Tchaikovsky Sym (box set)

[M forever]

Much as I like Maazel (& I have seen him live) - he seems too cool as a conductor to me (except his DG Rimsky Korsakov's Cap. Espagnole). Pletnev is also another "cool" conductor. I prefer a more emotional response to Romantic era music. Hence, I asked about the 3 conductors' sets. 

The Maazel 1-6 set is very good done when he was young with VPO, he was very passionate and dramatic in his early days. Also has a great Sibelius set done during this period also with Decca/VPO

I haven't heard any of these recordings myself, but if they are only "half as good" as the Sibelius set, I may have to order them.

Rabin Fan: you should forget those clichés and just listen to the music without imagining which conductor is "cool" and which is not. Apart from the fact that these recordings are indeed fairly "early Maazel", he has done a lot of not at all "cool" recordings, although his performances are basically always very well prepared. Which is a good thing, I guess.

I saw him in concert very often in the 80s and still quite a few times during the 90s (he didn't come to the BP for a while because he was pissed off that they didn't appoint him principal conductor when Karajan died, but he still came regularly to Berlin with the SOBR and then later, he started coming back to the BP), and when he was "on", he was totally "on". I heard some amazing and very "emotional" concerts with him, among them incredible Sibelius 1 and 2 and Prokofieff 5, and one of the greatest concerts I ever heard was him conducting the Orchestra National de France in a blazing performance of *Tchaikovsky* 6 which went completely through the roof.

[Brian]

Brian - I have the early release of the stereo Mravinsky.

Oh sorry

[MISHUGINA]

How about this?

Just heard this set....um I've done on symphonies 4th and 5th. Pretty fine from what I've heard so far.

[PerfectWagnerite]

Talking about Maazel, about a week ago I heard a NYPO concerto broadcast over the radio. The piece was Mahler's 7th. You will not believe how SLOW the first movement was. It must lasted close to half an hour. FOr a minute I thought it was a joke and it must be some sort of rehearsal sequence. Of my upteenth recordings of this work I don't think anyone took it even close to the way Maazel took it. I haven't been to any NYPO concerts since Maazel took over so I don't know whether as he gets older he just gets slower like Giulini or what.

[Lethevich]

Talking about Maazel, about a week ago I heard a NYPO concerto broadcast over the radio. The piece was Mahler's 7th. You will not believe how SLOW the first movement was. It must lasted close to half an hour. FOr a minute I thought it was a joke and it must be some sort of rehearsal sequence. Of my upteenth recordings of this work I don't think anyone took it even close to the way Maazel took it. I haven't been to any NYPO concerts since Maazel took over so I don't know whether as he gets older he just gets slower like Giulini or what.

Hehe... I can imagine Sarge running to Operashare the second he read that to see if anyone recorded it... "Can this equal the great Klemperer?"

[Michel]

I've got Muti, but don't listen to it in 4-6 as I've got Mvarinsky - i would strongly suggest you do too!

[Renfield]

My apologies for the so-called "thread necromancy", but may I ask which of the two Karajan sets are being compared to the Muti and the Jansons? Because as far as I'm concerned, the 70's box set with just the six symphonies is significantly inferior to the "Karajan Conducts Tchaikovski" one.

The latter combines the 70's 1-3, which were K's only recordings of the works, with the 60's 4-6, which were K's best recordings of the works, performance-wise. Not to mention you get the Rococo Variations with Rostropovich, the Piano Concerto with Richter, ballet suites, etc. - and all for much the same price as the other set.

In other words, and even though you are likely to already possess any of the important "extras" like the Rococo Variations (I know I did when I bought that set ), I'd still recommend "Karajan Conducts Tchaikovsky".

(Truth be told, I am a Karajan admirer. But even I was suspicious of his Tchaikovsky, before I encountered those specific performances; and I still love to listen to them, even while having the legendary Mravinsky recording setting my standards. )

[BorisG]

My apologies for the so-called "thread necromancy", but may I ask which of the two Karajan sets are being compared to the Muti and the Jansons? Because as far as I'm concerned, the 70's box set with just the six symphonies is significantly inferior to the "Karajan Conducts Tchaikovski" one.

The latter combines the 70's 1-3, which were K's only recordings of the works, with the 60's 4-6, which were K's best recordings of the works, performance-wise. Not to mention you get the Rococo Variations with Rostropovich, the Piano Concerto with Richter, ballet suites, etc. - and all for much the same price as the other set.

In other words, and even though you are likely to already possess any of the important "extras" like the Rococo Variations (I know I did when I bought that set ), I'd still recommend "Karajan Conducts Tchaikovsky".

(Truth be told, I am a Karajan admirer. But even I was suspicious of his Tchaikovsky, before I encountered those specific performances; and I still love to listen to them, even while having the legendary Mravinsky recording setting my standards. )

I do not like Karajan Tchaikovsky, except for the 1971 EMI Berlin recordings of Symphonies 4 through 6. I thought these showed energy that escaped the others. I asked earlier about possible EMI Gemini remastering for these.

[Renfield]

I do not like Karajan Tchaikovsky, except for the 1971 EMI Berlin recordings of Symphonies 4 through 6. I thought these showed energy that escaped the others. I asked earlier about possible EMI Gemini remastering for these.

Truth be told, I haven't heard Karajan's EMI Tchaikovsky recordings, yet. But I'm still very satisfied with the DG ones I referred to above, as well as the 6th from his 70's DG cycle.

But I know well that, especially when it comes to Karajan, it greatly comes down to personal appreciation of performance and recording choices, rather than an "objective" sense of greatness.

[rubio]

Has anybody here heard Svetlanov's various performances of these symphonies? And what do you think of them interpretation- and quality-wise? Is the below Scribendum set the same performances as those on BMG/Melodiya? Which of these labels use to have the best transfers? Anybody familiar with his live set from Japan on Canyon Classics?

http://www.mdt.co.uk/MDTSite/product//SC024.htm

[jwinter]

Has anybody here heard Svetlanov's various performances of these symphonies? And what do you think of them interpretation- and quality-wise? Is the below Scribendum set the same performances as those on BMG/Melodiya? Which of these labels use to have the best transfers? Anybody familiar with his live set from Japan on Canyon Classics?

http://www.mdt.co.uk/MDTSite/product//SC024.htm

I have that Svetlanov set, picked it up from BRO several months ago.  I'm not sure as to the provenance of the recordings, although the Melodya logo is on the back of the box, so I assume it was issued by them at some point. 

Performance-wise, I think these are excellent, very hard-driven in the Russian style, the ensemble sounds a touch ragged at times but nothing to distract from the enjoyment.  The recorded sound is decent but not great, clear but a little distorted at the extremely loud points, range a bit narrow as you might expect from a 1960s era recording.  For complete sets I have these, Markevitch, and Muti, and I think I prefer Svetlanov by a nose, for what that's worth.

I believe Drasko has this set as well, if you need a 2nd opinion...

[dirkronk]

I have heard Svetlanov in 1, 2 and 5 (all on old LPs, but at the moment can't recall if they were Angel/Melodiya or Vox/Melodiya, since Melodiya was licensing to every western label back then). I still have the first two and still enjoy putting them on occasionally, but the 5 is gone, since I have options I much prefer.

FWIW,

Dirk

[Sergeant Rock]

Talking about Maazel, about a week ago I heard a NYPO concerto broadcast over the radio. The piece was Mahler's 7th. You will not believe how SLOW the first movement was. It must lasted close to half an hour. FOr a minute I thought it was a joke and it must be some sort of rehearsal sequence. Of my upteenth recordings of this work I don't think anyone took it even close to the way Maazel took it. I haven't been to any NYPO concerts since Maazel took over so I don't know whether as he gets older he just gets slower like Giulini or what.

Hehe... I can imagine Sarge running to Operashare the second he read that to see if anyone recorded it... "Can this equal the great Klemperer?"

I missed this thread when it first appeared. I heard Maazel and Cleveland perform the Seventh. I knew the Klemperer already and I don't recall thinking the Maazel performance was wildly different....well, besides a more obvious and normal basic Allegro tempo for the first movement. (Of course memory is a curious thing and I could be entirely wrong.) I own Maazel's Vienna performance (released in 1986) and it's one of the slowest Sevenths I own. It is Klemperer-like, at least in the slow tempos (but Klemp is rock solid while Maazel indulges in many gear-changes and exaggerated rubato). So to answer PW's question: I think Maazel has always been slower than average and this latest performance is just more of the same. Lethe is correct: I'd love to hear this latest performance and compare it to what he did in Vienna twenty-two years ago.

I haven't heard any of these recordings myself, but if they are only "half as good" as the Sibelius set, I may have to order them.

Rabin Fan: you should forget those clichés and just listen to the music without imagining which conductor is "cool" and which is not. Apart from the fact that these recordings are indeed fairly "early Maazel", he has done a lot of not at all "cool" recordings, although his performances are basically always very well prepared. Which is a good thing, I guess.

I saw him in concert very often in the 80s and still quite a few times during the 90s....

I wouldn't call Maazel cool either. I saw him very often in the 70s (including his first concert with the Cleveland Orchestra after he'd been named music director; the superb and heartfelt Sibelius Fifth he conducted that evening turned me into a Sibelius fanboy). But Maazel was variable. When he was "on" you left Severance or Blossom exhilarated (that Mahler 7, for example). Other times (too many really) he just seemed to be going through the motions. Even a work I'd have considered a sure thing would too often fall flat (like a lackluster Berlioz Requiem that was one of the most disappointing concerts I've ever heard). Maybe it's this aspect of Maazel's character that Rabin defines as cool.

Sarge

[Drasko]

I believe Drasko has this set as well, if you need a 2nd opinion...

I'm having deja-vu feeling, haven't we been over this before?
Second opinion will be similar to first, Svetlanov's 1-3 are among best there is, along with Markevitch and as more emotional and flexible a good supplement to Markevitches usual lean and mean self. I'm less keen on 4 and 5 but Pathetique is very good and so is Manfred. That is very good batting average in my book. As for sound I agree with jwinter, Scribendum mastering is fine, managed to soften some of the coarsness in loud passages typical of '60 Melodiyas.

Anyhow, hear for yourself, here is Scherzo from Svetlanov's Winter Dreams. Beautiful shaping of the theme in the strings and getting certain balletic feel across better than anyone else I know.

http://www.mediafire.com/?da42mnmuqnn

14.3 MB mp3 @ 256kbps

[hautbois]

I thought Haitink's cycle with the Concertgebouw is highly under rated. Do check it out with available cheap!

Howard

[Iago]

Loren Maazel is totally uninterested in what the "critics" or the "audiences" think of him.
He is only interested in what the musicians in the orchestras he conducts, think of him.
His musical interpretations, at times, may seem totally idiosyncratic. But that is the case ONLY to the uninformed and inexperienced in his audiences and to the critics. But to the musicians he works with, no  conductor has ever been more prepared, more thoroughly immersed in the score and the spirit of the music, and more capable of eliciting the finest in music making from his orchestras.

No conductor (active today) has earned more respect from his colleagues than Maazel has.

[Sergeant Rock]

Loren Maazel is totally uninterested in what the "critics" or the "audiences" think of him.
He is only interested in what the musicians in the orchestras he conducts, think of him.

When the musicians of the Cleveland Orchestra voted for Music Director in the musician's preference poll after Szell's death, the results were thus:

Kertész 76
Abbado 13
Frübeck de Burgos 4
Barenboim 3
Maazel 2
Leinsdorf 0

So much for the respect of the musicians 

Of course their vote meant nothing to the orchestra's general manager and he hired Maazel anyway after a very dubious meeting in which only 38 of 58 trustees were invited. Not even Szell's assistant, Louis Lane, was allowed to address the meeting. Only 24 trustees voted for Maazel but that sealed the deal.

Many of the players in the orchestra never did warm to Maazel. Principal hornist, Myron Bloom, became his enemy, despising the conductor's "odd modifications of tempo and mannered inflections."

So it isn't just the "uninformed" who dislike some of Maazel's interpretations.

Personally, I enjoy his idiosyncratic performances. It's no secret I like musicians with individuality; who aren't afraid of bending the rules and altering the score to suit their own purpose: Bernstein, Gould, Mutter, Klemperer, Barbirolli, Sinopoli, Maazel. Music is a performing art and I want to hear the personalities of the players. The Maazel concerts I recall disliking were the ones where he seemed on autopilot; just going through the motions, giving us very little of himself. Of course that's just my interpretation of his interpretation.

Sarge

[Iago]

When the musicians of the Cleveland Orchestra voted for Music Director in the musician's preference poll after Szell's death, the results were thus:

Kertész 76
Abbado 13
Frübeck de Burgos 4
Barenboim 3
Maazel 2
Leinsdorf 0

So much for the respect of the musicians 

Sarge

Since he left Cleveland, Maazel has been the music director of the Pittsburgh Symphony and of the NY Philharmonic.
Those two orchestras (management and personnel) have been quoted as saying that they had great respect, admiration and fondness for his musicianship and for his persona. Maazel is now in his 75th year (I believe) and he is a far more mature, seasoned, professional, than he was almost 40 years ago when he took over frpm Szell. He is simply a far better conductor now, as well as being a far better person.
Recently (within the last 6 weeks)  he conducted a series of "Die Walkure" performances at the Metropolitan Opera. The orchestra  (in interviews published in the NY Times), remarked on his geniality, his preparedness. his musicianship
and his profound understanding of the score.

I'm sure you could have found something more recent to report than an almost 40 yr old news story.

[Brian]

Since he left Cleveland, Maazel has been the music director of the Pittsburgh Symphony and of the NY Philharmonic.
Those two orchestras (management and personnel) have been quoted as saying that they had great respect, admiration and fondness for his musicianship and for his persona. Maazel is now in his 75th year (I believe) and he is a far more mature, seasoned, professional, than he was almost 40 years ago when he took over frpm Szell. He is simply a far better conductor now, as well as being a far better person.
Recently (within the last 6 weeks)  he conducted a series of "Die Walkure" performances at the Metropolitan Opera. The orchestra  (in interviews published in the NY Times), remarked on his geniality, his preparedness. his musicianship
and his profound understanding of the score.

I'm sure you could have found something more recent to report than an almost 40 yr old news story.

The Times reports that the NYPO said much the same things about Gustavo Dudamel, if I remember correctly...?