Holst's The Planets

[Peter Power Pop]

[snip]

This was a few pages back, but I cannot refrain from commenting: GET THE HAHN. The Sibelius is one of my favourite pieces of music. Hahn and Salonen are  just perfect in this recording. Also worth a listen is Vilde Frang's debut record from a few years back. The orchestra's not that great, but Frang makes for a compelling interpreter. The opening has me holding my breath every time.

[/hijack]

Here 'tis:

https://www.youtube.com/v/kDIvOIAJkPk

Very nice.

[Peter Power Pop]

Scheherazade would be awesome. It's a work that I'm not too familiar with yet, I would love to discover it with you.

[snip]

I'm not all that familiar with it either. I've heard Scheherazade maybe two or three of times – once or twice on the radio, and once on the CD I bought of it (Enrique Bátiz with the Philharmonia Orchestra, London on Naxos).

I remember liking it enormously, so I'm looking forward to getting to know it a lot better with you. Onward and upward!

[André]

What about Enigma ? This work has become a staple of this household. Its multifaceted colours and gorgeous tunes never cease to fascinate, enthrall or tug at my tummy.

And there are SO many versions to choose from... 

[Peter Power Pop]

What about Enigma ? This work has become a staple of this household. Its multifaceted colours and gorgeous tunes never cease to fascinate, enthrall or tug at my tummy.

And there are SO many versions to choose from... 

I'm not much of a fan of the Enigma Variations. The thought of spending a few months with that particular piece of music fills me with... well, not dread, but... reluctance. That's it: Reluctance. That's the thing holding me back from leaping on it with both ears.

Glimmer-of-Hope Time: I might do it later.

In the meantime, I'm gearing up for Scheherazade. I now have about 25 versions of it, and am on the lookout for more.

PS: My favourite movement (by far) of the Enigma Variations is "Dorabella".

PPS: My favourite version of the Enigma Variations is the one by Eugen Jochum.

https://www.youtube.com/v/i1bkeaWRhYE

[Peter Power Pop]

Eek!

I was all set to pester a gaggle of Rimsky-Korsakov Scheherazade recordings (I now have about 30 recordings sitting on the hard drive, rarin' to go), when I came across this monster survey of that very piece:

http://www.classicalnotes.net/classics2/rimsky.html

What do I do?

Plough ahead with my own survey? Or simply be content in the knowledge that someone's already done one (and probably done it very well), and think of a different work to do?

Yours asking for suggestions,

Redundant-Reviews Pete.


PS: Daphnis et Chloé, The Enigma Variations, and Also Sprach Zarathustra are now looking like very viable alternatives.

[mc ukrneal]

Eek!

I was all set to pester a gaggle of Rimsky-Korsakov Scheherazade recordings (I now have about 30 recordings sitting on the hard drive, rarin' to go), when I came across this monster survey of that very piece:

http://www.classicalnotes.net/classics2/rimsky.html

What do I do?

Plough ahead with my own survey? Or simply be content in the knowledge that someone's already done one (and probably done it very well), and think of a different work to do?

Yours asking for suggestions,

Redundant-Reviews Pete.


PS: Daphnis et Chloé, The Enigma Variations, and Also Sprach Zarathustra are now looking like very viable alternatives.

Why does it matter? It's not complete anyway. And maybe it will be interesting to compare notes?

[Peter Power Pop]

Why does it matter? It's not complete anyway. And maybe it will be interesting to compare notes?

Fair enough. Plus I do want to get to know Scheherazade a lot better.

Scheherazade it is!

[Drasko]

Now, if you were to say, "How about Sibelius' Third Symphony?", I'd say, "Now you're talking."

I adore the slow movement of Sibelius' Third Symphony. It's probably my favourite bit of music Sibelius wrote. I adore it.

Sibelius' Third Symphony would actually be very interesting topic for a comprehensive survey, and exactly because of the slow movement. Sibelius left somewhat contradictory markings for the slow movement. Tempo marking is Andantino con moto, quasi Allegretto which implies, not once but twice, that it should be quite swiftly flowing piece, but on the other hand his metronome marking (which I can't recall at moment) suggests much, much slower piece. Various conductors seem to adhere to one or another, or anything in between, so we have from very quick readings clocking at seven and a half minutes of Anthony Collins and Rozhdestvensky to very slow eleven minutes plus of Kajanus or Oramo, to everyone else somewhere in between. Four minutes difference in a piece relatively short as that is enormous and definitely changes the whole idea about the movement, and the symphony as the result.

[North Star]

Why does it matter? It's not complete anyway. And maybe it will be interesting to compare notes?

+1
And you seem to be interested in hearing the recordings and comparing them, and also thinking of the piece and the interpretations while (or after) listening. Reading what someone else who did the same thing thinks of the recordings isn't really the same thing.
E:

Fair enough. Plus I do want to get to know Scheherazade a lot better.

Scheherazade It is!

Splendid! Great fun, especially live.

Sibelius' Third Symphony would actually be very interesting topic for a comprehensive survey, and exactly because of the slow movement. Sibelius left somewhat contradictory markings for the slow movement. Tempo marking is Andantino con moto, quasi Allegretto which implies, not once but twice, that it should be quite swiftly flowing piece, but on the other hand his metronome marking (which I can't recall at moment) suggests much, much slower piece. Various conductors seem to adhere to one or another, or anything in between, so we have from very quick readings clocking at seven and a half minutes of Anthony Collins and Rozhdestvensky to very slow eleven minutes plus of Kajanus or Oramo, to everyone else somewhere in between. Four minutes difference in a piece relatively short as that is enormous and definitely changes the whole idea about the movement, and the symphony as the result.

Kajanus, Oramo, and others are right. Sibelius marked the slow movement thusly because, according to him, the conductors at the time played slow movements far too slowly. He later said that contemporary conductors didn't do that anymore and he should revise the tempo marking. Actually, Kajanus's recording seems to be the most reliable source we have for the correct tempo of the movement.
http://www.sibelius.fi/english/musiikki/ork_sinf_03.htm

[Drasko]

Kajanus, Oramo, and others are right. Sibelius marked the slow movement thusly because, according to him, the conductors at the time played slow movements far too slowly. He later said that contemporary conductors didn't do that anymore and he should revise the tempo marking. Actually, Kajanus's recording seems to be the most reliable source we have for the correct tempo of the movement.
http://www.sibelius.fi/english/musiikki/ork_sinf_03.htm

Thanks for the info! I'm having hard time even imagining those old time conductors Sibelius was objecting against. Is it possible to go slower than Kajanus and to avoid stopping altogether? It seems majority of today's conductors aren't also willing to go quite that deep into Kajanus territory, most readings are bit quicker than him. I personally prefer it at about nine, nine and a half minutes, like Mustonen. Not everything is in tempo of course.

[Gurn Blanston]

Fair enough. Plus I do want to get to know Scheherazade a lot better.

Scheherazade It is!

Yes you do. Surprised to see it when I came to check out this thread. I'm not much of a Planets fan, love  Scheherazade though!

[Peter Power Pop]

...I do want to get to know Scheherazade a lot better.

Scheherazade it is!

Yes you do. Surprised to see it when I came to check out this thread. ...

I dare say you thought you were going see something about The Planets here. Tee hee.

...I'm not much of a Planets fan, love  Scheherazade though!

Excellent. That just gives me more impetus to get stuck into Scheherazade as the next "Oh no, what's Peter writing about now".

[André]

Since you won't do Enigma  I'll settle for Schéhérazade   .

BTW does your review of Planets by Hymisher Greenburg really suggest it's a very good interpretation, or was it a spoof ? I mean, Hymisher Greenburg 

[Peter Power Pop]

Sibelius' Third Symphony would actually be very interesting topic for a comprehensive survey, and exactly because of the slow movement. Sibelius left somewhat contradictory markings for the slow movement. Tempo marking is Andantino con moto, quasi Allegretto which implies, not once but twice, that it should be quite swiftly flowing piece, but on the other hand his metronome marking (which I can't recall at moment) suggests much, much slower piece. Various conductors seem to adhere to one or another, or anything in between, so we have from very quick readings clocking at seven and a half minutes of Anthony Collins and Rozhdestvensky to very slow eleven minutes plus of Kajanus or Oramo, to everyone else somewhere in between. Four minutes difference in a piece relatively short as that is enormous and definitely changes the whole idea about the movement, and the symphony as the result.

Kajanus, Oramo, and others are right. Sibelius marked the slow movement thusly because, according to him, the conductors at the time played slow movements far too slowly. He later said that contemporary conductors didn't do that anymore and he should revise the tempo marking. Actually, Kajanus's recording seems to be the most reliable source we have for the correct tempo of the movement.
http://www.sibelius.fi/english/musiikki/ork_sinf_03.htm

Thanks for the info! I'm having hard time even imagining those old time conductors Sibelius was objecting against. Is it possible to go slower than Kajanus and to avoid stopping altogether? It seems majority of today's conductors aren't also willing to go quite that deep into Kajanus territory, most readings are bit quicker than him. I personally prefer it at about nine, nine and a half minutes, like Mustonen. Not everything is in tempo of course.

This is to answer all the questions/queries/conundrums posed by the fine folk above. I want to make a couple of points...

Point 1: As much as I love Sibelius's Third Symphony, I'd be reluctant to undertake a comparison of available recordings, because all the time I'd be thinking "But what about Sibelius's other symphonies? Isn't it unfair to single out one of his symphonies for a survey?" The completist in me thinks it'd be like listening to only "Mars" from all the Planets recordings.

Point 2: With regard to conductors and their adherence to the composer's intentions, any survey I do is less a case of "This is what the composer wanted, therefore it must be better" and more a case of "This is what I'm enjoying".

Point 2 (continued): When I was listening to the Planets recordings, I noticed there were quite a few liberties taken with the score here and there. But that didn't stop me responding with a "You know, I like what they did there". For me, any survey I do is invariably about my response to what I hear, not what might be the most accurate performance.

[Peter Power Pop]

Since you won't do Enigma  I'll settle for Schéhérazade   .

How about I do the Enigma Variations after Scheherazade? I'm fine with that.

BTW does your review of Planets by Hymisher Greenburg really suggest it's a very good interpretation, or was it a spoof ? I mean, Hymisher Greenburg 

Believe it or not (and it surprised me enormously), it's a magnificent interpretation. If you want to hear for yourself, send me a PM and we'll sort something out.

I was surprised because it was $4 on eBay, and it had all the hallmarks of an ultra-cheapy release. Everything about it screams "Stay away!", from the artwork to the name of the artists. (I was fairly sure they were fictitious.) But when I listened to it I was amazed. It's by far the best of the ultra-cheap Planets recordings. It's better than the one by the much-touted Geoffrey Simon on Laserlight (and other labels). And Hymisher's recording gives more expensive Planets a run for their money.

[André]

I received Hymisher's Planets yesterday and am currently listening to it (midway through Uranus). Some very  listenable tape hiss makes me doubt it's really DDD, although the sound is otherwise fine and wide-ranging. I have no qualms about the interpretation, except that the big tune in Jupiter is taken far too fast and fails to mark the wine-and-conversation midway-post through the meal. Orchestrally I find the strings rather meagre, certainly not as portly and athletic as those of the London Philharmonic or Philharmonia orchestras to name but two. Could it be that the violins are divided ?

In any case, one more planet to go (it's starting now, rather unmysteriously)... I paid a penny (litterally) for this disc.. Plus postage and exchange it came to about 7$ CAD

[Peter Power Pop]

I received Hymisher's Planets yesterday and am currently listening to it (midway through Uranus). Some very  listenable tape hiss makes me doubt it's really DDD, ...

I'm listening to Hymisher's "Neptune" now, and I'm having no trouble at all with any tape hiss. Hang on, I'll crank it up to maximum volume...

Yeah, the hiss is there, but I don't find it bothersome. And I'd better turn it down before my ears explode.

That's better. No appreciable tape hiss.

I'd say it's definitely an analogue recording. And I'd also say it wasn't recorded in 1993, the date specified on the CD back cover.

By the way, I don't know if you have the release I have. This is the one I bought:

... although the sound is otherwise fine and wide-ranging. I have no qualms about the interpretation, except that the big tune in Jupiter is taken far too fast and fails to mark the wine-and-conversation midway-post through the meal. Orchestrally I find the strings rather meagre, certainly not as portly and athletic as those of the London Philharmonic or Philharmonia orchestras to name but two. ...

I think those orchestras have the weight of numbers behind them.  ("Your orchestra has 24 violins? Ha! We have 326!") And a heap of history. ("How old are your violins? 200 years? Pshaw! Ours are 500 years old! And you can't buy them anywhere! At any price!")

... Could it be that the violins are divided ?

Er, hang on...

Well, I don't know if this counts as "divided", but at the start of "Jupiter" the second violins are situated at about 11 o'clock in the soundstage, followed by the first violins at about 9 o'clock. ("They certainly took their time..." – boom! boom!.)

In any case, one more planet to go (it's starting now, rather unmysteriously)... I paid a penny (literally) for this disc.. Plus postage and exchange it came to about 7$ CAD

Beautiful.

[North Star]

Point 1: As much as I love Sibelius's Third Symphony, I'd be reluctant to do undertake a comparison of available recordings, because all the time I'd be thinking "But what about Sibelius's other symphonies? Isn't it unfair to single out one of his symphonies for a survey?" The completist in me thinks it'd be like listening to only "Mars" from all the Planets recordings.

What about Beni Mora and Egdon Heath? 

[Peter Power Pop]

What about Beni Mora and Egdon Heath? 

Yes and yes – but there's a backlog of other, reader-friendlier tunes* to get through first.

I don't know how many people would be champing at the bit to see a large list of Egdon Heaths.


(*Scheherazade, Carmina Burana, Enigma Variations, Daphnis et Chloé, Also Sprach Zarathustra, "Tiptoe Through The Tulips" etc.)

[North Star]

Yes and yes – but there's a backlog of other, reader-friendlier tunes* to get through first.

I don't know how many people would be champing at the bit to see a large list of Egdon Heaths.

Oh, I only meant that you shouldn't let that stop you from starting (and possibly finishing) with one Sibelius work.