ones produced by old Gunther Whatshisname,at DG.I can think of few
> post-1965 classical records,I would enjoy listening to.What about
> you?There are not enough collectors,or audiophiles,in radio to know what
> really good records,are supposed to sound like,because the classical
> labels have produced such dreck,for so long.
> My $0.02 worth,
> Roger Kulp
> Tom Fine <[log in to unmask]> wrote: