Re: Mystery Orchestra 6

On Mar 6, 9:02 pm, jrsn...@xxxxxxx wrote:
On Mar 6, 6:33 pm, "Michael Schaffer" <ms1...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:



jrsn...@xxxxxxx wrote:
I would have loved to be blind tested with the Karajan recording,
because I would really like to know if I would have been able to
identify them and him. I heard them live many times, and I am very
familiar with the sound and playing style of the orchestra, and I
think I recognize some very typical elements in this recording, but it
is easy to say that when one knows what it is...
It is pretty obvious that it is a German orchestra from the brass and
woodwind sound and the sound of the basses, and also they way the
basses always play very slightly ahead is one of the typical features
of Karajan's BP. How technically well everything is played definitely
points to a "top" orchestra, but the problem is that there are about
30 or so orchestras in Germany who can play like this on a good day,
maybe not on every day, but it doesn't say anywhere if this was a
normal day at the office or a particularly good day. So I couldn't
claim that I would have been able to pinpoint this as the BP under
Karajan. Maybe. Maybe not. I will never know...

I found that bonus to be a very difficult clip. The Palexa sound is a
factor

I don't think there is a "Palexa sound". They just released tapes they
somehow got their hands on, probably from radio stations. Overall, I
thin the sound on this disc is pretty good, and although I only
listened to the accompaying Beethoven 7 once, and the sound may
technically not be as good as some contemporary studio productions, it
is actually musically better than a lot of the contemporary DG stuff
because it's much less tampered with. When I listened to the Beethoven
7, it really reminded me of what I had heard in live concerts, more
than many DG discs.

I think you misunderstood what I was saying. I didn't mean that Palexa
has just one house style that they apply to the recordings. It's
pretty clear that they reissue radio recordings and with decent or
little treatment. Rather, I was just saying what you are saying, which
is that the sound differs from the DG recordings we're used to, and
that Palexa sound, or what ever you want to call it, specific to this
disc and to the Jochum Bruckner 7 I have, is different enough that one
might feel disoriented in identifying the orchestra. I actually like
the sound as you do...it seems more like a real relatively untampered
sound, somewhat close but not excessively so. That's what I meant by
the statement below, as well.

I see. Yes, that's what I meant as well.

(I have another of their BP discs and it is also not a
"typical" Berlin sound, but in this case I think that's an advantage
for the music. The giveaway for me, if there is one, is probably the
interpretation: the way Karajan treats those big repeated tutti
chords....not too many people do it that way--slow and heavy and built
so deliberately bottom up. But even though that moment, and the soft,
lush opening, made me think Karajan briefly, I ultimately dismissed
the thought. There was little else that cried out for me to ID the
orchestra as Berlin. The clarinets were definitely possibly Berlin,
but even they didn't quite sound right to me--a little edgier (but
then a little edge was necessary to think in terms of the older Berlin
Phil clarinets). And the oboe and English horn, especially at the very
end of the clip where they get rather reedy, didn't quite match my
expectations.

I really did not hear the brass or horns as Karajanesque, the horns
holding back perhaps, in such a way that the sound seemed denser. The
playing was excellent, but there were some untidy things here and
there to be expected of a live performance but not as good as an
average night for Rattle's orchestra, to be sure

How would you know? How many average nights have you heard them? Not
too many, I would guess. This blasé remark disappoints me, coming from
you. The playing on the clip is very good, yes, I can hear the very
sligtly "untidy" moments, too, but these are fairly irrelevant, stuff
that would also be left unedited if the "moment is right" and that you
can hear on many studio recordings, so there is no basis at all for
saying that. I was actually surprised when I heard the recording by
how few and how little blemishes there are. There are some places
which are a little "wild" and in which the strings are not "perfectly"
together, but they aren't totally not together either, but I think
this actually adds to the "live effect" and would be preferred by many
to a "clinical" studio recording. Plus, this "devil may care" string
playing with the basses always pressing ahead is a trademark of the
BP, especially of those days, so you can hear that on many of their
studio recordings, too. They still do that, BTW. It's a concept of
feeling the rhythm and playing it rather than metronomically executing
it.

Again, I understand that live concerts aren't perfect and that many
orchestras are very good at feeling the rhythm outside the metronomic
marking. That style can produce a lovely effect, even in this music,
but that loveliness doesn't compensate for the advantage of more
tidiness in Stravinsky IMHO. It's a tough call, I suppose--you can't
have everything--but I think this is the sort of thing in which Rattle
gets better results in because the freedom is not quite so persistent
and "untidy" sounding.

Dunno. I haven't heard them play that under Rattle. I heard it many
times in Berlin because they play that all the time, I can't remember
all the times I hear it with the BP alone. I specifically remember
Mehta, Jansons, and Haitink (didn't they also record it with him? I
specifically remember they recorded The Firebird with Haitink), but I
haven't heard it with Rattle. They did play it under him a few times
and also made a film about the music in which underpriviledged kids
dance to the music under the direction of some English ballet master.

Is that a "blasé" comment if I don't have the proper frame of
reference? Maybe, but it's an honest comment. It's my impression based
on a number of broadcasts with Rattle as well as live recordings with
Karajan.

I understand that. But you are extrapolating from other recordings and
the general impression you have formed of Karajan. Which is basically
true, BTW, contrary to a very common cliché, Karajan aimed for
"perfection", but live, he still preferred the "moment" over just
that, even at the "risk" of things going not quite as planned. For
someone who many picture as the ultimate control freak, he let things
"just happen" much more than many think.
Anyway, the problem here is that this is actually an extremely "tidy"
performance, especially for an undedited live recording. In the
excerpt I posted, there is really just one slightly uncertain and, if
you will, "untidy" moment (4:45, some of the violins). So what you are
saying does make a lot of sense, especially when you are discussing
Karajan and elements of his style in general. But just not in relation
to this recording. It's mostly imagination.

I've heard a fair amount of their "live" work in that way.
How much is enough to form an impression of average quality? Just two
concerts, of course. Additional experience merely narrows the
error. ;-)
,



This couldn't have
been Karajan's very best results. So I was stumped by mixed signals
and didn't have any suggestions for it--certainly not English or
American or Czech or Russian and very odd if French, but not really a
good match for any of my usual German suspects, either.

And perhaps, as good as these results are, they are the best Karajan
could do with Stravinsky and that I just prefer the way others do it.

Me too, but this implies that, "well, he tried, it didn't really work
that well, but that's really the best he could do". In fact, this is
an excellent live performance by any standards, no matter what you or
me may have as our own personal preferences. BTW, my "ideal" for this
piece is probably still represented by the PhO/Muti and Boulez/ClO
(yes, by both of them, somewhere in between there). But that doesn't
change the fact that I can see what an astonishing performance Karajan
realized here, one that clearly belies many clichés about his work. I
admit I found it a little hard to believe at first what I heard, quite
different from what I thought I would have to "expect", but then I
listened again.

Though I enjoyed both recording excerpts, I would probably prefer the
Mehta performance.

--Jeff


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Hurwitz on Furtwangler
    ... orchestra play when they felt they needed to. ... of conducting and playing which is hard to explain in words - it ... becomes very clear and when I listen to his recordings, ... of sound he usually got from the orchestra. ...
    (rec.music.classical.recordings)
  • Re: Hurwitz on Furtwangler
    ... > orchestra play when they felt they needed to. ... of conducting and playing which is hard to explain in words - it ... becomes very clear and when I listen to his recordings, ... of sound he usually got from the orchestra. ...
    (rec.music.classical.recordings)
  • Re: Mystery Orchestra 6
    ... familiar with the sound and playing style of the orchestra, ... has just one house style that they apply to the recordings. ... the way Karajan treats those big repeated tutti ...
    (rec.music.classical.recordings)
  • Re: Immersing in Sinopolis Mahler
    ... really interesting about the CBSO's thinnish, plasticky sound. ... Sinopoli's orchestra. ... the thin sound of the recordings really detract from the experience.. ... "complete" set of Mahler symphonies I would like to have is Sinopoli. ...
    (rec.music.classical.recordings)
  • Re: Zinmans Schumann?
    ... and Harnoncourt's Amsterdam Schubert recordings are among the ... >>> weightlessly floating sound, especially in stretches of the great C ... >>> orchestra which invited Harnoncourt to come and work with them, ... > the BP, as impressive as Karajan's own concerts were, as unimpressive ...
    (rec.music.classical.recordings)
Loading