Brownsfan, what comes to mind are the Rudy Van Gelder recordings of the late 1950's and early 1960's. I bought a few Analogue Production remasters thinking that I would be front and center at a live event, no way. We've gotten spoiled over the years, especially us classical music fans given the level of recording quality that is out there today. I know exactly what you mean by the sonic comparison to a cartridge upgrade. There is apparently surface noise in the tapes and that the bottom end is washed out. I'm guessing that it may have a somewhat steely sound. These engineers were probably dealing with a lot of reverberation.
Learsfool, I run hot and cold with Mr. Abbado. His Brahms violin concerto with Gil Shaham and the Berlin is one of the best. However, I'd favor Pierre Boulez as a conductor as well as some other not so obvious choices. |
Goofyfoot, Steely is not a problem on the DG remasters based on what I have heard so far. At least not steely in a digital steely sense. I think you really have to buy this stricktly on artistic merit. That said, I'm sure the remastering helped some. |
"This is no minueto!" That is very funny, Brownsfan. And thanks for your impression of the new Karajan.
I'm disappointed to hear that some of the muddiness is still there, but I'll be comparing it to the original 1963 CD release which sounds very muddy with some violins mixed in.
You know what I mean, there's a string section in the mix, but no separation.
Oh yeah, and I remembered the word to describe Karajan 1980s performances..."Passion." There is a lack of passion on Karajan's part. |
Hey Lowrider,
look forward to your impressions of the Karajan '63 original CD vs the Remaster. I felt the Remasters were definitely better...no, not the best remaster/CD i have by some margin. Its not a MA Recordings or even an FIM remaster of an older recording...but it is markedly superior to the original CD which felt 'stereotypically' thin in comparison. one man's experience. |
Update on the DG SACD 1963 Herbert von Karajan recordings. Tonight I listened to the Eroica. I was stunned. Just stunned, by how much better the recording quality was from the 1, 2, 7, & 8. Yes, there was still a little grunge here and there, but it was really good. Lower strings were not at all tubby or bloated. Horns were glorious. Violins were satisfactory. And this, my friends, is the best Eroica I have heard. I had forgotten how good this was in the 35 years since I last heard it.
Now I know why I loved HvK so much in my youth and wandered away as he aged. Stay tuned, perhaps tomorrow night I will do the 4th or the 5th. |
Brownsfan, I didn't realize that these DG remasters were SACD hybrids. Just to recapitulate our earlier discussion; if DG allocates all of this time and money towards remastering the Von Karajan, then wouldn't one expect that they'd rival their Japanese competitors? In other words, after all of this, if I were to compare both side by side and find that the Japanese remasters were superior to the DG, then I would just have to shake my head and wonder. |
Goofyfoot, With the first dozen measures of the DG Eroica, the thought came to mind that the Japanese cherry picked the 3rd. The 3rd and 4th are the only ones I see available in the Japanese remasters. On the other hand, if the Japanese were able to remove just a little more of the grunge that I still hear in the DG, then it may be worth $50. This performance is one for the ages. The SHM process offers some advantages that are not available to a standard hybrid SACD, so there could be improvements due to that apart differences in how the remasterings may have been done. I think I am in the process of talking myself into trying one of the Japanese remasters. Not quite there yet, but getting close. |
Brownsfan, I assume that it is believed by most but certainly not all that the SHM SACD hybrids offer the best remixing and remastering available. That appears to be the competition for these larger labels like DG. Why DG can't step up their game and surpass what the Japanese are doing is puzzling. Anyway, I'm tempted to make the Japanese HvK Beethoven purchase once I have the extra $60.00 to spend. Also the Brahms and Sibelius if I find the Beethoven is worth the cost. |
Please discuss SHM-SACD.
Cheers |
That's a good question Rok2id. Brownsfan would you, or anyone else for that matter, happen to know the idiosyncrasies of the differing media formats concerning 'SHM', SACD, Redbook. etc...? It seems like these catalogue descriptions might confuse people into thinking that they are getting more of something or may be getting something different from what is actually in the CD. |
Goofyfoot, It is a real dilemma. Here I sit, with my recently purchased DG SACD remasters, for the most part thrilled with the artistic merit, but recognizing that the recordings leave much to be desired. Certainly, they aren't bad at all for 1962 vintage recordings, --but, well, its still mostly about the artistic merit. I've heard 1-8 now, and guess what? The 3rd and 4th rise well above the rest with respect to recording quality. The very ones that are offered as SHM remasters. What to do?
Is it possible that the SHM reputation is based on astute cherry picking, or are they going to take this already excellent DG effort on the 3rd and 4th to a new level.
Apparently, the Universal Japan remasters of the Kempe Strauss are available, and expensive. Some of the reviews on other releases in the Universal Japan EMI catalogue have not been favorable. These are not SHM recordings. Again, what to do?
Rok2id, if you go to the acoustic sounds website, any of the SHM offerings give a brief description. That would be the sum total of what I know. |
as an aside, has anyone noticed that on Amazon, on EVERY recording of LvB symphonies, at least ONE reviewer will say it's the best Ever!! :)
Cheers |
Brownsfan,
certainly these engineers who are remastering in the SHM format have little time 'for wasting where with fools' as I would guess that there's an abundance of good material for them to choose from. They seemingly aren't dumb enough to release something that won't live up to that $60.00 a disc price tag. I don't know what the Japanese labels are required to pay for the original tapes and for the rights to release the material but I would assume that it isn't cheap and so it's a professional decision to limit what they're willing to work with.
The artistic merit alone is enough reason for someone interested in the art of classical music performance to purchase the entire set. For example, I have William Backhaus remasters from around 1918 including the first full recording of the Grieg piano concerto and I couldn't begin to tell you how much I value those CD's.
The DG 3 and 4 sound like they shine in the face of what was initially a difficult set of conditions. After what you've told me however, I would probably pass on the recent box set only because I have other recording antiquities that I am mildly more interested in but I would certainly treasure a good 3rd and 4th be it either on the DG label or on the Japanese label.
As far as forking over cash on CD's, the reality sometimes creeps in when I'm looking at a slow work month and the bills are piling up. This is where I am now, so internet window shopping has become a regular past time. I am rather curious however why these Japanese label reissues are so limited with respect to which websites will even make them available. |
Rok2id,
I rarely take reviews on Amazon seriously though admittedly some are substantial. I often post on and read from the Gramophone website and as much as I respect that magazine and its staff, I need to put things from Gramophone in there proper context.
Honestly, I've found the help at the Harmonia Mundi store at Opera in Paris to be the most helpful and second to that, the SATURN help in Köln. As for internet selection and reviews, I mostly value ArkivMusic.com.
It has taken me years to know where and how to get information and when or when not to take it too seriously. However of all of the sources that I value the most, I would have to credit my lesson instructors, music theory teachers, music history teachers and/or conservatory professors in general, as they have given me the ability to think for myself. |
Hey GFoot,
What is your view on Penguin Guide to Classical? I have enjoyed going thru mine and have bought many based on their recommendation...over time, i have expanded by buying additional ones not included there, and in a few cases disagreed. But generally been happy with their recommendations. Your thoughts welcome! |
Hi Lloydelee,
I find the Penguin Guide to be a bit conservative though it is consistent. Do you remember the Schwann Catalogue for classical recordings? I really liked that catalogue and I was nearly devastated when it stopped publication because I would look through each quarterly issue backwards and forwards before placing an order with the local record store. The advantage that the Pinguin had over the Schwann would be that the Pinguin reviews and rates its CD's. The advantage that the Schwann had over the Pinguin is that it listed everything that was in print, therefore making the Pinguin catalogue seemingly minuscule by comparison.
The point that I'm driving at with this comparison between the Schwann and Pinguin is that if the Pinguin were to comprehensively list and review all of the excellent recorded performances available, then it would end up being the size of six unabridged dictionaries. Consequentially my collection is less mainstream in nature from that of the Pinguin entries and recently I've been relying on the reviews in Gramophone, Fanfare, etc... before making a purchase.
The Pinguin however is consistently dependable if there is a work that you aren't familiar with. Lastly, the Pinguin seems to choose most of its CD's from the corporate labels and less from the boutique labels but admittedly I have not seen its recent edition. |
Listened to Gardiner's Symphony 9 and 1 on Youtube and really like it. Wonder if the following two sets are the same and why one is so much cheaper ? thanks
http://www.amazon.com/Beethoven-The-Symphonies-Ludwig-van/dp/B0033QC0WE/ref=pd_sim_m_2
http://www.amazon.com/Beethoven-9-Symphonies-Luba-Orgonasova/dp/B0000057EO |
http://www.amazon.com/Beethoven-9-Symphonies-Luba-Orgonasova/dp/B0000057EO
I own this set. This one has 6 discs. The sixth disc is an interview with Gardiner. I don't think that would account for the price increase. He wasn't that profound! I think it's just 'these sellers' cashing in.
Cheers |
K330, if you look at the release dates, one is from 1994 and the other is from 2010. Essentially this means that the earlier set is the original release and is currently out of print. The two should however sound the same as it doesn't appear as if any remastering was done to the 2010 release. You may find however that the earlier box set includes a booklet which isn't included in the later reissue. |
Thanks, Goofyfoot! Good to know...seems like Penguin stays here and i will keep an eye out for Schwann! |
Thanks, Rok2id and Goofyfoot for confirmation. Will get the 2010 set for such a good price. |
You may wish to try the Beethoven cycle on Sony/DG with Paavo Jarvi and the Deutsche Kammerphilharmonie Bremen. This are hybrid SACDs recorded in DSD, recently reviewed in the absolute sound issue 226. This is a chamber sized orchestra, maybe not to everyone's taste, but I like the Symph 6/2 disc I found locally. |
I have heard good things about the Paavo Jarvi Beethoven symphonies...how good is the recording/mastering? Sounds promising... |
I like the DSD version. The smaller ensemble is like the "sports car" version of Beethoven with better acceleration and handling, not so ponderous.
But, I checked the 44.1/16b layer and it is not as smooth and spacious. YMMV |
Thanks Oldears...will get around to listening to them at some point. I have full sets from Furtwangler (tried to get each individual of the most recommended from his various symphonies...mainly during WWII but also from Vienna in early '50s), von Karajan '63 (Remastered), and Harnancourt. |
I recently acquired the Japanese SACD of HvK 1962 LvB No. 3, and was blown away by the recording, both SQ and performance.
Easily the best Eroica I have ever heard. |
Congrats, Merlinus! I was pretty impressed by the 'regular remastered hybrid SACD set' of his 9 symphonies from the '63 era. Enjoy! I admit i listen to von Karajan the most for all but the 9th where i enjoy Harnancourts' version quite a lot. |
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. |
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? |
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. :-) |
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. |
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)? |
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 |
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. |
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. |
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. |
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. |
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? |
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 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. |
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 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. |
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. |
Thanks Goofyfoot! i think its Orchestre Révolutionnaire et Romantique and John Eliot Gardiner...on DG. Archiv. |
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. |
Hey Loydelee, thanks! I requested the Gardiner cycle from my local library. |
Great Goofyfoot! Look forward to hearing your thoughts. |
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. |
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. |
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. |
