Bruckner's 9th Symphony

[BorisG]

He means it with regard to Celibidache applying all sorts of slightly "kooky" theories to his music-making, or at least justifying his creative decisions with said theories. In my view, though, the actual music he made was very, very good.

The kooky theories were more of an epiphenomenon, if you will. Pun intended.

My theory is that he just wanted to stay and be adored (Good hair!) on the podium as long as possible. In concert adverts there was always a notice to bring food and water.

[M forever]

Ouch. You know, I'd actually describe Celibidache's achievements in exactly the same words you use for Wand, if admittedly with a more self-important "wrapping". Anyhow, that's going off-topic.

Not really off-topic, because both were prominent Bruckner conductors. I don't see how one could describe both in the same words though as they are pretty much diametrically different musical personalities with very different developments. Whatever musical "truth" is, Wand got closer and closer to it while Celibidache drifted further and further away from it in favor of his personality show which was not just all the pseudo-philosophical blablaing he broadcasted endlessly but also the extremely showy way he celebrated his sound concept and slow tempo thing - which was not the result of a long and continuous musical development as with some other conductors who tended towards slower tempi as they got older (e.g., Giulini, Klemperer) but something he came up with at some point because he desperately needed something which would set him apart from other conductors and give him the attention he had craved all his life, but never quite gotten. Celibidache was an extremely gifted musician and very competent conductor but he was also his own worst enemy and his music making, especially in his late phase, was never about the music, it was all about himself and how he wanted to be seen - that is about as "un-Zen" as it gets.
He had a very special sense for sound and really knew how to develop the sound of an orchestra - the Muenchner Philharmoniker sounded astonishingly good under him, although unfortunately, most recordings don't really reflect well how and just how good that sounded, so if you haven't heard it live, you can't really understand that at all. But other conductors achieved similarly refined results without throwing all the other parameters of the music overboard and making a lot of words and a big show about everything they did. Ironically, Karajan was also very interested in Zen but never really talked much about it, but apart from his own personality show, his music making and the way he worked towards just letting the music happen in the moment were actually much more Zen than what Celibidache did.
Interestingly, the sound of the orchestras they conducted was also very similar, except that Karajan aimed for a much bigger dynamic range. But the actual sound and tone production esthetic were fairly similar in their approach - not surprisingly because both were heavily influenced by Furtwängler.

[Haffner]

Everyone forgive my tangential post now, but I must admit that, after having been completely floored by the Symphony no.8 half of my Karajan/VPO DVD yesterday, I'm gearing up to spin the 9th this evening. Am very very excited.

[MISHUGINA]

I haven't listen to Giulini VPO but his recording with Concertgebouw is my top pick. The tempi for the first movement is astonishingly slow, yet miraculously it never falls apart and the Scherzo is quite apocalyptic. Harnoncourt with VPO is also a fine recording.

[eyeresist]

I doubt what you are encountering there is actually noise reduction in the sense I was talking about - it is probably just dynamic compression introduced by the broadcast medium (and possibly other distortions).
... But I also doubt it is that much "more expressive" than his later performances as Wand was a highly expressive conductor in his later years, too, as I had the priviledge of witnessing many times in the 80s and 90s in live concerts

Well, I've heard this recording and you haven't, so you'll have to take my word that it IS heavily noise-reduced. Unbalanced frequency levels, strange smoothed-over sound esp. in tuttis, and the characteristic "spangling" sound.

As for expressiveness, of his late period I only know his 5 and 9 with the NDR, and 4 and 9 with Berlin. In contrast with these, the early performance has much more tempo manipulation, frequent rubato, and general feeling of energetic enthusiasm (IIRC). I can't think of a better word than "expressive" to describe this approach.

[M forever]

Well, I've heard this recording and you haven't, so you'll have to take my word that it IS heavily noise-reduced. Unbalanced frequency levels, strange smoothed-over sound esp. in tuttis, and the characteristic "spangling" sound.

Dunno if I can take your word for it since I don't know if you even know what noise reduction is. That doesn't sound like any noise reduction technology that I know. Can you post a clip of that which illustrates these elements you described?

As for expressiveness, of his late period I only know his 5 and 9 with the NDR, and 4 and 9 with Berlin. In contrast with these, the early performance has much more tempo manipulation, frequent rubato, and general feeling of energetic enthusiasm (IIRC). I can't think of a better word than "expressive" to describe this approach.

"Expressive" is too general a word for this comparison. It is just a different sort of expressivity.

[eyeresist]

Dunno if I can take your word for it since I don't know if you even know what noise reduction is. That doesn't sound like any noise reduction technology that I know. Can you post a clip of that which illustrates these elements you described?

Do YOU know what "noise reduction" is? From years of experience processing audio files in CoolEdit, I flatter myself I have some slight inkling.
I don't have any facility for loading a clip online, so basically you'll have to take my word or spend some of your hard-earned.

"Expressive" is too general a word for this comparison. It is just a different sort of expressivity.

Can you suggest a better word than "expressive"?

[M forever]

Do YOU know what "noise reduction" is? From years of experience processing audio files in CoolEdit, I flatter myself I have some slight inkling.
I don't have any facility for loading a clip online, so basically you'll have to take my word or spend some of your hard-earned.

Dunno, after "years of experience" "processing audio files" on the computer, you should have figured out how to edit and upload clips. That is very easy. So I don't think you know what you are doing. That's like saying "I have many years of experience as a cook but I don't know how to boil an egg". So I can't take your word for it sorry.
And yes, I do know "what noise reduction is". I am a professional audio and cinema engineer working for one of the (some say *the*, but that's not for me to judge) best companies in the US (some say *in the world*, but that's not for me to judge) in our special area (which is cinema, film festival and studio projects as well as customized sound systems for stadiums and other special venues). I just installed and aligned $300.000+ worth of digital cinema and professional broadcasting equipment for the Tribeca Film Festival in NYC -not as impressive an achievement as clicking around a little in "Cool Edit", I know, I know, but I think I can say I might know one or two things about the whole subject, too. But thanks for asking.

[Renfield]

Not really off-topic, because both were prominent Bruckner conductors. I don't see how one could describe both in the same words though as they are pretty much diametrically different musical personalities with very different developments. Whatever musical "truth" is, Wand got closer and closer to it while Celibidache drifted further and further away from it in favor of his personality show which was not just all the pseudo-philosophical blablaing he broadcasted endlessly but also the extremely showy way he celebrated his sound concept and slow tempo thing - which was not the result of a long and continuous musical development as with some other conductors who tended towards slower tempi as they got older (e.g., Giulini, Klemperer) but something he came up with at some point because he desperately needed something which would set him apart from other conductors and give him the attention he had craved all his life, but never quite gotten. Celibidache was an extremely gifted musician and very competent conductor but he was also his own worst enemy and his music making, especially in his late phase, was never about the music, it was all about himself and how he wanted to be seen - that is about as "un-Zen" as it gets.

(Late answer, I know)

Absolutely, I agree that Celibidache's "justification" of his interpretative choices was suspect. What I meant to say above, and still stand with, is that they were not unnecessarily due to a sudden change of approach, but something like early vs. late Bernstein.

Of course, I did acknowledge what you said about him adopting the slowness to cover for having nothing else to add, and that is potentially an interesting point.

But you say it yourself: he could refine the sound of an orchestra along with the best of them. Would it be too far-fetched to suppose he came up with the slow speeds to "show it off", and the metaphysics to try and make sense while doing so?

And also, more crucially, isn't that "late style" - gradually-adopted or otherwise - still an evolution of his earlier style, albeit along the "wrong" way as per your judgement?

I'm no musician as you know, and perhaps that's why I enjoy Celibidache's odd approach, for what it is; and I also like Wand.

But my point was about how they're similar in taking something and constantly developing it: Wand his "truth", Celibidache is "vision".

[eyeresist]

Dunno, after "years of experience" "processing audio files" on the computer, you should have figured out how to edit and upload clips.

The one does not follow logically from the other. Anyway, as I said, I don't have the facilities for such stuff.

And yes, I do know "what noise reduction is". I am a professional audio and cinema engineer working for one of the (some say *the*, but that's not for me to judge) best companies in the US (some say *in the world*, but that's not for me to judge) in our special area (which is cinema, film festival and studio projects as well as customized sound systems for stadiums and other special venues). I just installed and aligned $300.000+ worth of digital cinema and professional broadcasting equipment for the Tribeca Film Festival in NYC -not as impressive an achievement as clicking around a little in "Cool Edit", I know, I know, but I think I can say I might know one or two things about the whole subject, too. But thanks for asking.

Not sure what installing theatre equipment has to do with noise reduction.

OK, I'll describe the basics of noise reduction with the software I used (haven't done it for a couple of years so may be slightly rusty).
We have the audio file open, and we look at the parts where no sound is (supposed to be) playing. If there is background noise in the file, we will see it in these "silent" parts, using a spectrographic view. We select and sample this area. We can use this sample as a profile to reduce background noise over the entire file. It's a balancing act, however, because noise reduction leaves audio artifacts (the "spangling" I refered to). Ideally, neither the background noise nor the noise reduction artifacts will be audible in the final product, but engineers may have to choose one or the other, in which case they should prefer hiss etc to the alternative.
Beyond this "blunt instrument" approach, there are various kinds of notch filters and shaped filters, with which specific frequency areas can be adjusted. This can be employed over the whole file, or used to shape the sound of specific areas, e.g. reducing the boom of a drum sound. An example of noticable notch filtering is the radio recording of Barbirolli conducting Young Person's Guide to the Orchestra, as release on BBC Legends. From the strange sound of this recording I surmise there was a continuous electronic tone through the recording, which was dealt with by a notch filter. However, the filter was not used selectively, so there are audio artifacts in that narrow frequency range from the beginning to the end of the recording (a high, scrambling sound). Presumably the audio restorer's options were reduced by the narrow frequency range of the original recording.
Regarding Wand's early Bruckner 8, it sounds to me like a noise reduction profile was applied to the entire recording without discrimination, by someone without much experience in audio restoration. Hence the previously mentioned unnatural sound and artifacts. I haven't examined the wave file, so maybe I am wrong, but that's what it sounds like to me.