Furtwangler and Bruckner
James Park
Okay, here's my question. I know that there are 3 DG doubles flying
around outside of the US that have Furtwangler conducting some of
Bruckner's symphonies. However, they're not available here, and hbdirect
doesn't have them... And I couldn't find them on the net in general. So
what's the best way to obtain these things? Would Borders or Tower be
able to import them for me, or is there a cheaper way?
Second, I know that some of these same recordings, or different ones, are
available in other places. EMI has two historical sets, which includes
Furtwangler conducting 7,8, and other folks conducting the other
symphonies. Would this be worth getting (ie, are the other conductors
also good with Bruckner) or should I hold out and stick with Furt?
(I don't have that much money, or else I'd probably buy all of them.)
Also, the same (or similar? don't know) Furtwangler recordings are on
Testament, Music and Arts... What's the best avenue to go here? BTW, price
is a factor. Not the most important one, but I can't go around spending it
as much as I might like. So... help?
--James
HenryFogel
>>Subject: Furtwangler and Bruckner
>From: jhp...@unix.amherst.edu (James Park)
>Date: Sun, May 24, 1998 12:11 EDT
>Message-id: <35684...@amhnt2.amherst.edu>
Most of the DGG performances are, in fact, difficult to find; but I am happy to
recommend Furtwangler recordings of Bruckner symphonies that can be found with
relative ease.
SYM #4 - The best combination of performance and sound is the October 22, 1951
Vienna Phil tour performance from Stuttgart; unfortunately, it is only found in
good sound on some Japanese DG transfers, impossible to find in USA and
terribly expensive through Japanese dealers. Therefore, I'd go to the October
29, 1951 performance from the same tour (Munich), which can be found on Music &
Arts CD-796. This is a reasonable transfer.
SYM #5 - The 1942 Berlin performance is more taut, more intense, more cohesive
than the 1951 Salzburg Festival performance; it was on DG427 774 -- hard now to
find; but the sound isn't too bad on Dante Lys 108 (though that company is now
without US distributor). That may mean that you should turn to the Salzburg
performance, which sounds best on EMI 5 65750 2 -- an "official" transfer from
Salzburg Festival archives, and much warmer and richer than other transfers.
SYM #6 - The only surviving performance is missing the first movement. Music &
Arts CD-805 is as good a transfer as any.
SYM #7 - Best performance (and good sound) is from October 18, 1949, with
Berlin Phil, on Japanese EMI TOCE 8513, and also included in EMI's historic
Bruckner set, which is very good overall. (The Japanese EMI is hard to find
except from Japanese sources -- i.e. Abend on the Internet). The DGG recording
is of a live Cairo performance in 1951 (Berlin Phil tour) -- not the most
settled of performances, with some tenative playing and shaping. A later 1951
performance from the same tour is better (from Rome - best transfer is on
Arkadia 653).
SYM #8 - Best overall is March 14, 1949 -- Testament SBT 1143; good transfer,
great performance. The EMI Bruckner set has performance from the next day
(March 15, 1949) -- noisy, cough-ridden audience, performance doesn't seem
quite as concentrated in its energy to me -- but it is still good, and you may
find that sufficient if you have that set.
SYM #9 - Only one Furtwangler recording -- 1944, issued by many labels
including DGG. Music & Arts transfer is fine (CD-730) -- better than Iron
Needle or Dante Lys. DGG is good, but harder to find -- and M&A is almost
identical.
Henry Fogel
Lionel Tacchini
In article <35684...@amhnt2.amherst.edu>,
jhp...@unix.amherst.edu (James Park) wrote:
>
> Okay, here's my question. I know that there are 3 DG doubles flying
> around outside of the US that have Furtwangler conducting some of
> Bruckner's symphonies. However, they're not available here, and hbdirect
> doesn't have them... And I couldn't find them on the net in general. So
> what's the best way to obtain these things? Would Borders or Tower be
> able to import them for me, or is there a cheaper way?
Maybe the best way is not to get them at all.
The 1942 5th (coupled with Richard Strauss stuff in the DG Double set)
can be had on Music & Arts.
The 1944 8th is the wrong transfer (the one with the wrong pitch and flutter)
so you'd better wait for someone to reissue the proper one (usually only
available on an expensive Japanese 2 CD set).
The 10.22.51 4th that goes with it is the one with the best sound,
but the 10.29.51 4th on Music & Arts is said to be a good alternative.
The "Cairo" 7th is the weakest of the 3 complete Furtwaengler 7th
available and in bad sound. Berkshire has the Rome recording for $4.99
on Arkadia.
Remains the 9th, but this one is available in various other incarnations
as well.
So you don't have to get those DG Doubles at all costs, really.
> Second, I know that some of these same recordings, or different ones, are
> available in other places. EMI has two historical sets, which includes
> Furtwangler conducting 7,8, and other folks conducting the other
> symphonies. Would this be worth getting (ie, are the other conductors
> also good with Bruckner) or should I hold out and stick with Furt?
Yes. Especially the 2nd set, with Kabasta and von Hausegger is essential
and guess what : Berkshire has it for $23.97 :
Label: EMI/ANGEL Media Type: CD Price: 23.97 Description: Bruckner,
Symphonies 6-9. (Munich Phil./Kabasta {#7} & Von Hausegger {#9}.
Berlin Phil./Furtwangler {#'s 6 & 8}. Rec.1943, 1942, 1938 & 1949)
Stock Number 66210 (M) [DUTCH] 3 CD set
The Furtwaengler 8th is the 15/3/49 recording (the one with the plane, not
the one with the dog ...).
The Kabasta 7th might be my overall favourite and the Hausegger 9th is
one of the best ever too.
> (I don't have that much money, or else I'd probably buy all of them.)
You will, eventually. The EMI set is a good start.
The other EMI set has Boehm's early 4th and 5th with Dresden, which are
in no way as essential as any of the other recordings mentioned above,
and the best of the various Furtwaengler 7th (the one from 1949),
plus various scherzo recordings which are more for the curious, the
specialists or freaks like me.
You'll find Berkshire at http://www.berkshirerecoutlet.com
Now if you really want to spend all your money buying the DG Double sets,
you should be able to order them from CD Mail in France at
http://www.ate.tm.fr/cdmail
Hope this helps.
LIonel Tacchini
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading
Lionel Tacchini
And I forgot to say that the 3 remaining movements of the Bruckner 6th
by Furtwaengler are also included in the 2nd EMI set, the one at Berkshire.
Lionel Tacchini
Old 8H
I very much appreciate the always very comprehensive and reliable
musical / heirarchical ordering by Henry of the Furtwaengler
performances, and his general indications of audio quality. Whenever
I have had the opportunity of auditioning the identical material, I
have enthusiastically agreed with him. I am especially glad to read
that he feels that other Bruckner 7ths by Furt. are better than the
Cairo one, which has always left me utterly cold and indifferent.
However, he NEVER indicates if the transfer is in fake stereo.
Perhaps this is not important to some collectors of historical
material, but it is of crucial importance to ME, and to at least one
or two of my acquaintances, after we have been "burned" by some of the
early issues on Iron Needle, Grammophono, Radio Rarities, and recent
issues by Music & Arts.
Cannot one listen with phones to these recordings and note for us if
they are in genuine mono? As far as I know there are absolutely NO
extant Furtwaengler performances on tape taken down in 2-channel
stereo or binaural format, though there are examples of German
Magnetophon stereo recordings by other artists of extremely high
quality, realism, and stereo perspective from c. 1944, such as the
Varese LP/Music&Arts CD release of the amazingly good sounding 1944
Gieseking/Rother Emperor Concerto.
When I listen to Furtwaengler, I want to hear the original hall
acoustics of the recording or broacasting venue. They are superbly
preserved on some reissues on CD, such as the M&A version of the
Sibelius Violin Concerto, the DGG & M&A copies of the 1942 Bruckner
5th, and the spectacular sounding 1951 Brahms First and the 1953
Schumann Fourth on DGG. However, when one has to endure the continual
"honky" reinforcing fake stereo resonance at the low end of bass
frequencies, applied by Maggi Payne in her fake-stereo Hamburg Brahms
First on M&A, or the phasiness of the Lowell Cross edition of the old
Furtwaengler 78 commercial recordings in the 4-disk M&A set, one
begins to stop listening to the quality of the performance, and to
start noticing the artifact of this peculiar, "one-note" resonating
phony echoing.
I do not hear this in the DGG "Dokumente" series of single-channel
transfers, but in examining these closely on heaphones, I find that on
occasion, at the very end of performances (such as the 1944 Till or
Daphnis Suite) there is a sudden cut-off of the recording at the
applause point, adding an electronic echo-chamber "fake stereo"
ambient decay. Strange, because this lasts for only a couple of
seconds at the very end of a true, monophonic, single channel
transfer! DGG went to an awful lot of trouble to do this, rather than
just to fade down on the audience applause, which I would much prefer.
Now, I have given up ever having any effect by talking directly to
record companies about fake stereo. My only recourse is just to bring
it up in letters to CD review magazines, or in cyberspace newsgroups,
in order to find out if there are any other collectors of historical
material who would appreciate hearing transfers that just clean up old
recordings without ADDING anything to them!
That is why I am personally so enthusiastic about the EMI historic
Bruckner sets, which I have mentioned in an earlier post (see the
thread about the Testament Furt. Bruckner 8th). The reproduction is
rock-solid MONO. No echo or ambience of any sort has been added. I
can indeed detect some computerized noise reduction in one or two
recordings (the Boehm Fourth is too muffled in the quieter passages;
we could tolerate a LITTLE scratch!) and I can hear just the slightest
trace of what sounds like Cedaring in the Furt. Bruckner Sixth
(movements 2, 3, 4 included, first tragically lost to posterity.)
That last mentioned performance is probably the most amazing reading
of the work that I have ever heard, and surely is the greatest
recording of 1943 I have ever audited: done on tape, it sounds utterly
magnificent, with glorious uncompressed climaxes. Missing the first
movement, it is just a sort of oddity, but one should collect it
anyway.
Now, is the M&A transfer really MONO like the EMI? Or has some little
electronic wizard patched in the echo chambers and phase shifters to
"help" the recording out and fake-stereotize it?
The Kabasta Bruckner 7th in the second volume of the 2 EMI sets,
according to the liner notes, has never before been transferred to a
medium later than 78s, and is absolutely first rate, though using the
Loewe edition (the critical edition wasn't ready in time for the 1942
recording.) The most conspicious difference is the big cymbal crash
in the adagio (which the technology cannot properly accomodate: it is
swallowed up in a very wretched and distorted limiter gulp); but all
other musical passages of the symphony sound excellent (for the time),
and the Munich Phil plays like the BPO.
Von Haussegger's 1938 Bruckner Ninth, using Orel's version of 1934,
(opening up some of Loewe's cuts) was the premiere recording of the
work, and is a very powerful, unsentimental reading of great majesty.
I first became acquainted with it from a post-WWII Victor set of the
78s in 1961. Contrary to the liner notes of the EMI set, it is
available in a purist CD transfer from Preiser, which has a bit more
surface scratch and apparently did not employ any noise-gates, either
the analog or digital variety: it sounds more like a very fine copy of
the original disks than the sanitized EMI dub. However, it is not
worth the money to buy the Preiser if one already has the EMI set. If
you happen to know the old Horenstein Vox recording (my first LP copy
of the work), you may find the Von Haussegger somewhat similar in
pacing and expression compared, say, to Bruno Walter's or Karajan's
very different performances, the two extremes of interpretation of
recordings up to the early '90s; lately we have had the Bernstein and
Giulini CDs of the Ninth, and find that the piece has developed
swollen ankles, having inflated from the 54' duration of V. H. to the
68' peroration of Giulini. I am not altogether sure this is really
"progress"!
Yours,
Old 8H
MWKluge
In article <356e0832...@nntp.ix.netcom.com>, NOS...@NOSPAM.ARG (Old 8H)
writes:
(Snip- cogent arguments against phony stereo)
>The Kabasta Bruckner 7th in the second volume of the 2 EMI sets,
>according to the liner notes, has never before been transferred to a
>medium later than 78s, and is absolutely first rate, though using the
>Loewe edition (the critical edition wasn't ready in time for the 1942
>recording.) The most conspicious difference is the big cymbal crash
>in the adagio (which the technology cannot properly accomodate: it is
>swallowed up in a very wretched and distorted limiter gulp); but all
>other musical passages of the symphony sound excellent (for the time),
>and the Munich Phil plays like the BPO.
I'm glad you added the caveat about the notes. This performance was available
on an Electrola LP over twenty years ago- but presumably unheard of in Britain.
>
>Von Haussegger's 1938 Bruckner Ninth, using Orel's version of 1934,
>(opening up some of Loewe's cuts) was the premiere recording of the
>work, and is a very powerful, unsentimental reading of great majesty.
>I first became acquainted with it from a post-WWII Victor set of the
>78s in 1961. Contrary to the liner notes of the EMI set, it is
>available in a purist CD transfer from Preiser, which has a bit more
>surface scratch and apparently did not employ any noise-gates, either
>the analog or digital variety: it sounds more like a very fine copy of
>the original disks than the sanitized EMI dub. However, it is not
>worth the money to buy the Preiser if one already has the EMI set. If
>you happen to know the old Horenstein Vox recording (my first LP copy
>of the work), you may find the Von Haussegger somewhat similar in
>pacing and expression compared, say, to Bruno Walter's or Karajan's
>very different performances, the two extremes of interpretation of
>recordings up to the early '90s; lately we have had the Bernstein and
>Giulini CDs of the Ninth, and find that the piece has developed
>swollen ankles, having inflated from the 54' duration of V. H. to the
>68' peroration of Giulini. I am not altogether sure this is really
>"progress"!
>
>Yours,
>Old 8H
>
The only thing Loewe did that could be considered a cut was the 4-bar
abbreviation of the Scherzo first-time ending, so that three bars of timpani
taps could be added as transition to the Trio. The other movements are exactly
the duration of the original. Loewe's revision consisted of instrumental and
harmonic changes, such as the dilution of the dissonant climax in the Adagio.
Hausegger even incorporated some Loewisms into his recording, including the
bowed string chords at the close of the first movement. I agree heartily about
the more natural sound heard on Preiser's transfer. It was also available in a
fine LP transfer from Past Masters, again apparently unknown in Britain.
You are right on target about the tendency toward ever-slower tempi in this
score. Apart from Hausegger and Horenstein, Abendroth and Kabasta also turned
in early recorded performances well under an hour in duration. Walter's 1953
Salzburg performance of the Ninth is far more driven than his Columbia
recording of 6 years later.
Mark K.
rkha...@adnc.com
In article <199805291043...@ladder03.news.aol.com>,
mwk...@aol.com (MWKluge) wrote:
>
> In article <356e0832...@nntp.ix.netcom.com>, NOS...@NOSPAM.ARG (Old 8H)
> writes:
>
> (Snip- cogent arguments against phony stereo)
> >according to the liner notes, has never before been transferred to a
> >medium later than 78s, and is absolutely first rate, though using the
> >Loewe edition (the critical edition wasn't ready in time for the 1942
> >recording.) The most conspicious difference is the big cymbal crash
> >in the adagio (which the technology cannot properly accomodate: it is
> >swallowed up in a very wretched and distorted limiter gulp); but all
> >other musical passages of the symphony sound excellent (for the time),
> >and the Munich Phil plays like the BPO.
>
available
> on an Electrola LP over twenty years ago- but presumably unheard of in
Britain.
>
> >
> >(opening up some of Loewe's cuts) was the premiere recording of the
> >work, and is a very powerful, unsentimental reading of great majesty.
> >I first became acquainted with it from a post-WWII Victor set of the
> >78s in 1961. Contrary to the liner notes of the EMI set, it is
> >available in a purist CD transfer from Preiser, which has a bit more
> >surface scratch and apparently did not employ any noise-gates, either
> >the analog or digital variety: it sounds more like a very fine copy of
> >the original disks than the sanitized EMI dub. However, it is not
> >worth the money to buy the Preiser if one already has the EMI set. If
> >you happen to know the old Horenstein Vox recording (my first LP copy
> >of the work), you may find the Von Haussegger somewhat similar in
> >pacing and expression compared, say, to Bruno Walter's or Karajan's
> >very different performances, the two extremes of interpretation of
> >recordings up to the early '90s; lately we have had the Bernstein and
> >Giulini CDs of the Ninth, and find that the piece has developed
> >swollen ankles, having inflated from the 54' duration of V. H. to the
> >68' peroration of Giulini. I am not altogether sure this is really
> >"progress"!
> >
> >Yours,
> >Old 8H
> >
>
> abbreviation of the Scherzo first-time ending, so that three bars of timpani
> taps could be added as transition to the Trio. The other movements are
exactly
> the duration of the original. Loewe's revision consisted of instrumental
and
> harmonic changes, such as the dilution of the dissonant climax in the
Adagio.
> Hausegger even incorporated some Loewisms into his recording, including the
> bowed string chords at the close of the first movement. I agree heartily
about
> the more natural sound heard on Preiser's transfer. It was also available
in a
> fine LP transfer from Past Masters, again apparently unknown in Britain.
>
> You are right on target about the tendency toward ever-slower tempi in this
> score. Apart from Hausegger and Horenstein, Abendroth and Kabasta also
turned
> in early recorded performances well under an hour in duration. Walter's
1953
> Salzburg performance of the Ninth is far more driven than his Columbia
> recording of 6 years later.
>
> Mark K.
>
The slowing down of the 9th appears to be a historical fact, but judging from
Haussegger's 9th might be a little misleading. Modern collectors now have a
chance to listen to an earlier performance, namely Klemperer's 1934 with the
NYPO on the historical set which I have only heard from a friend. Although
the sound of Klemperer's performance is dismal (esp. in the First movt.), that
performance seems to me more spacious than Haussegger's without lacking in
power whatsoever. IMHO, it is even significantly better played than
Haussegger's effort which can be scrappy at times.
At any rate, the slowing down of the 9th hasn't necessarily been bad.
Although I love the Giulini recording that Old 8H cites, I could agree that it
is perhaps too slow and ponderous in places, notwithstanding its enormous
power and meditative spirituality. Bernstein's last effort with the VPO is
similar, except in the Scherzo where he's even slower than Giulini! (I am
grateful to Dave Griegel for quizzing me on the Bernstein recording :-)
Slow tempi have produced some marvelous readings. I am thinking particularly
of Haitink's digital recording with the Concertgebouw where the playing is
superlative and the balance between Furtwaengler's terror and Giulini's repose
is, IMHO, marvelously achieved.
Now, if the historical record is to be set straight, maybe the record
companies will give us Norrington or Gardiner with an orchestra half the size
of Walter's last effort, breezing through the piece in 50 minutes while, in
8H's words from another post, "illuminating hitherto-unexpected sonorities."
This could happen, couldn't it? :-(
Cheerfully yours,
Ramon Khalona
Carlsbad, California
P.S. It would be interesting to find out the timing differences between
Haussegger's and Klemperer's early recordings and, more importantly, whether
there are any significant differences in the editions they used.
Old 8H
As usual, the authoritative Mark Kluge adds perceptive details that
correct the simplistic statements given in the EMI set liner notes,
written by the distinguished (but somewhat uninformed) Robert Layton,
which I accepted without having directly- contradictory knowledge.
Now, I believe you, Mark (and possibly Henry Fogel?) have contributed
annotations to some of the Music & Arts recordings. If Mark agrees
with me about phony stereo, could not he pass on a whisper or two to
Fred Maroth about it?
M&A avers to me in a recent email response that they are too small a
company, on a shoestring budget, to be concerned with extensive
comments and critiques from a casual patron.
If that is the case, then I wonder WHY a shoestring-budget outfit
would expend the time, energy, and money to have an engineer run very
good sounding monaural recordings, with perfectly acceptable EQ and
S/N ratios, through computer processing, echo chambers, and phony
stereotizers...then, they compound this confusion by NOT stating so on
the record jacket, which often implies that this is a monaural source,
by specifying the original recording date of the '30s or '40s.
Not being a Furtwaengler specialist, I stupidly purchased the M&A set
of "The Best Studio Recordings, 1929-1943" on CD-954 (expensive, with
4 disks) primarily to get what was described on the rear cover, and I
quote precisely, as "Bruckner: Symphony No 7 in E BPO, April 1942
(Telefunken)"...of course, it turned out to be the second movement
only, and not the complete work (as I was fully informed only after
purchase, from MWK's excellent annotations.) Similarly, the jacket
implies that the album contains "J. S. Bach: Suite for Orchestra, No.
3 in D" when all it contains is really the Air. Finally, the
recording lists "Furtwaengler: Symphonic Concerto in b BPO, Edwin
Fischer, Aug. 1939 (HMV)"...that turns out to be only the 10' second
movement. In no case whatsoever on the rear jacket, does the album
indicate the timings of these tracks, or that they are excerpts from
the complete works. Intentional, or an oversight? Are we all assumed
to be totallly familiar with somebody's scholarly, thorough
Furtwaengler discography in all its details? Furthermore, nowhere on
the outside of the album does the information "fake stereo" appear to
warn the purchaser, like me, to expect doctored sound.
Up till about '92 or 3, M&A was doing only purist transfers, and every
one I bought was great, the equal of the best sources I had ever
heard. Now, I don't know what to expect, and will only buy after I
have had a chance to audition the recording: none of the twits in
Fanfare, ARG, or any other publication ever really informs us about
transfer quality: they just use right-brain analogies, such as saying
the sound is "plangent" or has "tizziness"; I want to know if it has
been noise-gate filtered, Cedared, fake-stereotized, severely re-EQ'd,
or if it is genuine, undoctored, best-source original mono (or stereo,
as the case may be.)
I am deeply grateful, Mark, for even a scrap of reinforcement; your
brief comment "Snip- cogent arguments against phony stereo" was a
tonic!
Yours,
Old 8H
Old 8H
>Slow tempi have produced some marvelous readings. I am thinking particularly
>of Haitink's digital recording with the Concertgebouw where the playing is
>superlative and the balance between Furtwaengler's terror and Giulini's repose
>is, IMHO, marvelously achieved.
Oh, yes; absolutely! I have no objection whatsoever to what LB and CG
are inspired to do in their very distended interpretations: both are
effective in a grand, tragico-romantic effect.
It is just that, say, after going through the EMI Bruckner historical
set, and hearing the evolution of the earliest versions of Haas
editions, auditing the Bruno Walter 1940 NBC 'Romantic' and the jaunty
one Mistah Klemps did 11 years later, being spirited along by the
inspired Furtwaengler (who certainly did not favor ponderous tempos,
but took his orchestra where flights of imagination impelled him), and
being riveted by a recent re- hearing of the DGG set of the Nine by
Jochum, one arrives at this anomalous terminus of Bernstein and
Giulini. Does that portend the future? Can phrasing be stretched any
further before the edifice completely breaks down?
Yours,
Old 8H
Takashi Kikuchi
C. N. Chew (na...@alphalink.com.au) wrote:
: Old 8H wrote:
: > [...] one arrives at this anomalous terminus of Bernstein and
: > Giulini. Does that portend the future? Can phrasing be stretched any
: > further before the edifice completely breaks down?
: There were reports on this ng of a Chicago performance under Asahina
: that went to 75 mins. It scarcely seems possible that the piece would
: cohere at such speeds, and according to some reports it didn't on this
: occasion.
Well, I loved it :-). I kinda agree that the scherzo was very slow
(probably longer than 13 min), and 1st and 3rd movements being the longest
I've ever heard. Yet, like Mr. Henry Fogal once remarked, Asahina was
able to sustain the tension, if not structure thoroughly, and to deliver
the "message" well.
: Asahina's latest Osaka recording runs for a somewhat more normal 63
: mins. and just about holds together
And I remember his other Pony Canyon record with Tokyo SO runs a little
more than 59 minutes. Actually I thought the scherzo was not necessary
being held of its structure well, though still very effective.
: I wouldn't like to see these sorts of tempi attempted by conductors less
: able than Giulini or Asahina or Tate to sustain interest and tension
: over a long span.
Do "conductors less able" include Bernstein? I thought the scherzo part
is most haunting, with tutti making a listener feel like pounded into
hell. Sony one is a joke, but DG one is marvelous, another recording
which Bernstein was able to transform into the conductor being played,
thanks to VPO (NYPO probably wouldn't have done it due to less playing
history of Bruckner, arbitrarily speaking).
My other favorite Bruckner 9 scherzo is Mravinsky, with its sharp-edged
accent on scherzo and bouyantly played trio (quite contrary to
Furtwangler's soul wandering playing). Karajan/VPO on videotape from DG
is worth watching. Because Karajan stands still but bows and bodies
of strings move together with the tempo at the tutti, I thought the
earthquake hit the Musikverein! Musically Karajan is less interesting
than those more often recommended on this newsgroup, but combined with
visual art side of music, he is a master and this tape proves it.
: I'll let others speak for Celibidache.
I'll be interested.
As for the scherzo getting slower, I think it will stop around 12 minutes
(at least on recordings). I haven't checked, but isn't Chially (sp?)
playing scherzo less than 12 minutes? I have a feeling that the music
will be disintegrated and therefore not interesting if played for more
than 11 minutes, without idiosyncrasy of conductors. Only other living
conductor I would think capable of slow scherzo at this moment is
Sanderling. I don't think other famous living Bruckner conductors
(Barenboim, Rattle, Wesler-Most, Tinter to name a few) would naturally
choose a slow tempo, at least at this moment. Slow scherzo won't give the
image of flaring hell; instead agonizing, battered soul (which I also
like to hear).
Takashi M. Kikuchi
MWKluge
In article <356ecc1d...@nntp.ix.netcom.com>, NOS...@NOSPAM.ARG (Old 8H)
writes:
>Now, I believe you, Mark (and possibly Henry Fogel?) have contributed
>annotations to some of the Music & Arts recordings. If Mark agrees
>with me about phony stereo, could not he pass on a whisper or two to
>Fred Maroth about it?
I have done so several times, both directly and in reviews. The unlamented
Brahms set on M&A CD-804 was one of my exemplars for unnecessary processing. I
believe that M&A is in fact shifting away from use of phony stereo. Strictly
speaking, an annotator's role includes little or no input to the sonic product
(in fact, his work often precedes the technical production). However, I will
always argue for use of the best mono sources and minimal processing for
historical material.
>(snip)
>
>Not being a Furtwaengler specialist, I stupidly purchased the M&A set
>of "The Best Studio Recordings, 1929-1943" on CD-954 (expensive, with
>4 disks) primarily to get what was described on the rear cover, and I
>quote precisely, as "Bruckner: Symphony No 7 in E BPO, April 1942
>(Telefunken)"...of course, it turned out to be the second movement
>only, and not the complete work (as I was fully informed only after
>purchase, from MWK's excellent annotations.) Similarly, the jacket
>implies that the album contains "J. S. Bach: Suite for Orchestra, No.
>3 in D" when all it contains is really the Air. Finally, the
>recording lists "Furtwaengler: Symphonic Concerto in b BPO, Edwin
>Fischer, Aug. 1939 (HMV)"...that turns out to be only the 10' second
>movement. In no case whatsoever on the rear jacket, does the album
>indicate the timings of these tracks, or that they are excerpts from
>the complete works. Intentional, or an oversight? Are we all assumed
>to be totallly familiar with somebody's scholarly, thorough
>Furtwaengler discography in all its details?
I would guess that no movement timings on the back of a multidisc box is a
fairly widespread practice because of space limitations. However, the
performances should certainly be identified in sufficient detail to determine
if they are complete or excerpted, without continual reference to
discographies.
>........none of the twits in
>Fanfare, ARG, or any other publication ever really informs us about
>transfer quality:
Sad, but true, true, true. Even more common than right-brain fluff are
statements along these lines: "This transfer far surpasses every previous one
of this material..." Many an inferior CD found its way into my collection until
I learned to ignore such hype. Based on such experiences, an informal
translation of these types of claims might be: "The engineer has peaked the
high end to an extreme that promotes the heavy use of analgesics. He has also
added ambience or phase shifting because he thought the [Concertgebouw,
Kingsway Hall, Old Philharmonie, you name it] was acoustically inferior to
whatever vast, boomy space he and his nifty software could synthesize. Any
similarity to an actual orchestra in a congenial acoustic is purely
accidental."
Now, we all know there are reputable engineers (such as those contributing to
this ng) who, with clean originals, careful declicking, well-judged
equalization, and discreet use of noise reduction, can produce superior,
natural-sounding transfers. The only issue is, why can't they *all* do it???
>
>I am deeply grateful, Mark, for even a scrap of reinforcement; your
>brief comment "Snip- cogent arguments against phony stereo" was a
>tonic!
>
Thanks, I'll put my soapbox away now.
Mark K.
B. Korstvedt
About the tempo of the Scherzo of Bruckner's 9th: Ferdinand Lo:we stated
that the reason he took out the pizzicato eighth note figure (first
appearance in mm. 7-8) was that it is very difficult to play pizzicato
eighths at the rapid tempo Bruckner envisioned. (Lo:we gave the figure to
the flute.) Bruckner had apparently played over the movement on the
piano for Lo:we.
More evidence that it's been getting slower. . .
ciao, Ben
**************************************************************************
* Benjamin M. Korstvedt * kors...@blue.weeg.uiowa.edu * (319) 358-1047 *
* *
**************************************************************************
* So many books, discussions, systems, subtle distinctions, methods *
* did not stop her from saying "I like," "I don't like," *
* "I accept," "I refuse." *
* Someone thought of her as an innocent. . . *
* --Goffredo Palluccini *
**************************************************************************
C. N. Chew
Old 8H wrote:
> [...] one arrives at this anomalous terminus of Bernstein and
> Giulini. Does that portend the future? Can phrasing be stretched any
> further before the edifice completely breaks down?
There were reports on this ng of a Chicago performance under Asahina
that went to 75 mins. It scarcely seems possible that the piece would
cohere at such speeds, and according to some reports it didn't on this
occasion. Asahina's latest Osaka recording runs for a somewhat more
normal 63 mins. and just about holds together; Jeffrey Tate's 65-min.
Rotterdam performance, with a 27-min+ third movement, is borderline,
though I haven't quite decided which side of the border. I wouldn't like
to see these sorts of tempi attempted by conductors less able than
Giulini or Asahina or Tate to sustain interest and tension over a long
span. I'll let others speak for Celibidache.
Naun.
rkha...@adnc.com
In article <6kmtn4$kre$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,
rkha...@adnc.com wrote:
>
> P.S. It would be interesting to find out the timing differences between
> Haussegger's and Klemperer's early recordings and, more importantly, whether
> there are any significant differences in the editions they used.
>
Just in case anyone else was curious.
Hausegger Munich Phil: 23:39 - 9:02 - 22:37 TT 55:20 (Preiser CD)
Klemperer/NYPSO: 22:13 - 9:41 - 23:07 TT 55:22 (NYPO Historical Set)
Virtually a tie!
(Many thanks to Paul Goldstein for the above info)
Ramon Khalona
Carlsbad, California
Tyson Olaf Hahn
Takashi Kikuchi wrote:
>
>
> : I'll let others speak for Celibidache.
>
> I'll be interested.
>
> As for the scherzo getting slower, I think it will stop around 12 minutes
> (at least on recordings). I haven't checked, but isn't Chially (sp?)
> playing scherzo less than 12 minutes? I have a feeling that the music
> will be disintegrated and therefore not interesting if played for more
> than 11 minutes, without idiosyncrasy of conductors. Only other living
> conductor I would think capable of slow scherzo at this moment is
> Sanderling. I don't think other famous living Bruckner conductors
> (Barenboim, Rattle, Wesler-Most, Tinter to name a few) would naturally
> choose a slow tempo, at least at this moment. Slow scherzo won't give the
> image of flaring hell; instead agonizing, battered soul (which I also
> like to hear).
>
> Takashi M. Kikuchi
On the fabulous performance I have (on Exclusive and in
more-than-exceptable sound) with the Muenchner Philharmoniker,
Celibidache's timings are:
I. 27'20"
II. 12'07" (nice guess Takashi)
III. 26'50"
I don't know whether this will be the same performance that EMI will use
on its forthcoming box-set, but if it isn't, I urge you to hunt down
this issue (coupled with an equally arresting account of the "Romantic"
with the Stuttgart Radio Symphony Orchestra).
Gddecker
In article <199805252058...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
henry...@aol.com (HenryFogel) writes:
>SYM #4 - The best combination of performance and sound is the October 22,
>1951 Vienna Phil tour performance from Stuttgart; unfortunately, it is only
found
>in good sound on some Japanese DG transfers, impossible to find in USA and
>terribly expensive through Japanese dealers. Therefore, I'd go to the October
>29, 1951 performance from the same tour (Munich), which can be found on Music
>& Arts CD-796. This is a reasonable transfer.
The October 22, 1951, Vienna Philharmonic performance of the Fourth is the one
included in the DG Doubles set issued in 1994 by Polygram France, DG 445 415-2,
and available from German Music Express for about $25 if I am remembering
correctly. It's coupled with the October 17, 1944, Vienna Philharmonic
performance of the Eighth. Be careful, though, because this Eighth is a bad
transfer and incorrectly pitched.
Polygram France also issued the April 23, 1951, Berlin Philharmonic performance
of the Seventh in Cairo and the October 7, 1944, Berlin recording of the Ninth
on another DG Doubles set DG 445 418-2 at the same time as the aforementioned
set. It's also available from German Music Express for about $25.
German Music Express is at www.musicexpress.com.
Geoffrey Decker