Retrograde

Shifting into reverse to head back two hundred years takes a little extra effort. Sometimes it’s good to make an about face, but it also takes something out of the ordinary to trigger the effort. That’s what the string quartets of Luigi Cherubini (Ke-roo-BEE-nee) have done.

On the surface Cherubini’s quartets are straight ahead classical period music that adhere to the ideals of the age of reason. The guiding tenants of the age were symmetry, structure, discipline, order, form, logic. Music and all the arts of the period followed suit, rejecting the frivolous embellishment of the Baroque, thus establishing a new, more restrained, intellectual approach. But these confining attitudes didn’t choke Cherubini’s emotions or his imagination. He mastered the rational framework of classical music by molding it to his vision, then turned its restrictions around to instinctual advantage. Willingly accepting and consciously applying limitations can be a powerful tool in the creative process. Very few artists unearth this superficially counterintuitive, and consequently, rare technique. Cherubini shaped a cognitive spade out of the constraints of classicism to dig into his own creative depths. The way of any artist who makes the grade is to take the style of the day, put it under a stress-test, then push it to the breaking point—not to smash it entirely—just enough to crack the edges, to find the limit within the limits.

Cherubini lived from 1760 to 1842, a contemporary of Mozart and Beethoven, he was well known and highly respected in his time, but over the subsequent centuries the names Haydn, Mozart and Beethoven would come to overshadow him, regretfully. His quartets, composed between 1814-1837, are all from his later years. All show personal as well as stylistic maturity that moves towards Romanticism. His quartets have a spirit of freedom and creative innovation that clearly exceeds Mozart and challenges Beethoven’s long held seat as the King of Breaking Bounds. Each quartet brings new surprises. The 2nd and 3rd quartets are to me particularly inviting. Filled with bravado, contrasts and stark transitions, they keep my ears at attention. Yet, it’s not easy choosing favorites. On another day, in another mood, another one may become my favorite.

The recordings are a box set of all six quartets, performed by HAUSMUSIK London on the CPO label. On the technical side, the performances are just shy of impeccable, but on the interpretive side they radiate. HAUSMUSIK London’s sense of rhythm, their subtle, and sometimes not so subtle, rubato is executed with such precision it seems like the music is taking control of the performers—as if there’s a single mind manipulating all four musicians. This kind of synchrony comes from years of playing together, but also from an innate sensitivity to each other as their individuality dissolves into the group and the music takes command. It’s a strange and amazing phenomenon to hear.

The recordings bring more good news. Through skillful engineering they present an excellent balance between reverberation and presence that lends us a sense of space while maintaining the intimacy expected of chamber music. We can hear the musicians’ breathing, their fingers on the strings in precisely the right amount. They also exhibit the most well defined imaging of any string quartet recordings I’ve heard. Frequently quartet recordings have a lopsided soundstage, the violins to the far left and the viola and cello seemingly sitting on top of each other in the center. But these recordings clearly and evenly space each performer—1st violin, 2nd violin, viola, cello—from left to right. Add in the lively spiritedness of Cherubini’s music with the energy of HAUSMUSIK London and you have an outstanding musical experience with a refreshing view of classicism.

Music : A ║ Performance : A- ║ Recording : A+ ║ HAUSMUSIK London, Luigi Cherubini, Complete String Quartets, CPO 2003

Posted in Discover, Music reviews | Tagged , | Leave a comment

In & Out

Debates among audiophiles never cease. Digital will never sound as good as analog, Vinyl makes music more involving, tubes have a fuller soundstage, and on and on. And now, there’s a new product making some incredible claims. It says it can pull out “sonic information that previously was locked inside signals.” It further claims to give a “realistic and complete rendering of the original acoustic event” by retrieving information “hidden and buried in electronics.” (Wait a sec, hidden where, the signal or the electronics?) Somehow they say this is done without processing (ahem), instead it extracts the natural “phase information within all signals” (If it’s there naturally, where’s it hiding?) to restore the full “spacial content of a real sonic event.” (Funny, the inventor states his goal was to emulate the effect of omnidirectional speakers.) Initial reviews and early adopters are raving about it. It’s a revolution in audio! It’s the first breakthrough in decades! It’s four (4) thou$and US dollars!

Stop!

There is only one criterion that matters for audio realism. If it’s going to sound real, be complete, natural, and reveal all the information captured in the original recording, then there is only one way to determine if that is true : compare the output to the input. Any change in the signal between the input and the output is distortion. Any deliberate change is signal processing. Any claim to the contrary is a lie.

The closer the output matches the input, the more accurate, the more faithful, the more real the reproduction, and that’s as complete as it’s going to get. It doesn’t matter whether the in/out runs through a microphone, mixing board, amplifier or a piece of wire, the rule remains the same. That’s all there is to it. Nothing complicated, no hidden or buried mystery, just plain, cold in & out.

On the other hand, one’s subjective preferences may conflict with plain, cold reality. It’s perfectly natural too. Pleasant sounds are not always the most pure. Intensified color saturation is inviting. Concentrated flavors are tempting. Hyperreal is irresistibly tantalizing. That “revolutionary” new product says it does its tricks by layering in (mixing in) out of phase copies of the original signal. (Is that how it dances around the “adding nothing” and “no processing” claims?) I’m not going to say that doesn’t create a pleasant effect. It may sound amazing. But no matter how incredible it is, it is processing the signal. It is adding information not present in the original regardless of whether the addition is extracted from the signal itself. Those out of phase copies are not part of the original signal nor the recording engineer’s intent and not in any way real, natural, or restorative, and most certainly not recovering or completing any content lost, or hidden, or buried, or locked in the original.

And, you know, most stereo/AV receivers already have a bunch of signal processing tricks, special modes that are supposed to enhance video games or movies, or to simulate the acoustics of an arena or a nightclub. It’s all contrived and artificial, and after playing with it a few times, boring.

Geez, put an astronomical price tag on a kitschy fake “spacializer,” call it “signal completion,” promote it with piles of stupid declarations and obtuse descriptions of its loopy hijinks and people get snookered into believing it’s a miraculous new leap in technology.

Ha!

The best audio reproduction happens when nothing happens, when in = out.

Posted in Audio, Discover | Tagged , , , , | 1 Comment