What are the characteristics quality recordings?


I've been pondering what differentiates a quality recording from one that is mediocre. To me, good recordings transmit a realism of performance, have clarity, and reproduce the dynamic range of the artist(s) and their instruments. Good recordings also allow the emotionality of the music to be felt, IMO. Mediocre recordings do not do all or parts of the above. I ask this question in order to broaden my understanding of reproduced music.

That leads to my two part question:

1. What do Audiogoners believe constitutes a good recording? That is, what are the sonic qualities of an excellent recording?

2. What are examples (specific CDs or records)of recordings that reflect your answer to #1?

John
johnrob
Hi Timf, thanks for your comment. As to reproduction of size, I tend to differentiate that from soundstaging in my own listening. For me, soundstaging is about relative positioning in the recreated acoustic space, and a natural rendering of the instruments in that space: do I hear instruments spread naturally across the stage and in depth, or are instruments jumping around due to spot miking or is the soundstage totally flat due to excessive use of multi-miking, inept capture of stereo imaging or excessive processing that has destroyed phase relationships. (Some folks talk about height here as well, but that's not a hot button for me.)

Some great examples of excellent soundstaging on recordings, and recordings that make it very easy for others to hear exactly what one is talking about in this regard, are:

    Holst "Savitri" with Janet Baker, Argo ZNF 6 (In this wonderful recording, listen to the entry of the husband at stage far deep right and listen to his voice as he moves across the stage and then up to the front of the stage. Also listen to the voice of Death at the far left rear of the stage. On a good playback system, the spacial location is precise and specific as the singer move around the stage.)

    Allegri "Miserere", Tallis Scholars, CFP 40339 (The Scholars split into two antiphonal choirs in this recording, with one clearly in the far distance of the church in which this was recorded. If you have someone who claims not to understand what is meant by "depth" in a sound system, or how sounds can be behind the back wall behind your speakers, play this for them.)
"Size" can refer to size of the soundstage or apparent "size" of the instruments. In a favorite recording of mine, the Starker Bach Cello Suites (listed above), Starker plays a cello that appears to be 6' tall. The close miking really makes this instrument sound oversize. And yet, when I listen in a small room to a live solo cello, and if I'm sitting right up close in the first row next to the performer, this LP is not far off from what I've heard live in these settings, notwithstanding what I might otherwise imagine it should sound like.

In LP playback, I've found that different cartridges make a big difference in apparent size of both instruments and soundstage. These variables have made me somewhat more tolerant of the "size" issue.

Best wishes,
WOW - Some excellent responses to this post! Thank you.

I would enjoy hearing from other people regarding their views on this topic - particularly on what cds or albums exemplify a good recording in areas of music such as rock, jazz, etc.

Thanks again

John
I've always wondered, Bufus, why I have to turn Pearl Jam CD's WAY DOWN when I play them. They are so much louder than my other CD's. Is that due to "normalization, compression, etc..."?

Or just maybe the Ed Vedder honeymoon is over for me... sigh.

Cheers.
Thanks Rushton. Perhaps I will check your recommendations out. I obviously have difficulty describing what I hear so I appreciate the clarification.
Rushton has hit it spot on! My listening biases are oriented as his are toward classical and jazz vinyl. Music that is well recorded, that preserves the space and natural harmonic overtones of the performance, dynamic swings, and the leading edge transients that give you what J. Gordon Holt calls the "goosebump factor" make you forget about listening to your gear and allow the music to wash over you.

That being said, I think his list is a very good example of recordings that do just that. I would add that the example of Holst's "Savitri" on the Argo lable is a great test of your system's ability to resolve placement of the voices on the stage. The male voice moves down and across the stage as the recording progresses. Janet Baker's voice in this recording is so liquid and involving, if your system is up to the task, you will be completely immersed.

I would also add Stravinsky's "Firebird" on the Sheffield Lab lable as well (Lab 24) a direct-to-disk recording with Erich Liensdorf and the Los Angeles Symphony. Recorded in one take in a large recording studio, this recording as enormous dynamic swings, with some of the best recorded drum whacks I have ever heard. Great performance as well, maybe not quite as emotionally involving as the Dorati/Mercury, but well worth seeking out.

Respighi "Church Windows" Reference Recordings 45 rpm

Miles Davis "Kind Of Blue" Classic Records 45 rpm reissue.
I am very partial to the "Flamenco Sketches" track.

The example of Starker/Bach "Cello Suites" is wonderful in that while the instrument itself is so closely miked, and the cello seems huge, it is intimate at the same time. The acoustic space in which it is recorded is well delineated, and you can sense and feel the subtle shifts of nueance in the various parts of each piece. You can also detect Starker shifting his position in the chair as he plays.

Recordings that are so faithful to the performance, that make me forget I am listening to a "hi-fi", that paint a visual image in my head of the players spaced across the stage in front of me, that gets it done for me.

There is a wealth of fine reissues ou there right now, that while a little pricey (for the LP), represent the golden age of jazz and classical recordings at their best.