The performances speak for themselves, so what I want to concentrate on is the much-anticipated 24-bit/192kHz remastering touted by this new production. I’ll say right up front, while the sound is indeed improved here – sometimes subtly, sometimes notably, and sometimes remarkably – it becomes incrementally better as it goes on, as the orchestra gradually increases in size progressing into the later symphonies. (Though this wasn’t necessarily a consistent observation, as noted below, in some of the earlier symphonies.)
That being said, I wonder how much of the improvements actually come from being transferred from the original master tapes (which I highly doubt Decca used in previous CD reissues) as the 24/192 transfer method itself. In fact, the outer box of this production doesn’t actually use the word “remaster”, but merely “transfer”. So whether it’s technically a true remastering per se, or a new transfer (at 24/192) from the original tapes is debatable – though a remastering engineer is listed in the booklet. So make of that what you will. And really, it doesn’t matter. What does matter is what the end result sounds like. And I’ve made some observations on what I hear when comparing the old to the new.
First – and this is important – for comparisons, I used my 1991, 8-volume set (of 4-CDs each, in the hard-case boxes with the attractive blue trays) which utilized the ubiquitous “ADRM” remastering typical of Decca in the 80s and 90s. They took up A LOT of space, but were glorious at the time – though I always thought the remastering could have been better.1
To get an idea of what this new release offers sonically, I sampled several tracks, back-to-back, from a few random symphonies, then progressed to more extended sections of some of the later ones. I began with Symphony #76 (on CD 22), for no other reason than I like it, and listened to the 1991 CD first (henceforth referred to as the “original” or the “old”, for simplicity). I was amazed at how warm, airy and positively lovely it sounded. I immediately thought, uh-oh, the remastered version surely can’t better this. And in some ways it doesn’t. The newer one (the “new”) is transferred at a slightly higher level, so initially it seemed more dynamic. But that was a misperception. After adjusting the volume to match the other CD as closely as possible (only a notch or two on volume knob), the difference is subtle. It is a tad clearer and more present, but loses just a touch of that lovely inner glow. So it’s a toss-up so far.
Jumping ahead next to #79, again for no particular reason, I hear something a bit different. There is just a touch of darkness to the original that I hadn’t noticed in #76, and it sounds a bit closed in; a bit confined. Hmmm. Going to the new, it is noticeably more open and airy, with silkier string sound, as if there are a few more violins than before. Again though, it’s fairly subtle, but becomes a bit more obvious now.
In #82, the original again displays a hint of congestion in the midrange and lower mids, but now also an icy edge to the violins which I hadn’t noticed in the earlier symphonies. The newer CD is definitely more open in the midrange, but with a bit of emphasis in the bass, though the timpani are better defined and more articulate. So that’s interesting. Most remarkably though, the edge on the violins is entirely absent. They are silky and airy – absolutely glorious.
Continuing with this same disc (CD 24), I was curious to hear Symphony #83, which is more dramatic musically and in a minor key, so I expected the differences to be even more pronounced. And they are. This time I started my listening with the newer one (as it was already in the disc player). The sound is open and airy, and the orchestra sounds slightly bigger-boned, but wonderfully transparent in texture and inner detail. So even though it sounds to be a slightly larger orchestra, the recorded sound is just as clean and clear. But there is still a slight pronounced plumpness in the bass which was somewhat bothersome. But on the other end of the spectrum, these violins sing just as sweetly as you please, yet played with crisp, precise articulation. Now going to the original CD, it is a bit warmer and more relaxed, and interestingly, the bass isn’t as prominent as on the remastered version. It is better incorporated into the orchestral fabric, due, I think, to the slightly fuller, warmer midrange. So that’s interesting. But overall, it is less incisive and just a touch weightier, and thus less propulsive. So even with the bass anomaly, I’ll take the newer over the older any day.
Now jumping ahead to some of the more familiar (named) symphonies in the set, I began listening to longer sections, often complete tracks. Starting with the original (1991) CDs, Symphony #96 (“Miracle”) is just dumpy and cramped, hampering full enjoyment of the music. Here we have a fuller, perhaps even bigger orchestra, and this is where the new transfer really comes into its own, with sound which is more open, more alive and more articulate. Listening to several complete tracks from the symphonies which follow, it became increasingly more difficult to listen to the originals for extended sessions, as the ear craved the extra clarity, transparency and engaging involvement the newer set provides. Each and every time, going back to the original, I was continually made aware of the recording itself, which was distracting – sounding a bit muddy and confined. While the warmth and richness of sound were a constant pleasure, the irrepressible joy of Haydn was ever so slightly curtailed, restricted somewhat by the cramped acoustic. Listening to the new, remastered CDs drew me into the music in ways the originals simply could not.
Out of curiosity, I did a final round of spot checks on some of the earliest symphonies to determine consistency throughout the set. And this proved enlightening. In Symphony #44, just as in #76, the differences were very subtle, with the newer CD offering ever so slightly cleaner and silkier violins and a slightly fuller body of sound. And again, this was after a single notch adjustment of the volume knob to compensate for the slightly higher transfer level. Interestingly, #45 was somewhat more obvious, providing a fuller, smoother and silkier string section. Going even further back, Symphony #6 (“Le Matin”; morning) on CD2 sounded distant and slightly murky on the older CD, and the cellos/basses were curiously muddled. I had to turn the volume up several notches to get any kind of presence from the orchestra, which was unusual. The newer one was an instant and obvious improvement – notably fresher and more involving, providing the orchestra a more lifelike presence.
However, on my last comparison, here is where things got interesting. Listening to Symphony #13 (CD 4), I found myself so drawn into the music, I sat back, relaxed, and just listened for a few minutes, taking in the wonderful musicmaking. I noted lovely, warm string sound, within a lovely acoustic, and most notably, cellos cushioned on pillows of air in the most glorious way. I was ready to definitively proclaim the new remastering an unequivocal success and finish up this review accordingly. When much to my surprise, I suddenly realized I was actually listening to the older 1991 CD! I was certain I had loaded the newer one in the player; but I was mistaken. Dumbfounded, I switched it out for the newer one, and sure enough, some of that cushion of air was diminished, replaced with a slightly leaner body of sound to the cellos and a clearer acoustic. It still sounded wonderful, silky smooth and articulate, but not quite as alluring. Was it an improvement? Nah. It was just slightly different. So there’s no denying that, at least on some tracks, the differences may not always be perceived as an improvement. And this little “senior moment”, while a bit embarrassing, proved exactly that.2
I believe I’ve honestly – and as carefully as humanly possible – described the differences one can expect to hear from the new set. Based on what I hear on my system, I can confidently state that, overall, the improvements are real – and audibly significant to those who care about such things. I will also say, that even in the symphonies where I heard the most pronounced differences, in the overall scheme of things, if you don’t have a high quality sound system which excels at revealing audiophile details like this, you may have to listen very hard to appreciate the improved recorded sound. (And if you’re listening on your computer or earbuds, you probably won’t notice any difference at all.) In which case, you may wonder how one can possibly justify the cost of this, especially if you already own one of the previous issues. And I can understand. Indeed, they still sound quite wonderful – and as I discovered in at least a couple of instances, perhaps even “better”, depending on your preferences. But overall, when compared with the newer transfers, the remastering generally provides sound which, in a nutshell, is clearer and more articulate, opens up the soundstage, and mitigates the edge on the violins (and the occasional thinness up high), allowing me to appreciate the performances even more than before, and become more fully immersed in the glories of Haydn. But it ultimately depends on your listening environment and personal preferences.
As to the production, it is first class all the way. Having all of Haydn’s Symphonies in updated sound and an attractive, relatively compact box is a luxury (although I don’t particularly like the very tight cardboard sleeves the discs are imprisoned in). However, Decca includes extras here which I was not terribly interested in (the Oratorios and such), which of course increases the price commensurately. But I can confidently say, as a box set of the symphonies alone, it is worth it – not only for the convenience, but most certainly for the improved sound, no matter how it might be perceived on some playback equipment. For me, these remastered recordings overall are simply more rewarding and enjoyable than before – more involving, compelling and life-affirming.
Postscript.
So typical – and totally expected – availability is immediately an issue with this box set. And speaking of price, it has been all over the place. Amazon initially listed this as a preorder for $209. But once it became available and a “positive review” immediately appeared in their review section (and it is hardly a review; succinct and very generalized in its observations – more like assumptions – it reads rather like a marketing blurb), the item went out of stock immediately thereafter and the price has subsequently jumped up substantially. (It is listed at $250 to $350 (!) right now, available only from 3rd-party Marketplace sellers who are exploiting its lack of availability.) Meanwhile, Presto Classical (in the UK) offers it at just under $230 (and they’re currently showing it is in stock), but their shipping cost to the U.S. is prohibitively expensive. (And to be fair, it is a fairly big, quite heavy box.) So that’s completely out of the question. So perseverance is the key.3 But do try to get it sooner rather than later; who knows how long Decca will keep it in print.
1 I have not heard the subsequent boxed sets issued in 2006 and 2009, which were, to the best of my recollection, just repackaged in cheaper, more manageable boxed sets, without any updated audio remastering.
2 I’m confident this is the only time that little mix up occurred. And in my defense, I had just been distracted by a call or text or something, and immediately caught it before continuing on.
3 I managed to get mine from a European seller (through Amazon) who just happened to list it one day for $167 plus $3.99 shipping. I jumped on it instantly. So putting this review in context, my justification for its cost-effectiveness is based on what I paid for it, as opposed to its current price – though I doubt my opinion of it would change regardless.
