Musicians Also Can Be Very Nasty

Started by Homo Aestheticus, December 19, 2008, 12:41:41 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

knight66

Sarge, Thanks for the links, interesting items. You can never really tell which way Lebrecht will jump, but he is really running to his own agenda here:

"Over the past quarter of a century, hardly a week has gone by without Kaplan and I chewing over some Mahler theory or discovery, some clue that might take us closer to the composer's mission. Kaplan has, I believe, changed the way we hear this work and, more importantly, demystified the art of conducting to a point where no-one will ever again dismiss the performance of a determined amateur. He had, in a verb, democratised the maestro myth."

In what way have we been affected by Kaplan that alters how we hear this symphony?
What nonsense about the amateur; by pouring that time and money, having that influence by various means, there is probably not another such amateur around.

It does seem rather mean spirited of the orchestra; to the extent that this was a sellout performance to benefit their own pension fund.

Mike

DavidW: Yeah Mike doesn't get angry, he gets even.
I wasted time: and time wasted me.

karlhenning

Quote from: knight on December 22, 2008, 07:34:51 AM
Sarge, Thanks for the links, interesting items. You can never really tell which way Lebrecht will jump, but he is really running to his own agenda here:

"Over the past quarter of a century, hardly a week has gone by without Kaplan and I chewing over some Mahler theory or discovery, some clue that might take us closer to the composer's mission. Kaplan has, I believe, changed the way we hear this work and, more importantly, demystified the art of conducting to a point where no-one will ever again dismiss the performance of a determined amateur. He had, in a verb, democratised the maestro myth."

Show me a fine violinist who plays only the Beethoven Opus 61, and nothing else, and we shall have found someone to 'democratize the virtuoso myth', too.

MishaK

Quote from: Superhorn on December 22, 2008, 07:26:06 AM
   I'm quite  familiar  with  Koussevitzky's  recordings, and  some  are  excellent, but  it  appears  that  the  orchestra  was  able  to  play  so  well  INSPITE  of  him,  not  because  of  him.  My  point  was  that  if  he  were  trying to start  a  ceareer  today,  he  would  probably  not  have  made  it. 

Superhorn, that's just patently nonsense. Koussevitzky studied with Nikisch, who was the most highly regarded conductor of his time. He came from a musical family and enjoyed superb training in Russia. His musical credentials are as good as anyone's working today. Your attempts at depicting him as a hack are comical.

Quote from: Superhorn on December 22, 2008, 07:26:06 AM
   Yes,  working  in  an  opera  house as  a  coach  and  assistant  conductor  is  certainly  a  great  way  to  develpe  conducting  skills,  and  some  today  HAVE  done  this,  working  their  way  up,  such  as  Christian  Thielemann,  who  is  certainly  a  major  talent.  But  not  all  great  conductors  have  started  this  way, such  as  Mengelberg,  Stokowski, Ormandy, Beecham, Koussevitzky, Munch  and  others.

Speaking of Munch... what would his career had been like if he hadn't had access to the wealth of the Nestle chocolate heiress to finance his conducting debut? My point being that how you get your foot in the door, so to speak, is irrelevant, if you have the talent and the musical insight and know how to communicate it.

Quote from: Superhorn on December 22, 2008, 07:26:06 AM
   And  the  BSO  WAS  a  world  class  orchestra  before  Koussevitzky,  having  been  led  by  the  likes  of  Monteux  and  Karl  Muck. Although  largely  forgotten today,  Muck  was  a  very  important  conductor  and one of  the  first  to  make  recordings.

Sure, it was good, but Koussevitzky vastly increased its profile. From the BSO's own website:

"Koussevitzky, legendary for his extraordinary musicianship and electric personality, began an unprecedented 25-year term as Music Director in 1924. During his tenure, the Boston Symphony began regular radio broadcasts and, in 1936, performed the first Boston Symphony summer concerts in the Berkshires. The orchestra moved into its permanent summer residence, Tanglewood, in 1937. Three years later Koussevitzky, who passionately shared Higginson's dream of "a good honest school for musicians," founded the Berkshire Music Center (now called the Tanglewood Music Center)."

Now can you stop beating up poor old Serge?

Quote from: Superhorn on December 22, 2008, 07:26:06 AM
   When Richard  Strauss  made  his  first  visit  to  America  around  1904,  he  claimed  that the  BSO  was   the  greatest  orchestra he  had  ever  heard.

That was before he had made it over to Chicago where he said the same thing about the CSO (which had already played all of his tone poems and given most of their US premieres under Theodore Thomas).   ;)   "I came here in the pleasant expectation of finding a superior orchestra, but you have far surpassed my expectation, and I can say to you that I am delighted to know you as an orchestra of artists in whom beauty of tone, technical perfection, and discipline are found in the highest degree."

Quote from: Superhorn on December 22, 2008, 07:26:06 AM
   Also,  the  notion  that  great  conductors  were  "more  devoted"  to  their  orchestras  in  the  past  and spent  more  time  with  them,  incostrast  to  the  allegedly  superficial "Jet-Set"  conductors  of  today  is  a  myth. 

You totally misunderstood my point. There were plenty of, shall we call them "ocean-liner-setters" - since we're talking about the pre-jet age - back in the days. But you simply have fewer conductors these days who stay in one place long enough to elevate it from backwater to musical prominence, and that is a real test of a conductor's mettle because that sort of orchestra building really trains you to lead an ensemble and improve its musical qualities. Anyone can conduct a world class orchestra and sound competent. Part of the reason, like I said, is that there are fewer "backwaters" and musical standards across the board have generally increased. Solti tells in his biography how much easier it was to audition musicians for the CSO towards the end of his career than it was in the 60s, due to the larger number of exceptionally technically and musically accomplished applicants.

Quote from: Superhorn on December 22, 2008, 07:26:06 AM
   Today,  orchestra  seasons  are  much  longer  than  in the  past,  and  often include  residence  at  Summer  festivals  which  did  not  exist  previously.  It's  simply  impossible  for  one  conductor  to  lead  150-200  concerts  a  year,  and many  great conductors  of  the  past  did  a great  deal  of  guest  conducting.  For  example,  Erich  Kleiber  did  a   vastly  greater amount of  work  and  appeared  with  far  more  orchestras  and  opera  companies  than  his  late  and  eccentric  son  Carlos.

PS: Why do you keep putting two spaces after each word? It is really annoying to try to read that.

Sergeant Rock

#43
Quote from: knight on December 22, 2008, 07:34:51 AM
Sarge, Thanks for the links, interesting items. You can never really tell which way Lebrecht will jump, but he is really running to his own agenda here

I'm aware of Lebrecht's penchant for hyperbole but an "agenda" seems a bit harsh, Mike. That he's a friend of Kaplan's he's never denied. In the blog Slipped Disc he writes, "I make no secret of being a long-standing friend and admirer of Gilbert Kaplan's. I have published that disclaimer several times and have no reason whatsoever to be ashamed of it. Having watched him master the work over almost 25 years, I am convinced - and so are many musicians - that no-one alive has such detailed knowledge of the score."

I think that last point is correct. What other conductor, professional or not, has studied the score so extensively and conducted the work as often as Kaplan? Keen amateurs in many fields can put professionals to shame.

But Lebrecht isn't my point. My point was, and is, that Kaplan has given us two superb performances on disc of Mahler 2. (I would usually say "in my opinion" but in this case the critical consensus agrees with me.) That Lebrecht too agrees with me doesn't matter: I'd never heard of Norman Lebrecht until after I'd acquired both Kaplan performances.

Sarge
the phone rings and somebody says,
"hey, they made a movie about
Mahler, you ought to go see it.
he was as f*cked-up as you are."
                               --Charles Bukowski, "Mahler"

knight66

Well, we will differ to an extent on this issue. I don't think that matters. I could not get anything out of that first Kaplin performance, it felt mechanical to me and I missed the ebb and flow I look for. So, I got rid of it.

Lebrecht is a man with several missions; one of which is to suggest that there is nothing special about modern conductors. I think the concept of someone who can conduct the Mahler, but who is not a musician in the normal sense of the term, keys in very conveniently with his ideas. Why would he disclaim acquaintance with someone he feels backs up his polemic?

If people enjoy Kaplin, fine. I heard Sinopoli live in the piece and thought it was awful. I heard Rattle live and loved it, his studio performance sits on the shelves unlistened to. So, perhaps Kaplin can conduct this single piece, but I don't enjoy his fix on it, I don't accept the concept of the talented amateur as having much to say about music, if he is restricted to one single piece. How about where that Mahler sits in the great flow of pieces conductors learn and perform? Where can the resonances be that use that history of music to resonate in this piece? It is being performed in a vacuum. I am perfectly sure I could be easily fooled in a blind listening, I would not remember his turns of phrase or his particular take on it; but I imagine I still would find it like an autopsy, rather as the live Sinopili came across.

As was mentioned, he is a one trick pony; if folk like that trick, fine, but clearly there is nothing else in the stable.

Mike
DavidW: Yeah Mike doesn't get angry, he gets even.
I wasted time: and time wasted me.

Sergeant Rock

#45
Quote from: knight on December 22, 2008, 01:16:32 PM
Lebrecht is a man with several missions; one of which is to suggest that there is nothing special about modern conductors...

Okay...I understand your use of "agenda" now.

Quote from: knight on December 22, 2008, 01:16:32 PM
As was mentioned, he is a one trick pony; if folk like that trick, fine, but clearly there is nothing else in the stable.

Has he, or anyone else, ever claimed otherwise? He's on record as saying he's never going to conduct any other work. He doesn't pretend to be a professional conductor; he has no such aspirations. Despite the claims of the tombonist, Kaplan seems remarkably modest about his accomplishments and future endeavors. He conducts Mahler 2, and he supports, financially, musicians. I fail to understand how anyone, especially a musician, can complain about that.

That you think his performance with the LSO is an autotopsy is something I'll never understand. As I said in my first post, I believe he gives us Mahler's authentic voice as well as or better than any conductor I've heard...and I've heard almost everyone. The Resurrection has profound personal meaning to me and Mrs. Rock...it's a piece I expect to move me and when it doesn't, I'm pissed ;D But Kaplan's remain near the top of my list, never failing to generate the thrills and chills.

QuoteI am perfectly sure I could be easily fooled in a blind listening

I wonder if that is not significant? Perhaps you listened to the performance with a prejudiced ear? No matter. What I've learned after forty years of listening to and debating the merits of different performances is, no one will ever agree 100% of the time  ;)

Just curious Mike...what is your favorite Mahler2? If you can, disregard the soloists. Your choice based on conductor only please. (Mine are Bernstein DG, Kaplan/WP and, weirdly and surprisingly, Maazel/WP).

Sarge
the phone rings and somebody says,
"hey, they made a movie about
Mahler, you ought to go see it.
he was as f*cked-up as you are."
                               --Charles Bukowski, "Mahler"

drogulus

Quote from: knight on December 22, 2008, 01:16:32 PM
I am perfectly sure I could be easily fooled in a blind listening, I would not remember his turns of phrase or his particular take on it; but I imagine I still would find it like an autopsy, rather as the live Sinopili came across.

Mike

     I haven't heard the Kaplan recordings. From what I gather there isn't anything about how he conducts the piece that suggests that he doesn't know how to conduct other pieces. I guess you have to know something about Kaplan to perceive that fact. If you didn't know the Kaplan story would you be able to detect an amateurish quality in his conducting? Being able to "fool" Sarge sounds like a strict test (stricter than fooling me). What other test would Kaplan have to pass to make his Mahler 2 equivalent to an expert performance as opposed to one you just don't personally find compelling?
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:136.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/136.0
      
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:128.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/128.0

Mullvad 14.5.4

knight66

#47
Sarge, I really had no axe to grind on Kaplin. I bought into the hype, got the discs and expected to be swept away. So it was not predjuice.

I know he is not claiming to be able to deal with other pieces; but it seems like someone who can recite all of War and Peace, but has never read anything else. There is more to the Mahler 2 than the Mahler 2. It is a culmination of what lead up to it and we now find resonances of later pieces in it. But of course it is subjective, he moves you, not me. I don't think that means I lack discernment.

My favourite recordings.

A Klemperer Concertgebow performance; here it is, though my edition is from a different source.



This has the most remarkable sweep and despite what I said about ebb and flow, it at times sounds like some epic machine, unstoppable.

My other favourite is Mehta on Decca with the Vienna Phil. I feel he really has a grip on the piece, yet lets it breathe.

I have eight versions, including the live Lucern Abbado; but much as I want to like that one, it leaves me cold.

Mike
DavidW: Yeah Mike doesn't get angry, he gets even.
I wasted time: and time wasted me.

knight66

Quote from: drogulus on December 22, 2008, 02:01:54 PM
     I haven't heard the Kaplan recordings. From what I gather there isn't anything about how he conducts the piece that suggests that he doesn't know how to conduct other pieces. I guess you have to know something about Kaplan to perceive that fact. If you didn't know the Kaplan story would you be able to detect an amateurish quality in his conducting? Being able to "fool" Sarge sounds like a strict test (stricter than fooling me). What other test would Kaplan have to pass to make his Mahler 2 equivalent to an expert performance as opposed to one you just don't personally find compelling?

Not once have I said I thought he was amateurish in his approach. Not once have I suggested it is less capable technically than the versions I do like. What I did not like was that I failed to respond to his approach, and I question the entire exercise. But those who like him and the performances; fine. No one is making me listen to them. The criticism of his actual performance on a technical level was from the blog writer.
DavidW: Yeah Mike doesn't get angry, he gets even.
I wasted time: and time wasted me.

jlaurson

#49
Quote from: Sergeant Rock on December 22, 2008, 01:00:26 PM
I'm aware of Lebrecht's penchant for hyperbole but an "agenda" seems a bit harsh, Mike.

His point is besides the point, though. Knowing the score well and being able to conduct an orchestra are two different things. That's like saying that knowing the road very well makes you a great race car driver. Kaplan has walked up and down that road many times, polished the traffic signs and trimmed the grass by the side, but he shouldn't be allowed in a Ferrari. Not, at any rate, when others are paying to see a good race.

But I am being too generous to the NYP. Make that a used 1985 Lincoln Towncar, not a Ferrari.

Aside, Lebrecht is Classical Music's [Bob] BILL O'Reilly. You don't take him seriously, you just watch it to be entertained.

Brian

Quote from: jlaurson on December 22, 2008, 02:11:37 PM
Aside, Lebrecht is Classical Music's Bob O'Reilly. You don't take him seriously, you just watch it to be entertained.
...Bill?

Sergeant Rock

Quote from: jlaurson on December 22, 2008, 02:11:37 PM
His point is besides the point, though. Knowing the score well and being able to conduct an orchestra are two different things. That's like saying that knowing the road very well makes you a great race car driver. Kaplan has walked up and down that road many times, polished the traffic signs and trimmed the grass by the side, but he shouldn't be allowed in a Ferrari. Not, at any rate, when others are paying to see a good race.

I paid to see the race...twice. And I'm more than happy. Obviously we disagree...and many critics disagree with you also.

But I'm glad to see you return to the forum, Jens! I'm a faithful reader of IONARTS, enjoying especially your reviews of concerts and recordings. You've turned me on to many a recording I would have otherwise have passed up...and made me regret I don't travel to Munich more often to see and hear the Münchner Philharmoniker and the SOBR.

Sarge
the phone rings and somebody says,
"hey, they made a movie about
Mahler, you ought to go see it.
he was as f*cked-up as you are."
                               --Charles Bukowski, "Mahler"

Sergeant Rock

#52
Quote from: knight on December 22, 2008, 02:02:56 PM

A Klemperer Concertgebow performance; here it is, though my edition is from a different source. This has the most remarkable sweep and despite what I said about ebb and flow, it at times sounds like some epic machine, unstoppable.

Yes, I'm a bit surprised by this choice, thinking, from your previous posts, that a more flexible conductor is what you had in mind. I see Ferrier, that darling of the British, is one of the soloists. Are you sure she hasn't clouded your opinion?  ;)

Seriously, thanks for your answer. I'll have to check out the Klemperer (I have his EMI studio version). I own the Mehta too...and also own Jens' current favorite, Boulez. Both are outstanding performances I admire but haven't fallen completely in love with.

Sarge
the phone rings and somebody says,
"hey, they made a movie about
Mahler, you ought to go see it.
he was as f*cked-up as you are."
                               --Charles Bukowski, "Mahler"

MishaK

Quote from: jlaurson on December 22, 2008, 02:11:37 PM
But I am being too generous to the NYP. Make that a used 1985 Lincoln Towncar, not a Ferrari.

Ouch! When was the last time you heard the NYP live?

Quote from: drogulus on December 22, 2008, 02:01:54 PM
     I haven't heard the Kaplan recordings. From what I gather there isn't anything about how he conducts the piece that suggests that he doesn't know how to conduct other pieces. I guess you have to know something about Kaplan to perceive that fact. If you didn't know the Kaplan story would you be able to detect an amateurish quality in his conducting? Being able to "fool" Sarge sounds like a strict test (stricter than fooling me). What other test would Kaplan have to pass to make his Mahler 2 equivalent to an expert performance as opposed to one you just don't personally find compelling?

Bingo!

Quote from: knight on December 22, 2008, 01:16:32 PM
So, perhaps Kaplin can conduct this single piece, but I don't enjoy his fix on it, I don't accept the concept of the talented amateur as having much to say about music, if he is restricted to one single piece. How about where that Mahler sits in the great flow of pieces conductors learn and perform? Where can the resonances be that use that history of music to resonate in this piece? It is being performed in a vacuum.

You seem to suggest that it is impossible to understand Mahler's context without having conducted the rest of the repertoire. Why should it not be possible to absorb that understanding on a theoretical level? I often go to operas or symphonic concerts that illuminate to me connections to piano works I may be playing, upon which I may revise my approach to those works, even though I have not personally conducted thos operas or symphonies. For Kaplan to perform Mahler 2 in a vacuum, he would have to have been kept in a soundproof closet, unexposed to any other music, which I find hard to believe.

Quote from: knight on December 22, 2008, 01:16:32 PM
I am perfectly sure I could be easily fooled in a blind listening,

Isn't that the ultimate test, though? If you can't tell amateur from pro in a blind comparison, then what could possibly be wrong with the amateur's approach?

karlhenning

Quote from: O Mensch on December 22, 2008, 03:06:02 PM
You seem to suggest that it is impossible to understand Mahler's context without having conducted the rest of the repertoire.

I cannot answer to what Mike may or may not suggest.  I have alluded to (rather than really having made) the point that a great conductor (as a great performer) learns his craft partly by mastering a wealth of literature.

Quote from: O MenschIf you can't tell amateur from pro in a blind comparison, then what could possibly be wrong with the amateur's approach?

A pretender can stand in front of a professional orchestra, and unless he gets spectacularly in the way (which a professional orchestra could likely work around anyway), it is unlikely that the p. o. is going to sound genuinely bad.

Kaplan is wealthy enough that he can buy his way out of this embarrassment, but I should find it instructive to watch three hours on DVD of Kaplan developing the piece with a semi-pro orchestra which has never played the piece before.  That would show you what kind of chops he has.  Waving your arms in front of a world-class orchestra, they're going to make you sound good no matter if you lose your place (and not long ago I heard a funny story about a conductor, a fine orchestra, and a symphony in the standard rep . . . .)

drogulus

Quote from: karlhenning on December 22, 2008, 03:17:18 PM
I cannot answer to what Mike may or may not suggest.  I have alluded to (rather than really having made) the point that a great conductor (as a great performer) learns his craft partly by mastering a wealth of literature.

A pretender can stand in front of a professional orchestra, and unless he gets spectacularly in the way (which a professional orchestra could likely work around anyway), it is unlikely that the p. o. is going to sound genuinely bad.

Kaplan is wealthy enough that he can buy his way out of this embarrassment, but I should find it instructive to watch three hours on DVD of Kaplan developing the piece with a semi-pro orchestra which has never played the piece before.  That would show you what kind of chops he has.  Waving your arms in front of a world-class orchestra, they're going to make you sound good no matter if you lose your place (and not long ago I heard a funny story about a conductor, a fine orchestra, and a symphony in the standard rep . . . .)

     I've heard a few stories about conductors following rather than leading the orchestra. I was watching a video of Bernstein conducting and noticing just how far ahead of the beat his gestures were. When I attend Spectrum Singers concerts I watch the conductor and I find it hard to imagine anyone replacing him who didn't know how to lead the group. It wouldn't look the same at all. And of course the musicians would be perfectly aware. Have any of the many musicians who worked with Kaplan blown the whistle on him? I'm not convinced you could buy your way out of that.

     Kaplan conducting a student orchestra unfamiliar with Mahler does sound like an interesting test. Has he passed that one?
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:136.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/136.0
      
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:128.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/128.0

Mullvad 14.5.4

jlaurson

#56
Quote from: Sergeant Rock on December 22, 2008, 02:26:21 PM
I paid to see the race...twice. And I'm more than happy. Obviously we disagree...and many critics disagree with you also.

Sarge

Well, I wasn't at this particular race - but I heard him with the NSO a few years ago. I was pretty generous, then, but really - it was just capable. But it is an awesome work, and it is difficult not to be impressed by it, when hearing it live.

Thanks for the kind, welcoming words.

Re: O Mensch - "Ouch! When was the last time you heard the NYP live?"

Most recently (and lots) in 2006 and early 2007. For example

this time, that time, and and then.

Can't think of an orchestra that sounds and looks more ostentatiously bored than the NYPhil. (Well, the NSO takes its time-outs, too, I suppose. But not like that.)  But I am very eager for them to prove me wrong! Especially coming May.

karlhenning

Quote from: jlaurson on December 22, 2008, 03:46:36 PM
Well, I wasn't at this particular race - but I heard him with the NSO a few years ago. I was pretty generous, then, but really - it was just capable. But it is an awesome work, and it is difficult not to be impressed by it, when hearing it live.

(Disclaimer :: the following remark is not specific to Kaplan)

Great art will prove impressive, even in ruins.

drogulus

     Having just read the blog I'd say the whistle has been blown. Kaplan may have good things to say about Mahler. He may even have good things to say about conducting Mahler. It appears however that in important respects he can't actually do it. Unless doing it means making good recordings with orchestras that can play the work expertly without his assistance. Or maybe the blogger was just offended by his amateur status just like some here. But for me the odds just shifted towards empty-suithood, though of a knowledgeable variety.

Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:136.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/136.0
      
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:128.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/128.0

Mullvad 14.5.4

MishaK

Quote from: karlhenning on December 22, 2008, 03:17:18 PM
A pretender can stand in front of a professional orchestra, and unless he gets spectacularly in the way (which a professional orchestra could likely work around anyway), it is unlikely that the p. o. is going to sound genuinely bad.

Oh, fully agreed. And that was one of my points earlier. There are many conductors whose stage presence is mostly decorative. But while the orchestra might produce competent performances despite them, it is highly unlikely that they would produce a truly insightful or memorable one. For that they would need an actually more than just competent conductor. But that is a difference one should be able to hear in a blind listening comparison. A professional orchestra can competently slog through a standard repertoire piece despite the conductor. But they cannot produce a meaningful and coherent interpretation.