Dvorak Symphonies
Tony Salazar
I would like to get a Box Set of the complete
symphonies.
Any recommendations? Kubelik, Kertesz, etc.
Thanks
Randy Lane
Unless you only marginally care about Sym. 1-6, be sure to include
Rowicki in the mix.
IMHO Rowicki is preferable to either Kubelik or Kertesz in 1-5 ;
Kubelik's 6th is certainly his best in the less-well-known symphonies
Given that I have many great recordings of 7-9, if I were to only keep
one integral cycle of 1-9, it would without a doubt be Rowicki (if the
choice only incldued Rowicki, Kubelik, and Kertesz).
I have not looked for a while, so I'll ask others - is Neumann still
available?
Greg
If owning only one set - Rowicki or Kertesz, not Kubelik. Rowicki is
best in the early symphonies (1-6). Kertesz is also good and has the
best sound; 8 is the high point in his cycle, and you should own it in
some form. Kubelik has some high points, but his sound is awful.
Other than Kertesz's 8, you can do better for 7-9 by going outside of
complete cycles. I don't hear anything special in Neumann or Suitner,
which are other cycles often recommended.
Greg
Mark S
I'd go with Kubelik. The sound isn't the best, but he really knows the
music, and the band is great. I like his 6 very much.
Kertesz gets lots of recommendations, but outside of the great sound,
I'm not such a fan. Seems like he's running through the pieces.
Rowicki has worse sound then Kubelik, IIRC.
M forever
Generally agree with those comments although my first choice would be
the Neumann cycle. It's all there, great orchestra and conductor, very
stylish performances, rather good sound despite the slight "early
digital" edge. My second choice would be Staatskapelle Berlin/Suitner.
I do like the Kubelik recordings but the shrill, glassy sound really
bothers me. Pity they didn't record the cycle with the SOBR. DG
generally made better sounding recordings in Munich.
Mark S
> On Oct 13, 9:27 pm, Mark S <markstenr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Oct 13, 5:23 pm, que...@webtv.net (Tony Salazar) wrote:
>
> > > I would like to get a Box Set of the complete
> > > symphonies.
>
> > > Any recommendations? Kubelik, Kertesz, etc.
>
> > > Thanks
>
> > I'd go with Kubelik. The sound isn't the best, but he really knows the
> > music, and the band is great. I like his 6 very much.
>
> > Kertesz gets lots of recommendations, but outside of the great sound,
> > I'm not such a fan. Seems like he's running through the pieces.
>
> > Rowicki has worse sound then Kubelik, IIRC.
>
> Generally agree with those comments although my first choice would be
> the Neumann cycle. It's all there, great orchestra and conductor, very
> stylish performances, rather good sound despite the slight "early
> digital" edge.
Agree. Pity it costs twice what most sets are going for these days.
That fact entered into my recommendation. Though the OP didn't mention
price as a concern, I feel more comfortable recommending a $30
purchase of rep unfamiliar to a potential buyer that a $60 purchase,
especially when the pluses and minuses among the competition are
pretty much a wash.
>My second choice would be Staatskapelle Berlin/Suitner.
Don't know that set, but I've been impressed with Suitner in the past.
> I do like the Kubelik recordings but the shrill, glassy sound really
> bothers me. Pity they didn't record the cycle with the SOBR. DG
> generally made better sounding recordings in Munich.
Has the sound been fixed/tamed in the Originals issues of the late
symphonies? I can't recall, even though I own them. Maybe DG could
remaster these and fix the sound.
Heck51
Kertesz is also good and has the
> best sound; 8 is the high point in his cycle, and you should own it in
> some form. >>
the whole set is very excellent, and indeed the #8 is terrific, my
favorite Dv8 - but #6 is, for me, the highlight - a real thriller,
jrsnfld
> On Oct 13, 5:23 pm, que...@webtv.net (Tony Salazar) wrote:
>
> > I would like to get a Box Set of the complete
> > symphonies.
>
> > Any recommendations? Kubelik, Kertesz, etc.
>
> > Thanks
>
> I'd go with Kubelik. The sound isn't the best, but he really knows the
> music, and the band is great. I like his 6 very much.
If you get it boxed with the overtures etc., then there's more than
one band involved, of course--the BPO for the symphonies and the BRSO
for the fillers.
>
> Kertesz gets lots of recommendations, but outside of the great sound,
> I'm not such a fan. Seems like he's running through the pieces.
Agreed.
--Jeff
Heck51
> I would like to get a Box Set of the complete
> symphonies.
>
> Any recommendations? >>
Kertesz/LSO - outstanding, don't hesitate
earbox
My suggestion would be to get the Vaclav Neumann performances.
Interpretively, they are played pretty straight, but the orchestra
sounds excellent and there is very distinctive wind playing. The
complete set is priced right and available in 3 sets of 2 discs each
from Qualiton.com These are my favorite recordings.
Tony Salazar
Thanks for all of your suggestions
Randy Lane
> Thanks for all of your suggestions
Before closing out though, if you're looking to broaden your library
od Dvorak orchestral works, the 17 CD Naxos white box is worth
considering.
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B0001FYRB2
Admittedly there are surely better recordings of every symphony, but
on the other hand none of the recordings in the box are
disappointments either.
And you get a wealth of other fine music too, much of it far under
appreciated by the common listener/audience.
Not easy to get though. I watched for it for at least two years before
finding a first class used on on eBay for less than $50.
I remember the Czech Suite being included on one of Dorati's Detroit
Sympohony recordings for Decca at the dawn of the digital LP era. Many
raved about the mostly unknown work, but even that was enough to
prompt others to folow suit and ressurect some of the other neglected
Dvorak orchestral gems. The Dorati is still available by the way in a
few compilations, including this Decca Double :
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B000040OX3
Maybe Brilliant Classics will do us a favor and put together a
complete Dvorak Edition someday.
jrsnfld
I hope the sound can be fixed. I tried to post earlier but it doesn't
show up here, so I'll reiterate: part of the problem is that detail is
washed away in an overblown perspective, not just shrill climaxes. In
all, whatever good Kubelik does is lost in the sonics. Kosler's sound
is also not very good, but Pesek, who has pretty good sound, is not as
taut as Neumann, if I recall correctly, so I have mixed feelings about
what I've heard of his set. Macal has the best sound of all, probably,
but otherwise is merely good.
I concur with recommendations for Neumann and Suitner, although I
haven't heard the complete sets of either (Kubelik and Kertesz are the
only sets I have complete--the others I have about 2/3). Some people
might be happier with Pesek, I suppose. So far I would also recommend
Rowicki overall because the ensemble is crisp and the sonics allow a
lot of clarity and good balance. No sacrifice of energy involved
either. The comparison with Kertesz, who not only seems to be sight
reading but is rather emphatic at times, is instructive. Rowicki is
the one who invites repeated hearing.
--Jeff
jrsnfld
I find the sound on the Kubelik maddening to the point where I won't
recommend it. Too much detail is washed out; the tone of the
orchestras is overwhelmed by the acoustic. There seems to be some
attempt to make the Berlin Phil more impressive than it already is.
Anyway, I wouldn't get that set as it doesn't make the right
impression for this lithe, vigorous music that depends on clarity. And
to be honest Kubelik is so good in concert with the Czech Phil on
Denon, and his Bavarian radio orchestra on Orfeo, that the DG set is
now an afterthought in all but the earlier symphonies 1-5 where he
doesn't really seem more compelling than the others, like Neumann
Rowicki, Kertesz, Pesek or Macal. If you really love Kubelik, of
course, there's plenty of reason to enjoy his cycle, but it's not as
good as it ought to be nor better than the alternatives.
Rowicki's sound is not the most up to date, but it's pleasant enough
and much more detailed. The effect is significant. Rowicki is also
superb in 1-6. Since anybody who collects a set of Dvorak is
undoubtedly eventually going to have one or two favorite performances
of 7, 8 and 9 outside the set, the Rowicki set is a strong contender
here.
Comparing Rowicki to Kertesz, from the same period with the same
orchestra, I find the orchestra plays with better style and balance
for Rowicki. I should listen again to mention specifics, but it's been
a long time. I like Kertesz's energy and the relatively beefy Decca
sonics, but Rowicki is far from lacking here. Whereas Kertesz seems a
little scruffy and underrehearsed, Rowicki is often tidy and
penetrating. He's more rewarding in the long run, in my experience.
I've only heard part of the Neumann set, but if price is no object,
he'd be at the head of the class along with Rowicki.
Pesek's all digital set doesn't have such great sound--I'd have to try
his again. I liked him in the early symphonies but haven't heard him
in the later ones (after 6). I don't see any advantage over Neumann.
The best recorded set I've heard is the Macal/Milwaukee. Macal isn't
better than the competition, but he's efficient and decent throughout--
the main point is the sound and it's the only American-made cycle
until Alsop completes one in Baltimore, which counts for those of us
who like to hear American-style winds (and probably doesn't count for
anyone else).
Kosler's sound is kind of shrill, so I only heard one disc from that
set. Suitner, on the other hand, has excellent sonics and like Rowicki
is very smartly stylish and crisp, which keeps Dvorak from getting
annoyingly overblown (which is why Kertesz verges on the tiresome).
But I haven't heard the whole set so I have no idea if he fares as
well as Rowicki. let alone Neumann in the later symphonies.
Rather than getting a set, if you can't stand having more than one
recording of a work, you could instead consider getting the two-fers
with Rowicki's 1-6, then select your favorite 7-9 in another two-fer
(for instance, Dohnanyi/Cleveland would be a superb choice and Davis/
Concertgebouw basically as good) or in single discs, like Davis,
Dohnanyi, or Jansons in 7/8 and, oh, maybe Kondrashin in 9.
--Jeff
Ray Hall
As far as I know it is. Effectively the box is three thick twofers (1-3,
4-6 and 7-9) contained in a thin paper cover, and is my choice for these
works. With the Czech PO, the performances feel spot on.
I'd still like to grab the Rowicki however sometime.
Ray Hall, Taree
jrsnfld
There seems to be a significant delay in posts appearing through
Google, but perhaps nobody has mentioned Valek's set yet? My
impression from a few broadcasts is that Valek's Dvorak performances
have plenty of character and that would count for a lot more if they
were a bit more polished. So I can't imagine this set is a first
recommendation.
--Jeff
herman
>
> > I do like the Kubelik recordings but the shrill, glassy sound really
> > bothers me. Pity they didn't record the cycle with the SOBR. DG
> > generally made better sounding recordings in Munich.
>
> Has the sound been fixed/tamed in the Originals issues of the late
> symphonies? I can't recall, even though I own them. Maybe DG could
> remaster these and fix the sound.
Surely you're aware that there is another set of Dvorak symphonies by
Kubelik, on Orfeo, with the BRSO, recorded in the late seventies.
This is the Kubelik set to have, not the DG one.
Mark S
> Surely you're aware that there is another set of Dvorak symphonies by
> Kubelik, on Orfeo, with the BRSO, recorded in the late seventies.
>
> This is the Kubelik set to have, not the DG one.
The man asked for a recommendation on the complete set. Last I looked,
Kubelik's Orfeo set is out of print. I don't make recommendations that
involve spending who knows how much time searching for hard-to-find
recordings, then paying out the wahzoo when and if they're located.
Gerard
That's it, in a nutshell.
The sound of the Rowicki set is much better than the DG/Kubelik set.
Rowicki's set is a real bargain. As is Suitner's (it's even cheaper in a "Basic
Box" reissue).
Gerard
I've never heard Valek.
But Angu�lov (on Oehms) might be a nice alternative for those who have some of
the top-recommendations.
Gerard
I have the last three symphonies on Orfeo, and I find them disappointing. I see
no reason to recommend one of those.
The 6th should be something exceptionally good, but that's the one I don't have.
jrsnfld
Huh? I have live Kubelik Dvorak 6-9 (not all on Orfeo, but that much
I've seen on Orfeo as well). So what's this set...do you have a link?
--Jeff
Satid
I used listen to Neumann/zCPO on Supraphon and Kertesz/LSO on Decca
sets and like them both. They are good in different ways. Kertesz's
set has better sound with clean and comparatively more conventional
way of performance while Neumann's set is a bit more forceful in some
parts. My overall impression with them are equally satisfying. I have
Rowicki's no.6 and find it good as well.
For the time being, these sets of Rowicki, Kertesz, Neumann, and
Kubelik are all on sales promotion at either Presto or MDT. Their
prices are quite attractive. Do not wait for too long to decide which
one. At the promotion price, you may afford to buy two sets for
comparative listening.
herman
That is true, and I was aware of the OP's quest. I was however
responding to posters who complained about the bad sound on Kubelik's
DG recording.
To me the best set would be taking the 1 - 6 with Rowicki and taking
Neuman or Kertesz for the last three symphonies.
Christopher Howell
> I do like the Kubelik recordings but the shrill, glassy sound really
> bothers me.
As a teenager I bought the Kubelik 8th on its first SLPM issue and the
sound has always seemed fine to me. Did it get messed up in the CD
transfer?
Chris Howell
Gerard
>
> For the time being, these sets of Rowicki, Kertesz, Neumann, and
> Kubelik are all on sales promotion at either Presto or MDT. Their
> prices are quite attractive. Do not wait for too long to decide which
> one. At the promotion price, you may afford to buy two sets for
> comparative listening.
The sets by Suitner and Kertesz are less than half of the price of Neumann's:
http://www.prestoclassical.co.uk/r/Berlin%2BClassics/0300036BC
http://www.prestoclassical.co.uk/r/Decca/4300462
Rowicki is even cheaper:
http://www.prestoclassical.co.uk/search.php?searchString=rowicki+dvorak
jrsnfld
If you have 1-6 with Rowicki (I'm with you there--and easy to do with
the two-fers) why limit yourself to Neumann or Kertesz in the last
three? A few days ago you were recommending people get anything they
find of Giulini's--wouldn't you recommend getting his Dvorak 7-9 on a
two-fer to complete the cycle? A lot of people like Dorati's 7-8 disc;
that and an Ancerl 9th might also make a nice completion to a cycle
started by Rowicki's 1-6.
--Jeff
Alan Cooper
news:7ca100da-a13c-433d...@g7g2000vbv.googlegroups.c
om:
Good point, esp. about Ancerl's 9th (I like the live one on Orfeo best). You
mentioned Dohnanyi's superb 7-9 previously, and I'd also like to sneak in a word
for Silvestri in 7 & 8--possibly my favorite recordings of the works, although the
treasurable Disky box that included them is op.
AC
Randy Lane
> jrsnfld <jrsn...@aol.com> wrote innews:7ca100da-a13c-433d...@g7g2000vbv.googlegroups.c
>
> - Show quoted text -
Silvestri seconded!
Keep your eyes on the Japanese sights. Toshiba typically reissues the
8th every few years.
I watched eBay for the Disky box for a few years, watching several go
by with bids upward of $200, before landing one in perfect condition
for less than $50 about a year ago.
herman
> jrsnfld <jrsn...@aol.com> wrote innews:7ca100da-a13c-433d...@g7g2000vbv.googlegroups.c
As it happened I listened to the Orfeo Ancerl just now.
If I may ask, what are the best Dvorak 7ths in your view?
M forever
> On Oct 13, 6:49 pm, M forever <ms1...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Oct 13, 9:27 pm, Mark S <markstenr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Oct 13, 5:23 pm, que...@webtv.net (Tony Salazar) wrote:
>
> > > > I would like to get a Box Set of the complete
> > > > symphonies.
>
> > > > Any recommendations? Kubelik, Kertesz, etc.
>
> > > > Thanks
>
> > > I'd go with Kubelik. The sound isn't the best, but he really knows the
> > > music, and the band is great. I like his 6 very much.
>
> > > Kertesz gets lots of recommendations, but outside of the great sound,
> > > I'm not such a fan. Seems like he's running through the pieces.
>
> > > Rowicki has worse sound then Kubelik, IIRC.
>
> > Generally agree with those comments although my first choice would be
> > the Neumann cycle. It's all there, great orchestra and conductor, very
> > stylish performances, rather good sound despite the slight "early
> > digital" edge.
>
> Agree. Pity it costs twice what most sets are going for these days.
> That fact entered into my recommendation. Though the OP didn't mention
> price as a concern, I feel more comfortable recommending a $30
> purchase of rep unfamiliar to a potential buyer that a $60 purchase,
> especially when the pluses and minuses among the competition are
> pretty much a wash.
I didn't check the price, but it is probably possible to find used
copies for much less. In any case, it's really worth it.
An IMO absolutely essential to this cycle is the CD with the 4 fairy
tale tone poems. It was recorded a few years earlier, in the late
analog era and sounds absolutely fabulous, just a little distant, but
the sonorities of the orchestra are extremely well captured, and
musically, it's spectacularly good, everything is spot on and highly
convincing. It's one of the very few recordings that I can think of
which I would say are more or less "perfect", to a degree at which it
has somewhat spoiled all other recordings of these pieces I know.
> >My second choice would be Staatskapelle Berlin/Suitner.
>
> Don't know that set, but I've been impressed with Suitner in the past.
>
> > I do like the Kubelik recordings but the shrill, glassy sound really
> > bothers me. Pity they didn't record the cycle with the SOBR. DG
> > generally made better sounding recordings in Munich.
>
> Has the sound been fixed/tamed in the Originals issues of the late
> symphonies? I can't recall, even though I own them. Maybe DG could
> remaster these and fix the sound.
Probably not. It's just the way they were recorded.
M forever
Unfortunately though, the LSO strings are no match in the quality and
style of their tone for the CP or SB. And the winds, while competent
in their own way, aren't as appealing in this music as those of either
orchestra either.
Dave Cook
> Rowicki has worse sound
I only have the middle symphonies, but I thought the sound was
excellent.
Though I haven't heard the other symphonies, I would suggest the
Rowicki set because it's so cheap.
Dave Cook
Gerard
There are other cheap sets as well.
Suitner's is one of the cheapest.
But having heard them might be a stronger argument.
J.Martin
> My suggestion would be to get the Vaclav Neumann performances.
> Interpretively, they are played pretty straight, but the orchestra
> sounds excellent and there is very distinctive wind playing. The
> complete set is priced right and available in 3 sets of 2 discs each
> from Qualiton.com These are my favorite recordings.
My sentiments as well. I find it interesting that recorded sound
seems to a key selling point for so many of us with this music. For
me, I must admit it's particularly important in some of the earlier
symphonies--even if these aren't "great" music, they can be great
listening with a great band and great sound.
And it goes without saying that in addition to having a solid complete
set, one needs any number of individual performances from Szell,
Kondrashin, Kubelik, Talich, Tennstedt...
M forever
> On Oct 13, 6:27 pm, Mark S <markstenr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Oct 13, 5:23 pm, que...@webtv.net (Tony Salazar) wrote:
>
> > > I would like to get a Box Set of the complete
> > > symphonies.
>
> > > Any recommendations? Kubelik, Kertesz, etc.
>
> > > Thanks
>
> > I'd go with Kubelik. The sound isn't the best, but he really knows the
> > music, and the band is great. I like his 6 very much.
>
> > Kertesz gets lots of recommendations, but outside of the great sound,
> > I'm not such a fan. Seems like he's running through the pieces.
>
> > Rowicki has worse sound then Kubelik, IIRC.
>
> I find the sound on the Kubelik maddening to the point where I won't
> recommend it. Too much detail is washed out; the tone of the
> orchestras is overwhelmed by the acoustic. There seems to be some
> attempt to make the Berlin Phil more impressive than it already is.
I think that's probably what's behind it and I guess on LP, they did
sound somewhat more "grandiose" than the recordings of some other
labels, and when people didn't expect as much plasticity and
transparency because of the limitations of the medium and playback
equipment at the time, that kind of superficial gloss may have worked
really well, but listening to it now, especially with headphones, is
really maddening. It's the same esthetic which they developed there
for and with Karajan. The recordings they had made in the same venue
just a few years earlier are so much better. For the same reasons, I
find it next to impossible to listen to Karajan's roughly contemporary
Ring even though what seems to be there behind the glossy haze appears
to be highly attractive orchestrally.
There is a fabulous disc with 8 and 9 with Levine and the
Staatskapelle D.
M forever
> On Oct 13, 7:23 pm, que...@webtv.net (Tony Salazar) wrote:
>
> > I would like to get a Box Set of the complete
> > symphonies.
>
> > Any recommendations? Kubelik, Kertesz, etc.
>
> > Thanks
>
> Interpretively, they are played pretty straight, but the orchestra
> sounds excellent and there is very distinctive wind playing. The
> complete set is priced right and available in 3 sets of 2 discs each
> from Qualiton.com These are my favorite recordings.
Completely agree. The vibrant, reedily colorful and slightly "folksy"
sounding clarinets at the opening of the 5th symphony alone are
fabulous and they set the tone for a very spirited, very stylish
performance. And the same standard applies for pretty much all the
symphonies.
Alan Cooper
news:efbb6e5d-d6dc-4c2e...@f5g2000vbz.googlegroups.c
om:
> If I may ask, what are the best Dvorak 7ths in your view?
I grew up with Monteux, but that performance no longer excites me. I've never been
fond of Szell, Dorati, Kubelik, Kertesz, Rowicki, or Neumann for various reasons,
mainly having to do with pacing and orchestral sound. Talich would be ideal if not
for his draggy Scherzo. I wonder why he chose that tempo. A stodgy finale ruins
Belohlavek's 7th for me even though the CzPO sounds wonderful. Anyway, I already
mentioned my affection for Dohnanyi and Silvestri, but if I could have only one
recording in modern sound I might keep either the live Mackerras/Philharmonia on
Signum, which seems to get everything right, or else the beautiful Fischer/BFO
recording on Channel Classics. If recorded sound is not a consideration, the
greatest of all the CzPO recordings is undoubtedly Sejna's, c/w an equally fine 6th
on Supraphon CD. (Sejna's 5th is the one to have also).
AC
Ray Hall
Could you describe Suitner's performances, even briefly. He always
seemed a bit lightweight from memory.
Also, the Rowicki appeared on the Philips Duos, so how come that Decca
also is issuing them? Unless they are different performances which I
doubt. Also is the mastering the same? Thanks.
I'm still very happy with Neumann though as I consider them essential.
Ray Hall, Taree
Gerard
> Gerard wrote:
> > Dave Cook wrote:
> > > On 2011-10-14, Mark S<markst...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > Rowicki has worse sound
> > >
> > > I only have the middle symphonies, but I thought the sound was
> > > excellent.
> > >
> > > Though I haven't heard the other symphonies, I would suggest the
> > > Rowicki set because it's so cheap.
> > >
> > > Dave Cook
> >
> > There are other cheap sets as well.
> > Suitner's is one of the cheapest.
> > But having heard them might be a stronger argument.
>
> Could you describe Suitner's performances, even briefly. He always
> seemed a bit lightweight from memory.
attentful to details, never rough but yet very much to the point (I didn't hear
them recently - this is from memory).
>
> Also, the Rowicki appeared on the Philips Duos, so how come that Decca
> also is issuing them? Unless they are different performances which I
> doubt. Also is the mastering the same? Thanks.
any information about it.
But all reissues of Philips recordings appear on Decca these days (and some on
Newton Classics).
The Philips Duos are no longer available AFAIK.
>
> I'm still very happy with Neumann though as I consider them essential.
>
> Ray Hall, Taree
(dragging).
Mark S
> Also, the Rowicki appeared on the Philips Duos, so how come that Decca
> also is issuing them? Unless they are different performances which I
> doubt. Also is the mastering the same? Thanks.
the record biz shortly after PolyGram was sold to Universal and the
licensing of their name to Philips Classics went with it.
The old Philips catalog is still owned by Universal, who is reissuing
and relabeling the Philips catalog on the DG and Decca labels.
The Rowicki set on Decca is the same set that appeared on Philips.
There is a chance that the recordings were remastered for this Decca
issue, but these days, that kind of info gets buried in the CD
booklet, rather than being used as a marketing tactic.
Gerard
what has been written already by others.
jrsnfld
> herman <her...@yahoo.com> wrote innews:efbb6e5d-d6dc-4c2e...@f5g2000vbz.googlegroups.c
to his earlier recording. Fischer is excellent in this piece, as are
Kocsis (is there a commercial recording?) and Jansons. Dohnanyi is
also near the tippy-top of the list, as is his 8th, except...
I have an inordinate fondness for Colin Davis's rhythmic punctuation
of the third movement. Nobody else quite gets it right as far as I'm
concerned. So that's still probably my favorite overall just to have
that 3rd movement. But the live Giulini/Concertgebouw that's I've
heard is breathtaking as well, for different reasons. Sejna is another
must-have.
I'm not sure who else I'd put in that exalted company.
--Jeff
Mark S
discussion of various recordings brings a smile to my mind's ear.
Dontait...@aol.com
> herman <her...@yahoo.com> wrote innews:efbb6e5d-d6dc-4c2e...@f5g2000vbz.googlegroups.c
amazing performance. There must be a Sony CD of it, perhaps?
And I agree about Sejna in no. 5. Except for Walter Goehr on Concert
Hall/Musical Masterpiece Society. I even prefer it. Again, if up-to
date recorded sound is not a consideration.
Don Tait
M forever
7th is fabulous, too. Really dark and menacing, really tragic, but
also very lyrical where needed. Dunno Davis' recording but I may check
that out from the library. I haven't listened to the 7th in a long
time, so I am in the mood for that.
Alan Cooper
news:985d46e8-6c2d-4b20...@v28g2000vby.googlegroups.
com:
> I haven't heard the Mackerras/Philharmonia. I'll have to listen
> again to his earlier recording. Fischer is excellent in this
> piece, as are Kocsis (is there a commercial recording?) and
> Jansons. Dohnanyi is also near the tippy-top of the list, as is
> his 8th, except...
Hungarian National Philharmonic, and you're right: it is tremendous. Do you have
a clean copy? Mine has an unfortunate glitch in the first movement. I don't
know of any commercial recording. Haven't heard Jansons.
> I have an inordinate fondness for Colin Davis's rhythmic
> punctuation of the third movement. Nobody else quite gets it
> right as far as I'm concerned. So that's still probably my
> favorite overall just to have that 3rd movement. But the live
> Giulini/Concertgebouw that's I've heard is breathtaking as well,
> for different reasons. Sejna is another must-have.
one on Sony, right?). Will try to listen to both again. Getting the tempo and
rhythm of the third movement right does seem to be tricky (it even eludes
Talich!). You're not a Silvestri fan?
AC
Greg
few others. It had been a long time since I compared recordings of
this symphony, and I wanted to see if my memory was correct or if my
tastes have changed.
Davis: I agree with your thoughts on the 3rd movement - wonderfully
detailed, but that's the only thing that stands out. The finale in
particular never really takes off.
Kocsis: Great performance despite audio glitches, but I wish I had a
better copy.
Mackerras/Philharmonia: Very good, but not in the top tier for 3
movements. The finale is notably good.
Neumann: Better than I remembered. In general I found Neumann's
cycle too relaxed when I listened to it several years ago, but I
really enjoyed his 7th tonight. It could be a bit tauter and more
forceful a la Szell, but there is a lot of interesting detail and
color and it really doesn't lack excitement in absolute terms. A
contender I think.
Ormandy: Too. Damn. Slow.
Kertesz: Impressive in its way - colorful, propulsive, great sound,
but I really don't like the interpretation. Not nearly dark enough.
Sounds exactly like his 8th (which I love), but those are very
different symphonies the way I hear them.
I need to dig up the Giulini you mentioned. I think I have seen, but
not listened to it.
Greg
Paul Goldstein
says...
Sol L. Siegel
2304-4d8a-872...@m4g2000yqm.googlegroups.com:
> Have you heard Bernstein/NY Phil. in no. 7? A Columbia LP. It's an
> amazing performance. There must be a Sony CD of it, perhaps?
I'm also fond of Ormandy; too bad about the accompanying 8.
Then again, I still think Monteux maintains a gold standard in the work.
Other faves of mine include Pesek in 3; Ancerl in 6 (despite no first-
movement repeat and the retouching in the coda of the finale); and the
stereo Walter 8. Honorable mention to the wild, wacky 1947 Walter/NYPO 8.
- Sol L. Siegel, Philadelphia, PA USA
Gerard
>
> I've heard Davis, but neither own it nor recollect it. Ditto Giulini
> (that's the one on Sony, right?).
Maybe the live recording is in one of the anthology boxes.
Christopher Howell
>
> Then again, I still think Monteux maintains a gold standard in the work.
>
I've not heard even mentioned for years is the Schmidt-Isserstedt.
Late in life he named it as his favourite among his own recordings,
not least because it was made with his own Hamburg orchestra. I had it
in its ACL form and always liked it. The early Decca sound with seedy
strings might be a problem today.
Chris Howell
Gerard
Oscar
>
> > Generally agree with those comments although my first choice would be
> > the Neumann cycle. It's all there, great orchestra and conductor, very
> > stylish performances, rather good sound despite the slight "early
> > digital" edge.
>
> Agree. Pity it costs twice what most sets are going for these days.
> That fact entered into my recommendation. Though the OP didn't mention
> price as a concern, I feel more comfortable recommending a $30
> purchase of rep unfamiliar to a potential buyer that a $60 purchase,
> especially when the pluses and minuses among the competition are
> pretty much a wash.
cheaper than Kertesz and Kubelik.
Here are the prices Presto Classical is currently asking for Dvorak
Symphonies boxed sets. Shipping cost to USA is $3.20, $1.05 each
additional item, a multi-disc selection counts as one item.
Rowicki 6CD — $24.00 — http://tiny.cc/hu5cd
Neumann 6CD — $26.85 — http://tiny.cc/kj30f
Suitner 5CD — $29.75 — http://tiny.cc/vbdu5
Kertesz 6CD — $31.36 — http://tiny.cc/x0t3t
Kubelik 6CD — $31.36 — http://tiny.cc/2mjdy
Pesek 8CD — $32.02 — http://tiny.cc/6ndjv (w/ addt'l orchestral works)
Satid
>
> The sets by Suitner and Kertesz are less than half of the price of Neumann's:
>
> http://www.prestoclassical.co.uk/r/Berlin%2BClassics/0300036BC
> http://www.prestoclassical.co.uk/r/Decca/4300462
>
Incorrect. At 16.5 UKP, the "6-CD" set of Neumann with CzPo on
Supraphon on current promotion at Presto is cheaper than Suitner
(18.33 UKP) or Kertesz (19.23 UKP). The same shipping charge applies
to all these sets at Presto.
http://www.prestoclassical.co.uk/r/Supraphon/SU37062
Gerard
were shown.
In another post Oscar mentions the prices (with shipping to the USA).
jrsnfld
wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > herman <her...@yahoo.com> wrote innews:efbb6e5d-d6dc-4c2e...@f5g2000vbz.googlegroups.c
> > om:
>
> > > If I may ask, what are the best Dvorak 7ths in your view?
>
> > I grew up with Monteux, but that performance no longer excites me. I've never been
> > fond of Szell, Dorati, Kubelik, Kertesz, Rowicki, or Neumann for various reasons,
> > mainly having to do with pacing and orchestral sound. Talich would be ideal if not
> > for his draggy Scherzo. I wonder why he chose that tempo. A stodgy finale ruins
> > Belohlavek's 7th for me even though the CzPO sounds wonderful. Anyway, I already
> > mentioned my affection for Dohnanyi and Silvestri, but if I could have only one
> > recording in modern sound I might keep either the live Mackerras/Philharmonia on
> > Signum, which seems to get everything right, or else the beautiful Fischer/BFO
> > recording on Channel Classics. If recorded sound is not a consideration, the
> > greatest of all the CzPO recordings is undoubtedly Sejna's, c/w an equally fine 6th
> > on Supraphon CD. (Sejna's 5th is the one to have also).
>
> > AC
>
> Have you heard Bernstein/NY Phil. in no. 7? A Columbia LP. It's an
> amazing performance. There must be a Sony CD of it, perhaps?
overture, but something in me resists the charms of Bernstein's Dvorak
7. It is passionate, the tempi are good, but (am I imagining
something?) something makes me squeamish. Maybe some intonation
problems. Maybe the engineering. Something seems unnecessarily coarse,
and not necessarily the interpretation itself, that disturbs me, and
normally I am quite forgiving about such issues. So I consider it one
of Bernstein's better NYP recordings (and I also like his Dvorak 9)
but I wouldn't say it's amazing.
Perhaps Bernstein simply goes "over the top" pushing for his orchestra
to give him something extra, where, on the other hand, the music is so
lovely and melancholy and viscerally exciting that all you really need
is refinement. By contrast, Harnoncourt seems relatively uninterested
in ratching up the tension and instead holds my attention with an
interesting sonority here or a slightly overdone accent there.
Meanwhile, the overall high quality of the engineering and playing
makes me want to come back for a second helping despite the lack of
overt excitement that would put this on a more exalted level of "must
have".
When I was a teenager I almost certainly would have preferred the
Bernstein.
--Jeff
jrsnfld
character of the third movement (notice how distinctive the opening
is--yet utterly different than the way Davis does it and ultimately I
don't think Harnoncourt caries his idea through as well as Davis did).
The refinement pays dividends throughout--this is a disc I can live
with and study, but not my favorite.
--Jeff
M forever
the playing of the orchestra itself, coupled with Bernstein's emphatic
and driven direction which strikes you as somehow lacking. This music
simply needs more sonic depth and quality in the orchestral playing
than the NYP had to offer at that time. Wiry strings and forced wind
playing somehow simply don't make Dvorak more interesting or
"exciting". The playing needs more vibrancy and color to do the music
fully justice. Also, Dvorak's writing in this symphony is full of fine
detail and somewhat unusual musical gestures - it really is a highly
original and unusual piece, and I think Bernstein doesn't really enter
that musical world. I think that also explains why you find
Harnoncourt more interesting even though his performance is less
"exciting". But you get highly colorful and sonorous orchestral
playing as well as an interpretation which is more interested in all
that detail and in finding just the right shape for each phrase.
Interestingly, one of the best Dvorak 7 I have heard was live with -
Celibidache, of all people. That performance was not as slow overall
as one might expect (or at least it didn't *seem* slow) but it was as
meticulously rehearsed down into the smallest detail and also played
with that full and rich but transparent sound with restrained, rounded
brass playing that was characteristic of his style, so you could hear
and enjoy all that fine detail, especially in the woodwind writing.
Roland van Gaalen
> It says something about the quality of Dvorak's music that even this
> discussion of various recordings brings a smile to my mind's ear.
-Kubelik/Berlin Philh (1971)
-Kubelik/Concertgebouw (1950)
-Haitink/Concergebouw (1959)
A very nice piece.
It seems sentimental in a slightly disturbing fashion. It's beautiful but altogether not satisfying because the mood doesn't appear to vary much.
So far, the only Dvorak composition I like without any reservations is the Cello Concerto.
--
Roland van Gaalen
Amsterdam
R.P.vanGaalenATchello.nl
jrsnfld
> You're not a Silvestri fan?
>
> AC
box..thanks for reminding me. It's outstanding.
--Jeff
herman
> -Haitink/Concergebouw (1959)
>
> A very nice piece.
>
Concertgebouw are very interesting.
This is, apparently, one of the first Bernard Haitink recordings, and
the first fully symphonic one (after an LP with two violin concertos).
It wasn't deemed a success, yet.
M forever
wrote:
> > It says something about the quality of Dvorak's music that even this
> > discussion of various recordings brings a smile to my mind's ear.
>
> Although I find this effect difficult to visualize,
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/98/245744537_9b2401b807.jpg
> you persuaded me to spend a few hours listening to various of recordings of
> Dvorak's 7th symphony.
>
> -Kubelik/Berlin Philh (1971)
> -Kubelik/Concertgebouw (1950)
> -Haitink/Concergebouw (1959)
>
> A very nice piece.
>
> It seems sentimental in a slightly disturbing fashion. It's beautiful but altogether
> not satisfying because the mood doesn't appear to vary much.
Frank Berger
"jrsnfld" <jrs...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:09d3ffaa-f983-41ca...@s7g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
of 5, 6 and 7? His 6 could be the best of them all.
jrsnfld
> "jrsnfld" <jrsn...@aol.com> wrote in message
in a killfile.
--Jeff
Gerard
My copy is from the 'Bernstein Century' series (for Don: SMK 60561). I've
relistened to it partially. I was not really amazed either.
Roland van Gaalen
> Roland van Gaalen <rolandv...@gmail.com> - Sat, 15 Oct 2011
> 14:46:28 -0700 (PDT):
> > So far, the only Dvorak composition I like without any reservations is the Cello Concerto.
>
>
Not yet, but that may change -- any particular recommendations?
Frank Berger
Roland van Gaalen
> On Oct 15, 5:46 pm, Roland van Gaalen <rolandv...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Dvorak's 7th symphony.
> > It seems sentimental in a slightly disturbing fashion. It's beautiful but altogether
> > not satisfying because the mood doesn't appear to vary much.
>
> Huh?
Let me try to explain.
Maybe I am making sense to no one except myself, but as an example of a vaguely comparable symphony with more contrasts (in my perception) I submit Brahms's third symphony.
Listening to Dvorak's seventh feels like sitting in a very comfortable chair (I think the music is for the most part quite beautiful) but keeping one's body in in more or less the same posture all the time (I think the composition as a whole is a bit monotonous, despite the tempo changes).
As I hear it, the mood of this piece appears to be consistently somber even in the scherzo and the finale.
Moreover, it borders on distasteful sentimentality every now and then, especially in the admittedly gorgeous second movement (which in that respect is comparable to the andante of the Brahms symphony, in my opinion).
All power to those who think I am just imagining things -- they are probably right.
Gerard
Gerard
Aren't you the one who said that Dvorak's symphony 9 should not be played any
more?
William Sommerwerck
wrote in message
news:12564805.1831.1318771872173.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@vbzc27...
> All power to those who think I am just imagining things -- they are
probably right.
what you hear.
Compared to Brahms or Beethoven, Dvorak is not particularly strong on
development, which is what hurts his early symphonies. It's possible you're
reacting to this. And there's nothing wrong with that.
Everyone has different toes, and we've all dipped them in different streams
at different times.
Sol L. Siegel
>> > So far, the only Dvorak composition I like without any reservations
>> > is the Cello Concerto.
>>
>> None of his chamber or vocal works?
>>
>
> Not yet, but that may change -- any particular recommendations?
the bull!
The Opp. 96 ("American") and 106 string quartets.
The Op. 81 piano quintet and Op. 87 piano quartet.
The Op. 90 ("Dumky") piano trio.
I believe the Op. 65 piano trio and the Op. 97 string quintet
(also aka "American") are equal to the above, but they need to
be really well played. Try Suk in the trios and Smetana in
the quintet.
Bob Harper
> It says something about the quality of Dvorak's music that even this
> discussion of various recordings brings a smile to my mind's ear.
complete sets, and wouldn't wish to surrender any of them. Suitner's is
for me a recent, and welcome, discovery.
Bob Harper
herman
> Roland van Gaalen <rolandvangaa...@gmail.com> wrote innews:5751081.2276.1318767972311.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@vbak12:
'sentimentality' bar.
I would recommend both the op. 105 and 106 string quartets and the Op.
81 piano quintet and Op. 87 piano quartet. The Op. 97 is a splendid
piece.
Gerard
> On 17 oct, 06:44, "Sol L. Siegel" <vod...@aol.com> wrote:
> > Roland van Gaalen <rolandvangaa...@gmail.com> wrote
> > innews:5751081.2276.1318767972311.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@vbak12:
> >
> > > > > So far, the only Dvorak composition I like without any
> > > > > reservations is the Cello Concerto.
> >
> > > > None of his chamber or vocal works?
> >
> > > Not yet, but that may change -- any particular recommendations?
> >
> > Now, that's like waving the proverbial colored flag in front of
> > the bull!
> >
> > The Opp. 96 ("American") and 106 string quartets.
> >
> > The Op. 81 piano quintet and Op. 87 piano quartet.
> >
> > The Op. 90 ("Dumky") piano trio.
> >
> > I believe the Op. 65 piano trio and the Op. 97 string quintet
> > (also aka "American") are equal to the above, but they need to
> > be really well played. Try Suk in the trios and Smetana in
> > the quintet.
> >
> > - Sol L. Siegel, Philadelphia, PA USA
>
> I suspect the op. 96 and the op. 90 would also run into RvG's
> 'sentimentality' bar.
>
Roland van Gaalen
Roland van Gaalen
Amsterdam
Roland van Gaalen
> On 10/14/11 3:48 PM, Mark S wrote:
> > It says something about the quality of Dvorak's music that even this
> > discussion of various recordings brings a smile to my mind's ear.
>
Agreed. Because of Mark's message I am exploring more Dvorak at this very moment!
Roland van Gaalen
Amsterdam
Roland van Gaalen
>
> I suspect the op. 96 and the op. 90 would also run into RvG's
> 'sentimentality' bar.
(What is sentimentality? And when does sentimentality become distasteful? What does it mean for something to border on distasteful sentimentality?
I suppose if other listeners were to recognize their own response to the music, I could claim the dubious justification derived from shared experience, even without defining all terms.)
>
> I would recommend both the op. 105 and 106 string quartets and the Op.
> 81 piano quintet and Op. 87 piano quartet. The Op. 97 is a splendid
> piece.
Matthew B. Tepper
letters to be typed in news:Xns9F81778BD2...@130.133.4.11:
and Quartets Opp. 34, 51, 96, and 105, as well as the Brahms Piano Quintet
and further quartets by Beethoven, Haydn, Janácek, Mozart, and Smetana.
--
Matthew B. Tepper: WWW, science fiction, classical music, ducks!
Read about "Proty" here: http://home.earthlink.net/~oy/proty.html
To write to me, do for my address what Androcles did for the lion
Opinions expressed here are not necessarily those of my employers
Kevin N
> On Oct 13, 5:23 pm, que...@webtv.net (Tony Salazar) wrote:
>
> > I would like to get a Box Set of the complete
> > symphonies.
>
> > Any recommendations? Kubelik, Kertesz, etc.
>
> > Thanks
>
> I'd go with Kubelik. The sound isn't the best, but he really knows the
> music, and the band is great. I like his 6 very much.
>
> Kertesz gets lots of recommendations, but outside of the great sound,
> I'm not such a fan. Seems like he's running through the pieces.
I assume that Kertesz with the LSO. I have 9 with the WP (are there
any others with the WP?), which is excellent. I haven't heard the LSO
symphonies, but everything I've heard about them is that they're a big
disappointment.
> Rowicki has worse sound then Kubelik, IIRC.
Gerard
herman
>
> The Janácek Quartet box on DGG will conveniently give you the Piano Quintet
> and Quartets Opp. 34, 51, 96, and 105, as well as the Brahms Piano Quintet
> and further quartets by Beethoven, Haydn, Janácek, Mozart, and Smetana.
see if they have Panocha, or Prazak Qts in the used bin, etc.
Roland van Gaalen
Morevover RvG will visit the Concerto store, as suggested by H.
--
RvG
Amsterdam
R.P.vanGaalenATchello.nl
jrsnfld
me--not as bad as the Mahler 5 that jarred my senses last time I
listened. It's a pretty good interpretation, actually. I can't really
fault Bernstein here. I hear a couple instances where I'd like a
little more bite in the string attacks in the first movement, and
another place where the horns could have been more prominent, but
nothing to really complain about.
The most bothersome thing I think is that the winds are not really
consistently good at blending, and I as part of that problem there are
intonation issues--especially noticeable in the second movement. There
are moments of perfectly good unison playing, and then something goes
awry here or there. (I also think the clarinet sounds nearly
unpleasant in the opening of the movement, but that's not the basic
problem). None of this should be enough to throw out the recording,
and I'm not even sure I care all that much about these issues, but if
forced to choose, this wouldn't the Dvorak 7 to trot out for people
who are looking for amazement.
The bottom line is that there's some very good playing mixed with the
minor fleeting flaws and Bernstein's highly romantic conception is
compelling. The shape of the piece overall, and the balances
generally, the manner of expression--all to the good. I don't think
Don is wrong to like this recording.
--Jeff
jrsnfld
> the playing of the orchestra itself, coupled with Bernstein's emphatic
> and driven direction which strikes you as somehow lacking.
It's not particularly driven--not too fast, not too emphatic. I could
use more speed in the third movement and maybe even in the fourth
movement. Nor does it tread too heavily. But it is more "romantic"
than some--willing to sacrifice a little forward momentum to dwell on
a precious moment.
>This music
> simply needs more sonic depth and quality in the orchestral playing
> than the NYP had to offer at that time. Wiry strings and forced wind
> playing somehow simply don't make Dvorak more interesting or
> "exciting". The playing needs more vibrancy and color to do the music
> fully justice.
I agree that they can sound sort of raw and forced at times. I don't
think this recording is a good example of that, upon further
listening. I still hear some intonational strangeness here and there
in the winds, but nothing awful. And actually the strings acquit
themselves just fine. Not everything is gorgeous but they show their
depth of tone enough to set themselves apart from the rabble. I'd call
it sufficiently first-rate string playing overall (very few lapses),
even though I will admit that the NYP strings are even more gorgeous
in some of their pre-Bernstein recordings and their tone during this
period is not going to win prizes.
I agree the color of the strings is a bit bland to my ear--not varied
or focused as much as I like, but hardly lacking in "vibrancy" or
tending toward "wiry". Perhaps the hall has something to do with this,
or the engineering, but I often find the string sound for Bernstein on
Columbia had a certain, I don't know..."hollowness" about it, even
when you can tell they nail something with intonation and unanimity of
vibrato etc. and there's a clear tone and power with strong resonance
emanating from the recording.
>Also, Dvorak's writing in this symphony is full of fine
> detail and somewhat unusual musical gestures - it really is a highly
> original and unusual piece, and I think Bernstein doesn't really enter
> that musical world.
He does ok with this aspect without nailing every little thing that
I've learned to like in this piece.
>I think that also explains why you find
> Harnoncourt more interesting even though his performance is less
> "exciting". But you get highly colorful and sonorous orchestral
> playing as well as an interpretation which is more interested in all
> that detail and in finding just the right shape for each phrase.
> Interestingly, one of the best Dvorak 7 I have heard was live with -
> Celibidache, of all people. That performance was not as slow overall
> as one might expect (or at least it didn't *seem* slow) but it was as
> meticulously rehearsed down into the smallest detail and also played
> with that full and rich but transparent sound with restrained, rounded
> brass playing that was characteristic of his style, so you could hear
> and enjoy all that fine detail, especially in the woodwind writing.
>
I'm sure it wasn't slow. In fact, on the disc I have (a live
performance with the Munich Phil from 1987, on the "Live Artists"
label) nothing is too slow, and the 3rd movement and the 4th movement
are noticeably on the speedy side. I like Celi's performance very
much, and consider it one of my favorites (I've mentioned it in a
previous thread, but didn't this time for some reason). I don't
consider the brass more restrained than the NYP for Bernstein, by the
way. The brass in that Columbia recording lack the punch that Celi
gets from his brass. It is, as you say, a extraordinarily well
rehearsed performance, incisive, bouncy, balanced, beautiful.
This is a prime example of why Celibidache was a great conductor; he
actually put all that rehearsal time to some good. The way various
instrumental choirs mimic their counterparts to perfection, the way
various lines are brought to the fore at exactly the right moment and
then back off to let others come through. The energy and confidence in
the way everything is phrased. Exemplary. Had Don called this
performance "amazing" I wouldn't have flinched one bit. Thanks for
reminding me.
I wonder why this wasn't issued on EMI....
--Jeff
M forever
you with Bernstein, but not the former?
jrsnfld
> "jrsnfld" <jrsn...@aol.com> wrote in message
>
> news:570d79a0-c05c-4059...@y22g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
> On Oct 16, 12:44 am, "Frank Berger" <frankdber...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > "jrsnfld" <jrsn...@aol.com> wrote in message
>
> >news:09d3ffaa-f983-41ca...@s7g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
> > On Oct 14, 7:25 pm, Alan Cooper <amcoo...@NOSPAMoptonline.net> wrote:
>
> > > You're not a Silvestri fan?
>
> > > AC
>
> > I just tend to forget the Silvestri Dvorak because it's in the big
> > box..thanks for reminding me. It's outstanding.
>
> > --Jeff
>
> > Is it possible that no one has mentioned Karel Sejna's fabulous recordings
> > of 5, 6 and 7? His 6 could be the best of them all.
>
> Not possible...unless you have a couple of us long-time contributors
> in a killfile.
>
> --Jeff
>
> I do, but I searched via google and didn't find a mention.
mentioned Sejna a while before you did. I'm not sure why those posts
didn't show up, but in any case that doesn't mean you shouldn't
mention Sejna anyhow--and explain what it is that Sejna does right!
--Jeff
jrsnfld
old Czech Phil winds very much--especially when they take solo turns.
I expect more from the NY Phil players of that period (clarinet
excepted) and usually I get more pleasure from them. However, for
every sour note or unlovely sound in Sejna's winds you get something
so divinely simple, so seemingly impossible to "teach," that you have
to love them: like the chirping staccatos in the first minute or so of
the third movement. Those notes aren't just short, and they're not
just clipped or rounded--they're bubbles of froth popping off a
freshly poured beer.Or the little lift at the top of the ascending
flute line about 30 seconds into the fourth movement repeated later in
the violins--extremely subtle--and then the burbling staccatos on a
single note again, this time in the trumpets and later the horns, etc.
Over and over little details like this make the music move. Other
quirks of articulation and rhythm that are genuinely unanimous
throughout the orchestra, yet idiosyncratic, explain the "charm" of a
performance that otherwise is, phrase to phrase, kind of straight.
Some of the great Czech quartet playing often feels this way--so
simple, almost blank, yet uniquely tugging you along anyway.
Most significantly, in the big picture, Sejna drives the piece forward
simply toward very specific climaxes (sometimes picking up the tempo a
bit at such moments), whereas Bernstein is not in a hurry, more
interested in a heartfelt shaping of the music on a more moment-to-
moment basis even though he has a very good idea of how all of this
fits together. I don't find this "wrong" or stylistically
unacceptable. I believe Bernstein is very much "inside" the music--I
can feel what he's doing and it makes sense-- but he's molding a
performance that drawing our focus to the beauty, the harmony, the
texture. The little intonation flaws, the slightly insufficient range
of color, etc. in beauty are so much more crucial as a result. Sejna's
depends much more its rhythmic energy. So Sejna can have occasionally
wiry, raw strings; woolly wind solo playing--and succeed because he's
got balance and unanimity of character in the rhythms to move the
music inexorably toward where he wants it to peak.
This isn't to say that Sejna's performance lacks beauty, or doesn't
depend on so much else like properly projected harmony, or Bernstein's
lacks rhythm and dramatic climaxes--far from it--but I think this is
the distinction that makes me complain about Bernstein's in terms of
beauty and not Sejna's for the same flaws.
--Jeff
Oscar
complete Dvorak Symphonies cycle, the first CD will be released next
month via Warner Classics. http://tiny.cc/6e8c5
• Slavonic Dance No. 1 in C Major, Op. 46 No. 1
• Symphony No. 9 in E minor 'From the New World', Op. 95
• Czech Suite, Op. 39
• Slavonic Dance No. 10 in E minor, Op. 72 No. 2
<<The start of the first complete cycle of Dvorák symphonies on Warner
Classics. It follows the enormously successful complete Glazunov
symphonies cycle from José Serebrier with the Royal Scottish National
Orchestra and complete Glazunov concertos with the Russian National
Orchestra. José Serebrier has a special affinity with Slavic music
including an outstanding live performance of Rachmaninov The Bells, as
well as the complete symphonies and concertos of Glazunov.
Recorded at the Lighthouse, Poole, 22 & 23 June 2011 by producer &
Grammy-nominated engineer, Phil Rowlands>>
jrsnfld
> José Serebrier and the Bournemouth Symphony Orchestra are recording a
> complete Dvorak Symphonies cycle, the first CD will be released next
> • Slavonic Dance No. 1 in C Major, Op. 46 No. 1
> • Symphony No. 9 in E minor 'From the New World', Op. 95
> • Czech Suite, Op. 39
> • Slavonic Dance No. 10 in E minor, Op. 72 No. 2
>
> <<The start of the first complete cycle of Dvorák symphonies on Warner
> Classics. It follows the enormously successful complete Glazunov
> symphonies cycle from José Serebrier with the Royal Scottish National
> Orchestra and complete Glazunov concertos with the Russian National
> Orchestra. José Serebrier has a special affinity with Slavic music
> including an outstanding live performance of Rachmaninov The Bells, as
> well as the complete symphonies and concertos of Glazunov.
Egads...just three sentences of marketing drivel in that paragraph and
one of them is largely redundant.
I wonder how many people bought that enormously successful Glazunov
cycle?
--Jeff
Gerard
Matthew B. Tepper
> On Tuesday, October 18, 2011 1:11:06 AM UTC+2, herman wrote:
>>
>> > The Janácek Quartet box on DGG will conveniently give you the Piano
>> > Quintet and Quartets Opp. 34, 51, 96, and 105, as well as the Brahms
>> > Piano Quintet and further quartets by Beethoven, Haydn, Janácek,
>> > Mozart, and Smetana.
>>
>> Or RvG could check out the Concerto store on the Utrechtsestraat, and
>> see if they have Panocha, or Prazak Qts in the used bin, etc.
>
> RvG appreciates MBTs recommendation and intends to acquire the box
> concerned.
>
> Morevover RvG will visit the Concerto store, as suggested by H.
Quartet box, not least of which (and how could I fail to mention this?) is
the Mendelssohn Octet.
Matthew B. Tepper
be typed in news:28f93b7e-dd68-4630-bfa3-f13434956407
@t38g2000prg.googlegroups.com:
suspect that Mr. Wiser did not do so.
M forever
would particularly appeal to you.
> I expect more from the NY Phil players of that period (clarinet
> excepted) and usually I get more pleasure from them. However, for
> every sour note or unlovely sound in Sejna's winds you get something
> so divinely simple, so seemingly impossible to "teach," that you have
> to love them: like the chirping staccatos in the first minute or so of
> the third movement. Those notes aren't just short, and they're not
> just clipped or rounded--they're bubbles of froth popping off a
> freshly poured beer.Or the little lift at the top of the ascending
> flute line about 30 seconds into the fourth movement repeated later in
> the violins--extremely subtle--and then the burbling staccatos on a
> single note again, this time in the trumpets and later the horns, etc.
> Over and over little details like this make the music move. Other
> quirks of articulation and rhythm that are genuinely unanimous
> throughout the orchestra, yet idiosyncratic, explain the "charm" of a
> performance that otherwise is, phrase to phrase, kind of straight.
> Some of the great Czech quartet playing often feels this way--so
> simple, almost blank, yet uniquely tugging you along anyway.
right" way of playing, just like an idiomatic way of speaking has just
the right tone and accent to it.
> Most significantly, in the big picture, Sejna drives the piece forward
> simply toward very specific climaxes (sometimes picking up the tempo a
> bit at such moments), whereas Bernstein is not in a hurry, more
> interested in a heartfelt shaping of the music on a more moment-to-
> moment basis even though he has a very good idea of how all of this
> fits together. I don't find this "wrong" or stylistically
> unacceptable. I believe Bernstein is very much "inside" the music--I
> can feel what he's doing and it makes sense-- but he's molding a
> performance that drawing our focus to the beauty, the harmony, the
> texture. The little intonation flaws, the slightly insufficient range
> of color, etc. in beauty are so much more crucial as a result. Sejna's
> depends much more its rhythmic energy. So Sejna can have occasionally
> wiry, raw strings; woolly wind solo playing--and succeed because he's
> got balance and unanimity of character in the rhythms to move the
> music inexorably toward where he wants it to peak.
surprising because he wasn't a big "interventionist", more a steward
of traditions, and the orchestra in his time still had those very
characteristic sonorities, although the playing had become technically
more secure in the meantime, so that is why his are among my top
choices for these symphonies.
> This isn't to say that Sejna's performance lacks beauty, or doesn't
> depend on so much else like properly projected harmony, or Bernstein's
> lacks rhythm and dramatic climaxes--far from it--but I think this is
> the distinction that makes me complain about Bernstein's in terms of
> beauty and not Sejna's for the same flaws.
Al Eisner
I would certaintly second the various quartets and the quintet. But there's
also orchestral music worth trying, especially the trilogy of "nature"
overtures, particularly "In Nature's Realm" and "Otello". These are
on a first-rate 3-CD Brilliant Classics set of miscellaneous Dvorak tone
poems, overtures, plus the Czech Suite, conducted by Theodore Kuchar.
Many of these works are quite to-the-point. (And the Brilliant
set is quite inexpensive, of course.)
--
Al Eisner
Gerard
conducted by Neeme Järvi, Belohlavek and Jansons.
Also the Brilliant Classics set with the string quartets, and the set with the
remaining chamber music.
William Sommerwerck
poems, and the early symphonies are disappointing, but it's worth it just
for the last five.
Gerard
> What ever happened to the Kertesz box set?
It's still available:
http://www.amazon.com/Dvorak-Symphonies-Box-Set-Antonin/dp/B0000041WV/
> It doesn't have all the
> tone poems, and the early symphonies are disappointing, but it's
> worth it just for the last five.
Is Kertesz more disappointing than others?