Beethoven Symphony cycle
Nicholas
CD.
Many thanks,
Nicholas
Hou Fang-Lin
thanks, Fang-lin
Nicholas <nos...@usa.net> wrote in message
news:8fabjf$3nj$1...@nntp9.atl.mindspring.net...
Sacqueboutier
> Could anyone make a recommendation for a stereo Beethoven symphony cycle on
> CD.
>
> Many thanks,
> Nicholas
Several excellent sets:
Karajan (1962) on DGG (He made 4 complete cycles. This the one I prefer as a
whole.)
Harnoncourt on Teldec
Szell on Sony
Gardiner on Archiv (period instruments)
Wand on RCA
Cluytens on Seraphim or EMI
That said, you will probably get a better set by mixing and matching. But
then,
that takes a lot time and research. If you are looking for good starting
point, I
suggest Szell or Karajan 62. Both excellent sets and both quite inexpensive.
--
Don Patterson
* DCP Music Printing
* Professional Computer Music Typeset
* Music Arrangements
* don...@dclink.com
* Trombonist
* "The President's Own"
* United States Marine Band
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
Kevin
Philips.
* Sent from AltaVista http://www.altavista.com Where you can also find related Web Pages, Images, Audios, Videos, News, and Shopping. Smart is Beautiful
mif
<nos...@usa.net> wrote:
>Could anyone make a recommendation for a stereo Beethoven
symphony cycle on
>CD.
>
>Many thanks,
>Nicholas
I'm far from an expert but I'll repeat a previous post: the
Harnoncourt set on Teldec is on sale for $19.95 plus S&H at BMG
Music Club. It is very good. I also have, and enjoy, the David
Zinman set on Arte Nova. Both are crisply played and fastish.
Neither is HIP.
MIFrost
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
wetmorer
Buy single discs. A good start is the Kleiber 5 & 7, which
are not my favorites by far, but in good sound and well
played and pretty exciting. Another second choice would be
Reiner/CSO, which I prefer to the Kleiber, but are not in
good sound, but are also on one disc.
I would then recommend the Bohm/VPO 6 on DG Originals.
Great sound and performance.
For the Eroica, I recommend the Savall (on original
instruments if you can deal with them) or Leibowitz/RPO on
CHesky coupled with a pretty good 1.
For the 9th, get the Leibowitz/RPO on Chesky. By far the
best reading of this work I have heard. The four soloists
including the great Richard Lewis and Inge Borkhe are
sensational, and are backed by the great Beecham Choral
Society and Royal Phil Orchestra. This is one of the most
inpired Beethoven recordings I own. YOU CAN'T DUE Without
this one!!!
Best of Luck,
Randall
Massimo Nespolo
series of CDs remastered at 24bit. It's a good choice, IMO.
Massimo
"Nicholas" <nos...@usa.net> wrote in message
news:8fabjf$3nj$1...@nntp9.atl.mindspring.net...
Simon Roberts
: Could anyone make a recommendation for a stereo Beethoven symphony cycle on
: CD.
Could you give us some idea if there's a particular style of Beethoven
playing you prefer (HIP vs modern, slow/fast, modern sound/don't care,
"romantic"/"literal" -- that sort of thing)? Until then I would suggest
Mackerras as a first rate, inexpensive modern/HIP compromise.
Simon
Marc Perman
>Has anybody else heard the Barenboim new Teldec set favored by Simon?
>thanks, Fang-lin
I'm working my way through the set; early impressions are very
favorable. The sound and playing are stunning.
Marc Perman
JRsnfld
I have no recommendation other than that I don't like Norrington or Gardiner,
particularly--neither seems as good as Savall's as yet incomplete Beethoven
survey.
For decidedly non-HIP:
Szell is great--I like it more than the very good Cluytens which is the
cheapest these days.
I'll be decidedly unfashionable and add an endorsement for Solti's first cycle
with Chicago, which is rather cheap too. Hopefully DG will issue the rest of
Kubelik's excellent cycle (7-8-9 are out already). I sometimes like the Karajan
(1962) but find his super-suave sound loses detail and muscularity that you get
with Szell, Solti, and others.
The best set I've heard so far, in excellent mono sound, is the Schuricht on
EMI.
--Jeff
Mikael Boedeker
and books.
Open the Composition performance ranking list to find many answers to your
question.
Read the code descriptons if the summary looks confusing.
Nicholas wrote in message <8fabjf$3nj$1...@nntp9.atl.mindspring.net>...
>Could anyone make a recommendation for a stereo Beethoven symphony cycle on
>CD.
>
>Many thanks,
>Nicholas
>
>
Matthew Silverstein
"JRsnfld" <jrs...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20000510012947...@ng-cu1.aol.com...
> For decidedly non-HIP:
> Szell is great--I like it more than the very good Cluytens which is the
> cheapest these days.
Can someone describe the virtues of Cluytens' Beethoven? I heard a few of
these recordings a long time ago and was not impressed. Now that they are so
cheap at Berkshire, I was thinking of picking them up. But can someone let me
know what I'm in for if I do?
Matty
Raymond Hall
>
> I don't recommend a cycle.
>
> Buy single discs. A good start is the Kleiber 5 & 7, which
> are not my favorites by far, but in good sound and well
> played and pretty exciting. Another second choice would be
> Reiner/CSO, which I prefer to the Kleiber, but are not in
> good sound, but are also on one disc.
>
> I would then recommend the Bohm/VPO 6 on DG Originals.
> Great sound and performance.
>
> For the Eroica, I recommend the Savall (on original
> instruments if you can deal with them) or Leibowitz/RPO on
> CHesky coupled with a pretty good 1.
>
> For the 9th, get the Leibowitz/RPO on Chesky. By far the
> best reading of this work I have heard. The four soloists
> including the great Richard Lewis and Inge Borkhe are
> sensational, and are backed by the great Beecham Choral
> Society and Royal Phil Orchestra. This is one of the most
> inpired Beethoven recordings I own. YOU CAN'T DUE Without
> this one!!!
>
matching, I personally would opt for Walter/CSO, in the 1st, 2nd, 4th
and 6th (on Sony). A good 3rd also from Walter, but Klemperer (EMI
stereo) gets my vote here (by a whisker) and his 6th is a fine one too
(EMI stereo). Carlos Kleiber for the 5th, with a goodish 7th as coupling
(DG Originals). Wyn Morris on Carlton for the 8th. I haven't heard the
9th above (not a favourite work of mine), but I'll take your
recommendation for this.
Regards, # RMCR Contributor's WebSites Compilation
# Favourite Conductors, and Doris Day Pages
# http://www.users.bigpond.com/hallraylily/index.html
# http://sites.netscape.net/rayengineeraus/
Ray, Sydney
Simon Roberts
: Can someone describe the virtues of Cluytens' Beethoven? I heard a few of
: these recordings a long time ago and was not impressed. Now that they are so
: cheap at Berkshire, I was thinking of picking them up. But can someone let me
: know what I'm in for if I do?
I can't say they impress me much either, though that's partly because by
the time I got around to relistening to them on CD I had already heard
so many "central" performances that these seemed redundant (but then I
didn't think much of them when I first heard them on LP in the 1970s).
Part of the problem may be the rather dull sound: I wonder if it's a
coincidence that I've kept the discs containing 4, 5 and 9 which, with
their rather brighter, more immediate sound, make the performances seem
more incisive and powerful (I refer to the Seraphim transfers; I've no
idea how the French EMI and Royal Classics transfers compare).
They're certainly far from being bad, but given what I think I know of
your taste, I rather doubt you would be much taken by them.
Simon
: >
: > I'll be decidedly unfashionable and add an endorsement for Solti's first
: >
John Wilson
Roberts) wrote:
>Matthew Silverstein (matthew.s...@corpus-christi.oxford.ac.uk) wrote:
>
>: Can someone describe the virtues of Cluytens' Beethoven? I heard a few of
>: these recordings a long time ago and was not impressed. Now that they are so
>: cheap at Berkshire, I was thinking of picking them up. But can someone let me
>: know what I'm in for if I do?
>
>I can't say they impress me much either, though that's partly because by
>the time I got around to relistening to them on CD I had already heard
>so many "central" performances that these seemed redundant (but then I
>didn't think much of them when I first heard them on LP in the 1970s).
>Part of the problem may be the rather dull sound: I wonder if it's a
>coincidence that I've kept the discs containing 4, 5 and 9 which, with
>their rather brighter, more immediate sound, make the performances seem
>more incisive and powerful (I refer to the Seraphim transfers; I've no
>idea how the French EMI and Royal Classics transfers compare).
>They're certainly far from being bad, but given what I think I know of
>your taste, I rather doubt you would be much taken by them.
>
>Simon
>
>
I agree. I recently got these in the inexpensive Royal Classics box
because I had read so many glowing recommendations here on RMCR about
them. I found them to be rather ordinary central performances.
I will stick with Toscanini, Klemperer and Karajan (62).
John
Matthew B. Tepper
is reputed to have iterated as follows...
>
>www.[snip].com summarizes review references to several magazines
>and books.
>
>Open the Composition performance ranking list to find many answers to
>your question.
>
>Read the code descriptons if the summary looks confusing.
Do you have anything to actually SAY in this newsgroup, or are you just
flogging your damn Website?
--
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
"Compassionate Conservatism?" * "Tight Slacks?" * "Jumbo Shrimp?"
Terrymelin
I'm listening to it, of the new Teldec release of Mengelberg and the
Concertgebouw doing the 5th and 6th in 1937. The sound is glorious and the way
he paces it and lets the music breathe is marvelous. I highly recommend this
issue.
Terry Ellsworth
Terrymelin
so interminably dull that he's unlistenable. This set definitely goes into the
"overrated" category for me.
Terry Ellsworth
Jeremy Dimmick
only in their signatures. I hope you'll start posting more substantial
contributions, now that people know you're here.
"Mikael Boedeker" <mikael....@kolumbus.fi> wrote in message
news:8fb537$a6a$1...@news.kolumbus.fi...
> www.classical-cams.com summarizes review references to several magazines
> and books.
>
> Open the Composition performance ranking list to find many answers to your
> question.
>
> Read the code descriptons if the summary looks confusing.
>
rkha...@adnc.com
cycle on
> CD.
So many good ones, but let me recommend an inexpensive set by a much
underrated conductor: Herbert Kegel and the Dresden Philharmonic on
Laserlight. Don't let the cheap label and price put you off. These are
great performances in excellent sound.
Ramon Khalona
Carlsbad, California
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Sander Verheule
(http://www.classicstoday.com/f3_0500.html). I found this review
amusing and informative, but it may enrage others.
Sander Verheule.
On Wed, 10 May 2000 02:57:04 GMT, per...@mindspring.com (Marc Perman)
wrote:
Smuras
<fh...@midway.uchicago.edu> writes:
>Subject: Re: Beethoven Symphony cycle
>From: "Hou Fang-Lin" <fh...@midway.uchicago.edu>
>Date: Tue, 9 May 2000 20:06:03 -0500
>
>Has anybody else heard the Barenboim new Teldec set favored by Simon?
>thanks, Fang-lin
>
Yes, and I think it's a marvelous set: dramatic, colorful and poetic. There's
a wonderful clarity of textures combined with a feeling of weight and body to
the sound. The color and character of the woodwinds come through particularly
well, much more so than in most of the other recordings with modern instruments
that I know (Solti I and II, Karajan '60s, Abbado/Vienna, and some various
single performances) . The bass/cello and viola lines also come through well.
After hearing these recordings, I came away with a much better sense of
Beethoven as a colorist. The clarity of textures and immediate, almost
physically palpable sound, work to create a keen sense of drama, and there's a
sense of line and changing color of sound that creates a feeling of poetry. I
was particularly impressed and surprised by the dramatic and colorful presence
of the brass and timpani throughout, especially in those moments, such as 7i,
where the horns in other recordings seem to disappear (Reiner's CSO recording
for example). The more old-fashioned tempi in 3i and 5i may not be to
everyone's taste, but I found them just right.
Stanley Murashige
samir ghiocel golescu
On Wed, 10 May 2000, Sander Verheule wrote:
> There is a review of this cycle on David Howitzer's site
> (http://www.classicstoday.com/f3_0500.html). I found this review
> amusing and informative, but it may enrage others.
Enraging? Not. Amusing? Yes. Most amusing is the consistent (negative)
obsession with Furtwangler's "fanatics", with Furtwangler himself (if we
made fools of ourselves trying to demonstrate he was a Nazi, some flaws in
the winds' intonation are always there, in those live recordings, ready to
be pointlessly pointed at, isn't so?), and, ultimately, the abhorrence of
(the) Tradition(s), coeternal and consubstantial with every fresh-born
prophet that discovers "for the first time" the "correct" interpretation
of the Holy Text(s).
Enough. A chaque jour suffit sa peine, as Pascal translated Jesus's words.
regards,
SG
barry7665
it :). Mr. Hurwitz likes to point out other's obsession
with Furtwangler, then he spends a good chunk of his review
making "factual" statements such as to the superiority of
Barenboim's Beethoven over anything Furt did (again, he
refuses to accept that there are other criterion to judge
performances by aside from the "objective" ones he uses).
I suppose I fall into the German, Romantic (historic) camp,
but unlike Mr. Hurwitz's assumption, I felt the highlights
of Barenboim's cycle are 7, 3 and 9 (and by the way, I
don't where he gets the idea that Furt was weak in the
4th.....guess he hasn't heard the wartime performance).
Seven may be as fine as any recording of that piece I've
heard. Three and nine are a notch or two below that. The
rest of the cycle didn't thrill me. Eight was flat out bad
IMO, and the others were nice, but nothing special. I know
others have spoken very highly of the cycle. I borrowed
it, and after listening through a couple times, I won't be
buying it. When the symphonies come out on individual
disks, I'll definately pick up the 7th, and possibly the
3rd and 9th.
Incidentally, I like Barenboim's earlier 9th with this same
orchestra more than the new one. It's a more dramatic
reading with much more extreme tempos changes that work
wonderfully.
Barry
Mark Jordan
> > Could anyone make a recommendation for a stereo Beethoven symphony cycle
on
> > CD.
> >
> > Nicholas
It depends on what you want--
Polished & Powerful: Karajan (60's)
Slow Yet Vital: Klemperer
Fast Yet Poised: Harnoncourt
Dramatic & Energetic: Toscanini
Spacious & Grand: Furtwangler
Mark
samir ghiocel golescu
> I sense that I'd agree with Samir's post, if I understood it :).
You did. :0)
> I don't [know] where he gets the idea that Furt was weak in the
> 4th.....guess he hasn't heard the wartime performance
The 1943 rec. is my favorite as well--the introduction, about a minute
longer than in most other recordings, is given a weight that makes the
unmatched explosion of light thereafter immensely more significant.
WF's Beethoven Fourth's live version in Munchen (1951? I forgot), less
dark, a (slightly!!) more predictable Fourth, is exceptional as well.
The only W.F. Beethoven Symphonies I had troubles with were his Eighths
(too speculatively metaphysic, IMHO, even if splendid in their own way)
and the Second (the (only subsistent) live recording of which does not
bring the best of Furtwangler, mebelieves).
regards,
SG
samir ghiocel golescu
Sorry, not to be picky, Mr. Jordan, but Furty and Signor Toscanini are not
in stereo (the poster asked for stereo cycles).
My stereo picks would be Klemperer and Walter.
regards,
SG
barry7665
were his Eighths (too speculatively metaphysic, IMHO, even
if splendid in their own way) and the Second (the (only
subsistent) live recording of which does not bring the best
of Furtwangler, mebelieves).>>>>>
I actually like the Stockholm Phil and 1954 Salzburg 8ths
very much, although I have to say that Scherchen's
recording of that piece is the best I know of.
In fact, Scherchen's 6th is the only Pastoral I've heard
with fast tempos that works for me. I just ordered his
Eroica and am anxious to hear it.
Matthew B. Tepper
>
>> > on CD.
>> >
>> > Many thanks,
>> > Nicholas
>
>It depends on what you want--
>
>Polished & Powerful: Karajan (60's)
>Slow Yet Vital: Klemperer
>Fast Yet Poised: Harnoncourt
>Dramatic & Energetic: Toscanini
>Spacious & Grand: Furtwangler
>
Except that the poster wanted stereo, which the Toscanini and Furtwängler (and
the best of the Klemperer) aren't.
--
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
Simon Roberts
: There is a review of this cycle on David Howitzer's site
: (http://www.classicstoday.com/f3_0500.html). I found this review
: amusing and informative, but it may enrage others.
Well, it certainly contains the usual proportion of sheer idiocy amongst
the unobjectionable stuff. Thus:
"The ‘authenticists' argue that Beethoven's symphonies are the logical
continuation of the tradition inaugurated by Haydn and Mozart, and should
be played the same way, in accordance with period performance practice.
The symphonies are less important as individual works, than as exemplars
of a compositional style, and performances are adjudged acceptable or
unacceptable simply by virtue of the interpretive approach."
Well, if any "authenticist" said any of those things, I would sneer too –
but which of them does/has? After that swipe at some straw men we get
this attack at some real ones he encountered here (I assume that's his
provocation):
"Much more threatening to a proper understanding of Barenboim's
achievement is the cynical prejudice of the ‘historicists.' These people
believe that standards of interpretation have steadily declined since some
mythical ‘golden age,' generally represented by dreadful sounding mono
radio broadcasts, remastered 78s, and pirate ‘live' recordings given by
dead conductors of varying greatness, from (at the top) Toscanini and
Furtwäängler, to (in the middle) Walter and Mengelberg, to (at the bottom)
anyone alive and in front of a microphone in the days before the LP, or
suitably obscure and (more often than not justifiably) neglected
thereafter."
Well, we've seen that rubbish before here, and there's nothing more that
needs to be said – except: are these alleged "historicist" traits really
"much more threatening" than the idiotic remarks he attributes to
HIPsters? Could anything be more damaging to Beethoven (or anyone else)
than performing his music merely as indistinguishable exemplars of "the
classical (or any other) style"?
"Just as ‘authenticists' exaggerate the role of ‘style' and minimize the
role of the conductor [they do? which ones aside from Hogwood?], so the
‘historicists' extol their podium idols, neglecting the contributions of
ensembles trained in the performance tradition that the conductor claims
to espouse."
Well, we've been here before too. But this very recording demonstrates
precisely the opposite: compare Barenboim's Beethoven with this orchestra
to Suitner's....
And will Hurwitz ever get over his Furtwaengler obsession? Thus Barenboim
is "just as talented, if not more so [than Furtwaengler]." Why is this
generalization necessary here? He continues: "So let's get one thing out
of the way immediately: these performances resemble Furtwängler to the
extent that they belong to the same musical tradition, one that both
conductors share, and that's all. What Furtwängler fanatics tend to forget
is the fact that their idol was not a solitary genius, but a genius
working within the continuum of a performance tradition that did not
originate with him. Nor did it die with him. Indeed, much of it has
nothing to do with conducting at all, but rather with central European
orchestral training and playing habits."
Well, make up your mind. If the conductor matters so little and the
"tradition" so much, and if that tradition is still alive, why is it that
Hurwitz finds Barenboim so superior to Furtwaengler in so many of the
symphonies, not just conceptually but in terms of orchestral execution?
Continuing:
"The classical element in Beethoven was alien to [Furtwängler], as was (in
consequence) much of the composer's blustering humor and sly wit."
Really? Aren't we supposed to be sneering at HIPsters for obsessing about
"the classical element in Beethoven." Isn't the classicism in question a
matter of form and, thus, unrelated to such substantive interpretative
matters as conveying "blustering humor"? But there's more:
"Also problematic were all of those interpretive points that can only be
achieved through the kind of disciplined ensemble coordination,
accentuation, phrasing, and instrumental balance that conductors such as
Toscanini, Szell and Reiner pioneered, and which we take for granted
today."
And which interpretative points are they? We aren't told.
"These are the result of a consistency of execution and sheer podium
technique that Furtwäängler simply lacked. Barenboim's vision of Beethoven
shows none of these weaknesses."
It's unclear what he's saying here. Is he suggesting that Furtwängler's
"inconsistency of execution" is the result of his "vision"? If not,
Barenboim's vision can't be superior because it lacks such flaws of
execution. If so, then he should stop and wonder whether there's more to
music and conducting technique than the sort of precision Hurwitz is
obsessed with, an obsession which allows him to say:
"The Ninth, of course, is Furtwäängler territory, and it's fascinating to
see Barenboim beating the old boy [why "old boy"? How old was Furtwängler
in 1942, and how old is Barenboim today?] at his own game at such places
as the recapitulation of the first movement, which has all of
Furtwäängler's drama and impact but so much more ensemble discipline and
clarity."
But of course it's in part because of all that "ensemble discipline and
clarity" that Barenboim's 9th (not just here but throughout the first and
last movements), despite its virtues, doesn't come close to Furtwängler's
"drama and impact."
And so on, and on, and on, but I've gone on and on and on long enough....
Simon
M-T
is the fact that their idol was not a solitary genius>>
They forget this fact because he *was* a solitary genius... This, quite
independently of how much one admires (or hates) Furtwaengler: there's
no doubt that he was unique, and recognized as such by friend and foe.
Regards,
mt
Baldric
find useful in these posts is when a poster backs up the ideas of
others so in that vein.....
I think you are wasting your time with a complete cycle however I
would recommend in this order:
Walter - minus the Ninth (it's terrible). Replace it with
Cluytens, HvK or Fricsay. (I found a 1945 recording Walter made
with the NYPO)
HvK 1962
Szell
Cluytens - it was the original set I owned on LP and I still
think it rates well overall.
Baldric
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
Brian Cantin
> As a set the HvK 1962 set is an excellent acquisition, but if mixing and
> matching, I personally would opt for Walter/CSO, in the 1st, 2nd, 4th
> and 6th (on Sony).
Agreed to all of the above. In addition, the Furtwangler Lucerne 9th,
the Kleiber 5th/7th that Mr. Hall mentioned (for the the 5th).
Other excellent sets include Szell (if you like your Beethoven
somewhat brutally forceful), Gardiner for HIP (but the 9th is weak),
and Zinman for a vigorous HIP influenced bargain.
--
Brian Cantin
An advocate of poisonous individualism.
To reply via email, replace "dcantin" with "bcantin".
Mark Jordan
(and
> the best of the Klemperer) aren't.
>
Well, that's an obvious enough nit to pick, but I won't withdraw the
recommendation of those mono cycles-- great music deserves great
performances, and those two merit anyone's consideration, even in mono
sound. LvB's scoring is not so dense and colorful that stereo is necessary
to sort it all out.
Mark
samir ghiocel golescu
Of course, and if you read my postings, you may know that I don't give a
damn on stereo as well...
regards,
SG
vaneyes
cycle on
> CD.
>
> Many thanks,
> Nicholas
IMO the necessary LvB cycle starts with Eroica. A box-set of anything
eliminates a lot of fine work.
Single suggestions...
3 Klemperer EMI (stereo)
4 Walter SONY
5 & 7 Kleiber DG
6 & 8 Harnoncourt TELDEC
9 Karajan DG (1977)
Regards
wetmorer
Beethoven; however, I simply do not think that is what
Beethoven had in mind or would have approved off in these
symphonies.
Beethoven was ultimately a classicist IMO. The symphonies
are too often given a teutonic weight that just seems
inconsistent with Beethoven (though I admit I like
listening to it often), not to mention the score. When
first listening to Beethoven's symphonies, I had trouble
getting into them. It wasn't until I heard some that
generally followed the score, and metronome markings that I
felt like "I got it."
IMO, the 1st movement of 5, and the 9th symphony are the
most misrepresented music in the entire symphonic
repretoir. I really think most conductors don't even have
a clue.
I guess my point is, I would always recommend a beginner
something that gives Beethoven's score and metronome
markings quite a bit of weight. That is surely how
Beethoven imagined the works to be played, or at least my
studies have pointed in that direction.
Of course, no one will ever know for sure what Beethoven
had in mind, but ignoring his metronome markings, I think,
would have irritated him if not down right pissed him off
knowing how stubborn he was...
Just my opinion of course
John Grabowski
I've only heard a 9th by DB that was (I think...it was a few years ago)
on Erato (or EMI?). I recall a VERY slow, soggy, weighted performance
that sounded like it was trying to be like Furtwangler. (And I don't
even like WF's later attempts here, for the same reason.) I literally
don't think I made it through the whole CD before it came out of my
player, flew across the room, and made contact with some plaster,
edge-first. That put me off on DB for a long time.
I *hope* the new Teldec recording is better.
BTW, for what it's worth, I think Danny did a superb Brahms 3rd a few
years back on Erato. The others from the cycle I like somewhat less,
but again, he's competing with Furtwangler, whose Brahms, except for the
Third, is pretty hard to beat, IMHO.
John
--
"The future will be better tomorrow." -- Dan Quayle
Spammers: I don't need Viagra, a work-at-home business or a ground-floor
investment opportunity, thank you.
Simon Roberts
: I've only heard a 9th by DB that was (I think...it was a few years ago)
: on Erato (or EMI?). I recall a VERY slow, soggy, weighted performance
: that sounded like it was trying to be like Furtwangler. (And I don't
: even like WF's later attempts here, for the same reason.) I literally
: don't think I made it through the whole CD before it came out of my
: player, flew across the room, and made contact with some plaster,
: edge-first. That put me off on DB for a long time.
: I *hope* the new Teldec recording is better.
It is; but it's not the best performance in the set (that might be 3 or
8), partly because the last movement rather hangs fire.
Simon
Marksten
I'll cast a dissenting vote from the generally positive reviews given this set
to date.
I always try to listen to a new complete B cycle in order with score in hand.
Ergo, I started with the first where I was immediately put off with the
imprecision in the orchestra on their very first entrance. I found the rest of
the symphony pretty sloppy and uninvolving - and everyone here knows that I
never consider precision next to godliness.
My favorite Beethoven, the Fourth, failed to score points as well. A bit
unloved by the conductor - no mystery to the opening and little spunk
thereafter. Barenboim also tries too hard in the Fifth, yanking things around a
bit in an attempt to "say something" rather than letting the music play
naturally.
I found the Pastorale rife with odd balances and over-wrought gestures ending
with an underwhelming romp through the storm music.
In the Ninth he's simply out-gunned by too many others...the opening measures
of his Ninth are totally devoid of mystery, almost as if Barenboim is trying to
say "dammit, they're six-lets" in the strings. No mistaking this for
Furtwangler or Karajan! The chorus is also surprisingly weak (Bohm on DGG still
does the best Ninth Finale in my books). After listening through the whole set
I came away with positive feelings only toward the Eroica and the Eighth.
I guess I lost interest in the cycle pretty early on. I started out listening
to the set in my living room on my best set-up. By the time I hit the Fifth,
the set had been relegated to the car player for auditioning during my commute,
though the Eighth sparked enough interest to give it a whirl later on the
"real" stereo.
As in any cycle, there are moments of interest - a bass line here, a woodwind
lick there. The overall effect, though, didn't add up to much. It's defintely a
vast improvment over the extremely dull, distantly recorded and over-rated
Zinman on Arte Nova, but that's not saying much.
I trust the opinions of many who have a more positive view of the set, so I'll
probably go back and give it another chance at some point. But if first
impressions are to be believed, I'd save my money on this one.
Mark Stenroos
Marc Perman
>Of course, and if you read my postings, you may know that I don't give a
>damn on stereo as well...
Perhaps because you own only one speaker? :)
Marc Perman
Smuras
>on Erato (or EMI?). I recall a VERY slow, soggy, weighted performance
>that sounded like it was trying to be like Furtwangler. (And I don't
>even like WF's later attempts here, for the same reason.) I literally
>don't think I made it through the whole CD before it came out of my
>player, flew across the room, and made contact with some plaster,
>edge-first. That put me off on DB for a long time.
>
>I *hope* the new Teldec recording is better.
>
>years back on Erato. The others from the cycle I like somewhat less,
>but again, he's competing with Furtwangler, whose Brahms, except for the
>Third, is pretty hard to beat, IMHO.
>
>
>
>John
>
I do think the Teldec recording is much better, at least, I like it a lot, lot
more, and I'm rather partial to this sort of approach. In part, I think some
of the differences in my perception of new Teldec vs. Erato (yes, it was on
Erato) performances result from differences in the recorded sound. The Erato
does seem to veil the sound, diminishing the differences among the different
sections of the orchestra: the timpani in the Erato have far less presence, the
bass and cello sound heavier and far less resonant and articulate, the
woodwinds are there, yes, but often barely, and I seem to "sense" more than
really hear very clearly the inner voices. The basic approach seems to be
consistent, but the new Teldec recording has far more rhythmic punch; the
clarity and presence of sound allow the different sections of the orchestra to
play off of each other with more drama, color and poetry. The timings, but for
the scherzo, are pretty much the same: 9i is now 17:35, while the Erato is
17:51, but the Teldec is to me far more dramatic. The weighty sonority now
really moves the music forward. (Sheesh, I just reread what I wrote, sorry to
sound so darned stuffy, at least I didn't claim that DB had the measure of the
music.)
Stanley M.
Jeremy Dimmick
news:8ff9ms$nh$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> In article <8fabjf$3nj$1...@nntp9.atl.mindspring.net>,
> "Nicholas" <nos...@usa.net> wrote:
> > Could anyone make a recommendation for a stereo Beethoven symphony
> cycle on
> > CD.
> >
> > Many thanks,
> > Nicholas
>
>
> IMO the necessary LvB cycle starts with Eroica. A box-set of anything
> eliminates a lot of fine work.
> Single suggestions...
>
>
> 3 Klemperer EMI (stereo)
> 4 Walter SONY
> 5 & 7 Kleiber DG
> 6 & 8 Harnoncourt TELDEC
> 9 Karajan DG (1977)
>
Harnouncourt's set as the pick, but I can't really work out why. The 8th is
fine, if a bit relentlessly over-accentuated for my tastes, but the 6th I
don't get on with at all. Mannerism and point-making throughout the first
movement which I find seriously annoying, and things only partly improve
after that. He seems to be going "what shall I do with *this* phrase?",
time after time. Walter's superb 4th is coupled with a 6th that strikes me
as much more the sort of thing.
My pick of Harnoncourt's cycle - conveniently adding a recommendation for
no. 2 - is 2 and 5. His fifth is slightly odd, in that the first movement
is relatively sober, as though he's worried that going all out for drama
here will make the rest of the symphony anticlimactic, and in fact he's
superb thereafter. The Second is beyond reproach for me, one of the best
performances I've heard of a subtle and really challenging score, full of
wit and a kind of poised, appropriately self-aware elegance, as well as
propulsiveness and rhythmic zest. I also like Harnoncourt's Eroica (coupled
with a decent 1st), though a lot of people find his first movement just too
fast. He's exceptional in the funeral march, which is strikingly austere
without being especially slow. Szell also does a mean Third.
Jeremy
John Grabowski
[lots of interesting comments snipped]
What really annoyed me (I just started reading the review) is the very
opening, which you didn't mention:
His long-anticipated Beethoven cycle belongs in the pantheon
of great recorded versions of this music, a fact that unbiased
listeners will readily admit...
I hate this kind of straw man tactic: if you agree with what I say,
you're an unbiased listener. If you don't, you're not. So if I told DH
I didn't hear it this way, I'd be "biased" and I'd have an agenda. Yet
it sure sounds by these loaded words that if anyone here has a bias,
it's him.
Then...
...after a few minute's encounter with any one of these nine
staggeringly fine performances.
Again, I haven't heard this set, so I'm neither burying nor praising DB,
but this comment raises a red flag, just based on my experience: he
seems enamored with all these performances. I've yet to find a cycle of
LvB symphones, or anything else for that matter, where I am enthusiastic
about everything in the box. Some conductors do this well, some do that
well. *No one* does everything well. If DH thinks so, he's not
listening very carefully, or with high criteria. Here alone I'm
wondering if I will get anything out of this review, and I'm only on the
first paragraph.
A. Brain
news:20000511224801...@ng-cs1.aol.com...
> Re Barenboim's Teldec Beethoven cycle:
>
> I'll cast a dissenting vote from the generally positive reviews given this
set
> to date.
>
> In the Ninth he's simply out-gunned by too many others...the opening
measures
> of his Ninth are totally devoid of mystery, almost as if Barenboim is
trying to
> say "dammit, they're six-lets" in the strings. No mistaking this for
> Furtwangler or Karajan! The chorus is also surprisingly weak (Bohm on DGG
still
> does the best Ninth Finale in my books).
It's defintely a
> vast improvment over the extremely dull, distantly recorded and over-rated
> Zinman on Arte Nova, but that's not saying much.
Which of the Boehm recordings on DGG are you referring to? (There's a
recent reissue of a 1971/2 recording from a complete set, then there's the
digital one from much later.)
I like what I have heard of the Zinman, but haven't heard the 9th.
--
A. Brain
Remove "nospam" when replying via email
> Mark Stenroos
MSten4MHS
Early 1970s with Jones, Troyanos, Thomas, Ridderbusch, VPO.
Mark Stenroos
VP of Marketing & Catalog Development
Musical Heritage Society, USA
Simon Roberts
: I like what I have heard of the Zinman, but haven't heard the 9th.
Unless you want to complete his series I would suggest you skip it: it's
small-scale, underpowered and offers no virtues that I can detect except
for a minor textual variation in the finale.
Simon
Mark Jordan
damn on stereo as well...
regards,
SG
Yes, Samir, I know : ) I don't post very many comments, so it may be a
while before everyone's familiar with my approach. But I read lots of posts
and always look forward to yours.
Cheers,
Mark
Matthew B. Tepper
>
Are you referring to the baritone decorating his solo? (Which is the
only one which comes to mind from my one hearing of it.) I was under the
impression that it uses a "new" edition of the 5th as well.
--
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
Simon Roberts
: In article <8fh154$ij9$1...@netnews.upenn.edu>, si...@dept.english.upenn.edu
: >Unless you want to complete his series I would suggest you skip it: it's
: >small-scale, underpowered and offers no virtues that I can detect except
: >for a minor textual variation in the finale.
: >
: >Simon
: Are you referring to the baritone decorating his solo? (Which is the
: only one which comes to mind from my one hearing of it.) I was under the
: impression that it uses a "new" edition of the 5th as well.
No; I'm referring to whatever it is at some transitional point (a firmata?
I can't remember; if no-one else chimes in I'll report back when I get
home and get a chance to look at the disc) in the finale which gives
Zinman an opportunity to perform half or more of the last movement twice
(once the usual way, once the alternative way); it struck me when I heard
it as a lot of fuss over nothing much, but who knows. By the way, in case
you've not heard any of his recordings in this series, the most obvious
textual differences in this series have nothing to do with the new edition
but with Zinman's encouraging wind players to embellish their lines at
certain points.
Simon
vaneyes
I haven't had the chance to read too many of the posts. I did see one or
two that approach the LvB Syms. as I do, in a piece-meal manner (If
someone just hasta have a box-set with the same conductor, then gofer
Herbie's '62 or '77).
Didn't see the other Harnoncourt mentionings.
You and I have different takes on the Harnoncourt 6 & 8 disc. I don't
think it's over-cooked at all (We're not talkin' Lenny here). Quite the
contrary, I see lots of subtlety in it. Mannerism is there, thank God,
but just the right amounts IMO. I like how the soloists get involved
without overdoing it...being annoying as you say. Some bands are like
Glenn Miller or Tommy Dorsey, the way the stage is set for the
principals.
Re Harnoncourt's 2 & 5, I'm not interested in 2 by anybody, and 5 I'll
continue to leave with Kleiber...no need to look beyond.
The Szell cycle I just can't listen to anymore. It's begun to all blend
together. Don't know whether it's the perfectionism George demanded or
the sound...might be both. Consider that nit-picking on my part, if you
like.
I have no problem with the Walter 6 that's attached with the 4. It's a
little "bigger" than Harnoncourt's, that's all. The sound on this disc
(20-bit remastered), as well as the Harnoncourt 6 & 8, is impeccable.
Let's never confuse superb dynamics with annoying mannerisms.
Baldric
<dca...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>si...@dept.english.upenn.edu (Simon Roberts) writes:
>
>The Zinman 9th is the weak link in an otherwise fine set.
You could say that about quite a few Beethoven sets with the
Walter/Columbia SO being the most glaring example, followed by
the Harnoncourt. For a reversal of this the only version of
the 9th that Fricsay recorded is great but his efforts with 3,5 7
& 8 are lamentable (with the possible exception of 7).
Brian Cantin
> A. Brain (abr...@nospam.att.net) wrote:
>
> : I like what I have heard of the Zinman, but haven't heard the 9th.
>
> Unless you want to complete his series I would suggest you skip it: it's
> small-scale, underpowered and offers no virtues that I can detect except
> for a minor textual variation in the finale.
The Zinman 9th is the weak link in an otherwise fine set.
--
Jeremy Dimmick
> I haven't had the chance to read too many of the posts. I did see one or
> two that approach the LvB Syms. as I do, in a piece-meal manner (If
> someone just hasta have a box-set with the same conductor, then gofer
> Herbie's '62 or '77).
> Didn't see the other Harnoncourt mentionings.
Not in this thread, sorry - just a vague "in the past". It's something I
remember from some early reviews.
> You and I have different takes on the Harnoncourt 6 & 8 disc.
We do, don't we? (And I adore the 2nd symphony, too.) Thank the lord for
diversity.
Best,
Jeremy
horizon
Every performance is generally good, and some are truly outstanding (with
the best last two movements of the 9th I have ever heard). Sound ranges
from good to boxy, depending on the vintage.
Matt Carnicelli
"Nicholas" <nos...@usa.net> wrote in message
news:8fabjf$3nj$1...@nntp9.atl.mindspring.net...
Matthew Silverstein
Simon wrote:
[snip]
> it as a lot of fuss over nothing much, but who knows. By the way, in case
> you've not heard any of his recordings in this series, the most obvious
> textual differences in this series have nothing to do with the new edition
> but with Zinman's encouraging wind players to embellish their lines at
> certain points.
To occasionally disastrous effect (the oboe solo in the recapitulation of
7/i). And it's not only winds; see the opening of 3/iv.
Matty
Brian Cantin
> In article <wkk8gz8...@earthlink.net>, Brian Cantin
> <dca...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> Walter/Columbia SO being the most glaring example, followed by
> the Harnoncourt.
Yowsa, the Walter 9th is a mess. The Gardiner set is another example
of the 9th being the weakest performance.
In the 9th, you have to have capable soloists. Getting together 4
capable vocal soloists is a challange. Keeping the rythmic pulse
between the orchestra and chorus is not always attained even by the
best conductors. Then there are the stylistic challenges. Making the
fourth movement coher with the first three is something few conductors
manage. One of the reasons I like the Smidt-Issestedt so much is
the coherence of the performance. The soloists are not too bad
either.
vaneyes
<<I hate this kind of straw man tactic: if you agree with what I say,
you're an unbiased listener. If you don't, you're not. So if I told
DH I didn't hear it this way, I'd be "biased" and I'd have an agenda.
Yet it sure sounds by these loaded words that if anyone here has a bias,
it's him.>>
Prefaces or taglines along this line are used all the time, in here and
elsewhere, to show reviewer-enthusiasm for the work(s) more than
anything, not to insult the reader.
<<'...after a few minute's encounter with any one of these nine
staggeringly fine performances.'
Again, I haven't heard this set, so I'm neither burying nor praising DB,
but this comment raises a red flag, just based on my experience: he
seems enamored with all these performances. I've yet to find a cycle of
LvB symphones, or anything else for that matter, where I am enthusiastic
about everything in the box. Some conductors do this well, some do that
well. *No one* does everything well. If DH thinks so, he's not
listening very carefully, or with high criteria. Here alone I'm
wondering if I will get anything out of this review, and I'm only on the
first paragraph.>>
His enthusiasm does appear to go over the top. I agree that box-sets do
not contain all the glory.
I have sampled snippets from each Symphony and preview-liked what I
heard in both sound and performance. 9's singing is a little different
from what I'm used to, but that's my bias, and may be considered as
nit-picking, not a detriment to the performance.
I want to hear more from these works, but will I buy the set? No, I'm
not about to fork out $70 to $80 on curiosity...and also run against my
LvB Syms. piece-meal philosophy.
vaneyes
Amen to diversity.
On the other hand, there are several versions of most works most people
can agree on and live with quite happily.
Lists are boiling-down processes, and the results can often invoke raw
or tender discussion. hehe
Paul Kintzele
Brian Cantin wrote:
>
> Yowsa, the Walter 9th is a mess. The Gardiner set is another example
> of the 9th being the weakest performance.
I disagree about the Gardiner 9th; I quite like it. The vigor and
violence in the first movement are extraordinary, and the soloists and
choir in the finale are superb (for once you can hear all the notes in
the introductory "O Freunde!"). On the other hand, the Zinman 9th,
which was what touched off this sub-thread, is not the copestone to the
cycle it could (and should) have been; the first two movements are okay
and at least comparable to the performances elsewhere in the set, but
somewhere in the Adagio the juice drains out of the musicmaking,
resulting in a rather routine finale.
Paul
W. J. McCutcheon
Paul Kintzele <kint...@english.upenn.edu> wrote in message
news:391DA4B7...@english.upenn.edu...
I also really like Gardiner, including the 9th. You may be in the minority,
Paul, but you're definitely not alone. [I haven't heard Zinman, can't
comment on that.] -- Bill McCutcheon
Matthew Silverstein
> I also really like Gardiner, including the 9th. You may be in the minority,
> Paul, but you're definitely not alone. [I haven't heard Zinman, can't
> comment on that.] -- Bill McCutcheon
I love it too--one of my favourites.
Matty
Ward Hardman jr
Mark Jordan wrote:
> > > Could anyone make a recommendation for a stereo Beethoven
symphony cycle
> on
> > > CD.
> > >
> > > Many thanks,
> > > Nicholas
>
>
> Polished & Powerful: Karajan (60's)
> Slow Yet Vital: Klemperer
> Fast Yet Poised: Harnoncourt
> Dramatic & Energetic: Toscanini
> Spacious & Grand: Furtwangler
>
> Mark
Shallow and Dull: Harnoncourt. In fact that's not strong enough.
Harnoncourt is second only to Norrington in production of amusical
shit.
William Sommerwerck
> enough. Harnoncourt is second only to Norrington in
> production of amusical shit.
This is the sort of response that makes me wonder what the point of any
reviewing is.
Of the perhaps ten Beethoven symphony cycles I've heard, and none has ever
struck me as being of consistently high quality except the Harnoncourt. It's the
only one whose performances stand comparison with the best separate recordings.
(The Pastoral is the best I've ever heard, anywhere.) They are anything but
shallow (if you want shallow and amusical, try Gardiner). My only quibble is
that Harnoncourt tends to bring the final movements to relatively limp
conclusions.
This is a set very much worth having. If you're new to Beethoven symphonies, get
it. You can then start exploring other performances of each work.
PS: Harnoncourt seems to be entering the decline that afflicts almost every
conductor in his latter years -- "slow + mannered = profound." The recent Bartok
album was great, but it included samples from other albums, one of which, a
movement from Ma Vlast, was a misconceived disaster.
Alex
"Ward Hardman jr" <wfh...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1102660909.4...@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>
> Shallow and Dull: Harnoncourt. In fact that's not strong enough.
> Harnoncourt is second only to Norrington in production of amusical
> shit.
Can't agree, I'm no fan of Norrington (an understatement) but Harnoncourt is
in a different class - e.g. his versions of Schumann 4 and Schubert 4 (BPO)
and Schubert 9 (Concertgebouw) are my favourites of any recordings.
Mozart and Haydn also powerful if occasionally mannered. His Brahms,
Beethoven and perhaps Bruckner are less essential IMHO, but the Bruckner 9
is good. Orchestral musicians certainly think he is very talented.
MIFrost
I wonder if you've seen the raves of Mr. Norrington's new Beethoven
cycle on the Classicstoday website:
http://www.classicstoday.com/review.asp?ReviewNum=6291
Have you (or anyone) heard these and are they as good as they're
purported to be? I have no true-HIP set and would like to get one.
MIFrost
Ivailo Partchev
instruments are concerned. So that might leave you with Gardiner. But do
have a look at Savall's recording of No.3
Simon Roberts
says...
I don't know what you mean by "true-HIP" but if that includes period
instruments, Norrington II doesn't qualify. If you want such a thing I would
recommend Bruggen's on Philips (if it's still in print) over the alternatives,
augmented by an Eroica with a fast i (Savall's) and a better recorded 9th
(Gardiner's or Herreweghe's perhaps).
Simon
Bill McCutcheon
"Ivailo Partchev" <Ivailo....@uni-jena.de> wrote in message
news:cpcntg$bve$1...@fsuj29.rz.uni-jena.de...
> Neither Harnoncourt nor the new Norrington are 100% HIP as far as the
> instruments are concerned. So that might leave you with Gardiner. But do
> have a look at Savall's recording of No.3
>
really like Gardiner. For a set that draws less vitriol from this NG,
there's Bruggen. I don't like Norrington 1 nor Goodman.
-- Bill McC.
MIFrost
think are absolutely outstanding. I wish he'd record the Beethoven.
MIFrost
Paul Ilechko
I have his Beethoven 1 and 2 - they are available cheaply from BRO.
JR
find a better deal on line? Thanks.
Bob Harper
be completed, though from what I've read/heard, this seems unlikely.
Still, would it be too much to ask for 3, 5 & 7?
Bob Harper
Ward Hardman jr
William Sommerwerck wrote:
> > Shallow and Dull: Harnoncourt. In fact, that's not strong
> > enough. Harnoncourt is second only to Norrington in
> > production of amusical shit.
>
> This is the sort of response that makes me wonder what the point of
any
> reviewing is.
Huh?
>
> Of the perhaps ten Beethoven symphony cycles I've heard, and none has
ever
> struck me as being of consistently high quality except the
Harnoncourt.
This is the sort of response that makes me wonder if someone is missing
their trousers because someone else has cloth ears. What sort of virtue
is that? What is the use of cycle being consistently anything?
William Sommerwerck
>>> Shallow and Dull: Harnoncourt. In fact, that's not strong
>>> enough. Harnoncourt is second only to Norrington in
>>> production of amusical shit.
>> This is the sort of response that makes me wonder what
>> the point of any reviewing is.
> Huh?
If two people have diametrically opposed views, especially in terms of what they
hear (as opposed to how they react to or interpret what they hear), what's the
point of reviewing?
Fanfare sometimes publishes multiple reviews of controversial recordings.
Variations in taste I understand. But (for example) when one reviewer says the
soprano sings with great expression, and the other says she's univolved, you
have to wonder. This sort of observation is more or less objective, having
little to do with taste. How am I supposed to figure out which reviewer is
"right" (other than buying the recording)?
>> Of the perhaps ten Beethoven symphony cycles I've heard, and
>> none has ever struck me as being of consistently high quality
>> except the Harnoncourt.
> This is the sort of response that makes me wonder if someone is missing
> their trousers because someone else has cloth ears. What sort of virtue
> is that? What is the use of cycle being consistently anything?
One reason for buying performer X's cycle of composer Y's cycle is to learn how
he views those works, simply for your own education and edification, whether or
not you agree. My favorite Beethoven piano sonata sets are Goode's and Roberts'.
Their approaches to these works are consistent and quite different. (The Roberts
set on Nimbus is $3 a disk, a total, utter steal. Wait until you hear #14 --
worth the price of admission.)
Another reason is to get a uniformly good set at an attractive price so you
don't have buy separate disks. The Harnoncourt is the _only_ BS cycle I could
recommend to someone on a tight budget who didn't want to buy individual
recordings -- as I said, the performances can stand comparison with the best
individual disks.
I'm not a big fan of HvK (at least, not his "latter" performances), but the 1963
BS cycle is a solid, middle-of-the-road set that I could also recommend to a
more-conservative listener.
El Klauso
especially at the Arte Nova price. However, the bloomy sonic ambience
works against the clarity Zinman and the new edition were trying to
achieve.
I know the Wand cycle has been subject to a bit of bashing over the
last decade; but it is a good, objectivist old-school view of the works
in decent enough sound. Solti often seems merely brusque, Szell's sound
and his corseted approach may distance many, and Karajan's readings,
except for the early stereo DG version, seem slack.
Of the authentic instrument approach, I can only give a nod to
Gardiner. His readings are both dramatically cogent and seemingly
observant of most of the tenants of HIP. Hogwood's approach seems
suspiciously like Beecham with gut strings, and the Hannover Band
sounds..well, scrawny is the first term that comes to mind.
Now, if you want to talk Monophonic, the field opens up considerably...
Regards,
Chuck Klaus
Paul Ilechko
> I'm not a big fan of HvK (at least, not his "latter" performances), but the 1963
> BS cycle is a solid, middle-of-the-road set that I could also recommend to a
> more-conservative listener.
>
I could almost give you that ... if it wasn't for the godawful versions
of 3, 4 and 6. Blomstedt is better overall, but HvK beats him hands down
in 5 and 8. Between the two cycles you can get a halfway decent set,
though ;-)
Ward Hardman jr
'Sbring' posted this about Harnoncourt a few years ago, sorry, I
haven't worked out how to post a link with the new google groups.
"But the fact is I'm intrigued by two things. One is the fact that so
many value his conducting so highly, and often referring to qualities
which are exactly those I find missing. The other is the difficulty I
have to pinpoint what makes his music making so obnoxious to me. It's
not that it often sounds mechanical; that's excusable and to be just he
just as often creates unmotivated rubati and dynamic effects. The
nearest I get to describe the feelings I get when I listen to his
recordings is a kind of meanness; it's like the ceiling is very low
over his musicians. Curious... He executes music, but like an
executioner."
gggg...@gmail.com
> On 10 May 2000 10:57:35 GMT, (Simon
> Roberts) wrote:
>
> >Matthew Silverstein () wrote:
> >
> >: Can someone describe the virtues of Cluytens' Beethoven? I heard a few of
> >: these recordings a long time ago and was not impressed. Now that they are so
> >: cheap at Berkshire, I was thinking of picking them up. But can someone let me
> >: know what I'm in for if I do?
> >
> >I can't say they impress me much either, though that's partly because by
> >the time I got around to relistening to them on CD I had already heard
> >so many "central" performances that these seemed redundant (but then I
> >didn't think much of them when I first heard them on LP in the 1970s).
> >Part of the problem may be the rather dull sound: I wonder if it's a
> >coincidence that I've kept the discs containing 4, 5 and 9 which, with
> >their rather brighter, more immediate sound, make the performances seem
> >more incisive and powerful (I refer to the Seraphim transfers; I've no
> >idea how the French EMI and Royal Classics transfers compare).
> >They're certainly far from being bad, but given what I think I know of
> >your taste, I rather doubt you would be much taken by them.
> >
> >Simon
> >
> >
>
> I agree. I recently got these in the inexpensive Royal Classics box
> because I had read so many glowing recommendations here on RMCR about
> them. I found them to be rather ordinary central performances.
>
> I will stick with Toscanini...
According to this article:
- His recordings of Beethoven's symphonic cycles are eloquent testimony to his artistic philosophy.
http://chicagomaroon.com/2005/05/17/the-aesthetic-brilliance-of-toscanini-and-furtwangler/
Terry
> Could anyone make a recommendation for a stereo Beethoven symphony cycle on
> CD.
>
> Many thanks,
> Nicholas
Dave Cook
Dave Cook
eugenep...@gmail.com
> I don't know about a cycle but I am particularly fond, at the moment because
> I'm listening to it, of the new Teldec release of Mengelberg and the
> Concertgebouw doing the 5th and 6th in 1937. The sound is glorious and the way
> he paces it and lets the music breathe is marvelous. I highly recommend this
> issue.
>
> Terry Ellsworth
Dear Terry Ellsworth--
I can't figure out how to make the site do this privately, which is how I'd prefer to write this. I think I used to correspond with you on a regular basis and we exchanged recordings many times. This was, for you, in a sort of previous life I think. If you are that Terry Ellsworth, would you please get into touch with me. My-mail address is: gpol...@comcast.net. Thanks. Gene pollioni
gggg...@gmail.com
> Could anyone make a recommendation for a stereo Beethoven symphony cycle on
> CD.
>
> Many thanks,
> Nicholas