| Ave
Atque
Vale,
CD! |
| Commentary |
| Mike
Silverton |
| April
1999 |
Clem
Perry asks for
a wee spurt of
prose to help
launch his
webzine. Back
at Apex
Greeting,
where I do the
verse for
condolance
cards, I get
$8.75 the
word. For an
old pal like
Clem, it's
barter. My
handle and
that of my
Doppelgänger,
Signor
Scardanelli,
appears in
Clem's
masthead as an
exercise of
what the
Internet does
best: a
hyperlink to
our music
commentary in
my own
webzine, La
Folia.
Disclosure:
Madrigal Audio
Laboratories
sponsors La
Folia.
Demurrer: my
relationship
to Madrigal in
no way affects
Clem's
operation.
Truth be told,
he's not
especially hot
for Madrigal's
Mark Levinson
gear. Clem and
I have
discussed
these matters
at length and
with some
heat. As a
generality,
unless the
designer of a
given audio
object
obtained his
degree in
electronics in
a distant
galaxy, or if
the piece
isn't
hand-assembled
out back in
the garage or
in a moonlit,
mountaintop
temple by
Aquarian
consumptives,
it fails to
attract my
buddy's
interest. He's
a fair-minded
fellow withal
as witness the
rant I'll soon
be submitting
about the Mark
Levinson
one-click-under-reference
No.33H mono
amps.
When
writers
pontificate
about
recording, we
know what they
listen to. If
they presume
to comment on
a recording's
sound quality,
it's equally
important to
know what they
listen with.
Further
disclosure: we
begin with the
Mark Levinson
No.39 CD
player and
move right
along (close,
indeed, to the
speed of
light) to the
Levinson
No.33H mono
power
amplifiers,
thence to
Wilson Audio
WATT/Puppy 5.1
speaker
systems.
Cabling:
Nordost
Quattro Fil
balanced
interconnects,
Nordost SPM
speaker
cables.
Tweaks: for
the CD player
only, an Audio
Power
Industries'
112 Ultra
Power Wedge
line
conditioner
and API PL 311
and 313 Power
Link line
cords. Under
the player, a
Bright Star
Audio
air-cushion
platform. A
pair of
Siltech
jumpers Scot
Markwell made
for me
replaces the
W/P's Puppy
Tails. I play
CDs only, and
the player's
analog level
control does
for a preamp.
There you have
it: CD player,
amps,
speakers,
tweaks. If the
listener
proposes to
get as close
as he can to
the recording
rather than
adrift in a
sea of ersatz
liquidity,
musicality,
whatever, less
is more,
always, amen.
On,
then, to the
much maligned
compact disc.
I am so very
grateful to
Clem for
allowing me
this
opportunity to
set up my
little soap
box here at
the end of the
line. For it
does appear
that the
16-bit CD will
soon defer to
a disc
embracing an
expanded
word-length
and, who
knows,
additional
channels.
Sooner than
later, the CD
joins the LP
in history.
But not, I
think, in fond
regard. Why, I
wonder.
From
the compact
disc's
inception,
we've had
examples of
good-sounding
productions
along, of
course, with
rubbish. Yet
if the digital
playback
medium were
capable of but
one sonically
splendid
exemplar, why
isn't it clear
to the
format's loud
and persistent
critics that
their disdain
is
misdirected? I
am listening
at the moment
to a
much-loved
four-disc set
on Philips,
Mozart / The
Great Sonatas
for Piano and
Violin
/ Arthur
Grumiaux,
violin; Walter
Klien, piano
[412 141-2].
The digital
sessions took
place in '81
through '83 in
La
Chaux-de-Fonds,
Switzerland.
The box does
not state the
set's release
date but it
does tell us
the catalog
numbers of the
five-LP and
three-microcassette
versions, a
marketing
practice long
since
abandoned.
Victor, Count
Goldstein
recommended
these gorgeous
performances
ages ago, and
it's become
one of the
things I
delight in
after a day of
critical
listening to
what a
colleague has
characterized
as
cats-in-a-clothes-dryer
music. Were
these Mozart
discs issued
last week, I'd
not question
their
verisimilitude
to live music.
Is the
production
perfect? I
detect on my
present system
a mild, not
unattractive
veil. But
certainly none
of these
irritants the
CD's critics
trot out time
and again as
ample reason
to mourn the
LP's demise.
It's
important to
mention that I
write about
classical
music,
primarily
recent, and a
little jazz
because,
unlike a good
deal of pop,
classical is
for the most
part recorded
as a
simultaneity
in an effort
to replicate
the way in
which we hear
it live. (Live
jazz is almost
always
amplified,
generally
terribly, as
something to
bemoan for
another time.)
The old
engineers we
revere --
Lewis Layton,
David Jones,
Bob Fine,
Kenneth
Wilkinson,
Marc Aubort --
did their work
by minimal
means, and
some do still.
Aubort, for
example, is
active. But
setup was
always a
painstaking,
time-hungry
affair. When
budget-conscious
producers got
their hands on
multi-track
recorders,
multi-miking
soon followed,
and so,
beginning, I
believe, in
the middle
Sixties, the
recording of
acoustic (unlayered)
events took a
downward turn.
Witness the
unenviable
reputation
Columbia
Records earned
among
audiophiles.
As a
generality,
many of the
majors shared
in critical
pejoration. On
the one hand,
poor
productions,
on the other,
inferior
pressings....
I
oversimplify,
of course.
Economies
weren't the
only factor.
Willful celebs
like Bernstein
and Karajan
presided,
post-session,
over the
mixing board
to achieve the
balances they
sought --
bring up the
cellos, less
trombone --
never quite
understanding
that their
technology-heavy
legacy sounds,
as sound, not
very good. But
even through
this bleak
period,
competent
producer-engineer
teams turned
out quality
recordings
which have
always sounded
right, on
vinyl and on
silver.
One
would be
foolish to
deny inferior
CD reissues.
John Culshaw's
landmark
production,
the Decca /
London Solti Ring,
is an
ameliorative
case in point:
earlier
digitized
disinterments
were poor.
Similarly,
EMI's new ART
(Abbey Road
Technology)
provides us
with accurate
-- read:
analog-like --
reissues of
historically
significant
releases. One
would be no
less foolish
to deny that
digital
playback gear
has improved
over the
years.
Comparisons
will prove it
to all but the
comatose. And
yet, in the
face of these
necessary
admissions --
one cannot say
this too often
-- I've any
number of CDs
on my shelves,
original
productions
issued from
the early
Eighties on,
that I play
today with
pleasure. Thus
one's
impatience
with the
digiphobic
claque for the
widespread
mischief it's
wrought.
Wherefore
mischief? The
expression
"filter-down
economics"
(as a
refashioning,
I suppose, of
"What's
good for GM is
good for the
country")
perhaps
defines a fact
of civilized
life.
Attitudes also
filter down,
as another
fact of
civilized
life. I wish
I'd kept a log
of the
comments I've
seen in the
general-interest
press about
how much
better vinyl
is. One
especially
truculent
speciment has
made a good
living
carrying on
thus. Were it
not for my
disquietude at
the prospect
of a letter
bomb, I'd
identify him
to you. Look,
if this ditzy
mindset
operates
merely as an
aspect of the
nostalgia
besetting
postmodern
society, let's
let it go with
the rest of
the
foolishness.
If, however,
it parrots the
claque, more's
the pity.
Higher-resolution
digital? Come,
dearest, to
our loving
bosoms! Yet
this condition
of secularized
agape reminds
me of the
anecdote about
a woman trying
on shoes.
"I wear
size seven,
but eight
feels so good,
I think I'll
take a
nine." In
other words,
fellow music
lovers, 16-bit
technology,
properly
utilized, has
given us some
remarkably
good
recordings.
The better I
make my sound
system, a
statement of
opinion more
and more
resembles a
fact.

|