Blind comparison: Bach Cello Suites

[aukhawk]

[^^^ Results are published upthread ^^^]

Well they're both still in, and as it happens they're assigned to different groups next round.  You can let me know which of them you really really wnat to hear again and I shall make it so. 

Though I might add - be careful what you wish for ...

[mszczuj]

[^^^ Results are published upthread ^^^]

Well they're both still in, and as it happens they're assigned to different groups next round.  You can let me know which of them you really really wnat to hear again and I shall make it so. 

Though I might add - be careful what you wish for ...

Oh, I didn't understand. I thought C group players were in F group, and these two were missing. So do as you think will be the best. (But I wasn't very fond of C2.)

[Pat B]

Well, every version I own has now been eliminated (Bylsma 1979, Starker/Mercury, Casals, Rostropovich).

Bylsma is the one that surprises me.

[prémont]

Well, every version I own has now been eliminated (Bylsma 1979, Starker/Mercury, Casals, Rostropovich).

Bylsma is the one that surprises me.

Let me put it the other way round:
I own all the eliminated versions except one (Wispelwey III), but I suppose, that I also own some of the not-eliminated versions.
Time will show.

[Pat B]

Let me put it the other way round:
I own all the eliminated versions except one (Wispelwey III), but I suppose, that I also own some of the not-eliminated versions.
Time will show.

Wouldn't shock me if you have all of them.

I guess Beschi is a surprise too. I've only heard samples of this recording (which I liked enough to mark "next in line") but it is certainly a favorite around here.

Breakdown of Group E (5 voters): E5 was in everybody's upper half (well, xochitl had it tied for 3rd) and got 3 first-place votes. E4 was also in everybody's upper half but with no first places -- I'm thinking this might be as good as it gets for an alternate instrument. Casals was in everybody's lower half.

The others had less of a consensus. ter Linden was premont's top choice, but the rest of us had him in 5th or 6th. E6 ranged from tied for 1st to 5th. E1 was very controversial (again): premont and I put it at the bottom (again) but the other 3 put it in the top 2.

I really liked B1-E5 in round 0 also, so hopefully it's an easily-obtainable version.

[jlaurson]

Well, every version I own has now been eliminated (Bylsma 1979, Starker/Mercury, Casals, Rostropovich).

Bylsma is the one that surprises me.

I was going to say: "Funny, I own none of the eliminated versions."

But then I realized, that's not quite true.

I have Rostropovich and Casals (which was my first, EMI [in two versions, even, I just found out), I probably have Jaap ter Linden in the Brilliant Bach box, I have Isserlis and Beschi (which I'm surprised to see having fallen by the wayside); I probably have one of the Yo-Yos. I don't think I have the Starker and I know I have neither Bylsma. Not sure if Isang Enders is laying about somewhere of if I've only seen it in a release-sheet.

[Pat B]

I have Rostropovich and Casals (which was my first, EMI [in two versions, even, I just found out), I probably have Jaap ter Linden in the Brilliant Bach box, I have Isserlis and Beschi (which I'm surprised to see having fallen by the wayside); I probably have one of the Yo-Yos. I don't think I have the Starker and I know I have neither Bylsma. Not sure if Isang Enders is laying about somewhere of if I've only seen it in a release-sheet.

Rostropovich was my first (back in my Penguin-reading days), and for many years only. I did not imprint on it, but it probably delayed my appreciation of the music.

A couple years ago I did some extensive sampling. I didn't expect Bylsma to contend. I had previously heard his second recording, and was not especially fond of it. (It's telling that so much of the discussion of it centers around the instrument.) But his first recording is the one I ended up choosing.

The other two I didn't really seek out. Starker came as part of the first Living Presence box, and I found Casals cheap locally.

There are a few on my consider-buying list (including, IIRC, your favorite). Beschi is the only one of those to be eliminated yet.

[Ken B]

Bylsma is the one that surprises me.

New to GMG are we?

[Pat B]

New to GMG are we?

Huh? That recording has fans here (aside from myself). I'd say the same for Bylsma in general.

ETA: or do you just mean that somebody else's group eliminated a great recording?

[aukhawk]

Oh, I didn't understand. I thought C group players were in F group, and these two were missing.

To be clear - C2 became E6 and will go through as G1.  C5 became D1 and will go through as H3.

I own all the eliminated versions except one (Wispelwey III), but I suppose, that I also own some of the not-eliminated versions.

And maybe several that were not incuded at all.  Don't forget that the original pool was 30 recordings, and there must be around 100 out there in total.  There are certainly at least a dozen 'name' recordings that were not included yet may well be on a par with many of the 10 which are left in.

As for Beschi - well personally I'm very sorry he's gone.  I really thought he was nailed-on for a place in the final 4, and I feel sure he would have done well in Suite 6 (next round) and Suite 5 (final).  He just seems to have had an off-day in the particular pieces that were sampled (3/1, 4/3-4-5).  The same must be true of Bylsma(1) and to a lesser extent, Gaillard and ter Linden.

But that's the nature of a knock-out format - like the FA Cup - it's always possible for a 2nd-rank player to win through - if losing Beschi at this stage is unacceptable (and it borderline is!) then maybe it's the contest itself which is at fault.

Anyhoo - it's midnight (or it was) here near the Greenwich meridian, so I'm off to bed, g'night all, see you tomorrow 

[jlaurson]

- if losing Beschi at this stage is unacceptable (and it borderline is!) then maybe it's the contest itself which is at fault.

Wondering if including different selections (i.e. Group A also has to listen to the cellists of Group B, but in different excerpts) could broaden the scope. Would mean more listening-time spent, but still not as much as making everyone hear everything.

[xochitl]

so far this reinforces my notion that almost any cycle ive listened to has moments (movements, or even whole suites) i dont care for in the hands of a particlar performer while the same recording can have some of my favorites. i'm looking at you: Fournier!

it is a bit of an extremely interesting crapshoot

[Ken B]

Huh? That recording has fans here (aside from myself). I'd say the same for Bylsma in general.

ETA: or do you just mean that somebody else's group eliminated a great recording?

Some GMG comparisons seem more deaf than blind.  😀

[mc ukrneal]

Some GMG comparisons seem more deaf than blind.  😀

What do you mean by that?

[kishnevi]

Since I voted F4 in first, I should be more interested in viola versions than I actually am...
Of the versions voted off the island, I have Casals, Starker, Ma, and not sure about Bylsma.  The only one of the three I regret not advancing is Casals.

Well, on to the next round of victims!

[prémont]

And maybe several that were not incuded at all.  Don't forget that the original pool was 30 recordings, and there must be around 100 out there in total.  There are certainly at least a dozen 'name' recordings that were not included yet may well be on a par with many of the 10 which are left in.

Well. I can mention at least 50 versions which are on par with the best of the versions which were excluded.

I suppose, that most of the 10, which were not excluded, are among them.

[prémont]

Wouldn't shock me if you have all of them.

Wouldn´t shock me either.   

[aukhawk]

PMs with links for round 2 have been sent to:
Jeffrey Smith;  Jo498;  Jay F;  mc ukrneal;  :premont:   xochitl;
jlaurson;   aligreto;  Pat B;  mszczuj;  banpuku

ie, anyone who voted in the last round, plus one new member.

If anyone else would like to participate you'll be more than welcome, just let me know.

[edited to add -
This is the previous history of the 10 remaining recordings - whited out in case you prefer to play completely blind:
G1 was E6/C2:   G2 was D5/A8:   G3 was F6/C8:   G4 was F2/C6:   G5 was E1/B7:
H1 was F5/C1:     H2 was E5/B1:   H3 was D1/C5:   H4 was D3/A10:  H5 was E4/B5:
===

[banpuku]

Here are my rankings from Group 2:

4
2
1
3
5

While I did not hear group 1, I will say that the #4 from Group 2 is worthy of consideration as a finalist.

[mc ukrneal]

Here are my rankings from Group 2:

4
2
1
3
5

While I did not hear group 1, I will say that the #4 from Group 2 is worthy of consideration as a finalist.

Wow! That was fast!!  

By Group '#2' do you mean group H?