Haydn's Haus

[Mandryka]

I am soon going to be faced with the difficult task of choosing between Dorati and Fischer for a complete set of Haydn symphonies.   My main interest is for the middle period symphonies  (between the Sturm & Drang and the Paris series), since Kuijken, Harnoncourt, Szell and Bernstein cover nos 82-104 perfectly.     I have Dorati on vinyl, which means that I have not heard them for years.     I hear good reviews for Fischer.     It's boils down to a choice between "safety first" with Dorati (ie something that I know is good),  or exploring a different interpretation with Fischer.

Any advice?

If you want storm and stress then the choice is, IMO, clear. Pinnock every time.

I'm not a great fan of Dorati. In the fast movements especially he doesn't cut the mustard for me.

[Mandryka]

Not really. A lot of his symphonies are pretty damn inconsistent.

You may well be right Josquin.

A while ago there was a lot of fuss made about Symphonies 6, 7 and 8.

And someone convinced me that the most "magical" recording ever was this one: the Prague Chamber Orchestra with Bernhard Klee

So like a lamb to the slaughter I bought it -- at tremendous expense.

But what's the big deal? I can see the music is colourful, nice, soothing. And I can see the performance is great: beautiful string sound and very committed and intense.

But great music. No way!

Or am I missing something?

[Herman]

When a composer writes a 108 symphonies I would not call him "pretty damn inconsistent" if his first, say, ten symphonies aren't as good as those from, say, nr 40 onwards.

That still leaves us with more than fifty symphonies to slap around.

[DavidW]

You may well be right Josquin.

A while ago there was a lot of fuss made about Symphonies 6, 7 and 8.

And someone convinced me that the most "magical" recording ever was this one: the Prague Chamber Orchestra with Bernhard Klee

So like a lamb to the slaughter I bought it -- at tremendous expense.

But what's the big deal? I can see the music is colourful, nice, soothing. And I can see the performance is great: beautiful string sound and very committed and intense.

But great music. No way!

Or am I missing something?

Well I think you should have gone with a cheap recording of those symphonies first to see if you really loved them.  It doesn't make sense to become an obsessive collector over works you never heard before!

[Coopmv]

I am soon going to be faced with the difficult task of choosing between Dorati and Fischer for a complete set of Haydn symphonies.   My main interest is for the middle period symphonies  (between the Sturm & Drang and the Paris series), since Kuijken, Harnoncourt, Szell and Bernstein cover nos 82-104 perfectly.     I have Dorati on vinyl, which means that I have not heard them for years.     I hear good reviews for Fischer.     It's boils down to a choice between "safety first" with Dorati (ie something that I know is good),  or exploring a different interpretation with Fischer.

Any advice?

I think Fischer's recordings may have better SQ.  I know for sure I do not have any Haydn symphonies by Dorati on CD but do not recall offhand if I have any on LP.

[alkan]

If you want storm and stress then the choice is, IMO, clear. Pinnock every time.

I'm not a great fan of Dorati. In the fast movements especially he doesn't cut the mustard for me.

Yes, one day I will finally get Pinnock for the S&D, but I currently have Solomons and I really like this version.

What is wrong with Dorati in the fast movements ??     Is it the interpretation or the orchestra (or both?).    I'd be interested in hearing more details here ....   thanks

[Mandryka]

Yes, one day I will finally get Pinnock for the S&D, but I currently have Solomons and I really like this version.

What is wrong with Dorati in the fast movements ??     Is it the interpretation or the orchestra (or both?).    I'd be interested in hearing more details here ....   thanks

I just find that he's a bit unexciting compared with say, Szell or Harnoncourt. Not bad -- just I think that you can do better. His fast movements don't make me want to dance like theirs do.

I own quite a lot of the Dorati but I rarely play it. It doesn't pain ever  pain me, but personally  I get more pleasure from Harnoncourt, Fey, Pinnock, Szell, Jochum Mackeras, Rattle, Furtwangler, Sanderling (great #82), Kujken . . .

With all these big sets it's the same thing. They are rarely the best for everything. You need to compare them on a symphony by symphony basis.

I've never put the work in for the Haydn symphonies.

Maybe there are symphonies in the Dorati which are superlatively excellent -- does anyone have any suggestions?

[Mandryka]

You may well be right Josquin.

A while ago there was a lot of fuss made about Symphonies 6, 7 and 8.

And someone convinced me that the most "magical" recording ever was this one: the Prague Chamber Orchestra with Bernhard Klee

So like a lamb to the slaughter I bought it -- at tremendous expense.

But what's the big deal? I can see the music is colourful, nice, soothing. And I can see the performance is great: beautiful string sound and very committed and intense.

But great music. No way!

Or am I missing something?

I just listened to this recording again and it sounded absolutely bloody marvelous -- not just the performance but also the music.

I must have been in a grumpy mood yesterday and I regret making that post.

I would delete it -- except there have been replies.

If you know what's good for you, put me on ignore.

[Josquin des Prez]

You may well be right Josquin.

A while ago there was a lot of fuss made about Symphonies 6, 7 and 8.

And someone convinced me that the most "magical" recording ever was this one: the Prague Chamber Orchestra with Bernhard Klee

So like a lamb to the slaughter I bought it -- at tremendous expense.

But what's the big deal? I can see the music is colourful, nice, soothing. And I can see the performance is great: beautiful string sound and very committed and intense.

But great music. No way!

Or am I missing something?

The deal with those three symphonies is that they are the first Haydn wrote that show a modicum of character. They are the most common choice among those who are curious to investigate the young composer but don't want to bother buying a complete set. We need to remember that Haydn wrote mostly for the entertainment of his patrons, and many of the early symphonies were written on a weekly schedule, to be performed once then forgotten (this is not the case with the cantatas of Bach, which were written under the same conditions, but then, Bach is considerably greater then Haydn). Unless you are obsessed with the composer, there's really no reason to not simply start with the Storm and Stress symphonies.

BTW, Pinnock also recorded those three symphonies. Since you liked him in the Storm and Stress (which are indeed very good), you might also try him again here.

[Herman]

We need to remember that Haydn wrote mostly for the entertainment of his patrons, and many of the early symphonies were written on a weekly schedule, to be performed once then forgotten (this is not the case with the cantatas of Bach, which were written under the same conditions, but then, Bach is a considerably greater then Haydn).

Pardon me but this doesn't seem to add up. What's the part we "need to remember"?

[Josquin des Prez]

I just listened to this recording again and it sounded absolutely bloody marvelous -- not just the performance but also the music.

I must have been in a grumpy mood yesterday and I regret making that post.

I would delete it -- except there have been replies.

If you know what's good for you, put me on ignore.

Ho shoot, you are right. How foolish of you to presume you could cast an objective judgment upon a work of art. Who are you to impute early Haydn isn't as great as everything else he has written? Did you forget perceptions are subject and prone to change, that the existence of objective standards is a myth? You have already been scheduled for re-education, move along citizen. 

[Valentino]

Op 50 - 6 quartets. My personal favorites.

But who do I buy? I have Mosaïques in opp. 20, 33, 64, 76 and 77+103, but since they haven't done op. 50...

[Bulldog]

But who do I buy? I have Mosaïques in opp. 20, 33, 64, 76 and 77+103, but since they haven't done op. 50...

My first choice is the Tatrai on Hungaroton; second is the Nomos on CPO.

[Valentino]

Thanks. Can you describe their virtues, Bulldog?

[SonicMan46]

But who do I buy? I have Mosaïques in opp. 20, 33, 64, 76 and 77+103, but since they haven't done op. 50...

Well, I'm w/ Don - I've the Nomos Quartett in the Op. 50 works; 2 CDs @ a great price! 

[Bulldog]

Thanks. Can you describe their virtues, Bulldog?

The Tatrai are somewhat romantic and lush (a relative thing); Nomos are very clean, detailed and even pristine.

[Gurn Blanston]

The Tatrai are somewhat romantic and lush (a relative thing); Nomos are very clean, detailed and even pristine.

Yes, the Nomos' are a strong recommend from me. Op 50 is my favorite Haydn 6 pack, and this performance of it is very good. Not quite as enthralling as the Tokyo, but a hell of a lot easier to get!

[DavidW]

I like Quators Festetics a lot. But I haven't heard Quators Mosaiques yet...

Seriously?  I've heard them all, didn't I share them with you?

[DavidW]

The Tatrai are somewhat romantic and lush (a relative thing); Nomos are very clean, detailed and even pristine.

Yup that's why I prefer Nomos, and also like the Angeles Q, and Kodaly as well.  I like a clean, detached performance, none of that wubba wubba as Karl would say.

[Gurn Blanston]

Seriously?  I've heard them all, didn't I share them with you?

No...




----------------
Listening to:
Gottfried von der Goltz - Musikalisches Opfer, 'Musical Offering'/11: Canon a 4