Double double. (The Music).(comparison of two recordings of 'Sheherezade')

Have you ever seen a warhorse in an audiophile dogfight? Pardon the mashed metaphor, but that's what we've got going here this month. When Telarc recently released a CD of Rimsky-Korsakov's Sheherezade in audiophile-grade DSD sound (Telarc CD-80545, featuring the Atlanta Symphony Orchestra conducted by Robert Spano), we thought a natural comparison would be to the audiophile-oriented Reference Recordings HDCD-processed release that garnered high praise for its sonic virtues when it was released back in 1999 (Reference Recordings RR89CD, featuring the London Philharmonic Orchestra conducted by Jose Serebrier).

As always, Tom and I have refrained from discussing these two recordings other than deciding that these were the two we would compare for this issue. Because this is an odd-numbered issue, I will lead off with my observations and then Tom will present things from his point of view.

KWN: Let me say at the outset that these are two very well recorded and well performed versions of Rimsky's colorful scores (both CDs are filled out with The Russian Easter Overture). From a sound quality perspective, there is little to choose between them. Both have a warm, wet, slightly distant sound. Both have spectacular bass drums (the Telarc at times in the final movement sounds a bit more forward and powerful, the RR a bit deeper in pitch and more natural in perspective, but both can give your woofers a good workout). And for once, the recording levels are quite similar, making it easier for me to do A/B comparisons of passages using the remote on my Legacy Audio preamplifier (for the record, the rest of the equipment was the same as I have been using for a while now -- Arcam Alpha 9 and Weltronics CD8 CD players, AVA FET-Valve 550hc power amplifier, Legacy Audio Empire speakers, and Legacy Audio Point One subwoofer. For the record, in my final comparisons, I played the RR disc through the Arcam to take advantage of its HDCD capability.)

In careful comparison, the main differences in sound that I heard were that the RR production seemed slightly more distant, mixing in more hall sound; and that the Telarc had better focus with solo instruments, particularly the solo violin, which seemed more firmly anchored than that in the RR version. The closer perspective and better focus of the Telarc gave it the overall sound quality nod, but only by a whisker. Subjectively, both were quite pleasing, and should be so even to the fussiest of audiophiles, particularly those with systems of sufficient radiating power and wallopsome wattage to project a big, powerful sound.

Sonically, then, things are pretty well a wash. How about musically?

Both orchestras play well, although I must report that the solo violinist in London, Joakim Svenheden, seemed to play his part with a touch more expression than his Atlanta counterpart, Cecylia Arzewski (who, as I mentioned above, was recorded better.) In matters of interpretation, I find that I prefer the faster first movement of Serebrier, and the slower third movement of Serebrier. And although the timings of the even-numbered movements were quite close, I still found myself with a slight preference for the Serebrier versions.

When all is said and done, then, Serebrier emerges as the top dog in the battle of conductors, and even though they were slightly outpointed in the sound quality skirmish, then, Reference Recordings wins the warhorse dogfight. Woof!