BEST brand for Classical Recordings?

Reference Recordings is my favorite--but they are not all equal. I have a Mozart Concerto that is terrible, but then all of the Eiji Oui with Minnisota are exceptional--probably the best Classical I own on CD. Delos, Chesky, and Sony Classical are also excellent--but definitely a second to Reference Recordings in my opinion. On vinyl I like Reference Recordings, Sheffield, Klavier, and Classic Records Re-issues (180g). Again, there is some variation on these. Reference Recordings here has the most variation--I've gotten a few with quite a bit of surface noise. The others are consistent. The re-issues seem to generally be a function of the source material. I hope that helps.

If Deutsche Grammophon is not such good, why is that label among the most expensive ones? Why do most of the most prestigious orchestras record for this label? For example de Berlin and Viena Philharmonics. Thanks for your responds.

Jorge, we audiophiles are few, we don't count on the big market, so the big record labels don't record according to our gospel and/or needs. They record for the needs of the mainstream. Now most low end, mid fi CD players sound rather forward and harsh in the highs, so the very drawn back renderings of the Beethoven in my excample may be just right for that kind of gear. The ordinary music lover, not being audiophile hardly cares for soundstage, resolution, layering of depth, right placement of instruments or what have you. He quite innocently just wants to enjoy the music. He will not buy for "sound", as many of us do, he will buy for the artistic rendering, which not all of us, but the mainstream of music lovers would.

I'm with Detlof all the way on his recommendations and also agree to be careful of Duetsch Grammophone recordings so far as quality of the recordings, not too many good ones on vinyl although many excellent performances to answer Jorge. Some of their more recent digital recordings are better IMO. It is unfortunate that a label that records such great orchestras with many excellent performances would not be as discriminating in the engineering of their recordings.

Detloff's answer is right. DG sounds like it does because they multi-mike everything, then use the engineer to mix everything the way the engineer feels sounds natural (not necessarily what the orchestra sounded like in the recording venue, either). On a revealing system this will usually show up (although their recent recordings sound reasonably good), but on an ordinary system that the masses use (including many music critics) it sounds fine. I agree with a lot of the posts above--for a "best" record company, you have to decide if you want sonics or great performers/performances. Actually, these days most classical labels do a decent recording job, although Reference, Telarc, Delos, Harmonia Mundi, EMI and London/Decca have consistently fine sound. It wasn't always that way--many Columbias/CBS and early digital recordings from the "major" labels sound downright awful. As far as performers and performances go, that's personal taste for the most part. Some of the performances panned above are pretty good, in my opinion, but that's my viewpoint only. The big names aren't always the best; many of the Naxos recordings are superb performances, but you'll be hard-pressed to recognize the artists. That's why I like having a good tuner and a good classical station, to sample the performances before I buy them.