Question for classical lovers

The majority DO suck! There is a wasteland of 10-15 years (early 80s to mid 90s) where classical CDs–except from some smaller labels like Telarc, Chandos, Chesky, Reference Recordings, and a few others who managed to produce excellent sounding productions–are painful to listen to. The large labels piled crap-on-crap as far as sonics. Some exceptions were Decca and (some) Philips.recordings. Reissues on CD of previously excellent sounding analog releases were also a disgrace. These same analog recordings are now turning up on more tolerable sounding SACDs but still can’t quite equal the sound of an LP played (even) on a reasonably priced turntable system.

With some of the newer, higher sampling digital processors and players the shrillness and metallic quality of some of these offensive recordings can be tamed but not completely cured. It is a shame so many excellent recordings by great artists were butchered by such crappy sound. The situation seems to have improved in recent years. I guess the complaints (maybe even from the artists themselves) started to pile up enough that someone took notice.

So be careful what you buy and read some of the opinions of other members here. Members, Rushton and Texasdave, have given some excellent choices in the past on these forums that have assisted me in my purchases.

Regards,
8>(

Rotarius, you've posed an issue I've resolved for myself by staying firmly with LPs in my classical music collection. At the same time, I have a number of audio friends who derive great pleasure from classical music via CD, such as Audigon members Texasdave and Trcnetmsncom.

Here are a few classical CD suggestions for you to try that I know can sound good with well-tuned digital front end (there are certainly others):

Rutter, Requiem, Reference Recordings 57
Bax, Symphony No. 6 or No. 7, David Lloyd-Jones on Naxos
Tchaikovsky, Violin Concerto, Wallenstein/LSO with Perlman on Chesky

None of these have the ease and naturalness of sound that I hear from a comparable LP on a decent turntable setup, but all have quite reasonable string tone. If they don't work for you, then either some work on your audio system is needed, or, like me and Albert Porter, you may just need to shift back to a turntable. ;-)

Vvrinc, glad some of the music suggestions have resonated well with you!
.

Rotarius-I feel your pain! I loved my vinyl, and refused to even consider buying a cassette or even a reel to reel. When CD's came along, I was taken by the great S/N ratio, dynamic range, etc, but--- something wasn't right!

I bought my first CD player in 1984. Most of the early digital recordings were really bad. About 1990, we started getting some recordings that were better. 20-25 years after the birth of digital, we are starting to get equipment and recordings that really draw me back to long listening sessions rather than running me out of the room after 15 minutes. Vinyl is fussy and high maintenance but can be really rewarding, if you pay your dues. Digital is relatively easy, and there is an abundance of recorded material out there. It’s getting a whole lot better. I recently bought an Audio Mirror D-1, and I'm quite fond of that little box. It's not quite analog, but its certainly not digital sounding as we have come to know digital. If you think about the enormous leap in quality that vinyl saw from 1955 to 1980, maybe we are on a similar timetable with digital. We are about 25 years in now. I think we are about to get digital right, at long last.

Rotarius:

Agree with Vvrinc that the majority 80's-90's recordings sound bad, but a good CDP can improve things enormously. Just curious: What kind of CDP do you use?
Jay

Thank you all for your responses thus far. As for system synergy, let me say that I am not just talking about my current set of separates, my opinions stem from trying a lot of DACs, preamps, amps etc. and I am tired of it. Now room acoustics is the one aspect I have ignored and being recently divorced, well I don't have much by the way of plush furniture. I will work on that aspect and I am sure it will help reduce fatigue to some extent. In my collection, 1 out 6 recordings are tolerable where the massed strings are etchy but "listenable". Only a handful are silky smooth and if even 1 or 2 sound great, it stands to reason that your equipment has the potential to resolve complex music. In fact, I have been happy with how most other instruments sound as well as the imaging, sound staging, vocals etc, on various equipment. I recently had a Cal Sigma tube dac driving an AVA hybrid pre and thought the tubes rolled off the highs but the strings still felt rough just not as prominently. To eliminate the possibility that it could be my sensitive hearing, I will buy the titles mentioned above and see where I stand. If someone here has heard the new hybrid sacd LSO live release of Brahms 4/Haitink, I would like to know your opinion. I was surprised at how etchy and unnatural the strings sounded even on sacd layer. I hope I am not the only one who thinks that!
Anyway, Brownsfan, I kinda thought I'd give the non-OS DACs a try so I bought the Poth Audio equivalent to the Audio Mirror to experiment. I have maybe 20 hours on it and a ordinary coax cable so I can't critically evaluate it yet but so far it added punch, cleaner midrange but can't say that it smoothed out the highs. That maybe because of the coax cable though, I have a better one coming so hopefully I can get rid of some jitter otherwise I just want to step back for a bit, enjoy College football for a while and then focus on getting back to LPs.
Cheers!