| Columns Retired Columns & Blogs |
May 12, 2008 - 7:52pm
#1
Lack of Classical New-Releases on LP
| Loudspeakers Amplification Digital Sources | |
Analog Sources Accessories Featured | |
Music Columns Retired Columns | |
Show Reports | |
Features Latest News Community | |
Resources Subscriptions |
© 2024 StereophileAVTech Media Americas Inc., USA
All rights reserved
Nothing new. There have not been any significant new classical LP releases in at least 2 decades (with the exception of a few 'audiophile' specialties).
Kal
That's pretty sad. I guess they stopped making LPs right after I grew out of them. I still remember buying the Pogorelich-Abbado Chopin Concerto #2 LP from Tower Records as a kid. & Perahia-Haitink Beethoven. I guess that is long time ago, but it seems so recent to me. I must be getting old.
I think it's because any new classical LP would essentially just be a cover version of material that's already been done.
Hot Button Warning:
This post is lame and inaccurate. Caution must be exercised in case this reply pushes one of your Hot Buttons.
Your neurolinguistic programming may vary.
Caution Ahead: This thread may eventually contain a reference to two ears requiring no more than two speakers.
They aren't releasing very many new classical CDs these days either. So the chances of any of this on LP is nil.
Huh? Are we on the same page here? There are SO many new classical CD releases monthly, that often, I'm overwhelmed by the choice! In fact, the opposite is true, Logan. The # of new CD releases listed in the Nov 1988 issue of Gramophone was 284 CDs and LPs (so they did make LPs in '88!). The # of new CD releases listed in Mar 2007 issue of Gramophone was 401 CDs. (The figures are from The New Yorker mag's classical critic Alex Ross's website.)
Yeah, it sucks. Seems LPs are making major come back in jazz and alt rock. Classical? nadda... Even the used market is almost non-existant in most cities.
Lame and inaccurate (but I get the smiley).
Kal
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure his statement was... a joke? I thought it was really funny!
Well, I amended my reply (before I saw yours) but, even with the smiley, it hit a sore point too often made by the uninformed. It reminds me of those who insist that only two speakers/channels are needed because humans have only two ears. So my reply had less to do with your humor/insight that it did with my hot buttons.
Kal
OK, I amended my post, so you may want to re-amend your amended reply, or not.
If you do re-amend your amended reply, then I will re-amend this post so as to reflect your re-amendment, but I am not plannning to re-re-amend my original post...unless I can find a sexier picture of a "hot button."
Also, I would never make that two speaker statement. I am well aware that since there is only one given source of any given sound in a recording, then only one speaker is required to fully reproduce the original source.
Love the amended post!
Thanks for taking this thread to a Borgesian dimension, Buddha. I thought I was in a time-warp there for a bit.
Getting back on point, I agree w/ dbowker... it's just not cool that on the alt-rock & jazz front, the LP revival is flourishing, while the classical fans have to languish in the shadow. I guess as consumers we can't really do anything to actively effect a change, but it still feels wrong to accept it as our fate with an 'oh well' and a shoulder shrug, you know? Doesn't seem right.
Anyone good at spamming corporate email in-boxes?
You know, I've been thinking about this.
The cost to sales ratio of classical LP production seems like it would have a high energy (cost/benefit) of activation.
I was thinking a cool thing to try might be an LP subscription program.
Remember "Direct to Disc" LP's? We could kind of do that now, with "Direct to Vinyl" performances.
So, here's what we do:
First, a hall needs to spend only enough for a good miking set up and a feed to a hi rez digital signal to transmit. They could use the same mics for the whole season, or years, for that matter! This would keep overhead reasonably low.
Then, (I know, I'm about to use a swear word...) a hi rez digital recording could be engineered from any hall at one central mixing location, and the recordings could be sent to be pressed onto vinyl based on how many copies were purchased within a certain time frame. That way, no excess inventory.
That way, each classical music lover could peruse the performances coming up in the halls he is interested in or by the performers/orchestras he prefers, and could build his LP collection with new recordings.
Like Dead Heads trading "shows," this might also start a collecting movement that could fuel a hobby via well maintained resale values - and we all know that many audiophiles are drawn to the idea of exclusivity.
I think it could work, why don't we invent it?
Agreed. We just have to move it around quickly.
Kal
True but the trade-off for me is the lively classical repertoire in multichannel SACD where nothing comparable exists in any other genre.
I do remember reading elsewhere in the forum about your phenomenal collection of SACDs. Way to rub it in, mate.
Please don't compare chalk and cheese. Look at the 1998 figures instead, when LP was no longer competing. And factor out the boutique/vanity "labels" which might appear in 1% of record stores. When did a major US orchestra/emsemble last issue a new recording on a major and readily-available label not of its own making? And what is the ratio of new recordings to reissues amongst the major labels these days?
Chalk & cheese?
Even the recording industry is more interesting now. I don't know what you consider as boutique/"vanity" labels, but the best of the artists are now on smaller labels that produce recordings that just plain sound better than DG or EMI or whatever conglomerate. I'm thinking of Hyperion, Harmonia Mundi, etc. And more eclectic composers are being represented b/c of the industry's diffraction, strangely enough. I'd agree w/ you on one account: the major game is not with the major labels these days. DG's been taking really interesting risks, like taking on Golijov or releasing Otter's Terezin discs, but I can't remember buying an EMI or a Sony release recently (Perahia excepted). You know why? Because they're lagging behind. They're putting out reissues b/c they can't innovate their moribund systems, and not because there's a dearth of talent or lack of new releases. They can't compete. As I maintained, there are more new releases now than there was ever before, '98 included. It's because there are more classical record labels than there was before, and I see it as a good thing. I love the fact that one the most thrilling Beethoven cycles in these years was committed to record by Minnesota/Vanska and not Rattle/Berlin, by BIS and not DG. Likewise, some of the best performances of Bach Cello Suites were recorded by Hyperion or Channel, and not EMI. And I don't know about you, but I buy these recordings at places like Borders or Barnes & Noble. I live in NYC, so it makes a difference, but most of the people buy online now anyways. These recordings are easily accessible to anyone who want them.
And the repertory represented has become more diverse & interesting, too, as has the range of musicians. The diffraction of recording industry has slaughtered popular music, but for some reason, it jolted classical music out of the boring routine, the funeral march of the giant labels. Even digital downloads: as crappy as lossy files are, for some reason, people are turning more to classical music. 12% of iTunes sales are classical. That's staggering.
I'll reiterate: there are more new releases now than there was in '98. Not re-issues. It's a bit more daunting to wade through the reeds, to discern what's worthy & what's not, but that process itself is exciting, I think. Who wants to be spoonfed another Bruckner 4 by the Berlin on DG? I'm much happier now than I was 10 years ago as a classical listener, no contest. More choice, less stagnance. And I simply like the vitality of the scene now better. It's more about music, less about elitism.
You might want to read this blog post by Alex Ross, the New Yorker critic... it's where I got my #s from last time:
http://www.therestisnoise.com/2007/04/reality_check.html
It's not chalk and cheese, it's...
Record stores? They are irrelevant today, so no filtering of smaller labels is necessary.
You keep moving the goalposts. What difference does it make what label the release appears on? The majors are becoming increasingly irrelevant, except as distributors.
Vide supra.
Kal (who sees no shortage of new classical releases in CD and other formats, except for LP)
I find the number of classical releases to be overwhelming. I read lots of great reviews, by lots of recordings and I can't keep up. I have a good couple of dozen CDs unopened right now.
In my experience the overall quality has gone up as well. Very rarely do I feel a classical purchase was wasted. The worst reaction I typically have now is "I would not have performed it that way". Pretty cool.