Shostakovich Symphonies, Cycles & Otherwise

Started by karlhenning, April 25, 2007, 12:02:09 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

karlhenning

I've been doing a parallel survey-listen of the two boxes, Maksim Dmitriyevich (second run-through, as I had picked this one up some time ago) and Kirill Petrovich this week . . . still at it, so I am yet preparing comments.  At this point I have listened to the First through Tenth, and I think it fair to offer the 'preview' remark that, while I certainly enjoy and think very well of the Kondrashin set, I prefer the Shostakovich fils box.

— similarly, Jeffrey, the first symphony I had heard (a couple of years before Supraphon reissued as a box set) was the Fourth, which immediately became my best-regarded recording of that wonderful symphony.

(Dave, I haven't heard the entire Barshai set . . . I think I've heard the First through Sixth, and Thirteenth . . . maybe another or two.  Some aspects of the recording tech is better with Barshai than Kondrashin, but in general I found Kondrashin and his band musically preferable.)

ezodisy

Quote from: karlhenning on January 10, 2009, 03:02:31 PM
Maksim Dmitriyevich Kirill Petrovich

you might as well write in cyrillic if you're going to speak formally

Quotewhile I certainly enjoy and think very well of the Kondrashin set, I prefer the Shostakovich fils box.

get outta town. How is this possible?

I haven't heard the, um, Maks(?)im Dmitriyevich set, but it doesn't have many if any fans over at rmcr, hence the question. Sanderling certainly has some fans over there though

karlhenning

Quote from: ezodisy on January 10, 2009, 03:07:39 PM
you might as well write in cyrillic if you're going to speak formally

The Roman letters are more generally legible in this forum.

Quote from: sidozeget outta town. How is this possible?

The music-making and the sound, chiefly.

ezodisy

Quote from: karlhenning on January 10, 2009, 03:17:09 PM
The Roman letters are more generally legible in this forum.

yes but we shall not engage in half-measures, shall we?

Quote
The music-making and the sound, chiefly.

well the sound bit is a little unfair as they seem to have been recordered at different times and in different circumstances. The music-making is something else. I suppose the younger Shostakovich brings out all the horror and pain and humour of these symphonies quite well then?

karlhenning

Quote from: ezodisy on January 10, 2009, 03:19:07 PM
well the sound bit is a little unfair as they seem to have been recordered at different times and in different circumstances.

I don't see where "unfair" enters into it.  You asked how it is possible to prefer one to the other;  this is as objective a measure as one could wish for in such a comparison.  It is one element, but it is an entirely legitimate one.

Quote from: sidozeThe music-making is something else. I suppose the younger Shostakovich brings out all the horror and pain and humour of these symphonies quite well then?

Not merely quite well, but very well, indeed. Is there some reason he should not?

ezodisy

Quote from: karlhenning on January 10, 2009, 03:26:50 PM
I don't see where "unfair" enters into it.  You asked how it is possible to prefer one to the other;  this is as objective a measure as one could wish for in such a comparison.  It is one element, but it is an entirely legitimate one.

yes you do have a point. Though if you're going to use sound as part of a preference it might be better not to listen to any historical recordings, of course, otherwise you'll be for ever disappointed. Or at least nothing by early Melodiya. But that is your choice, naturally.

Quote
Not merely quite well, but very well, indeed. Is there some reason he should not?

no, no particular reason. But when you observe discussions on RMCR for years and years, you would expect to see his name mentioned a little more often, as it hardly was at all. After all he was the son of the composer, not exactly someone obscure.

Drasko did you ever hear the Maxim recording?

vandermolen

Quote from: karlhenning on January 10, 2009, 03:02:31 PM
I've been doing a parallel survey-listen of the two boxes, Maksim Dmitriyevich (second run-through, as I had picked this one up some time ago) and Kirill Petrovich this week . . . still at it, so I am yet preparing comments.  At this point I have listened to the First through Tenth, and I think it fair to offer the 'preview' remark that, while I certainly enjoy and think very well of the Kondrashin set, I prefer the Shostakovich fils box.

— similarly, Jeffrey, the first symphony I had heard (a couple of years before Supraphon reissued as a box set) was the Fourth, which immediately became my best-regarded recording of that wonderful symphony.

(Dave, I haven't heard the entire Barshai set . . . I think I've heard the First through Sixth, and Thirteenth . . . maybe another or two.  Some aspects of the recording tech is better with Barshai than Kondrashin, but in general I found Kondrashin and his band musically preferable.)

Thanks Karl - that's very helpful and reassuring. I'll post my views when I've heard more of the Supraphon box.
"Courage is going from failure to failure without losing enthusiasm" (Churchill).

'The test of a work of art is, in the end, our affection for it, not our ability to explain why it is good' (Stanley Kubrick).

karlhenning

Glad to be of some service, Jeffrey.

The Eleventh is a wonderful heart-in-throat slowburn in the Supraphon set.  So much of the first movement is glacially still & hushed (this stuff gives me chills), I fear there must be some noise in the Melodiya (really a drag on the Largo from the Fifth, for instance) . . . but soft!  Mayhap the document will surprise on the upside  8)

Herman

I haven't listened to DSCH symphonies in a long time, but my memories of Mzim Shostokocich' recordings are not too good. Not very driven, not very musical either. Slow. I'm sure Maxim knows his father's music better than anyone, but I didn't get the feeling he can make an orchestra do whatever he wants. The funny thing is I'm reminded of Robert Craft's Stravinsky, another non-conductor (IMO) whom Karl admires while I don't.

Dancing Divertimentian

Quote from: Herman on January 10, 2009, 06:01:54 PM
I haven't listened to DSCH symphonies in a long time, but my memories of Mzim Shostokocich' recordings are not too good. Not very driven, not very musical either. Slow. I'm sure Maxim knows his father's music better than anyone, but I didn't get the feeling he can make an orchestra do whatever he wants.

That's not very illuminating considering the memories you're drawing on are from "a long time" ago.

QuoteThe funny thing is I'm reminded of Robert Craft's Stravinsky, another non-conductor (IMO) whom Karl admires while I don't.

This one-liner serves what purpose?


Veit Bach-a baker who found his greatest pleasure in a little cittern which he took with him even into the mill and played while the grinding was going on. In this way he had a chance to have the rhythm drilled into him. And this was the beginning of a musical inclination in his descendants. JS Bach

Dancing Divertimentian

Quote from: ezodisy on January 10, 2009, 03:32:42 PM
no, no particular reason. But when you observe discussions on RMCR for years and years, you would expect to see his name mentioned a little more often, as it hardly was at all.

When did RMCR become the barometer for all things great?

Veit Bach-a baker who found his greatest pleasure in a little cittern which he took with him even into the mill and played while the grinding was going on. In this way he had a chance to have the rhythm drilled into him. And this was the beginning of a musical inclination in his descendants. JS Bach

Herman

Quote from: donwyn on January 10, 2009, 06:22:05 PM
That's not very illuminating considering the memories you're drawing on are from "a long time" ago.

This one-liner serves what purpose?

Thanks for your comments. Do you do this a lot?

Dancing Divertimentian

Veit Bach-a baker who found his greatest pleasure in a little cittern which he took with him even into the mill and played while the grinding was going on. In this way he had a chance to have the rhythm drilled into him. And this was the beginning of a musical inclination in his descendants. JS Bach

Dancing Divertimentian

#633
I've been contributing to this subject since at least one or two boards ago. This thread included.

As to right now, my queries to you are straight-up.

I question the reliability of criticism that isn't grounded in something more tangible than "old memories".

And the Craft one-liner needs clarification. How does THIS add to the Maxim Shostakovich discussion?

Veit Bach-a baker who found his greatest pleasure in a little cittern which he took with him even into the mill and played while the grinding was going on. In this way he had a chance to have the rhythm drilled into him. And this was the beginning of a musical inclination in his descendants. JS Bach

George

Quote from: karlhenning on January 10, 2009, 03:02:31 PM
I've been doing a parallel survey-listen of the two boxes, Maksim Dmitriyevich (second run-through, as I had picked this one up some time ago) and Kirill Petrovich this week . . . still at it, so I am yet preparing comments.  At this point I have listened to the First through Tenth, and I think it fair to offer the 'preview' remark that, while I certainly enjoy and think very well of the Kondrashin set, I prefer the Shostakovich fils box.

I hope to soon get back to finishing my Kondrashin box for the first time. I doubt I will keep up with your pace, but it would be nice to compare notes along the way.

Herman

#635
Quote from: donwyn on January 10, 2009, 06:48:18 PM
I've been contributing to this subject since at least one or two boards ago. This thread included.

As to right now, my queries to you are straight-up.

I question the reliability of criticism that isn't grounded in something more tangible than "old memories".

And the Craft one-liner needs clarification. How does THIS add to the Maxim Shostakovich discussion?

I wouldn't be surprised if many comments and opinions on these boards are based on listening we did a couple years ago. If ever single opinion was based on last-minute in-depth listening noone would be able to post and hold a job at the same time. Actually I think some of this "I just heard this and it's fantastic" stuff is not very valuable either.

Apart from that I would 'question the reliability' of any kind of criticism anyway. People have different ears and expectations. There have only been a few times I purchased a record after reading a rave here and not wondering what the fuss was all about. However, as much as I question other posters' enthusiasms I happen to think it doesn't work very well to challenge people the way you do. I don't think that's the idea of GMG. The idea would probably be: "Maxim didn't do it for you? Too bad. To me he's fine, and I'll tell you why."

Re: Craft. I'm not entirely sure how Karl listens to these symphonies. Perhaps perusing the scores meanwhile? Obviously I'm not saying there's anything wrong with that. it's just that I have a feeling listening to these IMO less than visionary conductors with the score in hand offers a kind of satsfacttion not available to listeners without a score. However this is just speculation.

This is all useless talk, though: if Karl likes Maxim S better than Kondrashin, I'm happy for him.

And if you find my contributions unilluminating, or not as illuminating as your own, just skip 'em. There's probably something in the GMG guidelines to that effect.

The new erato

Quote from: ezodisy on January 10, 2009, 03:07:39 PM

I haven't heard the, um, Maks(?)im Dmitriyevich set, but it doesn't have many if any fans over at rmcr, hence the question. Sanderling certainly has some fans over there though
According to a recent Gramophone survey; Maxim's 15th is the best there is.

ezodisy

#637
Quote from: donwyn on January 10, 2009, 06:40:36 PM
When did RMCR become the barometer for all things great?



I may have overstressed it, true, it's just that they have far more experience than we do, so much it sometimes borders on the ridiculous (some of those guys have so many LPs in their houses that they can't even get out the door). Don't intend to mention it again however, once is enough.

Quote from: erato on January 11, 2009, 01:45:16 AM
According to a recent Gramophone survey; Maxim's 15th is the best there is.

well I don't mean to say that just because the whole set is rarely mentioned it must be a dud. Was just surprised by the comment. Like Herman I haven't listened to Shostakovich in ages (aside from the 4th and 15th it's been several years). Not on the horizon again either, so I'm outta here and will stfu now. Erato do you have Gramophone's recommendations for the 4th and 8th? Cheers. But of course there's no such thing as "the best" and for the sake of the survival of their magazine they should never use that word. Just another reason why forums are so much more enjoyable than professional magazines

jlaurson

Quote from: erato on January 11, 2009, 01:45:16 AM
According to a recent Gramophone survey; Maxim's 15th is the best there is.

Are you sure they are not referring the the (slightly mythical) Melodiya recording - and not the Supraphon one?

jlaurson

Quote from: donwyn on May 17, 2007, 05:53:25 PM
How interesting!

Speaking of Bychkov, apparently he's embarking on a complete cycle for Avie. Can't confirm that but the signs seem to point to it. Should be interesting.

I have yet to sample his fourth on disc -- but in concert it was little short of awesome. The DSCH recordings I have of him (although not yet sampled in depth) are well above average. More bombastic than Barshai's cutting, chilling (not to be mistaken for the Haitink-clean-yet-sumptuous way) recordings.

So much choice, these days, when you also consider Kitajenko... (and almost not to mention Caetani and the MDG cycle from Bonn - both of which have gotten rather mixed reviews.)