Classical music in mono

Unlike with rock and jazz, it seems to me that pre-1970s classical records do not have appeal in monoaural. I would agree with this in that classical in mono lacks the punch that some of those other genres have. Instead, it sounds gagged. Does anyone actually prefer mono to stereo when it comes to classical? Is it even worth looking through really old classical records, or is it just better to skip those and find good stereo versions? I realize, of course, that some really early recordings only exist in mono so those one may pick up strictly for the performance. It's a shame given how many pre-1970s classical records one finds in these parts. Does anyone have a different take?

 

Lovers of classical music are generally more interested in the performer and the quality of the performance than whether the recording is monaural or stereophonic. Many consider the 1950s and early 1960s the Golden Age of classical recordings (HMV, Columbia UK, Decca UK) and most of those were monaural.

 

Generally in classical records the problems with early rock recordings (having to premix an entire rhythm section to one track to have room to overdub vocals, etc.) weren't a factor, so I don't think there are many cases in classical where mono is preferable to stereo, assuming a true stereo recording exists.

 

It all depends on the labels (engineers). Try, for instance, Mercury's Living Presence Monaural or monaural recordings by K.E.Wilkinson for Decca.
From my recent experiences, I guess some old French dedicated monaural recordings have same kind of allure that old rock mono records have.

 

I think the recording technique and microphone placement are more important factors in classical recordings than mono or stereo. I've heard quite a few classical stereo recordings that didn't sound good or were even ruined by microphone placement and the (over)use of multi-mic'ing.

 

I don't think of as gagged, rather as focused.

I sought advice here on available cds of mono classical music several years ago, there didn't seem to be a lot available.

I guess any solo piano performance might as well be mono?

 

If I may make a correction to your post, classical recordings in stereo stretch back to the late 1950's. By the 1960's stereo was commonplace for classical music.

 

To be perfectly honest, if a particular performance exists in stereo of equally good sound quality then I'm flat out not interested in the mono.

If the stereo is a bit ropey and distorted or something, and there's a much better mono version of the same performance I'll go with the mono.

Whether it's mono or stereo doesn't affect my enjoyment of the piece, so if something's only available in mono (eg Erich Kleiber's early 50s Beethoven on Decca, Klemperer's early work for EMI, etc.) then that's perfectly fine for me too. Geez, I'll even happily listen to an acoustically cut 78 rpm classical recording if i like the performance (The third and end of the 5th movements of Oskar Fried's Mahler 2 for example - while secretly wishing they waited a few short years for microphones).

The only thing in classical music that really gives me the irrits annoys me just as much as it does in every other genre: fake stereo.

 

Yeah, Furtwangler, too.

 

Terrific advice. Thanks to all the responses thus far. I figured it was more complicated than I was making it out to be. I guess it is worth going through the old classical $1.00 bins to look for treasures beyond Deutsche grammophon and other such quality stereo labels.

 

Most Classical fanatics prefer Stereo if both were released. Exception is mono original recordings released in Rechanneled Stereo, the Rechanneled Stereo are virtually worthless.

 

Actually Deutsche Gramophone offers plenty of mono treasures, recently they even released a CD mono box, and many of the performances are terrific.

 

Depends on the mic'ing. The most realistic recorded piano I had ever heard was using a less conventional mic placement from roughly 15 feet back, not the usual close mic'ing. This technique picked up the depth, body and resonance of the piano as well as the room, it wouldn't have been possible to achieve that in mono.

Catalogue - PlayClassics, the art of true music

It was Albeniz's Iberia from that link. It's a good performance, just no match for Alicia De LaRocha.

 

Wow. I've never seen DG on vinyl certainly. Had no idea.

 

The answer to your first couple of questions is a resounding YES! Among others, some of the pre-60's EMI recordings are still an example of not only performance, but of recording balance that many more modern recordings lack. A lot of people associate Abbey Road with the Beatles, but the reason why this studio was so famous to begin with was because of the equipment and the engineers (and artists) it had before the Fab Four even existed. Look for recordings made by Walter Legge for starters. Of course, there are other labels that some of the other posters have mentioned - such a DG, for example.

 

I will have to respectfully disagree with the part I bolded if you are referring just to classical music. I uniformly find that the best recorded classical music is the more recent recordings. By best recorded I mean recordings that fool me into thinking I am listening to music live with my live reference being BSO and NYPO. That isn't to say vintage recordings aren't without their charms.

Abbey Road did record some incredible classical pre Beatles, just a couple of days ago I was listening to parts of Schnabel's Beethoven piano sonatas and Moiseiwitsch playing Pictures at an Exhibition.

 

There's always someone to disagree - but that's okay. Remember, I was referring to the balance of the recording. Of course a mono recording can't in any way fool you into thinking you're listening to live music by the very fact that it's in mono. However, I will agree with you about the Schnabel; that's pre-pre-Beatles in that it was from 1932-35, and what a recording it is - if you have a version without too many clicks and pops. By the way, what is BSO?

 

Boston Symphony Orchestra.

Actually, Schnabel recorded the Beethoven Piano Sonatas between 1932 and 1937.

 

Boston Symphony Orchestra like J.A.W. said.

When I said realistic I was including balance as well, IMHO modern recordings fill in the center very well and sound pretty balanced and natural to me. There are some outliers like some Pentatone reissues that have unnaturally wide stereo spread, but I find that is more the exception than the norm. Just to give you a reference, I find the best symphony recordings are from Channel Classics with Budapest Festival Orchestra.

The Schnabel transfers I recently picked up were very well done, much bigger improvement over what I had to listen to. Manual click/pop removal and very mild noise reduction, none that effects the high frequencies of the piano. The Moiseiwitsch is from 1945, still very pre pre Beatles

 

Which Schnabel transfers did you pick up? I had the earlier EMI CD-set, but sold it; it suffered from way too much noise reduction etc. Warner Classics, who now own EMI Classics, recently released a Schabel set with his complete EMI recordings, but people who heard it don't seem to be too happy with the sound - too much processing again, apparently. I have the Naxos CDs that were done by Mark Obert-Thorn.

 

Perhaps on certain labels. My experience with 80's and 90's recordings were bad, with their multi-miking that made the violins shrill with flat and artificial imaging. I'm not familiar with the Moiseiwitsch. I think the original poster was referring to vinyl. I'm not aware of any decent Schnabel Beethoven on cd! The original EMI cd was muffled, the Pearl cd, unfortunately, had way too many clicks and pops, and was from another source. Then another one came out which was no-noised, but with no low end which made the piano sound clangy...

 

Which label?

 

My recordings of Schnabel are on Naxos. A tremendous upgrade in sound quality from the thin, upper midrange boosted Pearl transfers. The Pearl transfers also sounded raw with no noise reduction or click/pop removal. I'm hesitant to use hyperbole, however this is true- listening on headphones I could never listen to the Pearl at more than 25% volume, I could easily listen to the Naxos well past 50% volume.

Moiseiwitsch was a fabulous pianist. If I could recommend only one disc it would be the Naxos disc with Pictures of an Exhibition on it. I like Richter's 1958 performance slightly more.

 

I can't remember. We were doing one of those vinyl vs cd comparisons against my HMV and Serephim records. The records are a true wonder. Then, just for the fun of it, we decided to compare the cd's vs cd's. I think the box had a bunch of rainbow-like colours to it, with Schnabel's picture faintly meshed in with the colours.

 

yes, exactly. some of those wartime Berlin Phil recordings are amazing performances.