Gurn's Classical Corner

[Gurn Blanston]

You raise a good point!  All of those individual volumes will probably eventually be available in a larger box if I want them.  The one-offs will likely not.  In any case, I chose the Sturm und Drang disc.

As for Haydn:  I've had the same problem with him in the past that I have with other classical era (Beethoven excepted) and baroque composers and, for that matter, Mendelssohn.  Beautiful music, but it didn't provide the emotional sustenance necessary to keep me interested.  That said, now that I'm out of the Sturm und Drang days of my teenage years and early twenties (Forgive the pun!) I decided I want to revisit these composers and see if I may enjoy having less drama in my music.  I feel that if worst comes to worst I'll simply gain a new lens through which to view Beethoven and Brahms and look to these eras again in the future.

That said, I do have some Haydn on hand:  I just ordered the first set of Colin Davis' London symphonies (what can I say?  It was cheap!) and I already own a disc of Baryton trios (period instrument recording), string quartets, and...a fourteen disc box set of his complete works for solo keyboard on period instruments. (It was on sale for a very low price a few years back.)

In any case, this brings up another question:  Does anyone have recommendations for period recordings of Mozart's or Haydn's late symphonies?  Mozart in particular; I'd like something to supplement my Bohm recording with.

Well, your problem with Classical Era music is a not uncommon one. The intention of the composers in that time was not to move you emotionally (except possibly CPE Bach and his adherents in the Empfindsam movement), it was rather more to entertain you. Music was of 3 types then; sacred music, opera and instrumental. Instrumental was the lowest on the totem pole by far, and was in fact held in lowest regard, and one of the main reasons is that it existed solely as entertainment (bad, bad music! ). The concept of toying with the emotions of the listener is purely Romantic. Mendelssohn, BTW, is a Romantic by chronology only. Much of his music is recognizably Classical.  IMO, when you read about great gouts of emotion affecting this or that listener while listening to Mozart, I can almost certainly assure you that it is strictly the listener applying his/her own feelings to the music, it is not Mozart trying to elicit those feelings from them (outside of opera, of course, which is an entirely different proposition).

You could very well enjoy the Colin Davis London's. But if you don't, don't give up on Haydn, try something different. I think a good rec for someone trying to get into Haydn by that route is the currently available Minkowski set, 4 disks for $25, very nicely done.
[asin]B0036FOV4W[/asin]

Finally, a nice place to start with Haydn is the late piano trios. Here is a very nice introductory disk, eminently affordable and worth double:

[asin]B0000028UD[/asin]

As for Mozart PI symphonies, I need to leave that for someone else. All I have is this one, which is all I need and more than you are looking for, I think;

[asin]B000004CYS[/asin]

I have heard good things (and bad things) about the Pinnock set. Here is somewhere that I would even consider deviating from my PI ways. I have this set which is, to me, the best MI set in town;

[asin]B001FWRYVA[/asin]

It is a 10 disk set now available for $25, and IMO, Mozart the way it should be played, even on modern instruments!! 

[Geo Dude]

Again, thanks for the recommendations, Gurn.  Mackerras is a good example of what I was thinking of when I referred to HIP-influenced recordings with modern instruments.

[Leon]

Does anyone have recommendations for period recordings of Mozart's or Haydn's late symphonies?  Mozart in particular

Pinnock has recorded all the symphonies by Mozart (his set is not as complete as Hogwood's but has what most people think of as Mozart's symphonies) at about half the price of Hogwood.  Taste's differ, but his set is generally well thought of.

[asin]B000069KJ3[/asin]

Rene Jacobs has recorded most of the late symphonies.  He has made quite a good impression with the operas, and his symphony series is highly praised as well:

[asin]B003122HD2[/asin]

[asin]B000L421NY[/asin]

And then there's the Naxos box, which is on MI but done with HIP practice (I linked to Amazon, but ClassicsOnline has this same item priced much cheaper):

[asin]B0001FYRAS[/asin]

[Gurn Blanston]

Good solid rec's all, Arnold. I haven't heard the Naxos ones, but other disks I have by those orchestras are all very well played.  I particularly like the Jacobs disks. I might throw Minkowski's into the mix here too:



Not really sure if Geo is looking for a set, a single, early, late or in between. There are lots and lots of singles, especially #40 & 41 that are very well done. But when you move outside of that zone, the field narrows considerably. 

[Geo Dude]

A set of late symphonies (akin to Bohm's, for example) would be nice, but I won't object too much to putting a full set of symphonies on the wish list if they're at a reasonable price.

[Gurn Blanston]

A set of late symphonies (akin to Bohm's, for example) would be nice, but I won't object too much to putting a full set of symphonies on the wish list if they're at a reasonable price.

Well, that narrows it down considerably! At the very least you can get the last 4 in good order:

PI - Jacobs

MI -
[asin]B0011J2R0K[/asin] (2 disks)
[asin]B003153ZEE[/asin] (2 more disks)

I have no reservations bout rec'cing any of these disks. I have already invested in them myself with no regrets.

[Geo Dude]

Thanks for the recommendation.  Given the excellent price on the Mackerras full set I decided to pull the trigger on that. (It cost the same as the price of the two late works Mackerras sets together!)   I'll definitely look into the Jacobs recordings.

[mc ukrneal]

Thanks for the recommendation.  Given the excellent price on the Mackerras full set I decided to pull the trigger on that. (It cost the same as the price of the two late works Mackerras sets together!)   

The Mackerras is very good. And so are the Haydn London symphonies by Davis. I think you will have no regrets.

[Elgarian]

Just a few personal thoughts:

1. Pinnock's box of Mozart symphonies put me to sleep for a few years: their 'politeness' significantly delayed my appreciation of HIP classical music. When, much later, I bought his box of Sturm & Drang Haydn symphonies, I did so kicking and screaming, expecting more of the same. What a shock. Not at all! It may be, of course, that my response to the performances is coloured by a personal preference for Haydn's symphonies over Mozart's (as I'm coming to suspect), but even so the difference in attitude seems very marked.

2. I bought the Colin Davis London symphonies simply because they're so highly recommended by everyone. Waste of money, for me. Big, cloudy, smoothed-out modern approach: good of their type, I'm sure, but offering too much of what I don't want in performance of music of this period.

3. Minkowski's London symphonies (recommended above by Gurn), by contrast, represent pretty much everything I do want. Full of life and wit. Not polite, yet still delicate.

[mc ukrneal]

Just a few personal thoughts:

1. Pinnock's box of Mozart symphonies put me to sleep for a few years: their 'politeness' significantly delayed my appreciation of HIP classical music. When, much later, I bought his box of Sturm & Drang Haydn symphonies, I did so kicking and screaming, expecting more of the same. What a shock. Not at all! It may be, of course, that my response to the performances is coloured by a personal preference for Haydn's symphonies over Mozart's (as I'm coming to suspect), but even so the difference in attitude seems very marked.

2. I bought the Colin Davis London symphonies simply because they're so highly recommended by everyone. Waste of money, for me. Big, cloudy, smoothed-out modern approach: good of their type, I'm sure, but offering too much of what I don't want in performance of music of this period.

3. Minkowski's London symphonies (recommended above by Gurn), by contrast, represent pretty much everything I do want. Full of life and wit. Not polite, yet still delicate.

I like Davis' Haydn for precisely the reason Minkowski drives me a bit crazy on the clips from youtube, and I like the bombast that Davis brings. See, cloudy is not how I would classify Davis (the word doesn't even occur to me as I listen). It's just big band style and not the pared down version Minkowski and some others bring. Rather, I'd say Minkowski is too spare or severe (or restrained), though I don't dislike Minkowski (he clearly has something to say).  I doubt you would use those words to describe it. This is one area where being a neophyte is so confusing (at least it was when I was figuring out what I wanted to hear). I'm using the drumroll (103) symphony if you are curious what I am comparing.

[Gurn Blanston]

Well, this has gone swimmingly. I should sleep more often.

I haven't heard Davis' London's, which was why I was so non-committal. However, when it comes to Haydn I don't care generally for "Big Band", so my personal preference would be to steer clear. If big band doesn't bug you, then I think they are worth a shot. Clearly Alan and I are on the same page vis-a-vis our Haydn preferences. 'Spare' works well for me, transparent does too. I particularly like the works that lean on percussion, they play those very well. 'Military' is my favorite London symphony anyway, and the drumming is memorably done there.

Politeness is what kills Haydn. And most Mozart too. That's where their undeserved reputations as salon composers came from. When played properly, they could visit MY salon any time.

Ultimately, performance is what makes or breaks any composer. The reason that I am such a big period fan is that I feel that a Romantic era orchestra, no matter how well they play, will turn a work composed for an orchestra 1/3 their size into a bowl of mush. No matter the good intentions. That is, however, only my opinion. I may be wrong.

[Elgarian]

I like the bombast that Davis brings. See, cloudy is not how I would classify Davis (the word doesn't even occur to me as I listen). It's just big band style ...

The 'bombast' that Davis brings ... yes, that's what troubles me. The 'bombast', as I respond to it, is coming primarily from him and his big orchestra, rather than from Haydn. But I wonder if we're meaning the same thing by it - it's often hard to find the right words to describe these impressions. I suspect that what you call 'big band' may be (inevitably) what I call 'cloudy', even though it's not the word you'd have used. I'm referring to the effect of the large body of instruments that smears everything together, when I want to hear them articulated distinctly (particularly noticeable in strings). Like Gurn's 'bowl of mush': that's better than my 'cloudy'.

And for Minkowski, yes, 'spare', is close to what I'm after, but not, I think 'severe'; Gurn's 'transparent' is a good fit.

I have to say also that I'm not talking here about what ought, or ought not, to be done for historical accuracy's sake. I haven't a clue about that. My response is purely subjective: the one turns me off; the other turns me on. I've nothing to say on the rights and wrongs.

[mc ukrneal]

The 'bombast' that Davis brings ... yes, that's what troubles me. The 'bombast', as I respond to it, is coming primarily from him and his big orchestra, rather than from Haydn. But I wonder if we're meaning the same thing by it - it's often hard to find the right words to describe these impressions. I suspect that what you call 'big band' may be (inevitably) what I call 'cloudy', even though it's not the word you'd have used. I'm referring to the effect of the large body of instruments that smears everything together, when I want to hear them articulated distinctly (particularly noticeable in strings). Like Gurn's 'bowl of mush': that's better than my 'cloudy'.

And for Minkowski, yes, 'spare', is close to what I'm after, but not, I think 'severe'; Gurn's 'transparent' is a good fit.

I have to say also that I'm not talking here about what ought, or ought not, to be done for historical accuracy's sake. I haven't a clue about that. My response is purely subjective: the one turns me off; the other turns me on. I've nothing to say on the rights and wrongs.

The use of words around this subject is fascinating. Big band and cloudy do not go hand in hand for me. I think Davis is heavier (perhaps weightier), which is what I think you are responding to (but even here, I find Davis fairly fleet when he wants to be). Interestingly, I think Davis VERY transparent. I hear absolutely everything. You can hear all the parts. 

Politeness is what kills Haydn. And most Mozart too. That's where their undeserved reputations as salon composers came from. When played properly, they could visit MY salon any time.

Ultimately, performance is what makes or breaks any composer. The reason that I am such a big period fan is that I feel that a Romantic era orchestra, no matter how well they play, will turn a work composed for an orchestra 1/3 their size into a bowl of mush. No matter the good intentions. That is, however, only my opinion. I may be wrong.

Politeness will kill any composer. And while I prefer certain sounds or approaches, committed playing will always trump non-commited playing (or middle of the road/wishy-washy playing), regardless of what instruments they play or what approach they take. I just don't think a modern orchestra automatically means a lack of clarity / transparency or mushiness. I've eaten mush - and I don't like it!

[Elgarian]

The use of words around this subject is fascinating. Big band and cloudy do not go hand in hand for me. I think Davis is heavier (perhaps weightier), which is what I think you are responding to (but even here, I find Davis fairly fleet when he wants to be). Interestingly, I think Davis VERY transparent. I hear absolutely everything. You can hear all the parts.

Following what you said, I've been listening to the Drumroll (first by Minkowski, then by Davis) while I was having my lunch, and came back to this chat with a clear confirmation of what I know I like, but no particularly clearer knowledge of how to describe it. It may be that the differences in 'transparency' we're speaking of are illusory - so that when I describe Minkowski's as 'transparent', perhaps I only feel that I'm hearing more detail. The crispiness and crunchiness of a Chunky Kitkat don't add extra detail to the taste, compared with a Mars Bar. They just make it crispier and crunchier, and one either likes it, or doesn't.

Illusion or not, listening this lunchtime I find the Davis, for me, seems to put a smeary veil over everything in the background, so that individual instruments seem highlighted against a sort of wall of sound. The varieties of texture in the background seem evened out, so that it feels softer and less exciting than the Minkowski. And 'exciting' is the word for me here, rather than 'bombastic'. The Davis doesn't seem bombastic - just heavier, and smoother. Slightly Phil Spector-ish as opposed to Beatles-first-album-ish. (Now there's a futile blind alley for us to stumble helplessly into!)

[chasmaniac]

This is very good indeed.

[asin]B003IP2Y4O[/asin]

[chasmaniac]

Just experimemting with this amazon image number thingy.

[asin]B0009SQC7I[/asin]

[chasmaniac]

Well, shave my head and call me curly. It works!

[mc ukrneal]

This is very good indeed.

[asin]B003IP2Y4O[/asin]

Lethe recommended Beck many months ago, though I think on the main listening thread. I think she liked the CPO recordings too.

[chasmaniac]

Does it work for amazon.ca too?

[asin]B00006O8P2[/asin]

EDIT: Yes! though the link is still to .com. Must be the same ID number. OK, I'm through messin' about.

[chasmaniac]

Listening to Mallon has reminded me of this little number from the back catalogue, which I remember nothing about. Must give it a go.

[asin]B0008JEKCC[/asin]