Ten favourite conductors...

[MishaK]

Have you heard his Bruckner 9? I bought that recently on an impulse; haven't listened to it yet. I also have a CD of a Bruckner 5th with the VPO, issued as some sort of commemorative box, that is amazing in its intensity and roller-coaster improvisatory feel that I rarely hear with Bruckner.

Yes, the 5th and 9th are great too, but the 8th is really something special.

Yeah, he's really good. I heard him do the Bruckner 9th of a lifetime in (of all places) Trenton, NJ.

With NJSO?

Some really good recordings with the MN orchestra too.

Yes. Some fantastic stuff there. That Bruckner 9 they did is amazing. Another few notches better than the one he did with Saarbrücken.

[Archaic Torso of Apollo]

With NJSO?

That's right. It was back in 2001 or so, shortly after he recorded it with Minnesota.

[Geo Dude]

The adoration Weil gets in some circles is actually mystifying to me. This is a man I have seen and heard in rehearsal and performance many times, and he has always struck me as a genial laissez-faire sort of guy. He lets people play mostly the way they want without much interference on his part. To what extent his recorded "interpretations" are really his or his musicians' is anyone's guess. He is no technician, no orchestra builder, that's for sure.

Fascinating (and bizarre) information given the great results he gets in recordings.  I'm not particularly concerned with whether he or the musicians get the results, just that they're there.

By the way, it's been a while but I do recall hearing some of Kubelik's Mahler and greatly enjoying it.

[dave b]

I can name approximately 6 or 7 conductors, period. This is the kind of thread where I can learn a lot, broadening my classical music exploration. Thanks to whoever started this one, and to all the contributors. You'd be surprised what inexperienced folks like me can pick up here, just by sitting back and "listening".

[Mandryka]

The adoration Weil gets in some circles is actually mystifying to me. This is a man I have seen and heard in rehearsal and performance many times, and he has always struck me as a genial laissez-faire sort of guy. He lets people play mostly the way they want without much interference on his part. To what extent his recorded "interpretations" are really his or his musicians' is anyone's guess. He is no technician, no orchestra builder, that's for sure.

What does he do when there's disagreement about how to play the music?

Koopman says he encourges the musicians to make their own decisions, and there's also some of John Eliot Gardiner's Brandenburg Concertos.

If you think that the craft of music making is really essential to seeing how to make the music meaningful, then it's going to be natural to let the craftsmen, the instrumentalists, come up with ideas. If you think that the meaning comes fom your inspiration or research as leader, then you'll treat them less respectfully I suppose. You'll just want them to deliver your ideas. It's like the difference between an auteur (Goddard maybe) and someoneone like Peter Brook, in theatre.

[MishaK]

Fascinating (and bizarre) information given the great results he gets in recordings.  I'm not particularly concerned with whether he or the musicians get the results, just that they're there.

Not bizarre at all. The recordings of his that you praise are all of works that can basically be done (and have been done) in a competent way without a conductor (or with a choral conductor with minimal competence in the instrumental department). While a great conductor may elicit marvellous performances of a Haydn symphony, a good performance of one does not necessarily indicate that a conductor had to do a lot to achieve that, especially with a professional orchestra for which it is standard repertoire. But try something more thorny and the results are different. I have at home a number of small label and non-commercial recordings of Weil in more difficult repertoire (from Brahms to Mahler to Janacek) that are pedestrian at best. His Flying Dutchman recording got resoundingly panned in reviews as far as the conducting is concerned. I have seen him work many times, and I have never seen him move his left arm independently of his right, except when he was turning pages. Look, I'm not saying that he might not be an excellent choral leader or know his way around some classical period repertoire. But to qualify for a top ten list of great conductors I would expect several leagues better knowledge of his craft and better results in more difficult repertoire, not stuff that can be led by the concertmaster.

[Geo Dude]

I haven't heard him in Brahms or other material so I won't comment on that, but my basis of placing him in top ten is not getting merely good results in the repertoire I've cited but in producing some of the best recordings of those works I've ever heard.  His Haydn symphonies and his Beethoven 3rd, 7th and 8th in particular are pretty much perfect.  Same with his orchestral Seven Last Words.  That said, it's entirely possible that these recordings (along with his brilliant choral material) are merely flukes and that he's mediocre for the most part and I won't contradict that assertion until I've heard more material myself, but what I have heard is nothing short of brilliant.

[MishaK]

I haven't heard him in Brahms or other material so I won't comment on that, but my basis of placing him in top ten is not getting merely good results in the repertoire I've cited but in producing some of the best recordings of those works I've ever heard.  His Haydn symphonies and his Beethoven 3rd, 7th and 8th in particular are pretty much perfect.  Same with his orchestral Seven Last Words.  That said, it's entirely possible that these recordings (along with his brilliant choral material) are merely flukes and that he's mediocre for the most part and I won't contradict that assertion until I've heard more material myself, but what I have heard is nothing short of brilliant.

I'll put them in my Spotify queue and will listen. It is likewise possible that in his other jobs he was merely phoning it in an collecting a paycheck so he could focus his energies elswhere and on things he really cares about. 

[MishaK]

OK, Geo Dude. I gave this a fair try. I listened to Weil's complete Eroica on Spotify that you linked above beginning to end straight through. And all I hear are the same issues I've always had with him: fluffy attacks (pppwwa instead of ta) that show that nobody bothered about ensemble coordination (the triplet buildup to the climax of the slow movement is practically a train wreck - for several beats nothing is together), small dynamic range (mp-f), clipped rests and notes at end of phrases that are not held for the full indicated length, mediocre balancing (rather sad, given that Tafelmusik is a small ensemble to begin with - voices should be much easier to hear, esp. woodwinds), no particular intrepretation beyond a few HIP gestures - once a movement is set in motion it just continues the way it started (funeral march is actually way too buoyant the way Weil does it - this is more appropriate for the second movement of the 7th - while the scherzo is relatively slow-ish - not enough contrast between the two). Really, by now we've seen the HIP thing done a million times in a million ways (with historic instruments and with modern ensembles) and not rarely much better than this. Take for example this guy:

[asin]B00111WS8O[/asin]

My current favorite Eroica. Compare these two side by side. You'll see what I mean with what ensemble coordination ought to be for instance, not to mention finer gradation of dynamics and an altogether more individual and compelling conception of the work as a whole.

[Geo Dude]

Thank you for the analysis, that was interesting information.  I'll keep an eye out for that Antonini recording for sure (hopefully someone will put it up for a cheaper price on the MP at some point) because I'm always on the hunt for a great Eroica and I trust your knowledge on the subject.  However, let me state for the record that Weil's is not the only Eroica I've heard or anything.

[jochanaan]

...If you think that the craft of music making is really essential to seeing how to make the music meaningful, then it's going to be natural to let the craftsmen, the instrumentalists, come up with ideas. If you think that the meaning comes fom your inspiration or research as leader, then you'll treat them less respectfully I suppose. You'll just want them to deliver your ideas. It's like the difference between an auteur (Goddard maybe) and someoneone like Peter Brook, in theatre.

Speaking as an orchestra player, I sometimes appreciate the "auteur" approach.  If, say, a conductor "leads" a Beethoven symphony in a standard way without much verbal direction, I'll tend to play it in a lackluster manner; but if another conductor leads in different tempos, or begins to demand something unusual, I'll start to pay attention and my playing will change, usually for the better.

[jochanaan]

At the end of Bernard Haitink's concerts, or so I've heard, he always holds up the score, as well as acknowledging the orchestra, chorus and soloists.  That affirms what I already knew about his approach, that he centers on what is written (without any loss of personality).

This story is told about Arturo Toscanini: At the end of a rehearsal, he asked rhetorically, "What am I?  I am nothing."  (This would have surprised the orchestra greatly! )  "Who are you?  You are nothing."  (That was no surprise; he had told them that often enough! )  "Beethoven!  Beethoven is everything."

[Mandryka]

Speaking as an orchestra player, I sometimes appreciate the "auteur" approach.  If, say, a conductor "leads" a Beethoven symphony in a standard way without much verbal direction, I'll tend to play it in a lackluster manner; but if another conductor leads in different tempos, or begins to demand something unusual, I'll start to pay attention and my playing will change, usually for the better.

What do you work in, a modern symphony orchestra or a small orchestra? The reason I ask is that I remember Koopman says he changes his approach. He said that when he works with baroque orchestras, everyone's friends with everyone else, everyone gets on. And so there can be more discussion and freedom. When he works with big modern orchestras he's more authoritarian.

It may be more the size of the orchestra and the attitude of the performers which determin the approach, rather than the complexity of the music. I don't know.

[Mandryka]

At the end of Bernard Haitink's concerts, or so I've heard, he always holds up the score, as well as acknowledging the orchestra, chorus and soloists.  That affirms what I already knew about his approach, that he centers on what is written (without any loss of personality).

This story is told about Arturo Toscanini: At the end of a rehearsal, he asked rhetorically, "What am I?  I am nothing."  (This would have surprised the orchestra greatly! )  "Who are you?  You are nothing."  (That was no surprise; he had told them that often enough! )  "Beethoven!  Beethoven is everything."

The Toscanini view seems hopelessly old fashioned to me. Has he never read Taruskin, or what?

[Karl Henning]

(Can hardly believe that I've not "played" here yet. Let me marshal my thoughts . . . .)

[North Star]

Alas, I can't cover all the alphabets...
Abbado
Barbirolli
Boulez
Chailly
Davis, Sir Colin
Mackerras
Neumann
Rattle
Sokhiev
Vänskä

[MishaK]

At the end of Bernard Haitink's concerts, or so I've heard, he always holds up the score

No, not always. I've seen him many times and I've only seen him do that once when the applause wouldn't let up and after many curtain calls he wanted to acknowledge that the bulk of the praise belongs not to the people on the stage.

Sokhiev

Yes, that guy really knows what he's doing on a technical level, knows what he wants, knows how to get it from people he's never met before, and has some unique and interesting ideas about how a piece should sound. Definitely someone to keep an eye on going forward.

[jochanaan]

What do you work in, a modern symphony orchestra or a small orchestra? The reason I ask is that I remember Koopman says he changes his approach. He said that when he works with baroque orchestras, everyone's friends with everyone else, everyone gets on. And so there can be more discussion and freedom. When he works with big modern orchestras he's more authoritarian.

It may be more the size of the orchestra and the attitude of the performers which determin the approach, rather than the complexity of the music. I don't know.

I've done both.  And every aspect of the music, including the number and attitude of musicians, affects the conductor's approach, and the players'.  But certain things are always the same in my playing, principally how I listen to everyone around me and watch the conductor.

[Karl Henning]

It's watching the conductor that is probably the mischief; only encourages the blighter.

[jochanaan]

The Toscanini view seems hopelessly old fashioned to me. Has he never read Taruskin, or what?

But it was a needed corrective at the time he was conducting.  Maestro Toscanini was trained in the Romantic tradition, in which "what the composer wanted" had no significance in the face of performers' desire for personal expression.  His early recordings are highly nuanced, with lots of unwritten tempo changes and score editing.  But in later years Toscanini came to the conclusion that it was better to follow the notes and other written indications exactly as on the score.  Yet despite this, Toscanini had awesome personality and was one of the great conductors of history.

Richard Strauss and Igor Stravinsky, who both did a lot of conducting, took similar approaches, especially to their own music.  And in Stravinsky's recordings of his own music, the music invariably makes total sense, so much so that other recordings sound distorted to me.

In my own playing, when I practice something I always, when I'm working things out, do it exactly as written.  Only if something really doesn't work for me will I make changes, and even then I try to stay as close as possible to what's written.  (Except in early music where performers were expected to add things.)

It's watching the conductor that is probably the mischief; only encourages the blighter.

Well, somebody's got to lead us! To be fair, there are conductorless orchestras; Orpheus is one of the most famous, and they're a fine group.  But even there, someone has to start the music going...