Bruno Walter

[Que]

For those interested in prewar Bruno Walter, I'd like to point out that Japanes Opus Kura has issued quite a few of them:

    

 

 

   



Q

[Daverz]

For those interested in prewar Bruno Walter, I'd like to point out that Japanes Opus Kura has issued quite a few of them.

Any general comments on the quality of the transfers?

[Que]

Any general comments on the quality of the transfers?

I don't have any of these particular issues, but based on several other Opus Kura issues I think you can expect very fine transfers with a purist approach: very little filtering and full blown, immediate sound. Transfers tend to have "body" at the lower end (unlike Pearl, for instance), some would say "bottom-heavy" but it sounds very realistic to me. Personally I consider Opus Kura one of the best in the historical recordings field.

Check the samples on the Opus Kura site HERE.

Q

[Que]

Bumping this thread with a re-post:

Brahms : Schicksalslied, op. 54 (Live 22.X.1947)
Mahler : Symphony No 1 (Live 16.X.1947)
Concertgebouw Orchestra, Toonkunstkoor Amsterdam

Unfortunately the quality of the recording is a major obstacle in appreciating the Brahms' Schiksalslied: the choir sounds murky and very distant. This work really needs a recording in which one can clearly distinguish the different lines in the chorus.

BUT Mahler's 1st is a different story altogether. Here Tahra mentions the use of the original tape in the radio archives of the Dutch broadcasting society AVRO - probably quite familiar to you. And it shows, or rather sounds... A fair amount of hiss, but apart from that excellent (for 1947), detailed and very immediate sound. And the performance is real Concertgebouw: intense, yet mellow and intimate. And Bruno Walter was clearly inspired that evening - as was the orchestra. Gorgeous!

Interestingly the booklet indicates that in both works Walter used Mengelberg's scores and followed his notations. Which is of course an excellent idea for the Mahler, but perhaps not such a good idea for Brahms...

Q

[vandermolen]

My favourite recordings by Bruno Walter are:

Bruckner Symphony 9

Mahler Symphony 5 and Symphony 9

Samuel Barber Symphony 1

[MichaelRabin]

Walter's Sym 4 & 6 are simply very lovely. 6 is probably one of the top versions to set aside from Bohm/VPO. How are the others like?

[Lilas Pastia]

The fifth is warm and glowing, but tired sounding in the finale. A less than triumphant achevement, I'd say. The first movement is without repeat (I don't mind), and boasts that special Sony Columbia Symphony sound that was so satisfying: lots of bass, excellent dynamic range and plenty of air around the orchestra. Strings sound a bit fuzzy, though. Still, it has a lot going for it, if only as a supplement to more driven, rythmically sharp readings.

I agree with your assessment of 4 and 6. I haven't heard the others.

[prémont]

Walter's Sym 4 & 6 are simply very lovely. 6 is probably one of the top versions to set aside from Bohm/VPO. How are the others like?

I have heard all of them (the Columbia Symphony Orchestra set), and though it was many years ago, I remember them as - yes, lovely and warm and generally transparent with especially well focused winds. Well, maybe a little loose in the musical structure. I have considered a purchase, but the set is expensive and difficult to get hold of in Europe. The set is IMO far superior to the VPO / Böhm set, which´s  greatest virtue is military precision.

[Holden]

Walter's Sym 4 & 6 are simply very lovely. 6 is probably one of the top versions to set aside from Bohm/VPO. How are the others like?

The Walter LvB cycle with the Columbia SO is excellent with one caveat (more of that later). Numbers 4 & 6 are the pick of the cycle with the Pastoral being the best ever performance of this work IMO.

Now for the caveat - the 9th. It all goes very nicely until the 4th movement when the soloist enters. You immediately cringe as the bass utters 'O Freunde' and it deteriorates from there. You'd be much better off getting his earlier performance with the NYPO. It has a lot more drive and energy, far superior soloists and an excellent chorus. In fact, the 4th and 6th excepted, his cycle with the NYPO, although it's in mono, is a better set overall. However, the stereo set is also a top recommendation. So can I recommend that you get 1 - 8 in stereo and get this for the ninth

[dirkronk]

The 6th by Walter is my favorite rendition of all time, bar none. No, not even Bohm/VPO, good as that is.
The 4th doesn't surpass, say, Monteux/LSO or a few live items (including a couple of Carlos Kleiber's) but it's definitely in the top tier with them.
If you already have these, and you should, you have the cream of Walter's Beethoven symphonies IMO.

The rest of the Walter cycle never appealed to me that much. The Eroica has features I like very much but still ends up being far from my fave. I think Lilas's analysis of the 5th is quite on target. The 7th is similarly a mixed bag, and overall not a winner; to my ears, it plods when it should dance. The 8th, too, is too slow for me...give me Szell from the same period or (best of all?) Scherchen for that piece. It's been far too long since I've heard the 1st and 2nd to provide an accurate account, though I recall them as being pleasant if without a "wow" factor (which you CAN hear in the 2nd by Reiner/Pittsburgh mono or Scherchen again). But I definitely warn you away from the 9th, which I have always found most disappointing.

Remember, these are my opinions only. I'm not saying to avoid hearing Walter, but if you're planning an outlay of serious bucks, listen BEFORE committing.

Cheers,

Dirk

P.S. Just read Holden's post and his comment about the alternative 9th is, I think, quite a good one.

[MichaelRabin]

Thanks guys for your replies (and esp. Holden's help on more ways than 1). Cheers again.

[MichaelRabin]

Just rec a great Sym 5 & 6 BPO Maazel on Australian Eloquence. Though Maazel's 6 is very good, it doesn't beat the 6 on Sony (Bruno Walter's)

[ccar]

The 6th by Walter is my favorite rendition of all time, bar none. No, not even Bohm/VPO, good as that is.
The 4th doesn't surpass, say, Monteux/LSO or a few live items (including a couple of Carlos Kleiber's) but it's definitely in the top tier with them.

The rest of the Walter cycle never appealed to me that much. The Eroica has features I like very much but still ends up being far from my fave. I think Lilas's analysis of the 5th is quite on target. The 7th is similarly a mixed bag, and overall not a winner; to my ears, it plods when it should dance. The 8th, too, is too slow for me...give me Szell from the same period or (best of all?) Scherchen for that piece. It's been far too long since I've heard the 1st and 2nd to provide an accurate account, though I recall them as being pleasant if without a "wow" factor (which you CAN hear in the 2nd by Reiner/Pittsburgh mono or Scherchen again). But I definitely warn you away from the 9th, which I have always found most disappointing.

P.S. Just read Holden's post and his comment about the alternative 9th is, I think, quite a good one.

Very interesting comments and comparisons. Thank you.

I was also curious if anyone compared Walter vs Walter - this more well Known Columbia-Sony set vs the New York/Philadelphia (Music &Arts / ...).

And particularly for the others Walter's 6ths - Vienna 1936 and Philadelphia 1946 - how do you compare them with the famous Columbia reading. 

 

     

[Lilas Pastia]

I've heard a few of them (4, 7 and 8 IIRC) and, like Klemperer's, it's a strange feeling. Objectively, I consider the earlier recordings of both to be much closer to the beethovenian ethos. But then, I feel like I've just discovered my grandparents are still sexually active... Somehow, the drive and agitation don't sem to derive from the right motivations...

Now, just imagine a 1940s-1950s concertgoer listening to 1960s Walter or Klemperer discs... zzzzz....  Your parents can disappoint you as much as your children will...so, in answer to your question: don't ask the question: enjoy what there is to be enjoyed 

[ccar]

I've heard a few of them (4, 7 and 8 IIRC) and, like Klemperer's, it's a strange feeling. Objectively, I consider the earlier recordings of both to be much closer to the beethovenian ethos. But then, I feel like I've just discovered my grandparents are still sexually active... Somehow, the drive and agitation don't sem to derive from the right motivations...

[Lilas Pastia]

You got it, ccar !

When I was younger (say, the 1970s,  ), Walter and Klemperer were geriatric figures. It was all about Karajan.  The HIP crowd had not been venturing into Beethoven yet...  I was not even aware  there was a HIP movement.... - let alone a crowd...

[Holden]

Very interesting comments and comparisons. Thank you.

I was also curious if anyone compared Walter vs Walter - this more well Known Columbia-Sony set vs the New York/Philadelphia (Music &Arts / ...).

And particularly for the others Walter's 6ths - Vienna 1936 and Philadelphia 1946 - how do you compare them with the famous Columbia reading. 

 

     

Your post has prompted me to pull out the Philadelphia 6th and give it a good listen. Like Dirk, I consider the stereo 6th peerless with the Cluytens BPO coming in a close second. I'll report back after my listening session.

[val]

Walter recorded the best 4th Symphony I know, warm, dynamic, with a sublime phrasing in the Adagio. The 6th is also exceptional but there I prefer Furtwängler (VPO, 1952). Another great moment is the 5th.

But I didn't like much the 2nd, 3rd and 7th. Walter seems lost in details, not in the global movement, at least compared with Monteux (2nd), Toscanini or Reiner (3rd), Monteux (7th). 

[ccar]

Walter recorded the best 4th Symphony I know, warm, dynamic, with a sublime phrasing in the Adagio. 

Prompted to relisten and to compare some of the Beethoven symphonies by Bruno Walter, I was again seduced by the constant singing flow of his phrasing. A very different approach from Furtwangler where the changing pulse, hesitation and drama are usually much more present.
This singing character was commented by Bruno Walter himself in an old interview - and I can't resist to transcribe some of his illuminating words:



... " All music is opera" ... "All music is singing" ...

" The ideal is to make the orchestra play like singers. Singing is the fundamental of making music - and if this had been recognized by everyone there would have been fewer aberrations. To sing is the most natural way of making music, and it is as old as mankind.

This was one of the things that made the Vienna Philharmonic such a great orchestra. Every evening they sat in the pit and heard singers - very often, very good singers - and it influenced their playing. ...

... My very first experience as a boy - I accompanied singers, lieder recitals. There you learn that you have to take breath -  and breath-taking is the enemy of precision. This idea of precision in orchestral playing is very recent. It was a necessary reaction to a certain lackadaisical way of attacking tasks, and Toscanini in forwarding it did a wonderful service. But now precision has become an ideal, which is wrong.

Music must breathe. You must get used to that, and make allowances. It gives life to the singing. "

[Renfield]

I am more and more tempted to pick up the last Walter Beethoven 6th, on account of this thread.

From the other two, though I've a while to sample either, I remember finding the 1936 more persuasive. As is the case in general with Walter's recordings, for me; the earlier, the better (cf. his Brahms, as well).