I have decided to keep

Bruckner 3 / Haitink / Concertgebouw Orchestra / 1963
(Philips 442 043-2, in 9-CD box Philips 442 040-2)

because I think it is actually very good: it flows quite beautifully and also powerfully, having the tasteful perfection of a the best Haitink studio recordings (at least, that's how it sounds to me), without sagging or losing momentum when forward movement is called for.

Bruckner 3 / Haitink / Vienna Philharmonic / 1988
(470 535-2, in 2-CD set 470 534-2)
is clearly inferior in some respects, I think. It's a bit slow and almost disjointed here and there, with grating brass, and not elegant all. A typical slightly boring Haitink recording? I will keep it anyway; I reserve the right to change my mind!
--
Roland van Gaalen
Amsterdam

PS: Did anyone ever cull a CD from multi-CD set without discarding the whole set?

On Sunday, January 7, 2024 at 10:50:39 AM UTC-6, Roland van Gaalen wrote:
> I have decided to keep
>
> Bruckner 3 / Haitink / Concertgebouw Orchestra / 1963
> (Philips 442 043-2, in 9-CD box Philips 442 040-2)
>
> because I think it is actually very good: it flows quite beautifully and also powerfully, having the tasteful perfection of a the best Haitink studio recordings (at least, that's how it sounds to me), without sagging or losing momentum when forward movement is called for.
>
> Bruckner 3 / Haitink / Vienna Philharmonic / 1988
> (470 535-2, in 2-CD set 470 534-2)
> is clearly inferior in some respects, I think. It's a bit slow and almost disjointed here and there, with grating brass, and not elegant all. A typical slightly boring Haitink recording? I will keep it anyway; I reserve the right to change my mind!

I agree- i have always preferred the earlier recording. The Concertgebouw has a delightful heft in the first, while the later is more polished. Not that I dislike the second. Haitinkn's best Concertgebouw Bruckner for me has always been 0-3, then the later 7 and 9.

On Sunday, January 7, 2024 at 10:56:09 AM UTC-6, Roland van Gaalen wrote:
> PS: Did anyone ever cull a CD from multi-CD set without discarding the whole set?

Accepting the premise that you have no concern for resale value, assuming someone comes into posession of the box/set/collection/whatever after you are no longer here, the absence of the expected material will be confusing and frustrating. You see the strange personal habits of owners when you go through a collection that has been passed on. I don't find them charming.

On Sun, 07 Jan 2024 08:56:05 -0800, Roland van Gaalen wrote:

>
> PS: Did anyone ever cull a CD from multi-CD set without discarding the whole set?

No. And I suggest you keep some bad recordings on hand
to make your good recordings sound better.

Op maandag 8 januari 2024 om 07:39:26 UTC+1 schreef Pluted Pup:
> On Sun, 07 Jan 2024 08:56:05 -0800, Roland van Gaalen wrote:
>
> >
> > PS: Did anyone ever cull a CD from multi-CD set without discarding the whole set?
> No. And I suggest you keep some bad recordings on hand
> to make your good recordings sound better.

Excellent suggestion!

Meanwhile, I admit that, for me at least, the CD era has not ended after all:

1 I really like the format (especially single CDs in individual 'jewel boxes' with a nice booklet (*) );
2 I like having the music physically in my possession, as it were;
3 I don't like being dependent on online music providers and their policies (content, commercials).

(*) The front cover pages of the booklets in those Philips twofers, such as those containing Brucker 3 & 8 and Bruckner 4 & 5 by the Vienna Philharmonic conducted by Haitink look extremely boring -- so boring that it seems natural to think that those recordings must be extremely boring, too, or at least nothing special. CDs issued by labels such as Music & Arts tend to have the opposite effect on me. They usually look like collector's items from the outset! (Of course this has nothing to do with the music itself, but may influence or reinforce one's perception of it, I suppose.)
--
Roland van Gaalen
Amsterdam

In article <4391ea23-6f41-4e3e-937a-56e28c2e7e1en@googlegroups.com>,
Roland van Gaalen <rolandvangaalen@gmail.com> wrote:
>1 I really like the format (especially single CDs in individual
>'jewel boxes' with a nice booklet (*) );

More often it is the cardboard slipcase these days....

>2 I like having the music physically in my possession, as it were;

I was very resistant to playing music through the computer on a
regular basis, but once it's on your hard drive, you do have it in
possession. I suppose you could say it's electronic possession &
not quite physical, but there's a lot of convenience to playing off
the computer. For one thing, regarding your question on discarding
parts of larger sets, I have an "active drive" for music, where I
remove the tracks/parts/etc I don't really need to have available.
(Then I still have backups with everything.)

I was resistant to the computer aspect until review copies got to
be more & more in the form of downloads, so it wasn't really
avoidable, and after a while, I found myself feeling like getting
out the physical disc was the nuisance....

>3 I don't like being dependent on online music providers and their
>policies (content, commercials).

Definitely agree with this, so that's an issue with streaming, but once
you have a download, this aspect is out of the equation....