I find Deutsche Grammophon is invaluable for chamber music repertoire, so many stellar string quartet, piano quintet, and wind octet recordings out there on DG. Karl Bohms recordings also have a special place in my heart, I find they usually have better engineering than Karajan's from the same era.
I have a few of the Bohm Mozart late symphonies on LP, which sound excellent but not the best I ever heard. They are pressed in Italy, and the jackets are not like the super-thin German made records, but thicker cardboard stock. A DG German pressing of the Schumann Rhenish with Carlo Maria Giulini that I bought used is probably the worst sound quality of any record I have. DG is like a crap shoot.
Do go for the new The Original Source reissues! Absolutely stunning! DG finally up their with the best and finally we are able to hear how well these releases were recorded!
If anyone dismisses DG due to its sonic reputation, they are going to overlook some of the most incredible music. When I see people in forums who basically only listen to classical music if it's Analogue Productions reissues of Living Stereo or Mercury I despair about what they're missing out on. Also, as well as some of the best chamber music recordings (mentioned in another comment), DG might be the best classical label for avant-garde/20th-century music.
Yes, they had incredible repertoire in the sixties and seventies. For example almost the entire Stockhausen catalogue. The four "Avantgarde" boxsets from DG are so important musically that I think they belong in any serious record collection. But from the mid-eighties on this momentum somehow dried up. This is why Stockhausen bought all the rights to his recordings from DG to reissue them himself on CD on his own private label in the nineties, as DG showed no interest whatsoever in reissuing them.
I feel the same way about people who restrict themselves to analog. I just listened to Manon Lescaut conducted by Marco Armiliato with Anna Netrebko as Manon. DG recorded live in 2016 with very warm and spacious sound. Listen to vinyl by all means, but there are plenty of wonderful digital recordings out there.
Nicely done. I totally agree with your ending notes. I have over 500 DG releases in my collection. DG’s have their rightful place in the classical cannon. I did a series of videos studying the labels I learned a lot, but I didn’t know that about Canadian pressings. Thanks for sharing. God bless
Here in Sydney Australia DG records are definitely easier to find than any other of the "great" labels. I particularly relish coming across mono DGs from the early 50s; they are pressed on very heavy vinyl, which is pleasingly rounded off at the edges, almost like a piece of porcelain. One copy of Beethoven's fifth that I found contained advertising material in German, and notes written in German by one Doktor Luther, who presumably owned the record in 1953. Total cost: one australian dollar. The covers of these early DGs contain an integrated pocket for the record, pre-lined with plastic and covered over with the front cardboard flap. Try putting a modern PVC free sleeve in there and you have a convenient sort of cover for protecting the contents. The edges of the "pocket" are stitch-bound, which I find quite appealing, and prevents seam-splitting.
Thank you so much for pointing out about the quality of the Canadian pressings of those DG albums. I was fortunate to find hundreds of them for a very inexpensive price a few years ago at a local used record store, which has closed. I am also a huge fan of Karajan's work. I was noticing the variety of albums stored behind you and noticed the spines of several Joni Mitchell albums. You have a very good taste!
Karajan has been also also on London. Interesting about that Milstein DG. I own the OG and it is very decent sounding. I have about 1000 DG LPs. Thanks for the thoughts in classical LPs. Very nice to see your generation into this. There is a very nice tulip DG called Maria Stader “Portrait Einer Sangerin”. It’s absolutely outstanding with great air and clarity and the cover is also beautiful.
Thanks for video Some comments 1 - the best DG pressings are French Prestige series 2- to enjoy DG you should run Teldec EQ not regular RIAA EQ 3- best DG recordings is Beethoven essential collection about 20 boxes of 4-5 records per box. Every Beethoven record on other labels I listen I compare to records from this collection. Maybe not best sounding but the best performance 4- best Tchaikovsky is performance on DG Ivo Pagarelic. 1 st concert Check out his biography 5 - Arthuro Salvadore from height-end-audio is not a guy. He is guru for audiophiles my reference for sound quality. He is Canadian btw. If you have a question check his site.
I enjoyed this. The Beethoven set you talked about as having been signed by Karajan is sadly signed by an autopen, not in person by Karajan. It's a great set, though, and was my first LP box set.
Here in Belgium it's easiest to find DG, not so for Decca. It's true, sound is not as good but good, and if I have a copy that sounds too thin I equalize a bit. I am no audiophile so I may :-)
I'm probably the 900th person to point out that Karajan recorded for EMI (UK Columbia and HMV), Decca, RCA and Philips in addition to DG, but I enjoyed your resume anyway. I'm 100% in agreement that the German tulip DGs are the best sounding of his DG vinyls. Here in the UK we had to contend with UK pressings in the 1970s that were wafer thin and riddled with static, at least after the oil crisis.
DG never had an audiophile reputation among classical record collectors. Thin highs, no bass--- German label equalized for European listeners with cheap record players. I was happy with DG releases; just never bought them for the sound. Great orchestras and conductors were DG's strength-- never the sound. I've collected and read about classical recordings for five decades. Decca/London was at the top of the heap for sound quality. I think RCAs were overpraised, especially the notorious "dynagrooves" which were specifically equalized for cheap phonographs. RCA even claimed so in its advertising.
Thanks for sharing about your DG collecting tips. One comment about your system description.. would be helpful to know the Phono and the cart that you use for your listening as well as all the other components..
I’m at total agreement with your good self about Deutsche Grammophon’s sound problems….Decca, EMI, Mercury….great sound in those labels, particularly Decca and Mercury.
My experience with DGG is that many stereo records sound good when you play them with another curve rather than RIAA. I know that is a quite controversial subject but specially with those that sound muffled, I play them through Vinyl Studio phono preamp on my Windows PC and usually playing at 450 Hz with 70Hz of bass cut and -10.5 to -12dB at 10 Khz they sound better. Vinyl Studio allows you to listen them in real time.
Milstein was one of the greatest violinists of the 20th century. The 1962/1963 cycle is among the best ever. I don't like Michael Fremer but those recordings are about the only thing we agree on. You probably have no way to alter the tonal balance of your sound system. Being an engineer and not an audiophile I wouldn't have a sound system that couldn't be adjusted. The audiophile ideas that less is more, one size fits all, and if you have the oerfevt sound system you will get perfect results every time strikes me as a poor idea. Learning to use tone controls and a graphic equalizer is a skill that takes time, patience, and an ear that knows what live music sounds like. This affords greater enjoyment listening to more recordings. IMO DG is a top label. Most of my DG recordings are CDs.
In my area, upstate NY, I come across way more "living stereo" records than I do DG tulips. The tulips are somewhat allusive where I am for some reason. But the post-tulip DG records are very easy to find. The 3 main record shops in my area have very limited classical sections. So thrift shops are the place to locate them.
In the 80´s on 70´and 80´s Stereo-Systems (in the last Millenium!) they sounded great, still today i listen them on my old System from Nokia and Dual. They reall sound not good on the modern Audiophile Systems, but on average German Stereo-Systems they where perfect. Almost everyone in these days has had a Dual ( like the Project A1) in his living room...and Deutsche Grammophon was the Label for "Das Volk". You can see now on the Original Source Series how good they where recorded.. but mastered for an purpose. So when you say, they sound better on low end Systems... this is the reason.
Thanks for the video. I appreciate the info. As a classical newbie, videos like this are super helpful. Do you have any suggestions for Canadian retailers of good quality records that focus on Classical. Vancouver lost it’s last classical focused store a little while back and most other stores pretty much don’t bother. Its just that postage can be so prohibitive from outside Canada.
Definitely difficult in Canada. Canadian retailers online for classical are hard to come by, and I'm only familiar with the greater Toronto area stores. Generally, some stores will have some smaller sections dedicated to classical, so you can look around different stores to see if that's possible. Generally, classical pressings are cheap, so you can experiment with different labels too and see what fits your ears/system. Value villages and garage sales can be great too. I just recently found some VG+ OG Canadian Living Stereos (same stampers as OG US pressings) at a value village for a dollar a pop, since people don't really pay attention to those pressings when they sell them. Also scouring Discogs for Canadian sellers is a good way to get some pressings. Usually if someone from Canada has one classical LP they will likely have a slew of others too! Hope that helps!
Valid points, when I was a kid and a teenager, with a decent hifi, I thought DG sound of the 70s was the best in the world. Now, with a very analytical, multi-way, multi-amped system with active crossovers, some of these recordings sound disappointing. But, people who choose recordings based on label and perceived sound quality, as opposed to conductor and orchestra, are not real music lovers. Sound, after all, is not just about hardware, it's also about its source. So, you miss most recordings of Karajan and BP's unique sound, for example, if you avoid DG for sonic reasons...
An example of one of the rare "audiophile spectaculars" from Deutsche Grammophon is the 2530 309 "Three Pieces for Blues Band and Orchestra" by William Russo (Ozawa conducting). It would make quite a good "demo LP" for any hifi show, as the music is also rather "light" or "cross-over". Try it, you will be surprised by the sound quality.
I agree, fun record. I was once listening to it on a classical music radio station (WQRS, Detroit) when midway the annoucer pulled it off the turntable, mumbled something incoherent, and substituted something more "audience appropriate".
At 9:00, you indicated that Karajan was "basically" an exclusive DGG artist. This should be revised. During his career, Karajan had recording contracts at various times with Decca/London, EMI (UK Columbia), and DGG. He recorded dozens and dozens of albums for EMI from 1949 through 1977, often with London's Philharmonia Orchestra but also with the Berlin Philharmonic. Karajan also recorded numerous albums during the 1950s with Decca/London, primarily with the Vienna Philharmonic. Some of the Vienna-based Decca/London recordings -- such as Bizet's Carmen featuring Leontyne Price - were issued under license by RCA Victor in the Western Hemisphere countries. Outside of some early 1938-41 recordings for Deutsche Grammophon Gesellschaft (a/k/a Polydor), Karajan's first post-WWII album for DGG was recorded in March 1959: Richard Strauss' Ein Heldenleben with the Berlin Philharmonic, catalog no. 138 025 SLPM (stereo microgroove) and 18 550 LPM (microgroove monaural). Until the massive sales success of the Karajan 1961-62 Beethoven symphony cycle, which catapulted him to sales supremacy for a DGG recording, the most common conductors for DGG recordings were Ferenc Fricsay, Eugen Jochum, Ferdinand Leitner, Igor Markevich, Lorin Maazel and Paul van Kempen. From 1963 onward, due to his remarkable sales success (building on the reputation of previous Decca and EMI successes), Karajan directed the majority of DG orchestral albums -- to the exclusion of the other conductors who had been closely associated with the label.
My theory as to why VG-M 1950s-‘60s DGs are easier to find than RCAs, Mercurys, Columbias in N. America: Back in the day, the domestic labels had much more exposure in newspaper or magazine ads. Those labels garnered more sales with the mass-market casual/novice fans who may not have looked after their LPs well. Ads for DG weren’t as common & more likely to be seen in specialty periodicals like Gramophone. Thus, the typical DG consumers of the time were classical music connoisseurs who handled their LPs with greater care. DG didn’t really establish mainstream awareness in the US until Leonard Bernstein signed with them after so many years of commercial success with Columbia. Like or dislike Lenny, you cannot deny that the man had a loyal following.
Be on the lookout for the other Beethoven master on DG, Carlos Kleiber. His 1975 recording of Beethoven’s Symphony No.5 in C Minor with the Vienna Philharmonic on DG was, and still is, considered a masterpiece. Not just Kleiber’s conducting and the Vienna’s execution, but this time DG engineers got it right. Full range, sweet string tone, highly dynamic (17 minute sides help!) and quiet surfaces. This was a best seller in its day so original copies should be easy to find and well worth your trouble. Kleiber’s Beethoven No.7 was recorded at about the same time, though I still prefer Karajan’s 1962 version myself. BTW, original pressings of the 1962 Karajan Beethoven cycle don’t suffer the indignities of the digital remasterings and really sound very, very good.
i noticed on my mid 80's to early 90's DG they are noisy. almost any label Angel, London, Phillips, Decca, Erato, Columbia, Mercury, RCA all quieter. Have you heard of Franklin Mint? They issued a set of classical records about 100 total in special slipcases that cradled the albums which were pressed on a quiet vinyl in burgundy color, they were particularly good. Michael Fremer had remarked how good they actually are, and the source were all original masters. the later edition of this series was not sold in the special cradles just the standard box with sleeves not as good i enjoyed your video.
The big advantage of DG to me is the quality of the performances. Back in the day no orchestra could compete with the BPO and Karajan. I read Karajan used to interfere with the recording production, much to the chagrin of the sound engineers. DG also had some excellent chamber groups such as the Amadeus.
If you really want to listen to these symphonies and hear them at their best, there is a bluray audio set of these recordings with full dynamic that sounds terrific and will not wear out with many playings. You do not have to own a $4,000 turntable with a nude mounted microline or Shibata needle to hear them sound right.
The problem with DGG is that their recording philosophy does not agree with the more minimalist ones. Their string sound was never captured right, brass was always too throaty and hard sounding. There was just too much multimiking. Give me DECCA, RCA Living Stereo, Mercury, EMI any day. Sometimes DGG came with very acceptable sound, particularly lieder, chamber music and piano (although kind of toppy sounding) but overall there were more musical labels out there.
DG had no 'corporate sound' as did Mercury Living Presence, RCA Living Stereo, Telarc, and Denon. It let the Berlin Philharmonic, the Vienna Philharmonic, and (when it got them) the Chicago Symphony and the Boston Symphony be themselves. Philips was much the same.
Thanks for your video! One nitpick, "D.P." on a record means "Domaine Public" meaning that the composition itself is not under copyright as most classical music is in the public domain.
I'm looking at a new system for my office and was considering the Rega P6 with Exact and Rega Elex Mk4 amp. Not sure on the speakers yet. Are you happy with your system? Anything you would change and still keep the same price point?
Yeah I think my system sounds great. I would not consider upgrading the main components for a while other than maybe the cartridge as that is used over time. There is also a possibility to get a dedicated pre-amp and amp, but that is further down the line as well. Overall, I love the sound of my system now
Do you have a reel to reel player? Deutsche Grammophon on reel blows away the vinyl. If you can get a good machine you can get used tapes pretty cheaply. New or old sealed ones can get super expensive.
Why are we talking about LPs like CDs never existed? No doubt LPs are a pleasure, but the premise that digital is bad is just religion, nothing more. And the most preposterous claim made about digital is that it has a sound. Digital is a potentially neutral medium and can sound like whatever the engineer wants it to sound like. It can capture accuracy just as well as it can capture distortion. Now that doesn't mean that the mastering is always great. But don't judge a transfer by it's status as analogue or digital- that' the height of foolishness. Now I respect someone who says "I like the way my LP chain affects the music, and I can't apply that to digital." That makes sense. But it also acknowledges that the sound colorations are happening in the LP playback process. The "warmth" that digital lacks? Turn the mirror around- it's your playback chain that is adding warmth. When you talk about the problems with "digital records" you aren't actually talking about digital technology. You are talking about the choices made by whomever did the mastering for the newer LPs. Period. "Digital" didn't do anyhing to the sound- the records could sound any way the engineer wanted, no matter how many layers of digital technology were involved. Mind you, I know what you are talking about- I listened to a Mercury release on Speaker's Corner (Respighi Birds, I recall), and a frequency analysis of that record showed a pronounced hum that was not present on the original LP release. And the newer record sounded muddy. I had them both, I transferred them both into Adobe Audition, and the difference could be seen- the lower frequencies were a mess on the newer reissue. That's not digital- that's a mastering choice (or failure) made by someone. (The same actually holds true for HD digital files- they've been remastered. If they sound different from lower-resolution CDs, it likely has to do with the mastering, not the bit rate.) Yeah, I have plenty of LPs. I like them- I have sentimental feelings about them. Plenty do not sound better than digital versions that are available. For instance, I'm not going to waste my time listening to Ancerl on Supraphon LPs. Digital sounds better (pre-Ancerl Edition, please). On the other hand, I just transferred three Rozsa LPs on Polydor/DG onto my computer so I can listen to them in my car/iPod etc. - and they sound great. They've never made it to CD, and the LPs are a treasure. Current religion in the LP-buying community just ignores 40 years of digital transfers. That's dumb! Are we interested in music, or are we interested in something else? Answer: many people are interested in something else. And that something else is complicated, involving, and expensive. It can also be a lot of fun. But it is more about the pleasures of collecting and spending your money than the pleasures of music. And from my point of view, life is too short for me to forget that it's about the music, not the medium. (You could also cynically say that I'm just not rich enough to play this game. That's true, too.)
CD/SACD and vinyl are solely mediums to play a recording on and theoretically, there should be no difference in the sound quality between these mediums when played back, aside from the actual chain of equipment (mainly record player vs. CD player) used to play these media by the listener. I have heard fantastic digital recordings in DSD flat transferred from tape (look at the SHM-SACD collection from around 2010-2014 done in Japan for many classic rock titles and the whole MoFi catalogue which sound fantastic no matter the controversy sparked). However, many classical new and old CD's, SACDs, and current digital recordings do not sound as good to my ears as vinyl does. This is entirely to do with the recording process, mixing, mastering, and digital transfer, but I do not fully like the way these digital recordings are made &/or transferred. Yes, there are some great classical digital recordings out there (take Julia Fischer's recording of Tchaikovsky's violin concerto on Pentatone for example), but most of these "digital are inferior to vinyl in my opinion and thus my use of "digital" as an all encompassing term for these recordings I do not like in this context. I apologize for the confusion on that and I try to avoid the use of "digital" as a negative connotation. I have no gripe with digital and I am against this "religion" that you mentioned for analogue, especially after the MoFi debacle that suddenly left many people hating the sound of recordings they once thought were perfect, just because they used DSD transfers. In fact I solely listened to CD's prior to getting into vinyl and just prefer the way these recordings from the 60s and 70s sound, as their all analogue chain appeals to my ears. Finally, I hope to include discussion of more CD's and SACD's in future videos, but I enjoy talking about the recordings I love, which happen to be the records I have shown thus far.
I am 66 years old and have been purchasing DG albums for many decades. I have found that 1973 and prior years pressings are excellent. After 1973, the quality went downhill. I agree with you that the RCA Living Stereo releases are excellent. The years that RCA distributed the Pablo jazz releases, they were excellent. But their contemporary releases on the RCA label during the same time frame were not that great.
I agree with everything you've said on the DG records and would add that on a highly resolving system the "Karajan" EQ virtually wrecks the recordings, in particular the boost to the treble is awful. Apparently this all comes down to Karajan who insisted all recordings had this boost. And as you've said buy the earliest records. All of this is a travesty to music lovers, here we have numerous recordings by a world class orchestra and great conductor and we are left with decades of terrible sounding records. Hopefully someday DG will properly remaster and release the best of the back catalogue.
Beethoven's Fifth ... by Vienna ... and Kleiber, from 1975 - is . .. ... - the greatest piece of music ever recorded in the history of man kind - and if the human race was to end - and had a chance to save at least something musical - it should be that !
I have a lot of original DG LPs from the 1970s and IMO they don't sound very good. Sound is somewhat thin and I feel the dynamic range is limited. RCA's Living Stereo classical recordings from the 50s and 60s completely blow away DG's sound.
@@chrismowbray5162 My reference for Beethoven are people like René Leibowitz. And in comparison, I think most others do neither get the tempi right nor the general tone. And are significantly less intense.
DG is great but vinyl sucks, vinyl is inferior to CD in every possible way of the sound reproduction and classic music deserves the best physical media which compact disc is
I find Deutsche Grammophon is invaluable for chamber music repertoire, so many stellar string quartet, piano quintet, and wind octet recordings out there on DG. Karl Bohms recordings also have a special place in my heart, I find they usually have better engineering than Karajan's from the same era.
Thanks for watching Michael! I also always found the Bohm recording on DG to have a little extra "oomph" to them
I have a few of the Bohm Mozart late symphonies on LP, which sound excellent but not the best I ever heard. They are pressed in Italy, and the jackets are not like the super-thin German made records, but thicker cardboard stock. A DG German pressing of the Schumann Rhenish with Carlo Maria Giulini that I bought used is probably the worst sound quality of any record I have. DG is like a crap shoot.
You and Michael have a similar way of presenting the information and that’s a compliment!!
Do go for the new The Original Source reissues! Absolutely stunning! DG finally up their with the best and finally we are able to hear how well these releases were recorded!
If anyone dismisses DG due to its sonic reputation, they are going to overlook some of the most incredible music. When I see people in forums who basically only listen to classical music if it's Analogue Productions reissues of Living Stereo or Mercury I despair about what they're missing out on. Also, as well as some of the best chamber music recordings (mentioned in another comment), DG might be the best classical label for avant-garde/20th-century music.
Yes, they had incredible repertoire in the sixties and seventies. For example almost the entire Stockhausen catalogue. The four "Avantgarde" boxsets from DG are so important musically that I think they belong in any serious record collection. But from the mid-eighties on this momentum somehow dried up. This is why Stockhausen bought all the rights to his recordings from DG to reissue them himself on CD on his own private label in the nineties, as DG showed no interest whatsoever in reissuing them.
I feel the same way about people who restrict themselves to analog. I just listened to Manon Lescaut conducted by Marco Armiliato with Anna Netrebko as Manon. DG recorded live in 2016 with very warm and spacious sound. Listen to vinyl by all means, but there are plenty of wonderful digital recordings out there.
Totally agree your last point about 20th century music on DG. Karajan's recordings of Honegger, Schoenberg, Webern and Berg were fabulous
Nicely done. I totally agree with your ending notes. I have over 500 DG releases in my collection. DG’s have their rightful place in the classical cannon. I did a series of videos studying the labels I learned a lot, but I didn’t know that about Canadian pressings. Thanks for sharing. God bless
Love your channel, glad to see you are back! T.Y.
Here in Sydney Australia DG records are definitely easier to find than any other of the "great" labels. I particularly relish coming across mono DGs from the early 50s; they are pressed on very heavy vinyl, which is pleasingly rounded off at the edges, almost like a piece of porcelain. One copy of Beethoven's fifth that I found contained advertising material in German, and notes written in German by one Doktor Luther, who presumably owned the record in 1953. Total cost: one australian dollar.
The covers of these early DGs contain an integrated pocket for the record, pre-lined with plastic and covered over with the front cardboard flap. Try putting a modern PVC free sleeve in there and you have a convenient sort of cover for protecting the contents. The edges of the "pocket" are stitch-bound, which I find quite appealing, and prevents seam-splitting.
Thank you so much for pointing out about the quality of the Canadian pressings of those DG albums. I was fortunate to find hundreds of them for a very inexpensive price a few years ago at a local used record store, which has closed. I am also a huge fan of Karajan's work.
I was noticing the variety of albums stored behind you and noticed the spines of several Joni Mitchell albums. You have a very good taste!
A lot of details. Love this channel!!!
Cool! A lot of information, presented in a fresh way. Got to dig for this DGs as the German boarder is just 20 minutes from my Swiss home away!
Karajan has been also also on London. Interesting about that Milstein DG. I own the OG and it is very decent sounding. I have about 1000 DG LPs. Thanks for the thoughts in classical LPs. Very nice to see your generation into this.
There is a very nice tulip DG called Maria Stader “Portrait Einer Sangerin”. It’s absolutely outstanding with great air and clarity and the cover is also beautiful.
Thanks for the suggestion! Will look for it when I'm digging through crates!
yes, Karajan used to be an EMI artist before he went to DG and got all smooth.
Very nice review, you shared many good points.
I'm collecting classical music on vinyl, you are invaluable. Keep on going!
Thanks for video
Some comments
1 - the best DG pressings are French Prestige series
2- to enjoy DG you should run Teldec EQ not regular RIAA EQ
3- best DG recordings is Beethoven essential collection about 20 boxes of 4-5 records per box. Every Beethoven record on other labels I listen I compare to records from this collection. Maybe not best sounding but the best performance
4- best Tchaikovsky is performance on DG Ivo Pagarelic. 1 st concert
Check out his biography
5 - Arthuro Salvadore from height-end-audio is not a guy. He is guru for audiophiles my reference for sound quality. He is Canadian btw. If you have a question check his site.
Karajan was not exclusive to Deutsche Grammophon, he also recorded for Decca and EMI. DG recordings always had variable sound.
I enjoyed this. The Beethoven set you talked about as having been signed by Karajan is sadly signed by an autopen, not in person by Karajan. It's a great set, though, and was my first LP box set.
Here in Belgium it's easiest to find DG, not so for Decca. It's true, sound is not as good but good, and if I have a copy that sounds too thin I equalize a bit. I am no audiophile so I may :-)
I'm probably the 900th person to point out that Karajan recorded for EMI (UK Columbia and HMV), Decca, RCA and Philips in addition to DG, but I enjoyed your resume anyway. I'm 100% in agreement that the German tulip DGs are the best sounding of his DG vinyls. Here in the UK we had to contend with UK pressings in the 1970s that were wafer thin and riddled with static, at least after the oil crisis.
Dead on accurate. DG is good and from time to time very good, clean but sonically not audiophile.
Very informative. I’m going to start sharing some of my collection as well. Thank you. Just subscribed and liked.
DG never had an audiophile reputation among classical record collectors. Thin highs, no bass--- German label equalized for European listeners with cheap record players. I was happy with DG releases; just never bought them for the sound. Great orchestras and conductors were DG's strength-- never the sound.
I've collected and read about classical recordings for five decades. Decca/London was at the top of the heap for sound quality. I think RCAs were overpraised, especially the notorious "dynagrooves" which were specifically equalized for cheap phonographs. RCA even claimed so in its advertising.
Pre-1960 pre-stereo-era monophonic DGG recordings tended to have pretty good sound quality. They tend to be overlooked by collectors and music lovers.
Thanks for sharing about your DG collecting tips. One comment about your system description.. would be helpful to know the Phono and the cart that you use for your listening as well as all the other components..
I’m at total agreement with your good self about Deutsche Grammophon’s sound problems….Decca, EMI, Mercury….great sound in those labels, particularly Decca and Mercury.
My experience with DGG is that many stereo records sound good when you play them with another curve rather than RIAA. I know that is a quite controversial subject but specially with those that sound muffled, I play them through Vinyl Studio phono preamp on my Windows PC and usually playing at 450 Hz with 70Hz of bass cut and -10.5 to -12dB at 10 Khz they sound better. Vinyl Studio allows you to listen them in real time.
Milstein was one of the greatest violinists of the 20th century. The 1962/1963 cycle is among the best ever. I don't like Michael Fremer but those recordings are about the only thing we agree on. You probably have no way to alter the tonal balance of your sound system. Being an engineer and not an audiophile I wouldn't have a sound system that couldn't be adjusted. The audiophile ideas that less is more, one size fits all, and if you have the oerfevt sound system you will get perfect results every time strikes me as a poor idea. Learning to use tone controls and a graphic equalizer is a skill that takes time, patience, and an ear that knows what live music sounds like. This affords greater enjoyment listening to more recordings. IMO DG is a top label. Most of my DG recordings are CDs.
In my area, upstate NY, I come across way more "living stereo" records than I do DG tulips. The tulips are somewhat allusive where I am for some reason. But the post-tulip DG records are very easy to find. The 3 main record shops in my area have very limited classical sections. So thrift shops are the place to locate them.
Don't understand the reverance for DG tulips. The few I have sound "dead".
In the 80´s on 70´and 80´s Stereo-Systems (in the last Millenium!) they sounded great, still today i listen them on my old System from Nokia and Dual. They reall sound not good on the modern Audiophile Systems, but on average German Stereo-Systems they where perfect. Almost everyone in these days has had a Dual ( like the Project A1) in his living room...and Deutsche Grammophon was the Label for "Das Volk". You can see now on the Original Source Series how good they where recorded.. but mastered for an purpose. So when you say, they sound better on low end Systems... this is the reason.
Thanks for the video. I appreciate the info. As a classical newbie, videos like this are super helpful. Do you have any suggestions for Canadian retailers of good quality records that focus on Classical. Vancouver lost it’s last classical focused store a little while back and most other stores pretty much don’t bother. Its just that postage can be so prohibitive from outside Canada.
Definitely difficult in Canada. Canadian retailers online for classical are hard to come by, and I'm only familiar with the greater Toronto area stores. Generally, some stores will have some smaller sections dedicated to classical, so you can look around different stores to see if that's possible. Generally, classical pressings are cheap, so you can experiment with different labels too and see what fits your ears/system. Value villages and garage sales can be great too. I just recently found some VG+ OG Canadian Living Stereos (same stampers as OG US pressings) at a value village for a dollar a pop, since people don't really pay attention to those pressings when they sell them. Also scouring Discogs for Canadian sellers is a good way to get some pressings. Usually if someone from Canada has one classical LP they will likely have a slew of others too! Hope that helps!
Valid points, when I was a kid and a teenager, with a decent hifi, I thought DG sound of the 70s was the best in the world. Now, with a very analytical, multi-way, multi-amped system with active crossovers, some of these recordings sound disappointing. But, people who choose recordings based on label and perceived sound quality, as opposed to conductor and orchestra, are not real music lovers. Sound, after all, is not just about hardware, it's also about its source. So, you miss most recordings of Karajan and BP's unique sound, for example, if you avoid DG for sonic reasons...
An example of one of the rare "audiophile spectaculars" from Deutsche Grammophon is the 2530 309 "Three Pieces for Blues Band and Orchestra" by William Russo (Ozawa conducting). It would make quite a good "demo LP" for any hifi show, as the music is also rather "light" or "cross-over". Try it, you will be surprised by the sound quality.
I agree, fun record. I was once listening to it on a classical music radio station (WQRS, Detroit) when midway the annoucer pulled it off the turntable, mumbled something incoherent, and substituted something more "audience appropriate".
At 9:00, you indicated that Karajan was "basically" an exclusive DGG artist. This should be revised. During his career, Karajan had recording contracts at various times with Decca/London, EMI (UK Columbia), and DGG. He recorded dozens and dozens of albums for EMI from 1949 through 1977, often with London's Philharmonia Orchestra but also with the Berlin Philharmonic. Karajan also recorded numerous albums during the 1950s with Decca/London, primarily with the Vienna Philharmonic. Some of the Vienna-based Decca/London recordings -- such as Bizet's Carmen featuring Leontyne Price - were issued under license by RCA Victor in the Western Hemisphere countries. Outside of some early 1938-41 recordings for Deutsche Grammophon Gesellschaft (a/k/a Polydor), Karajan's first post-WWII album for DGG was recorded in March 1959: Richard Strauss' Ein Heldenleben with the Berlin Philharmonic, catalog no. 138 025 SLPM (stereo microgroove) and 18 550 LPM (microgroove monaural). Until the massive sales success of the Karajan 1961-62 Beethoven symphony cycle, which catapulted him to sales supremacy for a DGG recording, the most common conductors for DGG recordings were Ferenc Fricsay, Eugen Jochum, Ferdinand Leitner, Igor Markevich, Lorin Maazel and Paul van Kempen. From 1963 onward, due to his remarkable sales success (building on the reputation of previous Decca and EMI successes), Karajan directed the majority of DG orchestral albums -- to the exclusion of the other conductors who had been closely associated with the label.
Perfect. Why does the poster say his copy of 63 B9 is digital? Cover is different color also.
My theory as to why VG-M 1950s-‘60s DGs are easier to find than RCAs, Mercurys, Columbias in N. America: Back in the day, the domestic labels had much more exposure in newspaper or magazine ads. Those labels garnered more sales with the mass-market casual/novice fans who may not have looked after their LPs well. Ads for DG weren’t as common & more likely to be seen in specialty periodicals like Gramophone. Thus, the typical DG consumers of the time were classical music connoisseurs who handled their LPs with greater care. DG didn’t really establish mainstream awareness in the US until Leonard Bernstein signed with them after so many years of commercial success with Columbia. Like or dislike Lenny, you cannot deny that the man had a loyal following.
Karajan was not exclusive to DG. He made numerous recording for Decca and EMI as well. Get your facts correct.
Be on the lookout for the other Beethoven master on DG, Carlos Kleiber. His 1975 recording of Beethoven’s Symphony No.5 in C Minor with the Vienna Philharmonic on DG was, and still is, considered a masterpiece. Not just Kleiber’s conducting and the Vienna’s execution, but this time DG engineers got it right. Full range, sweet string tone, highly dynamic (17 minute sides help!) and quiet surfaces. This was a best seller in its day so original copies should be easy to find and well worth your trouble. Kleiber’s Beethoven No.7 was recorded at about the same time, though I still prefer Karajan’s 1962 version myself. BTW, original pressings of the 1962 Karajan Beethoven cycle don’t suffer the indignities of the digital remasterings and really sound very, very good.
Thanks 1770Vinyl! I really enjoy your videos 👌
If you’re only listening to traditional repertoire on DG, just bump L.Dre’s “Lo-Fi Symphony”and call it a day. Peace.
Just discovered this channel. Excellent review of DG. Thanks for making this video!
i noticed on my mid 80's to early 90's DG they are noisy. almost any label Angel, London, Phillips, Decca, Erato, Columbia, Mercury, RCA all quieter. Have you heard of Franklin Mint? They issued a set of classical records about 100 total in special slipcases that cradled the albums which were pressed on a quiet vinyl in burgundy color, they were particularly good. Michael Fremer had remarked how good they actually are, and the source were all original masters. the later edition of this series was not sold in the special cradles just the standard box with sleeves not as good i enjoyed your video.
The big advantage of DG to me is the quality of the performances. Back in the day no orchestra could compete with the BPO and Karajan. I read Karajan used to interfere with the recording production, much to the chagrin of the sound engineers. DG also had some excellent chamber groups such as the Amadeus.
If you really want to listen to these symphonies and hear them at their best, there is a bluray audio set of these recordings with full dynamic that sounds terrific and will not wear out with many playings. You do not have to own a $4,000 turntable with a nude mounted microline or Shibata needle to hear them sound right.
The problem with DGG is that their recording philosophy does not agree with the more minimalist ones. Their string sound was never captured right, brass was always too throaty and hard sounding. There was just too much multimiking. Give me DECCA, RCA Living Stereo, Mercury, EMI any day. Sometimes DGG came with very acceptable sound, particularly lieder, chamber music and piano (although kind of toppy sounding) but overall there were more musical labels out there.
DG had no 'corporate sound' as did Mercury Living Presence, RCA Living Stereo, Telarc, and Denon. It let the Berlin Philharmonic, the Vienna Philharmonic, and (when it got them) the Chicago Symphony and the Boston Symphony be themselves. Philips was much the same.
Thanks for your video! One nitpick, "D.P." on a record means "Domaine Public" meaning that the composition itself is not under copyright as most classical music is in the public domain.
I'm looking at a new system for my office and was considering the Rega P6 with Exact and Rega Elex Mk4 amp. Not sure on the speakers yet. Are you happy with your system? Anything you would change and still keep the same price point?
Yeah I think my system sounds great. I would not consider upgrading the main components for a while other than maybe the cartridge as that is used over time. There is also a possibility to get a dedicated pre-amp and amp, but that is further down the line as well. Overall, I love the sound of my system now
@@1770VinylThanks. I really like the info you share.
Dry good video, thank you
Do you have a reel to reel player? Deutsche Grammophon on reel blows away the vinyl. If you can get a good machine you can get used tapes pretty cheaply. New or old sealed ones can get super expensive.
I do not. Maybe in the future!
Why are we talking about LPs like CDs never existed? No doubt LPs are a pleasure, but the premise that digital is bad is just religion, nothing more. And the most preposterous claim made about digital is that it has a sound. Digital is a potentially neutral medium and can sound like whatever the engineer wants it to sound like. It can capture accuracy just as well as it can capture distortion. Now that doesn't mean that the mastering is always great. But don't judge a transfer by it's status as analogue or digital- that' the height of foolishness. Now I respect someone who says "I like the way my LP chain affects the music, and I can't apply that to digital." That makes sense. But it also acknowledges that the sound colorations are happening in the LP playback process. The "warmth" that digital lacks? Turn the mirror around- it's your playback chain that is adding warmth.
When you talk about the problems with "digital records" you aren't actually talking about digital technology. You are talking about the choices made by whomever did the mastering for the newer LPs. Period. "Digital" didn't do anyhing to the sound- the records could sound any way the engineer wanted, no matter how many layers of digital technology were involved. Mind you, I know what you are talking about- I listened to a Mercury release on Speaker's Corner (Respighi Birds, I recall), and a frequency analysis of that record showed a pronounced hum that was not present on the original LP release. And the newer record sounded muddy. I had them both, I transferred them both into Adobe Audition, and the difference could be seen- the lower frequencies were a mess on the newer reissue. That's not digital- that's a mastering choice (or failure) made by someone. (The same actually holds true for HD digital files- they've been remastered. If they sound different from lower-resolution CDs, it likely has to do with the mastering, not the bit rate.)
Yeah, I have plenty of LPs. I like them- I have sentimental feelings about them. Plenty do not sound better than digital versions that are available. For instance, I'm not going to waste my time listening to Ancerl on Supraphon LPs. Digital sounds better (pre-Ancerl Edition, please). On the other hand, I just transferred three Rozsa LPs on Polydor/DG onto my computer so I can listen to them in my car/iPod etc. - and they sound great. They've never made it to CD, and the LPs are a treasure.
Current religion in the LP-buying community just ignores 40 years of digital transfers. That's dumb! Are we interested in music, or are we interested in something else? Answer: many people are interested in something else. And that something else is complicated, involving, and expensive. It can also be a lot of fun. But it is more about the pleasures of collecting and spending your money than the pleasures of music. And from my point of view, life is too short for me to forget that it's about the music, not the medium. (You could also cynically say that I'm just not rich enough to play this game. That's true, too.)
CD/SACD and vinyl are solely mediums to play a recording on and theoretically, there should be no difference in the sound quality between these mediums when played back, aside from the actual chain of equipment (mainly record player vs. CD player) used to play these media by the listener. I have heard fantastic digital recordings in DSD flat transferred from tape (look at the SHM-SACD collection from around 2010-2014 done in Japan for many classic rock titles and the whole MoFi catalogue which sound fantastic no matter the controversy sparked). However, many classical new and old CD's, SACDs, and current digital recordings do not sound as good to my ears as vinyl does. This is entirely to do with the recording process, mixing, mastering, and digital transfer, but I do not fully like the way these digital recordings are made &/or transferred. Yes, there are some great classical digital recordings out there (take Julia Fischer's recording of Tchaikovsky's violin concerto on Pentatone for example), but most of these "digital are inferior to vinyl in my opinion and thus my use of "digital" as an all encompassing term for these recordings I do not like in this context.
I apologize for the confusion on that and I try to avoid the use of "digital" as a negative connotation. I have no gripe with digital and I am against this "religion" that you mentioned for analogue, especially after the MoFi debacle that suddenly left many people hating the sound of recordings they once thought were perfect, just because they used DSD transfers. In fact I solely listened to CD's prior to getting into vinyl and just prefer the way these recordings from the 60s and 70s sound, as their all analogue chain appeals to my ears. Finally, I hope to include discussion of more CD's and SACD's in future videos, but I enjoy talking about the recordings I love, which happen to be the records I have shown thus far.
Funny - I started my collection with HMV, Decca then CBS - DG was very late on
While a lot of post-1970 DGG
I am 66 years old and have been purchasing DG albums for many decades. I have found that 1973 and prior years pressings are excellent. After 1973, the quality went downhill. I agree with you that the RCA Living Stereo releases are excellent. The years that RCA distributed the Pablo jazz releases, they were excellent. But their contemporary releases on the RCA label during the same time frame were not that great.
I agree with everything you've said on the DG records and would add that on a highly resolving system the "Karajan" EQ virtually wrecks the recordings, in particular the boost to the treble is awful. Apparently this all comes down to Karajan who insisted all recordings had this boost. And as you've said buy the earliest records. All of this is a travesty to music lovers, here we have numerous recordings by a world class orchestra and great conductor and we are left with decades of terrible sounding records. Hopefully someday DG will properly remaster and release the best of the back catalogue.
Not the whole story. Other DG recordings from the same time period has similarly bad sound, try the Bohm Beethoven symphony cycle.
How could the 1963 Karajan have been recorded digitally?
I think you are spot on with good sound but not spectacular. On the other hand you get spectacular orchestras and artist.
HvK made a shitload of records for EMI
the DGG recording of mozart magic flute with bohm has the best sound, typical warm and full, i am not a fan of the decca sound of the same period.
Beethoven's Fifth ... by Vienna ... and Kleiber, from 1975 - is . .. ... - the greatest piece of music ever recorded in the history of man kind - and if the human race was to end - and had a chance to save at least something musical - it should be that !
I have a lot of original DG LPs from the 1970s and IMO they don't sound very good. Sound is somewhat thin and I feel the dynamic range is limited. RCA's Living Stereo classical recordings from the 50s and 60s completely blow away DG's sound.
Bruckner in the background
Karajan is not great in Beethoven. He thought he was, but was generally better in the opera house.
In my opinion, very few conductors are great in Beethoven
That's not true. Therer were abd are many great Beethoven conductors... just not Karajan
@@chrismowbray5162 My reference for Beethoven are people like René Leibowitz. And in comparison, I think most others do neither get the tempi right nor the general tone. And are significantly less intense.
@@markusberzborn6346 The Fricsay Beethoven is really well done too IMHO
DG is great but vinyl sucks, vinyl is inferior to CD in every possible way of the sound reproduction and classic music deserves the best physical media which compact disc is