# What makes a great recording?



## Grosse Fugue (Mar 3, 2010)

When you go to buy a recording of a piece you don't have, how do you decide which one to buy? Also, what qualities do you look for in a recording?Sound quilitiy,interpretation, etc.?

I still have much to learn about what makes a good recording so I usally just look for recommendations or else I go by who recorded it. For me you can't go wrong with (at least for my limited knowledge) the Emerson String Quartet or the AAC or Academy of St. Martins in the Fields.


----------



## Huge (Dec 24, 2006)

The BBC does a very very good series on Radio 3 Recording of the week. The archives are on their website. I usually use that.


----------



## SPR (Nov 12, 2008)

This is a question I think about quite a bit when I am looking at CDs, but the more music I buy... the more often I am surprised that the recording quality keeps getting better as the years go on.

It used to be that I would doggedly search for Deutch Grammaphone, Phillips, or Harmonia Mundi CDs.. as I had good luck with them. But Decca, Sony, Naxos, EMI, Virgin and others have good stuff too...top notch. For older recordings I tend to stick with the labels and names I know. If I have a choice - I'll pick the Wien Philharmonic over Bobs Peanut Gallery kazoo orchestra and ragtime band. 

and of course... going with the ASMOTF, Emerson SQ, and the big symphonic names from Berlin, London and major US names are generally good. Lets face it - money pays for slick production.

Really ... when I think about it.... the only really *bad* (I mean hardly worth playing) CD's I have... are the really bargain basement disks that may or may not even have details of who is playing - and on labels I have never heard of before. Stuff that I picked up before I seriously was into classical music. Random samplers and the like.

I admit - I have one 'sampler' CD that I got years ago... that ramains maybe the only CD I have of its kind that is worth playing. I still think the version of Brandenburg #2 on this is the best I own, and have never been able to find the entire set by whoever plkays it. I also think the Trumpet Voluntary (Prince of Denmark) is simply spectacular..... so you never know. Sometimes you find gems in the junk.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0..._m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_r=0RZCK238ZE1ABVGQ0D77


----------



## Andy Loochazee (Aug 2, 2007)

Huge said:


> The BBC does a very very good series on Radio 3 Recording of the week. The archives are on their website. I usually use that.


Agreed. I think you are possibly referring to the Saturday programme called "CD Review", which is normally presented by Andrew McGregor. This mainly covers new CDs although there is section where they look at older ones. I listen to it occasionally when I know they are reviewing material of interest to me. It is certainly very interesting to listen to how people of that calibre assess the quality of different recordings. I'm often left in compete awe of their knowledge, and it makes me feel very dim at times.

Here's a link to last Saturday's programme:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00rjxvv


----------



## SalieriIsInnocent (Feb 28, 2008)

Well, I usually look it who is conducting it, what orchestra is playing it, and the audio quality comes last. For some recordings audio comes first.


----------



## Comistra (Feb 27, 2010)

Grosse Fugue said:


> When you go to buy a recording of a piece you don't have, how do you decide which one to buy? Also, what qualities do you look for in a recording?Sound quilitiy,interpretation, etc.?


Sound quality, for me, is a deal-breaker. I don't care how good an interpretation is if the recording is bad. Thus I tend to look for more recent recordings. I have a number of Naxos (ie budget) CDs that were recorded recently (1980s and 1990s) that sound great, and "big label" CDs with 50- to 60-year-old recordings that sound bad.

The interpretations do matter, of course, but I find the idea that there is a "correct" interpretation for a piece to be ridiculous. As long as the playing isn't just godawful, I can appreciate different approaches. I just need the recording quality to be good, or it grates on my ears.


----------



## scytheavatar (Aug 27, 2009)

There's no such thing as a ensemble/label/performer that can do no wrong; all respectable performers have their own sound signature that may or may not suit the work. I always check to see the consensus on the best recording of a work before getting one. In that aspect amazon.com is a great resource to use, the recording with the most reviews usually is the one which is the most popular, although of course just because it is popular doesn't mean it's good.


----------



## SalieriIsInnocent (Feb 28, 2008)

scytheavatar said:


> just because it is popular doesn't mean it's good.


Agreed. Back in the day, when I was searching for a good recording of Don Giovanni, the Giulini was the most popular, but I didn't like it. I opted for the Karajan cd.


----------



## Vaneyes (May 11, 2010)

The old bugaboo about sound versus/and performance is present on this thread, as it is on another thread currently running.

A great recording deemed so by experts, the sound is secondary by considerable margin.

A great recording for others, may simply be one that is attention-grabbing from beginning to end.


----------



## Stargazer (Nov 9, 2011)

Interpretation is the most important for me by far. It's amazing how different a piece can sound sometimes between multiple performances, even though the same notes are being played each time. After that for me would be sound quality....because really what else is there to take into account?


----------

