Is this 'GOLD CD' of Bach Goldberg Variations (Glenn Gould 1981) any better?

[LL21]

I have a tape (actually 2 reels 15ips 2 track) of the 1955 Gould Goldberg Variations. It is a dub from a European engineer's copy of the CBS distribution master. Don't have his 1981 redo. Critics are mixed on which they prefer in terms of performance. I'll give the tapes a listen today. Larry

Wow! Thank you!

 

[LL21]

I have a tape (actually 2 reels 15ips 2 track) of the 1955 Gould Goldberg Variations. It is a dub from a European engineer's copy of the CBS distribution master. Don't have his 1981 redo. Critics are mixed on which they prefer in terms of performance. I'll give the tapes a listen today. Larry

Thank you again. For very few people, the 1981 Glenn Gould Goldberg Variations is a great album and a test track. For me, they are both. And thus, I genuinely enjoy listening to it quite a lot. So the idea that [maybe] the original 1/4" tapes remastered in 2022 at 24/96 is better would be a lot of fun to hear.

But interestingly, I have not found ONE review that actually speaks of the quality of the remastering...only the numerous takes of the entire piece and how it helps shape one's understanding of Gould's interpretation...and for those who would know, also allows people to appreciate how polished and prepared Gould was in the studio where it appears he did far fewer takes than others.

 

[astrotoy]

I played my GG tape of the 1955 Goldberg Variations. Sonics are quite good for the 1955 mono recording, though definitely not at the modern standard like my other Goldberg Variations tape (Ito Ema's wonderful, though less dynamic and eccentric performance that Todd Garfinkle did on his MA Recordings label in 1994). The GG tape sounds much better than vinyl from Columbia, and with a much lower background vinyl noise level gives a greater sense of the dynamic range of Gould's playing. I also have the Zenph recreation of the recording on SACD, but currently my digital system is offline so I can't do a comparison with the tape. I remember being quite impressed when I first played the SACD many years ago. From a review by the NYT in 2007 the recording was made on a Yamaha Grand with a special Disklavier mechanism. Not sure which iteration of the Disklavier mechanism was used.

Larry

 

[LL21]

I played my GG tape of the 1955 Goldberg Variations. Sonics are quite good for the 1955 mono recording, though definitely not at the modern standard like my other Goldberg Variations tape (Ito Ema's wonderful, though less dynamic and eccentric performance that Todd Garfinkle did on his MA Recordings label in 1994). The GG tape sounds much better than vinyl from Columbia, and with a much lower background vinyl noise level gives a greater sense of the dynamic range of Gould's playing. I also have the Zenph recreation of the recording on SACD, but currently my digital system is offline so I can't do a comparison with the tape. I remember being quite impressed when I first played the SACD many years ago. From a review by the NYT in 2007 the recording was made on a Yamaha Grand with a special Disklavier mechanism. Not sure which iteration of the Disklavier mechanism was used.

Larry

Thank you for going thru the trouble and writing it up! This is helpful...I also have the Zenph which I prefer to the original 1955 (mainly due to the noise/hiss of the original). I do not listen to it too frequently preferring the 1981.

I will try to find anything more on the 1981 remastering from the original analog tapes which just came out in this release. I am a big fan of this particular work by Gould, so if a better quality version, then may well get it.

 

[Dogberry]

I prefer the 1981 recording to the 1955, which makes me unusual. I don't even mind the humming on the Sony CD, the trick is to hum yourself and enjoy it!

 

[LL21]

I prefer the 1981 recording to the 1955, which makes me unusual. I don't even mind the humming on the Sony CD, the trick is to hum yourself and enjoy it!

So do I. I think the 1955 is very very good technically. The 1981 is original. While some may love while others not so much, I do feel his 1981 original interpretation is rooted in a fundamentally sound way and that the piece 'makes good sense' the way he presents it.