Tchaikovsky / Dvorak: Serenades for Strings - Davis

Tchaikovsky / Dvorak: Serenades for Strings - Davis

Esoteric  ESSD-90179

Stereo Hybrid

Classical - Orchestral

Tchaikovsky: Serenade for Strings
Dvorak: Serenade for Strings

Symphonie-Orchester des Bayerischen Rundfunks
Sir Colin Davis (conductor)

Support this site by purchasing from these vendors:


Add to your wish list | library


1 of 1 recommend this, would you recommend it?  yes | no

Comments (17)

Comment by sancho santos - May 31, 2018 (1 of 17)

But when you listen it, nobody gess that, I don´t know what kind of miracle esoteric was made. Recomended...............

Comment by Euell Neverno - June 8, 2018 (2 of 17)

The remix and DSD conversion may indeed make the sound more pleasing, but, obviously, do not add information that is not in the master, which begs the question, why pay that much?

Comment by breydon_music - June 8, 2018 (3 of 17)

Well, presumably because the remix and DSD conversion make the sound more pleasing?!

Comment by Euell Neverno - June 9, 2018 (4 of 17)

55 euros more pleasing?

Comment by ubertrout - June 11, 2018 (5 of 17)

I can't imagine the sound on the Tchaikovsky is going to even be particularly close to the sound of Souvenir - TrondheimSolistene, but who knows.

Comment by sancho santos - June 12, 2018 (6 of 17)

I listened to the original Philips cd and the diference in sound is huge. It isn't just more plasent, but it has a lot more information and more natural sound.

Comment by sancho santos - June 12, 2018 (7 of 17)

I don´t understand how People that never listened to a disc make coments, about it.................

Comment by Adrian Quanjer - June 13, 2018 (8 of 17)


You are right. I haven’t heard this one either, so I cannot comment on it and will therefore not question your opinion either. However, isn’t the basic question here: should one pay a lot of money for a disc that is (according to you) worth every penny if there are alternatives of proven quality in playing and sound costing far less? I have the Trondheim Solistene, and although I’m not a fan of being surrounded by the players, I cannot but agree that playing & sound are both of high quality. And so is Boni with the members of the Royal Concertgebouw.

But please do enjoy what you like, value and paid for; you are not alone in appreciating the esoteric remastering of yesteryears heroes! Read for instance Ramesh Nair’s original site review on the quality of esoteric remastered discs here: Beethoven: Piano Sonatas 21 & 23, Eroica Variations - Gilels#comments

Comment by Euell Neverno - June 13, 2018 (9 of 17)

Universal Japan has a redo of this recording out at normal price, BTW, although not DSD. Agree the Trondheim Solistene is indeed very good (in both stereo AND mch). And, yes, I have not heard the Esoteric, because, as usual, it is overpriced, IMO.

Comment by sancho santos - June 14, 2018 (10 of 17)

Hello, a year ago I didn't have Esoteric Sacd neiter Universal Japan SHM Sacd.

UNtil now I purshsed more than 60 or so of this Disc.
I have no dought that they are the best Digital disc that I have in My colection by a large margin. And very close, if not beter than Vinil.

Just compare one of San Francisco Orchestra Malher Dsd Original with Sy 1 or 2 of Esoteric and the diference is like Night and Day. Or Sy 5 and 6 of Abbado on Shm Sacd.


Comment by Adrian Quanjer - June 14, 2018 (11 of 17)

Readers of these comments may find this discussion of interest: .

Comment by breydon_music - June 14, 2018 (12 of 17)

Well, I do own both of the discs mainly under discussion here - the Trondheim and the Davis. Obviously the Trondheim is the better recording! Beyond that it's a little difficult to make comparisons - Davis' version is a "bigger band" interpretation and performance; I've owned it for years on RBCD, love it, and have to say it sounds just so much better on the Esoteric issue. Equally obviously, in a sane - and boring? - world the law of diminishing returns applies, just as it doe (probably) with all of our equipment set-ups compared with a basic stereo or a computer CD drive (or Spotify) which will play anyone the basic music. I do wish Esoteric would declare the source of their transfers, though, and I do think they're variable, so I guess we all pay our money and take our pick?

Comment by Euell Neverno - June 14, 2018 (13 of 17)

If an older analogue master were remixed in DXD, you might want to obtain the recording in DXD or at least double or quad DSD. Of course, that would be a download file. Have never seen Esoteric download files.

Comment by ubertrout - June 17, 2018 (14 of 17)

I didn't mean to stir the pot quite this much, and we're all indulging in this hobby to get closer to what brings us joy. I picked the Trondheim recording simply because it's so plainly going to be better than the disc under discussion - Esoteric has essentially admitted that their discs are taken from 24/96 digital files, and than processed in the analog domain to give them a warmer sound. And some people really like that.

But I think the fetishization of Esoteric releases is bad for high res audio more generally. Most people have limited budget and information bandwith, and these releases take attention away from modern recordings and more reasonably priced remastering processes. To pull out another example, I'd much rather someone looking for a copy of the Dvorak Serenade picked up The Bohemian Album - Amsterdam Sinfonietta than this Esoteric release - they'd be supporting a label that continues to make first-rate recordings, and be getting a brand new DSD recording, instead of a disc that reflects several generations of iterations - the original analog recording, the conversion to PCM, and then Esoteric's conversion to analog and back to digital. And they'll be spending a third as much, or less.

As for those who own this disc and love it, more power to you. I'm sure if you love this recording the Esoteric is a pleasure. I just don't want folks casually browsing the internet to think Esoteric discs is the way you have to do high-res and that other releases are a downgrade from their standard.

Comment by Adrian Quanjer - June 18, 2018 (15 of 17)

Thanks Ubertrout, this is a most helpful and useful comment.

Esoteric certainly do lots of people a nostalgic favour by copying and remastering their old damaged LP war horses with delicate care, but it doesn’t mean that it is better than what is produced nowadays.

I particularly take the point that it is in our own interest to support the few still existing quality SACD manufacturers who seem to be able to delve up a host of young talent and orchestral formations that are at least as good as the limited number of the past. I furthermore think we owe it to the next generation to give them a chance of being recorded with the best possible means, being -sound wise - arguably better than the best ‘repackaging’ of old material.

Comment by William Hecht - June 18, 2018 (16 of 17)

Ditto and Ditto. I always enjoy the gusts of sanity that occasionally blow though these discussions.

Comment by Steven Harrison - June 29, 2018 (17 of 17)

Breydon, the new Bruckner does list the history, etc. I posted this in my comments about the disc.
I tend to think that this is how Esoteric has always done it.