Original or Revival Recording: Which Do You Prefer?

for which show...?

---

I should have clarified more: if you didn't take into account the show or the performers, would you prefer an original cast recording that showed off the production as it was first written, or a revival that maybe improved it a little? Just on principle?

---

I think I prefer the sound of the revival recordings. The clear sharpness of studio technology just makes it sound a lot better to me, whether I like the person singing it or not.

I think I just prefer recent recordings to old ones, because the new technology makes the sound clearer.

I generally prefer revival recordings. It's usually the production I saw and the sound is better. I also feel like when they do these major revivals, they have the pick of the littler for the cast, so it's usually pretty stellar. I know I'm somewhat alone in saying this, but Raul is kind of a "dream Bobby" whereas Larry Kert kind of fell into the part, being a TV and movie "star" at the time, and wasn't even with the show very long. That's not very indicative of the original show.

---

In general, I prefer original recordings -- especially if that's how I'm getting to know the show for the first time. Then, if I like the show well enough, I'll automatically want more recordings of it anyway.

If there's a currently-running revival of a show that I haven't seen or heard before, then I'd probably get the revival recording first, just because it seems to provide more of an immediate excuse to finally buy that show.

Ehhh? How could anyone choose a thing like that? I can't even decide for specific productions (am having a terrible time trying to pick which 'Assassins' recording to place in my top ten atm), how am I meant to decide which I prefer in general? Every recording of a show will bring something different to the table, and I couldn't say "well, I definitely prefer one to the other", even bearing in mind personal preference is not the same thing as judging superior quality. Unless a recording is downright dreadful, it's just as valuable as the next, and just because two (or more?) casts are different does not mean that I'll find one personally more enjoyable than the other(s).

Srsly, I couldn't possibly. Maybe for specific productions I might be able to, but in general? Too unanswerable a question.

---

I've got to say that in general, I prefer original albums to revivals. The revivals tend to sound a little TOO polished, whereas I find the originals to sound more 'authentic.'

It really depends on the show.

I go with the revival recording because it's the most recent one so it'll sound better. That is, if it's a show I don't already have the cast recording of. So, in the case of Assassins, Pacific Overtures, and 110 in the Shade, I went with the revival recording. Soon, I'm planning on getting Kiss Me Kate.

---

I usually prefer the original recording, probably 90% of the time. The only time I can think of liking a revival recording better would be Anything Goes ('87) and the Assassins revival. The performances on originals are usually better and although I guess the sound quality is technically worse, I enjoy the sound of old recordings better.
I guess that's just me :)

---

Depends on which I hear first. For example, I prefer the revival recording of Nine (but I still love the original recording as well) but I prefer the original cast recording of Sunday in the Park With George as opposed to the recent London revivaal recording.

Truth be told, if I love the show, I'll usually want as many recordings as possible, so I'll end up loving both the original and the revival recordings.

---

The poor sound quality and thin orchestrations on some of the older original recordings is enough to turn me off from them, unfortunately. I'm not sure I've ever made it through the entire Guys and Dolls original recording. I'm a sucker for lush sound.

Updated On: 6/19/07 at 10:49 PM