An even better question to ask is this--with so many excellent Stravinsky
recordings to chose from, why bother with this one at all?

I have to admit that the cover is sort of cool, but otherwise I would
quickly gravitate to a more masterful conductor's recording.

John Haley

On Fri, Apr 3, 2015 at 8:02 PM, Tom Fine <[log in to unmask]>

> This appears to be some kind of digital fraud.
> Look at the original CD details:
> The album was recorded in 1992. Exactly what high-resolution digital
> recording system existed in 1992? DGG was using a Studer system that
> operated at most at 48kHz/16-bit. There is an outside possibility that they
> were running analog tape backups, but I don't think so based on articles
> I've read about this "4D" thing they were touting.
> The MOST RESOLUTION POSSIBLE from this recording is whatever was the
> original recording medium. Up-converting it DOES NOT ADD MORE RESOLUTION.
> It may change the sound in some way that some people prefer, some sort of
> euphony involved with conversion to DSD and DSD-to-analog, perhaps.
> This sort of thing makes the Japanese reissue guys look a little batty.
> The other one that's really odd is a series called something like "BluDisc"
> that seems to suggest the CDs are made on the same equipment as BluRay
> discs and thus have "more precise" pits and lands. I've seen no scientific
> presentations or papers anywhere suggesting this offers any audible
> improvements. For what it's worth, I was loaned one of these CDs of a
> Mercury album, apparently made from the same digital master or a
> bit-perfect copy, as the CDs produced by the plant in Germany. As I
> suspected, no analysis software I could find revealed ANY DIFFERENCE in the
> CDs, and they sounded identical, to my ears. More importantly, they both
> ripped bit-identical files using dBPowerAmp's CD ripper with Accurip. I
> will say that it's possible that these "BluDics" are easier to read and
> thus perhaps produce fewer corrected errors in some inferior CD players.
> It's also worth reading the review included on the ArkivMusic descriptor
> page linked above. This is one of those DGG way-distant recordings where
> the orchestra sounds like it's a football field away from the mics. That
> whole "4D" process was never really detailed by DGG, it was apparently just
> a full integration of DGG recording techniques with Studer digital
> equipment, and was the subject of some mocking, especially by British hi-fi
> and pro-audio magazines in the 90s. To my ears, I don't care what digital
> system they were using as much as I care that everything sounds like it was
> recorded across a large space from the music, or in an echo chamber. Very
> few DGG recording sound very detailed or intimate, to my ears. They make
> the listener a spectator from a distance rather than a participant in the
> music.
> -- Tom Fine
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jim Long" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Friday, April 03, 2015 5:52 PM
> Subject: [ARSCLIST] SACD "surprise"
>  I get promotional e-mails from, mostly about vinyl.
>> The prices for the 45-rpm issues (about $50) are beyond my ability to pay
>> 99% of the time.  Now I see they are offering Esoteric SACD reissues for
>> $65!  See <
>> ESOSA90118/&utm_source=email&utm_medium=special
>> Has anyone been impressed by this (and other) Esoteric SACD reissues?