Although we doubt that anybody is holding their breath in nervous anticipation, as mentioned earlier we have been conducting comparative listening trials over two weeks between this recently re-mastered EMI (Japan) disc and the earlier re-mastered Esoteric version of the same original analogue recording. A very brief summary of findings follow.
Trials were conducted on my usual high quality stereo system - Marantz/dCS front end, MFA PTC pre, Krell power, M-L speakers, cabling Cardas GR (audio), Harmonix (power), Audience (digital).
Overall we much preferred the Esoteric version and quite consistently so despite changing the order of a variety of influential factors such as order, time of day, time from switch on, "blind" v "known" etc. There was plenty of excitement but not much emotive expression in either recording.
Esoteric
More natural instrument timbres (woodier woods, lower strings, more honk in horns, more realistic upper strings), more air around instruments, better separation and spatial positioning in dense passages (micro-dynamics), better sound-staging.
On the other hand we felt this disc to be less impactful and to have relatively limited bass performance. One sensed losses at both extremes of the frequency scale.
EMI (Japan)
More extended and better defined bass, higher "highs", more rasp on brass, greater dynamic range, more "hi-fi" sounding.
Conversely, the EMI disc suffered from congestion in dense orchestral passages, a general diminution of air around instruments making it harder to determine spatial positioning and a less coherent and three-dimensional sound-stage. The upper strings although well-extended tended to be 'screechy'.
On a sensible listening scale where 80 (of 100) would signify the very best sound realism currently realisable from SACD we gave the Esoteric 55 points and the EMI 47
|