Hi-Rez Highway

New high resolution SACD releases, players and technology.

Return to Hi-Rez Highway


Message Sort: Post Order or Asylum Reverse Threaded

Bach/Milstein: Which SACD?

99.171.130.84

Posted on January 29, 2024 at 13:16:43
Doktor Brahms
Audiophile

Posts: 616
Location: Southeast
Joined: November 25, 2004
Greetings.

Nathan Milstein's DG recording of the Bach solo sonatas and partitas has been a standard recommendation since its initial release in the 1970s. I'd like to have this on SACD, but there are competing releases in this format, both from Japanese sources. Tower Records has issued the set as a part of its in-house release program; Esoteric has done the same. I have various SACDs from both Tower and Esoteric, and all sound impressive. I don't think either label has access to original master tapes, but I could be wrong--details of the remastering process are not easy to come by. Can anyone express an opinion about these specific Bach/Milstein SACDs, or about Tower and Esoteric SACDs more generally? Thanks!

 

Hide full thread outline!
    ...
RE: Bach/Milstein: Which SACD?, posted on January 29, 2024 at 14:29:04
Kal Rubinson
Reviewer

Posts: 12539
Location: New York
Joined: June 5, 2002
You might look here:

 

Please give the Bach Guild (1950s) Joseph Szigeti set a listen!, posted on January 29, 2024 at 16:42:39
John Marks
Manufacturer

Posts: 8022
Location: Peoples' Democratic Republic of R.I.
Joined: April 23, 2000



I immediately bought the Milstein set when it came out on LP. I later became a close friend of Arturo Delmoni's, who had studied with Milstein.

So, in my world, NIL NISI BONUM when it comes to Nathan Milstein!

However, and not to pull rank on anyone, because I am sure I was a disappointment to all my violin teachers, in that, despite a degree of natural talent, I could never quite connect all the dots...

...that said, just being in the same room with Professor Kowalski was such a privilege. Let alone for him to play duos with me! In his pre-WWII youth he had been a student of Jacques Thibaud's (who was the dedicatee of Ysa˙e's "Obsession" sonata, which is all about Bach), and before that, Professor Kowalski had been student of two different students of Leopold Auer's (one of whom, Maia Bang, had been a classmate of Heifetz's).

Which is to say, I think I know at least a little about the violin.

Despite the mid-1950s mono recording, and despite Szigeti's disinclination to produce a beautiful tone for the sake of producing a beautiful tone... if I had to choose one Desert Island Bach solo-violin set... it would be Szigeti's.

I don't think of his approach as "cold," but I do think of it as "intellectual." Like a great Calculus lecture.

His arpeggios that start at m.89 of the Chaconne, for me, are the ones that are most filled with a sense of wonder and discovery. Some other players to me sound like they are spiritually on a treadmill, and they can't wait to jump off.

BTW... as one might imagine, I have attempted that section... or is the proper word "attacked"?

There is a claimed XRCD release of Szigeti's solo Bach, with language difficulties in its description.

Best of luck,

john

 

RE: Please give the Bach Guild (1950s) Joseph Szigeti set a listen!, posted on February 22, 2024 at 11:24:20
Doktor Brahms
Audiophile

Posts: 616
Location: Southeast
Joined: November 25, 2004
Thanks for the suggestion. I finally found this on YouTube. Impressive interpretations, but might I be forgiven for thinking that this recording was made just a bit too late in his career? Nevertheless, an important document.

 

RE: Bach/Milstein: Which SACD?, posted on February 22, 2024 at 11:33:07
Doktor Brahms
Audiophile

Posts: 616
Location: Southeast
Joined: November 25, 2004
Some useful comments there. The Tower SACD version is preferred. Similarly, on HRaudio.net the Esoteric version of the Ashkenazy/Previn Rachmaninoff concerto cycle was unfavorably compared to the Decca Japan SACD remastering. At least in these instances, "more expensive" does not necessarily mean "better."

Thanks for the link!

 

Page processed in 0.026 seconds.