As many classical music listeners, I own many different versions of a determined concert. Let's take for example Beethoven's ninth symphony. One version I like very much because of its brilliant performing and the director's style is Von Karajan's take on Beethoven's ninth in 1963, the one included in the Karajan Gold collection from Deutsche Grammophon. I own too one of those low-budget Decca London 80's records, with unknown directors and some unknown eastern-european orchestra. And, Finally, another Deutsche Grammophon version, Claudio Abbado's 1999 recording, which is IMO the best sounding one of all them. But, fact is that its tempo sometimes disturbs me , and I really like Von Karajan's one, despite its clear disadvantage in sound quality.
My question for all of you (well, at least the ones who share my dillema) is, what would be your criteria for loading music to the empeg, as evidently having more than one version of a determined concert would prove a waste of space, considering you still have to load many other tunes?
Thank you in advance.

Load them all, hard drives are "cheap" and you can even specify if you don't want certain ones to come on randomly.

If you're really bent on picking one version, it's really up to you. I know if it was my empeg I'd pick the version I liked the best, even if the recording wasn't the best, especialy knowing that you're going to be listening to these in the car where the acoustics and road noise will interfere with the near-perfect recordings.

Matthew

what would be your criteria for loading music to the empeg, as evidently having more than one version of a determined concert would prove a waste of space

I would either (a) upgrade the hard disk to fit all tunes, or (b) put the one YOU like the best on the player. It's your music, do what makes YOU happy.

The whole "technical quality versus performance/energy/fun" thing is something all musicians struggle with. The dream of any musician is to capture both at the same time. I can name many examples, though, where the more energetic performance wins out over the technically-better version. This seems to be the norm.

One good example is Andy Summer's guitar solo on the Police song "Driven To Tears". He specifically said in an interview that they did a lot of more technically precise takes, but in the end, the wild, sloppy, out-of-tune, dissonant solo won out because its energy was so tangible.

Even in filmmaking, George Lucas is a big one for energy-over-technical-precision. For instance, there is an infamous moment at the end of Star Wars, as everyone is celebrating in the hangar after destroying the Death Star, and Leia calls out "LUKE!", and he responds with "CARRIE!" quite clearly. It was left in the final edit anyway, because the performers had the best energy in that take.

what would be your criteria for loading music to the empeg, [choosing sound quality vs best performance]

There is not the slightest doubt: Best Performance.

Unless you are entering an IASCA stereo competition, who cares about the sound quality? It is the music that matters. Give me an inspired performance any day over technical studio perfection.

I have a performance of the Stars and Stripes Forever, recorded outdoors at a parade in 1961, just two microphones on sticks about 60 feet apart in front of a 120 piece band. The recording is lacking in bass response, is full of hisses, crackles, and pops from the original 40-year old Vinyl recording -- and if you listen to it, by the time you are 30 seconds into it you won't even hear the defects, you'll be so wrapped up in the performance. (tfabris and schofiel will back me up on this one!)

I have a performance of the Stars and Stripes Forever, recorded by the Boston Pops, perfect conducting, perfect acoustics, not a single mis-played note anywhere, excellent job of mastering the performance on CD. It is so cold and sterile and uninteresting that I don't even have it on my player.

This question is a no-brainer.

tanstaafl.

Yeah, that's a pretty insane performance of that piece. I'm not a fan of Sousa or anything, and most "patriotic" music makes me feel like I'm watching a newsreel in grade school. But the particular performance Doug is referring to is absolutely insane. Very rare recording, as I understand it.

Ah. IASCA competitions... there's nothing like it in my country. Of course, there's plenty of super-slick installs rolling around, but there's no association, no autosound club, nothing. In Argentina, they're far better grouped than here, there are many different meetings and competitions year-round. Well, that's the way it was, because now with their currency still going down and down, autosound stuff (all-imported) will get too expensive for them. As for me, I'm considering replacing my Peugeot's front components (pure crap) with a set of good ones, still considering between some Focal components (expensive but pretty good from what I've heard) and others from Lanzar. My installer claims the Lanzars are almost as good as the Focals, and they're much cheaper. Any experience on that?
As for the SQ Vs. Performance question, okay it was already decided, now it's confirmed, I'll stick with my preferred performances.

George Lucas is a big one for energy-over-technical-precision.

I'm pretty sure you meant ``was'', not ``is''.