Rimsky-Korsakov recommendations?

[DieNacht]

Chalabala´s recording is now on a first-CD issue, a twofer for one cd´s price or an mp3 at Amazon.de

Timings are:
10.09  11.32  11.33  12:20




EDIT: This is the early Chalabala-recording from 1953 in mono. He also made a stereo version. I´m beginning to wonder whether my LP version which clearly states "stereo" by the same forces is in fact this 1953 recording "restored". The sound is very spacious and clear, yet not very differentiated between the loudspeakers, so I guess that is the case.

[carlos]

95% dedicated to Sherhazade. Seem that as almost always happen, you don't know or don't care about chamber music. NRK string quartet and sextet, his piano and winds quintet and his huge piano trio don't mean nothing to you? And what about the movements he wrote for the collective string quartet works in honor to their protector Mitrofan Belaiev?

[Elgarian]

95% dedicated to Sherhazade. Seem that as almost always happen, you don't know or don't care about chamber music. NRK string quartet and sextet, his piano and winds quintet and his huge piano trio don't mean nothing to you? And what about the movements he wrote for the collective string quartet works in honor to their protector Mitrofan Belaiev?

The focus on Scheherazade has arisen because I've been (with the help of my friends here) engaging in an exploration of the various recordings of that particular work. For the explanation, see here (#56):
http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,4892.msg600643.html#msg600643

I'd add that I find Scheherazade almost inexhaustible, so I don't see these extended discussions of its recorded interpretations as in any way reprehensible. Rather, the music itself invites and rewards such attention.

I've dipped a toe into the operas but find them difficult to get into, much to my regret. But I'd surely appreciate some comment on the other works by R-K that I'm not familiar with (such as the chamber works you mention), and warmly invite you to say more about them.

[TheGSMoeller]

.[asin]B0007INY4E[/asin]


Best I've heard of both pieces.

[Elgarian]

.[asin]B0007INY4E[/asin]


Best I've heard of both pieces.

Fascinating! Of all the Scheherazades I've tried, the only one I couldn't get on with at all was Stokowski's!

Which goes to show, as I've said before - how lucky we are to have such a wide diversity of interpretations available that there's something to suit everyone.

[TheGSMoeller]

Fascinating! Of all the Scheherazades I've tried, the only one I couldn't get on with at all was Stokowski's!

Which goes to show, as I've said before - how lucky we are to have such a wide diversity of interpretations available that there's something to suit everyone.

This is very true, Elgarian. Which is why I also try to never label a recording as "definitive" because I don't think that exists. Different strokes for different folks. 

[Elgarian]

This is very true, Elgarian. Which is why I also try to never label a recording as "definitive" because I don't think that exists. Different strokes for different folks. 

Emphatically yes. I rejoice in your choice!

[Coopmv]

Chalabala´s recording is now on a first-CD issue, a twofer for one cd´s price or an mp3 at Amazon.de

Timings are:
10.09  11.32  11.33  12:20

This sounds like an interesting recording.  Czech Philharmonic is probably the best orchestra in central/eastern Europe ...

[Elgarian]

This sounds like an interesting recording.  Czech Philharmonic is probably the best orchestra in central/eastern Europe ...

I'm tempted myself, though the recording was (I think) made in the mid-1950s, and the samples I've heard are mono; and so I think I might end up just listening to it once, admiring it, then leaving it on the shelf.

[DieNacht]

Concerning Chalabala, I like it a lot. Many narrative details and fluent tempo.

EDIT: You are right. Checking further info, it is recorded from 1953.  I´m beginning to wonder whether my LP version which clearly states "stereo" by the same forces is in fact a "restored" 1953 recording. The sound is very spacious and clear, yet not very differentiated between the loudspeakers, so I guess that is the case.

[carlos]

@Elgarian: I'm and have been a serious listener and records collector for more than 55 years, but I'm not a musician, don't play any instrument nor can I read a sheet. So, can't made a musical analysis nor a technical comment about NRK chamber. All I can say is that I love those works, and IMO, the big piano trio is one of the best in Russian in the 19Th.century, with Tchaikovsky's and Taneyev's.
BTW, anybody knows Scheherazade by Nicolai Golovanoff and Moscow Bolshoi orch.(1947)?. The orchestra was third class, and the sound is really bad (in 1947, recording technique in Russian was crap), but the concertino was David Oistrakh, and the violin solos are just marvellous.

[Coopmv]

Concerning Chalabala, I like it a lot. Many narrative details and fluent tempo.

EDIT: You are right. Checking further info, it is recorded from 1953.  I´m beginning to wonder whether my LP version which clearly states "stereo" by the same forces is in fact a "restored" 1953 recording. The sound is very spacious and clear, yet not very differentiated between the loudspeakers, so I guess that is the case.

Unfortunately, I checked on Amazon under Vaclav Neumann, who was the conductor of the Czech Philharmonic for many years but cannot find any recording of works by Rimsky-Korsakov ...

[Elgarian]

@Elgarian: I'm and have been a serious listener and records collector for more than 55 years, but I'm not a musician, don't play any instrument nor can I read a sheet. So, can't made a musical analysis nor a technical comment about NRK chamber. All I can say is that I love those works, and IMO, the big piano trio is one of the best in Russian in the 19Th.century, with Tchaikovsky's and Taneyev's.

That's all OK. Heck, anyone around here will tell you that I'm a complete musical ignoramus in the technical sense. I just listen and write about what I hear, and hope it makes sense to someone else, somewhere.

Can you recommend particular recordings of the chamber pieces you love?

[carlos]

OK:
Quartet op12+quartet B-La-F (in honor to Belaief). This is a collective in 4 movements by RK,Lyadov, Borodin and Glazunov. The Lyric quartet.
Sextet for strings.Ensemble Classique Koln.
Quintet piano and winds. Eva Knardahl and Gothemburg wind quintet.
Piano trio: Oistrakh trio.
He wrote string quartet single movements for "Fridays" and "Birthday", also collective works.

[eyeresist]

BTW, anybody knows Scheherazade by Nicolai Golovanoff and Moscow Bolshoi orch.(1947)?. The orchestra was third class, and the sound is really bad (in 1947, recording technique in Russian was crap), but the concertino was David Oistrakh, and the violin solos are just marvellous.

That conductor's better known as Golovanov, a bit of a cult figure. Apparently his Scriabin is amazing, but in horrible sound.

[ASIN]B004PGNN40[/ASIN]

[Karl Henning]

Horrible sound of itself is amazing, in a way....

[Lethevich]

Golovanov's Liszt is something else too.

[Peter Power Pop]

Well, well, well. A couple of days ago Muti's Scheherazade dropped onto the doormat:



I'd ordered this, to be honest, with only mild interest. It cost me £2.99, post free. I had no great expectations. I put it into the player, picked up my book, and began to read, not anticipating that my reading would be much disturbed. In any case, I've listened to far too many Scheherazades in recent weeks. I must be suffering to some extent from Rimsky fatigue - right?

I lasted less than 5 minutes before putting the book down. I'm having difficulty pinpointing what it is about this performance that so captivates me, but captivate me it most certainly does. The orchestral sound is wonderfully and warmly spacious. The very sound of it makes me think of balmy Arabian evenings. Solo instruments seem to sing with exquisite clarity against this background like birdsong in the sultan's garden. But over and through all this is a sense of romantic lyricism and dramatic responsiveness that I find I can accept without question and allow it to carry me along. As I write that, I realise that I'm in danger of making it seem a bit wishy-washy, but oh no: the second movement, for example, is full of tension, strained to just the right degree, and then released with perfect timing. The climactic ending of the 2nd movement is simply superb. It makes me want to punch the air, turn up the volume, open the window, and frighten the neighbours with it.

Three quid, for this stunning recording? Could be the best bargain basement value-for-money Scheherazade on the market. This joins my list of keepers and gets glued in for good. It could even challenge Beecham for my desert island Scheherazade choice (never thought that would be possible). And if I were able to conduct an orchestra (in my dreams!), then this is the kind of Scheherazade interpretation that I would be wanting to present. Oh yes.

Courtesy of your enthusiasm, Elgarian, I looked for, found, and have now heard Muti's Scheherazade – and I love it. I'm with you: I'd also put it up there with Beecham's and Reiner's (and Silvestri's) Scheherazades.

Muti's Scheherazade is now available on Spotify:

https://play.spotify.com/album/5TrYvDXbKpGJquTj7eAJCX

or

https://play.spotify.com/album/0riQAkw6CLit4AHlTwtnOd

By the way, I've been reading and enjoying your survey of Scheherazades, and I've come to the conclusion that your taste in Scheherazade is incredibly similar to mine. I agree with pretty much everything you've said about the recordings you've heard.

[Elgarian]

By the way, I've been reading and enjoying your survey of Scheherazades, and I've come to the conclusion that your taste in Scheherazade is incredibly similar to mine. I agree with pretty much everything you've said about the recordings you've heard.

Isn't that smashing? I mean, we definitely don't need to agree with others when we're discussing these things (and actually I find I benefit a lot from reading viewpoints very different from my own), but it is ever so nice when we do, isn't it? There's a sort of virtual handshake in it. A nod of understanding made possible by the music. Cheers.

[Peter Power Pop]

I was surprised to discover that Litton's Scheherazade was one of the slower ones, and so I listened to it again today (third time). I find I'm quite lost for words. I really love this interpretation, though I can't say why. It doesn't sparkle in the way that Beecham does; it doesn't fly wildly like Svetlanov; it doesn't have the perfection of Kondrashin, or the smooth Cinemascope glossiness of Ormandy. It just suits me, almost perfectly. It's Romantic in all the ways I like; it has real weight in the climaxes. The wind whistles with just the right force, and the waves gather and crash mightily when they need to. The Prince and Princess are meltingly beautiful without being insipid. But I really haven't a clue just what it is that makes this feel so satisfying, compared with others.

Twenty years ago Gramophone damned it with faint praise ('exciting without being electrifying'), and I can see how one might say that - but it's not the whole truth. At least, not for me. It has a warmth; I get an impression of great affection for the music; I feel that affection myself. It breaks no new ground; it doesn't make me rethink any aspect of Scheherazade. It just fits me like a glove.

I'd like to think that at the end of this Arabian Odyssey, I'll be able to sort my Scheherazade discs into the 'indispensables' and the, well, 'not indispensables'. I've a fair way to go yet, but so far, Beecham, Svetlanov (with his Russian band), and now Litton have made it into the ranks of definite keepers.

I've just bought the Litton Scheherazade. It's part of a 2-CD set from Virgin Classics called Russian Music ($10 on eBay – bargain!):



I'll be buying the Beecham next.

Thanks for these recommendations, young Elgarian.