Shostakovich Symphonies, Cycles & Otherwise

[amw]

I have Haitink in the 11th. I just turn the volume way up and let the neighbors bear the full brunt of the 2nd and 4th movements. I mean, it's the 11th. A glorious, guiltfree piece of cheesy Soviet agitprop/film music turned gleefully on its head. Not exactly The Art of Fugue here. What else are you going to do with it?

[Karl Henning]

Went to concert featuring Symphony 4 in London last night (Petrenko, European Youth Orchestra). Very fine performance and great to hear it live. Am not surprised, in view of the manic and doom-laden resonances, why Shostakovich withdrew the work in 1936!

Isn't that a yet greater piece live in the space?!

[Madiel]

Most audio equipment has this magical little thing called a 'volume control'. I find myself adjusting it quite frequently. Not least because I've done enough neuroscience to know that the ear constantly adjusts its perception of what the volume actually is.

[vandermolen]

Isn't that a yet greater piece live in the space?!

Also heard Berio's 'Sinfonia' - not so keen on that.

[snyprrr]

Most audio equipment has this magical little thing called a 'volume control'. I find myself adjusting it quite frequently. Not least because I've done enough neuroscience to know that the ear constantly adjusts its perception of what the volume actually is.

Uhh... yea... but... my ear does it AUTOMATICALLY just like I would like my RECORDING to do- put the SET volume in the media so my poor ears can take a BREAK!! aye aye aye, stop acting like the scientist here, this is serious business!!

I too find myself adjusting frequently, until I find this magical little thing called the "sweet spot"... tap tap tap...  ... and I set it and forget it. If I can't hear it from there, IT'S THE RECORDING'S FAULT!! Volume adjusting IS NOT the jub of the Pleasure Seeker, it is the job on the Engineer!!

so there! 0:)

I share your pain - it's a real problem in all the 'modern' recordings of the 11th that I've heard, going back to De Priest/Helsinki, which is my favourite 11th - that must have been almost the last LP I bought, and even on vinyl the dynamic range was ridiculous.  The ratio of v.quiet music to v.loud music in this symphony is such that modern high-dynamic recordings are just impossible.  Thank goodness for remote controls.
Stokowski I heard on AM radio (and taped it) it must have been a repeat of his premiere perfomance, broadcast around 1960 - a thrilling listen - one way and another my tape must have had a dynamic range of about 5dB  I wish I still had that!

I think most 11 hunters have been through this exasperating dilemma,... we should start a Meeting! But seriously, everyone who is enamoured of this process always likes to start off SYMPHONIES quietly. I call it WILLFULLNESS, pure and simple!!

Choir positioned optimally. Soloist could be a smidgen more forward but nothing to fret about.

ok, I'm gonna pull it

[snyprrr]

Symphony No. 10 Op.93

Karajan '83 BPO


Shipway RPO

A.Davis LPO

Ashkenazy RPO

Litton/Virgin LPO


Is there a clarinettist alive who can match Karajan's? If one were to rely only on this, Karajan would probably go on for infinity, for I haven't found one who 'ghosts' into the first movement quite like the Berliner. And then in the zippy coda to the finale, this player sounds like no other; all others sound like mere mortals.

But, let's take some other considerations into play. Karajan's sound in the original CD is classic DG 'airless box' which is really artificial compared to these modern times we live in; however, once the ear adjusts, Karajan's performance steams along, only marred by the 'Volume Knob Syndrome' which requires superhuman attention and focus if one is to hear the quieter passages without 'Remote Dynamics Levelling'!

So, how does the roster compare? Fairly easily, it turns out. Now, Karajan's levels aren't the hottest at the opening, and, frankly, his is a recording one needs to turn up some (and, I really wish we could get some input as to whether the 'Originals' re-issue has any Miracle Remastering, in which case all of my criticisms would be null and void). Litton has the lowest levels, sounding as if the mic was set up in the back of an empty auditorium. Ashkenazy, to my surprise, is almost weaker than Litton, and seems to actually be the hardest to hear in a normal scenario. Shipway's 'live' recording actually has some decent levels, and Andrew Davis is afforded the best of all, so that one really really hears every note from the opening on.

Comparisons of the innocuous opening of the third movement 'Allegretto' yielded no real interpretive insights, but only, again, highlighted the various dynamic levels of each recording, with Ashkenazy at the bottom with an annoyingly low volume level (comparatively; interpretively he's still got some clout). This is also where Karajan is somewhat difficult to hear; only Davis, again, made listening not-a-chore.

For now, let's just leave it with the 'Allegro'. Karajan's boxy sound is the highlight of his opening, though he certainly corners the market in incisiveness. Litton sounds like he's making a furious romp in the next building... down the street, and, shockingly, Ashkenazy's recording is not much (if any) better, really disappointing in its impact. I just couldn't believe anyone would record this music from such a distance, or with such levels- it needs to be in-your-face, and even Karajan doesn't really make me fear for my life here.

Shipway alleviates the misery by having a nice, biting attack from the outset, with decent 'live' levels- which makes one wonder even more about the reasoning behind the distance in the other two. And then, again, Davis is afforded what I would simply call "normal" levels. I mean, what's going on here that everyone wants to be 'nice' with DSCH10? Davis's sound gives one some sorely needed impact, as if there was percussion from the outset- I mean, even though Karajan has 'bite' here, his boxy sound doesn't really allow for any bloom (and, surely, the Berliners are too polite!??), so, only Davis is given the sound needed to project this music. I will say, though, that Davis takes the 'Allegro' juuust a little slower than everyone else, and this effect was noted as I went through each one- it's not a bad effect, just jarring when everyone else seems to be a few seconds of one another- still, it works just fine, and, given the impact of the sound, his comes off quite well as a "gruff" version, whereas many others seem a more "regimented" approach?

So, I will continue to compare here, but, Davis is out and ahead by quite a margin. I suggest you track down this 1974 recording- I think the reason it's not getting the press is because it's down at Page14 of the Amazon Discography! Mine was a bit cheaper from Amazon.uk, but it's still not the most available disc ever.- definitely worth the search!

Andrew Davis/London Philharmonic (EMI- Classics-for-Pleasure) 1974-5

I listened to Ashkenazy more thoroughly, and WOW!, this is one of 'those' recordings, and yes, it kicks some serious ass in the climaxes. Surely this Ashkenazy 10th is the most scintillating recording, though, yes, it does get quiet and loud and back and forth. If your in a peaceful environment, set yer volume accordingly- but the climaxes, huge as they are, aren't of the speaker busting variety- it's a great engineering feat from Decca!

[snyprrr]

Symphony No.13




Kondrashin MPO (various;1963?)"girl hiding face"cover?
Ormandy (-)
Muti (Memories;1970)





Rozhdesventsky (various;1985)'speaking'
                                                                                                                                                                                        Kamu (Chandos;1987)

                                                                                                   Previn (EMI-AAD;1980)
Haitink (Decca;1984)             

                                                                                                                                                                                     Rostropovitch (Teldec;1989)   
                                                                                                                                                                                   Masur (Teldec;1994) Lieferkus
                                                                                                                                                                                       Solti (Decca) Aleksashkin
Inbal (Denon)                                                                      M.Shostakovitch (Supraphon;1995)
                                                                                                                                                                                       Jarvi (DG;1996) Lieferkus
                                                                                                                                                                                       Polyansky (Chandos;1999)

                                                                                                                                                                                       Shallon (Koch;1994)               
                                                                                                 Slovak (Naxos;1994)
                                                                                              Sondeckis (SONY;1996)


Sinaisky (BBCProms-'live';2000) Lieferkus

Jansons (EMI;2006) Aleksashkin
Temirkanov (RCA;2007) Aleksashkin
Barshai (Brilliant;2008) Aleksashkin
Fedosseyev (Relief-'live';2006) Aleksashkin 'live'

                                                                                           Caetani (Arts;2007)SACD
                                                                                           Kofman (MDG;2005)SACD

                                                                                                                                                                               Schwarz (Avie;2003)
                                                                                              Wigglesworth (BIS;2006)
                                                                                                                                                                         Ashkenazy (Decca;2007)

[Madiel]

LOL. The idea that there is one 'sweet spot' on your audio equipment that is going to be right for all recordings is just fanciful. For starters I automatically change mine every time I switch from pop to classical or vice versa.

You can't expect an engineer on one recording to know what recording level has been used for every other disc in your collection, especially not when they might have been made several decades apart.

[snyprrr]

LOL. The idea that there is one 'sweet spot' on your audio equipment that is going to be right for all recordings is just fanciful. For starters I automatically change mine every time I switch from pop to classical or vice versa.

You can't expect an engineer on one recording to know what recording level has been used for every other disc in your collection, especially not when they might have been made several decades apart.

No, I meant set it for each media once- of course you have to change volume between records. Each record has its OWN sweet spot that one should be able to set and forget... "should". (or, any recording engineered by a loving engineer- I don't expect the non-committal to make good recordings)

I mean, are you a FAN of having to change volume in the middle of a piece?? All these recordings of the 11th where you can't barely hear the awesome opening? I mean, aren't they as artificial as an engineer riding the fader? Just put me in the 3rd row- set it and forget it. I don't want to be the percussionist, and I don't want to be the usher at the back of the hall (or the ticket agent out front).

"I want what I want and I want it now."

[kishnevi]

But suppose the conductor intended for you to barely hear the opening?

[snyprrr]

But suppose the conductor intended for you to barely hear the opening?

then he's being WILLFUL

LOL. The idea that there is one 'sweet spot' on your audio equipment that is going to be right for all recordings is just fanciful. For starters I automatically change mine every time I switch from pop to classical or vice versa.

You can't expect an engineer on one recording to know what recording level has been used for every other disc in your collection, especially not when they might have been made several decades apart.

We're mis-communicating(wtf spellcheck??)

"What Every Good Engineer Knows"

SURELY Engineers are the type who DO know what other Engineers are doing. I mean, just look at the DDD boom- and yes, EACH COMPANY HAD THEIR OWN ENGINEERING STYLE (Chandos, for example,... BIS),


gaaaaah


Of course you have to turn up a BIS record, whereas you might have to turn down a Mercury Living Presence. And, yes, if you play one after the other you're going to have to fiddle. Obviously I'm not making a UnicornLand Fantasy Statement... anyhow...

WHAT I'VE NOTICED is that a well recorded recording has a sweet spot, and, different styles of great recordings TEND to have a sweet spot around the same place... it's Science... I don't know why there's an argument?

This one 'live' record here has NO sweet spot, it's so badly recorded. Some records I turn up to 11 and still it sounds like it's in the other room.



Haven't you noticed how on some Audiophile recordings the DEMAND that you go to the quietest part, set the volume, then go to the loudest part, adjust the volume, check a third spot, final adjustments,... and THEN the LET you enjoy the music.

Whereas some other Engineer took care of all that FOR YOU (thank you genius Engineer guy!) and produced a 'set it and forget it' recording ....


I grow weary of this interminably fascinating subject...


Some recordings I have to turn up,... and they "bloom"... others I turn up, and they still suck.





Lately, (out of a 1-10 scale) I've been setting volume for Classical at 5.0-5.2... Pop music gets set at 3.8-4.2... crappy Classical recordings I can turn up all the way and they sound no different than they did at 5.0.





(40 minutes here I will never get back- oh, how you goad me!!)

[snyprrr]

Did you know that Aleksashkin actually has FIVE 13ths? The Fedosseyev is 'live'- but, well, what are the probabilities that it can be either good or bad as a recording?

Symphony 13

I pulled Barshai and Jansons. If one of them works, we end the quest; if not, it's on to Inbal and Caetani. (Inbal's bass sounded quite impressive I thought)

[snyprrr]

Silly me, I didn't see that the Barshai listing had musical samples. Wow! that's some pretty nice and raw and live sound there! And the 13th promises...

[Karl Henning]

Did you know that Aleksashkin actually has FIVE 13ths?

I did not, but that's terrific: when you learn a big piece like that, it's great to get some mileage out of it.

[Madiel]

My last post was so provocative it generated 2 replies. 

[snyprrr]

My last post was so provocative it generated 2 replies. 

"May the 4s beat with hew!"

[snyprrr]

That's great. I'll buy a copy right now so you don't have to. We really appreciate you just buying cds you don't want just to inform us of opportunities- thanks for all you do around here. You know, I'd like to send you a copy of that Fedosseyev, what's your address?

there. fixed it for ya!

[Karl Henning]

That's how the Karl doesn't really write the posts attributed to him rumors get started, you know . . . .

[snyprrr]

That's how the Karl doesn't really write the posts attributed to him rumors get started, you know . . . .

Karl, will you make me a cup of cocoa and tell me a story?

[Karl Henning]

Well, Ormandy and Phila are very good in the Op.93. But it's not The Recording I should recommend, if asked.