Started by Discobole, May 04, 2012, 01:41:02 AM
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Quote from: Discobole on May 20, 2012, 04:00:06 PMResultsGroup EQualified :E1 is one of the most unanimous choices in this round, 6 times first and 2 times 3rd on 9 votes. But all versions had their supporters. E4 is qualified despite a not-so-high average ranking .Eliminated :- 3rd : E3 - Charles Munch, Boston Symphony Orchestra (RCA, 1956). Results in this group are certainly the most surprising of the whole first round, at least by the names of the eliminated. This version, generally considered as the main reference in this score, is eliminated, and frankly nobody seemed very impressed.- 4th : E2 - Roger Désormière, Česká filharmonie (Supraphon/Ultraphone, 10/1950). Another big name, this version which was considered as the best recording on earth ever, period, by Sviatoslav Richter (who played it for his old master Heinrich Neuhaus). A myth, which will remain so, but does not survive this comparison.
Quote from: Opus106 on May 20, 2012, 09:16:26 PMHm... by revealing the eliminated versions aren't you giving clues as to what those still in the race could be, perhaps introducing a little bias in the experienced listener? About F3: I guessed as much.
Quote from: Discobole on May 20, 2012, 04:00:06 PMResultsGroup AQualified :Things were difficult at first for A4, but it finally ranks 1st. A2 was virtually qualified through the whole vote, but it finishes 2nd and could have been endangered with a couple different votes...Eliminated :- 3rd : A1 - Michel Plasson, Orchestre du Capitole de Toulouse (EMI, 1987-1988). The orchestra from Toulouse sounds surprizingly full and with beautiful winds, but this interpretation lacks a little life, a little wind on the sea...- 4th : A3 - Serge Koussevitzky, Boston Symphony Orchestra (RCA Victor, 1938-1939). One of my favourite interpretations since I've known it. I just couldn't leave it out of the selection, even if I knew it would not go very far because of its sound quality. The orchestra is really incredible for these times, beautiful and precise.
Quote from: Opus106 on May 20, 2012, 07:58:16 AMF3 - Despite the length, I didn't get bored.
Quote from: Discobole on May 20, 2012, 04:00:06 PMF3 Sergiu Celibidache, Münchner Philharmoniker (EMI, live 1992)
Quote from: Opus106 on May 20, 2012, 09:16:26 PMAbout F3: I guessed as much.
Quote from: Sergeant Rock on May 21, 2012, 03:56:21 AMCeli's my favorite version of La Mer. It describes beautifully the majestic mass of the sea, and its crushing power.Sarge
Quote from: Opus106 on May 21, 2012, 05:22:47 AMQuite. The music really doesn't need to be 'sped up', methinks.
Quote from: Discobole on May 21, 2012, 09:25:39 AMIt doesn't really need to be slowed down either If you follow the indications on the score, the first movement should last about 8 minutes. 9 is already quite slow. But Celi takes 13 minutes !
Quote from: Brian on May 21, 2012, 09:22:36 AMSzell was my top choice there.
Quote from: Discobole on May 21, 2012, 09:25:39 AMIf you follow the indications on the score, the first movement should last about 8 minutes.
Quote from: Drasko on May 21, 2012, 10:40:29 AMAre voters maybe bit too much demanding of sound quality, if only one mono recording made it to second round? Personally I tried to disregard it as much as possible (voted for G2 even though hated the sound)
Quote from: Drasko on May 21, 2012, 10:40:29 AMHow many manage to clock it at 8? Off top of my head I can think of only one.Interesting results of first the round. I'm now especially curious about group E, two recordings that flat out eliminated Desormiere and Munch, both more than very fine in my opinion.But then again not much of an opinion as it seems, almost completely dismissed recording I [thought] like a lot (Markevitch). Are voters maybe bit too much demanding of sound quality, if only one mono recording made it to second round? Personally I tried to disregard it as much as possible (voted for G2 even though hated the sound)
Quote from: mc ukrneal on May 21, 2012, 10:55:30 AMPerhaps. I don't look at this exercise as which is the best version to buy, but rather which is the best executed performance. Poor sound can be hard on us, because it might hide details of the performance, but I try to let the performance take priority regardless of the sound. The Schumann, for example, had more recordings that were older. Because of the nature of Debussy, it may put older recordings at more of a disadvantage.
Quote from: Discobole on May 22, 2012, 10:39:30 AMhttp://www.timeanddate.com/counters/fullscreen.html?mode=a&year=2012&month=6&day=4&p0=195
Page created in 0.035 seconds with 27 queries.