TOSCANINI
Tag Gallagher
How about Toscanini's five best recordings>
August Helmbright
Tag Gallagher <t...@sprynet.com> wrote in article
<3300C1...@sprynet.com>...
> How about Toscanini's five best recordings>
Only 5? This is really tough. (So was the Furtwängler selection -- we're
talking about my 2 favorite conductors.)
Beethoven 7th Symphony -- NYPO 1936
Verdi Falstaff -- NBC broadcast from 1950
Wagner Die Walküre Act I Scene III with Traubel & Melchior -- NBC broadcast
from 1941
Mendelssohn Midsummer Night's Dream Scherzo -- NYPO 1929
Schubert Great C Major Symphony -- Philadelphia Orchestra 1941 (but the
1953 NBC version is also great)
The Melsons
On 12 Feb 1997 02:16:15 GMT, "August Helmbright" <alhe...@icnet.net>
wrote:
I echo all of the above, especially the admiration for the 1953
Schubert 9th, but would add Verdi's "Otello," the most terrifying
"Sorceror's Apprentice" ever recorded, a white-hot Smetana "Moldau"
and virtually any Rossini Overture. And do hear his NBC 1952 Beethoven
First, beautifully played and recorded.
James C.S. Liu
Hmm ... I'm not playing to a strength here, but I can try:
Beethoven: Missa Solemnis (1940 recording, lousy balances and all) on
Music and Arts; the Verdi Requiem from the same time is also wonderful
Verdi: Falstaff (RCA)
Beethoven: Symphony #4 (1939 Carnegie Hall cycle on Relief)
Brahms: Symphony #1 (I like a wartime NBC SO performance; possibly
also a good one from Great Britain on EMI? -- his 1950's 2nd on RCA is
also wonderful)
fifth disc, hmm. There's a fine Schubert 8th (stark contrast to
Furtwaengler or Walter), a wonderful disc of wartime Beethoven
concerto recordings (fiery Violin Concerto with Jascha Heifetz and
thrilling 3rd Piano Concerto with Artur Rubinstein), and there must be
some substantial chunk of Puccini out there, but nothing is springing
immediately to mind.
--
/James C.S. Liu |"Applying computer technology is simply
jame...@yale.edu | finding the right wrench to pound in
New Haven, Connecticut| the correct screw." -- Anonymous
My opinions have nothing to do with my employer!
I. Neill Reid
>Tag Gallagher <t...@sprynet.com> wrote in article
><3300C1...@sprynet.com>...
> How about Toscanini's five best recordings>
>
My current five favourites would be
Beethoven 6 with the BBCSO (from 1936)
Verdi's Falstaff (NBC broadcast)
Beethoven Missa Solemnis (probably 1940 version)
Haydn's sinfonia concertante (NBCSO)
Brahms 1st symphony with the Philharmonia
with the 1940 Verdi requiem and Otello trying to
sneak in somewhere close behind
Neill Reid - i...@dowland.caltech.edu
Owen Hartnett
#1 1953 Eroica. Others may quibble about it's so-called "mechanical
playing", but to me its the embodiment of the Eroica, unrelenting,
powerful, intense, tight as a wrapped steel wire, all in incredible, crisp
orchestra playing. And what better vehicle than a Beethoven symphony
about heroism. It's also passionate, with the return of the opening thema
in the last movement one of the most profound. If you don't like your
Eroica played precisely, razor-sharply on time with an incredible feeling
of motion, this isn't for you, but if you can appreciate the drama in
rhythmic intensity, you might agree. Even if you find you hate it,
everyone should hear it at least once.
#2 La Traviata. The sound is the usual Toscanini, the singers are not the
highest level for the parts, but the orchestra. The first act is unlike
any other first act of Traviata ever done.
#3 Beethoven 7th Symphony. Contrary to most, I'm fond of the 1950's era
version. I never understood the point of the last movement until I heard
this (some may say I still haven't understood, then :-) ). If you want to
hear dramatic rhythmic intensity at it's best, this is it. (I should
listen to the 30's version again, though, I haven't heard it since
college.)
#4 Beethoven 4th Symphony. The 30's era version. A wonderful introduction.
Usually coupled with a wonderful version of the 1st symphony.
#5 The William Tell Overture. While most conductor's take this as a
show-off piece and let their musicians have fun with it, this is all
intensely serious, and comes off incredibly. Listen to the crescendo in
the glissando scale just before the closing chords. Almost nobody did
this.
-Owen
JJ
1. Beethoven third symphony "Eroica" from 1939 (coupled with the 8th on
BMG) - his best Beethoven 3, IMHO.
2. Verdi - Falstaff, of course
3. Puccini - La Boheme - As a big fan of Karajan's sumptuousness and
lushness in Puccini, I don't know why I love this recording so much, but
there's something so rapt and wonderful about it that it comes close to
the top of the list of my favorite Puccini performances.
4. Wagner - highlights from Siegfried and Goetterdammerung with Traubel
and Melchior. I LOVE Toscanini's Wagner, I'd even go so far as to say
that his Wagner is every bit as good as his Verdi. I wish he had recorded
a complete Wagner opera in his N.B.C. days, like Tristan Und Isolde. Oh
well.
5. Brahms/Mendelssohn/Rossini disc with B.B.C. Syphony on Testament. Here
Toscanini conducts, in very warm performances, Brahms' 2nd and a beautiful
nocturne from Midsummer Night's Dream.
6. I'm sorry I went over the limit, but his Verdi Requiem is fantastic and
I can't leave it off. It surprises me that even in all the recordings
with digital hi-fi super-duper sound, nothing is as scary or thrilling
sonically as the drumstroke in his Dies Irae.
I think all of his opera recordings are essential, but I've only listed my
two favorites.
BTW, has anyone heard Music and Arts' CD of Toscanini's Wagner from a
Carnegie Hall concert in 1954 IN STEREO? I'd be interested to know
people's thoughts on this disc.
Jon
James C.S. Liu
On 14 Feb 1997 03:40:22 GMT, js...@cornell.edu (JJ) wrote:
>BTW, has anyone heard Music and Arts' CD of Toscanini's Wagner from a
>Carnegie Hall concert in 1954 IN STEREO? I'd be interested to know
>people's thoughts on this disc.
If this is the CD that I think you're talking about, then it's a
transcription taken from Toscanini's last concert, an all-Wagner
orchestral bleeding chunks program. If I'm not mistaken, it was in
the midst of this concert (the Tannhaeuser section, I think) where
Toscanini suffered the notorious memory lapse that compelled him to
end his career. The sound is as good as it gets for Toscanini (which
isn't all that great, but passable), but the performances struck me as
lacking the kind of incision that his earlier recordings had. FWIW.
Curtis Croulet
> BTW, has anyone heard Music and Arts' CD of Toscanini's Wagner from a
> Carnegie Hall concert in 1954 IN STEREO? I'd be interested to know
> people's thoughts on this disc.
>
This is the concert where he broke down, isn't it? I have a large
Toscanini collection but I've never been able to bring myself to buy
this Wagner concert.
The Melsons
>Tag Gallagher <t...@sprynet.com> wrote in article
><3300C1...@sprynet.com>...
>> How about Toscanini's five best recordings>
>
I. Neill Reid
In article <85613946...@manger.demon.co.uk>, wiz...@manger.demon.co.uk writes...
>Is it true to say that Toscanini is arguably the most over-reated myth in
>recording history - apart from Karajan of course? Are we looking at
>deification through rose-coloured specs?
And are you simply trolling?
>The man was a tyrant, a
>dogmatit etc. Sure the men played for him, but if your job was on the
>line, so would you. REad what some of the BBC SO players thought of him -
>after he'd gone.
Quotes please - there were also those who went on record as saying he
was one of the most demanding, but most satisfying, conductors to
play for. Theirs was one of the few orchestras where Toscanini did not
demand that any of the players be replaced. Several (many) were still around to be
interviewed for the BBCSOs 50th anniversary and said as much on Radio 3
at the time. And there are members of his NBCSO who were devoted to him.
Comes to that, I know a couple of people who sang in the Westminster Choir
in the 40s and who performed with (umm, under) Toscanini on a couple
of occasions. They seem convinced that the music was worth it.
>Or what the ROCG band thought of Solti? Of course yopu
>play whatever he says when he's on the stand, but does that make it MUSIC?
>Or merely intersting experience? Compare him to Giulini? Walter? Kempe?
>Beecham? Where warmth, love, respect produced supreme music making.
Walter wasn't quite the avuncular uncle figure, Beecham had a fairly cutting
wit - they weren't all sweetness and light. There's no cut and dried
good guys/bad guys - very different characters in very different times.
>
>IMHO. Do we make the gods we deserve, or need? Did we need martinets in
>the 30's / 40' 50's, so we made Toscanini? Tell me?? Does that mean he's a
>supreme musician? Or just interesting?
You can always try listening to the recordings yourself and
making up your own mind. Or must you rely on others to form your opinions?
Come back when you have something substantial to discuss.
Neill Reid - i...@dowland.caltech.edu
>
wiz...@manger.demon.co.uk
Is it true to say that Toscanini is arguably the most over-reated myth in
recording history - apart from Karajan of course? Are we looking at
line, so would you. REad what some of the BBC SO players thought of him -
Or merely intersting experience? Compare him to Giulini? Walter? Kempe?
Beecham? Where warmth, love, respect produced supreme music making.
IMHO. Do we make the gods we deserve, or need? Did we need martinets in
August Helmbright
James C.S. Liu <jame...@yale.edu> wrote in article
<33047ea...@news.yale.edu>...
> >Carnegie Hall concert in 1954 IN STEREO? I'd be interested to know
> >people's thoughts on this disc.
>
> transcription taken from Toscanini's last concert, an all-Wagner
> orchestral bleeding chunks program. If I'm not mistaken, it was in
> the midst of this concert (the Tannhaeuser section, I think) where
> Toscanini suffered the notorious memory lapse that compelled him to
> end his career. The sound is as good as it gets for Toscanini (which
> isn't all that great, but passable), but the performances struck me as
> lacking the kind of incision that his earlier recordings had. FWIW.
This is the legendary final and disastrous Toscanini broadcast. I have
steadfastly avoided purchasing the set, because, despite the novelty of
being the only Toscanini stereo recording, it must have been really poor as
a performance and meaningless as a reproduction of what Toscanini could
accomplish when he was at full power. B. H. Haggin, an erstwhile Toscanini
admirer, wrote of impressions he received from NBC Symphony musicians after
the broadcast (for which he was not present, but with which he was not
impressed over the radio): "As early as the Forest Murmers Toscanini had
failed to beat a couple of changes of time signature, but with no bad
consequences because the orchestra had played correctly. In the Bacchanale,
when the orchestra had become aware that he was no longer conducting -- his
face showing his mind not to be in contact with the performance, his right
arm gradually dropping to his side, his left hand covering his eyes -- it
had managed to keep going past the few wrong entrances, playing correctly
after that; and Toscanini had begun to beat time again. Then, in the
Meistersinger Prelude he seemed to summon all his strength in the grim
determination to beat time through the piece; and he had accomplished this,
but not the conducting of a musical performance. (Actually he did not beat
time to the very end of the piece, but was already off the podium when the
orchestra was playing the final chords.) ... It was reported that
throughout the day of the broadcast Toscanini had been undecided whether to
conduct the concert; and it would have been better if he had not conducted
it." [From Arturo Toscanini Contemporary Recollections of the Maestro by B.
H. Haggin, which is a reprinting, with some new material, of Haggin's two
books, Conversations with Toscanini and The Toscanini Musicians Knew.
Published by Da Capo. BTW, this book is spellbinding to anyone interested
in Toscanini. Haggin was a highly, even annoyingly, opinionated, but very
intelligent music critic for the Nation. He was a real Toscanini partisan,
but in many passages in addition to the one quoted above, reveals himself
not to be a blind disciple.]
Daniel Kravetz
On 18 Feb 1997, August Helmbright wrote:
>
> This is the legendary final and disastrous Toscanini broadcast. I have
> steadfastly avoided purchasing the set, because, despite the novelty of
> being the only Toscanini stereo recording, it must have been really poor as
> a performance and meaningless as a reproduction of what Toscanini could
> accomplish when he was at full power. B. H. Haggin, an erstwhile Toscanini
> admirer, wrote of impressions he received from NBC Symphony musicians after
> the broadcast
I strongly disagree that Toscanini's final concert is a recording to avoid.
He was not at his best, but second-rate Toscanini is much better than the
first-rate output of most other conductors. Hearing his orchestra in
stereo is an experience not to be missed; of course, you can hear it in
the Cantelli Franck Symphony, and in a recording the orchestra made
without a conductor of the Nutcracker Suite and Meistersinger and Roman
Carnival overtures that hasn't yet made it to CD (a Dvorak New World
Symphony from the same conductorless session was never even on a stereo
LP, to my recollection). The LP version of the Toscanini concert also
includes (in stereo) the rehearsal of the Rhine Journey where Toscanini
has a tantrum over his own mistaken instructions. None of this is the
last word on the art of Toscanini, but there is much to be learned from
hearing some of his work in the best available sound. The flaws should
not provoke unbearable heartbreak--Toscanini was human.
JJ
In article <E5sBp...@freenet.buffalo.edu>, Daniel Kravetz
<ah...@freenet.buffalo.edu> wrote:
Interesting. The reason for my interest in this recording had been
comments from quite a few people that this is the only recording which was
able to reproduce the special Toscanini sound.
Jon
Donald B Drewecki
I have recently transcribed over three dozen interviews with orchestra
players, singers and composers who knew and worked with Toscanini.
Almost all of them had nothing but admiration for his podium talent,
his extreme and painstaking study of a score, his deference (by and
large) for the composers' wishes, and his tremendous consideration for
players who were giving their all for the music. If and when the book
comes out based on these interviews (which should be taken as a
supplement to Haggin's "The Toscanini Musicians Knew"), one will find
that personal terror was an attribute that few people ever
attributed to Toscanini. Not everyone agreed with his every last
interpretation, but everyone agreed that his occasional tantrums had
little to do with terror, and everything to do with his commitment to
the music.
And several players pointed out that it was only when he pointed out
something for the third, fourth and fifth time did he get angry. "If
you could play what was in your copy, you needn't have feared
Toscanini," said NBC Symphony tympanist Karl Glassman. Mostly everyone
I have heard agreed with his assessment. Several players also pointed
out that, unlike a Szell or an Ansermet, who talked and talked and
talked, or a Reiner, who could carry a grudge and fire a player, with
Toscanini, every day was a new day, and every rehearsal was a chance to
learn music by playing it through whole, once or twice, so that players
got to know the structure of a work.
Maybe one day we will get a systematic, legitimate release of the nearly
300 hours of rehearsal recordings that exist, of Toscanini at NBC. That
will provide a useful corrective to the nonsense about Toscanini's
terror.
Then, of course, Toscanini also did things like write to the draft board
of the first horn of the NBC Symphony, asking that his induction into
World War II be delayed until a suitable replacement could be found. He
also conducted in Palestine at a time when Bruno Walter refused to do
so. He also conducted numerous concerts without pay.
Don Drewecki
<dre...@rpi.edu>
James C.S. Liu
On 18 Feb 1997 15:32:23 GMT, js...@cornell.edu (JJ) wrote:
[about Toscanini's last concert, an all-Wagner program, now on M&A]
>Interesting. The reason for my interest in this recording had been
>comments from quite a few people that this is the only recording which was
>able to reproduce the special Toscanini sound.
The sound is decent, but I wouldn't compare it with the best that
the industry had to offer by around 1954. Of course, this is a
general problem with older recordings, in that you don't really get as
much of a sense as possible of what kind of sound each conductor could
produce. (What I've heard of the late EMI Furtwaengler recordings,
though, are tantalizing, indeed!) Some would argue that it's a
virtue, in that it makes the listener fill in the blanks with sounds
that aren't there (sort of a variant on the pattern-recognition
principle). However, there is one Toscanini performance that I'd say
is in pretty decent sound: his cycle of Brahms symphonies with the
Philharmonia Orchestra from 1952. They were recorded by EMI, and I
think reissued on CD once, though H&B only shows an entry from
Arkadia, a semi-pirate concern. Those might be worth trying to find,
and are great, well-shaped performances to boot. Also, I wouldn't
give up entirely on the other late RCA studio recordings; the reissue
folk seem to have done a decent job with some of them (try the Brahms
2nd from that cycle, or perhaps the Beethoven 8th).
ENagamine
it was recorded in stereo. The problem with it in its various
incarnations is that it still has that hard Studio 8-H sound that really
make the orchestra sound less than great. One of the really bad
recordings made there was the Pictures at an Exhibition. In every LP
issue that I heard, the trumpeter Harry Glantz sounded like he was
playing a toy trumpet.
I wonder if the master tapes hold better sound than we've heard on LP
and CD. RCA was capable of great stereo in its early days as heard in
the Reiner/CSO recordings. Also, by that time, most of the great players
had left for the New York philharmonic. The orchestra of 1954 is not the
same one of the great 1939 Beethoven cycle.
The London Philharmonia Brahms of 1952 is truly a wonderful set even
with fireworks being set off during one the symphonies. The glory of
Legge's Philharmonia really shines in these performances. There's even
Sir Neville Marriner playing in the second violins. I think that the
reason these sound more listenable is that, the engineers were able to
record further back from the orchestra than was the case of Studio 8-H
and Carnegie.
The funny thing about Toscanini recording in NY is that Brunswick and
RCA did get decent sound for him in his earlier life as conductor of the
NYPSO. I wonder if the change in sound is really due to the maestro's
tastes and hearing or due to RCA's producers?
Aloha,
Eric
August Helmbright
> However, there is one Toscanini performance that I'd say
> is in pretty decent sound: his cycle of Brahms symphonies with the
> Philharmonia Orchestra from 1952. They were recorded by EMI, and I
> think reissued on CD once, though H&B only shows an entry from
> Arkadia, a semi-pirate concern. Those might be worth trying to find,
> and are great, well-shaped performances to boot.
I heard this Brahms set on old Turnabout LPs quite a while ago. They
sounded like they were recorded from a car AM radio using a dictaphone to
capture the sound. They also had missing notes and skips.
Is there actually a well recorded EMI recording, and I was just hearing
some poor pirate? If so, I'd love to find it. Despite the sound, I could
tell these were performances for the ages -- especially the 3rd, which far
surpassed Toscanini's recording with NBC. (The NBC recording -- made a year
later -- dates from a time when Toscanini was beginning to feel his earlier
Brahms conducting was too fast. In some cases, he was right. However, in
the case of the 3rd, his earlier, quicker approach worked much better. For
an example where his slower, weightier approach produced great results,
there is his last recording of the Tragic Overture.)
Matthew B. Tepper
In article <330C14...@lava.net>, en...@lava.net speaks...
>
>
>I wonder if the master tapes hold better sound than we've heard on LP
>and CD. RCA was capable of great stereo in its early days as heard in
>the Reiner/CSO recordings. Also, by that time, most of the great
>players had left for the New York philharmonic. The orchestra of 1954
>is not the same one of the great 1939 Beethoven cycle.
*Who* had joined the New York Philharmonic? Not Mischakoff; not Frank
Miller (who was to wind up in Chicago soon thereafter); not Harry
Glantz; not Carmine Coppola, etc. Or do you consider Saul Goodman to
be "most of the great players"?
--
"I don't care about being politically correct. I just want to be
anatomically correct!" http://www.deltanet.com/~ducky/index.htm
Matthew B. Tepper Web Brainiac and Gonzo Musicologist Quack!
August Helmbright
Matthew B. Tepper <du...@deltanet.com> wrote in article
<5eht6q$det$5...@news04.deltanet.com>...
> *Who* had joined the New York Philharmonic? Not Mischakoff; not Frank
> Miller (who was to wind up in Chicago soon thereafter); not Harry
> Glantz; not Carmine Coppola, etc. Or do you consider Saul Goodman to
> be "most of the great players"?
Actually, Mischakoff had left by 1954. He was replaced by Daniel Guilet in
1953 (?). Guilet is featured, along with Frank Miller and Carlton Cooley,
in the Don Quixote recording from 11/53. I heard Guilet play a recital at
the University of Oklahoma (where he taught briefly late in life) in the
mid 70s. Unfortunately, by then he had terrible arthritis, with resulting
poor control of his left hand and awful intonation. He'd have been better
off giving up public performances.
Matthew B. Tepper
In article <01bc1fae$fae34460$30e6fbcc@alhelmbr>, alhe...@icnet.net
speaks...
I know perfectly well that Mischakoff had left before the last season,
hence my reasoning. And Carmine Coppola (yes, the father of Francis if
anyone doesn't yet know this) was replaced as principal flute for the
last season by Paul Renzi.
Offhand, the only NBC player I can think of who went to New York was
timpanist Saul Goodman. What happened to the NBC's fine tuba player,
Bill Bell?
Regina Roper
In article <33066ae0....@nntp.ix.netcom.com>,
ame...@ix.netcom.com (The Melsons) wrote:
>On 12 Feb 1997 02:16:15 GMT, "August Helmbright" <alhe...@icnet.net>
>wrote:
>
>>Tag Gallagher <t...@sprynet.com> wrote in article
>><3300C1...@sprynet.com>...
>>> How about Toscanini's five best recordings>
>>Verdi Falstaff -- NBC broadcast from 1950
>>Wagner Die Walküre Act I Scene III with Traubel & Melchior
>>Schubert Great C Major Symphony -- Philadelphia Orchestra 1941
>I echo all of the above, especially the admiration for the 1953
>Schubert 9th, but would add Verdi's "Otello," the most terrifying
>"Sorceror's Apprentice" ever recorded, a white-hot Smetana "Moldau"
>and virtually any Rossini Overture. And do hear his NBC 1952 Beethoven
>First, beautifully played and recorded.
RESPONSE:
I would be loath to describe anything by Toscanini as the 'best' because of the enormous differences in the works he conducted: how does one equate Die Walkuere with a short tone poem or a symphony or a tiny piece from some incidental music? Rather, I would suggest my listing of favorite live
broadcasts, available on modern CDs:
1. 1953 Carnegie Hall La Mer broadcast; Hunt CD. This valedictory performance is richer and more rhetorical than the strict but brilliant 1950 Studio-8H commercial recording. Though the CD fades out after the applause started, in the original radio show that audience went crazy with bravos; everyone knew this would be the maestro's LAST La Mer!
2. 1946 Puccini La Boheme. The 50th anniversary of the premiere of this opera as conducted by AT in 1896 occasioned two broadcasts, comprising Acts 1 & 2, and Acts 3 & 4. The RCA CD set (and all previous commercial editions) cleans up the bad brass cues (by editing in the dress rehearsal passage) at the end of one of Act 2 that had set Toscanini into a
humiliated rage after the program. Maestro becomes a third participant in the famous duet, as his croaking voice is heard singing passionately here and elsewhere in the broadcast. The erotic vigor of youth is more apparent in the surging conducting than in any other rendition I have heard; Albanese is supremely poignant, and Peerce (for once) is not too piercing.
3. 1940 Tchaikovsky Manfred Symphony. The recently-issued Music&Arts 2-CD set (CD-956) has some glorious live broadcasts of the Russian master's music that have not been distributed as widely, or in as rich sound. I thought the 1949 commercial RCA recording was the most ferocious and magisterial Manfred ever done (albeit in a Toscanini-edited truncated version) but this broadcast has the extra razor-sharp intensity of a live event; I was most moved not by the hair-raising outer movements, but by the melos, the phrasing, and the uncanny concentration on the unbroken musical
line of the middle movements.
4. 1953 Berlioz Harold in Italy. Of the maestro's broadcasts of this piece, including the late 30s and 40s as well as the rendition from his penultimate season, this NBC Carnegie Hall performance is the richest and most flexible. The performance is expansive and -- yes -- somewhat slow-paced, taking 42:01 to Munch's 38:03, giving the lie to the oft-repeated phrase that Toscanini is a "fast" conductor.
5. 1953 Strauss Don Quixote. Much the same may be said for this wise and steady reading, lacking the hair-trigger energy of the old late-30s broadcast with Feuermann, but with a beautiful blended body of sound, utter clarity of projection, and a total lack of the episodic, disjointed nature of some conductors' showier interpretations. Both 4 and 5 are available on commercial BMG CDs in as good sound as we can ever possibly experience from the original master tapes.
Now, I'm a contrary sort of person, so I'll not stop at 5, but expand my list a bit more:
6. 1939 Beethoven Eroica. Oldtimers: remember how painful it was to try to negotiate the original 78 rpm set? The horn call of the scherzo was actually recorded on the LEAD-IN spiral of one of the sides; the sound was as bad as a telephone call. But the actual 33-1/3 rpm radio transcription airchecks recorded by RCA engineers, as issued on BMG 60269-2 RG), are almost glorious in comparison: vivid presence; noticeable hall ambience (not electronic echo, but the real decay of Studio 8-H, short as it was);
the 'early style' of interpretation, featuring expressive agogics and a fluctuating meter centering on a basic tempo. The wartime broadcast, the 1949 commercial session, and the 1953 live concert seem almost ascetically self-effacing by comparison.
7. 1939 Ravel Bolero. Has there ever been a more curious performance on disk? This is NOT a great, classic interpretation, but a document of the 'other' Toscanini, the mirror-image of the perfectionist-martinet. The maestro indulges in enormous ritards, the winds and brass throw in terrible clams, and the climax is naturally powerful but reigned-in compared to the blowsy effects of Munch, Bernstein, or Karajan. But I LOVE it!
8. 1947 Mendelssohn Midsummernight's Dream. Containing an extra excerpt (Ye spotted snakes) that was not approved for commercial release when the maestro went before the mikes for a 78-rpm recording session, this live broadcast (once on Music&Arts but out of print) documents the conductor's thorough understanding of early romantic music, Shakespeare, and brilliant orchestral execution. The Wedding March takes much longer to perform here than the 4:39 of the 78 disk, not only because of the expansive tempo, but also due to the inclusion of a repeat that enhances the power and grandiose effect.
9. 1952 Brahms Third. Maestro could not duplicate this rich, warm, and generous reading when he tried to nail it down on tape the next day. The broadcast has the faultless articulation, inevitable pacing, and emotional release that are presented in more exaggerated, self-conscious manner in the commercial recording, now on BMG 60259-2-RG. The live reading is almost 40 minutes in length, and is thus one of the longest and most nuanced readings ever documented; other Toscanini broadcasts of the problematic work may be more impulsive or dramatic, but the culmination of the finale, and its poignant resignation, speak with the transcendant voice
of a wise prophet. NOT available on disk, to my knowledge; a tragedy!
10. 1943 Sousa Stars & Stripes. When I want to have a little fun with a young classical listener, I put on this war-time broadcast, dated 4/4/43, and contained in Dell'Arte CD DA 9024. Not only is the sound quality vital, well-balanced, clear, and powerful, but also the interpretation of Toscanini's own orchestral arrangement is more fun and rousing than any other recording I have encountered. The outburst of approval at the towering conclusion by the service men that comprised the audience reminds one what it meant to be an American, an anti-Fascist, or a free woman or man during those heroic years.
Yours,
8H Haggis
Any more questions? Contact me at my other email address: pian...@juno.com
Curtis Croulet
> I think that many people feel that the last concert is special because
> it was recorded in stereo. The problem with it in its various
> incarnations is that it still has that hard Studio 8-H sound that really
Not so. Toscanini's last recording was made in Carnegie Hall.
Everything after the summer of 1950 was recorded in Carnegie. Studio 8H
was converted into a TV studio, which is still what it's used for -
"Saturday Night Live" is produced there. AT liked a close-up, dry
sound. He reportedly liked Royal Festival Hall, which I've always read
is exceptionally dry. Even so, the Philharmonia Brahms (performed in
RFH) set is superior to almost anything done in Carnegie Hall or 8H. We
would have benefited musically and technically if he had been taken over
by EMI and Walter Legge. Legge was not the sychophant that the folks at
NBC seem to have been, and Toscanini reportedly did NOT explode when
Legge criticised his "La Traviata" as being "too fast". A corrective
ear would have been welcome.
8-H Haggis
8-H Haggis
On 20 Feb 1997 04:26:54 GMT, "August Helmbright"
<alhe...@icnet.net> wrote:
>James C.S. Liu <jame...@yale.edu> wrote in article
><330b3c06...@news.yale.edu>...
>> However, there is one Toscanini performance that I'd say
>> is in pretty decent sound: his cycle of Brahms symphonies with the
>> Philharmonia Orchestra from 1952. They were recorded by EMI, and I
>> think reissued on CD once, though H&B only shows an entry from
>> Arkadia, a semi-pirate concern. Those might be worth trying to find,
>> and are great, well-shaped performances to boot.
>
>I heard this Brahms set on old Turnabout LPs quite a while ago. They
>sounded like they were recorded from a car AM radio using a dictaphone to
>capture the sound. They also had missing notes and skips.
The Turnabout was one of the few Arturo Toscanini
Society LPs that made it to market via the Vox
company before the lid was clamped down on Clyde
Key...it was made from AM radio recordings
apparently done by an amateur at 78 rpm, and
included some of the BBC announcements.
The Fonit-Cetra LP set of the late-60s/early-70s
was made from what sounded to me like rather dim
copies of the original EMI tapes...BBC recording
techniques were surely more brilliant than these
dull sounding disks...yet they still had better
fidelity than the awful Turnabout version. I have
not heard the Arkadia CDs.
As a matter of fact, I think the 1935 BBC
Toscanini Brahms 4th sounds much better and
clearer than the Cetra reproduction of the
1952 performance. Perhaps it is the dullness of
the somewhat too-distant sound that has always
left me dissatisfied with these interpretations.
For example, in 1952 in Carnegie Hall, Toscanini
gave a live performance of the Brahms 3rd that I
might claim to surpass the Philharmonia version;
it is a pity that the maestro could not get his
ideas on tape as cogently and effectively the
following day when he made the commercial RCA
recording. And I believe that the 1940 Carnegie
Hall Brahms First surpasses practically every
other Toscanini reading we have heard. That
leaves the Second symphony for comparison: I
recall that the first version with the NBC in 1938
had an especially hushed and intense second
movement; the live broadcast of 1952, done without
an audience, is lyrical but highly dramatic; the
1938 BBC has the intensity of a young man, coupled
with the ripe wisdom of maturity. Music & Arts is
just about to release the 1942/3 NBC Brahms cycle,
which I haven't heard in years! I dearly hope
they will also release the tremendously moving
German Requiem from 1943, which was so wretchedly
processed by Grammophono 2000 complete with awful
echo-chamber fake stereo.
While we're on Brahms, get a copy of the
delightful 1939 broadcast of the Rubbra
transcription of the Variations and Fugue on a
Theme by Handel. Though Toscanini felt the piece
was a little uncharacteristically showy and
somewhat un-Brahmsian, he nevertheless agreed to
do its broadcast premiere: the interpretation
seems a bit lumbering at times, compared to the
suavity of modern recordings by Ormandy or Jaervi,
but Toscanini put tremendous vigor into it. The
Dell'Arte CD release has about the same sound
quality as the original WRVR-Riverside broadcast
sound of the archival masters.
Yours,
8-H Haggis
Sivarama Venkatesan
>The London Philharmonia Brahms of 1952 is truly a wonderful set even
>with fireworks being set off during one the symphonies.
Yes, you can hear them going off early in the last
movement of the 4th symphony. I've always wondered
what caused those curious noises!
Venkat
Matthew B. Tepper
In article <5enkbp$l...@agate.berkeley.edu>,
sve...@helios.eecs.berkeley.edu claims...
I've always felt it was a bunch of overzealous fans of a certain tall
German conductor....
ENagamine
Matthew B. Tepper wrote:
>
> In article <01bc1fae$fae34460$30e6fbcc@alhelmbr>, alhe...@icnet.net
> speaks...
> >
> >Matthew B. Tepper <du...@deltanet.com> wrote in article
> ><5eht6q$det$5...@news04.deltanet.com>...
> >> *Who* had joined the New York Philharmonic? Not Mischakoff; not
> >> Frank Miller (who was to wind up in Chicago soon thereafter); not
> >> Harry Glantz; not Carmine Coppola, etc. Or do you consider Saul
> >> Goodman to be "most of the great players"?
> >
> >Actually, Mischakoff had left by 1954. He was replaced by Daniel
> >Guilet in 1953 (?). Guilet is featured, along with Frank Miller and
> >Carlton Cooley, in the Don Quixote recording from 11/53. I heard
> >Guilet play a recital at the University of Oklahoma (where he taught
> >briefly late in life) in the mid 70s. Unfortunately, by then he had
> >terrible arthritis, with resulting poor control of his left hand and
> >awful intonation. He'd have been better off giving up public
> >performances.
>
> I know perfectly well that Mischakoff had left before the last season,
> hence my reasoning. And Carmine Coppola (yes, the father of Francis if
> anyone doesn't yet know this) was replaced as principal flute for the
> last season by Paul Renzi.
>
> Offhand, the only NBC player I can think of who went to New York was
> timpanist Saul Goodman. What happened to the NBC's fine tuba player,
> Bill Bell?
> "I don't care about being politically correct. I just want to be
> anatomically correct!" http://www.deltanet.com/~ducky/index.htm
> Matthew B. Tepper Web Brainiac and Gonzo Musicologist Quack!
I should have just said left the NBC and I wasn't refering to just the
principals. For example, I believe that Robert La Marchina had gone on
to the Met. By, the way wasn't Harry Glantz fired by Toscanini just
prior to the final concert. I also seem to recall that there changes
within the oboe section. Bill Bell did go to the Philharmonic where he
played until the late 50's, where upon he became professor of Tuba at
Indiana University.
Aloha,
Eric
ENagamine
have been great if he had been given better sound like in his pre-NBC
days.
Aloha,
Eric
Radcliffe Bond
Those "sounds" at the beginning of the last movement of
the Brahms 4th sound like a swinging door crashing to me.
Maybe some people were rushing out of the hall to beat the
crowd to the subway.
Sivarama Venkatesan
In article <5eoap4$b...@skyway.bridge.net>,
Hmm, to me they sound more like paper bags
being burst!
Venkat
August Helmbright
Donald B Drewecki <dre...@cii3130-18.its.rpi.edu> wrote in article
<5ed1ut$j...@cii3130-18.its.rpi.edu>...
>
>
> Then, of course, Toscanini also did things like write to the draft board
> of the first horn of the NBC Symphony, asking that his induction into
> World War II be delayed until a suitable replacement could be found. He
> also conducted in Palestine at a time when Bruno Walter refused to do
> so. He also conducted numerous concerts without pay.
Are you sure about your facts about Walter? I had never heard that he
refused to conduct in Palestine. I admit that I don't know one way or the
other, but this sounds unlikely. Was it possible that he just wasn't asked?
(I remember the story about Klemperer complaining that he'd not been
invited to conduct the Israel Philharmonic, and their explanation that it
was due to his conversion to Christianity.)
Of course, Toscanini did conduct the Palestine Philharmonic very early
after its formation, as both a way to help them out and (probably) as a way
to thumb his nose at Hitler and Mussolini.
Deryk Barker
Matthew B. Tepper (du...@deltanet.com) wrote:
: In article <5enkbp$l...@agate.berkeley.edu>,
: >
: >In article <330C14...@lava.net>, ENagamine <en...@lava.net>
: wrote:
: >
: >>The London Philharmonia Brahms of 1952 is truly a wonderful set even
: >>with fireworks being set off during one the symphonies.
: >
: >movement of the 4th symphony. I've always wondered
: I've always felt it was a bunch of overzealous fans of a certain tall
: German conductor....
It was indeed a demonstration, complete with fireworks, by fans of a
certain tall German conductor.
But that conductor was perhaps not the obvious one: it was Klemperer.
--
|Deryk Barker, Computer Science Dept. | Across the pale parabola of Joy |
|Camosun College, Victoria, BC, Canada | |
|email: dba...@camosun.bc.ca | Ralston McTodd |
|phone: +1 250 370 4452 | (Songs of Squalor). |
Donald B Drewecki
The reference to Walter in Palestine came from cellist Jacob Bernstein,
who played first cello in the Palestine Symphony (now the Israel
Philharmonic), who later joined the NBC Symphony and played in it, on
and off, until 1954. Bernstein told my friend this story:
Toscanini had asked Bruno Walter if he too would like to come to
Palestine to conduct the new orchestra. According to Bernstein, Walter
told Toscanini, "Why would I want to go there? I have nothing in common
with those people." To which Toscanini replied, "I have nothing in
common with those people either, but I went." Meaning that Toscanini
was not Jewish but Catholic, but still felt it important to conduct
there nevertheless. Whether Walter changed his mind, I don't know.
This story was told on tape, and I transcribed it just a few weeks ago.
Don Drewecki
<dre...@rpi.edu>
TransfrGuy
On 20 Feb 1997, "August Helmbright" <alhe...@icnet.net> wrote:
<<James C.S. Liu <jame...@yale.edu> wrote in article
<330b3c06...@news.yale.edu>...
> However, there is one Toscanini performance that I'd say
> is in pretty decent sound: his cycle of Brahms symphonies with the
> Philharmonia Orchestra from 1952. They were recorded by EMI, and I
> think reissued on CD once, though H&B only shows an entry from
> Arkadia, a semi-pirate concern. Those might be worth trying to find,
> and are great, well-shaped performances to boot.
I heard this Brahms set on old Turnabout LPs quite a while ago. They
sounded like they were recorded from a car AM radio using a dictaphone to
capture the sound. They also had missing notes and skips.
Is there actually a well recorded EMI recording, and I was just hearing
some poor pirate? If so, I'd love to find it.>>
I have this Philharmonia Brahms series on CD from the Italian "Hunt"
label. The sound is quite good, (light years better than the Turnabout
LPs); it probably came from a dub of the EMI tapes. It's been reissued
since on Fonit-Cetra CDs, but I hear they've been No-Noised, so caveat
emptor.
Mark Obert-Thorn
TransfrGuy
On 19 Feb 1997, ENagamine wrote:
<<I think that many people feel that the last concert is special because
it was recorded in stereo. The problem with it in its various
incarnations is that it still has that hard Studio 8-H sound that really
make the orchestra sound less than great.>>
Actually, this final concert was recorded in Carnegie Hall. It just
*sounds* like 8-H because of the close miking RCA used (presumably to
avoid audience noises).
<<I wonder if the master tapes hold better sound than we've heard on LP
and CD. RCA was capable of great stereo in its early days as heard in
the Reiner/CSO recordings.>>
I'm sure a remastering of the original tapes by RCA itself would sound
much better. (Remember, we're listening to something several generations
removed from the original.) However, an "official" release is never going
to happen.
<<The funny thing about Toscanini recording in NY is that Brunswick and
RCA did get decent sound for him in his earlier life as conductor of the
NYPSO.>>
I don't think anyone else who's familiar with them would characterize the
sound of the two Brunswick sides as "decent" by any stretch of the
imagination!
<<I wonder if the change in sound is really due to the maestro's tastes
and hearing or due to RCA's producers?>>
I think it was Toscanini's own wishes that caused the records to be miked
as they were. He wanted to have the experience of listening to the
orchestra as *he* heard it, up close on the podium -- not as an audience
member sitting in the best seat in the house.
BTW, there's another complete concert in stereo, from the week before the
final Wagner concert. It featured the Overture to "The Barber of Seville"
and Tchaikovsky's "Pathetique" Symphony. I've heard it: the Rossini is
OK, but won't erase any memories of the 1929 Philharmonic disc, while the
Tchaikovsky is a pretty sorry affair, with ragged ensemble and a
March-Scherzo which utterly lacks drive. Why didn't RCA bring the stereo
equipment to Carnegie a little sooner?
- Mark Obert-Thorn
8-H Haggis
On 25 Feb 1997 03:22:54 GMT, trans...@aol.com
(TransfrGuy) wrote:
>On 19 Feb 1997, ENagamine wrote:
>
><<I think that many people feel that the last concert is special because
>it was recorded in stereo. The problem with it in its various
>incarnations is that it still has that hard Studio 8-H sound that really
>make the orchestra sound less than great.>>
>
>Actually, this final concert was recorded in Carnegie Hall. It just
>*sounds* like 8-H because of the close miking RCA used (presumably to
>avoid audience noises).
I am sure that to a certain extent, Toscanini did
impose a general requirement that his orchestral
balances be a clear and transparent as
possible...the lore has it that so many test
recordings were rejected because tiny details were
inaudible to the maestro (such as his various
tries with the Debussy 'Faun'.) I believe that
Walter Toscanini was quoted in the WRVR broadcasts
or somewhere that the maestro listened with the
volume up VERY loud, standing in front of his
speakers (a multiple setup according to Haggin)
and conducting furiously.
It is interesting, however, that the Cantelli
Franck D Minor, recorded very close to the final
Toscanini NBC concert in Carnegie Hall, has
virtually the same mike placement and close
perspective, though the blend is slightly more
cohesive than the evidence as heard on the M&A CD.
><<The funny thing about Toscanini recording in NY is that Brunswick and
>RCA did get decent sound for him in his earlier life as conductor of the
>NYPSO.>>
>
>I don't think anyone else who's familiar with them would characterize the
>sound of the two Brunswick sides as "decent" by any stretch of the
>imagination!
My copy of the Brunswick MND scherzo, as I recall,
was cut further near the label than practically
any 78 of a later period. Brunswick was
experimenting with some kind of photocell device
for playback, and their recording techniques were
equally quirky. The MND excerpts were distinctly
muddier and inferior in detail to the 1929 Victor
78s of the Mozart Haffner and Rossini Barber
Overture as heard in scroll-label pressings, or as
heard in the recent BMG CD transfers, which sound
about as good as a decent copy of the best RCA
Victor 78 pressings I ever obtained.
Incidentally, one of the sides of the 1926
AT/NYPSO MND excerpts was issued by Columbia in
the 1960s on a limited-edition disk of historic
recordings of the NYP...Walter, Stokowski,
Rodzinski, Stravinsky, and many others were also
included.
><<I wonder if the change in sound is really due to the maestro's tastes
>and hearing or due to RCA's producers?>>
>
>I think it was Toscanini's own wishes that caused the records to be miked
>as they were. He wanted to have the experience of listening to the
>orchestra as *he* heard it, up close on the podium -- not as an audience
>member sitting in the best seat in the house.
There is really an inconsistency in the body of
Toscanini recordings that has not been described
by critics, who tend to lump them all under the
canard that they are "harsh and close-miked."
The 1951 Beethoven First, for example, as heard in
the BMG CD is as spacious and fine a recording of
the period as I have heard...it is almost as good
as a modern rendition with the preamp set to L+R
mono. Live broadcasts of the Gluck Orfeo and
Saint-Saens Organ Symphony from 1952, on the other
hand, are too close-miked (though they were done
at Carnegie Hall, like the Beethoven mentioned
above.)
I think that the record producers may have -- in
some cases -- used spotlight miking and created a
mixdown, at least in the sessions of 1951-4.
Sometimes this causes a sort of claustrophobic
one-dimensional quality, where balances seem
artificial, and detail is exaggerated: listen to
the 1953 Missa Solemnis and hear what I mean.
On the other hand, some of the broadcasts are
really spacious and fine. The 1953 Don Quixote
and Harold in Italy have always sounded good, on
the original plum-label Red Seals, the German
edition, and the CDs. Yet the 1951 Beethoven
Fourth is glassy and one-dimensional.
According to various authorities, RCA and NBC
recording engineers, unlike the sophisticated
musical producers, rather prided themselves on
being 'workaday' guys who just came in and did
their jobs with a minimum of fuss and artistry.
Some -- like George Mathis -- seemed to have a
better sense of the right spot to place the mikes
than others.
>BTW, there's another complete concert in stereo, from the week before the
>final Wagner concert. It featured the Overture to "The Barber of Seville"
>and Tchaikovsky's "Pathetique" Symphony. I've heard it: the Rossini is
>OK, but won't erase any memories of the 1929 Philharmonic disc, while the
>Tchaikovsky is a pretty sorry affair, with ragged ensemble and a
>March-Scherzo which utterly lacks drive. Why didn't RCA bring the stereo
>equipment to Carnegie a little sooner?
>- Mark Obert-Thorn
It has not been noted by critics that the
breakdown in the first movement of the 1954
Pathetique is in some ways more chaotic than the
infamous disjointed episode in the Venusberg Music
in the last Toscanini broadcast!
Apparently, even after conducting the Tchaikovsky
6th innumerable times, on this occasion he must
have thrown a wrong cue to either the first or
second violins...there is a sudden and
embarrassing patch of ragged, dissonant chaos in
an echoing passage in the exposition; shortly
thereafter, when the section is repeated, maestro
apparently whips them back into order (I can
imagine his baton swirling around to catch the
musicians up to the beat.)
The performance has been characterized by some as
slack, but to others it sounds very autumnal and
touchingly expressive: it is massive and slow, at
least compared to the lithe 1947 commercial
recording; more in the spirit of the towering 1941
live concert on Music & Arts.
The Rossini Barber Overture of that program is no
doubt the slowest reading of it ever preserved in
a Toscanini interpretation. In fact, it is
shockingly slow: a sort of massive, Klemperer-like
grim solidity is achieved, not the mercurial
Italianate wit of the sparkling 1945 78-mastered
reading.
Rumor has it that an NBC executive took the master
tape home and actually erased part of the
Pathetique's scherzo by accident! I hope that
this isn't true, and that someday M&A or another
company will release a complete stereo recording
of the concert.
The miking of both these broadcasts is clearly not
based on the coincident-pair array; it sounds more
like a binaural or Blumlein setup, with enormous
amounts of L-R difference information. Yet the
mikes are so close to the instruments that there
is plenty of separation, which reveals the
interesting effects of the divisi violini, a
practice that Reiner also utilized in his early
Chicago Symphony layout, but abandoned later for
the more conventional modern arrangement of first
and second violins on the left, celli and bassi on
the right.
Yours,
8-H Haggis
August Helmbright
8-H Haggis <***NOSPAM***pian...@juno.com> wrote in article
<3313482...@nntp.ix.netcom.com>...
On the last broadcast of Tchaikovsky's 6th:
> The performance has been characterized by some as
> slack, but to others it sounds very autumnal and
> touchingly expressive: it is massive and slow, at
> least compared to the lithe 1947 commercial
> recording; more in the spirit of the towering 1941
> live concert on Music & Arts.
> The Rossini Barber Overture of that program is no
> doubt the slowest reading of it ever preserved in
> a Toscanini interpretation. In fact, it is
> shockingly slow: a sort of massive, Klemperer-like
> grim solidity is achieved, not the mercurial
> Italianate wit of the sparkling 1945 78-mastered
> reading.
I have not heard either of these, but this would be yet more evidence for
my belief that Toscanini did not simply get faster with age, but was in the
process of slowing down after a brief, rather hard pressed and nervous
phase in the late 40s (especially the 1947 Tchaikovsky 6th). In recordings
readily available in the RCA Toscanini edition, consider the Wagner
excerpts -- 50s versus early and late 40s, as well as the late Brahms 3rd
and Tragic Overture.
Russell W. Miller
On Tue, 25 Feb 1997 20:39:25 GMT, ***NOSPAM***pian...@juno.com (8-H
Haggis) wrote:
[snip]
>It is interesting, however, that the Cantelli
>Franck D Minor, recorded very close to the final
>Toscanini NBC concert in Carnegie Hall, has
>virtually the same mike placement and close
>perspective, though the blend is slightly more
>cohesive than the evidence as heard on the M&A CD.
Maybe one of our experts can unravel what, to me, is something of a
mystery. I have the EMI Artist Profile twofer of Cantelli, otherwise
devoted to recordings played by the Philharmonia, but including this
Franck Symphony with the NBC. Now, I always thought the Cantelli/NBC
recordings were owned by RCA. This very performance was issued on an
RCA LP some years ago; I believe this was its first issue in stereo.
I'm sure that LP came out many years after the reciprocal agreements
between RCA and HMV (EMI) expired, which would indicate that the
ownership of this master had been retained by RCA. But the EMI CD
booklet does not credit RCA, stating that the copyright is owned by
EMI. What is EMI doing with this recording? Have they purchased it
from RCA, and if so, might other Cantelli/NBC recordings be issued by
EMI?
Since I've pulled it off the shelf to consult the documentation, I may
as well give it another listen!
Russell W. Miller
r...@miller.mv.com
8-H Haggis
Being a European artist, Cantelli had a contract
with HMV. He made a number of Philharmonia
recordings as you have mentioned; they were issued
in the US on RCA Red Seal.
There are certainly extraordinarily confusing
examples of these cross-contactual affiliations on
just about every label: Pye/Mercury-Philips,
English Columbia/EMI/American CBS,
Nixa/Westminster, etc. etc.
Considering the long-time hostility between the
rivals American RCA and CBS/Columbia, I was
surprised to obtain as a gift an interesting set
of 3 CDs called "50 Great Moments in Opera",
produced by RCA/BMG. On Volume 2 there is a cut
by Ormandy/PO/Mormon Tabernacle Choir of the
Bridal Chorus that was recorded by CBS/Columbia c.
1963!
Money has no nationalities!
Yours,
8-H Haggis
Owen Hartnett
In article <5ed1ut$j...@cii3130-18.its.rpi.edu>,
dre...@cii3130-18.its.rpi.edu (Donald B Drewecki) wrote:
>Maybe one day we will get a systematic, legitimate release of the nearly
>300 hours of rehearsal recordings that exist, of Toscanini at NBC. That
>will provide a useful corrective to the nonsense about Toscanini's
>terror.
Thank you for your wonderful note. It's refreshing to read such after
having gotten through the cynical drivel of LeBrecht's "Maestro Myth."
It'll be unfortunate if books such as that (wherein he compares AT with
Hitler), somehow get to be accepted as gospel.
-Owen
8-H Haggis
Has someone else been writing this sort of
psychobabble? After the dreadful Horovitz screed
about Toscanini and the 'selling' of mass culture,
I have shielded by delicate soul from such
nonsense. I agree with Owen and Donald: it's time
to stop ridiculing and dissecting the musical
past, and spinning fanciful anti-establishment
theories that everything that happened in the
cultural establishment was a vulgar plot.
Yours,
8-H Haggis
TransfrGuy
On 26 Feb 1997, Russell W. Miller wrote:
<<Maybe one of our experts can unravel what, to me, is something of a
mystery. I have the EMI Artist Profile twofer of Cantelli, otherwise
devoted to recordings played by the Philharmonia, but including this
Franck Symphony with the NBC. Now, I always thought the Cantelli/NBC
recordings were owned by RCA. This very performance was issued on an
RCA LP some years ago; I believe this was its first issue in stereo.
I'm sure that LP came out many years after the reciprocal agreements
between RCA and HMV (EMI) expired, which would indicate that the
ownership of this master had been retained by RCA. But the EMI CD
booklet does not credit RCA, stating that the copyright is owned by
EMI. What is EMI doing with this recording? Have they purchased it
from RCA, and if so, might other Cantelli/NBC recordings be issued by
EMI?>>
What I had heard from an inside source at RCA was that shortly after RCA
released the Cantelli/NBC Franck in stereo on LP for the first time in
1978, EMI contacted them to say that *they* really owned the rights to it,
due to Cantelli's contract. Shortly thereafter, it turned up in stereo on
an EMI World Records LP at the same time it was in print on RCA Red Seal
(and later for a short time on an RCA Gold Seal LP). During the CD era,
the rights have apparently gone exclusively to EMI.
However (and this is where things get confusing), when I was in London a
couple years ago, I spoke with the producer of the Testament CD reissues
about the rest of Cantelli's NBC SO recordings for RCA (Haydn 93, Pictures
at an Exhibition and Mathis der Maler). I asked whether Testament, which
had already brought out a number of Cantelli CD reissues, would ever make
these available. He replied that his understanding was that RCA held the
rights to them.
It's possible that they may own everything except the stereo Franck; but
then who owns Cantelli's sole New York Philharmonic recording, which
originally appeared on a (US) Columbia LP? (It's too bad RCA doesn't have
the rights to the Franck; think what a great Living Stereo CD it would
make. The EMI Artist Profile is shallow sounding, like a dub of the LP
master tape, which it probably is. Maybe one of the independent
audiophile companies currently making high-grade vinyl and CD reissues can
license this, so we can hear it the way it *ought* to sound . . .)
- Mark Obert-Thorn
TransfrGuy
On 25 Feb 1997, 8-H Haggis (love that screen name, BTW) wrote:
<<Rumor has it that an NBC executive took the master
tape home and actually erased part of the
Pathetique's scherzo by accident! I hope that
this isn't true, and that someday M&A or another
company will release a complete stereo recording
of the concert.>>
I had heard that it, along with other irreplaceable portions of early
stereo master tapes by Stokowski, Munch and others, was cut out and put on
a stereo demo tape which subsequently became lost. The version of the
penultimate concert which I heard has the end of the March-Scherzo edited
in from the rehearsal (which, pace the discography in the Hupka book, was
indeed also recorded in stereo).
- Mark Obert-Thorn
8-H Haggis
>In article <5ed1ut$j...@cii3130-18.its.rpi.edu>,
>dre...@cii3130-18.its.rpi.edu (Donald B Drewecki) wrote:
>
>>Maybe one day we will get a systematic, legitimate release of the nearly
>>300 hours of rehearsal recordings that exist, of Toscanini at NBC. That
>>will provide a useful corrective to the nonsense about Toscanini's
>>terror.
>
>Thank you for your wonderful note. It's refreshing to read such after
>having gotten through the cynical drivel of LeBrecht's "Maestro Myth."
>It'll be unfortunate if books such as that (wherein he compares AT with
>Hitler), somehow get to be accepted as gospel.
>
>-Owen
Has someone else been writing this sort of
psychobabble? After the dreadful Horovitz screed
about Toscanini and the 'selling' of mass culture,
I have shielded my delicate soul from such
Jeffrey T. Sandersier
Which label is this Brahms set (Philharmonia) w/Toscanini? Is it still
available on CD?
Thanks,
Jeffrey
ENagamine
I would think that Testament would be an ideal source for the vinyl
re-issue. They have done a great job with the EMI material on vinyl. My
impression is that they are an independent company who license material
from EMI. Is this correct? Another possibility should be the german
company Alto. I hope that Classic Records doesn't get the rights to this
with their BMG/RCA agreement, though I doubt that they would re-issue
it.
Aloha,
Eric
Donald B Drewecki
I'm glad that Testament at least knows about the Cantelli/NBC
recordings, so again, what we should do is urge them to reissue them on
their own line. What we don't know is if the actual master
tapes still survive at BMG/RCA, and then, will they get someone like Art
Fierro and Seth Winner (who did the finest work in BMG's Toscanini
Collection series) to do the transfers, or will they farm out the work
to someone else, who will do a less good job.
For years, I had the original 78 rpm edition of the Haydn 93rd, and I
thought it had some of the very best sound out of 8H, fairly live,
clear, full, well-balanced sound. I never heard the LP. Again, you
have to have someone who knows where to look and how to do it right.
Art and Seth did it right, and still, Jack Pfeiffer couldn't have cared
less. That's why the AT/Philadelphia recordings were never remastered,
despite the false "ADD" claim on the slipcase.
Does Testament, or EMI Classics, have a web site?
Don Drewecki
<dre...@rpi.edu>
asgr...@aol.com
The funny thing about that book is that Toscanini comes out looking very good, despite the author's negative tone. I mean, he starts out saying how power hungry he was and then has to report the actual facts of Tocanini's war time activities. Between fund raising for the US war effort and his efforts to evacuate musicians, especially Furtwangler, from the Nazi's, it becomes impossible to hold a little thing like arrogance against him....if, indeed, he had it in the first place.
Scott Graham
James C.S. Liu
On 28 Feb 1997 00:23:03 GMT, "Jeffrey T. Sandersier"
<js...@cvip.csufresno.edu> wrote:
>Which label is this Brahms set (Philharmonia) w/Toscanini? Is it still
>available on CD?
The original set was arranged by EMI's Walter Legge, and I believe
the performances did appear on mid-priced EMI CD's at one point. I
don't think they're available now, though; if you want a CD set right
now, I think your best bet is probably a semi-pirate reissue like the
one on Arkadia (CD# 524).
--
/James C.S. Liu |"Madness takes its toll.
jame...@yale.edu | Please have exact change."
New Haven, Connecticut | -- Anonymous
My opinions have nothing to do with my employer!
ENagamine
mentioned anywhere before. I thought that all of the issues including
the LP's were all pirates. I have the issue on Hunt (OOP) which is okay
and has a very good booklet which describes how the concerts came about.
Aloha,
Eric
Russell W. Miller
On Mon, 03 Mar 1997 18:09:12 GMT, jame...@yale.edu (James C.S. Liu)
wrote:
>On 28 Feb 1997 00:23:03 GMT, "Jeffrey T. Sandersier"
><js...@cvip.csufresno.edu> wrote:
>
>>Which label is this Brahms set (Philharmonia) w/Toscanini? Is it still
>>available on CD?
>
> The original set was arranged by EMI's Walter Legge, and I believe
>the performances did appear on mid-priced EMI CD's at one point. I
>don't think they're available now, though; if you want a CD set right
>now, I think your best bet is probably a semi-pirate reissue like the
>one on Arkadia (CD# 524).
There was a Toscanini Brahms Fourth on an EMI CD, but it was a
recording from the thirties. I'm pretty sure there has never been an
authorized release of the Philharmonia cycle.
Russell W. Miller
r...@miller.mv.com
Doctor Gonzo
I'd have to disagree re. Messrs. Fierro and Winner --- they did
nothing to correct the treble-heavy, shrill sound "approved" by the
hearing-impaired Maestro. This is not to cast overall aspersions on
their skills as technicians and engineers --- they're among the best
in the business (listen to some of the Sony Masterworks Heritage
releases and judge for yourself), and got the job done under
tremendous time pressure, often with compromised or
non-first-generation source --- but the insistence that the original
sources be remastered so "they could be heard the way Maestro heard
them" was a blunder, one which resulted in releases which many ---
including The Doc --- find unpleasant to listen to. And you're wrong
about Jack "not car[ing] less' --- he was in the difficult and
delicate position of dealing with the Toscanini Estate, RCA's legal
and marketing people, and preliminary work on what would become The
Heifetz Collection, among about three dozen other projects including
new recordings. He was not keen on Fierro's work but did not want to
delay or interfere with what Bertelsmann deemed their classical
division's most important reissue project of all time. Jack did
express his overall displeasure with the technical quality of The
Toscanini Collection to a few of the reissue engineers shortly after
the entire set was released --- he is quoted as saying "It all sounds
like s#!t." (Two earwitnesses to this incident have personally
confirmed the story to The Doc).
If there is ever an opportunity for BMG to re-redo any of the
Toscanini masters, they should be done by a neutral, disinterested
party above the influence of Toscanini's remaining family, agents
colleagues. A different remastering approach --- one which would
correct the overly brilliant sound and dynamic compression and
limitation problems --- would no doubt make this important legacy
accessible to an entire group of listeners, not to mention re-igniting
interest in Toscanini once again.
As for the Cantelli/NBC recordings, the masters are probably in the
custody of BMG.
The Doc
Check out The Doc's web site at
http://www.pipeline.com/~drgonzo
Deryk Barker
ENagamine (en...@lava.net) wrote:
: James C.S. Liu wrote:
: >
: > On 28 Feb 1997 00:23:03 GMT, "Jeffrey T. Sandersier"
: > <js...@cvip.csufresno.edu> wrote:
: >
: > >Which label is this Brahms set (Philharmonia) w/Toscanini? Is it still
: > >available on CD?
: >
: > The original set was arranged by EMI's Walter Legge, and I believe
: > the performances did appear on mid-priced EMI CD's at one point. I
: > don't think they're available now, though; if you want a CD set right
: > now, I think your best bet is probably a semi-pirate reissue like the
: > one on Arkadia (CD# 524).
: > /James C.S. Liu |"Madness takes its toll.
: > jame...@yale.edu | Please have exact change."
: > New Haven, Connecticut | -- Anonymous
: > My opinions have nothing to do with my employer!
: Do you have any Catalog info on the EMI issue? I've never seen it
: mentioned anywhere before. I thought that all of the issues including
: the LP's were all pirates. I have the issue on Hunt (OOP) which is okay
: and has a very good booklet which describes how the concerts came about.
My understanding was that the cycle wasn't considered worthy of issue
because of the fireworks incident in the 4th. My copy is the Hunt
set. I believe there was an LP issue by another (the same?) Italian
company.
8-H Haggis
On Tue, 04 Mar 1997 15:24:51 GMT,
drgonzoNO...@pipeline.com (Doctor Gonzo)
wrote:
>Jack [Pfeiffer] did
>express his overall displeasure with the technical quality of The
>Toscanini Collection to a few of the reissue engineers shortly after
>the entire set was released --- he is quoted as saying "It all sounds
>like s#!t." (Two earwitnesses to this incident have personally
>confirmed the story to The Doc).
>
>If there is ever an opportunity for BMG to re-redo any of the
>Toscanini masters, they should be done by a neutral, disinterested
>party above the influence of Toscanini's remaining family, agents
>colleagues. A different remastering approach --- one which would
>correct the overly brilliant sound and dynamic compression and
>limitation problems --- would no doubt make this important legacy
>accessible to an entire group of listeners, not to mention re-igniting
>interest in Toscanini once again.
>The Doc
>
>Check out The Doc's web site at
>http://www.pipeline.com/~drgonzo
Doc, I'm touched by the kind approval you have
lavished on some of my posts here, so it is hard
to venture a somewhat dissenting note...it is not
to dispute or argue any point you have made, but
to call for something of a moritorium on the
knee-jerk, longtime condemnation of everything
done in history by RCA and now by its corporate
successor, BMG.
It is fashionable to say that Victor, NBC, General
Sarnoff, Harry B. Olson, everyone at RCA
corporate, Wanda Toscanini, Walter Toscanini, and
all others in a guilty cabal have done the Maestro
wrong. They have desecrated his art, destroyed
his legacy, and ruined his reputation. The
comment that "the recordings all sound bad" can be
traced from the most modern posts on the Internet,
all the way back to articles and books published
during the 1930s and early 40s.
There is a modern parallel here in the intemperate
reactions to any piece of software or any action
by the Microsoft Corporation. In the case of the
Toscanini recorded legacy, as in the case of
Microsoft's service to the computing community,
much is very good, and some is bad. But not ALL
is bad!
I was vilified in print when I dissented from the
hatchet-job given to the Franklin Mint Toscanini
LP set by the critic of Fanfare magazine (later
one of the annotators in the BMG AT series); I
have been pilloried when I have suggested that
some of the 8-H recordings are not bad at all. I
have been stripped of my epaulets for preferring
many of the CDs in the BMG set to even the vaunted
"2-S" pressings of the Red Seals (which have the
same totemic majesty as HP's stereo shaded dogs
among some critics.)
While we wring our hands about what some RCA
engineer or part-time outside consultant like the
estimable Winner is allowed to do (or is NOT
permitted to do) by his corporate masters, the
recordings are, at least, all here for us to
enjoy, and for their humanistic message to touch
our lives.
At no time during the living career of Arturo
Toscanini were these recordings ALL available, in
print, and to be found at any likely record store.
Yet today, they are collected and preserved --
imperfect like any human artifact, plan, or idea
-- and may be experienced by anyone who can afford
about $10 US per disk, a mere tiny fraction of
their cost in actual adjusted dollars during the
period of their inception. I hope that more than
compensates for the frustrations of some of the
idealists.
Yours,
8-H Haggis
Donald B Drewecki
In one case, BMG/RCA falsely attributed the Cosentini/Winner to a
transfer they didn't do -- the Rhenish Symphony.
The simple fact is that BMG put out a dozen CDs which they claimed were
remastered, newly, from the original sources. They weren't. That's
false advertising, as I see it.
Don Drewecki
<dre...@rpi.edu>
8-H Haggis
>On Tue, 04 Mar 1997 15:24:51 GMT,
>drgonzoNO...@pipeline.com (Doctor Gonzo)
>wrote:
>
>>If there is ever an opportunity for BMG to re-redo any of the
>>Toscanini masters, they should be done by a neutral, disinterested
>>party above the influence of Toscanini's remaining family, agents
>>colleagues. A different remastering approach --- one which would
>>correct the overly brilliant sound and dynamic compression and
>>limitation problems --- would no doubt make this important legacy
>>accessible to an entire group of listeners, not to mention re-igniting
>>interest in Toscanini once again.
>>
>>The Doc
>>
>>Check out The Doc's web site at
>>http://www.pipeline.com/~drgonzo
Well, at his urgings, I FINALLY dropped into the
Doc's web-page.
He is certainly quite a humorist.
However, may I be pardoned if I offer an
observation (for which I mean absolutely no
criticism or offense!):
It is difficult to take entirely seriously the
comments on the "Web Domain of Truth,
Classical Music, Audio & Beer" (quoting the
precise title currently employed on the page.)
Though the Doc is a great enthusiast, his
highly-effective posturing and satirical wit might
tend to diminish the essential correctness of many
of his statements. It would be like going to Dave
Berry in order to determine US foreign policy on
some delicate issue that would have reverberations
for decades. It's not that Dave is incapable of
offering a good insight or two; it's just that --
well, let's face it -- he might lack the
considerate, tempered judgment of a Madeleine
Albright or a George Schultz!
After reading aloud to a friend of mine (a manager
of a classical department at a large record
dealer, and very erudite collector) the Doc's
comments vis-a-vis the RCA/BMG Toscanini
collection (and especially the scatology
attributed to Pfeiffer, who sadly cannot affirm or
deny it) and my recent reply, my friend pointed
out another issue for which we may be grateful to
RCA:
The issue for the FIRST time of a number of
valuable and insight-providing interpretations
by the Maestro in high-quality, authorized
transfers: to wit, the composite Franck D-Minor
symphony; the Smetana Barterered Bride
overture; the Debussy Prelude; the Strauss
Salome's Dance. In each case, the sound
is vastly superior to bootleg disks, if one had
been so fortunate to be able to hear them.
When one buys bootleg recordings -- no matter how
desparately desired -- one is participating on the
fringes of the vital musical establishment as a
kind of 'parasite'. And, in truth, the REAL
parasites are the bootleg record companies that
pay nothing for their off-air tapes or purloined
copies of commercial material, and then profit
from them, denying any relief to the musicians (or
their estates); musician's unions; the musical
organizations; or the companies who paid for the
original recordings, their promotion, and their
distribution.
I suppose we ALL have offered such patronage to a
bootlegger of historical records at one time or
another. Yet this writer has certainly tried to
support the genuine coin-of-the-realm first and
foremost.
There will be some followup remarks in a few days
from the classical buyer, who will let you know
about the purchasing preferences of Toscanini
enthusiasts and other music lovers, and of the
success and popularity of the BMG series, as an
antidote to the poisoning of the well by the
anti-establishment 'conspiracy' buffs who insist
that at all times, Toscanini has been dis-served
by his record producers.
I work for NO record companies or record dealers;
I am a private individual (retired) who manages
his wife's piano studio. My only professional
income is derived from management of the process
of teaching of music to young children. Thus, I
hope that my comments in support of the tremendous
achievement of RCA/BMG in enriching our
collections and musical souls with the superlative
artistry of Toscanini, Reiner, Munch, and all
other Red Seal artists will be understood to be
pure expressions of appreciation, not paid
propaganda.
Yours,
8-H Haggis
On Wed, 05 Mar 1997 20:34:07 GMT,
***NoSPAM***pian...@juno.com (8-H Haggis) wrote:
>On Tue, 04 Mar 1997 15:24:51 GMT,
>drgonzoNO...@pipeline.com (Doctor Gonzo)
>wrote:
>
>>If there is ever an opportunity for BMG to re-redo any of the
>>Toscanini masters, they should be done by a neutral, disinterested
>>party above the influence of Toscanini's remaining family, agents
>>colleagues. A different remastering approach --- one which would
>>correct the overly brilliant sound and dynamic compression and
>>limitation problems --- would no doubt make this important legacy
>>accessible to an entire group of listeners, not to mention re-igniting
>>interest in Toscanini once again.
>>
>>The Doc
>>
>>Check out The Doc's web site at
>>http://www.pipeline.com/~drgonzo
>>
>
>I am getting grouchier by the moment as I
>contemplate the tiresome tirade against
>RCA for the 'destruction' of the Toscanini
>masters.
>
>Let me dissent from the crowd, and offer
>my bona fides from the following list of
>accomplishments.
>
>I was able to collect:
>
> 1. Many of the original 78s in pressings
> from the late 30s and early 40s;
> some of the original sides on 78s of
> the La Scala acoustics;
> 2. The old plum-label disks in the dark
> red jackets issued in celebration of
> the 1950 transcontinental tour, such
> as the '49 Eroica, the '47 Mozart
> Divertimento No. 15, and others;
> 3. Some of the original 45 rpm disks;
> 4. Many of the original-issue Red Seal LPs
> in 1S and 2S pressings from the mid-50s,
> including the Gluck and Saint-Saens
> broadcasts, the original Don Quixote,
> the Harold of '53, Schubert Unfinished+
> Beethoven & Schumann overtures; the
> original set of the Beethoven 9 symphonies;
> 5. Many of the late-60s issues, such as the
> great 7-disk set of broadcasts, the
> lovely 2-LP edition of overtures, the
> Beethoven 4th Concerto with Serkin, etc.
> 6. The Fonit-Cetra LPs of the 1952 Philharmonia
> Brahms cycle;
> 7. Virtually all of the Victrola reissues;
> sometimes BOTH the mono & phony stereo
> copies of a given release;
> 8. Many of the German RCA Toscanini "Gold"
> LP sets;
> 9. The historic transfers issued on numerous
> LP labels of some of the non-approved
> airchecks: Toscanini Society (original
> Key editions; Key-Everest, Key-Turnabout;
> Dell'Arte, M&A, etc. etc.
>10. The ENTIRE RCA/BMG Toscanini CD edition;
>11. Many of the authorized EMI CD transfers of
> BBC Symphony broadcasts;
>12. Many of the recent CD transfers of airchecks
> from Relief, Gramophono, M&A.
>
>At one point in the LP era just before CDs were
>introduced, in ticking off my discography against
>the Marsh and Toscanini Society lists, I owned
>every single performance that had been issued by
>Victor or RCA.
>
>After years of collecting and comparing this
>material, I have determined that there is ONE case
>of inferior transfer on the BMG CD edition,
>compared to a previous LP:
>
> The Schumann "Rhenish" Symphony, broadcast of
> November 12, 1949, on BMG CD 09026-602292-2.
>
>For some unaccountable reason, Costentini & Winner
>used what clearly sounds like a slightly noisy set
>of acetate disks; side joins are audible, and
>there is swishing noise plus numerous little ticks
>and pops. Frequency response is about equal to a
>good AM broadcast; i. e. about 5-6 kHz tops.
>
>Yet both the original Red Seal LP edition, as well
>as the Victrola VIC-1337 or VICS-1337(e), seem to
>have been made from a very clean, bright in-house
>tape master, or at least an absolutely unplayed
>33.3 rpm acetate linecheck.
>
>In virtually EVERY other instance, the CD reissue
>has more body, greater clarity, a wider dynamic
>range, less intermodulation distortion, or less
>tape hiss or groove noise. Even the few
>occasional CDs in the BMG series that have had
>artificial stereo ambience added (such as the New
>World Symphony performance on 60279-2-RG) are
>better sounding than the best copies of the
>original Red Seal or Victrola pressings
>that I possessed.
>
>In many cases, the digital refurbishing was an
>astonishing revelation of detail hidden beneath
>a shellac or vinyl blur: such as the Ravel
>Daphnis et Chloe Suite No. 2; the amazing rework
>of the Brahms Double Concerto; and the absolutely
>breathtaking transfer of the 1939 Eroica.
>
>Does the reader believe that by rewarding RCA/BMG
>with denunciation of their wonderful achievement
>will encourage FURTHER restoration work? I think
>not.
>
>Yours,
>8-H Haggis
>
>
>
>
8-H Haggis
8-H Haggis
>I'd have to disagree re. Messrs. Fierro and Winner --- they did
>nothing to correct the treble-heavy, shrill sound "approved" by the
>hearing-impaired Maestro... Jack [Pfeiffer] did
>express his overall displeasure with the technical quality of The
>Toscanini Collection to a few of the reissue engineers shortly after
>the entire set was released --- he is quoted as saying "It all sounds
>like s#!t." (Two earwitnesses to this incident have personally
>confirmed the story to The Doc).
>The Doc
>
>Check out The Doc's web site at
>http://www.pipeline.com/~drgonzo
Another though occurred to me.
The SAME audio engineers -- such as the
highly-competent Lewis Layton -- mastered NOT ONLY
the Toscanini recordings of the 1950s (the ones
that Doc et al. decry as being harsh or
unlistenable for one reason or another), BUT ALSO
the famous "shaded dog" recordings of Munch and
Reiner that everybody adores and hoards.
Why would these guys wreck Toscanini's artistry on
the one hand, and enhance Reiner's on the other
hand? It is a preposterous supposition!
Let's face it: the Toscanini recordings are NOT
THAT BAD. Many are quite fine, and the CD
transfers further enhance their listenable
qualities.
Yours,
8-H Haggis
8-H Haggis
>If there is ever an opportunity for BMG to re-redo any of the
>Toscanini masters, they should be done by a neutral, disinterested
>party above the influence of Toscanini's remaining family, agents
>colleagues. A different remastering approach --- one which would
>correct the overly brilliant sound and dynamic compression and
>limitation problems --- would no doubt make this important legacy
>accessible to an entire group of listeners, not to mention re-igniting
>interest in Toscanini once again.
>
>The Doc
>
>Check out The Doc's web site at
>http://www.pipeline.com/~drgonzo
>
I am getting grouchier by the moment as I
Dell'Arte, M&A) etc. etc.
10. The ENTIRE RCA/BMG Toscanini CD edition;
11. Many of the authorized EMI CD transfers of
BBC Symphony broadcasts;
12. Many of the recent CD transfers of airchecks
from Relief, Gramophono, M&A.
At one point in the LP era just before CDs were
introduced, in ticking off my discography against
the Marsh and Toscanini Society lists, I owned
every single performance that had been issued by
Victor or RCA.
After years of collecting and comparing this
material, I have determined that there is ONE case
of inferior transfer on the BMG CD edition,
compared to a previous LP:
The Schumann "Rhenish" Symphony, broadcast of
November 12, 1949, on BMG CD 09026-602292-2.
For some unaccountable reason, Cosentini & Winner
8-H Haggis
>I'd have to disagree re. Messrs. Fierro and Winner --- they did
>nothing to correct the treble-heavy, shrill sound "approved" by the
>hearing-impaired Maestro... Jack [Pfeiffer] did
>express his overall displeasure with the technical quality of The
>Toscanini Collection to a few of the reissue engineers shortly after
>the entire set was released --- he is quoted as saying "It all sounds
>like s#!t." (Two earwitnesses to this incident have personally
>confirmed the story to The Doc).
>The Doc
>
>Check out The Doc's web site at
>http://www.pipeline.com/~drgonzo
Another thought occurred to me.
8-H Haggis
On 6 Mar 1997 10:16:20 -0500,
dre...@lecture.its.rpi.edu (Donald B Drewecki)
wrote:
That is an extremely interesting statement.
I would like to hear from RCA/BMG or Adrian
Cosentini and Seth Winner of Winner Sound Studios
to confirm it.
I mean no disrespect, but -- evoking Carl Sagan --
extraordinary claims DEMAND extraordinary proof.
How is the reader of this newsgroup to know the
absolute truth of the assertion given above? We
read the assertions given by this individual,
without hearing any other reference, confirmation,
or explanation to corroborate them.
At the very least, my own life's experience in
dealing with corporations or bureaucracies has led
me to expect some lapses or confusions that are
NOT ALWAYS indicative of evil intent or the
existence of a cabal.
Of course, it is up to each of us to be completely
honorable and upfront about what we post: so
anyone can doubt anything I would aver regarding
my own listening experiences with the Toscanini
material. Yet at a certain point, the exercise of
verification becomes somewhat pointless, or at
least tedious.
However, in the case of the statement of 'false
advertising' attributed above, are we not entitled
to request SOME further authority?
Yours,
8-H Haggis
Paul Goldstein
8-H Haggis wrote:
>
[snip]
> Let's face it: the Toscanini recordings are NOT
> THAT BAD. Many are quite fine, and the CD
> transfers further enhance their listenable
> qualities.
>
> Yours,
> 8-H Haggis
I agree with this generally, in the sense that RCA seem to has done the
best it could with the INHERENTLY inferior Toscanini masters. (Inferior
to what? To other orchestral recordings being done by both RCA and
others contemporaneously with the Toscanini recordings. Compare, for
example, the luminous mono Monteux/BSO material of the early 1950s, e.g.
the Scriabin Poem of Ecstasy and Liszt Les Preludes.) However, I make
an important exception for the Philadelphia recordings, which IMHO have,
as Don has stated, been poorly (re?)mastered for CD. I find the
Mendelssohn and Debussy virtually unlistenable, with their patches of
pitch fluctuation and general murk. I wonder if these can be the same
recordings that (your namesake?) B.H. Haggin raved about (as I recall)
when he heard inside sources of them? (I am recalling Haggin's
discussion of this issue from somewhat distant memory.)
Owen Hartnett
In article <19970302180...@ladder02.news.aol.com>,
asgr...@aol.com wrote:
>>
>
>The funny thing about that book is that Toscanini comes out looking very
good, despite the author's negative tone. I mean, he starts out saying
how power hungry he was and then has to report the actual facts of
Tocanini's war time activities. Between fund raising for the US war
effort and his efforts to evacuate musicians, especially Furtwangler, from
the Nazi's, it becomes impossible to hold a little thing like arrogance
against him....if, indeed, he had it in the first place.
I don't think anyone comes out looking very good, and that's the problem
with the book. The facts don't jibe with the spin. It's the National
Enquirer of music books, crammed with gossip, speculation, and little nice
to say of anyone. In spite of AT's above named efforts, the author states
that his authoritarian stance on the podium was because of the influence
of the age of dictators, notably Hitler and Mussolini. One can hardly
imagine how AT would want to emulate Hitler!
-Owen
8-H Haggis
I originally wrote, in response to a denunciation
by "Doc Gonzo" of the Toscanini CD transfers and a
call for remastering of the set, among other
comments supporting the quality of the enterprise,
that:
>After years of collecting and comparing this
>material, I have determined that there is ONE case
>of inferior transfer on the BMG CD edition,
>compared to a previous LP:
> The Schumann "Rhenish" Symphony, broadcast of
> November 12, 1949, on BMG CD 09026-602292-2.
>For some unaccountable reason, Cosentini & Winner
>used what clearly sounds like a slightly noisy set
>of acetate disks...
>Yet both the original Red Seal LP edition, as well
>as the Victrola VIC-1337 or VICS-1337(e), seem to
>have been made from a very clean, bright in-house
>tape master, or at least an absolutely unplayed
>33.3 rpm acetate linecheck.
>In virtually EVERY other instance, the CD reissue
>has more body, greater clarity, a wider dynamic
>range, less intermodulation distortion, or less
>tape hiss or groove noise.
Unimpressed with this, on 6 Mar 1997 10:16:20
-0500, dre...@lecture.its.rpi.edu (Donald B
Drewecki) wrote:
>In one case, BMG/RCA falsely attributed the Cosentini/Winner to a
>transfer they didn't do -- the Rhenish Symphony.
>The simple fact is that BMG put out a dozen CDs which they claimed were
>remastered, newly, from the original sources. They weren't. That's
>false advertising, as I see it.
Well, at least in this ONE instance, we surely
know that the CD has INDEED been remastered; but
mastered from a poorer source than previous LP
editions.
Why? I can think of several (non-conspiratorial)
reasons: (a) a mistake; (b) destruction through
wear or age of the source disk or tape used for
previous, better-sounding editions; (c) lack of a
perfect-playing copy of the best earlier LP of the
Rhenish & consequent substitution of the 2nd-best
source; and (d) perhaps a reasonable decision at
that point to press onward and not seek further
refinement of just one, out of hundreds, of
masters.
It takes a certain hubris to assert that there is
a fifth speculative reason: there is a universal
case of intentional sloth and incompetence that
MANDATES badly-produced Toscanini CD transfers;
but I suppose somebody will assert it.
_ _ _ _
Now, what is the casual, non-fanatic music lover
who has stumbled on this thread to think of this?
Is it TRUE that a cabal of incompetent corporate
Toscanini-family-toadies SABOTAGED each and every
issue, down to this day, of all the Toscanini
masters? Did an insidious plot exist to badly
mike and poorly record the playing of the NBC
Symphony and all Toscanini records save the 1926
Brunswick sides? Is this YET ANOTHER CASE of
corrupt corporate greed wasting and despoiling
everything its shekel-stained hands touched and
befouled? Did a crazed Toscanini, lusting for
every last decibel, impose his power-mad desires
for clarity on poor, conservative engineers? Did
Walter, Wanda, Walfredo, or God knows who
(Mussolini's son, perhaps?) conspire to remix in
wretched, shrieking digitalia the lucious truth of
the original acetates?
Or is this just a typical "bandwagon" effect of
joining all the (incorrect) critics of the past,
whose party-line is being re-mastered and
re-plastered for consumption by today's crop of
neurotics who are incapable of any real enjoyment
and enthusiasm, or any true appreciation, of music
and recorded sound?
Is there not displayed in advancing this argument
(and I do NOTmean by the gentlemen, Doc and
Donald, who have taken their time and talents to
respond in this particular thread of discussion),
a self-absorbed tendency to peer down from an
ivory tower, as keeper of some kind of sacred
torch of audio idealism, to belittle the work of
lots of well-meaning and competent souls who have
contributed much of their lives to help promote
the artistry of Toscanini?
Where are the actual engineers and producers, who
have had hands-on experience with these tapes, to
inform us? And not the dead ones, who can be
quoted with impunity.
May I suggest that the interested music-lover
investigate the following Toscanini CDs to hear
the recordings and decide for themselves. If they
have some experience with monaural technology, so
much the better; if not, they should also acquaint
themselves with the old recordings of the period
by, say, Dorati, Ansermet, Walter, Munch,
Koussevitzky, Defauw, Reiner (PRE-Chicago),
Mitropoulos, etc., so that they can make valid
comparisons with contemporary RCA techniques.
1. STRAUSS: Don Quixote (1953) NBC. RCA BMG
60295-2-RG. Much richer and fuller than the
earlier Victor or German LPs; a live broadcast
from Carnegie Hall.
2. DEBUSSY: La Mer (1950) A truly great
performance, and a surprisingly wide-range,
detailed Studio 8-H recording. A legendary
gramophone classic. RCA BMG 60265-2-RG
3. CHERUBINI: Symphony in D (1952) The only
previous LP edition that came within a mile of
this was the excellent Franklin Mint transfer. A
far more transparent recording than the old Red
Seal original. Sound is so clean, clear, and
spacious -- thanks to Lewis Layton's engineering
-- that it is not much worse than a modern stereo
recording, played in L+R mono. RCA BMG 60278-2-RG
4. BERLIOZ: Harold in Italy (1953) The
performance to give the lie to the canard that
Toscanini was always "too fast". Live Carnegie
Hall broadcast, much fuller and more dynamic than
even the Red Seal 2-S pressing.
5. BOITO: Mefistofele - Prologue. (1954) Here's
my challenge: play the Telarc by Shaw with preamp
in MONO mode. Then play the Toscanini broadcast,
on this RCA BMG CD 60276-2-RG. Then tell me what
you think of 1954 radio recording quality compared
to the efforts of Telarc's wizards in the
1980s...a revealing and very surprising
experience!
6. VERDI: Un Ballo in Maschera (1954) Carnegie
Hall, live performance. This transfer, lovingly
accomplished on RCA BMG 60301-2-RG, was produced
by John Pfeiffer. Can anyone with a straight face
assert that he was NOT proud of the result? Some
have called this the greatest opera performance on
record. The sound allows one to savor every note
and nuance.
Now, I'd like to repeat, I have no animus to the
Doc or to Don. They are enthusiasts, and I don't
gainsay their knowledge or experience. I simply
wish to claim that there is ANOTHER point of view
to be considered: that the Toscanini CD set on BMG
is capable of enriching your appreciation,
enjoyment, and understanding of music. It was a
worthy enterprise, and it deserves your support if
you find Toscanini's art, and the music he chose
to interpret, to be of interest.
Yours,
8-H Haggis
Curtis Croulet
> who gave Karajan's Parsifal a rosette. In the immortal words of many a
> baseball fan -- "Kill the ump!") & Toscanini, etc.
Actually, I like Karajan's Parsifal. But, anyway, I have found the
remastering work in the Toscanini Collection to be good enough that I
almost never go back to the LPs. Some of the LP issues were hilariously
inept. The 1939 Eroica in the current CD issue has very good sound for
its time. To my mind, the 1951 Brahms 4th has sound of great beauty
(the Red Seal LP was good, too), not at all in the "sonic turkey"
category as one critic collectively lumped these recordings. Compare
any of these to the dark, murky sound Walter got from Columbia during
the same period.
August Helmbright
8-H Haggis <***NoSPAM***pian...@juno.com> wrote in article
<332099e...@nntp.ix.netcom.com>...
> 6. VERDI: Un Ballo in Maschera (1954) Carnegie
> Hall, live performance. This transfer, lovingly
> accomplished on RCA BMG 60301-2-RG, was produced
> by John Pfeiffer. Can anyone with a straight face
> assert that he was NOT proud of the result? Some
> have called this the greatest opera performance on
> record. The sound allows one to savor every note
> and nuance.
YES!!! When I first listened to this (on CD -- I never owned any of the
LPs), I was bowled over by two things -- the utterly luminous and lovingly
elastic music making and the excellent sound. I would go so far as to say
it is one of a handful of recordings to capture Toscanini at his best, with
good enough sound to not require the listener to use any imagination.
Imagine my surprise when I later read in the Penguin Guide that this
recording was "harsh." (On the other hand, maybe I should have only been
surprised if the Penguin writers had liked it. These are the same people
who gave Karajan's Parsifal a rosette. In the immortal words of many a
baseball fan -- "Kill the ump!")
There are many other recordings that hold up well, IMO. I would add the
1952 Pastoral Symphony for one. Even the 1939 Eroica, which is reputed to
have sounded terrible on 78s and LPs (I never heard it until the CD
reissue), is not at all bad for a recording of a 1939 live performance.
There was better work in studios at that time, but I can think of several
live historic recordings, even into the 50s, that don't sound as good as
this CD.
Doctor Gonzo
Hello 8-H,
Having just returned from a short-notice trip out of town, I have to
say I'm both flattered and a little shocked at the reaction (and
quantity of same) which my brief post on The Toscanini Collection
elicited! I feel compelled to reply to many of your thoughtful,
strongly opinionated, intelligently informed and heartfelt comments:
>...to call for something of a moritorium on the
>knee-jerk, longtime condemnation of everything
>done in history by RCA and now by its corporate
>successor, BMG.
>
>It is fashionable to say that Victor, NBC, General
>Sarnoff, Harry B. Olson, everyone at RCA
>corporate, Wanda Toscanini, Walter Toscanini, and
>all others in a guilty cabal have done the Maestro
>wrong.
[and, in a later post]
>Is it TRUE that a cabal of incompetent corporate
>Toscanini-family-toadies SABOTAGED each and every
>issue, down to this day, of all the Toscanini
>masters? Did an insidious plot exist to badly
>mike and poorly record the playing of the NBC
>Symphony and all Toscanini records save the 1926
>Brunswick sides? Is this YET ANOTHER CASE of
>corrupt corporate greed wasting and despoiling
>everything its shekel-stained hands touched and
>befouled? Did a crazed Toscanini, lusting for
>every last decibel, impose his power-mad desires
>for clarity on poor, conservative engineers? Did
>Walter, Wanda, Walfredo, or God knows who
>(Mussolini's son, perhaps?) conspire to remix in
>wretched, shrieking digitalia the lucious truth of
>the original acetates?
First, let me make it clear that I am not implying a Cabalistic
Corporate Conspiracy of Sabotage to besmirch the legacy of Toscanini.
I do agree that there have been such arguments, and would hardly
disagree that RCA and BMG are The Evil Empire of Classical Recordings
(as some may incorrectly imply from my comments). My argument is that
they haven't been perfect, and in many cases in The Toscanini
Collection could have been done better! There was an insistence that
the overall sound characteristics be preserved (this comes from
multiple sources, some currently and some formerly at BMG), and did
reflect an earnest attempt to lend sonic authenticity to the entire
undertaking, and which did indeed result in the new transfers sounding
far cleaner and transparent. Yes, I did call the approach BMG used "a
blunder"... guilty as charged!... but this, remember, is my personal
opinion, not a statement of rigorous fact, and can be attributed as
much to hindsight as to the opportunity to assess the entire legacy on
CD, to which the world owes BMG and everyone involved a debt of
gratitude. But the fact... er, opinion... remains that I still don't
like the sound of many of them (see below).
This is despite the fact that, in practically every case I've heard
(including most of The Toscanini Collection) BMG's CD reissues have
been an improvement, frequently a huge one, over previous non-CD
releases --- LPs., open-reel tapes, whatever. This even applies to
the Toscanini Collection CD releases vs. the dim-sounding,
phoney-stereo Tosacanini "medallion" CDs issued early on in the
mid-1980s.
>The comment that "the recordings all sound bad" can be
>traced from the most modern posts on the Internet,
No argument here -
>I was vilified in print when I dissented from the
>hatchet-job given to the Franklin Mint Toscanini
>LP set by the critic of Fanfare magazine (later
>one of the annotators in the BMG AT series); I
>have been pilloried when I have suggested that
>some of the 8-H recordings are not bad at all.
[and in a later post]
>The SAME audio engineers -- such as the
>highly-competent Lewis Layton -- mastered NOT ONLY
>the Toscanini recordings of the 1950s (the ones
>that Doc et al. decry as being harsh or
>unlistenable for one reason or another), BUT ALSO
>the famous "shaded dog" recordings of Munch and
>Reiner that everybody adores and hoards.
Many of the 8-H recordings sound very good, _especially_ the tape-era
recordings, but a small number sound too bright for these ears even in
The Toscanini Collection, and most from 78 or acetate source sound
"brittle" (I hate using that word... whenever I use it I always end up
thinking of my Aunt Hilde's peanut brittle, which I liked, and is
antithetical to the point of using the word... but I digress...).
You'll get no argument from me that Layton's work was for the most
part leagues ahead of the competition, but it is worth noting that
during the first years he was with RCA he was not averse to using a
limiter in the recording chain (a practice he'd carried over from his
radio engineering days but abandoned by around 1951). Classic case in
point: the Reiner/RCA Victor Wagner and Humperdinck "bleeding chunks"
issued on 09026-61792-2. Performances: fantastic. Instrumental
timbres: generally realistic. Dynamic range: missing.
>I have been stripped of my epaulets for preferring
>many of the CDs in the BMG set to even the vaunted
>"2-S" pressings of the Red Seals (which have the
>same totemic majesty as HP's stereo shaded dogs
>among some critics.)
Guess they'll have to take mine, too!
>I am getting grouchier by the moment as I
>contemplate the tiresome tirade against
>RCA for the 'destruction' of the Toscanini
>masters.
My original post was never intended as a tirade against RCA for
'destruction,' rather criticism for not doing enough for some of the
recordings the first time around and an expression of hope that they
will use seven years of technological advance on Toscanini's
invaluable legacy --- upgraded studio facilities, new Studer/Cello
tape playback gear, 20- and 24-bit mastering and editing facilities,
Apogee's super-smooth UV22 and _discrete_ use of noise-abatement
software.
>After years of collecting and comparing this
>material, I have determined that there is ONE case
>of inferior transfer on the BMG CD edition,
>compared to a previous LP:
>
> The Schumann "Rhenish" Symphony, broadcast of
> November 12, 1949, on BMG CD 09026-602292-2.
> [ker-snip]
>In virtually EVERY other instance, the CD reissue
>has more body, greater clarity, a wider dynamic
>range, less intermodulation distortion, or less
>tape hiss or groove noise.
DEFINITE agreement on this from The Doc!
>...in at least in this ONE instance, we surely
>know that the CD has INDEED been remastered; but
>mastered from a poorer source than previous LP
>editions.
>
>Why? I can think of several (non-conspiratorial)
>reasons: (a) a mistake; (b) destruction through
>wear or age of the source disk or tape used for
>previous, better-sounding editions; (c) lack of a
>perfect-playing copy of the best earlier LP of the
>Rhenish & consequent substitution of the 2nd-best
>source; and (d) perhaps a reasonable decision at
>that point to press onward and not seek further
>refinement of just one, out of hundreds, of
>masters.
>
>It takes a certain hubris to assert that there is
>a fifth speculative reason: there is a universal
>case of intentional sloth and incompetence that
>MANDATES badly-produced Toscanini CD transfers;
>but I suppose somebody will assert it.
With regard to the above issues, I won't assert the Fifth [sounds like
taking the Fifth ;-)], and I suspect (b) and (d) are the likely
reasons.
It should also be noted that BMG has turned up a few original
Toscanini sources since release of the Toscanini Collection, along
with other classical source which was missing or misfiled; some of
these rediscoveries have been due to BMG's moving their treasure trove
of masters into a new vault and a rigorous process of identifying and
bar-coding everything! And they won't be finished for at least a
couple years, so who knows what else will turn up...
>May I suggest that the interested music-lover
>investigate the following Toscanini CDs to hear
>the recordings and decide for themselves [snip]
>1. STRAUSS: Don Quixote (1953) NBC. RCA BMG
60295-2-RG. [snip]
>2. DEBUSSY: La Mer (1950) [snip] RCA BMG 60265-2-RG
>3. CHERUBINI: Symphony in D (1952) [snip] RCA BMG 60278-2-RG
>4. BERLIOZ: Harold in Italy (1953)
>5. BOITO: Mefistofele - Prologue. (1954) [snip] RCA BMG CD 60276-2-RG [snip]
>6. VERDI: Un Ballo in Maschera (1954) Carnegie
>Hall, live performance. This transfer, lovingly
>accomplished on RCA BMG 60301-2-RG, was produced
>by John Pfeiffer. Can anyone with a straight face
>assert that he was NOT proud of the result? Some
>have called this the greatest opera performance on
>record. The sound allows one to savor every note
>and nuance.
Jack actually talked to me about this performanceeonce... and of all
his work with Maestro, I suspect he was proudest of this. The sound
on these 1950-54 recordings is outstanding.
I would add to the list a "mixed-bag" recording, from disc and tape
sources, with variable overall sound but uniformly great transfer
quality:
7. PROKOFIEV: Symphony No. 1 (1951)
SHOSTAKOVICH: Symphony No. 1 (1944)
GLINKA: Kamarinskaya (1940)
LIADOV: Kikimora (1952)
STRAVINSKY: Petrouchka (abridged) (1940)
>After reading aloud to a friend of mine (a manager
>of a classical department at a large record
>dealer, and very erudite collector) the Doc's
>comments vis-a-vis the RCA/BMG Toscanini
>collection (and especially the scatology
>attributed to Pfeiffer, who sadly cannot affirm or
>deny it) ...
As noted, two individuals confirmed this to The Doc; one of those
present did further elucidate on this extremely rare example of Jack
making an ungentlemanly comment, and it is their opinion that in the
context of the original conversation Jack was venting frustration at
the pressure he and his subordinates were under to release The
Toscanini Collection on such a tight schedule.
And I agree with your friend who said
> The issue for the FIRST time of a number of
> valuable and insight-providing interpretations
> by the Maestro in high-quality, authorized
> transfers: to wit, the composite Franck D-Minor
> symphony; the Smetana Barterered Bride
> overture; the Debussy Prelude; the Strauss
> Salome's Dance. In each case, the sound
> is vastly superior to bootleg disks, if one had
> been so fortunate to be able to hear them.
>
>When one buys bootleg recordings -- no matter how
>desparately desired -- one is participating on the
>fringes of the vital musical establishment as a
>kind of 'parasite'.
Guilty as charged, as are meny, meny people in this group.
>And, in truth, the REAL
>parasites are the bootleg record companies that
<pay nothing for their off-air tapes or purloined
>copies of commercial material, and then profit
>from them, denying any relief to the musicians (or
>their estates); musician's unions; the musical
>organizations; or the companies who paid for the
>original recordings, their promotion, and their
>distribution.
It is interesting that only in the last couple of years have the
lawyers for labels, artists and even the BBC decided to co-ordinate
their efforts to fight the bootleggers in an organized manner. It is
very difficult, though, because so many aspects of live airchecks fall
into various grey areas of the law. It is also a shame that in the US
the AFofM is still unwilling to yield on the issue of recording
payments for pre-stereo recordings; if they would, there would be a
proliferation of _authorized_ historic recordings from the majors, the
indies, perhaps even orchestras themselves!
Now, onto a fun point
> It is difficult to take entirely seriously the
> comments on the "Web Domain of Truth,
> Classical Music, Audio & Beer" (quoting the
> precise title currently employed on the page.)
Part of the reason for my slowly-developing web site is that we DO
frequently take ourselves too seriously; as for the "beer" part, I've
been a home-brew hobbyist for over a decade, and am a stockholder in a
brewery in upstate New York. Man does not live by great recordings
alone...
All the best,
8-H Haggis
On Fri, 07 Mar 1997 20:57:47 -0800, Curtis Croulet
<curt...@pe.net> wrote:
>...But, anyway, I have found the
>remastering work in the Toscanini Collection to be good enough that I
>any of these to the dark, murky sound Walter got from Columbia during
>the same period.
Well, there you have it. Not everyone believes
that the RCA Toscanini CDs are incapable of
providing not only musical pleasures, but also
reasonably satisfying replicas of convincing
music-making.
I was glad to read the Doc's additions to my
comment, and further pleased at the other
responses to my assertion that the Toscanini
recordings have been receiving a short shrift
(that was begun by critics who examined only an
isolated sample) and continues on down to the
present.
Of course, if the Toscanini's are remastered --
and I would suspect that this is a distinct
possibility at some distant time in the future, as
the company (like all labels) revises and revamps
its product line -- then they will employ whatever
state-of-the-art gear they have on hand. One
hopes that Cosentini, Winner, and some of the
original engineers will be around to assist.
Perhaps the members of the Toscanini entourage
will be too old, or even deceased, when this
occurs.
But I do not suspect that a MAJOR difference in
many of the transfers will be effected.
The nice thing about CDs is that their dynamic
range and power response is wide: much wider, in
fact, than the original RCA tape recorders used to
take down the Toscanini tapes from 1949 to 1954.
If you DO get a Toscanini CD that seems to
"bright", that does not mean that something is
necessarily missing. Use your preamp tone
controls or equalizer to boost the lows a bit, and
cut down the highs a bit, and -- voila -- the
recording sounds more to your liking.
In the days of analogue LPs this was dangerous.
Boost the lows, and you run the danger of
overdriving your power amp & speakers from warps
and low-frequency noise; boost the highs, and you
hear nasty over-amplified snaps and pops. But
with CDs, you have a wide latitude for
re-adjusting the sound to your taste.
Of course, many of the purist audiophiles have NO
tone controls or equalizers in their systems. In
this eventuality, I would suspect that they would
be very disappointed and unrewarded by most
historical transfers on CD. In such cases, they
will be forced to stick with the recordings that
play back with a satisfactory sound for their
EXACT acoustical environment and system
characteristics; this, however, will deny them the
opportunity to enjoy some fabulous music-making.
I minored in advertising/marketing in college, and
in a 25-year career in recording and broadcasting
I had some dealings with high-end audio folks,
from manufacturers to dealers, plus record
companies (I produced and recorded one album that
made its way to print.) I can assure you that
their reaction to knee-jerk, uninformed, biased
criticism is pretty bad. Chastisement in print of
the record companies and their producers does not
have a positive effect: they don't smite their
foreheads and cry out, "Gee, I could have had a
V-8 (or rather, "I should have used less treble
boost!") Instead, they are simply perturbed and
irritated, and ignore the critics, waiting to see
how the public votes via their pocket-books.
There is a two-edged sword to this: if you buy NO
Toscanini CDs because you have been 'warned' by
the 'experts' that they are inferior to what MIGHT
be produced in a best-of-all-possible-worlds
situation, then the company merely deletes the
material, forgetting all about it. "We tried,"
they conclude, "but nobody cares; all we get is a
handful of crap for our trouble."
If you DO buy them, and perhaps send a respectful
suggestion to the company, thanking them for their
efforts in hopes that someday certain aspects of
the production will be re-evaluated, then they
WILL get the message, since they know you care,
and that you will BUY the next set.
Yours,
8-H Hagg
Curtis Croulet
Gotta question here, and perhaps you're not the right one to ask, since
I've lost track of who said what in this thread. Which LP issue of
Toscanini's Schumann Rhenish is supposed to be better than the CD? This
topic came up in CompuServe a year or two ago, and to inform myself I
spent some time comparing the current CD with the RCA Victrola LP, the
only LP issue available to me. Although they were definitely different,
I thought the CD held up very well in the comparison. I heard nothing
that would make me play the LP in preference.
Curtis Croulet
James C.S. Liu wrote:
>
> On 28 Feb 1997 00:23:03 GMT, "Jeffrey T. Sandersier"
> <js...@cvip.csufresno.edu> wrote:
>
> >Which label is this Brahms set (Philharmonia) w/Toscanini? Is it still
> >available on CD?
>
> The original set was arranged by EMI's Walter Legge, and I believe
> the performances did appear on mid-priced EMI CD's at one point. I
> don't think they're available now, though; if you want a CD set right
> now, I think your best bet is probably a semi-pirate reissue like the
> one on Arkadia (CD# 524).
> --
> /James C.S. Liu |"Madness takes its toll.
> jame...@yale.edu | Please have exact change."
> New Haven, Connecticut | -- Anonymous
> My opinions have nothing to do with my employer!
Dr. Liu, I do not believe this was ever issued on EMI. The topic of
these recording came up in an article in Gramophone several years ago -
I can't remember if the main subject was Toscanini or Legge - and it was
stated that the firecrackers in the 4th symphony made the recordings
unissuable in Legge's opinion. I'll try to look this up (no promises),
since the relevant issue is just a few feet away. There have been
several "pirate" issues on LP and CD. Despite the AM-quality sound and
missing passages, I have a certain fondness for the Turnabout LP set,
because it includes the radio announcements and Toscanini's performance
of God Save the Queen. You can imagine yourself listening the original
broadcasts.
A. Lesitsky
I found that the Victrola LP was significantly better, although it had
virtually no bass. The high end was much smoother and extended. But
there's a caveat: The Victrola LP was issued in both mono and
pseudo-stereo. The mono pressing, for more than obvious reasons is the one
to have. The stereo does sound shrill, and I can see why someone might
prefer the CD by default. Unfortunately, the mono copy had a very limited
press run, as it appeared around the time that dual issues were being
phased out.
--
A. Lesitsky (le...@nerc.com)
August Helmbright
Curtis Croulet <curt...@pe.net> wrote in article <332348...@pe.net>...
> Dr. Liu, I do not believe this was ever issued on EMI. The topic of
> these recording came up in an article in Gramophone several years ago -
> I can't remember if the main subject was Toscanini or Legge - and it was
> stated that the firecrackers in the 4th symphony made the recordings
> unissuable in Legge's opinion. I'll try to look this up (no promises),
> since the relevant issue is just a few feet away. There have been
> several "pirate" issues on LP and CD. Despite the AM-quality sound and
> missing passages, I have a certain fondness for the Turnabout LP set,
> because it includes the radio announcements and Toscanini's performance
> of God Save the Queen. You can imagine yourself listening the original
> broadcasts.
Yes, but the sound was so execrable that I could imaging myself listening
to the original broadcasts on a crystal radio with one of the old
transistor radio single earplugs.
TransfrGuy
On 7 Mar 1997, Paul Goldstein wrote:
<<I make
an important exception for the Philadelphia recordings, which IMHO have,
as Don has stated, been poorly (re?)mastered for CD. I find the
Mendelssohn and Debussy virtually unlistenable, with their patches of
pitch fluctuation and general murk. I wonder if these can be the same
recordings that (your namesake?) B.H. Haggin raved about (as I recall)
when he heard inside sources of them?>>
As has been mentioned in this group before, the Philadelphia recordings
were not remastered for CD release; the LP master tapes were re-used. A
fellow collector I know has original, undubbed 78 rpm vinyl test pressings
of some of the Toscanini/ Philadelphia recordings. I played the vinyls of
"Death and Transfiguration" (one of the worst-sounding of the series, at
least on the LP set) on my own equipment, and can vouch for the fact that
the originals sound *nowhere near* as bad as the transfers we've heard so
far. (They're not great, even for their time; but a much better job can
and should be done with them.)
- Mark Obert-Thorn
Donald B Drewecki
Let me add some followup here to the Toscanini Collection discussion:
As I said, roughly a dozen CDs in the series are so bad that they should
not be purchased under any circumstances. Some of the remaining have
some tiny flaws (such as the all-Sibelius CD), but most of the music has
been improved and the CDs should be bought. Virtually all of the major
works in the Toscanini canon have been remastered properly, those 12 CDs
excepted.
IF BMG/RCA were ethical, they would recall the Philadelphia Orchestra
recordings, the complete Berlioz Romeo and Juliet, the Schumann Rhenish,
the Beethoven Violin Concerto, the 1947 Schubert Ninth and Tchaikovsky
Pathetique, and the New York Philharmonic recordings and remaster them
from the actual original masters, which survive in all cases except the
Philharmonic items.
Thus, the Philadelphia Orchestra recordings should be remastered from
the multiple mint copies of the test pressings in the Toscanini Archives
in Lincoln Center; the Romeo should be remastered from the original
broadcast acetates, including the inside-start airchecks made by Mary
Howard in 1947, which have VASTLY superior sound to what we have had
before (and which I heard from those discs, before dubbing); the
Beethoven Violin Concerto should be remastered from the NBC engineers'
own recording, made during the actual sessions in Studio 8H, with a
better mike placement, and far better sound than the Victor recording --
this set of acetates was not even known to exist until last year; and
the Philharmonic recordings (while newly remastered) have a gritty,
lifeless sound that cries out for a decent transfer. Same with the
Schubert and Tchaikovsky. The careful use of CEDAR will help quiet
these recordings without affecting the ambience of the original sound.
Jack Pfeiffer was under a deadline? So why did he allow for
the first CD reissue of the Rachmaninoff Second Concerto from 1929, ten
years ago, one of the most abominable historical reissues ever released
on CD, and which had to be withdrawn and redone? The answer is that
Jack just didn't care, and made excuses. Why did he allow for the
horrible transfer of the Koussevitzky Pathetique? Jack just didn't care.
And as I said, the stereo master of the Cantelli Franck Symphony sat in
RCA's vaults for years, until someone (whom I can't mention) pointed out
to him that it was there. And Jack made that recording!
One thing I should add here: I am not talking about "cabals", but a
useful comparison between RCA and Columbia in those years can be made by
listening to the recent Sony reissues of Bruno Walter's Mahler 4th and
5th symphonies. Both were recorded in Carnegie Hall. They recorded in
1945 and 1947, the same time frame and location as so many
Toscanini/NBC recordings. But the Columbia engineer (Fred Plaut?) made
a bright, wide, clean sound for Walter and the NY Phil. RCA made a
compressed, lifeless, limited sound for Toscanini. Just compare for
yourself. As someone once said, "RCA has too many engineers, none of
whom knew what they are doing. Columbia has too few wngineers, but all
of them know what they are doing."
Don Drewecki
<dre...@rpi.edu>
Susan Murray
***NoSPAM***pian...@juno.com (8-H Haggis) wrote:
>In the days of analogue LPs this was dangerous.
>Boost the lows, and you run the danger of
>overdriving your power amp & speakers from warps
>and low-frequency noise; boost the highs, and you
>hear nasty over-amplified snaps and pops. But
>with CDs, you have a wide latitude for
>re-adjusting the sound to your taste.
I would think that you would be more likely to clip your amplifer with a CD.
Of course, if we didn't have CDs, we wouldn't be exposed to the joys of
vehicles equipped with 15 subwoofers blasting low frequency noise
through our neighborhoods.
>Of course, many of the purist audiophiles have NO
>tone controls or equalizers in their systems. In
>this eventuality, I would suspect that they would
>be very disappointed and unrewarded by most
>historical transfers on CD. In such cases, they
>will be forced to stick with the recordings that
>play back with a satisfactory sound for their
>EXACT acoustical environment and system
>characteristics; this, however, will deny them the
>opportunity to enjoy some fabulous music-making.
Here I sit tone-control-less listening to Frtiz Kreisler on EMI
Classics digitally remastered from 78s very much enjoying Humoresque.
Some people enjoy vinyl records and compact discs. Why pick
this bone? It's been picked clean on other newsgroups such as
rec.audio.high-end.
---
Susan Murray | email: cyt...@bellsouth.net
http://www.webcom.com/cyteen/
http://www.webcom.com/cyteen/CONDUCT.html The Dead Conductor's Page
Doctor Gonzo
dre...@lecture.its.rpi.edu (Donald B Drewecki) wrote:
>>IF BMG/RCA were ethical, they would recall ...the Beethoven
>Violin Concerto...and remaster [it] from the actual original
>masters
The indefatigable Nat Johnson remastered the Beethoven Violin Concerto
for "The Heifetz Collection," and the improvement over the Toscanini
Edition version is more than subtle!
The Doc
Check out a mind-bending "separated at birth?" discovery at
http://www.pipeline.com/~drgonzo/sab/sab.htm
Ramon Khalona
For members of these NGs who may also be shortwave listeners,
the BBC has a variety of radio programs (Composer of the Month,
CD reviews, music trends, etc.)
For a description of these programs and schedules/frequencies, go to
http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/classical/index.htm
Ramon Khalona
Carlsbad, California
eac...@aol.com
In article <332089...@aol.com>, Paul wrote:
>I make
>an important exception for the Philadelphia recordings, which IMHO have,
>as Don has stated, been poorly (re?)mastered for CD. I find the
>Mendelssohn and Debussy virtually unlistenable, with their patches of
>pitch fluctuation and general murk. I wonder if these can be the same
>recordings that (your namesake?) B.H. Haggin raved about (as I recall)
>when he heard inside sources of them? (I am recalling Haggin's
>discussion of this issue from somewhat distant memory.)
Let me fill-in here with representative quotations from _Conversations
with Toscanini_. (Btw., I find that the plates for the Doubleday Anchor
paperback of 1959 and for the Horizon Press reissue and partial
revision of 1979 are in fact identical, so page references are the same
for the body of the text, apart from the revisions for the Horizion Press
edition.)
In September, 1942, Haggin was invited to hear some test pressings
of AT's recordings at AT's home. Among the items heard was his
Philadelphia Orch. recording of _La mer_: "Toscanini, as before, listened
... standing and conducting the performance. At the end of the first
movement, his face registering his delight, he exclaimed: 'Is like
reading the score!' -- which clearly was his idea of what a performance
should be. Thus he stated one of his basic principles -- that whatever
was printed in the score must be audible in the performance. And a
moment later, listening to the second movement of _La Mer_, he
cried out in anger at not hearing one of the woodwinds, and made Walter
[Toscanini] stop the record." (p.25)
On p.23, Haggin tells the story, in very brief terms, of the fate of the
RCA Philadelphia masters (as was known at that time, before the later
LP or the still later CD reissues of the Philadelphia Orch. series): "By
the autumn of 1942 Toscanini had heard the test pressings of his
Philadelphia Orchestra recordings and had been dissatisfied with
certain sides, which it was expected he would re-record with the
orchestra. (But the long Petrillo ban on recording intervened to prevent
the remaking of these sides; in addition the processing of the recordings
in incorrectly constituted solutions had resulted in manyof the sides
being afflicted with noisy ticks; and these were made more
disturbing by the excessively low volume-level of the recording. As a
result of all these things the recordings -- some of Toscanini's finest
performances -- were never issued.)"
In the revisions for the Horizon Press edition, Haggin discusses
the Philadelphia Orch. recordings as they were issued (reissued, in
the case of the Schubert Sym.#9 in C, which had been issued on LP
in 1963) in 1976 in their entirety. Haggin cites David Hall's account,
in the booklet issued with RCA CRM5-1900, of the making of the
original recordings and their subsequent mishandling in processing,
but he adds, p.145: "...about the Schubert Ninth: the version issued
in 1963 on RCA LD-2663 had more amplitude and solitity than the one
issued in CRM5-1900, which appears to have been newly processed
to make its sound match the inferior sound of the other performances.
And I don't know whether the Philadelphia Schubert Ninth on German
AT-102 is the superior 1963 or the inferior 1976 version."
It's too bad that B.H. Haggin did not live to hear the BMG/RCA "Toscanini
Collection" on CDs, as his comments on the processing would doubtless
have been fascinating. Indeed, I have no idea whether Haggin even took
notice of the Compact Disc phenomenon as it appeared in his last few years. --E.A.C.
PGoldst515
Mr. Cowan wrote:
So what I was remembering was that Toscanini himself was pleased with the
sound, at least of part of La Mer! Interesting . . .
Paul Goldstein
Donald B Drewecki
In fact, Haggin did hear some of the very first Toscanini CDs, imported
from Japan, and then the first domestic RCA CDs. According to the late
Tom Hathaway, who played the CDs for B. H. H., Haggin actually cried and
broke out smiling when he was played the Tristan Prelude and Liebestod,
just a few months before his death in 1987.
The simple fact, once again, is that mint copy test pressings of all the
Philadelphia Orchestra recordings are in the Toscanini Archives at
Lincoln Center, and Jack Pfeiffer should have used these when he
presided over the 1990-92 reissue project. Instead, he used the
reference tapes made by John Corbett in the early 1960s for Walter
Toscanini -- the same tapes used as the source of the 1976 LP issue.
Don Drewecki
<dre...@rpi.edu>
Curtis Croulet
Prof. Cowan, do you have the 1963 issue of the Schubert 9th? Can you
compare it to the 1976 reissue? I well remember the 1963 issue, but I
think it was a premium-priced Doria Series recording, and since I was a
"starving student", I never bought it.
Donald B Drewecki
I can comment on LD 2663, the 1963 Soria Series issue of the Toscanini
1941 Schubert Ninth. Even though it is an old transfer, and has gritty
sound in the first two movements, it has stronger bass than the reissue
of 1976, where Jack Pfeiffer simply recycled John Corbett's transfer and
rolled off the bass somewhat. The album is worth getting, however, for
the wonderful photographs of Toscanini conducting the Philadelphians, at
the recording session -- photographs not included in the 1976 reissue.
However, all the work Corbett did still would be far outclassed, today,
by a modern, expert digital transfer of all the recordings from the test
pressings in the Toscanini Archives at Lincoln Center. The careful use
of CEDAR noise reduction would quiet the discs nicely without removing
any ambience of the Academy of Music. But again, for all the praise
of Jack Pfeiffer, this is something that he chose not do. The BMG CD
set is an AAD recycling of Corbett's tapes, most of which were done for
reference purposes only. We're talking about fraud here.
I should add that a visit to NYC, and to Toscanini's Archives (on
the third floor of the NY Public Library at Lincoln Center) is well
worth it. Just last week, I spent an entire afternoon listening to 1936
NY Philharmonic broadcasts -- performances of Schumann's Manfred
Overture, Sibelius's En Saga, Beethoven's Leonore No. 3, Mozart's
Symphony No. 40, and Ravel's Daphnis Suite No. 2. In all cases except
the final movement of the Mozart, every performance was slower (in some
cases, remarkably slower) than the well-known NBC performances. The
sound was poor much of the time, and the microphoning distant, but one
could hear wonderful woodwind playing, full and dark brass sound, and a
unanimity of ensemble that are breathtaking. In the Schubert Ninth,
which I also heard, the original source is so bad that it provides no
challenge to the Philadelphia performance. Also, the Philadelphia is
even grander, with greater flexibility and tonal warmth.
Don Drewecki
<dre...@rpi.edu>
TransfrGuy
On 04 Apr 1997, E.A. Cowan wrote:
<<Haggin cites David Hall's account,
in the booklet issued with RCA CRM5-1900, of the making of the
original recordings and their subsequent mishandling in processing,
but he adds, p.145: "...about the Schubert Ninth: the version issued
in 1963 on RCA LD-2663 had more amplitude and solitity than the one
issued in CRM5-1900, which appears to have been newly processed
to make its sound match the inferior sound of the other performances.
And I don't know whether the Philadelphia Schubert Ninth on German
AT-102 is the superior 1963 or the inferior 1976 version.">>
AT-102 was issued before the 1976 LP set; I know, because I got rid of my
copy when the boxed set came out. It's almost certainly the 1963
transfer. Collectors of Toscanini minutiae may be interested to know that
a third, much better transfer exists, which was done from vinyl pressings
by Ward Marston for the Franklin Mint's "Toscanini Official Family Archive
Collection" in the early '80s (using the Packburn to remove the ticks,
rather than manually as John Corbett originally had to do it. (It's in
Volume 1 of the series.)
- Mark Obert-Thorn
Matthew B. Tepper
In article <19970407023...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
trans...@aol.com was heard to remark...
But doesn't the Franklin Mint edition utilize a different take of the
first (78 RPM) side of the first movement?
--
"I don't care about being politically correct. I just want to be
anatomically correct!" http://www.deltanet.com/~ducky/index.htm
Matthew B. Tepper Web Brainiac and Gonzo Musicologist Quack!
eac...@aol.com
In article <19970407023...@ladder01.news.aol.com>, trans...@aol.com wrote:
>Collectors of Toscanini minutiae may be interested to know that
>a third, much better transfer exists, which was done from vinyl pressings
>by Ward Marston for the Franklin Mint's "Toscanini Official Family Archive
>Collection" in the early '80s (using the Packburn to remove the ticks,
>rather than manually as John Corbett originally had to do it. (It's in
>Volume 1 of the series.)
Thank you for that most interesting information! Best, E.A.C.
eac...@aol.com
So Haggin *did* get to hear a few of the earliest Toscanini reissues?
That's rather comforting to know, although I understand how also
saddening it may well have been for Haggin, who knew he was dying
but would have loved to see the AT edition for BMG/RCA brought to
fruition. (As you have suggested, he might, however, have gotten into
one of his purple rages had he heard what had been perpetrated in the
case of some of them, such as the "Rhenish" symphony...)
FWIW, for the 130th anniversary of AT's birth, last March 25, I played
recordings of the works that had been on the Maestro's very first
symphonic concert, in 1896, a century ago: Schubert's "Great" C-major
(yes, it was the first item on his very first concert!), Tchaikovsky's
Nutcracker Suite, Brahms' Tragic Overture, and, in place of the
Entry of the Gods into Valhalla from _Das Rheingold_, which AT
did not record, the Prelude to _Die Meistersinger_. --E.A.C.
eac...@aol.com
Yes, I do still have the 1963 Soria Series issue of Toscanini's Phila.
Orch. Schubert 9th. I got it as soon as I saw it in a record store (remember
those? <g>). I retain it mainly for the large booklet with its color
illustrations of Grinzing and for its biographical information about
Toscanini and about the fate of the Philadelphia Orchestra recordings.
At some time RSN, I should like to compare that issue (my copy is
2S/2S) (for the uninitiated, that designates the stamper numbers
for, respectively sides 1 and 2) with the one in the later multi-LP set
of the complete Philadelphia recordings and with the still later
reissues in BMG/RCA's "Toscanini Collection". Meanwhile, I think I
can safely assert that I see no problem with accepting Haggin's
description of the contrasting sound of the Soria and the later LP reissue. --E.A.C.
Matthew B. Tepper
In article <5i8jj3$i...@lecture.its.rpi.edu>, dre...@lecture.its.rpi.edu
was heard to remark...
>...The careful use
>of CEDAR noise reduction would quiet the discs nicely without removing
>any ambience of the Academy of Music.
*Is* there such a thing as "The careful use of CEDAR"? Every such CD
I've ever heard sounds like the original discs were rubbed with a piece
of hard wood (such as cedar) in order to remove as much of the original
sound as possible.
TransfrGuy
On 07 Apr 1997, Matthew Tepper wrote:
<<But doesn't the Franklin Mint edition utilize a different take of the
first (78 RPM) side of the first movement?>>
I never compared them; however, it wouldn't surprise me. When Ward was
doing transfers for the various Franklin Mint series, he sometimes had
access to multiple takes on metal parts or vinyl pressings. On occasion,
he would simply choose whichever sounded best to him. I recall his
mentioning that several sides of the 1939 Beethoven Fifth came from
unissued alternate takes because the originals were so worn out.
By the time he came to re-do some of these for BMG's Toscanini Edition
(including that Fifth), Jack Pfeiffer insisted that only the
originally-issued and/or approved takes be utilized. That didn't stop the
occasional unapproved take from slipping through, however (e.g. the end of
the 1953 "Egmont" Overture, which on the Toscanini Edition CD has an
uncharacteristically heavyhanded ritard just before the coda.)
- Mark Obert-Thorn
Radcliffe Bond
At one time I had the Soria, RCA Philadelphia box and
Japanese Toscanini 100 collection versions of the
Toscanini/Philadelphia Schubert 9th. They all sounded
different so I decided to time them. None of the versions
had the same timings! The difference wasn't much but the
question is, why were they different?
goran.soderwall
I most heartily agree! To hear all these carefully restorated originals
using the Cedar process, de-clicking devices is laughable. Everything
that made, for instance, Toscanini's records so vital and great,
especially his 78s is lost when all these so called transfer engineers
have finished their work. Just listen to some 78s in the right way using
good equipment and you are just bowled over!
Goran Sw
Curtis Croulet
> But doesn't the Franklin Mint edition utilize a different take of the
> first (78 RPM) side of the first movement?
Perhaps that accounts for the differences I noted in my previous post.