dynamic range -the good and bad?

There may be more going on than just the recording. Some equipment, mostly speakers, do not produce dynamics in a linear fashion to the input level, so that the speaker may not respond in the same proportion to a small signal at a given frequency than 1), it may respond to a larger signal at the same frequency or 2), and more commonly, at another frequency. For instance, if a speaker is voiced to boom and sizzle, the mids may be recessed making a solo harder to hear but when the orchestra kicks in the high and low frequencies overwhelm. The better the speakers, the easier to hear through the entire performance at various volume levels even when the overall dynamics actually improve. Here’s a review that touches on this point. Just one more thing that makes this hobby so fascinating.

http://www.sonoris.co.kr/review/reviews/tas/exoticaGR_part1.pdf

Pacific_island_audio...I question your suggestion that no classical recordings are compressed, although I agree that, unlike pop music, it is subtle.

A manual form of compression called "gain riding" is surely done, and when multiple microphone signals are mixed some gain adjustments are made. One practice which bothers me is to boost a soloist to unreal volume. If I turn my volume up so that the orchestra sounds right the soloist is louder than a real instrument can play.

If I turn my volume up so that the orchestra sounds right the soloist is louder than a real instrument can play.

That is my experience too. It is one of the reasons recorded music sounds like recorded music and not live music. I like Telarc because they tend not to over emphasize the lead instruments as much as some "audiophile" labels do.

It does sound like many recordings of concerti have the soloist separately and more closely miked. This changes the perception of presence, not only making the soloist sound louder than would be in person, but also sound closer relative to the orchestra.

Of course, there are times when the dynamic range is greater than the recording medium's capabilities, think the canons on the 1812 Overture. Older analog recordings didn't have the dynamic range possible with digital (especially high resolution formats 24/96 or DSD) which required some gain riding to avoid clipping or to keep the quietest passages from being swamped by tape hiss. My previous post was overstated, I stand corrected. Fortunately, digital recording does allow for much less of this, if any, and good recording engineers take advantage of the extend dynamic range.

Shadorne: I have opened the Drum Improves from the Sheffield Lab CD to view the spectrograph. It's interesting to note they have allow an occasional transient to clip.

Listened to a few choice parts of my 90's vintage standard issue Kind of Blue CD today.

Significant hiss in the background and a few spotty rough edges that sounded somewhat scratchy from time to time, but overall sounds very full bodied, textured and lifelike.

I think you just have to live with the hiss and rough edges on this one. Its noticeable but does not interfere with the overall performance and impact. Kind of adds some natural atmosphere that reminds you that this was recorded almost 50 years ago now, so its practically an antique. What a classic piece though!