add to wish list | library


17 of 19 recommend this,
would you recommend it?

yes | no

Support this site by purchasing from these vendors using the paid links below. As an Amazon Associate SA-CD.net earns from qualifying purchases.
 
amazon.ca
amazon.co.uk
amazon.com
amazon.de
 
amazon.fr
amazon.it
CDJapan
jpc

Discussion: Mahler: Symphony No. 2 - Zinman

Posts: 21
Page: 1 2 3 next

Post by Peter February 15, 2007 (1 of 21)
CD Universe has this for the above SACD:

**Super Audio CD (SACD)**
A Super Audio CD player is required to play this CD.
This item will not play on standard CD players.

whereas Symphony No1 has:

**Super Audio CD (SACD) Hybrid**
This CD will play in standard CD players.
A Super Audio CD player is required to take advantage of the SACD sound technology.

Post by seth February 15, 2007 (2 of 21)
Peter said:

CD Universe has this for the above SACD:

**Super Audio CD (SACD)**
A Super Audio CD player is required to play this CD.
This item will not play on standard CD players.

whereas Symphony No1 has:

**Super Audio CD (SACD) Hybrid**
This CD will play in standard CD players.
A Super Audio CD player is required to take advantage of the SACD sound technology.

Obviously it's a mistake. (HMV lists it as a Hybrid)

Do we really need a thread about this?

Post by Peter February 15, 2007 (3 of 21)
It wasn't obvious to me. If you think it's unnecessary, please feel free to ask for its deletion. Next time I have a query I'll be sure to ask your permission to post first.

Post by zeus February 15, 2007 (4 of 21)
Peter said:

CD Universe has this for the above SACD:

**Super Audio CD (SACD)**
A Super Audio CD player is required to play this CD.
This item will not play on standard CD players.

whereas Symphony No1 has:

**Super Audio CD (SACD) Hybrid**
This CD will play in standard CD players.
A Super Audio CD player is required to take advantage of the SACD sound technology.

I just ignore these warnings. CD Universe would sell more discs if they scrapped them.

Post by seth February 15, 2007 (5 of 21)
Peter said:

It wasn't obvious to me. If you think it's unnecessary, please feel free to ask for its deletion. Next time I have a query I'll be sure to ask your permission to post first.

I'll send you a submission form for future posts.

Post by pgmdir February 16, 2007 (6 of 21)
A different thread asks how we should help promote SACD. This site helps a great deal when newcomers drop by to find out what all the fuss is about. If this site is only for long time aficianados, these newcomers will simply go away. If someone is confused by the idiocy of CD universe and Amazon and how they list these discs, why should it be such a big deal to ask about it?

If it is assumed that new people are finding this site and this forum every day, perhaps it will help to make it more useful.

I'm looking forward to Zinman's take on Mahler.

Post by Claude February 16, 2007 (7 of 21)
I think that because of the very useful "start discussion" and "join discussion" links on every disc page, it's good to have a seperate thread for discussing a disc, as the discussion can be easily found later. Of course these threads should then remain on topic.

Besides these disc discussions, anyone is free to open a thread for more general topics.

Post by pgmdir February 16, 2007 (8 of 21)
Claude is, of course correct, but I was responding to the second post on this thread--- about this specific disc.

Has anyone seen this Mahler 2 on any site ofther than CD Universe?

Post by Peter February 16, 2007 (9 of 21)

Post by sgb May 10, 2007 (10 of 21)
I've just read the recent member review of this recording. I'll admit that prior to reading this I really had no intention of buying it since I was quite disappointed in Zinman's Titan. That, and the fact that I already own at least a dozen others in the various formats -- including the highly overrated Fischer. Now I'm not so sure. This review was objective enough to provide ample discussion of both the sonic and performance aspects, I thought.

What interests me is, though, that about half of the review assessments are negative, and I'm wondering on what basis these were made.

Page: 1 2 3 next

Closed