Best recording of the Ring
Mr Gert C Van Rooyen
Thanks
Neels van Rooyen
ucc...@link-1.ts.bcc.ac.uk
David Fox
Oh boy. I'm sure you'll get many responses to this question, and I'll try
to be brief and contain my comments.
Given what you say about your interest in the singing, I would not
buy a single conductor's Ring cycle, but would choose different
versions for different operas. It may be that you get a bit of
a price break on buying a set, but I think you'll get better
music this way.
My favorite RHEINGOLD is the Karajan on DG, which I find
superbly sung, and I love his refined orchestral sound.
For WALKURE, the Solti stands up very well --
but I find the Eric Leinsdorf just a bit
better sung (I certainly don't think Leinsdorf's conducting the equal of
the best here, but it's not bad); I love the Boehm performances of
SIEGFRIED and GOETTERDAMMERUNG, though many will prefer Solti here.
A few more comments. If you like more lyrical singing, you might prefer
the Karajan, which is, on balance, perhaps my favorite set. If you
don't mind rather dim, mono sound, investigate the Furtwangler studio
performance of WALKURE, and also think about one of the live sets from
Bayreuth; I find the Clemens Kraus especially thrilling.
I do think that -- especially since you are interested in the quality of
the singing -- I would avoid the recent Levine and Haitink sets. Both
have their fans, but I've heard few people rave about the singers.
David Fox
Jon Conrad
>I am interested in buying a complete recording of Wagner's Ring
>on CD. This is a major step (cost) and I would like to hear
>some peoples opinions about the best of the recordings. To me
>the quality of the singers and the singing plays a slightly
>more importand part than the conductor's interpretation.
I'm with you on that (note, all: we said "slightly"; I still want a good
conductor and orchestra!).
>I am
>favouring the Solti recording, but would like some oppinons.
I think Solti remains the best choice for one's first (or only) RING
recording. Those of us with more than one can pick and choose nicer
aspects of this recording or that, and there are certainly favorite bits
from other recordings that I'd hate to do without. But Solti's
recording is the one that gets it all pretty nearly right, and satisfies
time after time. He had the best Wagnerian singers available at the
time, which included some genuine greats like Birgit Nilsson. The
Vienna Philharmonic knows what to do with this music, and infuses it
with great expression. And the recording quality still stands among the
best achievements of the stereo era.
None of the other RINGs on disc boast such a strong *combination* of
qualities.
David Fox recommended choosing from different cycles for the four RING
operas. That's good advice when you're dealing with Beethoven
or Mahler symphonies, but I would counsel against it for the RING.
Despite the long time it took to compose, it really is a unified action,
and even on records I think it's desirable to have as much continuity as
possible, to get the full emotional impact. Stick with one cycle for
starters (my recommendation being, again, Solti).
Jon Alan Conrad
Mike Hurben
I have the Solti and the Levine, and my advice is, if you are more interested
in the SINGING rather than the conducting, go with the Levine. I am far more
impressed with these recordings than with the Solti, for many reasons....
First of all, if you have seen the video of version of Levine's Ring and
did not care for it, you are not alone. I did not like the style Levine
used at all. However, on the CD version, it is almost like a different
conductor...
The only part of the Levine Ring that I feel does not stack up against Solti
is Act I of Siegfried. Otherwise....
* James Morris as Wotan is wonderful, really.
* Hildegard Behrens as Bruenhilde lacks Birgit's power, but she has a
beautiful voice, and I like that better.
* Jessye Norman. 'Nuff said.
* Matti Salminen is awesome as Hagen, just as scary as Frick.
* Anything with Cheryl Studer in it is bound to be good.
* Sorry, but Solti's Act I of DW just does not turn me on. His Siegmund
does not sound like a man in love, to me. The way he shouts out Winterstuerme
leaves me cold. Gary Lakes sounds so much more sincere, IMHO.
* I personally dislike many of Solti's tempos - I think he rushes too often.
Levine really shines in the prelude to DR, in the Descent to Nibelheim,
in all of DW, and all of G. And his Forest Murmurs shimmer with more detail
and beauty than Solti's could ever dream of....
I really enjoy having the Solti, but I cannot understand why the Levine is
as maligned as it is. Give it a try....
Mike Hurben
Topi Ylinen
Hi, sorry for not replying sooner (our site was down and gets news quite
slowly anyway).
In article <C2C9I...@news.udel.edu> con...@brahms.udel.edu (Jon Conrad) write
s:
>In article <1993Feb11.1...@ucl.ac.uk> ucc...@ucl.ac.uk (Mr Gert C Van
Rooyen) writes:
>>I am
>>favouring the Solti recording, but would like some oppinons.
>
>I think Solti remains the best choice for one's first (or only) RING
>recording. Those of us with more than one can pick and choose nicer
>aspects of this recording or that, and there are certainly favorite bits
>from other recordings that I'd hate to do without. But Solti's
>recording is the one that gets it all pretty nearly right, and satisfies
>time after time. He had the best Wagnerian singers available at the
>time, which included some genuine greats like Birgit Nilsson. The
>Vienna Philharmonic knows what to do with this music, and infuses it
>with great expression. And the recording quality still stands among the
>best achievements of the stereo era.
>
>None of the other RINGs on disc boast such a strong *combination* of
>qualities.
Couldn't agree more!
However, be warned: there are a few things you should be aware of...
(though these are minor details and need not affect your choice).
First, not all of Solti's singers are *great*. Birgit Nilsson is, of course.
But there are some (NOT ME!) who would bash Dietrich F-D, Windgassend etc.
Hans Hotter... I think he was way too old in Die Walk~re. At least he
sounds that way. He cannot sustain difficult long notes (for example, listen
to the very last lines and compare to James Morris - mr Hotter cuts the note
short). On the other hand, he emphasizes the paternal aspect of Wotan very
well indeed (and is much more convincing in in Siegfried - possibly because
he was younger when Siegfried was recorded).
Secondly, you might or might not like Culshaw's sonic tricks. They do make
the whole set sound like a bit like a movie - if that's what you are looking
for. Personally I like this, but I can understand if some people find the
special effects a subject of endless ridicule and want a "clean" Ring.
Especially as some of the effects are not as sophisticated as the ones
produced nowadays.
The last thing which I unfortunately have to mention is the recording
technique. For sixties, it is a miracle. But IMHO it cannot rival the 90's
digital recording technique. I do not know whether it is Solti's "fault"
or the recording... compared to any "new" Ring, Solti's set repeatedly
sounds a bit awkward and brutal. But not unbalanced. And it does serve
the drama well indeed. And again, I personally _like_ it - not too
"hygienic", but gripping and intense!
Of all the Rings I have heard no other has such an intense feeling of drama
as Solti's. Listening to the Solti set, you can (at least I can) really "see"
the drama _without_ a video!
If you want, however, to make a "combination" Ring with different conductors...
well, I do not recommend this (for reasons which have been mentioned by others
already) and also because it is likely to cost you a lot more than buying
a "midprice" Solti set. If I were to make such picks, my personal list
would be as follows:
1. Das Rheingold: von Karajan (DG)
2. Die Walk~re: Haitink (EMI)
3. Siegfried: Janowski (Eurodisc)
4. G|tterd{mmerung: Solti (Decca)
Reason: they are _the_ best recordings of each set, respectively (IMHO).
So you'll get the best of von Karajan, the best of Haitink, the best of
Janowski and the best of Solti.
#############################################################################
#################Topi#Ylinen#(f1t...@kielo.uta.fi)###########################
#############################################################################
"A great while ago the world begun,
With hey, ho, the wind and the rain,
But that's all one, our play is done, (W. Shakespeare:
And we'll strive to please you every day." Twelfth Night)
#############################################################################
NOTE: If you reply to this, please do not copy the whole
text body. Thank you.
Robert Golub
> However, be warned: there are a few things you should be aware of...
[stuff deleted]
> The last thing which I unfortunately have to mention is the recording
> technique. For sixties, it is a miracle. But IMHO it cannot rival the 90's
> digital recording technique. I do not know whether it is Solti's "fault"
> or the recording... compared to any "new" Ring, Solti's set repeatedly
> sounds a bit awkward and brutal. But not unbalanced. And it does serve
> the drama well indeed. And again, I personally _like_ it - not too
> "hygienic", but gripping and intense!
I'm not sure if this is what you are referring to as far as recording
technique, but there are a number of isolated places in Rheingold and Die
Walkure (I haven't listened to the last 2 yet) where there is a severe
blaating sound to the horns (e.g. in the Ride of the Valkyries), which I
find extremely distracting. Other than those spots, I think the recording
quality is very acceptable. Have others noticed these "sour" spots? Is this
common in 60's recordings transferred to CD's?
-Rob
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
Robert M. Golub, M.D. Division of General Internal Medicine
222 E. Superior Northwestern University Medical School
Chicago, IL 60611 E-mail: go...@nwu.edu Voice:(312)908-8630
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
Topi Ylinen
In article <golub-160...@elvex33.acns.nwu.edu> go...@nwu.edu (Robert Golu
b) writes:
>In article <86...@kielo.uta.fi>, f1t...@uta.fi (Topi Ylinen) wrote:
>
>> However, be warned: there are a few things you should be aware of...
>[stuff deleted]
>> The last thing which I unfortunately have to mention is the recording
>> technique. For sixties, it is a miracle. But IMHO it cannot rival the 90's
>> digital recording technique. I do not know whether it is Solti's "fault"
>> or the recording... compared to any "new" Ring, Solti's set repeatedly
>> sounds a bit awkward and brutal. But not unbalanced. And it does serve
>> the drama well indeed. And again, I personally _like_ it - not too
>> "hygienic", but gripping and intense!
>
>I'm not sure if this is what you are referring to as far as recording
>technique, but there are a number of isolated places in Rheingold and Die
>Walkure (I haven't listened to the last 2 yet) where there is a severe
>blaating sound to the horns (e.g. in the Ride of the Valkyries), which I
>find extremely distracting. Other than those spots, I think the recording
>quality is very acceptable. Have others noticed these "sour" spots? Is this
>common in 60's recordings transferred to CD's?
The example you mention is one manifestation of the problem I was referring
to. A quite obvious one. I mean, overall, the sound of most instruments is
not so clean and natural as it can be on a modern recording.
Kimo B. Yap
>Organization: University of Tampere, Finland
>In article <golub-160...@elvex33.acns.nwu.edu> go...@nwu.edu (Robert Golu
>b) writes:
>>In article <86...@kielo.uta.fi>, f1t...@uta.fi (Topi Ylinen) wrote:
>>
......
>>I'm not sure if this is what you are referring to as far as recording
>>technique, but there are a number of isolated places in Rheingold and Die
>>Walkure (I haven't listened to the last 2 yet) where there is a severe
>>blaating sound to the horns (e.g. in the Ride of the Valkyries), which I
I've never heard the CD version - for numerous reasons I've been one of
those hold-outs such that I just got my first CD player a couple of days
ago.
This thread asked if this was a problem with 60s recordings transferred
to CD. I'd be curious to hear from someone who has good memory of both
versions of the Solti Ring. I haven't listened recently, but can't remember
that particular problem. I remember a couple of odd splices, but not
the distraction you mention.
On the other hand, I was not impressed by the vinyl version of the digital
remastering of the Solti Ring - not due to the defects of vinyl, but I thought
the original Decca pressings were better.
I recall vinyl versions of the Solti Ring. The most prevalent in this country
was the London pressings. If you looked hard, you could sometimes get the
Decca pressings which were MUCH better. Just before the digital remastering,
there was a Teldec version which used the analog master, but used Teldec's
DMM technology to lower the noise floor of the vinyl, but what they did was
to use the lowered noise floor to cram a lot more on each side. This is the
last "good" set of the Ring from the original mastering that I have (wore out
the Decca pressings, sadly). I tried the digitally remastered set on vinyl,
and, as I mentioned earlier, was not impressed. It sounded constricted and
closed compared to the earlier one, although I think it did correct a
couple of the editing flaws from the original. Overall, however, I preferred
the original. I will, when I get the chance, try and go back and see if I
can find the defect you mention in either of these sets, but I'd be interested
in hearing from others on the different versions of the Solti if they can
remember.-kby
Tony Movshon
> This thread asked if this was a problem with 60s recordings transferred
> to CD. I'd be curious to hear from someone who has good memory of both
> versions of the Solti Ring. I haven't listened recently, but can't remember
> that particular problem. I remember a couple of odd splices, but not
> the distraction you mention.
I not only remember them, I have them. The vinyl Solti Ring was miraculous for
its day, and the CD reissue is even better. There were a number of cases in the
original editing where the best choice of takes couldn't be made because they
couldn't get a clean splice. Digital editing made this possible, so they redid
a number of the edits to produce a subtly better version. The CD sound is fine,
and I don't have any problem with "blatty" brass, which someone complained of.
In fact, opera for opera, scene for scene, the Solti sound is better than the
Levine digitally-recorded set, and the Levine set has perfectly respectable
sound.
> I recall vinyl versions of the Solti Ring. The most prevalent in this country
> was the London pressings. If you looked hard, you could sometimes get the
> Decca pressings which were MUCH better.
I don't think this is right -- all the pressings sold on the London label were
in fact European, and thus the same as the Decca pressings. Certainly I always
felt that this was why London was so much better than Angel (which did a dismal
job for years with excellent EMI masters). I've at various times owned both
Decca and London versions of a few treasured and heavily-played recordings
(eg the Curzon/Szell/LSO Brahms 1st, the Giulini/NPO Mozart 40/41, the Solti
Rheingold, a couple of others). I've never heard a whisper of difference between
the two.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tony Movshon
Internet: mov...@nyu.edu Howard Hughes Medical Institute
Center for Neural Science
New York University
Phone: (212) 998-7880 4 Washington Place, room 809
Fax: (212) 995-4183 New York, NY 10003
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jon Conrad
[I had said:]
>>I think Solti remains the best choice for one's first (or only) RING
>>recording....
>>None of the other RINGs on disc boast such a strong *combination* of
>>qualities.
>Couldn't agree more!
>However, be warned: there are a few things you should be aware of...
>(though these are minor details and need not affect your choice).
>First, not all of Solti's singers are *great*. Birgit Nilsson is, of course.
>But there are some (NOT ME!) who would bash Dietrich F-D, Windgassend etc.
Though Windgassen is criticizable, he's still as good a Siegfried as
you'll find on complete recordings.
>Hans Hotter... I think he was way too old in Die Walk~re. At least he
>sounds that way. He cannot sustain difficult long notes (for example, listen
>to the very last lines and compare to James Morris - mr Hotter cuts the note
>short). On the other hand, he emphasizes the paternal aspect of Wotan very
>well indeed (and is much more convincing in in Siegfried - possibly because
>he was younger when Siegfried was recorded).
Hotter's flaws are easy to hear, and should be pointed out as you do.
My respect for him has grown enormously, though, after detailed
comparison among all the RING recordings. I'm in awe of someone who can
get so much more out of the role than anyone else, even when he can
barely sing the notes.
>The last thing which I unfortunately have to mention is the recording
>technique. For sixties, it is a miracle. But IMHO it cannot rival the 90's
>digital recording technique.
Here we disagree. I find the sound quality far superior to most
subsequent recordings.
>I do not know whether it is Solti's "fault"
>or the recording... compared to any "new" Ring, Solti's set repeatedly
>sounds a bit awkward and brutal.
That may be Solti you're reacting to. He gets the orchestra sometimes
to sound a bit more "blary" than I (or they, I bet) would like.
>But not unbalanced. And it does serve
>the drama well indeed.
And that is why I'll give Solti some leeway in this case. I might
prefer different conductorial choices, but he's in there all the way.
>If you want, however, to make a "combination" Ring with different conductors...
>well, I do not recommend this (for reasons which have been mentioned by others
>already) and also because it is likely to cost you a lot more than buying
>a "midprice" Solti set. If I were to make such picks, my personal list
>would be as follows:
> 1. Das Rheingold: von Karajan (DG)
> 2. Die Walk~re: Haitink (EMI)
> 3. Siegfried: Janowski (Eurodisc)
> 4. G|tterd{mmerung: Solti (Decca)
>Reason: they are _the_ best recordings of each set, respectively (IMHO).
>So you'll get the best of von Karajan, the best of Haitink, the best of
>Janowski and the best of Solti.
Fascinating! I'd make exactly the same choices (for a "mixed" RING,
which I'd recommend only after you have a "unified" one). I might only
hesitate over the WALKEURE, perhaps preferring Levine to Haitink (the
key in both cases being James Morris's Wotan, most important in this
opera and unsurpassed elsewhere...other elements balance out closely
between the two and my preference would then be tipped by the stunning
quality of the Met orchestra). But the Karajan RHEINGOLD and Janowski
SIEGFRIED; yes, definitely! (The latter was a lovely surprise when I
first heard it.)
Jon Alan Conrad
Robert Coren
> In article <86...@kielo.uta.fi> f1t...@uta.fi (Topi Ylinen) writes:
>
> [I had said:]
> >>I think Solti remains the best choice for one's first (or only) RING
> >>recording....
>
>
> Hotter's flaws are easy to hear, and should be pointed out as you do.
> My respect for him has grown enormously, though, after detailed
> comparison among all the RING recordings.
As it happens, I recently purchased, and even more recently listened
to, the Solti _Rheingold_ on CD (I had probably last heard it, on
vinyl, when I was in college in the mid-60s). I will therefore point
out (not contradicting anything anyone has said so far) that the
_Rheingold_ Wotan in this set is George London.
I will also say that I was pretty impressed. London may, in fact, be
the "weak link" in this recording -- there are times when his sound
just isn't "clean" enough for my taste.
I notice that Solti's tempos tend to the brisk side -- something
another poster complained about recently. I happen to like it that
way; it brings out the drive and sweep of Wagner's music, and as far
as I'm concerned doesn't obscure any details. I get annoyed with
conductors that make every significant moment in the _Ring_ sound like
*the* big moment.
> I'm in awe of someone who can
> get so much more out of the role than anyone else, even when he can
> barely sing the notes.
>
> >The last thing which I unfortunately have to mention is the recording
> >technique. For sixties, it is a miracle. But IMHO it cannot rival the 90's
> >digital recording technique.
>
> Here we disagree. I find the sound quality far superior to most
> subsequent recordings.
>
I'm not familiar enough with other recordings to agree or disagree
with this statement, but I certainly have no problem with the sound on
this recording. The problems of recording *fidelity* had been pretty
well solved by the time this recording was made.
> >I do not know whether it is Solti's "fault"
> >or the recording... compared to any "new" Ring, Solti's set repeatedly
> >sounds a bit awkward and brutal.
>
> That may be Solti you're reacting to. He gets the orchestra sometimes
> to sound a bit more "blary" than I (or they, I bet) would like.
Maybe it's just me, but I've rarely heard a Wagner recording that
doesn't have places where the brass sounds excessively heavy-handed.
Maybe this is Wagner's fault. :-) It's just as well that neither Loge
nor Wotan says anything of importance while Alberich is in
dragon-form, since they're just about totally inaudible.
Other notes on this recording: it's fascinating to hear Wagnerian
stars of a previous era singing lesser parts in the twilight of their
careers (Flagstad as Fricka, Svanholm as Loge). Svanholm's Loge is
perhaps the most beautifully-sung I've ever heard; this is not always
the first thing one looks for in Loge, but I think it works. (I don't
care for Eberhard Waechter as Donner, but then in my limited
experience I don't care for Eberhard Waechter as anybody.)
Culshaw went in for "sound effects" as a substitute for being able to
see what's going on. It's hard to compare the result, while listening
at home, to the amount of "action" sound one would hear from the stage
in live performance. Sometimes it aids the drama (at least he makes
the performers laugh when Wagner's stage directions say so), sometimes
it seems to obscure the music (I thought the piling up the treasure
in Scene 4, during one of my absolutely-favorite passages, got a
little too noisy). (I've also always had a slight quibble with the
decision [whosever it was] to have Alberich laugh in Nibelung-rhythm
at the end of scene 1, when this rhythm has yet to appear musically.)
I still don't have the Solti _Walkuere_ in any form; it's the only
piece of the Solti _Ring_ that I'm missing. But I already have more
_Walkuere_s than any other piece of the cycle (Leinsdorf and Karajan
on vinyl; Janowski and Levine on CD; Levine on home-VCR videotape),
and I hardly have time to listen to the ones that I've got. (I should
find somebody with the Furtwaengler everybody's been raving about, and
borrow it to see if I like it.)
Sigh... I wish it were possible to see a live _Ring_ without having to
travel hundreds of miles and spend hundreds of dollars and still get
inferior singers that one can't see or hear properly anyway.
--Robert
Sami Mitra
>>already) and also because it is likely to cost you a lot more than buying
>>a "midprice" Solti set. If I were to make such picks, my personal list
>>would be as follows:
>
>> 1. Das Rheingold: von Karajan (DG)
>> 2. Die Walk~re: Haitink (EMI)
>> 3. Siegfried: Janowski (Eurodisc)
>> 4. G|tterd{mmerung: Solti (Decca)
>
>>Reason: they are _the_ best recordings of each set, respectively (IMHO).
>>So you'll get the best of von Karajan, the best of Haitink, the best of
>>Janowski and the best of Solti.
>
>Fascinating! I'd make exactly the same choices (for a "mixed" RING,
>which I'd recommend only after you have a "unified" one). I might only
>hesitate over the WALKEURE, perhaps preferring Levine to Haitink (the
>key in both cases being James Morris's Wotan, most important in this
>opera and unsurpassed elsewhere...other elements balance out closely
>between the two and my preference would then be tipped by the stunning
>quality of the Met orchestra). But the Karajan RHEINGOLD and Janowski
>SIEGFRIED; yes, definitely! (The latter was a lovely surprise when I
>first heard it.)
While on the topic of multiple Rings, let me point out that the
EMI/Goodall Ring is now available at its new midpriced value here in the
US, finally. We have had discussions in the newsgroup regarding its plus
and minus points before, and so I shan't set them out in any great
detail again.
Anyhow, I bought The Valkyrie, a midpriced set, and am once again
fascinated as to how good this reading is. The three principal plusses
of this work are Goodall, Bailey's Wotan and Hunter's Brunnhilde. I
leave out Remedios' Siegmund and Curphrey's Sieglinde hesitatingly. If
only because I want to save my praise for Remedios' Siegfried.
As we've been having some discussion in this newsgroup regarding the
various Wotans, especially comparing Hotter and Morris, let us not leave
out Norman Bailey out of the mix!
And, leaving out the fortunate few who can understand sung German, there
is much to be said for words you can actually understand.
Sami Mitra
Jon Conrad
smi...@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (Sami Mitra) writes:
>While on the topic of multiple Rings, let me point out that the
>EMI/Goodall Ring is now available at its new midpriced value here in the
>US, finally.
Damn! Sami, I don't spend enough money on recordings already, you have
to tell me things like this? Even though I own most of this RING on LP
already, my copies are badly worn; they've been played as often as any
recordings I own.
>Anyhow, I bought The Valkyrie, a midpriced set, and am once again
>fascinated as to how good this reading is. The three principal plusses
>of this work are Goodall, Bailey's Wotan and Hunter's Brunnhilde.
I concur completely.
>I
>leave out Remedios' Siegmund and Curphrey's Sieglinde hesitatingly. If
>only because I want to save my praise for Remedios' Siegfried.
I do in fact think he's better in that role (and Curphey is not really
outstanding, though the context allows her to give of her best).
>As we've been having some discussion in this newsgroup regarding the
>various Wotans, especially comparing Hotter and Morris, let us not leave
>out Norman Bailey out of the mix!
Absolutely. I admire what Hotter does with the part, and I admire
Morris's ability to sing it all so beautifully and expressively. But I
lost my heart to Bailey's performance when I first heard it. It really
works, on every level.
And I would also salute Rita Hunter as our best evidence that one need
not have a superhuman voice to sing Bruennhilde well; one needs the
right concept of how to do the part. (Here, as elsewhere in this
production, Goodall's preparation of all his participants deserves
credit.)
>And, leaving out the fortunate few who can understand sung German, there
>is much to be said for words you can actually understand.
Amen! I understand sung German, pretty well, and even so I found
revelations here. Partly because these people really know how to use
their words and communicate, while not stinting on the singing. Not all
that common even in German-language performances.
Jon Alan Conrad
Sami Mitra
>
>Damn! Sami, I don't spend enough money on recordings already, you have
>to tell me things like this? Even though I own most of this RING on LP
>already, my copies are badly worn; they've been played as often as any
>recordings I own.
And, Jon, to make you spend more...I noticed that the famed Kempe
Meistersingers has just found its way into the local store here.
It is on mid-price, on four discs.
We all had discussions on the various recordings of this work
some weeks back. I remember that the consensus
seemed to point to the lack
of one definitive recording. In fact, this particular recording
would probably stand as the one qualifying most closely.
I had heard snatches of it in the music school library here a couple
of years ago, and my personal impressions of the recording aren't very
clear yet. Does anyone out there have any inputs on the merits of
this recording, this way or that? I shall probably acquire it anyway...
Sami Mitra
Sa,o
Jon Conrad
>And, Jon, to make you spend more...I noticed that the famed Kempe
>Meistersingers has just found its way into the local store here.
>It is on mid-price, on four discs.
Well. With that, the Goodall RING, and the Kempe ARIADNE now also out
(a *wonderful, fabulous* recording...one of the great opera recordings
ever), I'm in serious trouble the next time there's an EMI sale.
>We all had discussions on the various recordings of this work
>some weeks back. I remember that the consensus
>seemed to point to the lack
>of one definitive recording. In fact, this particular recording
>would probably stand as the one qualifying most closely.
In some ways, yes. I might prefer the stereo Karajan, though it's not
all-round satisfying either.
>I had heard snatches of it in the music school library here a couple
>of years ago, and my personal impressions of the recording aren't very
>clear yet. Does anyone out there have any inputs on the merits of
>this recording, this way or that? I shall probably acquire it anyway...
Beautiful, lyrical conducting by Kempe, maybe a little lacking in oomph
for the moments that need it. Elisabeth Gruemmer perhaps the best Eva
on records: lovely, full-bodied, soaring singing. Benno Kusche a highly
expert (and well-sung) Beckmesser in the buffo vein (which I don't by
any means despise). The others are uneven, ranging from unremarkably ok
(Gerhard Unger as David, Marga Hoeffgen as Lene) to vocally not quite
all there (Ferdinand Frantz's dry Sachs, Rudolf Schock's strained
Walther). Great orchestra (Berlin Phil) and massed choruses. The sound
on my LPs was always a bit dim and covered (and Angel was still
recording in mono as late as 1957); it would be nice if the CD transfer
turned out to clean this up.
But grab that Kempe ARIADNE, folks.
Jon Alan Conrad
Brian Cantin
The London lp issues had somewhat restricted dynamic range. The lps did not, however,
exhibit the overload distortion that can be heard on the cds. The Decca lps,
which I never heard, reputedely have better sound than the American issue.
Maybe Decca will remaster the set someday and get it right. That is, unless the
problem originated from a deterioration of the master tapes. In that case, all hope
is lost.
--
Brian Cantin
David Fox
>
>Well. With that, the Goodall RING, and the Kempe ARIADNE now also out
>(a *wonderful, fabulous* recording...one of the great opera recordings
>ever),
Absolutely!! I'm an ARIADNE freak, and there are a number of recordings
which I wouldn't be without. But despite my love of Schwarzkopf in the
title role (surely one that should have been in her stage
repertoire), I find the Kempe to be, on balance, the finest
performance of the piece -- and a real "desert island" disc for me.
Cheers,
David F.
P. S. I heartily concur with Jon's general comments about the
MEISTERSINGER.
Simon Crouch
> But grab that Kempe ARIADNE, folks.
I did. Then it grabbed me. Brilliant! Why has it been "in the vaults"
for so long? So, to introduce a little drift...
(1) Which great opera recordings exist that have not yet appeared on CD?
The CD guides are all very well but they don't have the category "wait
for so-and-so to be released".
(2) What great (or should that be "interesting") recordings have never
been issued at all?
I'd love to hear some of the recordings that were made at Bayreuth
(as John Culshaw relates in "Ring Resounding")
in the fifties that were never released (possibly because they weren't
up to it!) Do you have any favourites?
Simon.
Sami Mitra
>(1) Which great opera recordings exist that have not yet appeared on CD?
>
>been issued at all?
>
>I'd love to hear some of the recordings that were made at Bayreuth
>(as John Culshaw relates in "Ring Resounding")
>in the fifties that were never released (possibly because they weren't
>up to it!) Do you have any favourites?
>
Anyhow, as you mention Bayreuth recordings...
One great recording that isn't out on cd yet is the 1951 Knappertsbusch
recording of Parsifal. This used to be available, rather widely, in its
LP format (on the Seraphim label?). I have heard that it is to be out
soon on Teldec.
Of course, we've been talking of the Goodall Ring in this very thread.
The Knappertsbusch Ring
recorded in Bayreuth in 1957, now being sold on Laudis, is supposedly out
of print. I guess that means that the ones on the shelves are the only
ones you are gonna get.
Because of the burgeoning cd market, it seems that more and more of the
famed and once rare recordings are coming out with surprising
regularity. It is really a good time to get all those elusive
recordings. The Furtwangler Rings, both the Rome RAI and the La Scala
ones, talked of for years but out of circulation are once again being
sold, for example, and on more than one labels.
The two recent releases of Tristan I guess also fall into the category
you mention. The Beecham/Reiner Covent Garden(1937) one, and the
complete Reiner recording.
I am sure more netters can think of many more, and then of course there
are all these recent recordings of the Ring. The Levine, the Haitink and
the soon to be recorded Dohannyi versions.
One's got to choose!
Sami Mitra
Kenneth Shire
apparently posts weren't getting off the home machine. It all started
for me with Jon Conrad's recommendation of the Solti recording as the
best "overall." Ususally I have nothing but admiration for Jon's
thoughts on such matters. But recommending the Solti Ring to a new
generation of Wagner listeners seems to me to be wrongheaded at the very
least, since it is far from the only commercial recording available. At
the other extreme, it seems to be almost criminally irresponsible.
Recently Solti was in new york to conduct the Vienna Phil. The orchestra
played the Bruckner 8th. In my two previous posts, which I assume didn't
reach the newsgroup, I quoted extensively from Ed Rothstein's review,
since it captured in punchy, pithy prose the nature of Mr. Solti's music
making. Unfortunately, I've disposed of the review. In brief, Rothstein
noted that Solti played the loud sections for all they were worth, with
absolutely no sense that they were part of a larger musical structure.
in other words, the man is unmusical. As a former subscriber to the
Chicago series at Carnegie Hall, I can attest to the fact that this lack
of musicianship has been on offer with the works of other composers as
well. Even as Solti was picking up Grammies for selling lots of records
and thereby making classical music more of a profit center, such critics
as Joseph Horowitz have occasionally had the temerity to suggest that he
was a lousy conductor. What's interesting is that the reasoning always
seemed to correspond to Mr. Rothstein's comments.
A brief historical note: My feeling is that Solti was the creation of
John Culshaw. With an eye to the bottom line, Culshaw has confessed to
hoodwinking even the critical establishment of the 4th estate with such
silly escapades as telling them the London stereo technicians had
achieved a virtual miracle in recording not only left-right perspective,
but actually rendering the heights of Valhalla in relation to the depths
of the Rhine. And they went for it, according to Culshaw's book Ring
Resounding. In much the same way, I believe Culshaw created Solti as the
first media star of the post WW II generation using all the vile
techniques of the professional publicist.
Which leads me to the question of what is criminal about recommending
Solti's Ring. Of course, it's nothing that will or should earn someone a
prison term, but the recording companies respond to the bottom line, just
as any private enterprise. When we recommend a recording by one artist,
it is possible that another is going to get the ax. Here in NY, the
Mahler series by Elihu Inbal is gracing the clearance shelves. Lucky for
us who bothered to try them out and heard a truly interesting
interpreter, but according to the record shop clerks, the future looks
bleak for Inbal and THEY chalked it up to a lack of p.r.
Not to end on a bleak note, if someone is interested in the music of the
Ring, they could do worse than listen to the Furtwanger RAI Ring on EMI.
And if they must have stereo, there are the Bohm performances from
Bayreuth, with the special, glorious sound of the sunken orchestra pit,
and even some of the same casting featured in the Solti set.
I hope I haven't offended any Solti fans, but may I suggest that any of
you who are interested in trying a little experiment, take your favorite
Solti performance of, say, a Beethoven symphony, listen to it, and then
listen to any Furtwangler, no matter how wretched the sound. I'd love to
know the results. I've never known a Solti fan to survive this simple
experiment, though I concede that anything is possible.
Happy listening.
Jon Conrad
>recommending the Solti Ring to a new
>generation of Wagner listeners seems to me to be wrongheaded at the very
>least, since it is far from the only commercial recording available.
That would be true whichever recording one recommended. Unless we are
to listen to all recordings simultaneously as the only "fair" way, I
don't get any meaning out of this sentence.
>At
>the other extreme, it seems to be almost criminally irresponsible.
B*llsh*t. More detailed and reasoned responses below.
>Recently Solti was in new york to conduct the Vienna Phil....
>...In brief, Rothstein
>noted that Solti played the loud sections for all they were worth, with
>absolutely no sense that they were part of a larger musical structure.
>in other words, the man is unmusical.
Boy. Talk about getting from point A to point Z in one easy step
(actually, NO steps involving thought).
"Solti conducted an unsatisfactory concert. THEREFORE, the man is
unmusical." I. Don't. Think. So.
>As a former subscriber to the
>Chicago series at Carnegie Hall, I can attest to the fact that this lack
>of musicianship has been on offer with the works of other composers as
>well.
And as a former resident of Chicago, I can report many marvelous Solti
concerts as well:
Mahler 2nd, 8th symphonies
Das Lied von der Erde
Goetterdaemmerung Act III
Beethoven Missa Solemnis
Verdi Requiem
Haydn Creation
St. Matthew Passion
>A brief historical note: My feeling is that Solti was the creation of
>John Culshaw.
Oh good. This has to be only the 50th time I've heard this tripe
(always offered as an "original" insight). So Solti had no career
before Culshaw? And since the end of Culshaw's involvement with Solti
(late 60s)...what? Everyone has remained unable to see beyond the
original hoodwinking? Or Culshaw has been overseeing things from the
beyond?? Gimme a break.
>With an eye to the bottom line, Culshaw has confessed to
>hoodwinking even the critical establishment of the 4th estate with such
>silly escapades as telling them the London stereo technicians had
>achieved a virtual miracle in recording not only left-right perspective,
>but actually rendering the heights of Valhalla in relation to the depths
>of the Rhine. And they went for it, according to Culshaw's book Ring
>Resounding. In much the same way, I believe Culshaw created Solti as the
>first media star of the post WW II generation using all the vile
>techniques of the professional publicist.
Another really marvelous leap of non-logic. Culshaw twitted the critics
with a bit of PR chicanery (that did nobody any harm in the end). So
THEREFORE, he could also be capable of foisting an unmusical conductor
on the world (and everyone buying it), just for the hell of it?
>Which leads me to the question of what is criminal about recommending
>Solti's Ring. Of course, it's nothing that will or should earn someone a
>prison term,
Gosh, thanks. I'll rest a whole hell of a lot easier.
>but the recording companies respond to the bottom line, just
>as any private enterprise.
Of course. When has it ever been otherwise?
>When we recommend a recording by one artist,
>it is possible that another is going to get the ax.
That's an argument against ever recommending any recording (since
another will suffer). Is that your position?
>Here in NY, the
>Mahler series by Elihu Inbal is gracing the clearance shelves. Lucky for
>us who bothered to try them out and heard a truly interesting
>interpreter, but according to the record shop clerks, the future looks
>bleak for Inbal and THEY chalked it up to a lack of p.r.
I think the possibility that Inbal is "interesting" but not really
compelling if one's income is limited when it comes to Mahler, deserves
a modicum of consideration too. Or maybe in NY the record shop clerks
are more omniscient than they are around here.
>Not to end on a bleak note, if someone is interested in the music of the
>Ring, they could do worse than listen to the Furtwanger RAI Ring on EMI.
You bet. They'll hear a master conductor of the work, a highly uneven
(sometimes exemplary, sometimes unlistenable) cast, an orchestra that
seems barely to have shaken hands with the music at times, and variable
sound.
>And if they must have stereo, there are the Bohm performances from
>Bayreuth, with the special, glorious sound of the sunken orchestra pit,
>and even some of the same casting featured in the Solti set.
And a conductor who on this occasion surpasses Solti in the kind of
"unmusicality" you spoke of. Despite your praise of the sound, the ad
hoc balance of the recording combines with Boehm's sloppiness and haste
(not a purposeful quickness, just an evident wish to get through the
boring old thing anyhow) to make mush of one scene after another. On
the basis of RING recordings, between Solti and Boehm it's the latter
whom I'd unhesitatingly call "unmusical." (Not that that's really my
opinion of Boehm's career as a whole.)
>I hope I haven't offended any Solti fans,
Nope. Angered, yes. And I'm not even really a "fan" (see below).
>but may I suggest that any of
>you who are interested in trying a little experiment,
In idiocy, that is.
>take your favorite
>Solti performance of, say, a Beethoven symphony, listen to it, and then
>listen to any Furtwangler, no matter how wretched the sound. I'd love to
>know the results. I've never known a Solti fan to survive this simple
>experiment, though I concede that anything is possible.
Even being so brain-deficient that one thinks that a simple comparison
of one piece proves something about anyone's life achievement. What a
crock this is.
Here's another "experiment." Take Solti's performance of Der
Rosenkavalier; compare it to Boehm's or Karajan's. You'll find Solti a
master conductor here, full of line, color, nuance, and direction, and
with a human element the others don't touch. Oh, I know..."the Vienna
Philharmonic pulled him through it." Right?
Ok, take the same 3 conductors in Cosi fan tutte. Same result. And
this isn't the Vienna Phil, it's the London Phil. (And Boehm flunks
immediately anyway, for his preferred performing edition, as shown by
his first and third recordings which are barbarously butchered.)
Or Solti vs. Karajan in Schoenberg's Variations for Orchestra.
Your "point" is best dealt with in two parts.
(1) Solti is an uneven conductor who does some music much better than
others. If this was all you were saying, I'd have no problem. First
because it's offered as an opinion, and second because I happen to agree
with it. But you also say...
(2) Solti is an unmusical fraud whose whole career is a joke. This is
slanderous and untrue. He DOES have fine work to his credit, both live
and recorded. He is especially good in music with an overt dramatic
impulse or context, and works with voices (not against them) in a way
Karajan never mastered. This makes him well suited to opera, and so I
find him. We can disagree about this recording or that, but this
simple-minded "I don't like this performance so he was never ever any
good" is just ludicrous.
Truthfully, I would not (if we're to rank conductors at all) put Solti
among the very greatest conductors we've had this century. He's a good
if uneven conductor, not up there with the Furtwanglers, Kliebers
(both), etc. But that's not the same as saying nothing he ever did was
good.
If you can give up the career generalizations and fall back on actually
listening without prejudice, you may actually find that his RING
recording still stacks up as the most generally recommendable. Not
ideal in every way (I never said that, but whose is anyway?), and not
*primarily* because of his conducting. As I said at first, I'd prefer
different conductorial choices at many points. But he surpasses other
conductors at many points too (I've listened to all the commercial RINGS
and he surprised me). In particular, his willingness to consider the
dramatic impulse and allow the way the performance is going right at the
moment to influence how it proceeds, is certainly welcome after the
"everything predetermined in advance" anti-opera conducting of a Karajan
or Levine. (They have their strengths too, of course). Add to this
that he had the best Wagnerian singers available, at a time when the
best were damn good, and that the sound allows us to hear what's
happening at all times, and (as I said) you have a *combination* of
virtues that make this a good starting point for a RING collector.
We can certainly disagree about merits of any performance, live or
recorded, and respect each other's opinions. But this tired,
predictable notion that Solti's career is a gigantic hoax just won't
stand up. And I have *no* respect for it.
Jon Alan Conrad
Joseph J. Marcheso Jr.
con...@brahms.udel.edu (Jon Conrad) writes:
> We can certainly disagree about merits of any performance, live or
> recorded, and respect each other's opinions. But this tired,
> predictable notion that Solti's career is a gigantic hoax just won't
> stand up. And I have *no* respect for it.
Bravo Jon, Bravo.
Just one question. Who *would* you consider as the greatest conductors
of this century?
Jon Conrad
[A very welcome rebuttal to the Shire-sneers-at-Solti tirade, in which I
must make one factual correction, in relation to the Boehm RING
recording.]
>These performances, as a whole, are rhythmically slack, needlessly fast,
>sloppily played, and have a number of unpardonable cuts.
No, this RING is uncut. It's true that it was in this stage production
that Wieland Wagner made his notorious omission of Gutrune's nightmare
scene in GOETTERDAEMMERUNG. But the scene is present on the recording.
(David Hamilton plausibly suggested that a patch was recorded in the
summer before this recording's commercial release, when Ludmila
Dvorakova was singing other roles at Bayreuth.)
Perhaps one could say in another sense that the Boehm does not contain
"all" of the RING, because the notes are so approximately rendered in
some cases. But I doubt that's what you meant, Tony.
Jon Alan Conrad
Tony Movshon
> >These performances, as a whole, are rhythmically slack, needlessly fast,
> >sloppily played, and have a number of unpardonable cuts.
>
> No, this RING is uncut. It's true that it was in this stage production
> that Wieland Wagner made his notorious omission of Gutrune's nightmare
> scene in GOETTERDAEMMERUNG. But the scene is present on the recording.
> (David Hamilton plausibly suggested that a patch was recorded in the
> summer before this recording's commercial release, when Ludmila
> Dvorakova was singing other roles at Bayreuth.)
>
> Perhaps one could say in another sense that the Boehm does not contain
> "all" of the RING, because the notes are so approximately rendered in
> some cases. But I doubt that's what you meant, Tony.
I stand corrected. My impression on the cuts came from the story in Culshaw's
book, verified by a listen to an off-the-air taping of the broadcast of this
Ring. I confess to not having listened to much of the commercial recording,
mostly because it wasn't very nice to listen to ... I had the impression that
in the actual performances there were other cuts (Siegfried Act I? I'm not
sure ...), but I can't be definite.
Deryk Barker
[Lots of stuff about Solti and Bruckner/Wagner/Beethoven]
I obviously wasn't at the Solti Bruckner 8 discussed, but judging by
the Bruckner I have heard from him on record he has little feeling for
the composer. His 1980ish recording of the 5th is one of the worst
I've ever heard.
I would also agree about Solti vs. Furtwaengler in Beethoven. Solti
may be better played but WF invariably, to my ears, digs deeper into
the music.
--
Real: Deryk Barker, Computer Science Dept., Camosun College, Victoria B.C.
Email: (dba...@spang.camosun.bc.ca)
Phone: +1 604 370 4452
Mike Quigley
>
> [in response to some anti-Solti criticism]
>
> Oh, right. Because Culshaw found in Solti an artist sympathetic to his
> goals for recorded opera, Solti is Culshaw's puppet? Spare me ...
>
I too am appalled by this B.S. So I have been listening to Solti's recordings
like the Ring, Salome, as well as his Bartok and Mahler for almost the last
30 years and it's all been a waste of time? Get realistic!!
Jon Conrad
[on the subject of supposed cuts in the recording of the RING conducted
by Boehm in live performance at Bayreuth:]
>I stand corrected. My impression on the cuts came from the story in Culshaw's
>book, verified by a listen to an off-the-air taping of the broadcast of this
>Ring. I confess to not having listened to much of the commercial recording,
>mostly because it wasn't very nice to listen to ... I had the impression that
>in the actual performances there were other cuts (Siegfried Act I? I'm not
>sure ...), but I can't be definite.
I believe you're wrong about that. The standard at Bayreuth is that no
cuts are ever made in any of the "the master's" works there. This rule
is especially enforced for the "mature" Wagner (RING, TRISTAN,
MEISTERSINGER, PARSIFAL). The earlier works, which were added to the
Bayreuth repertory one by one, years after it got going, may be treated
with a bit more freedom in this respect -- I'm not really sure
(TANNHAEUSER, for one, offers lots of textual choices in any case).
But Wieland leaving out a whole scene from the RING (albeit only 4
minutes) -- that evoked enormous wrath from the true Wagnerites. He
only got away with doing it because he was running the Festival (and a
relative). And when the production was revived after his death, I think
the scene was put back in. There have been no other examples of cuts in
Wagner's later operas at Bayreuth. (If I'm wrong about this, I'll be
very glad to hear about it and learn more.)
In fact, all the "authorized" recordings of the RING (that is, those in
which the performers agreed to its release) are uncut. There are cuts
in 2 scenes of the Furwangler recording from La Scala, but that, though
now legal to issue in Europe, is a "pirate" recording in the US sense;
none of the artists concerned was consulted about its release. (I'm not
condemning the Scala RING, just trying to define exactly which
recordings are uncut. They're also the only recordings covered in the
forthcoming Met Guild book of opera recordings.)
Jon Alan Conrad
Deryk Barker
[....]
: There are cuts
: in 2 scenes of the Furwangler recording from La Scala, but that, though
: now legal to issue in Europe, is a "pirate" recording in the US sense;
: none of the artists concerned was consulted about its release.
I think you'll fiund it's only in *Italy* that it's legal, Jon. The
rest of the EC are continually applying pressure to Italy to change
its copyright law which says, as I recall, that any recording more
than 20 years old is in the public domain.
Anyway, I imagine virtually everybody concerned with WF's RIng is dead
by now, and in no position to be consulted. Interetsingly enough, Wf's
widow, Elisabeth, is still very much alive, and her main concern
appears to be that her husband's legacy be presented in decent sound
and correctly attributed, not whether she or anybody else has been
consulted.
This raises an interesting issue actually. It is obvious that some
companies are *very* lax about reissuing important recordings from the
past. EMI appear to have a (pewrhaps formal) policy of doing it
themselves when they see sufficient money to be made, and letting
somebody else (usually Pearl) do it when they don't.
What do others think about this? And what about the attitude of the
Boston SO over the ASDisc Koussevitskey edition? Yes the sound is
second-rate, but could be better if the company had access to official
sources. In which case the BSO could make some money from the discs.
As it is the entire edition is unavailable in the US - although they
are fairly easy to find in Canada.....
Jon Conrad
>con...@brahms.udel.edu (Jon Conrad) writes:
>[....]
>: There are cuts
>: in 2 scenes of the Furwangler recording from La Scala, but that, though
>: now legal to issue in Europe, is a "pirate" recording in the US sense;
>: none of the artists concerned was consulted about its release.
>I think you'll fiund it's only in *Italy* that it's legal, Jon. The
>rest of the EC are continually applying pressure to Italy to change
>its copyright law which says, as I recall, that any recording more
>than 20 years old is in the public domain.
I'm happy to stand corrected. The whole situation is made murkier, of
course, by the way these recordings can have "legit" issues in other
countries through quirks of licensing arrangements. (I remember all
that Cetra stuff coming into the US on Turnabout.)
>Anyway, I imagine virtually everybody concerned with WF's RIng is dead
>by now, and in no position to be consulted. Interetsingly enough, Wf's
>widow, Elisabeth, is still very much alive, and her main concern
>appears to be that her husband's legacy be presented in decent sound
>and correctly attributed, not whether she or anybody else has been
>consulted.
As I remember (but maybe I'm wrong), when EMI wanted to release the
Furtwangler RAI Ring, they tracked down each of the solo singers *or
their heirs* to obtain permission. After all, a main point of
copyright is that it endures after the original holder's death.
The same holds true for the complete broadcasts that the Metropolitan
Opera Guild has issued as subscription bonuses. For the orchestra,
in both cases, some kind of payment was made to the orchestra fund.
Frau Furtwangler's attitude is admirable. But in the case of an opera,
with its many solo participants, she is not (or should not be) the only
one with a say in the matter, at least until copyright expires.
Jon Alan Conrad