Haydn's London Symphonies
Bill Carroll
as performed by The Royal Concertgebow, conducted by Sir Colin Davis.Posting
just to prompt others to think of these magnificent symphonies -- maybe the
finest ever by anyone. HIP suggestions would be fun to get.This Davis
rendition is riveting.
bc
Sacqueboutier
Jochum on DGG is equally bracing.
For HIP, try any Bruggen you can find.
--
AAAAAHHHHH! The atmosphere! AAAAAAAHHHHHH!
Don Patterson
* DCP Music Printing
* Professional Computer Music Typeset
* Music Arrangements
* don...@olg.com
* Trombonist
* "The President's Own"
* United States Marine Band
Rick Cavalla
Davis is my favorite on modern instruments. For HIP, my top choice would be
Bruggen, who has recently been reissued on a couple of Philips DUOs. I also
like the two volumes (103/95/104 and 101/94/102) of Hickox on Chandos. Fey
on Hanssler is quasi-HIP (period brass, but modern everything else, I
think). He has only recorded 94, 104, and 95 (spread across two discs).
Unlike Hickox he is doing all of Haydn's symphonies, not just the London.
Start with Bruggen, but these are all worth checking out; one can never have
too much Haydn. :-)
Rick Cavalla
ra...@NO.erols.SPAM.com
==============
Currently listening to: Dufay - The Isorhythmic Motets
==============
Jim Ringland
lv...@sympatico.ca says...
Jochum and Brüggen. I've also gone through a variety of individual
disks. Having spent a few glorious weeks last September and October re-
listening to my collection of London symphonies, let me pass on some of
my notes. Many are very good. Nobody is perfect.
To calibrate, let me start with Davis. As noted, this is my favorite
full set. At his best (101 and 102 are especially good) Davis can be the
epitome of the big, smooth, subtle, flowing full orchestral Haydn.
Davis brings beautiful string tone and excellent woodwinds. This can be
alluringly lovely. Davis brings out the grace in Haydn: some of this can
be lilting. The downside is that Davis can lack force. In many places I
wish Davis would just let loose a bit more, and, when he does so, I
lament that he doesn't do so all the time. Brass can be weak. Tympani
are a special issue: sometimes they are fine contributors, but boomy
sound is a problem in several places.
Brüggen goes for a big, muscular, emphatic period instrument style.
Winds tend to be clear but the rather 'reedy' period string timbre
sometimes lessens their individuality. There is plenty of both energy
and weight, sometimes at the expense of being a bit heavy (or even heavy-
handed!) and missing some of the subtleties. When this flows just a bit
more, this style can develop a certain drive (even tension) that gives
Brüggen has an impact none of the others can match. 103 and 104 are
excellent and I quite like his 96, 97, 99, and 100 too. His 98 is widely
praised, but I find it just a bit too tense after enjoying the smoother
Davis.
Jochum's sound is very string heavy. The woodwinds do not come out as in
Davis and, with a few exceptions, the brass are really buried. This can
be more energetic than Davis in the outer movements, but Jochum does not
have Davis' subtlety or, in his hectic finales, the control. I've not
kept this.
Three HIP disks I've much enjoyed:
Hickox 95/103/104. This is a set of somewhat smaller-scale period
instrument readings. The winds are generally very nicely prominent with
clean sound -- sometimes there is even a whooping horn or blazing trumpet
call. The period string sound is not aggressive. A superb 95 (great
cello work in ii and iii). The smaller scale 103 is a fine complement to
Brüggen.
Goodman (93/94/95 and 101/102) Goodman is uniquely energetic (even
boisterous) and delightfully colorful, if maybe a bit short on precision.
This is a smaller period orchestra, but there can be weight (but no
heaviness) here. The readings have the requisite exuberance to handle
even the large symphony 102. I love his bold muted trumpet in 102/ii.
One oddity is Goodman's prominent use of fortepiano continuo. Tinkling
along in energetic sections is no problem, but it gets uncomfortably in
the way of some of the smoother lines. OOP but these have around at
Berkshire.
A few others:
I like Dorati's 94 (or more honestly, I love his fast, clean, but not
overdone 94/ii). I just found a used copy of Hogwood's 94/96, long OOP.
On first hearing, 96 is everyone Simon in this group have said it to be:
strong and perfectly balanced. I kind of like Goberman's big grand 98,
available from Pierre Paquin at http://sd-associates.com/ Take Davis and
make it even more bold, slow, and grand (if less subtle). On the whole,
Wöldike's big band sound is generally too much for me, but his 100 seems
just right. Rosbaud offers a stylish and clean full orchestral version.
1956 mono sound is quite fine (very occasionally boomy) by modern
standards.
There is a 13-th orchestral London item: the sinfonia concertante. I
have only the Wallfisch/OAE recording, which does little for me. Maybe
others can offer up some suggestions here.
--
Jim Ringland
Arthur La Porta
> Bill Carroll wrote:
> >
> > Having a glorious Saturday in Toronto listening to Haydn's London Symphonies
> > as performed by The Royal Concertgebow, conducted by Sir Colin Davis.Posting
> > just to prompt others to think of these magnificent symphonies -- maybe the
> > finest ever by anyone. HIP suggestions would be fun to get.This Davis
> > rendition is riveting.
> > bc
>
> Jochum on DGG is equally bracing.
Jochum on DGG is the worst I have ever heard. Woodwinds are week, brass are just
about completely inaudible. The sound is completely dominated by strings, and
there is no excuse for that.
I like Harnoncourt's recordings with the Concertgebouw, which used to be
available in a box set, but parts of which are available on Ultima releases.
Although they are performed with a modern orchestra, they are HIP insofar as
Harnoucourt's direction is concerned. They are remarkable in their aggressive
brass and percussion.
Raymond Hall
news:MPG.16a0f5b7a...@news.mindspring.com...
| In article <J1HZ7.46735$4d7.5...@news20.bellglobal.com>,
| lv...@sympatico.ca says...
| > Having a glorious Saturday in Toronto listening to Haydn's London
Symphonies
| > as performed by The Royal Concertgebow, conducted by Sir Colin
Davis.Posting
| > just to prompt others to think of these magnificent symphonies -- maybe
the
| > finest ever by anyone. HIP suggestions would be fun to get.This Davis
| > rendition is riveting.
| > bc
| >
| >
| >
| As a complete set, Davis remains my favorite. I have (or have had)
| Jochum and Brüggen. I've also gone through a variety of individual
| disks. Having spent a few glorious weeks last September and October re-
| listening to my collection of London symphonies, let me pass on some of
| my notes. Many are very good. Nobody is perfect.
Any comments about Szell's 93-98? Bold and muscular performances, aided by
the sound. Great fun though.
I agree about the quality of Davis's Haydn also, but often wish some of
Szell's impact would have rubbed off on Davis, who seems to have a tendency
to worry about every damn detail. Prissy is the word that comes to my mind
often with Davis. But I wouldn't be without his London symphonies.
Regards,
# RMCR Contributor Links :
# http://www.users.bigpond.com/hallraylily/tassiedevil2.htm
# Main Page :
# http://www.users.bigpond.com/hallraylily/index.html
Ray, Sydney
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.307 / Virus Database: 168 - Release Date: 11/12/01
Jim Ringland
hallr...@bigpond.com says...
...
>
> Any comments about Szell's 93-98? Bold and muscular performances, aided by
> the sound. Great fun though.
Don't have them. How is the balance between winds and strings? My sense
is that can be a problem in full orchestral versions.
>
> I agree about the quality of Davis's Haydn also, but often wish some of
> Szell's impact would have rubbed off on Davis, who seems to have a tendency
> to worry about every damn detail. Prissy is the word that comes to my mind
> often with Davis. But I wouldn't be without his London symphonies.
>
I'm not sure I'd go that far, but I'll admit his 96/I brings to mind
words like and gutless and wimpy, especially after the likes of Brüggen,
Hogwood, or even Harnoncourt.
--
Jim Ringland
Jim Ringland
jtr...@mindspring.com says...
> On the whole,
> Wöldike's big band sound is generally too much for me, but his 100 seems
> just right. Rosbaud offers a stylish and clean full orchestral version.
> 1956 mono sound is quite fine (very occasionally boomy) by modern
> standards.
>
Before someone else notes the problem here, let me correct my own
posting. Those last sentences should read
Rosbaud's 104 offers a stylish and clean full orchestral version.
1956 mono sound is quite fine (very occasionally boomy) by modern
standards.
--
Jim Ringland
Lena
>
> I agree about the quality of Davis's Haydn also, but often wish some of
> Szell's impact would have rubbed off on Davis, who seems to have a tendency
> to worry about every damn detail. Prissy is the word that comes to my mind
> often with Davis.
Somehow, the word "prissy" doesn't enter my mind when I hear Davis'. Not
really as strong and incisive as Brueggen, and perhaps there could
occasionally be more oomph, but most of these have good momentum, and there's
no excessive worrying about details, IMO.
A very interesting (and probably impossible to get) conductor for Haydn:
Maerzendorfer. (Have only a couple of his London symphonies, but treasure
them - these are definitely not small scale Haydn.)
Lena
Raymond Hall
| In article <a180k9$o55p9$1...@ID-101911.news.dfncis.de>,
| hallr...@bigpond.com says...
|
| ...
| >
| > Any comments about Szell's 93-98? Bold and muscular performances, aided
by
| > the sound. Great fun though.
|
| Don't have them. How is the balance between winds and strings? My sense
| is that can be a problem in full orchestral versions.
In the louder passages, the strings do definitely tend to dominate, but in
the passages where the woodwinds play a prominent role (2/3 of the way into
the Andante of 94, to take an example), they are heard to good effect, and
the balance is good, partly because the strings are required to play much
softer. The balance is acceptable, and many of these Haydn symphonies by
Szell, indicate to me (by his impeccable phrasing, and also gusto), just
what a great Haydn conductor Szell could be.
| > I agree about the quality of Davis's Haydn also, but often wish some of
| > Szell's impact would have rubbed off on Davis, who seems to have a
tendency
| > to worry about every damn detail. Prissy is the word that comes to my
mind
| > often with Davis. But I wouldn't be without his London symphonies.
| >
|
| I'm not sure I'd go that far, but I'll admit his 96/I brings to mind
| words like and gutless and wimpy, especially after the likes of Brüggen,
| Hogwood, or even Harnoncourt.
I tend to agree, but the Davis Concertgebouw Haydn London symphonies are
still a great big-band set. A bit more of Szell's adrenalin wouldn't have
gone amiss however. Nothing is perfect.
Which brings me to a question. Did Szell ever record the additional London
symphonies? If he didn't, then I consider it another sad case of recordings
that could and might have been.
Raymond Hall
news:6b33de45.0201...@posting.google.com...
| "Raymond Hall" <hallr...@bigpond.com> wrote in message
news:<a180k9$o55p9$1...@ID-101911.news.dfncis.de>...
|
| >
| > I agree about the quality of Davis's Haydn also, but often wish some of
| > Szell's impact would have rubbed off on Davis, who seems to have a
tendency
| > to worry about every damn detail. Prissy is the word that comes to my
mind
| > often with Davis.
|
| Somehow, the word "prissy" doesn't enter my mind when I hear Davis'. Not
| really as strong and incisive as Brueggen, and perhaps there could
| occasionally be more oomph, but most of these have good momentum, and
there's
| no excessive worrying about details, IMO.
As I seem to be entering a Haydn phase, I'll give the Davis set another
listen over the next few weeks. But generally I nearly always find myself
reaching for Szell in 93-98. For that extra oomph <g> The only HIP Haydn I
have is Weil, in the Paris set, and several other assorted symphonies,
including 88-90. Punchy and chunky. Excuse my use of adjectives - so damn
hot here, for so long, am getting lazy.
| A very interesting (and probably impossible to get) conductor for Haydn:
| Maerzendorfer. (Have only a couple of his London symphonies, but treasure
| them - these are definitely not small scale Haydn.)
Maerzendorfer's Haydn often gets mentioned. How much Haydn did he record?
Simon Roberts
> There is a 13-th orchestral London item: the sinfonia concertante. I
> have only the Wallfisch/OAE recording, which does little for me.
Maybe
> others can offer up some suggestions here.
Staying with HIP performances, Kuijken (coupled with cello concertos),
Brueggen (coupled with a pair of symphonies) and Harnoncourt (with some
other conertos) are all far superior to this boring recording; so for
that matter is the older Collegium Aureum disc. Steer clear of the
impossibly tame Norrington performance.
Simon
Simon Roberts
>
> Maerzendorfer's Haydn often gets mentioned. How much Haydn did he
record?
The whole lot, released on LP by MHS. Sadly none has been released on
CD (MHS no longer have the rights; I have no idea where they got them
from). The series is inconsistent, and they're hardly the last word in
polish, but at their best the performances have a degree of vitality and
flair sadly lacking in most performances (101/i is quite exhilirating).
His is the only performance of 93 I've heard whose first movement comes
close to my notion of allegro assai (some slow performances work, such
as Brueggen's, but it's odd that so many seem to think andante is
sufficient).
Simon
Martha & Russ Oppenheim
Arthur La Porta wrote:
>
> Sacqueboutier wrote:
>
> Jochum on DGG is the worst I have ever heard. Woodwinds are week, brass are just
> about completely inaudible. The sound is completely dominated by strings, and
> there is no excuse for that.
>
Maybe, but the 93, 94, 95, 98 Jochum did with the Dresden Staatskapelle
on Berlin Classics is very fine, esp 93 IMO. He did an earlier 98 (plus
88) with the Berlin PO on an LP I like but concerning which I don't
remember many details, not having heard it in a long time.
Edward A. Cowan
recording of Haydn's Sym. no.103 -- especially at the beginning, where
we get a virtual cadenza for timpani before the orchestra begins to
play! --E.A.C.
Arthur La Porta <al...@cornell.edu> wrote:
> I like Harnoncourt's recordings with the Concertgebouw, which used to be
> available in a box set, but parts of which are available on Ultima releases.
> Although they are performed with a modern orchestra, they are HIP insofar as
> Harnoucourt's direction is concerned. They are remarkable in their aggressive
> brass and percussion.
--
E.A.C.
Edward A. Cowan
backed by no.88 (Epic LC-3196, LP) The 104 is powerful and cleanly
played (just what one expects from Szell), but a little humorless. No.88
is almost totally humorless, but again, it is precisely played.
Sony Masterworks Heritage MHK 62979, two CDs, has a stereo recording by
Szell and the Cleveland of Sym. no.99 in E-flat major (with syms. nos.
97 and 98, of which the 97 is not the same performance as in the issued
set of nos.93-98). I keep hoping that there might exist some live
recordings by Szell of the rest of the London set not otherwise recorded
by him (nos.100, 101, 102, 103). --E.A.C.
Raymond Hall <hallr...@bigpond.com> wrote:
> Did Szell ever record the additional London
> symphonies? If he didn't, then I consider it another sad case of recordings
> that could and might have been.
--
E.A.C.
Simon Roberts
"Edward A. Cowan" <eac...@anet-dfw.com> wrote in message
news:1f5k6e7.1ibsl6w1ve0g6cN%eac...@anet-dfw.com...
> Szell did make a monophonic recording in Cleveland of Sym. no.104 in
D,
> backed by no.88 (Epic LC-3196, LP) The 104 is powerful and cleanly
> played (just what one expects from Szell), but a little humorless.
No.88
> is almost totally humorless, but again, it is precisely played.
>
> Sony Masterworks Heritage MHK 62979, two CDs, has a stereo recording
by
> Szell and the Cleveland of Sym. no.99 in E-flat major (with syms. nos.
> 97 and 98, of which the 97 is not the same performance as in the
issued
> set of nos.93-98). I keep hoping that there might exist some live
> recordings by Szell of the rest of the London set not otherwise
recorded
> by him (nos.100, 101, 102, 103). --E.A.C.
So you can have a set of the London symphonies that is humourless?
Simon
Simon Roberts
"Bill Carroll" <lv...@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:J1HZ7.46735$4d7.5...@news20.bellglobal.com...
With a few exceptions (the finale of 95, 101, 102) they don't rivet me.
They're beautifully played, sensible performances that don't have any
obvious flaws (such as the dreadful balances in Jochum's set); but to
these ears they're mostly a bit overrefined (a common problem with Haydn
performances) - tempi a little to safe, timpani audible but soft-edged,
brass present but polite, accents crisp but never jabbing; nothing ever
lets rip (as, say, Jochum occasionally does - try the timpani solo near
the end of 94/iv (he overdoes it, but...), the trumpets near the end of
101/iv, the horns near the end of 100/i, and his exhilarating tempi in
some of the finales; too bad he makes up for these "excesses" but
rendering these instruments all but inaudible elsewhere).
If you want to try a HIP set, your best bet is Brueggen's, which has
recently been reissued on a couple of Philips Duos (in Europe/UK, at any
rate). His set isn't consistently excellent, but at its best - 95, 98,
101, 103, 104 - he has few rivals, HIP or otherwise. He doesn't really
let rip either, but the bracing tone of his orchestra, good tempo
choices, rhythmic alertness and careful phrasing compensate. I
especially like his "interventionist" shaping of the slowed portion of
the finale of 98 right before the coda. Hickox seems to be doing a set
of the late symphonies, but I don't think they're nearly as good -
better recorded, perhaps, and the brass occasionally make an exciting
noise, but he doesn't shape the music as characterfully as Brueggen does
(103/ii sticks in my mind as being singularly unimaginative).
Norrington's recordings of the last 6 are probably more imaginative than
Hickox's, but they lack power and incisiveness overall - rather
disappointing (the recorded sound doesn't help - lacks presence).
Kuijken recorded all of them, but only one disc - 103/104 - is
competitive. Except for that disc, these are cautious, characterless
performances, almost as bad as his recording of the Seasons.
Although he uses the Concertgebouw, I suppose Harnoncourt's set
qualifies as HIP. Either way, these are very distinctive performances,
phrased like no others (his fondness for legato where everyone else
crisply jogs along is evident here too), with occasionally stabbing
accents and very fast trios. I'm not always convinced by these features
(though they're often very effective; try 104/ii and iii), but the main
problem for me is his occasional fondness for softening attacks (this
isn't quite the problem it sometimes is in his recordings of the
masses), which is almost disastrous in 102/i where those longish chords
that repeatedly interrupt the proceedings are rendered relatively gentle
and have none of the disruptive power they surely should have. But he's
never boring ("at least he thinks" quipped Anthony Hodgson recently) and
the performances can now be sampled cheaply in Ultima Duos.
Finally Fey - not yet remotely complete (he's doing all of them for
Haenssler). His three - 94, 95, 104 (on two discs; 95 comes with a
magnificent 82 and 88) - are like Harnoncourt on speed, minus the
occasional softness and are bound to be controversial with their odd
Harnoncourt-influenced phrasing, generally fast speeds, prominent winds,
brass and timpani (hard sticks) and unconventional boldness but I love
them. (His is probably the my favorite 95.)
Some non-set HIP performances:
Hogwood's 96 is superb, tonally magnificent, well-characterized, good
attention to detail (he's one of the few conductors to bring out - or
even notice - the important trumpet/horn exchanges towards the end of
i), and I like the timpanist's embellishments in iii. Easily my favorite
performance of this piece. Too bad the other three he recorded
(including its discmate, 94) don't come remotely close to this. I
wonder what explains the disparity.
Goodman's few discs on Hyperion are worth acquiring - very lively tempi,
very colourful (nothing reticent about his brass and timpani), if not as
distinctively shaped as Brueggen's. 101/102 is especially good. I could
do without the prominent continuo, though. These are generally miles
better than his earlier recordings on Nimbus, the exception being 94/i
where he brings out the horns to thrilling effect in the middle of i
(no-one else does this). The Nimbus 95 is memorable only as a joke -
the solo cello in the trio of iii is shockingly bad.
Non-HIP:
I'm not quite as anti-Jochum/DG as some. Despite the problem of
balances and the unhelpfully reverberant acoustic, at their best (93,
94, 98, 100, 102) these performances have a degree of exuberance missing
in many (including Davis), though since it's an all-or-nothing
proposition you may not think it's worth the modest expense to find out.
His Dresden set of 93/94/95/98 lacks the flaws of the DG equivalents.
Bernstein's set is problematic. I love the gruff, almost coarse,
orchestral tone he and CBS conjured up, but some of these performances
are surprisingly slow and stiff (93 and 94), while his 98/i is so slow
it almost acquires freak-show status. But there are some good things
here - a bold, if slow, 95, the most colourful and strongly
characterized 97 on records (i is a bit too slow), and an exciting 102
which I would like more if the strings weren't so prominent - the
buzzing of the lower strings is pretty exhilarating in i, but the winds,
brass and timpani might as well have stayed home.
There's probably no point mentioning Dorati, whose performances are
presently trapped in a set of the whole lot, except for a couple of
discs that don't contain the best ones - 93, 95, 103.
Mackerras's performances of 100/101/103/104 are worth trying. As usual
with him, you won't hear any distinctive quirks (good or bad) and I
suppose they're not quite as characterful as the best, but they have no
obvious flaws; probably the best of the modern chamber orchestra
performances - they have Marriner's crispness and cleanness but provide
a much more solid, colourful orchestral sonority (much as I like his
performances, tonally, Marriner often seems to be trying to emulate a
cloud of feathers).
A few others:
I'm not much of a fan of Klemperer's Haydn, but I think his 102 stands
out as one of the best Haydn recordings ever, a powerful, grand,
incisive performance that makes everyone else's seem relatively
small-scale and even trivial. Too bad it hasn't been released on CD
except in a three disc box. 102s by Walter and Koussevitsky are good,
but not in Klemperer's class.
There are hardly any good performances of 99. Berglund/Ondine and
Gielen/Intercord, while not quite good enough, are notable exceptions.
I'm waiting impatiently for Fey.... By contrast, 103 and 104 are quite
well served, but even so it's worth mentioning a wonderfully earthy,
exciting disc of 103/104 by Markevitch (was on Philips, now on Decca)
and Rosbaud's 104 (mono, DG). Finally, for now, although not really an
Abbado fan, a couple of his discs with the COE contain excellent
performances - there are few better, or as good, performances of 93 and
98.
Simon
David7Gable
Davis brings a lot of enthusiasm to the fast movements, but he doesn't moon
enough in the slow ones: not at all in fact. He seems afraid to do anything.
This puts him at a disadavantage above all in the sublime Andante from La Poule
(83) and the mysterious Capriccio from 86. (I know: they're not London
Symphonies.)
As for the London's, you ought to hear Rosbaud's sensational Oxford and 104 on
DGG (OK, so the Oxford is not a London Symphony either). These are certainly
among the candidates for greatest Haydn recordings ever. Rosbaud apparently
couldn't do anything wrong.
Another conductor who is as lively as one might hope AND capable of distinctive
shaping is Mogens Wöldike on Vanguard. Too bad he only does 99-104.
-david gable
Jan Depondt
"Simon Roberts" <sd...@pobox.upenn.edu> wrote in message
news:a19ush$5se$1...@netnews.upenn.edu...
|
|
| If you want to try a HIP set, your best bet is Brueggen's, which has
| recently been reissued on a couple of Philips Duos (in Europe/UK, at any
| rate).
These are in Holland also available (officially until Januay 31!) in a
slimline box (4 cd's) for Naxos prices, see:
http://www.kuijperklassiek.nl/dutoffer/cd002.html. This box is consequently
wrong about the orchestra (it says "Orchestra of the Age of Enlightenment" but
is actually "Orchestra of the 18th Century"). In a similar 5 cd box the Sturm
und Drang symphonies (until January 31 for the same price/cd), this one
correctly with the Orchestra of the Age of Enlightenment.
And thanks for your overview.
--
Jan Depondt
____________________________
Classical Budget cd's in Holland
http://home.wanadoo.nl/jdpt/
mail: jdptATwanadoo.nl
Bob Harper
Martha & Russ Oppenheim wrote:
> Maybe, but the 93, 94, 95, 98 Jochum did with the Dresden Staatskapelle
> on Berlin Classics is very fine, esp 93 IMO. He did an earlier 98 (plus
> 88) with the Berlin PO on an LP I like but concerning which I don't
> remember many details, not having heard it in a long time.
>
The 88 & 98 on DG LP is one of the great Haydn records. That it has not,
AFAIK, been transferred to CD is one of the great lacunae in the field
of reissues. If ever a disc deserved the Originals treatment, this is it
(and there would be room for more--perhaps one of the so far unreissued
performances from the DG Beethoven cycle).
Bob Harper
John Grabowski
Sorry, but I've never understood the reputation of this set, or why
Penguin gives it a Rosebud. I find it well played and smooth, but also
detached, stiff, unfeeling and totally lacking that wonderfully
spontaneous feeling so necessary for Haydn. What I love most about
Franc Joseph is how his music so often sounds as though the performances
are making it up on the spot, as though this phrase just naturally and
spontaneously follows that one. And it's the spontaneity I'm missing
with Advise and the Concertgebouw, a conductor and an orchestra I
generally admire greatly, btw. But not here. These put me to sleep.
Unfortunately, after much ballyhoo I acquired the Bernstein/Sony, and
found them wanting too.
Jochum has its flaws, but I'll still take it over those above. At least
the boys sound like they're having a good time. Davis is too earnest.
John
--
The sound and music are 50% of the entertainment in a movie. George Lucas
Arthur La Porta
>
>
> Jochum has its flaws, but I'll still take it over those above. At least
> the boys sound like they're having a good time. Davis is too earnest.
>
Yea, and it sounds like the boys in the brass section were having a good time
down the street in the local pub while the string section was making the
recording.
Two words, Harnoncourt, Dorati!
Raymond Hall
Actually, in the Surprise #94 of the issued set (93-98), Szell prepares the
"surprise" with wicked glee, (by almost "tiptoeing on eggshells"
beforehand), much more so than say Davis, to give but one example of where
Szell could exhibit humour (albeit musically).
Curtis Croulet
--
Curtis Croulet
Temecula, California
+33° 27' 59", -117° 05' 53"
Curtis Croulet
> record?
Back in LP days, I bought several of the early syms from MHS. Since they
were being issued more quickly than I could buy them, I jumped ahead and
bought 103 & 104, just to see where the series was headed. These were so
slack and dispirited, I bought no more.
Richard S. Sandmeyer
david...@aol.com (David7Gable) wrote:
I'll add a few comments to this thread:
I also like the Wöldike on Vanguard. I just bought it for $8.99 at
Berkshire and finished listening to it today (I bought it to replace my
LPs of it that were pretty well worn out.) As Mr. Gable says, it only
includes the second London set, 99-104. Sound is not at all bad for
recordings made in the early years of the stereo era, and the performances
are lively.
Also, Beecham's ancient sets (93-98 in mono, 99-104 in stereo) are lively
big band versions. Some may be put off by the corrupt versions of the
scores that he uses, but with that level of enthusiasm in the playing, I'm
willing to overlook such minor (to me) details.
I like both Davis and Jochum. I'll have to relisten to the latter to see
if I hear a problem with the balances as others have claimed. I don't
remember being disturbed by them, but now that they've been pointed out
I'll probably never enjoy the set again ;-{ .
Also, have and like the Szell recordings (93-99 on two Essential Classics
and one Masterworks Heritage, one gets two recordings of 97 this way as
well as the "Oxford" 92 this way but the sound is better than the old
Odyssey release). I also have Klemperer's 3 CD set and like it as well
except for Nos. 92 and 95 which are simply too slow (the others in the set
are 88, 98, 100, 101, 102, 104 and they're fast enough).
I'll have to look into the Brüggen set, since the only HIP ones I have now
are Hogwoods (94, 96, 100, and 104 -- if I recall correctly). They are
OK, but nothing special in my book.
Rich Sandmeyer
richsand at iximd dot com
Simon Roberts
"Richard S. Sandmeyer" <rich...@iximd.com> wrote in message
news:richsand-060...@192.168.123.135...
>
> I also like the Wöldike on Vanguard. I just bought it for $8.99 at
> Berkshire and finished listening to it today (I bought it to replace
my
> LPs of it that were pretty well worn out.) As Mr. Gable says, it only
> includes the second London set, 99-104. Sound is not at all bad for
> recordings made in the early years of the stereo era, and the
performances
> are lively.
"Not at all bad" is my reaction to the performances, which strike me as
pretty ordinary. To these ears the sound, however, is sensational for
the period (both heard in isolation and, even more so, compared to what
most other companies were getting at the same time) and better than most
that has been given this music.
Simon
Simon Roberts
>
> Actually, in the Surprise #94 of the issued set (93-98), Szell
prepares the
> "surprise" with wicked glee, (by almost "tiptoeing on eggshells"
> beforehand), much more so than say Davis, to give but one example of
where
> Szell could exhibit humour (albeit musically).
Perhaps, but (1) others provide an even bigger contrast (e.g.
Goodman/Hyperion) and (2) this, like the bassoon thing in 93/ii (which
Szell also does well), strike me as pretty obvious humour. What Szell
doesn't do is find any other humour in the music; nor does he give it
lilt or let it smile - partly the result of rhythmic rigidity (compare
his finale to 98, say, with Brueggen's or Abbado's).
Simon
Bill Hunt
> recently been reissued on a couple of Philips Duos (in Europe/UK, at any
> rate). His set isn't consistently excellent, but at its best - 95, 98,
> 101, 103, 104 - he has few rivals, HIP or otherwise.
Simon, do you have an opinion on Reiner for 95 or 101? His 95 seems
rather different from the others I have heard.
You recommended Abbado for 93 and 98. How about 96 and the Sinfonia
Concertante?
Bill Hunt
Simon Roberts
"Bill Hunt" <wjh...@pacbell.net> wrote in message
news:f37a146a.02010...@posting.google.com...
> > If you want to try a HIP set, your best bet is Brueggen's, which has
> > recently been reissued on a couple of Philips Duos (in Europe/UK, at
any
> > rate). His set isn't consistently excellent, but at its best - 95,
98,
> > 101, 103, 104 - he has few rivals, HIP or otherwise.
>
> Simon, do you have an opinion on Reiner for 95 or 101? His 95 seems
> rather different from the others I have heard.
I haven't heard it in a while - didn't like it the last time and ditched
it; can't remember why, exactly.
>
> You recommended Abbado for 93 and 98. How about 96 and the Sinfonia
> Concertante?
>
Not as good - in fact, I don't think they're good at all - pretty
tame/overrefined.
Simon
Kurt Hunciker
available at Tower (4th Street) for under $10.00 per CD. (If I recall
correctly, $18.99 for each of 2 CD sets.)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Simon Roberts" <sd...@pobox.upenn.edu>
Newsgroups: rec.music.classical.recordings
Sent: Sunday, January 06, 2002 11:43 AM
Subject: Re: Haydn's London Symphonies
[Excerpt Below]
Richard
How are his London Symphonies?
Thomas Wood
>
> Perhaps, but (1) others provide an even bigger contrast (e.g.
> Goodman/Hyperion) and (2) this, like the bassoon thing in 93/ii (which
> Szell also does well), strike me as pretty obvious humour. What Szell
> doesn't do is find any other humour in the music; nor does he give it
> lilt or let it smile - partly the result of rhythmic rigidity (compare
> his finale to 98, say, with Brueggen's or Abbado's).
It would be an interesting case for a psychologist or perhaps sociologist
why the bassoon fart in 93/ii is the ONLY humor Szell responds to in Haydn.
But it's true.
Tom Wood
Simon Roberts
>I own and enjoy Bernstein's Haydn Paris Symphonies.
>How are his London Symphonies?
Overall not as good - as I noted earlier in the thread, I rate some of
them highly - 95, 97, 102 - but the rest are unimpressive to iffy.
Simon
David7Gable
>found them wanting too.
I'm willing to bet the ballyhoo was not over Bernstein's London's but over his
Paris set, which routinely gets ringing endorsements around here especially
from me. His London's never do, although a couple of those recorded earlier
than the others are better than the ones recorded in the early 70's.
-david gable
David7Gable
>How are his London Symphonies?
>
Not remotely in the same league, I'm afraid. A couple of the twelve recorded
earlier than the others are pretty good, but I can't even remember which ones
they were. (99?) But overall the set is mighty disappointing compared to the
Paris set.
-david gable
Paul Goldstein
rkw_u...@hotmail.com says...
>
>I own and enjoy Bernstein's Haydn Paris Symphonies.
>How are his London Symphonies?
Comparably good at their best, but much more of a mixed bag than the uniformly
great Paris performances.
Paul Goldstein
Paul Goldstein
says...
>
>> If you want to try a HIP set, your best bet is Brueggen's, which has
>> recently been reissued on a couple of Philips Duos (in Europe/UK, at any
>> rate). His set isn't consistently excellent, but at its best - 95, 98,
>> 101, 103, 104 - he has few rivals, HIP or otherwise.
>
>Simon, do you have an opinion on Reiner for 95 or 101? His 95 seems
>rather different from the others I have heard.
Reiner's Haydn is indeed different - it features some of the slowest tempi you
will ever hear in this music. An interesting alternative, but not a first
choice (I say Penguaphonically).
Paul Goldstein
Paul Goldstein
"Thomas says...
No, it's not - I've never heard anyone handle the belated harpsichord entrance
at the end of 98/iv handled so humorously. Like everything else, humor is in
the ear of the beholder, and I find Szell marvelously alive to the wit of
Haydn's London symphonies.
Paul Goldstein
Flambongoose
"Bill Carroll" <lv...@sympatico.ca> schreef in bericht
news:J1HZ7.46735$4d7.5...@news20.bellglobal.com...
> Having a glorious Saturday in Toronto listening to Haydn's London
Symphonies
> as performed by The Royal Concertgebow, conducted by Sir Colin
Davis.Posting
> just to prompt others to think of these magnificent symphonies -- maybe
the
> finest ever by anyone. HIP suggestions would be fun to get.This Davis
> rendition is riveting.
> bc
>
>
Paul Goldstein
>
>What do you all think of the Karajan's Haydn?
Is that like "the Donald"?
I think as little of the Karajan's Haydn as possible, I'm afraid. Well, it may
be slightly better than the Karajan's Mozart.
Paul Goldstein
Martha & Russ Oppenheim
Agree on 102, would add 104, don't know 95 and 97.
Martha & Russ Oppenheim
Paul Goldstein wrote: [re Haydn 95 and 101]
>
> Reiner's Haydn is indeed different - it features some of the slowest tempi you
> will ever hear in this music. An interesting alternative, but not a first
> choice (I say Penguaphonically).
>
Reiner's last recordings, with a pickup orchestra, not the Chicago; IMO
not even an interesting alternative. They were coupled with a
wonderfully crisp and lively 88 (with the Chicago) but the production
was botched: the level drops and a hum comes up in the finale. I dumped
my copy.
David7Gable
To my own very great surprise, I like Karajan's digital Paris set very much,
and in general I loathe everything he stands for. Simon finds the minuets
"lumbering," but that suggests an awkwardness that isn't apparent to me at all.
While a soupçon of the trademark Karajan over-smoothness is there, they are
also rhythmically alert and distinctively shaped, some movements moreso than
others. His first-movement tempi are certainly as brisk as Dorati's, Davis's,
Bernstein's, etc.
I'm going to be dipping into this set again soon and may try to write more
about it then. If I could only live with one set of Paris symphonies for the
rest of my life, it would be Bernstein.
-david gable
Jim Ringland
david...@aol.com says...
>
> Davis brings a lot of enthusiasm to the fast movements,
> but he doesn't moon enough in the slow ones: not at all
> in fact. He seems afraid to do anything.
> This puts him at a disadavantage above all in the
> sublime Andante from La Poule (83)
> and the mysterious Capriccio from 86.
> (I know: they're not London Symphonies.)
Davis did a Paris set? This almost sounds like a description of Weil.
--
Jim Ringland
Simon Roberts
"Jim Ringland" <jtr...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.16a3ef0b5...@news.mindspring.com...
Speeded up, perhaps.... Davis certainly recorded 82/83/86/87 (the
first two were on a CD, the latter two on two separate LPs as fillers to
a couple of London Symphonies; I can't remember which - 98 and 99?); I
don't think he recorded 84/85 - or did he?
Simon
David7Gable
I don't know, but I have an 82 and 83 by him and I've heard an 86.
-david gable
Raymond Hall
Are you sure you are not referring to the Marriner Paris set on a Duo?
Pretty good performances in their way, and slightly more relaxing than
Weil's Paris set on Sony Vivarte, which I regard as an excellent set to
have. Must get to hear the oft recommended Bernstein Paris symphonies
though, if available.
Lani Spahr
> Szell did make a monophonic recording in Cleveland of Sym. no.104 in D,
> backed by no.88 (Epic LC-3196, LP) The 104 is powerful and cleanly
> played (just what one expects from Szell), but a little humorless. No.88
> is almost totally humorless, but again, it is precisely played.
The recording is available in my "Locked in the Vault Reissues"
series (Volume 17) coupled with Szell's 1949 Haydn Sym #92.
Email me for further details.
Lani Spahr
gggg...@gmail.com
> What do you all think of the Karajan's Haydn?
Haydn - Symphony n°104 - Vienna / Karajan 1959
Ed Presson
wrote in message
news:d111c38d-1ead-4ab6...@googlegroups.com...
>On Monday, January 7, 2002 at 10:52:51 AM UTC-10, Flambongoose wrote:
> What do you all think of the Karajan's Haydn?
years ago is: I detest it.
JohnA
Lawrence Kart
https://www.amazon.com/Haydn-London-Symphonies-Nos-93-104/dp/B000084I3Y/ref=sr_1_5?s=music&ie=UTF8&qid=1538180170&sr=1-5&keywords=haydn+herbig
Don't recall who pointed me toward this set, but after I heard it I got rid of Jochum, Woldike, and Davis. Still have some Klemperer on LPs.
Larry Kart
Bob Harper
first 6 (never been that fond of Davis)--I agree with the recommendation
for Herbig. I've been listening to them the last few evenings and
they're excellent.
Bob Harper
gggg gggg
> Having a glorious Saturday in Toronto listening to Haydn's London Symphonies
> as performed by The Royal Concertgebow, conducted by Sir Colin Davis.Posting
> just to prompt others to think of these magnificent symphonies -- maybe the
> finest ever by anyone. HIP suggestions would be fun to get.This Davis
> rendition is riveting.
> bc
"Repertoire: The IDEAL Haydn "London" Symphonies""
randy wolfgang
M&S Frost
MIFrost