"David Looser" wrote in message
...
"Iain Churches" wrote in message
...

"Mike Coatham" wrote in message
...
On 16/02/2010 11:20 a.m., Keith G wrote:
snip

"The analogy even extends to the recordings. In early 1953, Paray and
the DSO cut their first records for Mercury, which had startled the
hi-fi world in 1951 with the unprecedented clarity and musicality of an
acclaimed series of albums using a single microphone and no
equalization, filtering, mixing or compression.

Isn't that basically what Dave Plowman stated in regard to single
microphone recordings of big bands?? Which (if I also recall
correctly)was immediately poo poo'd by God's gift to recording
engineers -
Mr Churches and supported by your good self?
I could be wrong, ..... (snip)

Yes. You are wrong, in that you are trying to compare
two totally different genres requiring very different
recording techniques. You cannot compare single
mic classical recordings of Paray/Detroit Symphony
in mono, with multi close mic hard hitting big
band recordings in stereo,

What a wriggle! Of course you can compare a symphony orchestra playing
classical music to a big band. Both are large, multi-instrument, musical
ensembles.So any arguments in favour of multi-miking addressed to one
will apply equally to the other. So-called "classical" music is not a
"genre". it is a wide range of genres. Much classical music is similar in
sound and intensity to that played by big bands.

The objectives in recording are totally different.
In big band recording, the objective is to record a
close up hard hitting image (listen to Buddy Rich)
In classical recording the objective is to record a
performance set back in its acoustic environment.
Two totally different techniques are required, which
is why since the fifties up to the present day, the finest
big band recordings have been multi mic, and the
finest classical recordings are made with pairs, or
trees often with outriggers.

Iain