Havergal Brian.

[Karl Henning]

Karl,

Does this help?

http://www.havergalbrian.org/all-works-by-type.php

Thank you, sieur!

[cilgwyn]

Excellent! Very striking! Of course,you can always prop the Lp up,if you've got it,while listening to the cd!

The emi cd I was referring to is there to see,albeit in a very blurry photo. Just put Brian Mackerras into the Amazon search engine & it comes up. Well,it does for me,anyway!

[cilgwyn]

And ebay,£4.60,post free! I'll stick to the twofer,I think!

[J.Z. Herrenberg]

 Found it. Looks like a picture by Hogarth.

[Christo]

I have that CD of 31 & 7, the first-ever CD I bought and for which I even invested in a CD player! On the front cover: 'Lucifer and his Angels' on the tower of Strasbourg Cathedral: illustration by Sidney H. Meteyard for an edition of The Golden Legend by Longfellow (Hodder and Stoughton, before 1910)....

Have that one, too. Not my first CD, but probably among the first one hundred.

[John Whitmore]

Just had a quick listen to the new Naxos. First thoughts. Good playing but it doesn't sound Russian at all or even Eastern European. Not a complaint just an observation. I personally don't care much for Russian orchestral playing so it's a relief. Super recording. Natural, clear but not toppy. I've made myself another CD removing the ridiculous gap in the middle of Symphony 22. This supposed to be two movements played without a break. Strange artistic decision to leave such a pause. Ending of 22 is as lame as lame can be - smooth, lacking in bite and no sense of mystery. It just fizzles out. Prefer my old school band here. Overall much better than the Marco Polo stuff though.

[Sergeant Rock]

Regarding the Lp of the Groves eighth & ninth. You still can't beat that dramatic photo of Brian,with just his facial features picked out in the light. Almost planet like. A genuinely arresting image.

The emi cd I was referring to is there to see,albeit in a very blurry photo.

Here's my scan of the LP (left click to enlarge):




Sarge

[Karl Henning]

Almost a touch of Wagner there, wot?

[J.Z. Herrenberg]

Methinks the old Anton is in there somewhere, too.

[cilgwyn]

Just had a quick listen to the new Naxos. First thoughts. Good playing but it doesn't sound Russian at all or even Eastern European. Not a complaint just an observation. I personally don't care much for Russian orchestral playing so it's a relief. Super recording. Natural, clear but not toppy. I've made myself another CD removing the ridiculous gap in the middle of Symphony 22. This supposed to be two movements played without a break. Strange artistic decision to leave such a pause. Ending of 22 is as lame as lame can be - smooth, lacking in bite and no sense of mystery. It just fizzles out. Prefer my old school band here. Overall much better than the Marco Polo stuff though.

I'm going to have to listen to the LSSO performance now! And there I was going on about that great ending (on the Naxos recording). What do I know,eh?!
Interesting about that 'ridiculous' gap'?
It is great sound quality,though. I wonder how John rates this production in comparison to the Dutton recordings of Brian? I know he was very critical of the Dutton cd of the Violin Concerto. One thing I DO hate about Dutton. Their transfers of historic recordings. I only buy them when there is no alternative. Very interventionist. On the plus side some people won't listen to early electrical,or acoustic,recordings because of the background noises of shellac,swishing,etc;so they're more likely to listen to a cleaned up recording. My problem is the length to which Michael Dutton goes. This is why I forked out for the old Pearl 5cd set of Elgar's pre-electrical recordings,bronzed as they were,rather than the new restorations,from Music & Arts, all the Elgarians are banging on about. I'd swap airbrushed imposters for a bit of clarity & soothing,shellac background swish,any day!
Of course,John,being a bit of an expert on this kind of thing,may have a different slant. But what's the point of a 1930s,0r 40's recording,that's had so much background noise extracted,it sounds like a sterile,dull impersonation of it's former self?!

Thanks for reproducing that classic emi sleeve,Johan. I only wish I'd kept mine,now!

[John Whitmore]

I'm going to have to listen to the LSSO performance now! And there I was going on about that great ending (on the Naxos recording). What do I know,eh?!
Interesting about that 'ridiculous' gap'?
It is great sound quality,though. I wonder how John rates this production in comparison to the Dutton recordings of Brian? I know he was very critical of the Dutton cd of the Violin Concerto. One thing I DO hate about Dutton. Their transfers of historic recordings. I only buy them when there is no alternative. Very interventionist. On the plus side some people won't listen to early electrical,or acoustic,recordings because of the background noises of shellac,swishing,etc;so they're more likely to listen to a cleaned up recording. My problem is the length to which Michael Dutton goes. This is why I forked out for the old Pearl 5cd set of Elgar's pre-electrical recordings,bronzed as they were,rather than the new restorations,from Music & Arts, all the Elgarians are banging on about. I'd swap airbrushed imposters for a bit of clarity & soothing,shellac background swish,any day!
Of course,John,being a bit of an expert on this kind of thing,may have a different slant. But what's the point of a 1930s,0r 40's recording,that's had so much background noise extracted,it sounds like a sterile,dull impersonation of it's former self?!

Thanks for reproducing that classic emi sleeve,Johan. I only wish I'd kept mine,now!

I much prefer the sound quality of the new Naxos compared to the Dutton fiddle concerto. As far as restorations go there is a point where you have to say enough is enough and accept some residual background noise. I think that if you go too far you take too much away from the original performance almost to the point of destruction. This is where my friend at Klassic Haus comes up trumps. Just enough fiddling to improve things but never to the detriment of the originsal recording and its inherent spirit. One example is the LSSO/Tippett Suite in D, ruined by Pye by a hum at around 50hz. Remove it all = no bass. Remove a little = minimal hum but still with a decent bottom end. Which sounds best? The latter.

[calyptorhynchus]

"Ending of 22 is as lame as lame can be - smooth, lacking in bite and no sense of mystery. It just fizzles out."

Could this be an conscious decision, bearing in mind the recording then goes on to No.23, whereas the LSSO record 22 as a stand-alone?

[John Whitmore]

"Ending of 22 is as lame as lame can be - smooth, lacking in bite and no sense of mystery. It just fizzles out."

Could this be an conscious decision, bearing in mind the recording then goes on to No.23, whereas the LSSO record 22 as a stand-alone?

Maybe but music needs to stand alone. I don't expect a lame ending because of a record company's decision on couplings. No 22 isn't the first movement of something else.

[calyptorhynchus]

I've been listening again to the two versions of 22, John, and I'm inclined to agree with you.

The gap between the movements of the Naxos recording is too long. As for the ending, I can't detect much difference until the last few bars where the Naxos recording ignores the sforzandi. Oh we'll, I guess it wouldn't be the first recording where the the performance ignores a few of the directions in the score.

I guess this means that the LSSO is still the preferred recording for 22. The reissue of the LSSO disks would certainly be recommended for the symphonies 10 and 22. If another recording of 21 is issued it'll be interesting to compare with theirs.

[John Whitmore]

I've been listening again to the two versions of 22, John, and I'm inclined to agree with you.

The gap between the movements of the Naxos recording is too long. As for the ending, I can't detect much difference until the last few bars where the Naxos recording ignores the sforzandi. Oh we'll, I guess it wouldn't be the first recording where the the performance ignores a few of the directions in the score.

I guess this means that the LSSO is still the preferred recording for 22. The reissue of the LSSO disks would certainly be recommended for the symphonies 10 and 22. If another recording of 21 is issued it'll be interesting to compare with theirs.

I don't think the LSSO 22 is the preferred version. The Naxos playing is superior, of course it is, but the ending lets it down. My opinion of course.

[J.Z. Herrenberg]

I have to write a review for the HBS Newsletter, so I'll be comparing the two versions (and the Fredman, too). I agree that there is more 'bite' to the ending in the LSSO performance.

[John Whitmore]

I have to write a review for the HBS Newsletter, so I'll be comparing the two versions (and the Fredman, too). I agree that there is more 'bite' to the ending in the LSSO performance.

At the end of the day, we should be happy to have 3 versions of the symphony on hand. A good restoration of Fredman on Klassic Haus, another of the LSSO/Heltay LP (also on Klassic Haus) and now a new one by a Russian orchestra in spectacular sound. 2 downloads and a Naxos disc at a total cost of less than 20 quid. Not to be sniffed at. Hopefully the new Heritage transfer of Heltay's recording will also be worth a listen. It's a good piece. One of his best symphonies I think.

[J.Z. Herrenberg]

Yes, it's a good piece, very compelling. There is a fourth performance (from 26 October 1983), the first public one, which I have on a tape I can't play anymore: by Sir Charles Groves, conducting the Royal Philharmonic Orchestra. There is a review by Malcolm MacDonald on the HBS site: http://www.havergalbrian.org/sym22_1.htm

[John Whitmore]

Yes, it's a good piece, very compelling. There is a fourth performance (from 26 October 1983), the first public one, which I have on a tape I can't play anymore: by Sir Charles Groves, conducting the Royal Philharmonic Orchestra. There is a review by Malcolm MacDonald on the HBS site: http://www.havergalbrian.org/sym22_1.htm

Cassette or reel to reel? If it's a cassette I can transfer it for you.

[J.Z. Herrenberg]

Thanks for the offer, John. It's a cassette, but I don't have it here in Delft. I know the HBS must have a recording... I vaguely remember it, also a few fluffed notes here and there... Oh well, three performances is enough, and MM's review gives you an excellent idea.