Thanks for your reply on this one. I'm not sure whether I would strictly classify this one as a 360 degree surround recording. That's why I was curious to hear your view on Mr. Negri's recording style. This Rossini Quad does not have clearly discrete aspects in the rears, such as the children's choir singing off in the distance on the Bizet - Carmen recording. But, the rear channels work integrally with the front channels. This is why I used the term "immersive". The rear channels are providing more than just quiet hall ambience, like some other PentaTone Quad SACDs.
To be honest, I find terms such as "discrete" and "immersive" are used rather freely in the recording industry and can be confusing. Today I was listening to Telarc's Baroque Music for Brass SACD. On the cover it clearly states "Discrete Multi-channel Surround". But, this recording doesn't have clearly discrete elements coming from the rears. Rather it has an exceptionally deep soundstage that vividly captures the natural reverberation of the recording venue. So, the listener isn't really sitting in the center with the performers situated around at 360 degrees. Now, this might be subtle point that's open for debate, but I would still classify this as an immersive recording. I know many people have strict views on what is "real" surround sound. Perhaps I am a little more lenient.
Addenda: Would the fact that Phillips (and not DG) did the Rossini Quad recording make any difference?
Your description of the
Klangbild that Negri painted for this Rossini recording is very evocative and appealing — that is, I can pretty much hear what you're talking about, and you have put your finger exactly on the reason for this effect when you wrote "the rear channels work integrally with the front channels". So even if no direct sounds of instruments are coming from the rear, it is the relationship between the front and the rear that creates the effect. The are several factors that would contribute to that, but the most important one would be the distance between the front and rear mikes on the left side, and the same on the right. If they are too close, an unpleasant "comb filter" effect would be produced in the stereo mixdown, and if they are too far, you would hear only ambiance from the rear in quad. Negri apparently found the right medium, and I can believe that this sound picture would be very "immersive" even if no direct instrumental sounds are perceived to emanate from the rear. BTW, does the packaging say which hall this recording was made in?
The word "discrete" has apparently taken on a different meaning in recent years from what it meant back in the early days of quad. Now it seems to refer to what I have been calling "360-degree-direct" in my recent revisiting of quad, whereas in the late 60s and the 70s, when all of the controversy about matrixing was swirling around, "discrete" meant independent channels which had never been encoded by matrixing.
In Philips, the functions of sound engineer and producer were often combined in a single person, and that was the case with Negri. He did both, at the same time.
In DG, this never happened. For DG recordings, there were were always three people at the session (sometimes more, if it was a big opera production). One was the
Aufnahmeleiter, who was the studio producer for that session, and was responsible for musical matters — reading the score, marking it, keeping track of takes, talking with the conductor, etc. He was the "recording leader" (could have been called the
Aufnahmeführer, but for the unpleasant connotations of that word). He might have also been the executive producer, who had been in charge of the artist's contract, negotiations with managers, etc, but he might also have been simply the recording leader, with the executive production function having been fulfilled by someone else.
The second person at a DG session was the
Tonmeister, who was the sound engineer. He operated the mixing console, and was often referred to as "balance engineer". He had pretty much a free hand in determining all aspects of microphoning and mixing. The third person at DG sessions was the
Tontechniker, or recording engineer. He worked under the
Tonmeister, and operated the tape recorders during the session as well as physically splicing the tapes in post-production, under the direction of the
Aufnahmeleiter.
I almost always worked as both executive producer and studio producer. The reason that most of my productions were recorded either 8- or 16-track was that I wanted to have the ability to create the final mixes in post-production, which I did, rather than having them be written in stone at the sessions by the
Tonmeister. Usually this was pretty successful, but that is not to say that DG didn't make thousands of great recordings using their traditional division of labor. They did.