When I have time, I may write something about recording engineer/studio artificial reverb/echo. Tastefully applied - by a skilled engineer judged by them in a clean monitoring environment - using well designed spring echo, even a good plug-in, can be musically valuable.
Generally, we often think of classical recordings as more 'pure', when compared to pop/rock, and the other 'modern' stuff. And it is true, as far as it goes. Yet for the most part, classical recordings are 'mixed and matched' not unlike pop material, often with less desirable effect. Exceptions would be early radio air-check type recordings done live (think 'historical' classical and jazz 78 rpm records), or more recent (but now mostly discontinued) direct to disc analog productions.
In my decades long interaction with Peter Aczel, I assembled some of our correspondence into an article for his
Audio Critic Webzene, It was of course necessarily truncated and highly edited, and our discussions discussed recordings as much as gear. I mentioned a then recent Met Ring, and its 'sterile' (to me) sound. Aczel replied by discussing things he had learnt from his long-standing relationship with classical record producer Max Wilcox, and mentioned the latter's use of reverb, along with other's use of compression:
Q: I’d like to share an experience. Once, while listening to the Levine/Met
Ring, I immediately became aware of something unusual, something I’d not really thought about before. The sound coming from my speakers had absolutely no background artifacts. With records, there is always something extraneous going on in the quiet passages. At a live performance there is always something in the background, even if it is just audience noise. On the various Bayreuth live recordings one hears stage artifacts, most notably within quiet passages. However, the sound of my “studio”
Ring, while pristine, seemed almost artificial—artificial not because of what was there musically, but because of what was not there. Also, with, say, an LP record, dynamics are compressed. Yet, with the DGG Levine
Ring I can listen at relatively loud levels in order to enjoy quieter passages. As the music grows louder, I must adjust the volume down. You speak of this latter situation in your review of Mr. Alexander’s recordings for Water Lily Acoustics. Could it be that PCM technology is, in a strange way, too good? Or is this maybe just an argument for more “live” recording, and recordings where the engineer, to use your words, employs a “judicious raising of the dynamic floor and lowering of the ceiling”?
A:
Your Levine/Met recordings of the Ring
sound a bit sterile because they were made in Manhattan Center (New York), which is an acoustically rather dead venue. In 1989, Max Wilcox produced a wonderful-sounding recording of the Mahler 5th (Mehta/NY on Teldec, released 1990) in that same Manhattan Center. He added some very subtle artificial reverb, which is not at all perceptible as such but makes the sound come alive...
It should not be a bus effect built into snake oil processors for home playback!
I would not, however, call your 'bus effect processing' an example of 'snake oil'. Perhaps it's just a matter of semantics, though. Processors, whether one likes their effects or not, actually do something. So you are paying for an actual sonic artifact.
In my understanding, snake oil product is something marketed as producing a beneficial effect, but which essentially does nothing at all, like cable risers and magic bricks.