SQ or performance?


In classical music, how much does the sound quality influence your enjoyment of a particular piece?  I find it plays a large part. A recording is an artifact in itself.  There are many factors which contribute to the final product. And even a great performance can be sabotaged by poor engineering, poor pressing, poor microphone placement and the like. Conversely, a mediocre performance can be attractive to us because of sterling acoustics.   
In “historical” recordings we may allow for bad sound, but in contemporary performances the sound can have  a significant bearing on our perspective.
Also, our appreciation of a given performance can be affected by other factors.  For example, if we grew up loving a certain version, all others may suffer by comparison in our view.
 

 

rvpiano

Showing 1 response by bdp24

It depends on the degree of "badness", and to some degree by the nature of the music.

Bernstein’s traversals of Beethoven’s symphonies---though not of audiophile purist sound quality---are not sabotaged to anywhere near the same degree as are those of Toscanini, which though musically magnificent are sonically pretty anemic. The sound of a symphony orchestra can really be emasculated by a poor recording.

The sound quality of Glenn Gould’s J.S. Bach’s solo keyboard works recordings---also not of audiophile caliber---are not bad enough to get in the way of his performances. Though I prefer Bach on period instruments (for which the works were, after all, written to be performed on), Gould’s brilliance cannot be denied.