T$S drools.

How can one issue offend three times? Just joking, almost. Bet you thought it would be about the David A. Rich articles. No.

First, the Mahler No. 2 review by KWN. Unless I am mistaken, this Telarc was recorded in the early 80's and included a chorus. You don't name the chorus, but if it was before 1984, it would have been the Washington University Civic Chorus. I sang with that chorus from about 1970 until 1984. We did, indeed, perform the Mahler No. 2 at Powell Symphony Hall, but I'm not sure of the exact year. Blame your vinyl recording's sound on the recording company, not the orchestra or Maestro Slatkin.

In that hall, the orchestra sounds superb, and although I didn't always care for Slatkin's interpretations, he gets most of the credit for moving this orchestra into the top 5 or ten orchestras in the U.S. As a St. Louisan, I have attended concerts since about 1952 and still do.

Then, John Puccio criticizes Slatkin again. From the foregoing, I just don't get it. It would be fine if he says he likes another conductor more, but not in the obsequious manner that he does, and then tosses him a bone for his "Adagio". Here again, the problem is more with the recording (I never liked the EMI recordings of our orchestra).

Last, I am a little surprised that Steven G. Baird either didn't recognize the problem with his preamp or doesn't run periodic tests and checks on his equipment. To be a reviewer one would think that good maintenance would be a given. Maybe all your reviewers should be required to cycle new equipment through their systems at a reasonable interval, even if they aren't scheduled to do an equipment review, or at least perform some rudimentary testing. My modified and tweaked quasi-passive preamp, based on the Corey Greenberg design published in Stereophile is still going after more than 11 years. Admittedly, I don't put many hours on it.

Frank S. Thomas III

Ballwin (St. Louis), MO

I'm a bit puzzled by your remarks about my Mahler 2 review. The header of the review credits the performance to the "St. Louis Symphony Orchestra and Chorus," which is precisely what is stated on the cover of the Telarc SACD release, which makes no mention of the Washington University Civic Chorus. And if you were in the choir that was recorded, would you not remember that? Your comments seem, well, a bit confused.

Moreover, I did not, as you imply, blame the sound of the record on the orchestra or conductor. Indeed, I praised the performance, and then went on to mention that in its new incarnation, the sound is much better. Here is what I wrote:

I can still remember thinking back in the early '80s that what the world really needed was for Telarc to record the Mahler Second. The label had produced some really fine-sounding recordings, and the thought of having this magnificent piece of music available in Telarc-quality sound was enough to make me drool. When this recording was released on vinyl, I was extremely excited, and could hardly wait to bring it home from the record store so that I could fire it up on my stereo.

Man, was I disappointed. The recording seemed just too blurry and distant. I could tell that the performance was a good one, but the sound left plenty to be desired.

Many years later, Telarc has released a remastered version, and even on the CD layer of this SACD release (now that my CD player has died, I will be getting something that will play SACDs, but I do not yet have it in my system), the sound is better that I remember it. It may still be a bit on the warm, soft side, but it certainly sounds much better than it did in its original vinyl incarnation.

Not once did I make any criticism of Slatkin; in fact in my entire review, his name is not even mentioned. Therefore, I am not sure wiry you write that John Puccio criticizes Slatkin "again." You then go on to write that you yourself don't always care for his interpretations. Keeping that in mind, let's read what JJP actually wrote:

I mean no disrespect to a fine conductor, but I have seldom found maestro Leonard Slatkin's musical interpretations to be in the uppermost ranks of great performances. Perhaps this is unfair, given that the competition among truly great conductors is so easily accessible on DVD. But in the orchestral works of American composer Samuel Barber (1910-1981), Slatkin comes into his own, and there probably isn't another conductor, short of Leonard Bernstein, who illuminates the man's music so felicitously.

Did you really mean to use the word "obsequious" in characterizing JJP's remarks? I'm not sure what word you intended, but surely not that one. And what did you mean by "Tossing him a bone for his Adagio?" Again, let's look at what JJP actually wrote: "Yet despite the softer, warmer acoustics of the EMI recording, the Adagio and the other pieces with the St. Louis Orchestra sounded just right to me." That's right, JJP praised the other pieces on this recording as well.

As far as SGB's preamp problem, although I share you r dismay that he had a problem in the first place that may have led him to draw some unwarranted conclusions about the sound of some recordings, I ant glad that he caught the problem and was honest enough to admit what had happened. I am confident that he will be more careful in the future. SGB is honest to a fault, a true gentleman, and I admire Iris willingness to admit to his mistake.