Top 10 recordings in tems of technical quality of playing

[ajlee]

--- Quote from: Herman on January 22, 2011, 01:19:39 AM ---Also there's a type of individual, mostly found in the US, who thinks it's impossible to top Szell.

--- End quote ---

Hey! Regardless of how inevitably a few European egos would be poked, you have to admit that in CERTAIN regards to technicality, Szell's Cleveland Orch were---and probably still are---unmatched.

[ajlee]

--- Quote from: Herman on January 22, 2011, 01:19:39 AM ---Also there's a type of individual, mostly found in the US, who thinks it's impossible to top Szell.

--- End quote ---

Hey! Regardless of how inevitably a few European egos would be poked, you have to admit that in CERTAIN regards to technicality, Szell's Cleveland Orch were---and probably still are---unmatched.

[MishaK]

Hey! Regardless of how inevitably a few European egos would be poked, you have to admit that in CERTAIN regards to technicality, Szell's Cleveland Orch were---and probably still are---unmatched.

That depends on what you mean by technical ability. I would argue that Szell only required a certain technical spectrum from them while leaving other issues unexplored. Szell conducted rather straight tempos with clear (often quite harsh) rhythmic articulation. I have yet to hear a recording from that orchestra from that era where they produce a warm, lush string sound or really colorful blends of winds and brass, for example, or can actually negotiate hairpin turns when a conductor demands radical sudden tempo changes. That is a virtuosity they might have had, but there is virtually no recorded evidence of it that I am aware of. And Cleveland's subsequent music directors were often of a similar mould (Maazel). By contrast, if you take, for example the Chicago Symphony Orchestra, and it doesn't matter whether you go back to the 50s with Reiner, 70s or 80s with Solti, or 90s and 00s with Boulez, they could do all that Cleveland could do, PLUS they could produce the lushest colors you could ever want for e.g. Giulini AND cope with quite radical tempo changes and spin endlessly long lines for Barenboim. Even when I hear them today, there is hardly ever any of the kind of warmth in Cleveland that you hear not just from the great continental European orchestras, BUT also e.g. from NY Phil or Boston Symphony (or again Chicago, if and when they want to). Warmth and color, too, are technical skills, and the great orchestras can turn it on or off as appropriate for the repertoire. I also don't hear the same range of dynamics you get from e.g. Concertgebouw, CSO, LSO, etc. No offense to Cleveland. They are certainly a top rate orchestra, but I do find their reputation for technical perfection a bit overrated. I don't find it particularly impressive when an orchestra plays together when the conductor is leading a very predictable straight tempo, especially when you're talking about heavily edited studio recordings. It's much more impressive to me to hear e.g. how the present day Berlin Philharmonic in a live concert can breathe together as one and make both the most subtle and most radical tempo changes as one, as if they were a small chamber ensemble, completely attuned to each other. Likewise there are a few 14-CD sets of Concertgebouw radio broadcasts through the ages. It is much more amazing to me to hear how that orchestra, drawing on the puny talent pool of a tiny country managed a level of technical superiority in *live concerts* throughout its many decades of existence, than to hear the razor sharp precision of Szell/Cleveland in studio recordings that lack both the spontaneity and risks of live performance.  I am going to hear Cleveland with FWM here in Chicago next week, so I welcome the opportunity to be positively surprised.

[Herman]

--- Quote from: Herman on January 22, 2011, 01:19:39 AM ---Also there's a type of individual, mostly found in the US, who thinks it's impossible to top Szell.

--- End quote ---

Hey! Regardless of how inevitably a few European egos would be poked, you have to admit that in CERTAIN regards to technicality, Szell's Cleveland Orch were---and probably still are---unmatched.

No I don't have to, sorry, especially since you put it in such a vague manner.

[Scarpia]

Hey! Regardless of how inevitably a few European egos would be poked, you have to admit that in CERTAIN regards to technicality, Szell's Cleveland Orch were---and probably still are---unmatched.

To claim they were unmatched strikes me as silly, considering how many fine ensembles there are.  And as has been discussed above, Szell's style emphasized clarity of execution.  It doesn't follow that performances which did not emphasize such clarity don't require equal or greater technical skill.

[ajlee]

To claim they were unmatched strikes me as silly, considering how many fine ensembles there are.  And as has been discussed above, Szell's style emphasized clarity of execution.  It doesn't follow that performances which did not emphasize such clarity don't require equal or greater technical skill.

...thus I made the word "certain" boldfaced, didn't I? I do not for a second deny that there are other orchestras that possess a different kind of virtuosity and can produce a different kind of sound that's of a different type of technical challenge. Even the CO back in the days of Szell could not---or maybe just that Szell would not---produce a certain type of sound that's produced by my current favorite orchestra, Concertgebouw, probably on a daily basis. And Szell's CO never ever matched the dark, lush strings tone found in Vienna and the positively bold brass tones in New York and Chicago. (But then, whether those are absolute virtues depends on your taste.)

So, no, I do not think that Szell's CO is absolutely unmatched by any other orchestra, past or present. I merely find them unmatched in certain aspects like clarity and unanimity of staccatos (esp among the strings), the rhythmic incisiveness of the brass section, and the overall consistency of the entire team that's proven in both their stereo and live recordings.

Szell conducted rather straight tempos with clear (often quite harsh) rhythmic articulation. I have yet to hear a recording from that orchestra from that era where they produce a warm, lush string sound or really colorful blends of winds and brass, for example, or can actually negotiate hairpin turns when a conductor demands radical sudden tempo changes. That is a virtuosity they might have had, but there is virtually no recorded evidence of it that I am aware of.

Haven't you heard their live rendition of Beethoven's Missa?? The radical sudden tempo changes are pervasive throughout "Gloria" (the only mvt I heard)---more radical than any other performances of the work I've heard. Some other obvious example (in studio) include: in Beethoven Sym5, mvt4, he always applies the brake hard before the recapitulation of mvt3's horn theme.

Szell in fact uses very much tempo variation/flexibility, especially in live concerts. Yes, his approach is usually more subtle, but subtleties are often even harder to execute perfectly than hugely obvious ones. Just listen to his live Mozart recordings (e.g. Sym40 from that Tokyo concert) and you'll find very flexible phrasing in fast movements where only supremely virtuosic ensembles can pull off.

And whether the rhythmic articulation could be considered "harsh" is a matter of taste. Kubelik's famous Dvorak Slavonic Dances, for example, are attacked with such kind of articulation (much "harsher" than Szell's), the result is magnificently exciting.

Warmth and color, too, are technical skills, and the great orchestras can turn it on or off as appropriate for the repertoire. I also don't hear the same range of dynamics you get from e.g. Concertgebouw, CSO, LSO, etc.

I personally think that what Szell's CO supposedly lacked in warmth of tone is made up in the extremely sensitive and, yes, warm phrasing. For example, that sweet melody in mvt3 of Brahms sym3 (studio vers.) is as lovingly caressed as any other version.

It's true that the tone of the Szell/CO strings section is not to everyone's liking---and that's why Berlin and Vienna's lush strings tones are so widely popular. I just happen to slightly prefer that sort of extremely focused sound. And you're mostly right about the dynamic range---Szell eschewed effects to a point that sometimes I, too, wished he would've let go a little more. =/  However, that certainly isn't a lack of ability, as all musicians know that playing loud isn't the most difficult thing; in orchestral terms, proper balance is harder. Szell/CO was actually very loud in the closing pages of Sibelius 2nd when they played in that 1970 Tokyo concert.

No offense to Cleveland. They are certainly a top rate orchestra, but I do find their reputation for technical perfection a bit overrated.

You do have to understand that I was ONLY referring to the CO under Szell. In fact, I haven't bothered to listen to anything by the post-Szell CO except Dohnanyi's Brahms set.    The current day CO would be far from being my favorite---that would have to be, as mentioned above, the Concertgebouw.

[Herman]

Are you making these statements based solely on hearing recorded material?

BTW I am not sure whether I would call the VPO strings signally "dark and lush". I can think of darker and lusher, for instance Gergiev's Kirov orchestra.

And the way you frame Szell's unmatched Cleveland Orchestra recordings is pretty much tautological. They are unmatched in doing exactly what they were doing; however that applies to anyone doing anything. No one can match 100 meters finalist nr 5 in being nr. 5.

[Scarpia]

You do have to understand that I was ONLY referring to the CO under Szell. In fact, I haven't bothered to listen to anything by the post-Szell CO except Dohnanyi's Brahms set.    The current day CO would be far from being my favorite---that would have to be, as mentioned above, the Concertgebouw.

How do you know they're not good now if you have bothered to listen to anything by them after Szell?

[MishaK]

And the way you frame Szell's unmatched Cleveland Orchestra recordings is pretty much tautological. They are unmatched in doing exactly what they were doing; however that applies to anyone doing anything. No one can match 100 meters finalist nr 5 in being nr. 5.

Brilliant!

And Szell's CO never ever matched the dark, lush strings tone found in Vienna and the positively bold brass tones in New York and Chicago. (But then, whether those are absolute virtues depends on your taste.

...

And whether the rhythmic articulation could be considered "harsh" is a matter of taste. Kubelik's famous Dvorak Slavonic Dances, for example, are attacked with such kind of articulation (much "harsher" than Szell's), the result is magnificently exciting.

You weren't reading what I said. For some repertoire in some cases that kind of articulation is right, or the lushness of Vienna's strings is right, or the boldness of Chicago's trombones. But my point is that the truly great orchestras can turn these effects on and off. Whereas with Cleveland I find a certain monochromatic spectrum where nearly everything is played in a similar fashion. (BTW, I fault Vienna for that from the opposite side as well sometimes, they are miscast in some repertoire, especially French music.) In Berlin, the Concertgebouw or Chicago, their trademark characteristics are not always present and a good conductor knows how and when to use them and when not. For example, there have been many concerts where I was mesmerized by the CSO brass' ability to play the most stunningly controlled and warm pianissimos imaginable from a brass section. They don't always have to be strident. Likewise I have heard the Concergebouw produce an amazing wallop of a tutti punch that easily equaled the famed Chicago sound (in Shostakovich with Chailly). BTW, I'm basing my judgment of Cleveland on numerous recordings with Szell, Dohnyani, Maazel, Ashkenazi, Boulez, Barenboim, Levine, as well as live performances with Dohnyani. As I said, I am going to hear them with Welser-Möst next week, so I look forward to hearing new things, as I have never heard FWM live.

[Herman]

You weren't reading what I said. For some repertoire in some cases that kind of articulation is right, or the lushness of Vienna's strings is right, or the boldness of Chicago's trombones. But my point is that the truly great orchestras can turn these effects on and off. Whereas with Cleveland I find a certain monochromatic spectrum where nearly everything is played in a similar fashion. (BTW, I fault Vienna for that from the opposite side as well sometimes, they are miscast in some repertoire, especially French music.)

The VPO has rarely convinced me in Russian rep either.