Classical recording engineers
Robert G Adams
with the technical recording crew as it does with the performers. Yet, I
could name very few of those behind the scenes.
Who are some of the great classical recording engineers?
Tony Movshon
> Who are some of the great classical recording engineers?
The "Decca sound" is due to Kenneth Wilkinson, whose career spanned the
mono and early stereo eras, and who made many wonderful recordings, many
of which are still among the finest-sounding in the catalog. Some of his
best work is to be heard on the Chesky issues of recordings he
originally made for Reader's Digest (of all people).
RCA's finest engineer from the same era was Lewis Layton. Though I find
his work generally inferior to Wilkinson's, there is no general
agreement on that point and many find the RCA sound preferable to
Decca's. Some of these have come up spectacularly well on the XRCD
transfers issued -- for a frightful price -- by JVC.
These two seem to me to stand clear of their contemporaries, though DGG
and EMI also made some very fine recordings (Douglas Larter, Christopher
Parker and Robert Gooch were responsible for many of the latter).
Of course, the recording producer also has a great deal to do with the
sound. The great producers who determined the way that stereo sound
would be used were John Culshaw (Decca), Gordon Legge (EMI), Richard
Mohr (RCA), and John McClure (Columbia/CBS/Sony).
For me, the finest engineer working today is Tony Faulkner, whose
recordings mostly appear on Hyperion, Pony Canyon and RCA. His sound, to
me, is very much in the Wilkinson tradition. But in all fairness, there
are many engineers and producers working today who produce fine-sounding
recordings. So my hat goes off to the pioneers of the 50s and 60s.
And as a final note, one of the finest engineers of any era was
Friedrich Schnapp, who was responsible for many of the wartime RRG
recordings, including virtually all of Furtwängler's -- when those have
survived in good copies (as in, for example, the Tahra issue of the 1943
Beethoven 5th), the sound is extraordinarily fine.
I hope Mike Gray is watching -- his knowledge of this topic is
comprehensive, and vastly greater than mine.
Tony Movshon
mov...@nyu.edu
Edward A. Cowan
> Gordon Legge (EMI)
Surely you refer to *Walter* Legge, right?...
--E.A.C.
Van Eyes
news:IWsea.186066$qi4.80707@rwcrnsc54
Almost too numerous to mention now, with equipment being so good.
For most of the stereo era, I think Decca led the pack. Kenneth
Wilkinson. Check almost any Decca CD for his talented colleagues and
followers...Goodall, Dunkerly, Locke, etc.
Not as consistent, but still good, were Philips, and EMI (many EMI
names, incl. Larter, Clements). For some reason, Philips was often
reluctant to name engineers.
Currently, I find Tacet (Spreer), Hanssler (Wild), and harmonia mundi
(Michel) quite good.
Regards
--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG
Matthew B. Tepper (posts from uswest.net are forged)
to be typed in news:3E7A6764...@nyu.edu:
> Of course, the recording producer also has a great deal to do with the
> sound. The great producers who determined the way that stereo sound
> would be used were John Culshaw (Decca), Gordon [sic] Legge (EMI),
> Richard Mohr (RCA), and John McClure (Columbia/CBS/Sony).
I would not leave out Suvi Raj Grubb -- Legge minus the bad attitude.
--
Matthew B. Tepper: WWW, science fiction, classical music, ducks!
My personal home page -- http://home.earthlink.net/~oy/index.html
My main music page --- http://home.earthlink.net/~oy/berlioz.html
To write to me, do for my address what Androcles did for the lion
Mark Coy tossed off eBay? http://makeashorterlink.com/?M2B734C02
RMCR's most pointless, dumb and laughable chowderhead: Mark Coy.
David Wesolowicz
producers of the legendary Mercury recordings of the 50's.
Dave
"Van Eyes" <van...@excite.com> wrote in message
news:985510cc3f9aa72c80a...@mygate.mailgate.org...
Tony Movshon
Tony Movshon
> The list should include C. Robert and Wilma Cozart Fine, engineers and
> producers of the legendary Mercury recordings of the 50's.
Perhaps, though I've always found the Mercury recordings harsh and too closely
miked.
Tony Movshon
mov...@nyu.edu
Paul Goldstein
Klaus Strueben, Kenneth Wilkinson, Keith Johnson
Paul Goldstein
Beaver Lad
Orchestra recordings, from c. 1960 up to the '80s .
Jaap van Ginneken [spelling? - this is from memory] did many of the
'60s Concertgebouw discs, IIRC.
==================================
In article
<985510cc3f9aa72c80a...@mygate.mailgate.org>, Van Eyes
<van...@excite.com> wrote:
[snip]
Matthew B. Tepper (posts from uswest.net are forged)
I thought they called him "Adolf"! ;--)
Eric Nagamine
>
> Robert G Adams wrote:
> > Who are some of the great classical recording engineers?
>
> The "Decca sound" is due to Kenneth Wilkinson, whose career spanned the
> mono and early stereo eras, and who made many wonderful recordings, many
> of which are still among the finest-sounding in the catalog. Some of his
> best work is to be heard on the Chesky issues of recordings he
> originally made for Reader's Digest (of all people).
Actually, wasn't it Roy Wallace who did the pioneering Decca sound
stereo recordings? I tend to find his work less high-fi and more natural
sounding than Wilkinson's sometimes overly spectacular work. I think
that by the time Wilkinson retired, the "Decca Sound" had devolved into
a sonic morass of overly loud brass & flattened sonic perspectives.
Certainly it was not the same sound as what they got back in the 50's
and early 60's.
> RCA's finest engineer from the same era was Lewis Layton. Though I find
> his work generally inferior to Wilkinson's, there is no general
> agreement on that point and many find the RCA sound preferable to
> Decca's. Some of these have come up spectacularly well on the XRCD
> transfers issued -- for a frightful price -- by JVC.
Layton's early two track stereo recordings hold up better IMO than his
later multimiked stuff. Certainly Leslie Chase's early stereo work for
RCA is important as Layton was still on the main mono team with the late
Richard Mohr.
> These two seem to me to stand clear of their contemporaries, though DGG
> and EMI also made some very fine recordings (Douglas Larter, Christopher
> Parker and Robert Gooch were responsible for many of the latter).
EMI's early stereo work I think is vastly underrated in part due to it's
naturalness & fine string sound. When they started multimiking, they
somehow still managed to keep a wonderful string sound. I think that
EMI's London Symphony recordings with Previn were some of the most
beautiful sounding recordings. Similarly, Mike Clements (aka Mr. Bear)
more "hi-fi" sound for EMI still had great string sound. I wonder if it
was those great halls like Kingsway & Walthamsow or if EMI had a "House"
EQ.
> Of course, the recording producer also has a great deal to do with the
> sound. The great producers who determined the way that stereo sound
> would be used were John Culshaw (Decca), Gordon Legge (EMI), Richard
> Mohr (RCA), and John McClure (Columbia/CBS/Sony).
Certainly, if you mention Wilkinson's work for Reader's Digest, you
can't forget his producer Charles Gerhardt who was a great producer and
I think an underrated conductor.
John McClure's early work for Columbia had some of the label's best
sound. Even the understaffed LA Columbia SO had good sound (perhaps the
American Legion Hall), but I find his later work to have indifferent
sound.
> For me, the finest engineer working today is Tony Faulkner, whose
> recordings mostly appear on Hyperion, Pony Canyon and RCA. His sound, to
> me, is very much in the Wilkinson tradition. But in all fairness, there
> are many engineers and producers working today who produce fine-sounding
> recordings. So my hat goes off to the pioneers of the 50s and 60s.
Klaus Hiemann's work for Sinopoli/DG in their NY Phil recordings in the
90's had IMO, some of the best sounds for the Philharmonic in a long
time. Certainly, the sound of the musicians was easily recognizable.
--
-----------
Aloha and Mahalo,
Eric Nagamine
Norman M. Schwartz
Not noticed mentioned:
Bert Whyte
Paul Goodman
Gregory K.Squires
Norman M. Schwartz
"Tony Movshon" <mov...@nyu.edu> wrote in message
news:3E7A9417...@nyu.edu...
One can't possibly get too close for my taste plus my speakers have been
likened to sitting in the first row in a movie theater.
You can always pick up cheap nose-bleed seats for a concert and experience
some hall sound. Better still you can listen real good at the
bar/refreshment stand and following that, the Men's room.
Simon Roberts
>
>Edward A. Cowan wrote:
>> Tony Movshon <mov...@nyu.edu> wrote:
>>>Gordon Legge (EMI)
>>
>> Surely you refer to *Walter* Legge, right?...
>
>Um ... did his friends call him "Gordon" ... ?
He had friends?
Perhaps the best sounding recordings made in the 1950s - for my taste, anyway; I
much prefer them to what the "major" labels provided at the time - I've
encountered are courtesy of Westminster and Vanguard (I'm not wild about the
performances, but the sound on Woldike's Haydn 99-104 is amazingly good for its
period, for instance); I've no idea who the engineers were though.
Simon
Praetorius
Robert (Bob) Auger, who I understand was basically independent and
not tied to any particular company. Did work on, e.g. Vanguard and
Unicorn. Among his notable recordings, the Barbirolli/Hallé 1956
Vaughan Williams 8th (Douglas Terry, producer), recorded in
three-track stereo (currently on Dutton CDSJB 1021).
Frank Decolvenaere
To reply by e-mail, replace NMBR with 1612.
"You are no bigger than
the things that annoy you."
Jerry Bundsen
Tony Movshon
> Actually, wasn't it Roy Wallace who did the pioneering Decca sound
> stereo recordings? I tend to find his work less high-fi and more natural
> sounding than Wilkinson's sometimes overly spectacular work. I think
> that by the time Wilkinson retired, the "Decca Sound" had devolved into
> a sonic morass of overly loud brass & flattened sonic perspectives.
> Certainly it was not the same sound as what they got back in the 50's
> and early 60's.
The figure behind Decca stereo was really Arthur Haddy; Wallace and Wilkinson
were his lead engineers. Wilkinson is the name I recall in association with
the most memorable of the early Deccas, and it was Wilkinson who used to
travel out and set up most new recording locations, but Wallace also did some
very fine work. I have the impression that Wallace was more of a back-room guy
-- he built all the early Decca mixing consoles, for example. I also should
not have neglected Gordon Parry, James Brown, and Jimmy Lock, Wilkinson's
first liuetenants, who made many fine Decca recordings.
I have a more favorable view than you do of the later "Decca Sound", though I
can certainly think of recordings that match your description. Certainly the
60s, in general, were better than the 70s, in general, for these guys.
Tony Movshon
mov...@nyu.edu
Tony Movshon
> I wonder if it was those great halls like Kingsway & Walthamsow
Choosing and using great recording halls is an art in itself, and deserves a
thread of its own. Certainly Kingsway was a fine example. I think that Decca
did better there than EMI, but the EMI Kingsway sound was also very fine on
many occasions.
When did Kingsway get torn down?
Tony Movshon
mov...@nyu.edu
Norman M. Schwartz
comes to large ensembles, virtually all analog recordings have a "congested"
sounding property absent from digital ones whether or not the digitals be
"good" or "poor " sounding.
As for engineers I also have a fondness for DIGITAL recordings by Ralph
Couzens (Chandos).
"Simon Roberts" <sd...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:b5f14...@drn.newsguy.com...
Simon Roberts
1999, apparently. For a photo, see
http://www.uib.no/herrmann/articles/phototours/london/page3.html
and scroll down.
Simon
Tony Movshon
>
> 1999, apparently. For a photo, see
>
> http://www.uib.no/herrmann/articles/phototours/london/page3.html
But apparently it was altered and rendered useless as a recording hall by the
GLC n the early 80s.
Tony Movshon
mov...@nyu.edu
Thomas Muething
> Who are some of the great classical recording engineers?
The greatest classical engineer in history IMHO is Kennth Wilkinson, who
did so many superb jobs for Decca in the 50s, 60s and 70s. Better than
Lewis Layton IMHO.
As for the ones in business today (is Wilkinson still alive?), my vote
goes to Keith O. Johnson ("Prof. Johnson") of Reference Recordings, who
does spectacular things - unfortunately often for unspectacular
interpretations and/or repertoire. I wished he worked for other
companies, too.
Other great ones include Tony Faulkner, Tryggvi Trygvason (spelling?),
John Newton and (on occasion) Simon Rhodes. John Timperley was once near
the top of my list (mainly due to his engineering of Collins' disc of
P.M.Davies' The Devils), but he's done so many poor jobs in Prague
lately (for Silva Screen), he's out of the running.
Thomas
>
>
>
--
"There's just two things in this world that I can't stand. It's people
who are intolerant of other people's culture ... and the Dutch!"
(Michael Caine, in "Austin Powers: Goldmember")
James Chapman
>One can't possibly get too close for my taste plus my speakers have been
>likened to sitting in the first row in a movie theater.
>You can always pick up cheap nose-bleed seats for a concert and experience
>some hall sound. Better still you can listen real good at the
>bar/refreshment stand and following that, the Men's room.
i just realized that one of the things i like about the DG helmut
walcha bach recordings is that they're virtualy the only close-miked
organ records i've ever heard. i guess gould's one-off organ record is
another. usually organ is recorded from back in the gift shop. with
the walcha records you can HEAR the organ...matter of taste. i like
columbia's 60's recordings in general for the same reason...all that
analytical sound that's since gone out of fashion.
Matthew B. Tepper (posts from uswest.net are forged)
letters to be typed in news:b5f14...@drn.newsguy.com:
> In article <3E7A935B...@nyu.edu>, Tony says...
>>
>>Edward A. Cowan wrote:
>>> Tony Movshon <mov...@nyu.edu> wrote:
>>>>Gordon Legge (EMI)
>>>
>>> Surely you refer to *Walter* Legge, right?...
>>
>>Um ... did his friends call him "Gordon" ... ?
>
> He had friends?
Minions and lackeys do not count.
> Perhaps the best sounding recordings made in the 1950s - for my taste,
> anyway; I much prefer them to what the "major" labels provided at the
> time - I've encountered are courtesy of Westminster and Vanguard (I'm
> not wild about the performances, but the sound on Woldike's Haydn 99-104
> is amazingly good for its period, for instance); I've no idea who the
> engineers were though.
Wasn't there also a very good Dvorak "New World" conducted by Scherchen?
Paul Goldstein
I think in many cases the owners of Vanguard, the Solomon brothers, produced
their own recordings. I agree with you about the sound.
Paul Goldstein
Norman M. Schwartz
"James Chapman" <j...@fuguestatepress.com> wrote in message
news:12bm7vkfl06i1mvfn...@4ax.com...
same, *lousy*.
Andre Yew
classical music.
--Andre
Bruce Hodges
> with the technical recording crew as it does with the performers. Yet, I
> could name very few of those behind the scenes.
>
I second all the votes for Tony Faulkner, whose recent work on just
about everything seems so spectacular, and Keith ("Doc") Johnson,
whose work for Reference Recordings is just amazing.
--Bruce
Alan Hayward
news:jwEea.17099$ja4.1...@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> Robert (Bob) Auger, who I understand was basically independent and
> not tied to any particular company. Did work on, e.g. Vanguard and
> Unicorn. Among his notable recordings, the Barbirolli/Hallé 1956
> Vaughan Williams 8th (Douglas Terry, producer), recorded in
> three-track stereo (currently on Dutton CDSJB 1021).
I believe the engineer on the Vaughan Williams 8th was Robert Fine and not
Bob Auger. Producers were Wilma Cozart (Mrs Fine, IIRC) and Harold Lawrence.
Reference: booklet with CDSJB 1021!). Auger did record the coupling on that
CD - RVW 2nd Symphony.
IMO, Auger's best recording was the Horenstein Mahler 3.
Alan Hayward
news:3E7A9417...@nyu.edu...
> Perhaps, though I've always found the Mercury recordings harsh and too
closely
> miked.
I don't think that charge can be levelled against the Pye/Nixa recordings
Robert Fine made in the Free Trade Hall, Manchester with the Hallé and
Barbirolli. Indeed, they captured the sound I used to hear at concerts in
that hall remarkably well.
In particular, the Dvorak 8th Symphony recording made by Fine in June 1957
still sounds so good that it is difficult to believe it was recorded almost
46 years ago.
Tony Movshon
> IMO, Auger's best recording was the Horenstein Mahler 3.
I hope that's a joke. The technical quality of that recording is dismal
and the instrumental balance is dreadful (did Auger put a microphone
*inside* the timpani?). It is sometimes rumored that there exists a
minimally-miked 2-channel recording from the same sessions, made by
someone other than Auger, which I would love to hear.
Tony Movshon
mov...@nyu.edu
Tony Movshon
> closely miked.
>
> I don't think that charge can be levelled against the Pye/Nixa recordings
> Robert Fine made in the Free Trade Hall, Manchester with the Hallé and
> Barbirolli.
Probably true. It is the Mercury sound I am thinking of.
Tony Movshon
mov...@nyu.edu
Van Eyes
I don't know much about Auger's body of work. I don't think M3's that
bad. I've had two others tell me they don't like the sound of M3
(Unicorn-Kanchana). One of those two then pointed to the JH M1 (VOX) as
a much better sounding example. In that comparison, I prefer the M3,
with seemingly more truthful balances. But more importantly, I think the
M3 LSO plays better than the M1 LSO.
Regards
--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG
Paul Goldstein
Andrew
>
> ......As for the ones in business today (is Wilkinson still alive?), my vote
> does spectacular things - unfortunately often for unspectacular
> interpretations and/or repertoire. I wished he worked for other
> companies, too.
>
>
>
>
performances. I guess RR has limited resources and they've chosen to
devote them to sound per se. But this leads to the obvious question of
what the best sounding recordings would be, irrespective of
performance quality. Off the top of my head and not comprehensively,
some of my votes would go to:
CD's
1. Rachmaninoff - Symphonic Dances, Oue/Minnesota Reference
Recordings RR-96 Keith Johnson
2. Shostakovich - Symphony No. 1, Lopez-Cobos/Cincinnati Telarc
CD-8072 Michael Bishop
plus a few sleepers on cd:
3. Mozart et al., "After Mozart"/Kremerata Baltica Nonesuch 79633-2
Philipp Nedel
4. Haydn Symphonies 39, 70, 73, 75 Blum/Esterhazy Orch. Vanguard 6152
no engineer listed
5. Saint-Saens Violin Concerto No. 3 Shaham/Sinopoli/NY Phil DG 429
786 Klaus Hiemann
and a couple of lp's
6. Wagner - Bleeding Chunks o' Ring Leinsdorf/LA Phil Sheffield
LAB-7 Doug Sax & Bud Wyatt
7. Weill - The Two Worlds of Kurt Weill Gould/His Orch RCA LSC-2863
Robert Simpson
There are so many more but these are among my favorites soundwise.
(Most of the performances are pretty good too.)
Andrew Weintraub
Simon Roberts
says...
Surely the Horenstein Mahler 1 offered as an example of a better recording was
the Unicorn recording, not the Vox. Assuming it's the latter you heard, not the
former, one reason why the M3 orchestra sounds better is that the Vox M1 isn't
LSO but a lousy Viennese orchestra (though I prefer what he seems to be trying
to get them to do to the rather suaver LSO remake). If you think the M3 has
truthful balances, you must be accustomed to sitting behind the timpani....
Simon
Dirk A. Ronk
We've had plenty of comments about Wilkinson, Layton, the various
engineers for Mercury, EMI, et al. I would put a word in for the
engineers for French Harmonia Mundi who recorded such astonishing
things as Fete de l'Ane, Folia de la Spagna, Tarantelle and others for
the Clemencic Consort, the Paniaguas of Madrid and other groups.
Sorry, don't have the engineers' names in front of me--perhaps someone
else here can jump in and provide that information.
Another team worth remembering: Elite Recording, that collaboration
between Aubort & Nickrenz, which did stellar work for Vox/Turnabout
and Nonesuch, among other labels.
Dirk
Ray Hall
news:IWsea.186066$qi4.80707@rwcrnsc54...
| It seems to me that our enjoyment of recorded music often has as much to
do
| with the technical recording crew as it does with the performers. Yet, I
| could name very few of those behind the scenes.
|
Christopher Parker comes very close to my ideal. Many of the earlier EMI
recordings he did of Previn's EMI Prokofiev and Britten, are natural
sounding, warm and have plenty of body. This weight is most important in
Prokofiev's 5th.
Regards,
# http://www.users.bigpond.com/hallraylily/index.html
See You Tamara (Ozzy Osbourne)
Ray, Taree, NSW
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.461 / Virus Database: 260 - Release Date: 10/03/03
Van Eyes
> Surely the Horenstein Mahler 1 offered as an example of a better recording was
> the Unicorn recording, not the Vox.
Thanks for pouncing on the VOX typo, good work. The rest stands.
Ramon Khalona
>
> For me, the finest engineer working today is Tony Faulkner, whose
> recordings mostly appear on Hyperion, Pony Canyon and RCA. His sound, to
> me, is very much in the Wilkinson tradition.
Agreed on Faulkner's work. To give an example, Yuri Temirkanov/St.
Petersburg Phil. have generally been poorly served by RCA, but
Faulkner's recording of their Prokofiev 5th really stands out as one
of the finest sonically (the bass drum in the first movement is
unbelievable). IIRC, Faulkner was also responsible for Maag's
Mendelssohn recordings in Berne on the IMP label, which are also
excellent.
One name that comes to mind from the analog era is Claus Strueben
(working in the former DDR for Eterna and other labels). Some of his
recordings, particularly in Dresden, are among the finest analog has
to offer. They've been released on Berlin Classics.
RK
Eric Nagamine
The Mercury/Pye co-productions were done in both 2 & 3 track stereo
according to an article in the Classical Record Collector. Each company
mixed according to their own preferences.
I have to disagree about Bob Auger's work, finding it overly miked and
badly balanced. The Bernard Hermann symphony disc despite a great
reading has some of the worst balances I've heard.
--
-----------
Aloha and Mahalo,
Eric Nagamine
torcik wedlowski
wrote:
>It seems to me that our enjoyment of recorded music often has as much to do
>with the technical recording crew as it does with the performers. Yet, I
>could name very few of those behind the scenes.
>
>Who are some of the great classical recording engineers?
>
Did someone forget an engineer associated with RCA Living Stereo, John
Pfeiffer
Alan Hayward
> Alan Hayward wrote:
> > IMO, Auger's best recording was the Horenstein Mahler 3.
>
> I hope that's a joke.
No, not a joke, merely a hint that I have no great respect for Mr. Auger's
skills as a recording engineer. However, I do find the M3 less objectionable
than any of the other recordings I have that were made by Auger. "Best" is a
relative term.
Eric Nagamine
Actually, Jack Pfeiffer was a producer for RCA. Some of his best stuff
was recorded by engineer Leslie Chase.
César N. Díaz
"Ray Hall" <hallr...@bigpond.com> wrote:
> Christopher Parker comes very close to my ideal. Many of the earlier EMI
> recordings he did of Previn's EMI Prokofiev and Britten, are natural
> sounding, warm and have plenty of body. This weight is most important in
> Prokofiev's 5th.
>
You right! Two of my favorite recordings of all time are were engineered by
Christopher Parker: Beecham's Scheherazade with the RPO, and Stokowski
"Escales" with L'Orchestre National de La Radiodiffusion Française". In the
case of the Ibert, you're ON that boat.
BTW, I went through all these postings and didn't see anyone mention Decca's
Gordon Parry.
Argenta's "Capriccio Espagnol"/LSO, Øivin Fjelstad: "Peer Gynt" (which I
keep right next to Beecham's). I think these two recordings would qualify
him for at least an honorable mention.
César.
Tony Movshon
>>>IMO, Auger's best recording was the Horenstein Mahler 3.
>>
>>I hope that's a joke.
>
> No, not a joke, merely a hint that I have no great respect for Mr. Auger's
> skills as a recording engineer. However, I do find the M3 less objectionable
> than any of the other recordings I have that were made by Auger. "Best" is a
> relative term.
Phew.
Tony Movshon
mov...@nyu.edu
Praetorius
> > Robert (Bob) Auger, who I understand was basically independent and
> > not tied to any particular company. Did work on, e.g. Vanguard and
> > Unicorn. Among his notable recordings, the Barbirolli/Hallé 1956
> > Vaughan Williams 8th (Douglas Terry, producer), recorded in
> > three-track stereo (currently on Dutton CDSJB 1021).
>
> I believe the engineer on the Vaughan Williams 8th was Robert Fine and not
> Bob Auger. Producers were Wilma Cozart (Mrs Fine, IIRC) and Harold
Lawrence.
> Reference: booklet with CDSJB 1021!). Auger did record the coupling on
that
> CD - RVW 2nd Symphony.
It was a pun. No, a palindrome.
Still a great recording. (Others will say because Auger wasn't the
engineer.)
Frank Decolvenaere
To reply by e-mail, replace NMBR with 1612.
"You are no bigger than
the things that annoy you."
Jerry Bundsen
Alan Hayward
> Still a great recording. (Others will say because Auger wasn't the
> engineer.)
A great recording indeed. Not because Auger wasn't the engineer but because
Robert Fine was ;-)
Matthew B. Tepper (posts from uswest.net are forged)
following letters to be typed in news:b5h4v4$451$1...@titan.btinternet.com:
> "Best" is a relative term.
Really?
Rodger Whitlock
> It seems to me that our enjoyment of recorded music often has as much to do
> with the technical recording crew as it does with the performers. Yet, I
> could name very few of those behind the scenes.
>
> Who are some of the great classical recording engineers?
Peter Willimoes. (I may have misspelled his surname).
Peter Bartok.
--
Rodger Whitlock
Victoria, British Columbia, Canada
mikegray
Glad to see Gordon Parry was mentioned ... even though I don't agree
with the appraisal. Gordon, BTW, passed away last month.
The stereo Peer Gynt, incidentally, was balanced by Cyril Windebank -
Gordon Parry did the mono; Parry, however, did balance the stereo for
the Argenta sessions 1956/57.
Mike Gray
Tony Movshon
> Glad to see Gordon Parry was mentioned ... even though I don't agree
> with the appraisal. Gordon, BTW, passed away last month.
That is sad news.
> The stereo Peer Gynt, incidentally, was balanced by Cyril Windebank -
> Gordon Parry did the mono; Parry, however, did balance the stereo for
> the Argenta sessions 1956/57.
I don't think the Peer Gynt is very special, frankly. Parry's finest
work probably came in the Decca Vienna recordings, such as the Solti Ring.
Tony Movshon
mov...@nyu.edu
César N. Díaz
> mikegray wrote:
> > Glad to see Gordon Parry was mentioned ... even though I don't agree
> > with the appraisal. Gordon, BTW, passed away last month.
>
> That is sad news.
>
Indeed.
> > The stereo Peer Gynt, incidentally, was balanced by Cyril Windebank -
> > Gordon Parry did the mono; Parry, however, did balance the stereo for
> > the Argenta sessions 1956/57.
The London/Decca Classic sound series edition of Peer Gynt is then
incorrect, they list Gordon as the sole engineer on Peer Gynt. It lists
Andrew Reeve and Cyril Widebank as the engineers in the accompanying piano
concerto by the same composer.
> I don't think the Peer Gynt is very special, frankly. Parry's finest
> work probably came in the Decca Vienna recordings, such as the Solti Ring.
>
ĄCońo! You're right, my bad.
César.
Matthew B. Tepper (posts from uswest.net are forged)
> I don't think that charge can be levelled against the Pye/Nixa
> recordings Robert Fine made in the Free Trade Hall, Manchester with
> the Hallé and Barbirolli. Indeed, they captured the sound I used to
> hear at concerts in that hall remarkably well.
Mention of the Free Trade Hall (torn down a few years ago, as I recall)
reminds me that in my reading of history, I found the astonishing fact that
it was built on the "Peterloo" site. Has Sir Malcolm Arnold's overture on
this event ever been recorded by the Hallé Orchestra?
Alan Hayward
wrote in message news:Xns934882FB25E...@207.217.77.22...
> Mention of the Free Trade Hall (torn down a few years ago, as I recall)
> reminds me that in my reading of history, I found the astonishing fact
that
> it was built on the "Peterloo" site. Has Sir Malcolm Arnold's overture on
> this event ever been recorded by the Hallé Orchestra?
Last I heard (October last year) work had begun to turn the Free Trade Hall
into a luxury hotel. However, I gather that only the hall's facade will
remain; indeed the hall itself has probably gone by now.
You are quite right, the hall was built on the site of the Peterloo
Massacre, or on part of that site anyway. I cannot recall any recording of
Arnold's overture by the Hallé or, come to that, by the BBC Philharmonic (or
BBC Northern Orchestra, as it used to be called). "Peterloo" was, I believe,
performed at the opening of the Bridgewater Hall, which is also on, or very
close to, the site of the massacre.
Tony Duggan
Alan Hayward <alan_h...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:b5o032$gv9$1...@hercules.btinternet.com...
> Last I heard (October last year) work had begun to turn the Free Trade
Hall
> into a luxury hotel. However, I gather that only the hall's facade will
> remain; indeed the hall itself has probably gone by now.
The irony is that the Luftwaffe destroyed the first Free Trade Hall and the
one that's recently been torn down was the one built to replace it.
> You are quite right, the hall was built on the site of the Peterloo
> Massacre, or on part of that site anyway.
There was a move during the 70s to rename the hall Peterloo Hall. It never
happened.
> I cannot recall any recording of
> Arnold's overture by the Hallé or, come to that, by the BBC Philharmonic
> BBC Northern Orchestra, as it used to be called).
Another irony. When Arnold recorded it for EMI they gave him the City of
Birmingham Symphony Orchestra.
> Peterloo" was, I believe,
> performed at the opening of the Bridgewater Hall, which is also on, or
> close to, the site of the massacre.
Which they *should* have called Barbirolli Hall, but didn't. It seems an
aristocrat who paid for canals was deemed more relevant than the man who
dominated Manchester's music making for thirty years. End of pet peeve.
--
Tony Duggan, England.
dug...@scribble.freeserve.co.uk
Mahler CD recordings survey is at:
http://www.musicweb.uk.net/Mahler/index.html
Alan Hayward
news:b5o1ho$c9s$1...@news8.svr.pol.co.uk...
> Which they *should* have called Barbirolli Hall, but didn't. It seems an
> aristocrat who paid for canals was deemed more relevant than the man who
> dominated Manchester's music making for thirty years. End of pet peeve.
Indeed, they should. In the years following the second world war, JB did
more for Manchester's prestige than anyone else, apart from Matt Busby. At
least Manchester did have the grace to make both of them Freemen of the
city.
Tony Duggan
And neither men Mancunians by birth. Barbirolli a Cockney by birth (with
Italian and French parentage) and Busby a proud Scot.
There is a Barbirolli Walk in the Bridgewater Hall area, but then there is
half a motroway bypass just outside the city named after Alan Turing.