Everyone have their RCA LIVING STEREO SACDs yet? Better grab 'em! Leontyne Price...

I just checked some clips and liked, and added the the cart, PICTURES AT AN EXHIBITION , NEW WORLD SYMPHONY, and ALSO SPRACH ZARATHUSTRA, (Is that 2001 Soundtrack music i'm hearing? The others didn't stike me. I'm going to check out the next group of suggestions now.

Any other "Greatest Hits" to puruse that I may be familiar with? Top notch SQ is a must too. BTW, even through Amazon, those clips sounded great!

 

According to several reviews on the Amazon site, the "Pathetique" disc is defective (completely different recording on the SACD layer).

True?

 

Defective in what way? I have not noticed a problem with mine.

 

Apparently, the SACD layer contains a completely different recording (the redbook layer contains the "correct" recording). At least that's what I've gleaned from those reviews.

 

Interesting. Both layers of mine play the same recording. I did notice the catalog number on the back as: 82876-61392-2 RE 1 if that could possible indicate a corrected version

 

Yup that's one used in 2001 A Space Odyssey. Hm others of a "greatest hits" type beyond those Steve listed... and off the top of my head... try Respighi: Pines & Fountains of Rome (Reiner/CSO), Gershwin: Rhapsody in Blue (Wild/Boston Pops), Rimski-Korsakov: Scheherezade (Reiner/CSO), Ravel: Bolero etc (Munch), Copland: Billy the Kid/Rodeo/Grofe: Grand Canyon Suite (Gould), Berlioz: Symphony Fantastique (Munch). There's others and those aren't so much a "best" in serious musical terms as to say I'm guessing that even if you're not into much Classical you might enjoy 'em. Lend an ear and see...

If so they must have corrected it at some point.

 

Yes, that is true. I was really surprised to get what I think is some reggae artist on the SACD layer. I got my disc about a month ago & was thinking of picking up another. Are they all mis-printed?? I am sure Sony/BMG could give a hoot in holler about it.

 

Does yours say 82876-61392-2 RE 1 on the back?

 

I bought mine when it was released. I doubt if I've ever listened to the redbook layer, but the SACD layer was fine.

 

I can confirm this, bought a copy of this at lunch today from a local Barnes & Noble, & the SACD layer is in fact some weird new age / reggae music.

Matrix: A0100881608-A911 26

On the back of the CD case it has: 82876-61397-2 RE1

This blows! I hope they will take it back!

 

I absolutely love the Respighi. The first time I heard these pieces was around 1978 at a Boston Symphony Orchestra concert - they performed Pines, Fountains, and Roman Festivals.

 

ok, now I think I have all the titles from LS and MLP series I wanted... except Prokofiev: Piano Concerto No. 3, Rachmaninov: Piano Concerto No. 1 - Janis (MLP SACD)

 

Same here.

 

Just for clarification, the Also Sprach Zarathustra" used in 2001 is the Karajan/Vienna from 1959:

http://www.amazon.com/Strauss-Zarathustra-Herbert-Philharmonic-Orchestra/dp/B00004C8TF

 

Also Sprach Zarathustra is also in the opening scene of the awesome Peter Sellers movie Being There.

 

Sure wish Reiner / CSO had gone ahead and covered Feste Romane while they were at it. Sure the "Rome Trilogy" is descriptive rather than "meaty" music but IMH it's a good example of another of the pleasures of the world of music... My favorite Feste Romane is DePriest but that recording is nuts on bass and a bit difficult for me to enjoy. No such problems with these. Ah well - best two of three isn't too bad.

 

Nope................82876-613972-2 RE 1 Is your SACD layer correct??

 

Now's the time to take the plunge I think whilst they are so cheap and close to going out of print.

 

Regarding the defective "Pathetique" SACD, I don't know where y'all are seeing the "RE 1" part of that number. I see the number in several places on mine, but none has "RE 1" that I can see.

Spine (all four sides): 82876-61397-2
Back page of booklet: 82876-61397-2
Back of case: 82876-61397-2
UPC code on back of case: 8 28766 13972 3

Front of SACD: 82876-61397-2
Back of SACD (in tiny print; outer ring): 82876-61397-2 23
Back of SACD (in tiny print; inner ring): 82876-61397-2 D 21

Mine plays the correct symphonic program on both the SACD stereo and CD stereo layers. Oddly, I can't get my Denon DVD-3910 to recognize the "surround" layer; the back of the case states: "This was originally a two-track stereo recording; in SACD surround mode, the music will be heard only from the front left and right channels."

I wonder if the Denon can't recognize that layer because it's got the wrong data on it? That doesn't sense to me, but I'm curious whether those who are hearing the wrong music have tried switching between SACD stereo and SACD surround on your players. Or maybe that statement is just an awkward way of saying that there isn't a surround layer, and the program will default to the SACD or CD stereo layer instead?

Craig.

 

I tried switching between stereo & surround, hoping maybe the surround layer was correct; but no dice same new age reggae.

82876-61397-2 RE1 is on the back of the case under the FBI warning, and on the spine of the case. However the booklet & face of the CD have the same # without the "RE1." Matrix as I posted above.

Could others who have "correct" versions of Pathetique post their catalog # & matrices? Might be a big help for others trying to buy this one!

 

I have about 40 Living Stereo CDs from the original 90's reissue series, and think they sound really good. I also have about 40 LPs from the Classic Records Living Stereo series, and I think they sound great.

My preference is for the Classic Records titles -- they sound better than the CDs and of course have the beautiful, authentic original artwork.

Has anyone compared the SACD editions with the equivalent Classic Records LP? Which do you prefer?

 

Probably not. Not sure if it's an EQ thing, or simply the fact that the layers on hybrid SACDs actually do suffer, as Mark Levinson intimated more than 10 years ago. I haven't comprised a list of the older RCA CDs in this series that actually DO sound better than either the SACD or CD layers of the newer issues, but there are at least 10 of them.

 

I only have a few to compare, mostly Fritz Reiner and Cliburn. The CD layers are quite close, and in the rare case where the regular cd is arguably better, the advantage, if any, is slight. Whenever there is a major upside improvement, it has been on the SACD. Moreover, I find the SACDs generally to do what 24 bit does best, better ambiance, decay, cymbals really sound like cymbals, that kind of thing. Basically, if the SACD is available, it's the way to go, IMO.

 

Do they suffer like people who listen to PCM?

"Mark Levinson astonished Forum attendees with the revelation that the PCM recording system that is currently used for our CDs, DVDs, television, and cell phones has a negative effect on the body"​

http://www.michaelmckinnis.com/StadSociety/News-JapanDVD.htm

 

Bonjo overall the Classics are better. I remember an interview with famous Living Stereo Guru Jack Pfeiffer with Michael Fremer and on those 90s cds they were using tubes in the chain to "cut" the CDS! Shock of all shocks, unh? Grundman was using a solid state chain on the Classic cuts and they sounded good.... a little etched but good just the same. One title comes to mind , Daphnis et Chloe was really good on the RCA Living Stereo SACD and by Classic. The Chesky Daphnis et Chloe was even better than the Classic actually. It's less forward than the Classic cut and that was mastered by Tim de Paravicini who knows a little something about audio.Before I forget , Chesky's Living Stereo reissues were good , BUT they didn't have the original artwork which diminished their grandeur a bit.....