Blind Comparison : Debussy, La Mer

[DavidRoss]

Gatti is one of the worst recent versions I heard. But it's not a surprise, he's generally a disappointment, and the ONF is at the weakest point of its history...

Sinopoli is an interesting version, but really, it didn't have a cahance to win because of a very disappointing Philharmonia Orchestra. It was quite in the same taste as Celibidache or Svetlanov, but with an inferior technical achievement. Hence the non-selection.

Translation: "I didn't like Gatti's La Mer. I don't like Gatti. I don't like the Philharmonia Orchestra, either. And I tend to confuse my opinions with objective reality."

[Discobole]

As a forum is a place to express one's opinion, I didn't think it would be so confusing for someone if I didn't say "IMO" in every sentence. But I promise I'll try.

So, IMO there are a lot of technical mistakes in the Sinopoli recording, which are IMO flaws as IMO it doesn't sound as Debussy intended it IMO. But of course anyone can say anything and anything I say is just an opinion, so if a trumpet hits the wrong note it is just my opinion to say it is not good, maybe it is actually a sign of musical genius and I am really dumb.

[Dancing Divertimentian]

Translation: "I didn't like Gatti's La Mer. I don't like Gatti. I don't like the Philharmonia Orchestra, either. And I tend to confuse my opinions with objective reality."

[Opus106]

Translation: "I didn't like Gatti's La Mer. I don't like Gatti. I don't like the Philharmonia Orchestra, either. And I tend to confuse my opinions with objective reality."

Translation: Someone just dissed something I like, so I'm going to confuse his clearly stated opinion for a supposed objective reality and be petulant.



C'mon, David, it's not the first time in GMG that a member has stated his or her opinions of recordings with words like 'worst' (he did say "I heard") and 'disappointment' .

[DavidRoss]

Translation: Someone just dissed something I like, so I'm going to confuse his clearly stated opinion for a supposed objective reality and be petulant.



C'mon, David, it's not the first time in GMG that a member has stated his or her opinions of recordings with words like 'worst' (he did say "I heard") and 'disappointment' .

"Petulance" is the right word, Navneeth -- but you're applying it to the wrong poster.  See the series of responses starting with this post: http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,20461.msg638768.html#msg638768 

If you follow the thread from that point on, it should be very clear who's being petulant, who is going out of his way to offend someone whose opinion differs from his own, who regards his own opinion as holy writ, and who lacks the wit to recognize others' attempts to make peace and instead of responding with gratitude and graciousness and acknowledging that reasonable people's tastes may differ, chooses to respond by expanding his attacks.

And it should be equally clear that rather than the petulant response to slighting my taste that you mistook my post for, it was a pointed reminder of the difference between fact and opinion, offered only after subtler reminders had failed.

This is a great place when we share our experiences with the wonderful music we love. It's not so great when it degenerates into adolescent pissing contests. Gentle reminders usually suffice to keep all but the most deranged well within the bounds of civil discourse.

[Drasko]

If we're talking about recordings that weren't chosen for this particular comparison I'd like to mention few that I like, for this or that reason, regardless whether I think they could have gone far in the actual comparison.
Dimitri Mitropoulos with NYP is wonderfully taut and flowing performance in really disappointing boxy, airless and colorless sound from Columbia, annoying to think that they could just two years later produce fantastic sound for Mitropoulos' Shostakovich 5th.
Manuel Rosenthal with Paris Opera Orchestra on Addes, nicely piquant version, not perfectly played but ultimately again compromised by odd early stereo recording with crude spotlighting and then receding of instruments.
Mravinsky with Leningrad, not particularly idiomatic but superbly interesting very angular conception, more zig-zaging than ebb-and-flowing, more fauvist than impressionist, decently but not flawlessly played in front of tubercular audience in early 60s Leningrad.
Sinopoli with Philharmonia, his penchant for open textures and odd detail I find most appealing in La Mer as elsewhere, and I have to disagree with Discobole, I can't find any similarities between Sinopoli's and Celibidache's concepts of the sound, view of the piece, or goals they trying to achieve. I like the former as much as i dislike the latter.
But I'd have to agree with him on Stokowski, I have it and I really dislike it, his merciless taffy-pulling makes me nauseous. But it's not just in La Mer, I've yet to find a Stokowski recording that like. Question of non matching aesthetics I guess.

[Drasko]

BTW, has Pierre Dervaux's La Mer with L'Orchestre des Concerts Colonne (now that an orchestra you don't hear much about nowdays) ever made it to CD. I remember seeing LPs around, but never heard it?

And has Cluytens ever recorded La Mer? Not that I'd miss it all that much.

[Karl Henning]

If you don't have it Karl, I can send you a copy. I've got several on hand. It really is unique.

Found it, Sarge! I shall give it a spin to-day.

[Brian]

Given his reaction to Gatti, I'm interested to hear what happens when Discobole's copy of the Deneve arrives. They are very different accounts.

[Brian]

Now listened to Bernstein. Yes, had it entered the final round, I likely would have taken it #1!