Chess CD Question

Posted: 6/5/07 at 8:01pm

I'm a huge Chess fan but lately have been playing the Broadway and the Swedish CDs much more than the concept album. Anyway I pulled out the concept album and noticed how damn low the recording level is (which is normal with many CDs mastered in the 80s)--even though I bought my copy in the late 90s it's the thick double jewel case with the thick booklet etc.

Anyway I know/think the concept labum was reissued in a slim packaging--can anyone tell me if the sound has been noticeably remastered--especially the levels? Is it worth investing in?

E

[BSoBW2]

Posted: 6/5/07 at 11:08pm

I don't know about the sound quality on the re-release, but I love the Danish Tour Recording (in English). It follows the London version closely.

Emma Kershaw is a fantastic Florence. Probably my favorite. The rest of the cast is top notch.

Posted: 6/5/07 at 11:11pm

I own that tour as well and LOVE it you're right (tho the actual staging looked odd--more like a European style musical like Notre Dame)

I see that in the late 90s Decca Broadway released CHess (mine's on RCA) does anyone have this? was it remastered (I'm gonna guess yes?)

[BSoBW2]

Posted: 6/5/07 at 11:14pm

Yeah, you are very right about the very European staging...but I think it adds a lot to the production. I really like the split level stage.

I actually listen to this CD almost everyday on the bus. Isn't that sad. And it is so easy to read while listening to it.

Sorry, can't answer any of your questions. I only have this one (the original release) and the Broadway version - which I have only listened to once. Wish I had the others. Someday.

Posted: 6/6/07 at 3:48am

Not sad at all--I love Chess even if I have some issues about the theatricalness of the show. The concept recording is worth hearing, particularly for Benny and Bjorn's masterful (albeit more pop than Broadway) production work in the studio

E

Posted: 6/6/07 at 5:01pm

[misschung]

Posted: 6/6/07 at 5:12pm

I have to say that I really wish they did a studio recording of the Actors Fund Concert, because I loved the orchestrations. I only have the RCA recording, I'd love to hear the new release - was it remastered? I just feel like some of the songs sound so dated, particularly the Opening Ceremony sequence and Bangkok. The synthesizers and fillers are so 80s, I'd love if someone released a new version because I love the music so much.

Posted: 6/6/07 at 5:41pm

I agree but disagree I think when the show is kept in the 80s (which seeing the Russia/US tension and the importance of chess makes sense) the orchestrations are PERFECTION--particularly the Abba originals--stunning in spots even if they are VERY dated. Similar to how I feel about the original Company orchestrations being brilliant for a 1970 set version of the show.

I'm still nto sure if the newer release of the Chess concept is remastered--hence this thread. But it sure needs it--it's the lowest level recorded of any of my cast albums--when I play it in my discman in fact even on FULL blast it's not loud enough to really block stuff out if I'm going for a run or at the gym (One Night in Bangkok is a great running song :P )

E

[misschung]

Posted: 6/6/07 at 5:45pm

I agree with you - ideally, I would love to have a new version as well as a remastered version of the 84 recording, like we now have for Company. Hey, I can dream

[Mr Roxy]

Posted: 6/6/07 at 5:57pm

RCA botched it by making it a single CD

Another they botched was Inner City which I doubt will ever see the light of day on CD. Linda Hopkins rendition of " Deep In The Night" was gut wrenching and it was better still on stage

Posted: 6/6/07 at 6:44pm

Which did they make a one disc?

[NCGuy]

Posted: 6/6/07 at 9:34pm

Eric, I don’t know anything about the technical aspects of CD recordings, so take this with a grain of salt...the newer release still sounds too low to me, but not nearly as low as the older version.

Posted: 6/6/07 at 9:36pm

Hey thanks! So you mean it's not great but it is an improvement if you play them back to back? Maybe i'll keep an eye out for a cheap copy of that's true

[NCGuy]

Posted: 6/6/07 at 9:44pm

Yeah, if you can find it for a decent price, pick it up. For what it’s worth, the latest CD release was my fourth time buying the recording (LP, cassette tape, and original CD), and I didn’t feel like I’d wasted my money.

[Norma D]

Posted: 6/8/07 at 1:46pm

I agree with you NCGuy--I listened to the one that was the larger 2 disc release--the volume was junk! I bought the slim jewel cased 2 discs and it was definitely an improvement but not by any means the kind of sound quality we are used to with newer CD's.

[sweetestsiren]

Posted: 6/8/07 at 3:48pm

I think when the show is kept in the 80s (which seeing the Russia/US tension and the importance of chess makes sense) the orchestrations are PERFECTION--particularly the Abba originals--stunning in spots even if they are VERY dated. Similar to how I feel about the original Company orchestrations being brilliant for a 1970 set version of the show.

I'm kind of torn on whether I agree with this. I can see your point, definitely, but I don't think that Chess is a show that has to be tied to its stylistic time period. Company does because the characters are unquestionably a product of society in those particular times, but as long as you know the historical background for Chess, the characters themselves seem sort of...timeless. That sounds too dramatic for a show that revels in cheese and synth beats (which, don't get me wrong, I love), but I don't think that updating the orchestrations would take that much away from the show.

[misschung]

Posted: 6/8/07 at 4:49pm

Exactly, and I guess the same could be said for many other musicals, too. I mean if the quality of Rent had not surpassed the late 80s keyboard synths on Jonathan's demos, it would be a shame, you know?

I see both sides of this argument, and as I said, in a perfect world I'd love a fresh version of this recording, since the older one already exists

Posted: 6/8/07 at 4:57pm

Oh I think I largely agree with both of those points (and sweetestsiren I'm glad you agree with me about COmpany and its era--since even the writers don't seem to lol). I do think though that ther cold war part of Chess plays a big role--doesn't it? I mean Chess simply isn't as big a deal now...

As for the synths, etc--of course you don't want them to be so distracting that an audience can't get past that aspect--also I'm a big ABBA fan so I admit I love that over the top, but stunning production sheen Benny/Bjorn did--I'm not sure a theatre orchestra could ever replicate it quite the way the concept album did... (I have a bad habit of thinking of the Concept album as the London recording even though there were significant changes by then, like moving Story fo Chess from the ending)

E

[sweetestsiren]

Posted: 6/8/07 at 10:03pm

I confess that my favorite production of Chess to date is the original London one (with the 2003 Actor's Fund concert running a very close second and featuring what I think are the best revisions to date), but I think that to accept that Chess is stuck in the '80s is essentially to accept that it's dead. And I'm just not ready to let go. The thing that's so paradoxical about the show is that underneath all of the synthesized stuff, there's a really beautiful, fairly classical score hiding. I don't think that it could ever play in all its '80s glory in a major revival, because it doesn't (shouldn't!) have that cutesy '80s vibe that audiences love. Those orchestrations were fantastic for the time, but some of the newer ones seem more appropriate for modern audiences.

Company is an interesting case, because the show itself is inextricably tied to the '70s on textual and, arguably, contextual levels... so sounding '70s is appropriate. On the other hand, I completely love what John Doyle has done with the current revival by not-exactly-updating it, but removing it from any period and making it more of a psychological study and less of a piece of societal commentary. I wouldn't argue that that's the best interpretation of the material, but on a personal level it's the one I've found the most affecting of any of the productions I've seen. I agree that trying to make Company "modern" as in set in the '00s and with orchestrations that reflect current musical trends would be a major misstep, but I don't think the revival orchestrations are reflective of a specific period so much as a chamber orchestra sort of style. I can see where you'd disagree and think that losing the '70s sound interferes with the interpretation of the show, which it obviously does, but in this particular case it opens up a different perspective. So I don't think that the creators are mistaken in allowing different takes on their material, necessarily.

[misschung]

Posted: 6/8/07 at 10:09pm

I agree completely with what you just said. I dont think that in either cases of Company or Chess, updating the music would make the content seem anachronistic as long as, like you said, audiences are aware of the historical context of the piece.

With both productions, I think that tying them too tightly to their era is crippling in a way, and removes the timelessness of the material. Plus, I think its can be accomplished more easily since we are talking about the 70s and 80s versus the 1800s or early 1900s - making the orchestrations on musicals set in those time periods seem updated would be more difficult, if not impossible, without completely altering the content.

[best12bars]

Posted: 6/8/07 at 10:36pm

Eric, CDs in the '80s were (for the most part) mastered at very low levels. They're normalization was at -27db, which is exactly where Dolby Digital sound encoding is set for DVDs.

This allowed for the best dynamics available in the medium and kept clarity and distortion at a minimum.

Unfortunately... everyone wanted to go to "eleven" (as they say in "This is Spinal Tap")... and the industry kept pushing the average/normal sound levels to their breaking point. Today's CDs are mastered "way too hot" and don't allow for any significant scope of dynamics. They're already hitting the ceiling, so there's no place to go.

That said... I actually PREFER modern mixing levels, because there is nothing I hate more than over-exaggerated dynamics, forcing a listener to keep one hand on the volume control at all times. I prefer limited dynamics that keep the medium "checked" at all times. That's strictly from an "audience" perspective... but hopefully it explains the reason for the low levels of many early CDs... not just the concept album for "Chess."

It's my favorite, by far though. Elaine Paige and Murray Head are both peerless with this score. So are the original studio orchestrations.

Posted: 6/8/07 at 10:57pm

Best--thanks for the details. I knew pre 1990 CDs were generally mixed much lower (I think I said as much) but not all the details--I always assumed it was partly cuz everyone still played their vinyls which even after going thru an amp are much quieter than most modern music reproduction. Either way Chess is an especially abd example--the CD came out a year after Pacific Overtures' CD but you don't notice the insane low volume on PO--and as I said on a modern self contained player I have even at full blast Chess is pretty quiet (for my tastes--my main stereo can still crank it up of course)