Top 5 Karajan Recordings

[head-case]

Beethoven 9 Symphonien (1962)
Strauss Thus Spoke Zarathustra
Haydn The Creation
Mahler 6th and 9th Symphonies

He recorded Zarathustra three times (that I know of), the Creation three times (that I know of), and Mahler 9 twice.

[Renfield]

You are still assuming I think the CD is well-recorded, which I am not. However, I personally compare compact disc audio quality in a continuum from that of the earliest orchestral recording in my collection (late 1920's), to the present day.

Me too. But that recording also fares extremely badly when compared in the context of other roughly contemporary recordings of this or other roughly similar orchestral literature. It's just really bad by any standard. [...] There are a lot of better recordings, definitely sonically and also musically. Karajan was a great Strauss conductor who was very aware of the "idiomatic" style of playing this music, as many of his very good Strauss recordings show. He also brought his very own type of and feeling for sound to the music. Strauss shouldn't be played like one big gooey sound sauce, but like complex chamber music with a lot of freedom and long musical lines. There is also a lot of fine inner detail and very nuanced textures - which Karajan brought out admirably in his performances and also in many of his recordings. Unfortunately that is not represented in this recording though, and that is why I dislike it so much because it is neither good Strauss in general nor good Karajan Strauss in particular. What was particularly impressive about Karajan's Strauss was that as much substance, weight and richness of sound it had, it was extremly finetuned and amazingly transparent. But in this recording, it is either a massive blaring block of sound (in louder passages) or a distant haze with very little fine detail definition in the softer passages. A real pity, especially considering how good that really was live, but also when compared just to other recordings with other interpreters.

To begin with, a large part of your above view is based in strictly subjective criteria, yet your rejection of this recording has a rather objective sound to it. This is inconsistent, and bad argumentation, if I even need say that. How Strauss should sound, only Strauss could have known.

But the main issue here is as follows:

You lack the live listening experience to make such a comparison. It is pretty obvious that you don't even understand what I am actually talking about.

Actually, I offer the view that it is you who still does not understand my own point. I choose my words carefully, and reading them at least marginally as carefully often helps. Let me briefly elaborate...

Just because a recording sounds "historical" from a technical point of view, that doesn't mean that it can't be an effective recording in the way the available technical means were used to transport the musical content. Which is something that Karajan Alpensinfonie impressively demonstrates. They could have done so much better given what was available technically at the time. But they didn't. There is not more detail in this recording than in Böhm's 1956 mono recording. It may be in stereo and both the frequency range and dynamic may be much bigger, but when these parameters are used in such a bad way, that doesn't really matter much anymore anyway.

You are arguing, here and in a previous quote, above, that a recording should be compared within the context of only the group (or set) of its contemporary recordings, and then somehow also across the historical continuum, group-by-group.

I am arguing that I, personally, me, compare recordings across a historical continuum, period. In other words, I do not care if piece X was recorded in 1950, 1990, or 1930, when comparing it against other recordings. And the reason is that I do not consider the recording and the recording's aural presentation one and the same.

Now, I could elaborate that point, but I think we would end up with the following question:

"Is a recording only the sound you listen to, or is it a representation of a real event?"

And you know what's funny? I don't think it's either, but this is not the topic of this thread. So respectfully, I ask that we leave it at that. I do not question your erudition, nor your intelligence; but do consider whether some of us might listen to recordings for different reasons than yourself.


One more thing:

"If you play a live recording with sound as good as that of a live performance, and entirely faithful to the performance it was made to represent "on disc", would it be the same as the live performance itself?"

My answer here is "no". I've been repeating I consider live performances and recordings as distinct as the Mona Lisa from the woman in the picture: different entities, logical objects, entirely. I can't, and won't compare them, because there is nothing to compare. That is what I mean by "apples and oranges", even if they both are fruit (i.e. music).



So to sum up:

I hold that this Karajan recording, i.e. the "average" of the reading, the performance itself, the quality of the sound and the texture of the sound in this Karajan recording, satisfies me more than any other recording of this piece that I have heard.

If I were to pinpoint the reasons I like it, I would likely choose "reading", "performance", and overall aural texture, because I happen to enjoy the mystique it creates, in this specific disc. However, I am not claiming it is "as intended" for the piece - merely that I happen to like it, much like someone might like a "not as intended" imperfection in a work of art. Objectivity has no place in this, and the assumption that one lacks it because they might offer subjective criteria is ill-thought of at best, in my view.

Finally, live performances of the work and other such factors do not have a place in this discussion at all, given how you are questioning the validity of my opinion as expressed under the basis that "live" and "recording" are not compatible. If you disagree with my opinion's basis, argue against that.

Likewise for what should ideally have been done with it, which would be like saying Bruckner should have lived to finish the 9th symphony; he didn't, end of story.


P.S. (Irrelevant) head-case, there's at least one more Karajan "Zarathustra" from a live broadcast, that I'm aware of - pedantry, I know, but since you kept a tally...

[BorisG]

The DG web site does have a page says that "Deutsche Grammophon was the first to enter the market, when Herbert von Karajan recorded Richard Strauss's 'Eine Alpensinfonie' with the Berlin Philharmonic in 1981 - the first classical work to find its way on to compact disc."

http://www.deutschegrammophon.com/about/aboutdgg4.htms?PAGE=page4

It seems to me this claim is marketing hype.  How could they have "entered the market" by making a recording in 1981 when the first CDs were manufactured in August 1982 (before there were any players available to the public) and when DG had been making digital recordings for a year before the Alpine was recorded? The catalog numbers imply that if the Alpine was issued first, it was among at least 38 other releases. 

1982. CD pressing started in August, and CD Player sales, in October (priced at over 1,000 pounds sterling). About 150 CD titles, mostly classical, were available.

Several online sources seem to confirm that Abba's The Victors was the first CD pressed, and Karajan's "Alpine" the first classical recording pressed and released. It's generally thought that this honor went to Karajan for his strong advocacy of Compact Disc, and being that DG was a Polygram company, as were Philips and Decca.

For LPs, Denon in 1972 had the first commercial digital recording. Several others followed throughout the late 1970's, including Decca, EMI, Chandos. I do not know if Karajan's "Alpine" was on LP before CD.

My first CD player was a 3rd generation Philips, but I cannot remember the exact year (maybe 1985) or price (maybe $400). At the time, I was heavily into LPs and I was thrilled over the LP close-outs and their low prices.

By 1986 and 1987, CD selection and pricing became more attractive. Then through 1988 and 1989 was what's referred to as the golden CD sales era, because many were duplicating by buying what they had on LP.

Hard to believe 20 years have shot by. I still love CDs.

[M forever]

It's generally thought that this honor went to Karajan for his strong advocacy of Compact Disc, and being that DG was a Polygram company, as were Philips and Decca.

Were they all Polygram already at that time?

Some interesting info about Denon's 1972 recording I found googling the subject: http://sul2.stanford.edu/byform/mailing-lists/arsclist/2007/11/msg00152.html

[BorisG]

Were they all Polygram already at that time?

Some interesting info about Denon's 1972 recording I found googling the subject: http://sul2.stanford.edu/byform/mailing-lists/arsclist/2007/11/msg00152.html

Polygram (Philips essentially) became fully operational with DG in 1977, and bought Decca in 1979.

I think Denon seriously looked at the possibility of 1970 being the digital starting point, but for whatever reasons they have stayed with the 1972 date in their "official" literature.

http://www.denon.co.uk/site/frames_main.php?main=extr&MID=4&ver=

[head-case]

You're just rehashing what's already on this thread.  My point is that I don't know what it significance there is in claiming that the Alpine was "the first pressed" when they did production runs of dozens of polygram classical recordings before the first batch was released to the public. 

1982. CD pressing started in August, and CD Player sales, in October (priced at over 1,000 pounds sterling). About 150 CD titles, mostly classical, were available.

Several online sources seem to confirm that Abba's The Victors was the first CD pressed, and Karajan's "Alpine" the first classical recording pressed and released. It's generally thought that this honor went to Karajan for his strong advocacy of Compact Disc, and being that DG was a Polygram company, as were Philips and Decca.

For LPs, Denon in 1972 had the first commercial digital recording. Several others followed throughout the late 1970's, including Decca, EMI, Chandos. I do not know if Karajan's "Alpine" was on LP before CD.

My first CD player was a 3rd generation Philips, but I cannot remember the exact year (maybe 1985) or price (maybe $400). At the time, I was heavily into LPs and I was thrilled over the LP close-outs and their low prices.

By 1986 and 1987, CD selection and pricing became more attractive. Then through 1988 and 1989 was what's referred to as the golden CD sales era, because many were duplicating by buying what they had on LP.

Hard to believe 20 years have shot by. I still love CDs.

[BorisG]

You're just rehashing what's already on this thread.  My point is that I don't know what it significance there is in claiming that the Alpine was "the first pressed" when they did production runs of dozens of polygram classical recordings before the first batch was released to the public. 

The answer was included with the "rehash". Honorary.

[DarkAngel]

1)VPO/DG - Bruckner 7th (perhaps the finest Bruckner recording available by anyone IMO, HVK's final testament)



2)VPO/DG - Bruckner 8th (deeper spiritual insights than previous two recordings)
3)BPO/DG Galleria - Bruckner 9th (1966 version almost matches the great Giulini/VPO version)
4)VPO/Andante  - Bruckner 9th (1978 live version of great intensity, part of great 4CD Bruckner 7,8,9 Andante box set)
5)BPO/DG - Mahler 9th (live version)
6)BPO/DG - Beethoven 9th (1977 version, great cast and searing conclusion of work)

I think Karajan's lasting legacy will be his Bruckner work especially if we can get good remaster of his 1970s DG set to fully reveal all thier potential.

[M forever]

I think it is unlikely that there will ever be remasterings of his Bruckner recordings on DG, but fortunately, there are the EMI 4 and 7 which sound better and more "authentic" than the DG versions. Not that DG couldn't capture the sound of the BP under HvK "realitically" if they wanted to, instead of fiddling with the knobs ad nauseam to make the sound more "brilliant". The DG Bruckner 5 is a very good example for how well they could record the BP, and it is also musically very good so I would include that in a list of "top" recommendations although I wouldn't want to restrict myself to just 5 choices.

[BorisG]

1)VPO/DG - Bruckner 7th (perhaps the finest Bruckner recording available by anyone IMO, HVK's final testament))
*
*
*
2)VPO/DG - Bruckner 8th (deeper spiritual insights than previous two recordings)
3)BPO/DG Galleria - Bruckner 9th (1966 version almost matches the great Giulini/VPO version)
4)VPO/Andante  - Bruckner 9th (1978 live version of great intensity, part of great 4CD Bruckner 7,8,9 Andante box set)
5)BPO/DG - Mahler 9th (live version)
6)BPO/DG - Beethoven 9th (1977 version, great cast and searing conclusion of work)

I think Karajan's lasting legacy will be his Bruckner work especially if we can get good remaster of his 1970s DG set to fully reveal all thier potential.

#3, no contest. 1966 BPO/Karajan easily beats 1988 VPO/Giulini's glacial pace and softer dynamics.

I have not heard #4. Greater intensity than 1966? That I find hard to believe, but I will look forward to comparing.

I think his Bruckner legacy already is.

[DarkAngel]

#3, no contest. 1966 BPO/Karajan easily beats 1988 VPO/Giulini's glacial pace and softer dynamics.

I have not heard #4. Greater intensity than 1966? That I find hard to believe, but I will look forward to comparing.

I think his Bruckner legacy already is.

Boris
You must get the Andante set, Berkshire records still has some copies for sale at closeout price, it is essential!
Includes Hardbound digibook with 100 pages of photos and info, content:

Symphonies 7 {cond. Bohm. Rec.1976}, 8 {cond. Furtwangler. Rec.1954} & 9 {cond. Karajan. Rec.1978}. (All w.Vienna Philharmonic)

I know it is almost unthinkable but HVK surpasses the 1966 version in intensity with the 1978 VPO live, towering climaxes will take take your breath away, will make you rethink what HVK is capable of and makes me wish there were more live recordings like this available.

[head-case]

Remaindered at BRO and it's still 30 bucks?  No thanks.  What I don't understand is how andante is still in business.

Boris
You must get the Andante set, Berkshire records still has some copies for sale at closeout price, it is essential!
Includes Hardbound digibook with 100 pages of photos and info, content:

Symphonies 7 {cond. Bohm. Rec.1976}, 8 {cond. Furtwangler. Rec.1954} & 9 {cond. Karajan. Rec.1978}. (All w.Vienna Philharmonic)

I know it is almost unthinkable but HVK surpasses the 1966 version in intensity with the 1978 VPO live, towering climaxes will take take your breath away, will make you rethink what HVK is capable of and makes me wish there were more live recordings like this available.

[M forever]

I think I have the 1978 version of the 9th as a film on DVD (which also includes a performance of the Te Deum). I am pretty sure it is the same performance, I have compared them at some point but don't remember exactly what I found, although I seem to remember they shared a number of features which point to them being the exact same recording (such as one of the horns losing pitch on the very last, long held note) but the DVD has slightly better sound.

[head-case]

I think I have the 1978 version of the 9th as a film on DVD (which also includes a performance of the Te Deum). I am pretty sure it is the same performance, I have compared them at some point but don't remember exactly what I found, although I seem to remember they shared a number of features which point to them being the exact same recording (such as one of the horns losing pitch on the very last, long held note) but the DVD has slightly better sound.

That's this one?



I wasn't aware that it has been released in the US yet. 

[DarkAngel]

I think I have the 1978 version of the 9th as a film on DVD (which also includes a performance of the Te Deum). I am pretty sure it is the same performance, I have compared them at some point but don't remember exactly what I found, although I seem to remember they shared a number of features which point to them being the exact same recording (such as one of the horns losing pitch on the very last, long held note) but the DVD has slightly better sound.

More info for VPO/Andante 9th from booklet:

Recorded 5/8/78, Nowak edition, source of tapes Austrian Radio ORF

1)23:04
2)10:23
3)24:26

Total 57:55

[M forever]

The one I have is actually a Chinese edition I bought on ebay, maybe 2 years or so ago.

[BorisG]

The one I have is actually a Chinese edition I bought on ebay, maybe 2 years or so ago.

Probably a pirate. An online Bruckner discography lists VHS, Laserdisc, and Japan DVD for previous video releases of the 1978 9.

This is the first international DVD release (Feb. 4 in Europe). It also includes the 1979 St. Florian 8.

[head-case]

Probably a pirate. An online Bruckner discography lists VHS, Laserdisc, and Japan DVD for previous video releases of the 1978 9.

This is the first international DVD release (Feb. 4 in Europe). It also includes the 1979 St. Florian 8.

Do you derive some peculiar satisfaction from posting exactly the same thing that I have just posted?

[Danny]

Impossible to stop at five when the big haired guy gave us so much!   

[BorisG]

Do you derive some peculiar satisfaction from posting exactly the same thing that I have just posted?