Wikipedia:Featured sound candidates/JS Bach - Brandenburg Concertos 3, 5 & 6

JS Bach - Brandenburg Concerto No. 3
Fabulous pieces of music by JS Bach. These recordings illustrate the article about the Brandenburg Concertos, and come from the Al Goldstein collection in the Pandora music repository at ibiblio.org. They are recordings by the Advent Chamber orchestra in a live concert for the small record label that has released its work to the public. They are well played with spirit and would make a fine set of FS. Generally well-balanced although there is the occasional moment when the bass is a bit loud in the mix (perhaps they were sat too close to the mics). They were originally uploaded by Graham87.


 * Nominate and support. Major Bloodnok (talk) 22:19, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
 * May I suggest breaking this up into individual concertos? Reviewing 45 minutes of music is a bit much in one sitting. =) Adam Cuerden (talk) 21:32, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Fair enough! Sheer laziness on my part - I was doing it rapidly too as RL is quite demanding at the moment. I will divide them into No 3, No 5 & No 6 separately. Major Bloodnok (talk) 10:57, 9 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment The start of the first movement sounds a bit cut short. I can see Tony's point about the audio recording being a little lower-quality than some of our recordings, but it's not too bad. Unsure. I'll come back later. Adam Cuerden (talk) 22:41, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Weak support The page-turning and other noises (which dominate some parts), combined with the awkward start, make it hard to fully support, but it's a rather lively performance. The MP3 version is actually rather better for the first movement - grab that and convert it, and I'll reconsider. Adam Cuerden (talk) 02:02, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Weak oppose I'm not sure I hear quite what is being talked about in numbers 5 and 6, however this seems tinny to me, like it were being played on a cheap 1990s boombox. Does that make any sense?  S ven M anguard   Wha?  03:55, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
 * On the Fence they seem to be on the cusp of FS quality. Personally, I can't feel the emotion that this song is trying to convey. --Guerillero &#124; My Talk   02:05, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Weak support I reiterate Adam's concerns, the page turning is very dominant and the assortment of odd noises ruins the liveliness of the piece. The start (not that I consider that a start) is very, very strange indeed. —  Ancient Apparition •  Champagne?  • 2:28pm • 03:28, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Oppose—This is a great pity. The third movement is closest to promotion standards: the fizziness of the audio-engineering doesn't seem to be as bad is is for the first movement. But there's a problem: the third movement ends half-way through, ahem. The description page does say "Selections from the concert of December 2006". My guess is that this was an encore, since the musicians do appear to slow up very nicely at the "end"; but it doesn't make sense. I can't work out what is happening. The movement normally takes 4.5 minutes. The second movement: harpsichord seriously out of tune. Airconditioning, probably; it's a big problem for early instruments. In a recording studio, you'd stop and retune, which takes at least 20 minutes. I do like their pulse and vivacity. Tony   (talk)  07:28, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
 * The truncated 3rd movement is strange, but the Pandora Records website is riddled with errors, especially in the section with music by the Advent Chamber Orchestra, so I wouldn't put it past them. There are actually two versions of the 3rd movement of Brandenburg Concerto No. 3 on the Pandora Records website: the truncated version that you've just reviewed and a full version, which I've just uploaded over the truncated version of the 3rd movement. They are obviously from different recordings. I've made a note of this discrepancy on the description page, but the wording could probably be improved. I've always known that there were two versions of that file on the Pandora Records website, but I didn't know about the truncated version until now ... thanks very much for pointing it out. Graham 87 10:52, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I'd have supported the previous upload of the third movement if it had been complete. This is not nearly as good: the bass is very flabby ... probably an engineering problem. The inner parts are unclear in many places. The upper strings have slight ensemble problems in a few places, and their vibrato intrudes occasionally. 3 min 54 s is bad. The tempo is uncomfortably pushed after the first pause. The ending crashes into a heap. Is it the same orchestra? For such a well-known piece, we have to be fussy, IMO. For a far better performance, at baroque pitch, put "brandenburg concerto 3" into YouTube and click on the Frieburg one. But the audio-engineering sucks and the harpsichord really fuzzes the texture somehow. Tony   (talk)  15:10, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, it's the same orchestra, believe it or not. However I agree with you that my second upload of the movement is not as good as the original one ... it's not as polished. Graham 87 02:33, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I think we have a consensus of "Meh." It's alright, goodd enpugh for articles, but noone's gettin very passionate about it. Adam Cuerden (talk) 00:42, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Not promoted Consensus stands at 3/2/1, it is clear that there are significant issues with where the first movement starts and the background noises present. —  Ancient Apparition •  Champagne?  • 2:03pm • 03:03, 2 April 2011 (UTC)