Dmitri's Dacha

[Tapio Dimitriyevich Shostakovich]

We talked abou timing. This is the final moment of Sym#15, IV. Adagio. The following differences are ridiculous. I feel Sanderling (19:41) is way too slow and Barshai (13:56)way too fast. I like slow version the Sanderling, still [Edit: And it has superb quality]. Also, the Timpani in the Barshai recording seems out of pitch.

Barshai (from the Brilliant edition - the ending fade is by me, sorry):
[mp3=200,20,0,left]http://www.fileden.com/files/2007/9/21/1446950/shosti_barshai_15.mp3[/mp3]
Sanderling/Berlin SO:
[mp3=200,20,0,left]http://www.fileden.com/files/2007/9/21/1446950/shosti_sanderling_15.mp3[/mp3]

[karlhenning]

We talked abou timing. This is the final moment of Sym#15, IV. Adagio. The following differences are ridiculous. I feel Sanderling (19:41) is way too slow and Barshai (13:56)way too fast. I like the Sanderling, still.

Kondrashin/Moscow Phil 15:12
Maksim Dmitriyevich/Prague Symphony 16:12

[eyeresist]

Mravinsky - 13.48 (discounting post-track silence)

Can anyone beat that?

[Tapio Dimitriyevich Shostakovich]

Mravinsky - 13.48 (discounting post-track silence)

Can anyone beat that?

Well, Barshai minus post-tack silence is at the same length.

[karlhenning]

You're both including some after-echo time in the space, following the last chord? 

[Catison]

We talked abou timing. This is the final moment of Sym#15, IV. Adagio. The following differences are ridiculous. I feel Sanderling (19:41) is way too slow and Barshai (13:56)way too fast. I like slow version the Sanderling, still [Edit: And it has superb quality]. Also, the Timpani in the Barshai recording seems out of pitch.

Thanks for this.  But does this section have any relation to the tempo markings in the 4th symphony and 7th symphony, considering that is the allusion?

[eyeresist]

You're both including some after-echo time in the space, following the last chord? 

No, the Venezia release of the Mravinsky has about 20 seconds of dead air after the audio track has ceased.

[PaulR]

Since the Gergiev recording of The Nose has been released, I've been considering buying that one, as I don't have a recording of that opera yet.

But what I want to know how it compares to the Rozhdestvensky version of the piece.  I think the Rozhdestvensky might be better, especially because it also comes with The Gamblers op. 63b  But I really don't know either, and I would love some opinions before I buy either version.  (They are roughly the same price on arkiv)

Thanks!

[Dancing Divertimentian]

Since the Gergiev recording of The Nose has been released, I've been considering buying that one, as I don't have a recording of that opera yet.

But what I want to know how it compares to the Rozhdestvensky version of the piece.  I think the Rozhdestvensky might be better, especially because it also comes with The Gamblers op. 63b  But I really don't know either, and I would love some opinions before I buy either version.  (They are roughly the same price on arkiv)

Thanks!

Well, personally I wouldn't be so quick to declare Rozhdestvensky's recording as "better" if I hadn't heard it.

But I have - I've had it for quite a while now on LP. I also have the only other recording of The Nose to have ever been issued on recordings before the new Gergiev: Armin Jordan's on Cascavelle from Lausanne (in Russian). Alas, it's already OOP.

Personally my preference is by quite a margin in favor of the Jordan.

To me Rozhdestvensky's is heavy-ish, a bit sluggish, lacking in detail (despite the fine sound) and, well, extremely "Russian". Confused by this? Don't be. Because The Nose isn't much of a "Russian" work to begin with. It's perhaps the most "European" work of Shostakovich's I've ever heard. It's almost as if he's thrown his hat into the ring with all the other 'big dogs' from the Second Viennese school, like Berg, Webern, and such, and had a go at all manner of extreme experimentalism. The work is that zany in conception (musically).

This 'extremism' of course is why the work was so quick to be condemned by the Soviet commissars. "Formalist" they called it. A western trait. The Nose is perhaps the first link in a chain of works which eventually lead to Shostakovich's public trouncing.   

Sad.

Anyway, Jordan's is the type of performance that plays up all the extravagance in the work and presents it squarely as the experimental work it is.

Not that Rozhdestvensky is exactly bad, mind you, and I might come across as overly harsh above (it's really not a catastrophe), but it's just that in comparison with Jordan it really doesn't have the life and energy - the flair - the work clearly needs. At least to me.

Which leads me to the Gergiev recording. I haven't heard it yet but despite the seeming niggling here and there about Gergiev's merits as a conductor (nothing explicit, however, that I've ever read) he's mighty fine in the opera pit. And for the purposes of this post I'll just stick to the closest contemporary of Shostakovich who Gergiev has recorded operas of: Prokofiev. All four of the Gergiev-led Prokofiev operas I have (on Philips) show him to have a keen understanding of the dramatic and lyric potential of each respective work. He seems to be completely inside the music with every detail and phrase well thought-out, culminating in a type of 'stage presence' that literally resonates right into my little listening room. Dazzling!

So, with this in mind, my personal impressions are that the new Gergiev Nose should be a splendid affair. In every way I'm anticipating a performance perfectly in keeping with the spirit of the work: "western decadent" all the way.

(Now, just when I'll get it I don't know. I already have two recordings of the work ).


BTW, here's a pic of Jordan's Nose (no pun intended):

[PaulR]

Well, personally I wouldn't be so quick to declare Rozhdestvensky's recording as "better" if you haven't heard it.

I have - I've had it for quite a while now on LP. I also have the only other recording of The Nose to have ever been issued on recordings before the new Gergiev: Armin Jordan's on Cascavelle from Lausanne (in Russian). Alas, it's already OOP.

Personally my preference is by quite a margin in favor of the Jordan.

To me Rozhdestvensky's is heavy-ish, a bit sluggish, lacking in detail (despite the fine sound) and, well, extremely "Russian". Confused by this? Don't be. Because The Nose isn't much of a "Russian" work to begin with. It's perhaps the most "European" work of Shostakovich's I've ever heard. It's almost as if he's throwing his hat into the ring with all the other Big Dogs from the Second Viennese school, like Berg, Webern, and such, and having a go at all manner extreme experimentalism. The work is that zany in conception (musically).

This 'extremism' of course is why the work was so quick to be condemned by the Soviet commissars. "Formalist" they called it. A western trait. The Nose is perhaps the first link in a chain of works which eventually lead to Shostakovich's public trouncing.   

Sad.

Anyway, Jordan's is the type of performance that plays up all the extravagance in the work and presents it squarely as the experimental work it is.

Not that Rozhdestvensky is exactly bad, mind you, and I might come across as overly harsh above (it's really not a catastrophe), but it's just that in comparison with Jordan it really doesn't have the life and energy - the flair - the work clearly needs. At least to me.

Which leads me to the Gergiev recording. I haven't heard it yet but despite the seeming niggling here and there about Gergiev's merits as a conductor (nothing explicit, however, that I've ever read) he's mighty fine in the opera pit. And for the purposes of this post I'll just stick to the closest contemporary of Shostakovich who Gergiev has recorded operas of: Prokofiev. All four of the Gergiev-led Prokofiev operas I have (on Philips) show him to have a keen understanding of the dramatic and lyric potential of each respective work. He seems to be completely inside the music with every detail and phrase well thought-out, culminating in a type of 'stage presence' that resonates right into my little listening room. Dazzling!

So, with this in mind, my personal impressions are that the new Gergiev Nose should be a splendid affair. In every way I'm anticipating a performance perfectly in keeping with the spirit of the work: "western decadent" all the way.

(Just when I'll get it I don't know. I already have two recordings of the work ).

Well, I worded what I meant to say wrongly.  I meant that it would be a better deal for the money with the Gambler's op. 63b along with The Nose.  I didn't mean better musically or what not.

Thanks for the advice!

[Dancing Divertimentian]

Well, I worded what I meant to say wrongly.  I meant that it would be a better deal for the money with the Gambler's op. 63b along with The Nose.  I didn't mean better musically or what not.

Ah, gotcha. Sorry.

Thanks for the advice!

Whatever you choose let us know your impressions. There aren't a whole lot of folks who know this work.

[PaulR]

Whatever you choose let us know your impressions. There aren't a whole lot of folks who know this work.

I ended up ordering the Gergiev recording.  When I get a chance to listen to it, I will report my impressions.  I am looking forward to it

[Dancing Divertimentian]

I ended up ordering the Gergiev recording.  When I get a chance to listen to it, I will report my impressions.  I am looking forward to it

Nice.

[PaulR]

I got the CD of the Nose conducted by Gergiev today and I have listened to it.  I really liked Shostakovich's later Opera, Lady Macbeth of the Mtsensk District, so even though I wasn't expecting it to be anything like Lady Macbeth, I thought I would enjoy The Nose.  The Nose didn't disappoint me.  This is the only recording I have of the piece, as I've said before. 

To the CD, for the majority of the recording the balance between the orchestra and the singers were excellent, neither were too loud, or too soft, but at times I felt like the orchestra was overpowering the singers and could stand to be a little quieter, but this was not a huge problem for me, as I could still hear what they were saying, even if I couldn't understand them.  When I listen to the recording again, I will most likely listen while reading the libretto.  But the sound was clear and focused.  A really great start for the new label in recording quality, in my opinion.  I probably would have more specific things to say, or have more criticism or praise if I were a SRT major at my school, but I am not.  But I do think it was recorded extremely well.

Gergiev and the orchestra played extremely well.  I don't have the score, but everything seemed to me to fit perfectly in the style of the piece.  I really liked the interludes in the opera, especially with the percussion parts.

I hope when I have a chance to re-visit this in the future, it will make more of an impression on me, as I am sure I missed some stuff in the first listen, but I think it's an incredible piece of work and a great CD

[karlhenning]

It's quite a tour-de-force for Boy Dmitri!

[Lethevich]

Can anyone recommend a good collection of orchestral music that is not symphonies or concertos?

Any good disc or two packed to the brim with suites, overtures, odes, marches, variations, concert allegros/scherzos and whatnot will be of interest.

[karlhenning]

Can anyone recommend a good collection of orchestral music that is not symphonies or concertos?

Any good disc or two packed to the brim with suites, overtures, odes, marches, variations, concert allegros/scherzos and whatnot will be of interest.

Well, the Naxos disc of the complete Hamlet score should commend itself to you, here.

[Drasko]

Can anyone recommend a good collection of orchestral music that is not symphonies or concertos?

Any good disc or two packed to the brim with suites, overtures, odes, marches, variations, concert allegros/scherzos and whatnot will be of interest.

Well, there was Rozhdestvensky conducted Melodiya/BMG two-fer which exactly fits your description. I heard it ages ago and seem to recall that performances vere good enough and recording quality variable - soviet style, but it's long oop, you might find it used.
http://www.amazon.com/Shostakovich-Orchestral-Works-Anatoli-Obraztsov/dp/B000023ZS9

Other than that your best option is, I think, Chailly's three discs for Decca ('Jazz', Film and Dance). Cheap copies shouldn't be difficult to find. But take this as an information only, as I've heard only one of these three - 'Jazz' one and it's really good (though includes piano concerto which doesn't really work as coupling).
   

[Lethevich]

Damn, that Rozhdestvensky set looks perfect. Seems that its obscurity renders it not even piratable at this moment - I found only dead links. I'll bookmark the Amazon pages in the event of a sane price appearing in future! This one seems to have an interesting coupling of works:



Thanks for the Chailly tip! I didn't even know the recordings existed They do seem perfect, now all he needs to do is record an overtures disc, and I'm a happy cat 0:)

Edit: Worst Grammar Ever.

[Brian]

Can anyone recommend a good collection of orchestral music that is not symphonies or concertos?

Any good disc or two packed to the brim with suites, overtures, odes, marches, variations, concert allegros/scherzos and whatnot will be of interest.

Easy: Brilliant Classics has a 3 CD set of all the jazz suites, ballet suites, and a few other things besides.