Can Anyone Compare Abbado's and Karajan's Mendelssohn Symphonies?

[JohnGavin]

I would be very interested in hearing your views of these 2 sets.

I recently listened to Solti's Chicago Symphony recording of the Scottish (#3) and felt it to be too heavy handed - I love the music however and would like to get ahold of all the symphonies in a better interpretation.

Thanks.

[M forever]

Those Karajan recordings are rather nice performances, smooth and
polished, lyrical and fluent, but I find them very hard to listen to
because they were made in the early 70s, during the period when
Karajan and DG had "perfected" their overly sweetened, glossy, hazy
recording "style".

If you are looking for alternatives to the Abbado cycle, I would
recommend Dohnányi's with the Wiener Philharmoniker on Decca which is
musically excellent and very well recorded.
There are also two nice cycles with Masur and the Gewandhausorchester,
an almost too obvious choice when it comes to Mendelssohn, a little
more "robust" than Abbado, but no less refined in its own way. Of the
two, the later recording (on Teldec) is somewhat distant and
reverberant though, while the sound on the first one on Eurodisc is
not really "great" either, but it is good "honest" 70s analog stereo.

I generally wouldn't reach for Solti when it comes to Mendelssohn,
especially not with the CSO, but he did actually make a very nice and
highly virtuosic live recording with the Wiener Philharmoniker - the
orchestra makes all the difference here. Solti just worked better with
orchestras which toned down rather than amplified his angularity.
Somewhat oddly, this is coupled with Shostakovitch 5, but I believe
the reason for that is that they took that from a live concert with
those two works on the program, and it is a very good, very energetic
and dramatic performance, too, so the disc is definitely worth
checking out if you are interested in those two pieces.

[Paul Goldstein]

In article <9997cb8e-e178-4b07...@googlegroups.com>, JohnGavin
says...

Why those two cycles? I'd rather eschew Mendelssohn entirely than listen to
either one of them. Both Abbado and HvK are on autopilot throughout.

The best Mendelssohn 1 I've heard is apparently not on CD - it's by the
Cleveland
Orchestra under Louis Lane (Columbia LP).

I've never heard a recording of the 2nd that made me think it was worth re-
hearing.

Favorite 3rds include Maag/LSO and Maderna/Concertgebouw O (I think that is the
orchestra in question; a fabulous live performance floating around the
internet).

Top Italians are the Szell/Cleveland and van Beinum/Concertgebouw.

BSO/Munch are also top-tier in 3 and 4.

By far the best Reformation is the old NBC/Toscanini.

[rapu...@spiritone.com]

On Thursday, September 13, 2012 3:05:34 PM UTC-7, Paul Goldstein wrote:
> In article <9997cb8e-e178-4b07...@googlegroups.com>, JohnGavin
>
> says...
>
> >
>
> >I would be very interested in hearing your views of these 2 sets.
>
> >
>
> >I recently listened to Solti's Chicago Symphony recording of the Scottish (#3)
>
> and felt it to be too heavy handed - I love the music however and would like to
>
> get ahold of all the symphonies in a better interpretation.
>
>
>
> Why those two cycles? I'd rather eschew Mendelssohn entirely than listen to
>
> either one of them. Both Abbado and HvK are on autopilot throughout.
>
>
>
> The best Mendelssohn 1 I've heard is apparently not on CD - it's by the
>
> Cleveland
>
> Orchestra under Louis Lane (Columbia LP).

This was issued in a Sony 2fer w/ Ormandy Italian/Midsummer Nights Dream/Octet and Szell/CO/Francescatti Violin Cto.

Stan Punzel

[JohnA]

On Thursday, September 13, 2012 5:05:34 PM UTC-5, Paul Goldstein wrote:

> The best Mendelssohn 1 I've heard is apparently not on CD - it's by the
> Cleveland Orchestra under Louis Lane (Columbia LP).
>

It was released on Sony Essential Classics SB2K 63251

Disc 1: Ormandy/Philadelphia
Symphony No. 4
A Midsummer Night's Dream Incidental Music
Scherzo from Octet for Strings
War March of the Priests from Athalie

Disc 2: Szell/Cleveland (except Sym 1 - Lane)
Hebrides Overture
Violin Concerto (Francescatti)
Symphony No. 1

[Paul Goldstein]

In article <45d7f1c7-e6bf-4c77...@googlegroups.com>, JohnA
says...

Thanks to you and Stan for point this issue out. I had no idea.

[jrsnfld]

On Sep 13, 3:05 pm, Paul Goldstein <pgold...@newsguy.com> wrote:

>
> Favorite 3rds include Maag/LSO and Maderna/Concertgebouw O (I think that is the
> orchestra in question; a fabulous live performance floating around the
> internet).

The Maderna was issued in one of the big QDisc box sets of live
Concertgebouw performances.

>
> Top Italians are the Szell/Cleveland and van Beinum/Concertgebouw.
>
> BSO/Munch are also top-tier in 3 and 4.
>
> By far the best Reformation is the old NBC/Toscanini.

Paul, do you know Mitropoulos' Mendelssohn?

--Jeff

[Mark S]

On Thursday, September 13, 2012 3:05:34 PM UTC-7, Paul Goldstein wrote:

> I'd rather eschew Mendelssohn entirely than listen to
>
> either one of them. Both Abbado and HvK are on autopilot throughout.

What a silly statement. You don't achieve the balances those two conductors achieve in Mendelssohn whilst on autopilot.

You can ignore Paul's thoughts here. Both Abbado and Karajan are good options in Mendelssohn. I'd give Abbado the nod for up-to-date, more-realistic sound.

Paul is correct in his assessment of Louis Lane's #1 and the Szell Italian, but you are looking for a complete set, so that hardly helps.

Others have recommended Dohnanyi on Decca. That's another safe choice. It's probably preferable to either of the DG sets (Abbado or Karajan).

[Paul Goldstein]

In article <0c8d6955-4e22-48a2...@h4g2000yqo.googlegroups.com>,
jrsnfld says...
>
>On Sep 13, 3:05=A0pm, Paul Goldstein <pgold...@newsguy.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> Favorite 3rds include Maag/LSO and Maderna/Concertgebouw O (I think that =

>is the
>> orchestra in question; a fabulous live performance floating around the
>> internet).
>
>The Maderna was issued in one of the big QDisc box sets of live
>Concertgebouw performances.
>
>>
>> Top Italians are the Szell/Cleveland and van Beinum/Concertgebouw.
>>
>> BSO/Munch are also top-tier in 3 and 4.
>>
>> By far the best Reformation is the old NBC/Toscanini.
>
>Paul, do you know Mitropoulos' Mendelssohn?

I do, and I enjoy it, but in the end I find it too hectic and too harshly
recorded
to be a top recommendation.

[Paul Goldstein]

In article <cf745001-fa4d-4029...@googlegroups.com>, Mark S
says...

Mark has already amply demonstrated his preference for emotionally lobotomized
performances - recall his paeans to Maazel. So if "balances" are all you are
looking for, by all means gorge yourself on HvK or Abbado.

[Gerard]

Paul Goldstein <pgol...@newsguy.com> typed:

How's Ashkenazy's set?

[Paul Goldstein]

In article <5e310$50535202$5356543a$10...@cache70.multikabel.net>, Gerard
says...

>How's Ashkenazy's set?

I haven't heard it.

[jrsnfld]

On Sep 14, 8:49 am, "Gerard" <ghen-nospam_drik...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Paul Goldstein <pgold...@newsguy.com> typed:

I've heard only 1 and 5, but that's a very solid choice. Very good
sound and playing (I don't know of a better-recorded set, though the
Dohnanyi is excellent for its day, Flor's is certainly very decent,
and I suspect the Norrington recordings, if those are a complete set
now, are also very well recorded). I would hesitate jumping into
Abbado or Karajan's sets without first at least sampling the Ashkenazy
set.

--Jeff

[David Fox]

About two years ago I heard James Conlon conducting the LA Phil premiere
of Mendelssohn #1. Conlon mentioned in the program notes that this
piece was a pet favorite of his and that many of his guest conducting
performances of the piece were local premieres. It's a pleasant enough
piece but it's lack of inclusion in the standard rep doesn't seem
particularly unjust. IMHO, 3 & 4 are the only true masterpieces. 2 is
an outright failure and I've never warmed to 5.
Wonderful recordings of 3 & 4 abound and they are all the Mendelssohn
Symphonies I need.

DF

[Oscar]

On Sep 14, 9:17 am, David Fox wrote:
>
> About two years ago I heard James Conlon conducting the LA Phil premiere
> of Mendelssohn #1.

I was at that concert. Sarah Chang played the Violin Concerto
(poorly).

[M forever]

Mark didn't say that "balances" were the only aspect he is looking for
in a good Mendelssohn performance, but balance is indeed not easy to
achieve in Mendelssohn's symphonies which are very subtly orchestrated
but also obviously written with much smaller and much more transparent
orchestral forces in mind than a full modern symphony orchestra.
So pointing out that Abbado and Karajan are both quite successful in
achieving such good balances doesn't mean that he isn't looking for
other qualities nor that there aren't other qualities to be found in
these two conductors' performances. But that alone certainly means
that they weren't "on autopilot" so he is correct in pointing out that
that observation alone makes it hard to take your comments seriously.
But you do get a "I want to show what a rare and refined taste I have
by mentioning some rarely recommended and some hard to obtain
recordings" reward!
That's about it though. Your comments are obviously not rooted in a
fair critical assessment of these performance but in your prejudices
about Abbado and Karajan.
And about modern recordings.
Ah yes, and about Maazel who actually made rather nice recordings of
the 4th and 5th in Berlin back in the 60s.

[jrsnfld]

On Sep 14, 7:37 pm, M forever <ms1...@gmail.com> wrote:

> But you do get a "I want to show what a rare and refined taste I have
> by mentioning some rarely recommended and some hard to obtain
> recordings" reward!

Which of his recommendations were hard to obtain or rarely
recommended? I think only the Maderna recording among them is
difficult to get, but he is hardly the only person to hold it high
esteem. The others he mentioned are very commonly recommended in this
ng.

> That's about it though. Your comments are obviously not rooted in a
> fair critical assessment of these performance but in your prejudices

...

> Ah yes, and about Maazel who actually made rather nice recordings of
> the 4th and 5th in Berlin back in the 60s.

While Maazel's 4 and 5 of that era were superb, some people find
Maazel's conducting insensitive, no matter how virtuosic, intelligent,
or exciting the performances are. Prejudice? Maybe, but also possibly
an honest reaction.

--Jeff

[William Sommerwerck]

>> Ah yes, and about Maazel who actually made rather nice
>> recordings of the 4th and 5th in Berlin back in the 60s.

> While Maazel's 4 and 5 of that era were superb, some people
> find Maazel's conducting insensitive, no matter how virtuosic,
> intelligent, or exciting the performances are. Prejudice? Maybe,
> but also possibly an honest reaction.

For me, Maazel has never been a conductor to expect great performances from.
When he does deliver one, I'm pleasantly surprised.

[Paul Goldstein]

In article <8c1b5a07-e3aa-45dc...@y12g2000yqg.googlegroups.com>,
jrsnfld says...

>
>On Sep 14, 7:37=A0pm, M forever <ms1...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> But you do get a "I want to show what a rare and refined taste I have
>> by mentioning some rarely recommended and some hard to obtain
>> recordings" reward!
>
>Which of his recommendations were hard to obtain or rarely
>recommended? I think only the Maderna recording among them is
>difficult to get, but he is hardly the only person to hold it high
>esteem. The others he mentioned are very commonly recommended in this
>ng.

My recommendations are obscure only to someone, like the insufferably arrogant
M,
whose knowledge of recordings begins and ends with the Universal Classics
catalog.

[M forever]

On Sep 15, 1:31 am, jrsnfld <jrsn...@aol.com> wrote:
> On Sep 14, 7:37 pm, M forever <ms1...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > But you do get a "I want to show what a rare and refined taste I have
> > by mentioning some rarely recommended and some hard to obtain
> > recordings" reward!
>
> Which of his recommendations were hard to obtain or rarely
> recommended? I think only the Maderna recording among them is
> difficult to get, but he is hardly the only person to hold it high
> esteem. The others he mentioned are very commonly recommended in this
> ng.

I think the Maderna is only available in the orchestra's anthology,
correct? The Lane recording is not easy to find either, if one poster
hadn't pointed out that it did come out on that 2fer, one couldn't
really have found it on amazon as it is not tagged "Lane". Can you
point me to the van Beinum 4th?

Apart from those, you are right though in that most of the other
mentioned recordings are just the usual suspects - Szell, Toscanini,
Munch - an American of his generation would kneejerk to mention. That
is a pretty automated process in people like him. That, and the
nonsensical blanket dismissals he contrasted his "recommendations"
with do make them pretty worthless though, as Mark S pointed out.

> > That's about it though. Your comments are obviously not rooted in a
> > fair critical assessment of these performance but in your prejudices
> ...
> > Ah yes, and about Maazel who actually made rather nice recordings of
> > the 4th and 5th in Berlin back in the 60s.
>
> While Maazel's 4 and 5 of that era were superb, some people find
> Maazel's conducting insensitive, no matter how virtuosic, intelligent,
> or exciting the performances are. Prejudice? Maybe, but also possibly
> an honest reaction.

Like with most if not all other conductors, there is good Maazel, not
so good Maazel, and perhaps some bad Maazel, too, although his stuff
is usually at least technically very well done. There may be a lot of
polished and shallow Maazel out there, he did after all record and run
from one gig to the next like crazy for decades. But he did make at
least some really very good recordings, like the Mendelssohn 4 and 5,
obviously the Sibelius symphonies from the 60s (his later remakes were
rather nice, too, if not quite as impressive as his first cycle), his
surprisingly good Bruckner 8, his BR Strauss set, to name just a few
which come to mind spontaneously.

Same about live concerts. I saw him fairly often in the 80s until he
announced that he wasn't coming back to the BP (because they had the
nerve to elect Abbado, not him). Sometimes, he was visibly and audibly
bored and routine. Most of the time though, he was "on", and when he
was "on", he was really "on". I heard some phenomenal concerts with
him, e.g. Sibelius 1 and 2, Prokofieff 5, that Bruckner 8, and others.

[M forever]

On Sep 15, 10:33 am, Paul Goldstein <pgold...@newsguy.com> wrote:
> In article <8c1b5a07-e3aa-45dc-9328-2cfb4101a...@y12g2000yqg.googlegroups.com>,

Ah, I get it. Abbado bad. Karajan bad. Maazel bad. All Universal
Classics bad. Makes sense. That was my point. You just wanted to show
off, be different, have a different and very "strong" opinion. But you
just managed to embarrass yourself. "Insufferably arrogant"? Yes,
that's what I thought when I read your nonsense and your blanket
dismissals of these conductors rather than an actual critique of their
work.

[wagnerfan]

On Sat, 15 Sep 2012 15:08:25 -0700 (PDT), M forever <ms1...@gmail.com>
wrote:

I also prefer his Cleveland Prokofiev Romeo and Juliet to any other
version I have heard. Wagner fan