Wonderful works in need of a great recording!

[DavidRoss]

On the Glass thread I lamented the dearth of recordings of his fine Violin Concerto and wished there were something more completely satisfying available.  Another fine VC in the same circumstance sprang to mind:  William Schuman's  (a couple of years ago I heard Gil Shaham play this with Tilson Thomas and the SFSO and if that performance were on record I'd buy it in a heartbeat!)  Next I found myself wishing for a good recording of Dahl's Saxophone Concerto, and then the idea for this thread was born.

Most of us, I presume, are introduced to music overwhelmingly via recordings.  (Bruce is a notable and very blessed exception--why else would an expatriate Texan stay in New York?  )  Sometimes we hear a piece in performance that we'd love to have on record not just for ourselves but also to share with others, but the few recordings available don't measure up.  I've listed 3 such pieces above and wonder whether others feel the same way about some works, and if so, whether you would care to share some of your choices with us.

No rules, no poll...no phone, no pool, no pets--just have at it if you wish, and if anyone here is a record company exec, maybe they'll take notice and fulfill our hearts' desires!

[MDL]

I might be bending the rules a bit, but I'd like a complete recording of Penderecki's first opera, The Devils of Loudun. The original recording, excellent though it was, lopped off several minutes of choral music from the very end of the piece, and Penderecki has since revised the opera, adding two scenes. I think my only hope is that Wit records it for Naxos, but the chances are pretty slim.

[BachQ]

The Requiem of Antonio Rosetti (born Anton Rössler), a work performed at Mozart's memorial in December 1791.

AFAIK, this has never been recorded. 

[Drasko]

Gavriil Popov - Symphony No.1

Massive, expresionistic, gnarly dissonant behemot of a piece in dire need of first class orchestra and  conductor. Two recordings exist so far: one with barely adequate orchestra - Moscow State Symphony/Gennady Provatorov (Olympia), out of print as well and one with barely adequate conductor LSO/Leon Botstein (Telarc).

Igor Markevitch - Icare

Brilliant ballet in thorny french neoclassical vein. Wouldn't like to deride efforts of Christopher Lyndon-Gee and his Arnhem Philharmonic but they simply aren't top flight outfit. There is supposedly excellent recording by Bernstein/New York Philharmonic but it is unfortunately tucked into big expensive box. Wouldn't mind single disc release (with same coupling - Prokofiev's 2nd Concerto with young Ashkenazy)

[Brian]

Most desperate in my view:
Kopylov: Symphony in C minor
Only one recording has been made commercially available (on ASV), and it is awful. Which stinks, because Kopylov's is one of the most wonderful of the "Russian" symphonies, right in the same vein as Borodin and Friends. A lively, lovely piece desperately in search of convincing performers.

Also in need:
Rimsky-Korsakov: Night on Mount Triglav
A thirty-minute orchestral extravaganza in need of a great performance.

Gliere: Symphony No 3 "Ilya Murometz" (or Muromets)
Johanos/Naxos: Great conducting, non-great orchestra. Downes/Chandos: non-great conducting, good orchestra. Botstein/Telarc: haven't heard it, but I don't have my hopes up. All others: cut heavily.

Dvorak: Slavonic Rhapsodies
Sejna's version is in mono, leaving the (quite good!) Naxos recording the best option.

Wieniawski: Violin Concerto No 2
There are already great recordings of this work, by Shaham and especially (but slightly cut) Heifetz, but there oughta be more. This concerto is a masterpiece, probably on the same level as Bruch's First, so why the comparative neglect?

Johann Strauss jr: Ritter Pasman Waltz
One of the greatest of all Strauss waltzes, if you can get past the meandering introduction and its playful false starts. How come the Marco Polo complete edition is the only place this gem is available?

Beethoven: Symphony No 9
Okay, so there are a LOT of great recordings of this symphony. But there are no great recordings which attempt to match the tempi which Beethoven directed for the symphony. Several witnesses of the Symphony's premiere claimed that it took only 45 minutes to play, and was marvelous. I suspect that a 45-minute Beethoven Ninth would not be particularly marvelous, but there is only one way to find out - and nobody has really tried too hard yet. We need a great recording of this symphony that tries its darnedest to match the performing style at the premiere - perhaps just for curiosity's sake.

[M forever]

Several witnesses of the Symphony's premiere claimed that it took only 45 minutes to play, and was marvelous.

Who says that?

We need a great recording of this symphony that tries its darnedest to match the performing style at the premiere

Absolute tempi don't have that much to do with performance style as such. They are just one of several important elements.

[Gurn Blanston]

Who says that?

Absolute tempi don't have that much to do with performance style as such. They are just one of several important elements.

In the book "Beethoven: Impressions by his Contemporaries" (page 195), Sonneck quotes Sir George Smart, who was visiting Beethoven in 1825. Smart was the conductor of the Philharmonic Society of London, who were the owners and dedicatees of the 9th, and he had questions to ask B about tempos and timings. He said that B played out each of the themes for him on the piano, and told him that the premiere in Vienna took "3/4 of an hour". Smart didn't believe it, and asked the others that were there who were Karl Holz, Karl Beethoven, and Ries, and they all agreed that it was 45 minutes.

So, that's where that comes from.





----------------
Listening to:
German Chamber Symphony / Saraste  Olli Mustonen - Bia 441 Op 61a Concerto in D for Piano (after Violin Concerto) 2nd mvmt - Larghetto - attacca

[M forever]

So Beethoven was completely wrong when he wrote down the metronome markings?

[Gurn Blanston]

So Beethoven was completely wrong when he wrote down the metronome markings?

Hell, I don't know. I'm only telling you where that comes from. I think 45 minutes is a bit too brisk for MY taste too. The performances I prefer hover right around 60 minutes. And thousands think THAT is too fast! But you know, 180 years is a lot of weight to overcome when it comes to what we expect to hear in a work of music.



----------------
Listening to:
German Chamber Symphony / Saraste  Olli Mustonen - Bia 441 Op 61a Concerto in D for Piano (after Violin Concerto) 3rd mvmt - Rondo

[marvinbrown]

  Sadly I am still waiting for a GREAT recording of Wagner's Tristan und Isolde on DVD! I have seen so many DVD recordings of this music drama and have always felt that they were wanting in one way or another  .

  marvin

 

[Moldyoldie]

Gliere: Symphony No 3 "Ilya Murometz" (or Muromets)
Johanos/Naxos: Great conducting, non-great orchestra. Downes/Chandos: non-great conducting, good orchestra. Botstein/Telarc: haven't heard it, but I don't have my hopes up. All others: cut heavily.

I gave the Farberman/RPO recording (Are you aware of it?) three or four listens before chucking it; I can't possibly believe it was "cut heavily" since I found it to be the most monotonous music in my classical music experience -- unless one likes nearly half-hour intervals of constant Wagnerian swells and ebbs. Sure, it could've just been the performance.  I thereafter believed there simply must be more to this work (as in "less is more") than what I heard and had been meaning to get another "more compact" performance.

(edit)
I just found this survey of recordings, probably outdated, which you might find interesting. It seems I'm not alone in my disdain for the Farberman recording.  FWIW, it is indeed of the complete symphony (93 minutes!) and has been re-released on the Regis label, available at Amazon.  You're right, Brian, a "great recording" is indeed needed.

Beethoven: Symphony No 9
Okay, so there are a LOT of great recordings of this symphony. But there are no great recordings which attempt to match the tempi which Beethoven directed for the symphony. Several witnesses of the Symphony's premiere claimed that it took only 45 minutes to play, and was marvelous. I suspect that a 45-minute Beethoven Ninth would not be particularly marvelous, but there is only one way to find out - and nobody has really tried too hard yet. We need a great recording of this symphony that tries its darnedest to match the performing style at the premiere - perhaps just for curiosity's sake.

Anything faster than Zinman/Tonhalle might make me barf ...even if just for curiosity's sake.

[mahler10th]

Brian Havergal.  So much composed, so little performed (some not at all!), and so good too.  Other than recordings of the gargantuan first symphony, the rest of his works just get tickled at here and there, if at all.  Havergal deserves much more respect, more concert time and more airplay - of that I am certain.

[Lethevich]

I don't know if it's wonderful, almost nobody has even seen the score, but there is apparently a cello concerto by Robert Simpson which I would love to hear. Sadly it won't be recorded by Hyperion, which seems to be against the idea of expanding its Simpson series - which sucks, as with just a few more recordings it could've become a Simpson edition. (I totally failed the criteria for the thread with that btw, but it bugs me a lot )

It would also be nice to hear Truscott's music played by a halfway decent orchestra.

[Brian]

I gave the Farberman/RPO recording (Are you aware of it?) three or four listens before chucking it; I can't possibly believe it was "cut heavily" since I found it to be the most monotonous music in my classical music experience -- unless one likes nearly half-hour intervals of constant Wagnerian swells and ebbs.

Oh, sorry, forgot about that one; don't think I could stand Ilya dragged out to 90+ minutes when it's already pushing the envelope at 78

[The new erato]

William Schuman's  (a couple of years ago I heard Gil Shaham play this with Tilson Thomas and the SFSO and if that performance were on record I'd buy it in a heartbeat!) 

You've heard Zukofsky and MTT on DG? A very fine record (which I have on LP somewhere I think).

[(poco) Sforzando]

I would like to see a good complete recording in the original German of Spontini's Agnes von Hohenstaufen. And a recording of Méhul's Ariodant, which some consider his masterpiece.

[(poco) Sforzando]

Beethoven: Symphony No 9
Okay, so there are a LOT of great recordings of this symphony. But there are no great recordings which attempt to match the tempi which Beethoven directed for the symphony. Several witnesses of the Symphony's premiere claimed that it took only 45 minutes to play, and was marvelous.

No matter how many witnesses said this, I have trouble believing it. Just try to imagine: the Allegro at 11 minutes*, scherzo at 9 (maybe a repeat was cut?), and the slow variations zipping along at 12. You've got 13 minutes left for the choral finale. Good luck. And we're supposed to think an orchestra and chorus in 1824 barely familiar with this music was "marvelous"? I don't know how hard B's orchestral parts are, but I doubt they're easy to master for performers who might have been doing little more than sight-reading. I have sung bass in the choral finale (it's a killer) and have played most of his piano music. The late music especially is very awkward to play. I can believe 60-65 minutes, not 45.

--
* Leaving aside the controversy about B's metronome mark for the trio of the scherzo, if the Allegro is played at B's quite fast mark of quarter = 88, the 547 bars alone would take about 12.5 minutes.

[lukeottevanger]

No matter how many witnesses said this, I have trouble believing it. Just try to imagine: the Allegro at 11 minutes*, scherzo at 9 (maybe a repeat was cut?), and the slow variations zipping along at 12. You've got 13 minutes left for the choral finale. Good luck. And we're supposed to think an orchestra and chorus in 1824 barely familiar with this music was "marvelous"? I don't know how hard B's orchestral parts are, but I doubt they're easy to master for performers who might have been doing little more than sight-reading. I have sung bass in the choral finale (it's a killer) and have played most of his piano music. The late music especially is very awkward to play. I can believe 60-65 minutes, not 45.

--
* Leaving aside the controversy about B's metronome mark for the trio of the scherzo, if the Allegro is played at B's quite fast mark of quarter = 88, the 547 bars alone would take about 12.5 minutes.

Has anyone investigated the theory that, just as pitch was lower in Beethoven's day, so their hours were longer too? 

[The new erato]

Has anyone investigated the theory that, just as pitch was lower in Beethoven's day, so their hours were longer too? 

Well, seeing people were generally smaller, their mass would have been lower, and since time passes more quickly in weaker gravitational fields, one could well see them thinking the symphony was over in 45 minutes whereas in out spacetime fram of reference it really lasted 60 mminutes!

[lukeottevanger]

There, another mystery solved. Why do people have to make such a big deal out of it all, it's so simple really...