Dorati's Philips recording of "Nutcracker"
Harry C
and having enjoyed Dorati's recording of "Sleeping Beauty" (also with
the Concertgebouw Orchestra); I went out and bought this recording
over the weekend. I must confess to being very disappointed, and
somewhat puzzled. No doubt I am missing something, but, as far as I
can see, Dorati bulldozes through this most delicate and delightful of
scores, and rides roughshod over this most elegant of music. The two
big waltzes sound stiff-jointed, and it's almost as if Dorati had gone
out of his way to make the beautiful Intrada of the Act 2 pas-de-deux
sound as ugly and as ungainly as possible. I'd never imagined it was
possible to give so graceless a reading of so graceful a work.
Dorati is a conductor I admire greatly - especially in ballet music -
and, no doubt, this is the way he wanted it, but I can't help
wondering "why?" I am tempted to take this to the charity shops right
away, but, given the reputation of this recording, I suppose I should
listen to it a few more times before making my mind up.
So far, the only other recording I have of "The Nutcracker" is the one
by Mariss Jansons, which is pretty good, but I'm sure there are
better. Ideally, I'd like a performance that is graceful; that is well
recorded (i.e. that brings out the wonderful, ever-changing orchestral
colours of this miraculous score); and one where the conductor sees
fit to trust Tchaikovsky on matters of scoring, and desists from
adding extra percussion, cymbal crashes, etc.
Regards, Harry C
Gerard
> Having read good reviews of this, both on this board and elsewhere;
> and having enjoyed Dorati's recording of "Sleeping Beauty" (also with
> the Concertgebouw Orchestra); I went out and bought this recording
> over the weekend. I must confess to being very disappointed, and
> somewhat puzzled. No doubt I am missing something, but, as far as I
> can see, Dorati bulldozes through this most delicate and delightful of
> scores, and rides roughshod over this most elegant of music. The two
> big waltzes sound stiff-jointed, and it's almost as if Dorati had gone
> out of his way to make the beautiful Intrada of the Act 2 pas-de-deux
> sound as ugly and as ungainly as possible. I'd never imagined it was
> possible to give so graceless a reading of so graceful a work.
I don't agree with your story. But there's something true indeed: the Waltz of
Flowers sounds a little clumsy.
>
> Dorati is a conductor I admire greatly - especially in ballet music -
> and, no doubt, this is the way he wanted it, but I can't help
> wondering "why?" I am tempted to take this to the charity shops right
> away, but, given the reputation of this recording, I suppose I should
> listen to it a few more times before making my mind up.
I think you should. The more I have listened to this recording, the more I've
liked it.
>
> So far, the only other recording I have of "The Nutcracker" is the one
> by Mariss Jansons, which is pretty good, but I'm sure there are
> better.
Jansons is quite "dramatic", not very elegant. Somewhat like Gergiev. But I
doubt if you would like his "sturmy" (bulldozing, like you said about Dorati)
recording.
> Ideally, I'd like a performance that is graceful; that is well
> recorded (i.e. that brings out the wonderful, ever-changing orchestral
> colours of this miraculous score); and one where the conductor sees
> fit to trust Tchaikovsky on matters of scoring, and desists from
> adding extra percussion, cymbal crashes, etc.
>
I don't know which recordings (conductors) do the last (adding ... etc.). Do you
know any?
Alternatives: Ashkenazy (Decca), Dutoit (Decca), Mackerras (Telarc).
And if you can find one: Rozhdestvensky (Melodiya).
td
Although I appreciate all three Dorati Nutcrackers, with a slight
preference for the MLP stereo version with the LSO, the real sleeper
here is the Previn/LSO version on EMI, which most recently was
available as part of a boxed set of all three Tchaikovsky ballets. His
second version is not as good, by the way. But the first is truly
magical.
TD
Gerard
Here I don't agree.
Previn's version (on LP) has been a favorite to me for a long time. But later
versions (like the last one by Dorati) have put him into the shadow. I've bought
that EMI box. It was some disappointment; not a great one, but yet.
Which were Dorati's previous versions exactly?
I know about a stereo one on Mercury. Is there an older one?
Harry C
> > recorded (i.e. that brings out the wonderful, ever-changing orchestral
> > colours of this miraculous score); and one where the conductor sees
> > fit to trust Tchaikovsky on matters of scoring, and desists from
> > adding extra percussion, cymbal crashes, etc.
>
> I don't know which recordings (conductors) do the last (adding ... etc.). Do you
> know any?
Doesn't Jansons add a few unmarked timpani crescendos towards the end
of the Act 2 intrada? I may be wrong in this - it's a long time since
I heard it, and I don't have it with me right now to check. But what
Tilson Thomas does to the Act 1 battle scene has to be heard to be
believed: there are kazoos, tin whistles, a rattle....
>
> Alternatives: Ashkenazy (Decca), Dutoit (Decca), Mackerras (Telarc).
> And if you can find one: Rozhdestvensky (Melodiya).
Thanks for that - the Rozhdestvensky sounds interesting!
In any case, in view of the warm praise it never fails to receive,
I'll give the Dorati recording a few more listens.
Regards, Harry C
Gerard
>
> In any case, in view of the warm praise it never fails to receive,
> I'll give the Dorati recording a few more listens.
>
I think that's a good thing to do, and I hope you will enjoy that.
Dorati seems superficially fast at first, but his interpretation has real
refinement and is very satisfactory at repeated listening. Also when compared to
other recordings.
He is vivid and sparkling.
(Accidentally I've bought three copies yesterday, as presents.)
largo_57
> Which were Dorati's previous versions exactly?
> I know about a stereo one on Mercury. Is there an older one?
Dorati made one in Minneapolis for Mercury in 1953, then in London
(also for Mercury) in stereo in 1962.
- Bryan
Gerard
Thanks.
her...@yahoo.com
Those Previn Tchaikovksy ballets are terrible. I used to have them on
LP and when I recently listened to them again on cd I got the feeling
these were utterly unrehearsed recordings. The ensemble is messy, the
phrasing is sloppy and it doesn't have that crispness one needs in
ballet music.
The Dorati is good, but it's not my preferred recording. In Nutcracker
Gergiev is quite good. And it wouldn't be a bad idea to get a Bolshoi
ballet dvd and just listen to the music.
Herman
td
> On 2 mar, 21:54, "Gerard" <ghen_nospam_drik...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > largo_57 wrote:
> > > On Mar 2, 1:54 pm, "Gerard" <ghen_nospam_drik...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > Which were Dorati's previous versions exactly?
> > > > I know about a stereo one on Mercury. Is there an older one?
>
> > > Dorati made one in Minneapolis for Mercury in 1953, then in London
> > > (also for Mercury) in stereo in 1962.
>
> > Thanks.
>
> these were utterly unrehearsed recordings. The ensemble is messy, the
> phrasing is sloppy and it doesn't have that crispness one needs in
> ballet music.
I find these comments totally inexplicable.
Perhaps you could isolate a particular messy ensemble or sloppy
phrase?
TD
Dontait...@aol.com
> On Mar 2, 4:10�pm, her...
[snip]
> > Those Previn Tchaikovksy ballets are terrible. I used to have them o> LP and when I recently listened to them again on cd I got the feeling
> > these were utterly unrehearsed recordings. The ensemble is messy, the
> > phrasing is sloppy and it doesn't have that crispness one needs in
> > ballet music.
>
> I find these comments totally inexplicable.
>
> Perhaps you could isolate a particular messy ensemble or sloppy
> phrase?
>
> TD
I agree.
I know the Previn recordings well. I have never heard a messy
ensemble or sloppy phrase in any of the ballets, either. If they were
unrehearsed, then the recordings documented masterpieces of amazing
sight-reading and conducting.
Please provide evidence and proof for your contentions.
Don Tait
Meier
>
> - Show quoted text -
Agree with you about Previn, but I find Dorati's Concertgebouw rec. of
Nutcracker particularly delightful. Second best might be Bonynge on
Decca. Stuff the Russians!
Alf
TareeDawg
I endorse the protestations. The ballets are beautifully sprung and
played. This also applies to the Prokofiev ballets Romeo and Juliet, and
Cinderella as well, the R&J in particular, which I prefer over Maazel.
Nothing sloppy about the playing whatsoever from Previn and his gang.
Ray (Dawg) Hall, Taree
Meier
>
> - Show quoted text -
No, not sloppy, Ray. A tad "cosy" for my taste . Just ''Swan Lake",
that's all. Now, how about that "Scandinavian Thread" ?You first! I
agree with Previn R&J.
Alf
wagnerfan
news:bed68abb-7bb3-495e...@v19g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
Alf
I agree - too soft edged with is hardly what this composer needs. I also far
prefer Maazels Romeo to Previns - more dramatic. Wagner Fan
Meier
> "Meier" <alfre...@ymail.com> wrote in message
>
> - Show quoted text -
Having only heard Previn's 'Swan Lake',. how do the other Previn/
Tchaikovsky ballets compare? And Maazel's R&J? I have a satisfactory
recording of that too, also with Previn.
Alf
wagnerfan
Alf
I think Maazels R and J is one of the great ballet recordings - not only was
the Cleveland orchestra in peak form for the sessions, for me Maazels
direction is more in line with the way this music should go - the attacks
are harder, and I think the phrasing has a stronger profile - I think its
still available very cheaply - try it out - I hope you'll enjoy it!!
As for the Previn Tchaikovsky ballets, I personally prefer a stronger
profile - they are nice but just too nice. Wagner fan
Meier
>
> - Show quoted text -
Thanks, Wagner Fan, I'll give Ashkenazy R&J a try. At MDT's price I
have little to lose!
Alf
wagnerfan
Alf
I don't know the Ashkenazy - Wagner fan
TareeDawg
To distinguish between Maazel's recording, and Previn's recording of
Romeo and Juliet (Prokofiev) is to distinguish between the "heavy metal"
approach of Maazel, and accentuating the dynamic aspects of the work,
to the more dance-like, and truly balletic aspects of Prokofiev's score
which Previn brings. Some might say Previn is a bit soft-edged,
certainly more so than Maazel, but I think he gets it just right. Previn
underlies his approach with his recording of Cinderella. Noticeable is a
lack of a Cinderella recording from Maazel, as the score doesn't allow
the dramatics that Maazel is allowed with R&J.
PS: A Maazel Cinderella may be available, but I haven't heard of one.
Odd too, because normally I have more good things to say about Maazel
than many in this group would allow.
Ray (Dawg) Hall, Taree
Further PS: I haven't listened to Sibelius in a long long time. Maybe
time to immerse myself in some Atterburg, Nielsen and Sibelius, as our
summer draws to its conclusion.
Dan
Rodzinski's 1956 stereo recording with the Royal Philharmonic,
released originally on Westminster Records and most recently on a DG 2-
CD set with coupled Rodzinski's contemporary Tchaikovsky 4. Get it, if
you possibly can!
jrsnfld
I think I may agree with you about that--Rodzinski is bracing,
exciting, but not too overwrought to make you want to get up and
dance.
--Jeff
Gerard
> For me there is no recording of Nutcracker that comes close to Artur
> Rodzinski's 1956 stereo recording with the Royal Philharmonic,
Are you suggesting that you have heard all other recordings?
I have that recording by Rodzinski; but I don't see why it is praised so much
sometimes.
Gerard
> Meier wrote:
> >
> > Agree with you about Previn, but I find Dorati's Concertgebouw rec.
> > of Nutcracker particularly delightful. Second best might be Bonynge
> > on Decca. Stuff the Russians!
> >
> >
> > Alf
>
> To distinguish between Maazel's recording, and Previn's recording of
> Romeo and Juliet (Prokofiev) is to distinguish between
Might be interesting (and is said often), and maybe there are more differences
between Maazel and Previn, but did Maazel record the Nutcracker by Tchaikovsky?
jrsnfld
Well, he has recorded the Nutcracker Suite at least once or twice....
--Jeff
Gerard
That doesn't count of course.
Recordings of the Suite have been made with hundreds.
jrsnfld
Of course I would agree if it weren't for Mravinsky. Mravinsky's
little suite of the Nutcracker packs more intense, profound, and
lasting musical impact than practically any disc of anything I have.
No complete recording comes close (whoops, there we go again!)
--Jeff
ukrneal
>
> - Show quoted text -
Regarding R&J, both Previn and Ashkenazy are excellent. If you like
the music, neither will let you down. I've heard the maazel is quite
fine as well. In fact, this piece has done very well on disc.
Back to Tchaikovsky, I can also recommend both Mackerras and Ashkenazy
if you ever do decide to go for an alternative.
Gerard
I'm very sure that I have a recording by Mravinsky of the Suite (his own kind of
Suite that is - not the "official" one). I should relisten (if I will find it).
OTOH - a little knowing what to expect - an "intense, profound" recording of it
may be nice to hear sometimes, but I don't think it fits the spirit of this
music. I suppose it is more what Mravinsky had in mind than what Tchaikovsky had
in mind (same kind of difference between the recordings of Prokofiev's R&J by
Maazel versus others).
Nevertheless it can be a nice listening.
jrsnfld
Nice isn't exactly the word I would use. Humbling. Devastating.
Transporting. Whatever.
Mravinsky's little arrangement is more a symphonic poem than a ballet.
I think it's something Tchaikovsky had in mind, but not what he
actually put on paper, since he was trying to write something for
ballet, after all. How could Tchaikovsky could _not_ see where this
music had such "symphonic" possibilities?
Once I heard the Mravinsky, I couldn't go back to listening to the
Nutcracker as a ballet without realizing what is lost when the music
is put to the service of dance.
--Jeff
Harry C
> On Tue, 3 Mar 2009 05:28:10 +1100, Harry C wrote
> (in article
> <a1d11001-8553-43e7-8a51-ff5a24929...@z9g2000yqi.googlegroups.com>):
>
>
>
>
>
> > Having read good reviews of this, both on this board and elsewhere;
> > and having enjoyed Dorati's recording of "Sleeping Beauty" (also with
> > the Concertgebouw Orchestra); I went out and bought this recording
> > over the weekend. I must confess to being very disappointed, and
> > somewhat puzzled. No doubt I am missing something, but, as far as I
> > can see, Dorati bulldozes through this most delicate and delightful of
> > scores, and rides roughshod over this most elegant of music. The two
> > big waltzes sound stiff-jointed, and it's almost as if Dorati had gone
> > out of his way to make the beautiful Intrada of the Act 2 pas-de-deux
> > sound as ugly and as ungainly as possible. I'd never imagined it was
> > possible to give so graceless a reading of so graceful a work.
>
> > Dorati is a conductor I admire greatly - especially in ballet music -
> > and, no doubt, this is the way he wanted it, but I can't help
> > wondering "why?" I am tempted to take this to the charity shops right
> > away, but, given the reputation of this recording, I suppose I should
> > listen to it a few more times before making my mind up.
>
> > So far, the only other recording I have of "The Nutcracker" is the one
> > by Mariss Jansons, which is pretty good, but I'm sure there are
> > better. Ideally, I'd like a performance that is graceful; that is well
> > recorded (i.e. that brings out the wonderful, ever-changing orchestral
> > colours of this miraculous score); and one where the conductor sees
> > fit to trust Tchaikovsky on matters of scoring, and desists from
> > adding extra percussion, cymbal crashes, etc.
>
> > Regards, Harry C
>
> How strange. I think the Dorati recording is wonderful, and rivalled only by
> the Mackerras on Telarc. Oh well, to each his own.
>
> --
> Cheers!
>
> Terry- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Oh dear! - I'm definitely out on a limb on this one, aren't I?
I think it's largely a matter of expectations: I was expecting
something a bit more dreamy and soft-edged, and wasn't really prepared
for Dorati's rather vigorous approach, and his hurtling tempi. The
Jansons recording that I am used to is also dramatic (a bit too much
for my taste, I think, in this work) but his spacious tempi do allow
those lovely melodies to breathe; in comparison, Dorati's tempi seemed
to me rather breathless.
However, I did give the Dorati recording another listen last night,
and, coming to it with different expectations, I liked it much better
- although the waltzes still seem to me a bit stiff, and I still don't
think I could reconcile myself to his (to my ears) rather brusque
treatment of the Act 2 intrada. From reading the other posts here, it
seems as if the Previn recording is the one I should go for.
As for the description of Mravinsky's recording of the suite .... I
think I'd best brace myself for that one!
Thanks, everyone, for your comments.
Regards,
Harry C
her...@yahoo.com
I'm afraid I can't. I must have ditched the 3-ballet box after finding
they were not up to (my) snuff. I distinctly recall being dissatisfied
for the reasons mentioned. If you however are happy with it, I think
there is no problem.
One reason why we see these things differently is because some of you
may listen to this music as symphonic music. While Sleeping Beauty
certainly has symphonic ambitions, to me these ballets are ballets
first and foremost.
I probably have a dozen audio recordings of each ballet, and as many
videos.
her...@yahoo.com
>
> Mravinsky's little arrangement is more a symphonic poem than a ballet.
> I think it's something Tchaikovsky had in mind, but not what he
> actually put on paper, since he was trying to write something for
> ballet, after all. How could Tchaikovsky could _not_ see where this
> music had such "symphonic" possibilities?
>
> Once I heard the Mravinsky, I couldn't go back to listening to the
> Nutcracker as a ballet without realizing what is lost when the music
> is put to the service of dance.
>
> --Jeff
Obviously this is completely wrong. Tchaikovksy knew exactly what he
was doing when he composed Nutcracker (with very little pleasure btw):
he was composing stage music. When he made the Nutcracker Suite he
deliberately chose the dance "numbers" rather than turn it into "a
symphonic poem". Tchaikovsky did of course compose symphonic poems,
and they are a completely different form than the Nutcracker Suite.
You're obviously totally free to think something's "lost when the
music is put to the service of dance", but this is not how Tchaikovksy
felt, or "had in mind".
Herman
Meier
>
> - Show quoted text -
Sorry, I should, of course, said "Maazel". But Ashkenazy has recorded
R&J too, but the reviews weren't very flattering.
Alf
td
> On 2 mar, 23:50, Dontaitchic...@aol.com wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Mar 2, 4:01 pm, td <tomdedea...@mac.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Mar 2, 4:10 pm, her...
>
> > [snip]
>
> > > > Those Previn Tchaikovksy ballets are terrible. I used to have them o> LP and when I recently listened to them again on cd I got the feeling
> > > > these were utterly unrehearsed recordings. The ensemble is messy, the
> > > > phrasing is sloppy and it doesn't have that crispness one needs in
> > > > ballet music.
>
> > > I find these comments totally inexplicable.
>
> > > Perhaps you could isolate a particular messy ensemble or sloppy
> > > phrase?
>
> > > TD
>
> > I agree.
>
> > I know the Previn recordings well. I have never heard a messy
> > ensemble or sloppy phrase in any of the ballets, either. If they were
> > unrehearsed, then the recordings documented masterpieces of amazing
> > sight-reading and conducting.
>
> > Please provide evidence and proof for your contentions.
>
> > Don Tait
>
> I'm afraid I can't. I must have ditched the 3-ballet box after finding they were not up to (my) snuff.
Hmmmmmm
I think that's a "I can't really back up my statements with facts"
statement.
You will understand if it carries much less weight as a result.
TD
jrsnfld
> On 3 mar, 09:46, jrsnfld <jrsn...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Mravinsky's little arrangement is more a symphonic poem than a ballet.
> > I think it's something Tchaikovsky had in mind, but not what he
> > actually put on paper, since he was trying to write something for
> > ballet, after all. How could Tchaikovsky could _not_ see where this
> > music had such "symphonic" possibilities?
>
> > Once I heard the Mravinsky, I couldn't go back to listening to the
> > Nutcracker as a ballet without realizing what is lost when the music
> > is put to the service of dance.
>
> > --Jeff
>
> Obviously this is completely wrong. Tchaikovksy knew exactly what he
> was doing when he composed Nutcracker (with very little pleasure btw):
> he was composing stage music.
Hmmm; sounds like you misunderstood the nature of a little speculation
based on a relatively benign insight into Tchaikovsky's
music....actually, "with very little pleasure" suggests to me that
Tchaikovsky knew he could do other things with his ideas. After all,
what else gives a composer "little pleasure" when crafting great
music, except unwanted strictures?
Tchaikovsky's symphonies (and suites and tone poems) contain a fair
amount of music that is obviously related to "dance." I think you and
I both know that I was speculating, but fairly: his ideas about dance
music could go both ways--to stage or to concert music. Similar ideas,
just manipulated and developed differently.
Writers are the same way--some ideas can be morphed into poems or into
plays or essays or novels. It all depends on what you do with them,
how you fit the pieces into contexts, etc. The trick is finding a
pretext to use an idea as much as it is testing to see what form is
best for the idea. If you have to write a ballet, many of the ideas
floating in your head are going to come out as dance numbers; if you
have to write an essay, ideas are going to come out in essay form--the
same ideas that might otherwise be useful in a poem.
I have little doubt that Mravinsky is showing us something patently
obvious to musicians--a little twisting of tempo here or there, a
slight demphasis of the mechanistic nature of the beat, a
rearrangement of the ballet numbers--and presto, you have a concert-
music conception. If you don't think Tchaikovsky could have imagined
it--indeed, probably *did* imagine it while chafing under the
constraints of the stage, then you probably don't have much experience
with creating large works of art.
When he made the Nutcracker Suite he
> deliberately chose the dance "numbers" rather than turn it into "a
> symphonic poem".
Of course. But that's not a logical argument, one way or the other.
The point is not what he chose, but rather the raw material in his
head forced him to make such a choice. He organized his ideas into
dance numbers, but that meant choosing to use them one way and not
another. He was aware of such choices--that's all I was positing. I've
seen composers take an idea and move it around into different meters.
That music can be used in more than one way--we already have an
inkling of that from countless conductors who interpret the Nutcracker
as "unballetic-ly" as possible.
> and they are a completely different form than the Nutcracker Suite.
>
> You're obviously totally free to think something's "lost when the
> music is put to the service of dance", but this is not how Tchaikovksy
> felt, or "had in mind".
On the contrary, I think you're not giving Tchaikovsky's mind enough
credit. At a minimum, I can see that you can't see what's going on in
his mind any better than I can.
--Jeff
TareeDawg
I tend to agree, and this would seem to be a case where Mravinsky is
injecting something into the recording (performance) that is
antithetical to what Tchaikovsky intended. It happens in music, and it
is up to the listener to decide whether Mravinsky's interpretation is
truthful to what Tchaikovsky intended, or if not, then accept
Mravinsky's way. It is possible of course to enjoy both approaches.
To my way of thinking, the score is a ballet, and dance is what the
music was inherently originally intended for.
Ray (Dawg) Hall, Taree
jrsnfld
I think it is an exaggeration to say the performance is totally
undance-able; so, no, I'm not sure I'd call it "antithetical" on those
grounds, let alone on the broader grounds that Mravinsky makes a damn
good case for Tchaikovsky's genius.
It's pretty obvious that the music is intended for ballet. That's not
the really in question, even when we start to wonder what Tchaikovsky
knew he could do with the music if he weren't writing a ballet.
When you present this music in a concert hall, I think you have
already moved beyond what the music was "originally intended for" and
into the realm of "how can this music be most effectively presented to
an audience, without dancers to look at." And that is exactly the
question Mravinsky answers!
--Jeff
wagnerfan
Alf
Give the Maazel a listen - I think you'll be impressed Wagner fan
her...@yahoo.com
Tchaikovksy wasn't too thrilled at the Nutcracker commission, because
of the problematic nature of the story line.
Nonetheless one has to assume the music was inspired by the libretto
and Petipa's instructions, since that's the way it used to work in
ballet compostion: the music is crafted to fit the choreographer's
instructions. (Stravinsky used to love this.) So the idea that
Tchaikovsky had "ideas floating around in his head" and then came
Nutcracker is probably wishful thinking on your part. It's not a black
or white issue, but it would be worthwhile to consult the (extensive)
literature on the genesis of these ballets.
Herman
wagnerfan
news:dc67d166-c57e-4e39...@q30g2000prq.googlegroups.com...
--Jeff
The idea that the perfomance is "what Tchaikovsky had in mind" is
ridiculous - its up to the listener to decide if it works or not (whether it
works as a "ballet" or not is also moot since a live performance usually
has slower tempi to accomodate the dancers e.g. Gergievs Nutcracker is so
fast it, portions could never be actually danced but that doesn't mean its
not effective as a musical performance) Wagner fan
wagnerfan
--Jeff
Exactly right Wagner fan
Meier
>
> - Show quoted text -
Atterberg? Definitely! Perhaps Stenhammar, Berwald and Svendsen while
you're at it! Alfven? ho-hum, maybe. (our summer ain't started yet)
Alf
MELMOTH
dans nos oreilles grandes ouvertes mais un peu salestout de même, et
dans le message <f607$49ac2989$5ed13ae8$80...@cache4.tilbu1.nb.home.nl>,
les doux mélismes suivants :
> Alternatives: Ashkenazy (Decca)
Bof...
> Dutoit (Decca), Mackerras (Telarc).
Bof bof...
> And if you can find one: Rozhdestvensky (Melodiya).
+ 1000 !...
--
Car avec beaucoup de science, il y a beaucoup de chagrin ; et celui qui
accroît sa science, accroît sa douleur.
[Ecclésiaste, 1-18]
MELMOTH - souffrant
MELMOTH
dans le message
les doux mélismes suivants :
> the real sleeper here is the Previn/LSO version on EMI
Previn is a conductor ?!...
Meier
>
> - Show quoted text -
Already on order, Maazel, that is. Many thanks for your advice. Much
appreciated. I still enjoy Previn's R&J though.
Alf
3Bs
> Alternatives: Ashkenazy (Decca), Dutoit (Decca), Mackerras (Telarc).
> And if you can find one: Rozhdestvensky (Melodiya).
Rodzinski/RPO on Westminster. It's a showpiece for the conductor and
orchestra. The only thing keeping it from being perfect is that it is
also a showpiece for percussion.
I have all of the above save Mackerras. Ashkenazy and Dutoit are a
waste of time by comparison to Rodzinski. They just don't get the
orchestras to perform with as much zest, precision and drama. Rozh
certainly does- his a rich dish that presents some interesting
interpretive takes, all of which are enjoyable, even when a bit more
different (usually slow) than I prefer.
What did Victor Carr have in his ears when he reviewed Rodzinski for
ClassicsToday? Mark Kluge gets it right when he calls it a classic of
the gramophone. Someone tell me that Previn or anyone else is superior
to nutty old Artur here and I will gladly seek them out.
3Bs
> Are you suggesting that you have heard all other recordings?
> I have that recording by Rodzinski; but I don't see why it is praised so much
> sometimes.
Listen to the last few minutes of Act I again, then pick your favorite
and compare. Let us know the results. Oh, and I hope you have the
latest remastering, not an early MCA CD or LP.
Meier
> Ce cher mammifère du nom de td nous susurrait, le lundi 02/03/2009,
> dans nos oreilles grandes ouvertes mais un peu salestout de même, et
> dans le message
> les doux mélismes suivants :
>
> > the real sleeper here is the Previn/LSO version on EMI
>
> Previn is a conductor ?!...
>
> --
> Car avec beaucoup de science, il y a beaucoup de chagrin ; et celui qui
> accroît sa science, accroît sa douleur.
> [Ecclésiaste, 1-18]
> MELMOTH - souffrant
Oui, mais je crois que TD est un mammifère très intelligent!
I enjoy Previn's R&J, His Tchaikovsky less so.
Alf
ukrneal
Are we talking about the same performance with Ashkenazy performing?
The double CD (on Decca with the Seasons I think) is full of zest and
drama. I don't mind if it doesn't float your boat, but I disagree with
your characterizations of the set.
Gerard
It's my opinion that Tchaikovsky was at his best when making "dance" choices,
and that The Nutcracker is a crown (if not *the* crown) on his oeuvre, as it is
(a ballet).
Using the raw material for something else can give a nice listening, but the way
Tchaikovsky actually used is very exquisite; close to perfection.
Gerard
>
> Sorry, I should, of course, said "Maazel". But Ashkenazy has recorded
> R&J too, but the reviews weren't very flattering.
>
>
I think flattering enough.
Like:
http://www.classicstoday.com/review.asp?ReviewNum=6615
I have both Maazel and Ashkenazy. As performance of a ballet score, I prefer
Ashkenazy (next to Previn).
Maazel is more up to "icy orchestral perfection".
Gerard
>
> Are we talking about the same performance with Ashkenazy performing?
> The double CD (on Decca with the Seasons I think)
(i.e. with Glazunov's The Seasons)
> is full of zest and
> drama. I don't mind if it doesn't float your boat, but I disagree with
> your characterizations of the set.
I agree with the above.
Gerard
> On Mar 3, 1:57 am, "Gerard" <ghen_nospam_drik...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > Are you suggesting that you have heard all other recordings?
> > I have that recording by Rodzinski; but I don't see why it is
> > praised so much sometimes.
>
> Listen to the last few minutes of Act I again, then pick your favorite
> and compare. Let us know the results.
I will do when I find time - and maybe forget about it then ;-(
> Oh, and I hope you have the
> latest remastering, not an early MCA CD or LP.
The coupling with symphony #4 (471 228-2) - is that the latest?
her...@yahoo.com
After a couple of goes I only listened to the Glazunov. I can't help
thinking of a moment in a tv interview with Ashkenazy about him (in
his USSR days) being sent to a piano competition and being ordered to
perform the Tchaikovsky PC1, "and I said, madam I don't even like
Tchaikovsky".
At some point, obviously, Ashkenazy had recorded all the non-
Tchaikovsky material there was...
Herman
Gerard
>
> After a couple of goes I only listened to the Glazunov. I can't help
> thinking of a moment in a tv interview with Ashkenazy about him (in
> his USSR days) being sent to a piano competition and being ordered to
> perform the Tchaikovsky PC1, "and I said, madam I don't even like
> Tchaikovsky".
>
> At some point, obviously, Ashkenazy had recorded all the non-
> Tchaikovsky material there was...
>
> Herman
He has recorded the symphonies #4, 5 and 6, and Manfred too.
And Romeo & Juliet, Elegy for strings, Francesca da Rimini, and probably more
works by Tchaikovsky.
Maybe he has started to like him later.
3Bs
Awe talking about the same performance with Ashkenazy performing?
> The double CD (on Decca with the Seasons I think) is full of zest and
> drama. I don't mind if it doesn't float your boat, but I disagree with
> your characterizations of the set.
It is all comparative. Perhaps you will find different words for it,
but I'll bet if you compare the early RPO recording with the later
one, it will be clear which orchestra has the better precision,
cohesion, and collective spirit.
Meier
I haven't heard Ashkenazy in this piece (the RPO version?) but the
review wasn't very encouraging.
Alf
Gerard
Where isn't it encouraging?
Did you read the same review that says "This one's a winner"?
td
Although it has not been mentioned so far because it might
inadvertently awake the sleeping Jeffrey Powell, I have to say that
Ansermet's very incomplete Nutcracker is not altogether without charm.
That said, I still wince every time I hear those winds and those wiry
strings. But he conducted this piece very nicely.
TD
Gerard
> Although it has not been mentioned so far because it might
> inadvertently awake the sleeping Jeffrey Powell, I have to say that
> Ansermet's very incomplete Nutcracker is not altogether without charm.
> That said, I still wince every time I hear those winds and those wiry
> strings. But he conducted this piece very nicely.
>
> TD
At that time I was glad I could replace Ansermet's recording with ... Previn's.
But later I was much happier with some other recordings.
her...@yahoo.com
> Maybe he has started to like him later.
Yes, that could very well be the case. He didn't like PIT too much as
a pianist, but more as a conductor.
Meier
>
> - Show quoted text -
Thanks, Tom. I shall take your word for that. I would not want to
awaken the sleeping Jeffrey!
Alf
Meier
>
> - Show quoted text -
'Gramohone' I think. I've forgotten!
Alf
Gerard
Ah, that one is not very encouraging indeed.
But it is not "the" review ;-)
Brendan R. Wehrung
> For me there is no recording of Nutcracker that comes close to Artur
> Rodzinski's 1956 stereo recording with the Royal Philharmonic,
> released originally on Westminster Records and most recently on a DG 2-
> CD set with coupled Rodzinski's contemporary Tchaikovsky 4. Get it, if
> you possibly can!
Agreed! I didn't know it was still available.
Brendan
Meier
wrote:
Is Rodzinki's Tchaikovsy 4th really special - in the same way that
Mravinsky and Jansons are for me? If so, please could you give me the
disc number? Thanks in advance,
Alf
Gerard
That number - if it was the right one - was in my post of 17:34.
(The coupling with symphony #4 (471 228-2) - is that the latest?)
Meier
>
> - Show quoted text -
Thanks, Gerard, your help is, as always, much appreciated. If I may go
slightly off-topic for a while - is Sir Adrian Boult's recording or
RVW's Tallis Fantasia + English Folk Song Suite, also once available
on a Westminster LP, available on CD?
Alf
Gerard
I really don't know.
Maybe you should open a separate thread for this question, so it could get more
attention.
Meier
>
> - Show quoted text -
OK, I'll do that when I'm slightly more awake - hopefully! Boult
recorded these pieces with the Vienna State Opera Orchestra in stereo
- 1958, or thereabouts.
Alf
mark
> "Meier" <alfre...@ymail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:8af0c689-a542-467c...@c11g2000yqj.googlegroups.com...
> On Mar 3, 12:03 am, "wagnerfan" <wagner...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> > "Meier" <alfre...@ymail.com> wrote in message
>
> >news:bed68abb-7bb3-495e...@v19g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
> > On Mar 2, 11:04 pm, TareeDawg <rayto...@bigpond.com> wrote:
>
> > > Dontaitchic...@aol.com wrote:
> > > > On Mar 2, 4:01 pm, td <tomdedea...@mac.com> wrote:
> > > >> On Mar 2, 4:10 pm, her...
>
> > > > [snip]
>
> > > >>> Those Previn Tchaikovksy ballets are terrible. I used to have them
> > > >>> o>
> > > >>> LP and when I recently listened to them again on cd I got the
> > > >>> feeling
> > > >>> these were utterly unrehearsed recordings. The ensemble is messy,
> > > >>> the
> > > >>> phrasing is sloppy and it doesn't have that crispness one needs in
> > > >>> ballet music.
> > > >> I find these comments totally inexplicable.
>
> > > >> Perhaps you could isolate a particular messy ensemble or sloppy
> > > >> phrase?
>
> > > >> TD
>
> > > > I agree.
>
> > > > I know the Previn recordings well. I have never heard a messy
> > > > ensemble or sloppy phrase in any of the ballets, either. If they were
> > > > unrehearsed, then the recordings documented masterpieces of amazing
> > > > sight-reading and conducting.
>
> > > > Please provide evidence and proof for your contentions.
>
> > > I endorse the protestations. The ballets are beautifully sprung and
> > > played. This also applies to the Prokofiev ballets Romeo and Juliet, and
> > > Cinderella as well, the R&J in particular, which I prefer over Maazel.
>
> > > Nothing sloppy about the playing whatsoever from Previn and his gang.
>
> > > Ray (Dawg) Hall, Taree- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > that's all. Now, how about that "Scandinavian Thread" ?You first! I
> > agree with Previn R&J.
>
> > Alf
>
> > I agree - too soft edged with is hardly what this composer needs. I also
> > far
> > prefer Maazels Romeo to Previns - more dramatic. Wagner Fan- Hide quoted
> > text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Tchaikovsky ballets compare? And Maazel's R&J? I have a satisfactory
> recording of that too, also with Previn.
>
> Alf
>
> I think Maazels R and J is one of the great ballet recordings - not only was
> the Cleveland orchestra in peak form for the sessions, for me Maazels
> direction is more in line with the way this music should go - the attacks
> are harder, and I think the phrasing has a stronger profile - I think its
> still available very cheaply - try it out - I hope you'll enjoy it!!
> As for the Previn Tchaikovsky ballets, I personally prefer a stronger
> profile - they are nice but just too nice. Wagner fan
Being a Maazel fan and a fan of his R&J, I feel impelled to point out
that it's clear that Maazel never conducted this work in the theater.
For instance, the entrance of the Doge after the Act I fight is taken
as quickly as to defy a prop entrance for the dancers and totally
fails to characterize the Doge. Rating thr sound, I find both sets
pretty good with a slight edge to Maazel. However, both recordings
seem to clip the high end.
Now, I know that some people feel that a ballet score shorn of dancers
can and should be treated as a straight orchestral work. I don't. In
fact, when it comes to recordings of the Tchaikovsky ballets, I prefer
John Lanchbery on EMI. His experience in the ballet pit is telling in
these recordings.
wagnerfan
news:411fa265-358c-41bc...@40g2000prx.googlegroups.com...
I'm a fan of the Lanchberry as well Wagner Fan
Meier
>
> - Show quoted text -
I too prefer Lanchbery, particularly in 'Swan Lake'.
Alf
Kalman Rubinson
wrote:
I, too, am a big fan of the Maazel R&J and, although it is likely that
he never conducted it in the theater, I do not listen to it while
watching the performance. In fact, I am much less a fan of the dance
than I am of the music and, therefore, the purely orchestral nature of
the performance suits me just fine.
In fact, I usually only go to the ballet if the music is appealing.
Kal
Matthew B. Tepper
letters to be typed in news:qodrq4hr2ve54sn01...@4ax.com:
I am in total agreement with you there. That said, there was a televised
production of this work by the San Francisco Ballet many years ago, which I
enjoyed very much for the dancing as well as for the music.
--
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
Opinions expressed here are not necessarily those of my employers
Kalman Rubinson
<oyþ@earthlink.net> wrote:
>Kalman Rubinson <k...@earthlink.net> appears to have caused the following
>letters to be typed in news:qodrq4hr2ve54sn01...@4ax.com:
>
>> On Tue, 3 Mar 2009 14:20:00 -0800 (PST), mark <markst...@yahoo.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> I, too, am a big fan of the Maazel R&J and, although it is likely that
>> he never conducted it in the theater, I do not listen to it while
>> watching the performance. In fact, I am much less a fan of the dance
>> than I am of the music and, therefore, the purely orchestral nature of
>> the performance suits me just fine.
>
>I am in total agreement with you there. That said, there was a televised
>production of this work by the San Francisco Ballet many years ago, which I
>enjoyed very much for the dancing as well as for the music.
I didn't say that I do not enjoy ballet and I did get to see it twice.
I have found, btw, that I appreciate ballet more on BluRay perhaps
because of the interesting perspectives, clean video and excellent
sound. Perhaps, it's just that I am more comfortable at home.
Kal
3Bs
> Thanks, Gerard, your help is, as always, much appreciated. If I may go
> slightly off-topic for a while - is Sir Adrian Boult's recording or
> RVW's Tallis Fantasia + English Folk Song Suite, also once available
> on a Westminster LP, available on CD?
> Alf
I realize you may be looking for VSO recordings, but I have
transferred the English Folk Song Suite, Wasps Overture, Fantasia on
TT and Greensleeves and Old King Cole suite from two LP's- a '54
Westminster and a '82 PRT LP.
PRT was a Michael Dutton project at the time he was still doing
transfers for EMI, before he started Dutton Labs, IIRC. I don't
believe any of these recordings have made it to CD, but if anyone
knows otherwise, I'd be happy to buy them .
Just to clarify, Norfolk Rhapsody was on the older LP only. The PRT LP
had the Old King Cole music exclusively. The rest was duplication, so
I pulled it from the newer LP. I included both transfers of Fantasia
on TT just for kicks.
You can download them here:
http://rs583.rapidshare.com/files/68067296/AB-RVW.zip
Oddly, I just discovered that Lyrita has another Boult FoaTbTT, for
'68, it appears. I will have to get that, too.
Meier
Thanks, Bbs. I don't usually stay awake this late at night, but the
morphine withdrawal is causing a few problems, so, I'll dowload your
offering and report on it on the morrow. I can only hope it's in the
original stereo, but, not to worry. Thanks for your trouble.
Alf
Meier
Excellent! You have made an old man very happy, and saved me a few
quid. I cannot thank you enough! I shall transfer this ot CD
tomorrow! Thank you again!
Sincerely,
Alfred Meier.
Gerard
> Kalman Rubinson <k...@earthlink.net> appears to have caused the
> following letters to be typed in
> news:qodrq4hr2ve54sn01...@4ax.com:
>
> > On Tue, 3 Mar 2009 14:20:00 -0800 (PST), mark
> > <markst...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> > I, too, am a big fan of the Maazel R&J and, although it is likely
> > that he never conducted it in the theater, I do not listen to it
> > while watching the performance. In fact, I am much less a fan of
> > the dance than I am of the music and, therefore, the purely
> > orchestral nature of the performance suits me just fine.
>
> I am in total agreement with you there. That said, there was a
> televised production of this work by the San Francisco Ballet many
> years ago, which I enjoyed very much for the dancing as well as for
> the music.
Yes, I even have enjoyed *every* recording of this work I have heard and/or
seen.
Meier
>
> - Show quoted text -
Sorry about this. I downloaded the RVW to "temporary file",but, as I
am not completely computer-literate, could you please tell me where I
should look? Thank you.
Alf
3Bs
> Sorry about this. I downloaded the RVW to "temporary file",but, as I
> am not completely computer-literate, could you please tell me where I
> should look? Thank you.
> Alf
I would assume that if you right-click on the link, you can save it
wherever you want. The temporary folder is often hard to access.
Gerard
> 3Bs wrote:
> > On Mar 3, 1:57 am, "Gerard" <ghen_nospam_drik...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > Are you suggesting that you have heard all other recordings?
> > > I have that recording by Rodzinski; but I don't see why it is
> > > praised so much sometimes.
> >
> > Listen to the last few minutes of Act I again, then pick your
> > favorite and compare. Let us know the results.
>
> I will do when I find time - and maybe forget about it then ;-(
>
I gave it a short "shot" - the last 10 minutes, by Rodzinski and by Dorati.
I think I should do this again, maybe you can give me a hint for another part.
In this case I prefer Dorati, who's giving more 'magic'. Could be because the
sound is much better.
Meier
That would seem to be the case! Thank you for all your help and hard
work. I assure you that it is really very much appreciated.
Alf
Meier
I saved your file in 'My Documents', but Windows Media Player
stubbornly refuses to transfer it to disc E. Any further advice,
please?
Alf
Gerard
>
> I saved your file in 'My Documents', but Windows Media Player
> stubbornly refuses to transfer it to disc E. Any further advice,
> please?
>
Can't you copy it to disc E yourself (in Windows Explorer)?
Meier
I don't know! I've never used Windows Explorer - only Media Player.
Could you possibly advise me via Email?
Thank you.
Alf
Meier
Gerard
Media Player is a program to play "media". Not a program to use for moving files
from place A to B (and specially not to E ;-) )
If you open Windows Explorer, you will find all discs (maybe you have to expand
"this computer" first).
From there you can expand every item until you have found the downloaded file.
If you don't know where it is but do know the name of the file, you can do a
search (right click on the right disc - and use "Search').
You can expand disc E and locate the place where to want to file to move to.
With the functions "copy" and "paste" you can make a copy.
That is safer than moving the file.
But ... is there a reason the file should be on disc E?
Can't you use it where it is after downloading (without moving it to another
place)?
Meier
Thanks, Gerard. If I can stay awake this evening (doubtful !) I shall
indeed try your suggestion.
Alf
Gerard
>
> Thanks, Gerard. If I can stay awake this evening (doubtful !) I shall
> indeed try your suggestion.
>
>
Besides that, I would advise you to explore Windows Explorer, and to play with
it.
It is one of the most useful programs in Windows for manipulating files and
directories (folders).
A little Googling will bring you to many useful sites.
And will help you not to spend too much time in newsgroups about classical
music.
E.g.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Explorer
http://vlaurie.com/computers2/Articles/explorer2.htm
http://www.helpwithpcs.com/courses/windows-xp-tutorial-explorer.htm
http://ask-leo.com/where_is_windows_explorer.html
http://www.karbosguide.com/books/winxpbeginner/chapter05.htm
3Bs
The file is zip-compressed, so for starters, you need to unpack this
archive. If you don't have a zip utility, WinZip is free and one of
those shareware programs you really shouldn't be without. It has been
around for probably a decade. Then there is the fact that these are
MP3s. You may need to convert them to WAV or AIFF in order to burn
them to a CD. You could bring them into iTunes and convert them to
either, I believe, and burn a CD from there.
Sorry this is a hurdle for you, but I believe if you invest the time
in figuring out how all this works, it will pay off in the long run.
3Bs
the file for the English Folk Song Suite cuts off after five minutes.
No idea why. I have just re-transferred the PRT album using my new
turntable setup, so I would hope that it not only has more music, but
sounds a bit better, too. I have not uploaded the files yet, as I am
still encoding them. I will post an update here. This means the old
link will soon be inoperable.
3Bs
I should have waited a minute to say that yes, the files sound far
better, both because of a far more pleasant cartridge and because the
old turntable had clearly audible rumble. It was one of those low-end
Thorens models that gained a well-deserved bad reputation.
I may also transfer the Norfolk Rhapsody from the '54 Westminster LP,
so give me a few days to finish this project.
gggg gggg
> Having read good reviews of this, both on this board and elsewhere;
> and having enjoyed Dorati's recording of "Sleeping Beauty" (also with
> the Concertgebouw Orchestra); I went out and bought this recording
> over the weekend. I must confess to being very disappointed, and
> somewhat puzzled. No doubt I am missing something, but, as far as I
> can see, Dorati bulldozes through this most delicate and delightful of
> scores, and rides roughshod over this most elegant of music. The two
> big waltzes sound stiff-jointed, and it's almost as if Dorati had gone
> out of his way to make the beautiful Intrada of the Act 2 pas-de-deux
> sound as ugly and as ungainly as possible. I'd never imagined it was
> possible to give so graceless a reading of so graceful a work.
> Dorati is a conductor I admire greatly - especially in ballet music -
> and, no doubt, this is the way he wanted it, but I can't help
> wondering "why?" I am tempted to take this to the charity shops right
> away, but, given the reputation of this recording, I suppose I should
> listen to it a few more times before making my mind up.
> So far, the only other recording I have of "The Nutcracker" is the one
> by Mariss Jansons, which is pretty good, but I'm sure there are
> better. Ideally, I'd like a performance that is graceful; that is well
> recorded (i.e. that brings out the wonderful, ever-changing orchestral
> colours of this miraculous score); and one where the conductor sees
> fit to trust Tchaikovsky on matters of scoring, and desists from
> adding extra percussion, cymbal crashes, etc.
> Regards, Harry C
(Recent Y. upload):
"Dave's Faves No. 183 (Tchaikovsky)"