Why/how do old recordings sound so good?

[Robin L]

It's the 2013 remaster of the 1954 performance, the "Red Seal" one.

View attachment 460513

I've got the SACD for 1954 recording, the CD for this, the 1962 recording:

Both have brilliant engineering.

 

[Sokel]

I've got the SACD for 1954 recording, the CD for this, the 1962 recording:

View attachment 460517

View attachment 460518

Both have brilliant engineering.

I Deltawaved the two versions I have out of curiosity.
Blue is 1954, Red is 1962 .



L channel


R channel

They both look really good.

The 1962 back:

Edit: correct pics.

 

[MRC01]

Can't listen to your link but that's the artwork, yes.
It's the same as the YT I posted but better quality.

OK so I gave it a listen from Qobuz, which is uncompressed straight FLAC. And to compare with a modern recording, I used the LSO Live from 2023 with Roth.

The 1954 Reiner version is excellent for its time but you can hear its vintage limitations. In summary, the quiet parts are a bit louder, the loud parts are a bit quieter for overall less dynamic range. They lift the quiet parts just a bit to help it stand out from analog noise (whether tape hiss or vinyl groove noise) yet doing so also slightly changes the timbre of the instruments. As for the loud parts, at 1:05-1:06 I hear the volume level turn down a few dB to make room for the upcoming crescendo. I find that distracts from the realism and power of the crescendo. It's not in my head, that level change shows up in waveform analysis too. And the voicing has a bit of midrange-treble emphasis but this is less of a concern, as it's much better than most recordings from that era.

I'l agree that 1954 Reiner is one of the best recordings I've heard from that era. I have many old RCA Victor recordings that I've listened to for years so here's another one that I will add: the 1964 Moussorgsky Pictures with the Royal Phil and Leibowitz recorded at Walthamstow Town Hall. Both are good exceptions to the general rule as they better than most recordings of that era. Yet they're not as lifelike or realistic as the best modern recordings, and my original comment referred to "most recordings from that era", so the general rule still stands in my listening experience.

 

[Sokel]

OK so I gave it a listen from Qobuz, which is uncompressed straight FLAC. And to compare with a modern recording, I used the LSO Live from 2023 with Roth.

The 1954 Reiner version is excellent for its time but you can hear its vintage limitations. In summary, the quiet parts are a bit louder, the loud parts are a bit quieter for overall less dynamic range. They lift the quiet parts just a bit to help it stand out from analog noise (whether tape hiss or vinyl groove noise) yet doing so also slightly changes the timbre of the instruments. As for the loud parts, at 1:05-1:06 I hear the volume level turn down a few dB to make room for the upcoming crescendo. I find that distracts from the realism and power of the crescendo. It's not in my head, that level change shows up in waveform analysis too. And the voicing has a bit of midrange-treble emphasis but this is less of a concern, as it's much better than most recordings from that era.

I'l agree that 1954 Reiner is one of the best recordings I've heard from that era. I have many old RCA Victor recordings that I've listened to for years so here's another one that I will add: the 1964 Moussorgsky Pictures with the Royal Phil and Leibowitz recorded at Walthamstow Town Hall. Both are good exceptions to the general rule as they better than most recordings of that era. Yet they're not as lifelike or realistic as the best modern recordings, and my original comment referred to "most recordings from that era", so the general rule still stands in my listening experience.

The 1962 one I posted above sounds more like modern ones (in the context) as it's fuller down low (you can tell by the longer,louder organ intro)
My preference is the older one, still.

 

[dfuller]

And 0dBVU isn't necessarily calibrated to 0dBFS.

In fact it never is. 0VU is calibrated to +4dBu, which is generally about -16dBFS.

 

[MRC01]

The 1962 one I posted above sounds more like modern ones (in the context) as it's fuller down low (you can tell by the longer,louder organ intro)
My preference is the older one, still.

That's common. Many people find that light dynamic compression and just a bit of EQ such as mid-treble or bass emphasis enhances the musical experience if done tastefully, much like in photography some kinds of saturation and contrast adjustments can make them visually more appealing even as it makes them less realistic. As the French say, "chacun a son gout".

That's why I was careful to say it makes recordings less realistic or lifelike since "sounds better" is a subjective judgement.

 

[bmc0]

I Deltawaved the two versions I have out of curiosity.
Blue is 1954, Red is 1962

I only have a few of the RCA Reiner recordings, unfortunately, but here's another with lots of very low frequency content: