Best "Symphonie Fantastique"
art...@gmail.com
Dave Cook
> Beecham?:
>
> http://www.commentarymagazine.com/viewarticle.cfm/my-favorite-classic...
I haven't heard Beecham yet, but my choice would be the 1963 recording
by the "slapdash genius".
Matthew B. Tepper
be typed in news:5c23153e-5887-4ed3-8fc0-
ff9ce2...@r37g2000prr.googlegroups.com:
There are two very different Beecham recordings, one in mono from 1957-58,
the other in stereo from late 1959. I think the earlier recording is much
the better of the two.
--
Matthew B. Tepper: WWW, science fiction, classical music, ducks!
My personal home page -- http://home.earthlink.net/~oy/index.html
My main music page --- http://home.earthlink.net/~oy/berlioz.html
To write to me, do for my address what Androcles did for the lion
Opinions expressed here are not necessarily those of my employers
Dave Cook
> There are two very different Beecham recordings, one in mono from 1957-58,
> the other in stereo from late 1959. I think the earlier recording is much
> the better of the two.
That one doesn't seem to be readily available unless one wants to pay
"scalper" raters on Amazon.
There's also an 1987 CD. Do you happen to know the date of the last
remastering?
Dave Cook
J.Martin
> There are two very different Beecham recordings, one in mono from 1957-58,
> the other in stereo from late 1959. I think the earlier recording is much
> the better of the two.
>
So did Gramophone, which listed the mono Beecham as one of the best
SFs on record, if I recall correctly. I've heard only the stereo
Beecham, which was nothing special. FWIW, My favorite version is
probably Munch's second recording (1963, maybe?), which is even better
than the much vaunted Living Stereo version.
Anyway... what a strange article from Commentary. Imagine being so
oblivious as to imagine that today's great performances will never be
heard by later generations. If anything, today's musicians suffer from
overdocumentation, and it's only going to get worse as it becomes ever
easier to record and exchange performances.
JM
Phlmaestro
The Munch '54 is another favorite.
Matthew B. Tepper
letters to be typed in news:8383b4e2-089d-4c3c-a2a8-
da771f...@w1g2000prk.googlegroups.com:
> Anyway... what a strange article from Commentary. Imagine being so
> oblivious as to imagine that today's great performances will never be
> heard by later generations. If anything, today's musicians suffer from
> overdocumentation, and it's only going to get worse as it becomes ever
> easier to record and exchange performances.
I vaguely recall an issue of Fanfare a few years ago in which a reviewer
quoted a student at Juilliard (or perhaps at one of the other prestigious
music schools) expressed the opinion that it would have been wonderful if
Fritz Kreisler had left recordings of his compositions.
Remember, lots of younger folks these days are under the delusion that
something is only good if it's new, and in many cases that it doesn't even
exist unless it's current. Witness all the kids online whose lists of their
favorite movies are heavily weighted toward recent crapola.
Gerard
Is the "slapdash genius" Beecham?
For what reason would that recording be your choice?
Lionel Tacchini
> Remember, lots of younger folks these days are under the delusion that
> something is only good if it's new, and in many cases that it doesn't even
> exist unless it's current.
We need them to balance out the crowds who claim that the Golden Ages
have ended on the day they were born and that things of real value can
only belong to the past.
Wasn't there an acoustic recording of the Fantastique with cuts by
someone like Oskar Fried, never reissued on CD?
Lionel Tacchini ;-)
Steve LaBonne
available used), that now goes to the top of my SF list. It's vintage
Lenny- interventionist without ever crossing the line into mannerism.
It absolutely nails the paradoxical combination of abandon and
precision (the orchestral playing is splendid, as is the recorded
sound) that this music demands. Really, it's one of the best Bernstein
recordings of _anything_ that I've heard.
Gerard
Did you hear his 1963 recording with the NYP?
BrianK
Much as I enjoy this symphony I cannot say that I have heard a
recording that holds my attention in the way that other conductors do
in symphonies by other composers, and certainly not the extant Beecham
recordings. Colin Davis is one of my favourite conductors in this work
(London SO or the Concertgebouw) and I also enjoy a recording that
Seiji Ozawa made for DG with the Boston SO, almost balletic in parts.
I do think the best available recording is Stokowski's 1968
performance with the New Pghilharmonia Orchestra, but this is probably
a matter of taste. I have often wondered whether Kyril Kondrashin or
Carlos Kleiber ever conducted this symphony and what the results were
like. Among modern conductors I suspect that John Eliot Gardiner would
achieve the balance of poetic spirit, elegance and freneticism that
Berlioz's Symphonie Fantastique requires. Overall, this symphony seems
like one of the most difficult in the romantic repertory to bring off
convincingly.
Brian K
Steve LaBonne
Yes. It's very good, but I like the French one even better.
Steve LaBonne
BrianK
> BrianK- yes, Gardiner's is quite good.
I did not know that Gardiner had recorded it - many thanks for the
information.
Brian K
Heck51
> Beecham?:>>
I like both Soltis - I and II from '72 and '92 - splendid playing
I also like mitropoulos/NYPO from '56
Steve LaBonne
Don't miss his DVD of Les Troyens, if you don't already have it. It's
a revelation- the more transparent (yet at the same time, more
impactful) sound of the orchestra allows for somewhat lighter voices,
in particular a Rossini tenor as Enee who can actually SING his part
(and blend perfectly with the- superb- Didon in Nuits d'ivresse)
instead of alternately bellowing and crooning in the usual Heldentenor
fashion.
William Sommerwerck
it up next week. It will be interesting to compare it with the CD version.
Thomas Liebert
> Monteux/SFSO/1951 on Preiser
I recall reading somewhere that the Preiser transfer of this recording
is not very good (overly filtered, IIRC). I have this on an RCA Japan CD
(BVCC-37321) which sounds good to me. (I've not heard the Preiser.) This
RCA Japan CD gives the date of the recording as February 27, 1950 (War
Memorial Opera House, San Francisco). First Release: LM-1131 (May 1951).
--Thomas
Gerard
I can't remember having read here a good or nice comparison of this version with
Davis' LSO Live recording.
Maybe it has been discussed, but not seriously (but in terms like "boring" and
"more boring").
Do you know the LSO Live recording?
Norman M. Schwartz
> BrianK- yes, Gardiner's is quite good.
I like it a lot. It was recorded in a very small hall, and being "airless"
it very much sounds it. (The same hall in which it premiered, ?). Unless you
can tolerate dry recordings, I wouldn't get it, but for less than $10 at
Amazon,
http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_m?url=node%3D85&field-keywords=gardiner+and+berlioz&x=15&y=20
IMO anyone who likes the SF must have it.
There's a new one by Dudamel/LAP to be released this year, but is now
available for download at the DG store.
William Sommerwerck
No, and after being burned by Davis's LSO remakes of Romeo & Juliette, and
some Sibelius symphonies, I'm afraid to purchase any more. Davis has become
a member of the Slow Conductors Society, to little seeming point.
Steve LaBonne
I have it in the big Bicentennial box, and it doesn't buck the trend
noted by W.S.
Michael Schaffer
I find Abbado's CSO recording much more interesting.
randy...@gmail.com
This symphony, with all of its fine textures, benefits tremendously
from good acoustics with minimal microphones, IMHO.
The recording I find myself returning to more than any other is the
Paul Paray Mercury Living Presence recording. Paray may not impart the
most imaginative interpretation on the work, nothing compared to, say,
Bernstein. But the marvelous realism of the recording more than
compensate fro any lack of interpretive genius.
Dave Cook
> Is the "slapdash genius" Beecham?
> For what reason would that recording be your choice?
No, "slapdash genius" is Teachout's description of Lenny. I have all
of his fantastiques. I'll have to reevaluate my favorites, it's been
a while. I remember finding the EMI recording somewhat bass light. I
also have both Beechams on order.
My vinyl rip of the Mitropoulos is still available (MP3 with VBR ~
192k):
http://www.mydatabus.com/public/AlleyOop/berlioz_fantastique_mitropoulos.zip
I still have not encountered any of the commercial CD releases
anywhere. Has anyone heard the live Mitropoulos on Urania?
Dave Cook
Gerard
> On Jan 10, 1:55 am, "Gerard" <ghen_nospam_drik...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Is the "slapdash genius" Beecham?
> > For what reason would that recording be your choice?
>
> No, "slapdash genius" is Teachout's description of Lenny. I have all
> of his fantastiques.
I suppose "Lenny" is Bernstein.
Are there more than 3 of them ("his fantastiques")?
Matthew B. Tepper
letters to be typed in news:16e48ea5-0689-43fb-9031-
4ae899...@b38g2000prf.googlegroups.com:
> Overall, this symphony seems like one of the most difficult in the romantic
> repertory to bring off convincingly.
Particularly when those in "the biz" make recordings of it as a Sonic
Spectacular, instead of an important pioneering musical composition.
Matthew B. Tepper
following letters to be typed in news:ba462511-a1b8-43ce-b7bf-
ac24cf...@k1g2000prb.googlegroups.com:
There was an acoustic recording by Rhené-Baton, which our own Don Tait once
included on his radio show, which was broadcast here on KUSC before the Evil
Days. I had just enough presence of mind to patch my VCR into the stereo so
as to record it on the hi-fi track of a VHS tape. Many years later I loaned
that tape to the late John Wilson, who brought it into the digital realm and
did some noise reduction to diminish the surface hiss. If you can get past
the usual tiresome tubas and scrawny fiddles typical of orchestra recordings
of that era, it's a fascinating document.
Heck51
I should pick that one up - it was UA for awhile, IIRC.
Dave Cook
> Has anyone heard the live Mitropoulos on Urania?
I shouldn't describe that Urania as live. I can't find any
information on the
recording date. According to Lynn René Bayley in Fanfare it's in
stereo and
there are some vinyl noises, so perhaps they just ripped the CBS Lp.
Dave Cook
Dave Cook
> I suppose "Lenny" is Bernstein.
> Are there more than 3 of them ("his fantastiques")?
Only 3 AFAIK, NYP/1963, NYP/1968 and ORTF/1976.
The 1968 recording was on CD only once, in the "Great Performances"
series,
no matter what the dates given on the other releases in the Royal
Edition or
Bernstein Century series, which were both the 1963 recording.
Dave Cook
Gerard
Thanks.
I had that 1968 recording on LP. It made me avoid Bernstein's recordings during
many years. To discover later (by his other 2 recordings) that he was not that
bad all the time.
Dave Cook
> I shouldn't describe that Urania as live. I can't find any
> information on the
> recording date. According to Lynn René Bayley in Fanfare it's in
> stereo and
> there are some vinyl noises, so perhaps they just ripped the CBS Lp.
Sorry to keep replying to myself. MDT gives the date as 2/57, so I'm
betting that Urania did just take this from a CBS Lp.
http://www.mdt.co.uk/MDTSite/product//URN22342.htm
Dave Cook
Kip Williams
> On 10 Jan., 09:08, "Matthew B. Tepper" <oy兀earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>> Remember, lots of younger folks these days are under the delusion that
>> something is only good if it's new, and in many cases that it doesn't even
>> exist unless it's current.
>
> We need them to balance out the crowds who claim that the Golden Ages
> have ended on the day they were born and that things of real value can
> only belong to the past.
The idiot who praises with enthusiastic tone,
All centuries but this, and every country but his own?
Kip W
Ah, they don't write them like those 19th century Englishmen any more!
Thomas Liebert
Dave,
I have the Urania CD and your transfer. They are the same recording.
The two transfers sound very similar, but your's sounds a little dryer
to me. This recording was made in Columbia's 30th Street Studio and
Columbia usually added some artificial resonance to the recordings made
there. Perhaps Urania added a little more resonance or perhaps they used
a different source to which Columbia had added a little more resonance.
In any case, I personally prefer (slightly) your transfer.
Best regards,
Thomas
Arno Schuh
> Beecham?:
>
>
http://www.commentarymagazine.com/viewarticle.cfm/my-favorite-classical-recordings-14074?page=all
There are several recordings in my collection, some realy satisfying ...
until the bells comes in. Sounds like somebody hits a baking tin, a cooking
top or pot, a metal handrail etc. And on the other side there is this HvK
recording with a taped cathedral(?) bell.
Sometimes it sounds as serious like a Mel Brooks film.
Arno
Matthew B. Tepper
letters to be typed in news:gkb1g6$pud$00$1...@news.t-online.com:
> There are several recordings in my collection, some realy satisfying ...
> until the bells comes in. Sounds like somebody hits a baking tin, a
> cooking top or pot, a metal handrail etc. And on the other side there is
> this HvK recording with a taped cathedral(?) bell.
> Sometimes it sounds as serious like a Mel Brooks film.
There is a published rehearsal of Munch with a Hungarian orchestra; the bells
are indifferently played and the player misses some of the cues.
Dontait...@aol.com
> On Jan 10, 9:26�am, Dave Cook <dav...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > �Has anyone heard the live Mitropoulos on Urania?
>
> I shouldn't describe that Urania as live. �I can't find any
> information on the
> stereo and
> there are some vinyl noises, so perhaps they just ripped the CBS Lp.
I read Bayley's review of the Urania CD in Fanfare. From her remarks
that you paraphrased, I decided that the Urania might well be a rip-
off of the Columbia/CBS LP (after all, stereo from a purported 1950s
broadcast? And vinyl surface noise?) She didn't go into that, but then
I have decided that she is a naive and sad excuse for a critic,
ignorant of knowledge or information about the history of the
historical recordings she seems to want to review. Don't expect her to
know much. She'll only burble and enthuse.
Anyway, I'm more or less convinced that the Urania CD might well be
a rip-off of the Columbia LP.
Don Tait
Michael Schaffer
It's still in print on DG "entrée" but used copies of the original CD
with a somewhat psychedelic pic of Berlioz on the cover. I am not an
SF fan, so my recommendation does not have as much value as those of
people who are more into the piece and probably know more versions,
but I would say this Abbado recording is my personal favorite. It is
also very well recorded even though it is an "early digital" recording
(1983). But while DG committed the most hideous sonic sins in Berlin
at that time, they always made very good and "natural" sounding
recordings in Chicago. Definitely better than what Decca did there
back then.
Michael Schaffer
If good and "natural" sound are that important to you (which I find
very understandable since this piece has indeed a lot of fine textural
and color detail), shouldn't there be a more satisfying more recent
performance out there for you? Not that modern recordings are
generally better - far from it, as we all know - but there are a
number of very well recorded recent performances out there which are
also well played and musically satisfying, e.g. the Abbado/CSO
performance I mentioned in another post.
Heck51
> It's still in print on DG "entrée" but used copies of the original CD
> with a somewhat psychedelic pic of Berlioz on the cover.>>
Arkiv lists it as available. re-released in 8/08
>It is also very well recorded even though it is an "early digital"
recording
> (1983). they always made very good and "natural" sounding
> recordings in Chicago.>>
yes, the Abbado/CSO recordings on DG were very well recorded.
Gerard
>
> If good and "natural" sound are that important to you (which I find
> very understandable since this piece has indeed a lot of fine textural
> and color detail), shouldn't there be a more satisfying more recent
> performance out there for you? Not that modern recordings are
> generally better - far from it, as we all know - but there are a
> number of very well recorded recent performances out there which are
> also well played and musically satisfying, e.g. the Abbado/CSO
> performance I mentioned in another post.
They (Paray and Abbado) are both very fine performances with their own merits. I
couldn't say which of those is more satisfying.
Dave Cook
> I have the Urania CD and your transfer. They are the same recording.
> The two transfers sound very similar, but your's sounds a little dryer
> In any case, I personally prefer (slightly) your transfer.
Maybe I should upload the flacs then.
Dave Cook
Dave Cook
> I read Bayley's review of the Urania CD in Fanfare. From her remarks
> that you paraphrased, I decided that the Urania might well be a rip-
> off of the Columbia/CBS LP (after all, stereo from a purported 1950s
> broadcast? And vinyl surface noise?) She didn't go into that,
Yes, the lack of a recording date or any curiosity about the
provenance of the recording does strike me as odd. I found a stereo 6-
eye of this on ebay,
MS 6030.
Dave Cook
Thomas Liebert
Dave,
I would very much appreciate flacs of your transfer.
--Thomas
TareeDawg
He was rarely bad, maybe a touch ordinary at times. I revisited his
Haydn Paris symphonies only recently, and it strikes me as how
'straight' he plays most music, saving the case of Mahler where he has a
magnetic quality all his own. The final movement of Haydn's 87 is quite
something, but several of the inner movements are quite carefully
caressed, perhaps a bit too tenderly, but thank God he was a conductor
that never played God with the music he touched. His podium antics never
really translated to the score, unlike the special affects some of the
'revered' ones of the so-called historic 'Golden' age perpetrated via
the medium of scratch and hiss. Circus acts many of them.
Ray (Dawg) Hall, Taree
Thornhill
> Beecham?:
>
> http://www.commentarymagazine.com/viewarticle.cfm/my-favorite-classic...
I'll be an outlier and say Muti/Philadelphia
The Historian
> Beecham?:
>
> http://www.commentarymagazine.com/viewarticle.cfm/my-favorite-classic...
Munch 1963 and 1954. With Stokowski 1968 and Tilson-Thomas 1995 (?)
close behind. Inbal's effort brings up the rear, despite spectacular
sound.
Dave Cook
> Munch 1963 and 1954. With Stokowski 1968 and Tilson-Thomas 1995 (?)
> close behind. Inbal's effort brings up the rear, despite spectacular
> sound.
I'll have to try the Tilson Thomas again, but I got the Klemperer from
Japan around the same time and I remember preferring the Klemperer!
I do think the previously mentioned Muti is excellent. Also worth
mentioning is Freccia.
Dave Cook
Michael Schaffer
Why?
Dan
was with Andre Cluytens and the Paris Conservatory Orchestra, recorded
in Tokyo in May 1964. It was released in the EMI Great Conductors
series. The other was with Colin Davis and the Orchestre National de
France, recorded in Paris in January 2005. It was broadcast on radio
not long afterward, but I'm not aware that it ever came out on CD (I
was at the concert and I wish it would...).
Matthew B. Tepper
typed in news:b012ff14-0d9a-4d8e-9673-
83a73e...@b38g2000prf.googlegroups.com:
> I read Bayley's review of the Urania CD in Fanfare. From her remarks that
> you paraphrased, I decided that the Urania might well be a rip-off of the
> Columbia/CBS LP (after all, stereo from a purported 1950s broadcast? And
> vinyl surface noise?) She didn't go into that, but then I have decided that
> she is a naive and sad excuse for a critic, ignorant of knowledge or
> information about the history of the historical recordings she seems to
> want to review. Don't expect her to know much. She'll only burble and
> enthuse.
Lynn René Bayley and MPR's Julie Amacher -- separated at birth?
> Anyway, I'm more or less convinced that the Urania CD might well be
> a rip-off of the Columbia LP.
--
Dontait...@aol.com
> Dontaitchic...@aol.com appears to have caused the following letters to be
> typed in news:b012ff14-0d9a-4d8e-9673-
> 83a73ef3a...@b38g2000prf.googlegroups.com:
>
> > � I read Bayley's review of the Urania CD in Fanfare. From her remarks that
> > you paraphrased, I decided that the Urania might well be a rip-off of the
> > Columbia/CBS LP (after all, stereo from a purported 1950s broadcast? And
> > vinyl surface noise?) She didn't go into that, but then I have decided that
> > she is a naive and sad excuse for a critic, ignorant of knowledge or
> > information about the history of the historical recordings she seems to
> > want to review. Don't expect her to know much. She'll only burble and
> > enthuse.
>
You've mentioned MPR's Julie Amacher before. What have I missed? Who
is she? Um, an amateur?
Don Tait
Simon Roberts
art...@gmail.com says...
>
>Beecham?:
>
>http://www.commentarymagazine.com/viewarticle.cfm/my-favorite-classical-recordings-14074?page=all
Scherchen, Bernstein, Paita, and Freccia for me.
Simon
Russ (not Martha)
>
> There is a published rehearsal of Munch with a Hungarian orchestra; the bells
> are indifferently played and the player misses some of the cues.
>
Many many years ago, here in San Antonio the symphony gave a
performance of the Berlioz SF in which the bell player buggered things
up so badly that conductor Victor Alessandro yelled from the podium,
'WATCH!!!!'
Russ (not Martha)
Matthew B. Tepper
typed in news:04a556f0-b912-432b-b066-
c14fdc...@e1g2000pra.googlegroups.com:
> On Jan 11, 11:15 am, "Matthew B. Tepper" <oyþ@earthlink.net> wrote:
>> Dontaitchic...@aol.com appears to have caused the following letters to be
>> typed in news:b012ff14-0d9a-4d8e-9673-
>> 83a73ef3a...@b38g2000prf.googlegroups.com:
>>
>> > I read Bayley's review of the Urania CD in Fanfare. From her remarks
>> > that you paraphrased, I decided that the Urania might well be a rip-off
>> > of the Columbia/CBS LP (after all, stereo from a purported 1950s
>> > broadcast? And vinyl surface noise?) She didn't go into that, but then I
>> > have decided that she is a naive and sad excuse for a critic, ignorant
>> > of knowledge or information about the history of the historical
>> > recordings she seems to want to review. Don't expect her to know much.
>> > She'll only burble and enthuse.
>>
>> Lynn René Bayley and MPR's Julie Amacher -- separated at birth?
>
> You've mentioned MPR's Julie Amacher before. What have I missed? Who
> is she? Um, an amateur?
That would be an apt characterization were it not for the fact that she is an
actual commentator on Minnesota Public Radio. She is entrusted with a weekly
spot about new recordings which is also made available as a podcast (which is
how I hear it). More often than not, these are high-profile releases on the
so-called "major" labels, and her remarks about them indeed tend to be
enthused burblings, touting the said recordings with colorful adjectives and
verbs, without suggesting any reason to buy the given recording of a work in
preference to any other one.
I admit, I did buy the EMI Spohr/Krommer disc with Sabine Meyer et alii, but
it was because I was curious about the repertoire, which was new to me.
A. Brain
news:gkadu3$cad$1...@news.motzarella.org...
> I've ordered the quadraphonic SACD version of the 1974 Davis, and will
> pick
> it up next week. It will be interesting to compare it with the CD
> version.
I think it was the latest BBC mag that reviewed
a reissue of the Davis Requiem and found it to
be a vast improvement.
--
A. Brain
Remove NOSPAM for email.
William Sommerwerck
news:HTBal.129814$_Y1.1...@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
Which performance? An improvement in what way?
goldenc...@gmail.com
> The other was with Colin Davis and the Orchestre National de
> France, recorded in Paris in January 2005. It was broadcast on radio
> not long afterward, but I'm not aware that it ever came out on CD (I
> was at the concert and I wish it would...).
...this one?
Matthew B. Tepper
typed in news:9653eba4-18be-432b-a682-
9d5947...@s9g2000prg.googlegroups.com:
I wasn't aware that the London Symphony Orchestra ever disguised itself under
a French name. Maybe it had a clandestine meeting with its mistress.
Neil
Neil Miller, author: The Piano Lessons Book & Piano Classics Analyzed
Methods and theory for confident memorized performances.
To buy, or view pages, search at Amazon.com and books.google.com –
Neil Miller Piano Lessons Book or Neil Miller Piano Analyzed
Steve LaBonne
wrote:
I only have the 1954, but I've just never been able to warm to it. To
me it sounds pretty helter-skelter compared to Bernstein's equally
passionate, but more under-control and better-played, recordings.
makropulos
> Beecham?:
>
> http://www.commentarymagazine.com/viewarticle.cfm/my-favorite-classic...
My own favorites are Paray (Mercury), van Beinum (Decca), Munch (both
RCA versions), and Bernstein's first CBS recording.
Curtis Croulet
I've never understood the reputation of Davis in this music. "Sound and
Vision" (the ghost of what was once "Stereo Review") recently rated it one
of the top ten classical recordings of the past 50 years! Incredible! This
Concertgebouw recording of Sym Fantastique has to be one of the most tepid,
flaccid, pallid, uninteresting run-throughs ever made of the piece. I knew
this recording (and Davis's earlier and very similar LSO recording) for many
years before I heard Munch, so there's no "imprinting" effect of the latter.
What a difference! Munch "gets" the piece; Davis hasn't a clue. I think SF
is better with the repeats, which Davis plays and Munch doesn't, but
otherwise there's no contest.
--
Curtis Croulet
Temecula, California
33°27'59"N, 117°05'53"WPiano Analyzed
Paul Goldstein
I agree, with the minor caveat that I find the Davis/LSO recording to be
significantly more successful than the leaden Concertgebouw version.
I haven't read the entire thread, but I'll nominate for "best" a recording that
I daresay has not been mentioned - the Boulez/London SO on Columbia LP and OOP
Sony CD, an uncanny combination of Boulezian clarity and hallucinatory splendor.
mswd...@gmail.com
wrote:
I started off my listening with this recording, so this might explain
why I've never warmed to Berlioz. (Frankly, I've never warmed to
Davis, whose chief ally in the studio appears to be luck and a good
orchestra.) I recently got the Markevitch recording on DG Originals
for under $2 and found it quite enjoyable. There are plenty of
recommendations here that I will have to check out.
Michael Schaffer
I also have and like the Markevitch recording with the Lamoureux
orchestra. I really like the sound and playing style of that
orchestra, how "French" it sounds. And it's also pretty well recorded,
especially given the age. There is also a version with the BP which I
know some people prefer but I haven't heard that one yet.
TareeDawg
The recordings Davis made with the LSO and the BBC SO about 35-40 years
ago show him to be a great conductor in Stravinsky, Mozart, Berlioz,
Tippett, etc. Also Sibelius. Most efforts since then clearly show he has
lost what he once had. Efficient and reasonably s(t)olid at best, and
not a conductor I bother with much.
Ray (Dawg) Hall, Taree
Thomas Liebert
Well, chacun a son gout!
I'm a big fan of Charles Munch. My first two recordings of the Symphonie
Fantastique were the two Charles Munch RCA recordings (purchased shortly
after their initial releases).
My next two recordings were the Colin Davis LSO and Concertgebouw
recordings on Philips LPs (again purchased shortly after their initial
releases).
Over the years I have purchased the Munch & Davis recordings along with
many others on CD (most of which have been mentioned in this thread).
For me, both Munch and Davis are outstanding in their different ways,
but I agree with Sound and Vision's choice.
If I were forced to choose only one to take with me to the proverbial
desert island, it would be the Colin Davis Concertgebouw. (Maybe it's
those cornets in the 2nd movement that tip the scales in favor of the
Davis recordings for me.)
--Thomas
A. Brain
news:zKCdnYgS9PrlfvbU...@giganews.com...
> My next two recordings were the Colin Davis LSO and Concertgebouw
> recordings on Philips LPs (again purchased shortly after their initial
> releases).
>
> Over the years I have purchased the Munch & Davis recordings along
> with many others on CD (most of which have been mentioned in this
> thread).
>
> For me, both Munch and Davis are outstanding in their different ways,
> but I agree with Sound and Vision's choice.
>
> If I were forced to choose only one to take with me to the proverbial
> desert island, it would be the Colin Davis Concertgebouw. (Maybe it's
> those cornets in the 2nd movement that tip the scales in favor of the
> Davis recordings for me.)
I was a little surprised to find that I have only one
recording of the piece, and one that I acquired by
accident as well, as it came with the BBC magazine.
I do recall the first Davis and the cornets, but not the
repeats issue. But I think every review or comparison
ought to mention details like this. They almost never
do.
I think I kind of burned out on the piece back when
I played it a lot for friends, trying to "convert" them,
using what is an undeniably appealing piece if you
were a college kid in the early '70s.
A. Brain
The first one, in a new Phillips release. Can't seem
to find the mag just now. Improvement in sonics,
as I recall.
Gerard
The same here.
I've never understood where some people hear those "boring" or "tepid, flaccid,
pallid" things in Davis' performance.
BTW Martinon almost played that 2nd movement as a "cornet concerto".
Kip Williams
> I think I kind of burned out on the piece back when
> I played it a lot for friends, trying to "convert" them,
> using what is an undeniably appealing piece if you
> were a college kid in the early '70s.
I was at a friend's apartment about that time, looking at his records.
He told me to pick one to listen to, and I ended up choosing the only
classical selection, the Symphonie Fantastique, which I'd heard of but
never heard.
"I -KNEW- you'd pick that one!" he said, almost angrily, as if I'd
failed a secret test by taking him up on it. It was a few years before I
heard the piece.
Kip W
Thomas Liebert
> "Thomas Liebert" <tal...@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:zKCdnYgS9PrlfvbU...@giganews.com...
>
>>My next two recordings were the Colin Davis LSO and Concertgebouw
>>recordings on Philips LPs (again purchased shortly after their initial
>>releases).
>>
>>Over the years I have purchased the Munch & Davis recordings along
>>with many others on CD (most of which have been mentioned in this
>>thread).
>>
>>For me, both Munch and Davis are outstanding in their different ways,
>>but I agree with Sound and Vision's choice.
>>
>>If I were forced to choose only one to take with me to the proverbial
>>desert island, it would be the Colin Davis Concertgebouw. (Maybe it's
>>those cornets in the 2nd movement that tip the scales in favor of the
>>Davis recordings for me.)
>
>
>
> I was a little surprised to find that I have only one
> recording of the piece, and one that I acquired by
> accident as well, as it came with the BBC magazine.
I assume this is the recording by Andrew Davis and the BBC Symphony,
recorded live in Tokyo, Japan on May 28, 1993. This is an excellent
recording that I would recommend highly.
Paul Goldstein
Brain says...
>
>I was a little surprised to find that I have only one
>recording of the piece, and one that I acquired by
>accident as well, as it came with the BBC magazine.
As it happens, that recording, by Andrew Davis and the BBCSO, is superb, and by
far the best recording by the 'other' Davis that I've ever heard. IIRC it was
recorded in concert in Tokyo's Suntory Hall, and the recording is superb as
well.
Matthew B. Tepper
letters to be typed in news:gki48k$p39$2...@news.motzarella.org:
Back in the '70s, there was a time I brought a young woman back to my place,
showed her my LP collection (which was maybe 1,500 discs at the time), and
told her she could listen to *any* recording I had. She went right for the
original-cast recording of (and I'm ashamed to admit that I ever had anything
by this composer, let alone this work, but hey, it *was* the '70s) "Jesus
Christ Superstar." (Yes, the one where the chorus is so sloppy that they
can't even get their "st"s together in the very first number.)
I never asked her out again.
BrianK
> In article <Q_Val.282598$Mh5.229...@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>, A.
Unless something has changed recently, getting old BBC Music Magazine
cover CDs is just about impossible. The best bet is to borrow it from
someone or a library and **** it (i.e. apply a process that creates
perfect verisimilitude).
Brian K
Frank Berger
I see them all the time on E-bay.
Paul Goldstein
BrianK says...
>
>On Jan 14, 1:24=A0am, Paul Goldstein <pgold...@newsguy.com> wrote:
>> In article <Q_Val.282598$Mh5.229...@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>, =
>A.
>> Brain says...
>>
>>
>>
>> >I was a little surprised to find that I have only one
>> >recording of the piece, and one that I acquired by
>> >accident as well, as it came with the BBC magazine.
>>
>and by
>> far the best recording by the 'other' Davis that I've ever heard. =A0IIRC=
> it was
>> recorded in concert in Tokyo's Suntory Hall, and the recording is superb =
>as
>> well.
>
>Unless something has changed recently, getting old BBC Music Magazine
>cover CDs is just about impossible. The best bet is to borrow it from
>someone or a library and **** it (i.e. apply a process that creates
>perfect verisimilitude).
They used to show up in the used bins of brick-and-mortar stores more than they
do now. I don't know why that is. Still, the San Francisco Amoeba usually has
a decent selection of them, and they usually go for $1 apiece.
HKAlan
> > As it happens, that recording, by Andrew Davis and the BBCSO, is superb, and by
> > far the best recording by the 'other' Davis that I've ever heard. IIRC it was
> > recorded in concert in Tokyo's Suntory Hall, and the recording is superb as
> > well.
>
> Unless something has changed recently, getting old BBC Music Magazine
> cover CDs is just about impossible. The best bet is to borrow it from
> someone or a library and **** it (i.e. apply a process that creates
> perfect verisimilitude).
>
> Brian K
Not all that difficult:
Alan
A. Brain
news:gki48k$p39$2...@news.motzarella.org...
I don't know quite why, but I find this
hilarious. Maybe because I was notorious
for trying to force my friends to listen
to my classical records, as I phased out
(and eventually sold all) recordings of
rock music and the like around age 19.
Like the most fervent religious convert
or AA member (or worse, AA member
who is also a religious convert), I gave
up on all popular music for years.
You won't find me at a rock concert,
but I can now enjoy lots of "pop"
music. Not rap or "hip-hop".
A. Brain
news:Xns9B924BC3A4B...@216.168.3.30...
Reminds me of a date where there
was "movie music" on the stereo,
and years later, while working for
a law firm referred to by some as
"the Hitler Youth of Houston", some
of my colleagues thought "classical
music" was Broadway show tunes.
We went into a bar after work and
somebody was singing a number
from "Les Miserables"; I didn't
know what it was. "I thought you
were into classical music..."
And a partner in the firm, on my
introducing a friend who played
the viola, didn't know what that
was.
Alan P Dawes
Paul Goldstein <pgol...@newsguy.com> wrote:
> >Unless something has changed recently, getting old BBC Music Magazine
> >cover CDs is just about impossible. The best bet is to borrow it from
> >someone or a library and **** it (i.e. apply a process that creates
> >perfect verisimilitude).
> They used to show up in the used bins of brick-and-mortar stores more
> than they do now. I don't know why that is. Still, the San Francisco
> Amoeba usually has a decent selection of them, and they usually go for
> $1 apiece.
A word of warning about BBC Music Magazine CDs from volumes 1 and 2. These
were pressed by PDO at the time before they had discovered the cure for
the 'bronzing' of the CDs they pressed. As this performance was from
volume 2 No 1 be careful to check the CD before parting with any money.
Alan
--
alan....@argonet.co.uk
alan....@riscos.org
Using an Acorn RiscPC
Kip Williams
> Like the most fervent religious convert
> or AA member (or worse, AA member
> who is also a religious convert), I gave
> up on all popular music for years.
>
> You won't find me at a rock concert,
> but I can now enjoy lots of "pop"
> music. Not rap or "hip-hop".
I never stopped liking things I liked before about 1973-4, when I
started changing over to classical, but I reduced how much new rock I
processed from then on. I became aware of punk and new wave through a
friend I had around 1977, though I didn't go much beyond the stuff he
put on a tape at my request. Every so often, something else might
penetrate to my consciousness. I was at a party last night where I heard
"Tainted Love" more times than I ever had before, outside of a
particular TV commercial. I enjoyed it. Certainly, it beat the Macarena
that I heard a time or two. After the volume was increased from too loud
to nigh-intolerable, I wasn't enjoying much of anything.
Kip W
Matthew B. Tepper
letters to be typed in news:wYfbl.133723$_Y1.133464@bgtnsc05-
news.ops.worldnet.att.net:
> Reminds me of a date where there was "movie music" on the stereo, and years
> later, while working for a law firm referred to by some as "the Hitler
> Youth of Houston", some of my colleagues thought "classical music" was
> Broadway show tunes. We went into a bar after work and somebody was
> singing a number from "Les Miserables"; I didn't know what it was. "I
> thought you were into classical music..."
A former co-worker used to think of all classical piano music as "United
Airlines music," because he associated it with "Rhapsody in Blue." His
knowledge and appreciation of then-current rock was extensive, of course.
The irony of all this is that his last name ws Takacs.
> And a partner in the firm, on my introducing a friend who played the viola,
> didn't know what that was.
Well, ignorance is bliss in some cases.
Steve LaBonne
> Well, ignorance is bliss in some cases.
Ahem!
(Well, if you're talking about MY viola playing there may be some
truth in that...)
Norman M. Schwartz
I can't recall really being into any type of music as a youngster, other
than some pop tunes I might of by chance overheard. Classical music was on
AM radio all the time in my parent's household, as well as Toscanini/NBC SO,
Reiner/CO and Bernstein/YP's telecasts. Then in college, as part of the LA
curriculum I was required to attend and pass a 1 credit course in Music
Appreciation which opened both my ears and heart to music in general.
Perhaps of all the 128 required credits, that measly single credit did more
to make my life more enjoyable than did (nearly) anything else. And odd as
it might appear and the reverse of that which others have written, the
impact of CM made me receptive to both "soft" rock and pop. Perhaps it also
made possible childhood friendships with a neighbor kids interested in CM,
one of which was also studying French Horn. (It turned out that the entire
gang of my childhood friends became very much more accomplished than did I.)
>
> Kip W
Kip Williams
> I can't recall really being into any type of music as a youngster, other
> than some pop tunes I might of by chance overheard. Classical music was on
> AM radio all the time in my parent's household, as well as Toscanini/NBC SO,
> Reiner/CO and Bernstein/YP's telecasts. Then in college, as part of the LA
> curriculum I was required to attend and pass a 1 credit course in Music
> Appreciation which opened both my ears and heart to music in general.
> Perhaps of all the 128 required credits, that measly single credit did more
> to make my life more enjoyable than did (nearly) anything else. And odd as
> it might appear and the reverse of that which others have written, the
> impact of CM made me receptive to both "soft" rock and pop. Perhaps it also
> made possible childhood friendships with a neighbor kids interested in CM,
> one of which was also studying French Horn. (It turned out that the entire
> gang of my childhood friends became very much more accomplished than did I.)
I grew up in a house with a TV that only worked on occasion, and, after
a while, a working record player. Mom had a transistor radio on in the
kitchen almost all the time, playing the local middle-of-the-road
station whose offerings included mild pop, folk music, Paul Harvey, and
Don McNeill's Breakfast Club. Dad practiced piano in the living room
quite a bit, being a working musician supporting a family with four kids
through his efforts. Mom worked, but I don't recall that she ever did
anything other than volunteer work, though she tried for years to get on
at the library. Dad (who had been accepted by Casadesus as a pupil, but
married Mom instead of going to France) taught piano, played organ at
the church, and picked up a dollar here and a dollar there, trading
piano lessons for milk and eggs from farmers, and doing various
performing gigs.
My three older sisters all sang and learned bowed instruments and
guitar. Whenever we drove somewhere in the car, everybody sang.
Classical music was a background I took for granted, making little or no
effort to get to know it better unless I was hacking my way through it
on the piano. I took lessons from Dad on two or three occasions of
varying length, but they didn't take, and I ended up (mis-)teaching
myself for a long time. In my last year of high school or thereabouts, I
suddenly got interested again. Dad had the piano-roll recording of
Gershwin playing "Rhapsody in Blue" (in the "Legendary Piano Immortals"
set on Murray Hill), and after discovering that, I played it all over
the place. I found Prokofiev about the same time, on the same set,
playing his "Toccata" and others. Scott Joplin rags were also in the
air, and I diligently drudged away at those too.
There was something else in the air back then; something that gave a
special thrill to music. Ah, those wonderful 70s. Any music sounded
better with a little buzz, but I gradually found that classical music
usually beat any thrills that other music could offer. I miss that
augmented thrill, but I've found that its cost has skyrocketed in recent
years, thanks to the government price support program (which seems to
relish using all of its supposedly anti-terrorist measures to prevent
people like me from getting that buzz). I wish they'd legalize the stuff
-- I'd practice more.
Kip W
Norman M. Schwartz
Even though my mom's maiden name was Wallenstein, no music was performed by
anyone in my family.
Norman
>
> Kip W
Kip Williams
> Kip, thanks for your background info, it provided for an interesting read.
> Even though my mom's maiden name was Wallenstein, no music was performed by
> anyone in my family.
Wha--? What happened? Everything went dark... what time is it?
Somebody must have dropped a hat.
Kip W
Thornhill
> On Jan 11, 12:27 am, Thornhill <seth.l...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Jan 9, 7:21 pm, art...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > > Beecham?:
>
> > >http://www.commentarymagazine.com/viewarticle.cfm/my-favorite-classic...
>
> > I'll be an outlier and say Muti/Philadelphia
>
> Why?
It's a go for broke performances. Very energetic and well played.
Muti brings an intensity and drama to the first movement that helps
bookend it with the final two movements.
My high school music teacher used to use a video recording of Muti/
Philadelphia in LA performing SF to indoctrinate students to classical
music. It was quite effective.