Double double. (The Music).(recordings of Shostakovitch's Symphony No. 15)

Long-time readers may remember that some issues back, Tom Lyle and I compared a couple of versions of Shostakovitch's Symphony No. 15. One of the CDs in that comparison was a Denon disc (CO-78948) featuring Eliahu Inbal conducting the Vienna Symphony (not the VPO), which both Tom and I found to be an excellent release. On that disc, the final symphony of DSCH was paired with his Symphony No. 1. When Telarc recently released a recording of that composer's Symphonies No. I and 15 in DSD-based CD sound (Telarc CD-80572, featuring the Cincinnati Symphony Orchestra conducted by Jesus Lopez-Cobos, whose Mahler recordings we have found to be of the highest quality, we could not resist making these two releases the subject of one of our columns.

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 even-numbered issue, Tom will lead off with his comments and then I will present things from my point of view.

TL: One would expect me to go on at length regarding these two CDs. After all, they contain one of my favorite pieces of music (the 15th), one of them is from my favorite orchestra/label combinations of late (Cincinnati/Telarc), and the other is a CD I have recommended highly in the past. How could I choose between the two? But after listening to both one after the other for a couple of weeks, my preference, or lack thereof became rather clear. Hopefully, my following explanation will be as clear. And it didn't take up nearly as much space as I first thought it would.

The Lopez-Cobos is an amazing recording. The Telarc engineers seem to outdo themselves with every release. The DSD (Direct Stream Digital) recording captures every nuance of the Cincinnati's fine performance led expertly by Maestro Lopez-Cobos. What could be said that hasn't already been proclaimed in these pages and many others about the excellent sound quality of the Telarc releases of late? Yet the Denon CD is pretty darn good, too. Recorded in 1992 using the existing state-of-the-art equipment and methods, then mastered using 20- bit processing, the results are quite impressive. But the Telarc is a cut above. Nevertheless, we're talking about two excellent recordings here--a 10 out of 10 versus a 9 out of 10.

The Telarc sounds very natural in part because there seems to be a very good balance between the hall sound and orchestra. Plus, since both symphonies tend to highlight certain instruments, the silky-smooth mids and highs of these individual instruments lead to a very natural presence. However, it seems to me that the Telarc engineers end up sounding a bit over-zealous when it comes to the bass. The orchestra seems as if it is recorded from a normal perspective, but then the bass drum, for example, sounds as if it has been recorded with a spot microphone very close to the drum itself. It is very impressive from an audiophile point-of-view, but not as realistic as the rest of the recording. Still, the larger-than-life bass of the Telarc does not distract one iota from the fact that it is a spectacular recording. The Denon's low-end is more in line with the rest of the fine recording. It makes the Denon sound just as natural overall, but not as exciting.

Then there are the performances. As good as the Lopez-Cobos/Cincinnati is, I prefer the Inbal/Vienna. The timings of the movements of both symphonies are almost identical, and the tempos in each appear to be very similar even if one doesn't note the timings printed in the CD booklet. Yet the Inbal performance has more of a Russian/Soviet ...