Lowrider, my intuition tells me that the 3rd and 4th offer superior master recordings when compared to the others and that is not only why they sound better in the the DG box set but it is also why they were chosen by the Japanese engineers for remastering. The Japanese labels aren't going to waste time with recordings they can't make sparkle because they have to pay too much for the tapes and rights.
Also, I wasn't aware of this online citation because it wasn't included in the Karajan Japanese Beethoven description but I found it elsewhere and I feel it to be relevant since most of us have standard CD players (including myself) and not the SACD type players.
' Reissue features the high-fidelity SHM-SACD format (fully compatible with standard SACD player, but it does not play on standard CD players).'
Too bad. |
Goofyfoot... I don't mean to beat the subject of Karajan to death, but I find it curious that Nos. 3 & 4 are so superior to the rest of the set and meanwhile there exists the Japanese SHM of 3 & 4. One would assume the DG engineers did not do the remastering of these tracks.
Also, I'll bet there are more Japanese Karajan 1962 to come, since there is now #9 for sale on Amazon. I would have thought their first release would be Symphony No. 5.
Oh well, just very disappointed in this Karajan set. |
Hi Goofyfoot. For Mahler, the DG remastering of Bernstein's cycle is superb. I have Boxes I and II, and not III, because the eighth is my least favorite and it is an older recording, and this version of the ninth is awful.
I purchased Lenny's ninth with the BPO separately, which is wonderful. |
Hi Lowrider, I have not yet listened to the Bernstein Mahler remasters. However, if I were looking for a gold standard set of Bernstein recordings, then his Mahler would be it.
The Karajan 3 and 4 remaster that I mentioned is a Japanese import and it's not included with the other Beethoven recordings. I could only find it on the Acoustic Sounds website;
http://store.acousticsounds.com/d/75807/Herbert_von_Karajan-Beethoven_Symphonies_Nos_3__4-SHM_Single_Layer_SACDs
I just listened to the Gardiner Beethoven 7th and I have to say that as with the 3rd, the phrasing and emphasis between the instrumental sections is what stands out as uniquely exceptional. Also, his attention to dynamics is most obvious once he has gotten through part of the final movement. I would hope however that DG Archiv effectively remastered the most recent release as there are notable places throughout the CD's that appear inconsistent to the overall sound. If so, that would make this cycle even more appealing. |
Goofyfoot, do you know for certain that the LvB 3 and 4 included in the box set are Shm-CD remasters? I have not been able to find that info. I did find this Shm-CD...
http://www.amazon.com/Beethoven-Symphony-No-9-Chora-Shm-CD/dp/B000VZE08C/ref=wl_it_dp_o_pC_nS_nC?ie=UTF8&colid=29XG41GAZ363K&coliid=I3SQ6DZRTLYN3U
As far as improving the low-end sound, I was hoping the Karajan would be as improved as the 1960s Bernstein/Mahler remasters (2008). Have u heard them... a fantastic restoration by the Sony engineers. |
Thanks Lowrider, I may eventually purchase the Japanese remaster of Karajan's 3 and 4 but will look around some to see if I can get it for less than $60.00. The point that was made about the double basses is consistent with some of the older recordings, even the Gardiner Beethoven that I've heard so far. I'm assuming that the muddy lower registers are do to the fact that lower frequencies travel more slowly and that this has been an issue for engineers, however the Helmut Walcha recordings are totally balanced as well as many other earlier recordings so it's inconsistent as well as puzzling. |
It certainly seems that the Japanese remasters, especially sacds (e.g. HvK LvB 3), are superior to most others. After all, they have the largest per capita classical music audience of any country, and the technology as well. |
Lowrider, as I said earlier, this is more about artistic merit than sonics. The 3rd and 4th are stunning in terms of recording quality. This is my favorite 7th, just wish they could have improved the sonics. |
To Brownsfan, Goofyfoot, Lloydelee21, et al...
I finally received the Karajan 1962 SACD Remaster Set and my impression is very mixed. Now FYI, I am playing CD only and comparing this set to the original red and gold box set which I have owned for many years.
First order of business...OMG(as the kids say), Symphonies 3 and 4 are outstanding and were most certainly remastered on a different system, most likely by the Japanese as mentioned earlier.
Now the rest of the set... The cd is more open than 1962 with very organic sounding upper strings, woodwinds and brass, in fact I would say the entire set sounds more analogue-like than most CDs, especially a remaster. Much improved dynamics, but I am very disappointed with the lack of definition in the bass. Cellos and double bass mesh together and resemble the muddy low end of the early release. The attack of the timpani is only marginally better than the original.
A positive is the lack of compression; I don't mind some tape hiss if the result is increased clarity of the instruments as is the case here.
My first reaction was that for $72 US it should have sounded better, especially when using Nos. 3 and 4 as a reference. They show that it is possible to get such a high level of quality from some 50 year old tapes. But after I was finished with my critical listening, I started to appreciate the brilliance of the performances and Karajan at his best. I can now put my old Red and Gold box set in the closet and rediscover Karajan's Beethoven. |
Loydelee, I haven't had a chance yet to hear anything other than the 5th and the 3rd. If I'm not mistaken, the new reissued Gardiner Beethoven has been remastered. I've been listening to the original release but am now interested in the newer set. |
Thank you! I have read somewhere a strong preference for
Gardiner over the Academy of Ancient Music Beethoven Symphonies. Same forMackerras whose historical Mozart symphonies are apparently great. |
I just listened to the Gardiner 'Eroica' and I must admit that it is a remarkable performance. I read some of Gardiner's comments online about the symphonies concerning authoritative sources and Beethoven's own markings and notes and the fact that throughout history, most of these documents were overlooked or ignored. I want to add also that most of the musicians available during Beethoven's lifetime were inconsistent when it came to their levels of technique and musicianship and that additional instrumentalists could be added to or taken away from a performance based on a performers ability. Adding in parts was often an undertaking that was done by the orchestra director. So, the hard and fast rules that we observe today were not really understood in either the 18th or the 19th century. |
Does anyone know if the Gardiner Beethoven 5 CD Collectors Edition Archive re-release is any different from the original?
These look nice;
http://www.arkivmusic.com/classical/album.jsp?album_id=733459
Always interested in groups in or around my former short term town of Köln, De.
Chewwwws! |
Thanks Goofyfoot and Learsfool,
I am getting tempted now! I do like his Missa Solemnis. |
The sound on the Gardiner recording is not the best, no. However, the interpretations/performances are fantastic. The set is definitely a must have in that regard - it is by far the best performances on period instruments - much of the playing is really incredible. |
Loydelee, what I've heard so far isn't sub standard by any stretch, in fact there are some beautiful moments but the things that stand out in my head are those things that I mentioned. I suppose that this is how I'm wired. Yes, of course I need to listen to the rest of the set. I now remember when this Gardiner set came out and I believe the Harnoncourt set came out right after. I ended up buying the Harnoncourt. Some nice things about this Gardiner set is the ensemble size in the sense that much of the instrumentation is revealing when its balanced. The musicians are capable and their tone is what I prefer. There is no falling out by strings, woodwinds etc... and there are no obvious blunders. |
Wow that was quick...may i interpret this is as an initial indication that this is NOT a must-have set? The opening criticisms did not seem minor (from an audiophile or pure music fan's standpoint)...obviously, you'll want to hear more of the set...nevertheless, not a particularly encouraging start.
Fair interpretation? Thanks for taking the time!!!!! |
Sorry, a lot of things going on. Surprisingly, I found a Konica II rangefinder in excellent condition as someone was throwing it out. But anyway, I listened to Gardiner conducting the Beethoven 5th and have to say that either the hall and/or the miking is the culprit for criticisms surrounding this recording. It reminds me of when I saw Wozzeck at Avery Fisher Hall; the tympani heads sounded as if they were made out of paper and the woodwinds over powered the strings. From what I could tell with the Gardiner 5th, the brass was shrill and often overpowering, the oboes and bassoons could hardly be heard at all and the strings fluctuated between being dynamically balanced or washed out and behind the curtain. Staccato in the strings was for the most part unintelligible. What is most odd was the opening 4 note motive and that entire phrase by comparison to when it's repeated further along in the exposition. Why on earth is the introduction of that phrase softer with less emphasis than when it's played again later? I don't have the score on hand but the introduction should make a definite statement. The second movement was played and recorded beautifully. Any comments? |
Thanks, Stingreen...what Beethoven symphonies are your favorite? |
Lots of approvals for Gardiner, but I think for ME, the sound and the performance is not good. The 3,5,9, sysmphonies are the worst for me, but the others are better. |
Wow! That was quick! I really look forward to your thoughts on it! I nearly bought it myself, but in truth would love to hear your impressions first. I already have 3 full cycles...only wish to get Gardiner if really good and also really different. |
Loydelee, I just picked up the Gardiner Beethoven cycle. I haven't even been able to look at the discs yet to see if they're playable but I will give it a try once this cat finds a chair. Yes, surprisingly there wasn't a lot on offer when I checked to see which recommended recordings of the Missa Solemnis were still in print. I like the recording engineers at Harmonia Mundi so that recommendation jumped out at me when I saw it. The Solemnis is a monumental work but it would seem as if the record labels have shied away from it for some reason. I have a nice recording of Mozart's Missa Solemnis but that won't help any. Same text I would assume. |
Thanks, Goofyfoot! Sounds promising from the snips i just heard. I have read some say they prefer the scale and magnificence of Klemperer...I respected, but preferred the slightly more contemplative, smaller, nuanced Gardiner. |
This seems to be in competition with the Gardiner ;
Beethoven: Missa Solemnis / Herreweghe, Collegium Vocale Gent |
Lloydelee, yes the Gardiner Missa Solemnis is very rewarding. I've enjoyed it for many years. Another I've enjoyed over the years is the Karajan performance on DVD, live from the 1979 Easter Festival. I think this performance does a good job of capturing the spiritual impact of the piece, actually coming across more as a spiritual event than a performance, if that makes sense. I've never heard the 1935 Toscanini performance, which many consider the best recorded performance ever - although questionable sonically.
Any other rcommendations for best Missa Solemnis? |
Shouldn't HIP be HPP for historical performance practice? Then HIPP could be historical instrumentation performance practice. |
Kmmcarty
Thanks for your post...interesting to read. I like the Gardiner Missa Solemnis...smaller ensemble (so smaller sound) but articulate reading imho and well recorded. |
To clarify the HIP thing - this stands, as someone else said, for Historically Informed Performance. Technically, this can also refer to a performance on modern instruments, using the increased knowledge that we have thanks to scholarship of the last few decades (things like style, tempi, orchestra size, etc). However, in actual practice, this term is used interchangeably with "period performance." Period performance always implies period instruments. So the two terms should mean something different, but HIP is used in a more narrow sense than it should be. |
Kmccarty, thanks for the recommendationsI I found the live Kleiber d'Orfeo recording and I'm interested in hearing it but since I just ordered a Sandrine Piau CD, it will have to wait a bit. There's also a DG Original Masters remaster of Kleiber and the Vienna playing Beethoven's 5th and 7th. I typically opt for live recordings however and since d'Orfeo takes their recordings from the original source tapes, they tend to reign on my priority list.
Kleiber is an interesting conductor for me since he is primarily associated with Opera. Louis Langree is the same in this sense and will become full time conductor of the Cincinnati now that Paavo Jarvi has moved to the Rheinland. |
What a great thread - sorry I came to this party late. I scanned through the comments and offer a Beethoven 4th for consideration: Carlos Kleiber, Bayerisches Staatsorchester on the Orfeo D'Or label (Live Recording) C100841A. As I recall, this CD was not well reviewed when it was issued, but the performance is incandescent and sonics are outstanding. I second a previous suggestions for the best 9th Bohm, VPO, Norman, Fassbaender, Domingo, Berry; best 6th Bruno Walter, Columbia SO; best 5th and 7th Carlos Kleiber on DG. I don't think anyone suggested as a best 3rd from Karajan out of the 1977 cycle. Also, a very enjoyable but dark 4th is Mravinsky, Leningrad Philharmonic Orch, 1973, Melodiya label. Also worth finding is the quirkiest but most exuberant 2nd ever, Bohm VPO that was broadcast live from the Salzburg Festival (1980 or 1981) that I recorded from the radio at the time.
Anyone suggestions for the best Beethoven "Missa Solemnis"? Thanks. |
Great Goofyfoot! Look forward to hearing your thoughts. |
Hey Loydelee, thanks! I requested the Gardiner cycle from my local library. |
Certainly Merlinus, I can appreciate a large orchestra with the best of them. I've had a variety of experiences with different groups of various sizes in situations that may or may not come off so well. One of the most interesting was a performance of a Mahler work (I can't remember which one) where the motivation was to exemplify how music in the home was contingent upon people meeting with instruments, reading sheet music and playing the music themselves. Anyway, the band consisted of something like a marimba, oboe, trumpet, violin, cello, snare drum and cymbal and piano. I doubt if I'll ever hear Mahler played that way again but it was well thought out and rather interesting. However I tend to make a steady diet out of chamber music while listening to full scale orchestra only here and there. |
Thanks Goofyfoot! i think its Orchestre Révolutionnaire et Romantique and John Eliot Gardiner...on DG. Archiv. |
Hi Loydelee, I know that I've heard it but I don't own it. Which label is it on, etc..and I'll see if I can pick it up. I know that I liked it when I heard it.
Back when I took music theory I would always choose Beethoven scores to analyze and identify because they covered everything and were structurally perfect. Maybe for that reason it is rather easy for me to remember and sing Beethoven passages which makes it all the more fun. I don't however subscribe to the notion that understanding music is necessary in order to enjoy it but it helps and I fiercely oppose any type of anti-intellectualism with scorn.
Deciding to listen to something different from what one is used to certainly makes sense to me because I believe that change catalyzes artistic growth. After all Beethoven changed the face of Western music forever and it seems natural with any Beethoven interpretation to keep a foot in the past and to realize the scope of his vision. The idea of a smaller Beethoven period orchestra seems like a natural extension of what's previously been done. |
Hi Goofyfoot. Your point of familiarity is certain well-taken. But in the end, it is my response to any given performance that holds sway.
As an example, I recently acquired Enoch zu Guttenberg's Mozart Requiem. He uses much smaller forces than other conductors, e.g. HvK, Bernstein, Richter. The SQ is astounding, with great clarity and space around the singers and musicians, but in the end I wished his orchestra and chorus were larger. |
Thanks Goofyfoot...understood. i am not so sophisticated that i would necessarily dissect every Beethoven interpretation...but i do notice the differences in scale. And having both Furtwangler and von Karajan...i thought a smaller ensemble would be cool. In particular, Gardiner was supposedly done with smaller orchestra and quite good. Have you heard it? |
Hi Lloydelee. My understanding is HIP is historically informed performance, which more often than not uses instruments that the composer had access to rather than modern ones. It can also refer to score modifications based on recent scholarship.
And this approach uusually involves smaller forces than modern interpretations. |
I wonder if these choices in orchestra size aren't in many ways based upon familiarity. There are so many recordings from various orchestras that it would be hard not to find 50 wonderful examples of Beethoven's Eroica by small orchestras, large orchestras, fat conductors, short concertmasters. To me, a quality performance/recording is worth paying attention to and these external conditions may contribute to the performance but they won't dictate it. In other words, I work at not bringing with me a set of pre-determned conditions. |
Hi Merlinus,
thanks for that. I see where you are coming from on Beethoven and grand sweeping scale. I have to admit...i like the smaller scale Missa Solemnis from Sir John Eliot Gardiner. Extremely well put together...but much smaller scale.
What or who is HIP? |
Loydelee. his Stravinsky with the CSO is one of my favorites;
http://www.arkivmusic.com/classical/album.jsp?album_id=75678
He has an advantage when it comes to the Estonian, Latvian. Lithuanian and Scandinavian composers. He conducts from underneath as is the school in Estonia. |
I greatly prefer most of LvB to be on a grand scale, spacious, exciting, raw, turbulent, full of sound and fury, yet signifying greatness. This takes large forces, and is why I eschew HIP.
SQ is also very important, so no matter how impassioned Furtwangler and Toscanini were, the sonics are almost unbearable, for the most part.
I find much of HvK to be overly polished and attempting to be profound, but winding up as little more than syrupy and grandiose. It's more about him than the music.
Bernstein can often be that way, but for me, his Mahler is unsurpassed.
The 1963 HvK Nos. 3 and 9 are excellent, and Kleiber's 5th is great. Not so much the 7th. And I enjoy Barenboim's spaciousness, but find that lacking in Vanska, despite the amazing SQ.
For the 9th, Fricsay is hard to beat, on all levels.
But as always, YMMV. |
Keep in mind that it's more difficult to play an instrument slow and soft than loud and fast. The job of an orchestra is to play as an ensemble and not as a group of soloists. In most respects, I see ensemble playing as being the responsibility of the conductor but one can only do so much with what they have to work with. Classical musicians must have a knowledge of performance practice and a technique which will facilitate the objectives of a conductor and/or composer. This is why some conservatories pay more attention to ensemble playing than coaching along solo careers. The pedagogy of these two disciplines are significantly different from one another.
Contrary to popular belief, musicians in the best orchestras will always make mistakes however they are often covered over or they're faint to the ear. Primarily what makes a good performance is difficult to pin down exactly but I've often found that the experienced and competitive groups will take on a sense of danger whenever they're motivated by artistic inspiration. An inspired Berlin Philharmonic playing Beethoven under the baton of a fiery Furtwängler will certainly result in memorable evening. This is why I prefer live performances or live recordings and why I tend to overlook errors. It also serves an orchestra well to have a loyal and intelligent audience. |
For me tempo and orchestration are major factors in performances. I especially favor brisk tempos with a good beat, which I think more what Beethoven had in mind. I also like reduced orchestration where the inner instrumental detail becomes audible. For me both are sorely lacking in a lot of highly esteemed performances which seek grandiosity and gravity. I much prefer a sense of 'joy'. This is why I also prefer Kleibers style with the 5th for example. It is a great performance! Recording is OK, but I rarely pay any attention to the recording quality when it plays. It could sound as bad as Richter's Sofia performance of Mussorgsky's Pictures. Absolutely terrible recording of a live performance at which all of the audience members seemed to have colds. But the performance is transcendant and must be heard if you like this piece. It sets a standard against which others pale.
Fine recordings are just that, but without fine performances fitting my preferences they are not worth much to me. But we all hear differently. |
To any and everyone:
What makes one recording great, and another, playing the same music, by the same orchestra and conductor, just run of the mill or even bad?
Think of HvK, the berliners and Beethoven's symphonies. Same conductor, same orchestra, but some are considered among the best ever, and some not so good.
This is true of throughout the classical world. Is it the conductor or the recording process that makes a classic? I realize both have to be at least good, but which is more important? How much 'wiggle room' does a conductor really have? I get the tempo thingy. But other than that?
I was thinking of Kleiber and Beethoven's 5&7. Is it a great performance or actually, just a great recording?
Thanks
Cheers |
Thanks!! Maybe when i get around to it...i will give Jarvi a try. Is there a particular Jarvi recording/mastering you recommend? (the equivalent of the '63 von Karan)? |
Loydelee, I like the Paavo Jarvi cycle but I am biased because I saw him for ten seasons with our orchestra in Cincinnati. Nevertheless, his interpretations make sense, for example the opening four note motive of the 5th is taken with enthusiasm versus the sometimes slower approach. Dynamics especially stand out in this cycle as being well thought out in advance. The small size of the Bremen orchestra allows one to hear its quality players more closely. The recordings are very good to excellent. The room sounds open and tends to recede towards the tympani.
OK, so how does this compare with Karajan or Furtwängler? It has been some time since I've heard the Karajan but my instincts tell me that the Jarvi is less idiosyncratic and more focused on driving home the point so to speak. I certainly haven't heard enough Furtwängler recordings but he's such a towering iconic figure that I see him in some way as being a linked to Brahms and Beethoven themselves. The Furtwängler that I own is the d'Orfeo box set of the Berlin at the Salzburg Festival which is wonderful. However, I cannot make a fair comparison between the two at this point.
The only symphony which I found questionable to my liking in the Jarvi cycle would be the 9th. It isn't bad, it's just out of the ordinary. I once owned the Harnoncourt box set when it first came out in the 90's and found it beautiful in some ways but perceived the historical brass being combined with all modern instruments to sound out of place. There were also areas of the Harnoncourt that sounded a little 'run through'. If I were to recommend a modern recording of the Beethoven cycle, it would be the one from Paavo Jarvi.
Lastly, the now defunct Andante label issued some wonderful remasteres of Beethoven. The one that comes to mind is the LSO Salzburg set with Karl Böhm conducting the Beethoven 7th live. |
Lloyddelee, Have you considered Harnoncourt's cycle? Don't be put off by the fact that it is HIP. It is, but not to the extreme. I like it a lot. Much more in fact than most of the slow, grand, performances. It got pretty good reviews and is highly regarded.
BTW, while not small scale, Bernsteins performances are fine - they will keep your toe tapping. :-) |
Goofyfoot. Thank you! Yes, i own that set among other individual CDs...there were still a few CDs i went after individually from specialst remastering companies (Tahra from France) who had done some of his top rated symphonies.
Enjoy them all. What do you think of the Jarvi cycle in comparison with Furtwangler or von Karajan? I would not mind finding a more intimate, exquisite smaller ensemble Beethoven symphony (just for something different). Neville Marinner? |
Loydelee, have you seen the Furtwangler box set from Audite. Here's the website; http://www.arkivmusic.com/classical/album.jsp?album_id=220926
I also have the Paavo Jarvi cycle on CD. They were released on vinyl also. |
