Solti Ring Redux

[wkasimer]

It looks like Decca is about to issue the most recent CD remastering of the Solti RING in a budget box:

http://www.amazon.com/Wagner-Ring-Nibelungen-DVD-Combo/dp/B00VVZUXRS

This was the remastering used for the expensive deluxe edition, which I never purchased:

http://www.amazon.com/Wagner-Ring-Nibelungen-Super-Deluxe/dp/B008J1QFLU

I currently own the previous CD incarnation:

http://www.amazon.com/Wagner-Ring-Nibelungen-Cycle/dp/B0000042H4

So my obvious question is this - does the 2012 remastering (in RBCD) boast any significant improvement over the 1997 issue? I'm not interested, at least at the moment, in the sound of the Blu-Ray audio, since that's not how I listen to music due to my audio setups.

Bill

[james.g...@gmail.com]

I don't know about those. I have the 1990 issue, so do the later incarnations make an upgrade worthwhile?

[weary flake]

From what I've read, you already have the best issue.
It is flawed, but the remaster of 1997 is worse because
of noise reduction added. The recent remaster is the
1997 version with even more sound processing added. So
I think you have the best of three flawed CD issues.
This is all hearsay, I don't really know.

[Willem Orange]

On Thursday, May 7, 2015 at 10:59:24 AM UTC-4, wkasimer wrote:

A review of the CDs here
http://www.classicstoday.com/review/soltis-ring-deluxe-style/

[Bob Harper]

That was (is?) the opinion of David Gable, sometime poster here who
had--it seemed to me--sound reasons for his opinion. I have the 1997 box
myself, having previously owned the original Decca LPs, bought in the
mid-'70s. Long gone, alas.

Bob Harper

[Willem Orange]

On Thursday, May 7, 2015 at 10:59:24 AM UTC-4, wkasimer wrote:

This article goes onto more detail about the 2012 issue that I have ever read elsewhere and specifically compares the 1997 CD issue to the earlier and later issues.
http://wagnersocietyny.org/Special%20Topics/Solti%27s%20Ring%20Remastered%202013-07-13d.pdf


BTW I still find it hard to believe that ALL of the original tapes from the Ring recordong sessions spanning 1958-1965 had deteriorated to being unsable.

[tomdeacon]

Not unsable, unusable.

Tapes decay. Live and leard.

--
TD

[Willem Orange]

Possible yet Decca had no problem using the mastertapes for the 1955 Nozze and Don Giovanni for their Legends series and there are many other instances where Decca used other mastertapes from before and after the Ring sessions to produce that series. Yet the Ring recording, arguably the most important recording they ever made (and they knew it), in sessions spanning seven years from 1958 to 1965 had NO usable mastertapes??????? I don't buy it but even if true it doesn't say much for their tape preservation methods. But whatever.......

[wade]

Do we really know that they had the master tapes for the 1955 recordings to go back to?

[Willem Orange]

That's what they say in the literature that comes with the Legends series sets - I have no real reason to doubt it since other companies e.g. EMI are going back to masters from the early 50s to do some of their CD releases.

[wade]

yes, it DOES seem strange that Decca would have been that lax with storage standards for what was their label's standard bearer Ring cycle masters recorded over an 8 year span of time.

[Mark Zimmer]

Could its popularity have doomed the master tapes? Each time they're handled, they deteriorate more than if they had been left alone. That's why there are hardly any useable original prints of the Chaplin shorts---prints were stuck over and over and the negatives wore out and the prints were run to death. Something that's lain more or less undisturbed in the vaults for 50 years may be in better shape due to not being handles.

[Willem Orange]

On Thursday, May 14, 2015 at 3:56:44 PM UTC-4, Mike wrote:
> Record/CD manufacturer does something I find strange or just don't understand. Therefore the manufacturer is not telling the truth about pressing CDs on the cheap.

Well no -it actually doesn't make sense but if you want to chalk it up to "not understanding" that's OK

[Willem Orange]

For the Legends series not only does Decca say that the original analogue master tapes were used for the 96hkz 24-bit transfer but they also tell you specifics about the equipment that was used in the original recording e.g. the mixing desk, the type of microphones, the monitor speakers and amplifiers and the tape machines used.

[wade]

I believe that there WAS a remastering done during the pre-CD LP era but in actuality, the master tapes were probably not handled for the production of LPs/CDs that much (yes I know I am guessing, but it seems reasonable). They would have used second or third generation working tapes to create new LP stampers.

[Willem Orange]

Yes there was a remastering of the original 1959 LP issue about a decade later which sounded much more dynamic with a larger frequency range

[Oscar]

On Thursday, May 14, 2015 at 5:50:35 PM, Willem Orange wrote:
>
> Yes there was a remastering of the original 1959 LP issue about a decade later which sounded much more dynamic with a larger frequency range.

Better cutting heads. Many later pressings of EMI and Decca titles sounded better on account of technological advancements in the cutting field. The old Westrex heads produced in early Living Stereo and Living Presence LP's a warm narcotic glow sometimes at the expense of dynamic range and frequency response.

Everything you need to know about London/Decca classical records:
The label does not matter. The matrix codes tell you what you need to know about the record. Don't worry about whether or not it's a Decca or a London.

At 6 o'clock position:
You will see a matrix, say, ZAL-6526-2E. ZAL means it is stereo. If mono, XARL. The 6526 is a recording number. The 2 of 2E means second lacquer made from that recording. "E" is the code for cutting engineer. 2E/1W means side A and B came from lacquer cut by different engineers.

List of Decca Engineers from 1957 to 1972:
A= Guy Fletcher.
B= Ronald Mason.
C= Trevor Fletcher.
D= Jack Law.
E= Stanley Goodall.
F= Cyril Windebank.
G= Ted Burket (especially good)
K= Tony Hawkins.
L= George Bettyes.
W= Harry Fisher (especially good)

At 9 o'clock position:
There will be a number, e.g. "1" or "3". That is the mother number.

At 12 o'clock position:
There will be 2 letter code indicating what year the LP was pressed.

CT - from 1950-1951
RT - from 1959
ET - from 1960
ZT - from 1962
OT - from 1963
MT - from 1965
KT - about 1967 to 1969
JT - about 1969 to 1972
no age-codings were used after 1972

At 3 o'clock position:
There will be 2 letter code, e.g. "UG". That is the stamper number using the word "B U C K I N G H A M" to represent the numbers 1 through 10. UG means 27th stamper from that particular mother.

Many audiophiles think that the best cutting equipment was used during the 1969-1972 period.

[Willem Orange]

Yes i think you are exactly right - the difference in the sound between the 2 LPs sets of the Decca Rheingold are significant - much better on the second.

[wade]

was the LP remastering coordinated with the LP cover redesign and the reissue as a super boxed set with the Ring Resounding? or was that later?

[Willem Orange]

I think the cover redesign was first (along with the improved sound) and then later the four operas were put together the boxed set along with the book - this was the redesigned cover http://www.ebay.com/itm/London-OSA-1309-Wagner-DAS-RHEINGOLD-Flagstad-London-Svanholm-SOLTI-3-LPs-1960s-/371321087136?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item56747624a0

[Willem Orange]

Just to note that there were different covers for the original stereo and mono release of the Rheingold

[Willem Orange]

On Friday, May 15, 2015 at 5:11:52 AM UTC-4, themusicparlour wrote:
> Aside from the cut'n'paste Purchase Tax dating-codes being nearly completely wrong, the wagnersociety link appears in error.
> The, presumably, original stereo Rheingold masterings [new/unplayed 1960/1 'ET' LP's: 3/2/3/3/3/2 'E'] weren't "at a cautiously low volume level" - having quite typical max. modulation peaks.
> Transfered to SET series ... EMG Monthly Letter, Dec.68; "A slightly higher cut has given the sound even more richness and realism, but it has given the voices a slight edge..they do not seem as perfectly focussed as in the original".
> Without that/a later pressing to compare, the statement "the later mastering was considerably louder" implies less dynamic-range. The original LXT mono set is noticebly brighter/relatively 'scrawny', with slight additional transient capability.
> References to Decca 16 bit/48khz are at odds with Decca's digital recorder initially being @ 18/48.

But why would the dynamic range have anything to do with simple volume - can't you just turn the volume up regardless of the dynamic rnage????

[Willem Orange]

On Friday, May 15, 2015 at 7:47:42 AM UTC-4, themusicparlour wrote:
> SXL/LXT releases had an identical cover-design.
> LP masterings go no higher than certain peak modulation levels: thus if the 1968 levels, overall, are "considerably louder", then inherent dynamic-range is less.
> The original mono (eg: side 2 - loud orchestral chords just before the mid-point) appear far louder than the SXL - but the peak-levels are no greater.

Well at least in the USA the mono and stereo covers were different.

[Willem Orange]

I see that actually the original stereo set had two different cover designs -

http://www.ebay.com/itm/WAGNER-DAS-RHEINGOLD-SOLTI-LONDON-FFSS-STEREO-BLUEBACK-BOXSET-3-RECORDS-M-/371326211440?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item5674c45570

and


http://www.ebay.com/itm/TAS-LIST-DAS-RHEINGOLD-London-FFSS-OSA-1309-WBG-SOLTI-FLAGSTAD-3-LP-Box-/261864195832?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item3cf85286f8

[Steve de Mena]

On 5/14/15 12:36 PM, Mark Zimmer wrote:

> Could its popularity have doomed the master tapes? Each time they're handled, they deteriorate more than if they had been left alone. That's why there are hardly any useable original prints of the Chaplin shorts---prints were stuck over and over and the negatives wore out and the prints were run to death. Something that's lain more or less undisturbed in the vaults for 50 years may be in better shape due to not being handled.
>

That would seem to be the more likely explanation for the degradation
of the Solti Ring Master tapes. They might have been edited more
initially.

Steve

[gggg...@gmail.com]

On Thursday, May 7, 2015 at 4:59:24 AM UTC-10, wkasimer wrote:
> It looks like Decca is about to issue the most recent CD remastering of the Solti RING in a budget box:
>
> http://www.amazon.com/Wagner-Ring-Nibelungen-DVD-Combo/dp/B00VVZUXRS
>
> This was the remastering used for the expensive deluxe edition, which I never purchased:
>
> http://www.amazon.com/Wagner-Ring-Nibelungen-Super-Deluxe/dp/B008J1QFLU
>
> I currently own the previous CD incarnation:
>
> http://www.amazon.com/Wagner-Ring-Nibelungen-Cycle/dp/B0000042H4
>
> So my obvious question is this - does the 2012 remastering (in RBCD) boast any significant improvement over the 1997 issue? I'm not interested, at least at the moment, in the sound of the Blu-Ray audio, since that's not how I listen to music due to my audio setups.
>
> Bill

According to this:

- During the years, I have realized how much Solti’s conducting is leaning towards bombast, and how much his rendering of musical violence and brutal brass is unecessary and even misleading in Wagner. However, the front side of the coin is clarity, and control, letting the Wiener Philharmoniker drown you in the euphony of wonderful string playing.

http://www.wagneropera.net/wagner-recommendations.htm

[linde...@gmail.com]

On Thursday, May 7, 2015 at 12:36:19 PM UTC-4, Willem Orange wrote:

> On Thursday, May 7, 2015 at 10:59:24 AM UTC-4, wkasimer wrote:
> > It looks like Decca is about to issue the most recent CD remastering of the Solti RING in a budget box:
> >
> > http://www.amazon.com/Wagner-Ring-Nibelungen-DVD-Combo/dp/B00VVZUXRS
> >
> > This was the remastering used for the expensive deluxe edition, which I never purchased:
> >
> > http://www.amazon.com/Wagner-Ring-Nibelungen-Super-Deluxe/dp/B008J1QFLU
> >
> > I currently own the previous CD incarnation:
> >
> > http://www.amazon.com/Wagner-Ring-Nibelungen-Cycle/dp/B0000042H4
> >
> > So my obvious question is this - does the 2012 remastering (in RBCD) boast any significant improvement over the 1997 issue? I'm not interested, at least at the moment, in the sound of the Blu-Ray audio, since that's not how I listen to music due to my audio setups.
> >
> > Bill
>

> A review of the CDs here
> http://www.classicstoday.com/review/soltis-ring-deluxe-style/

Only for members.

Mort Linder

[meyers...@gmail.com]

There are many sites that gave detailed comparisons of the various Solti Ring releases. We didn't need this idiot to post another one