I'm proposing a new Blind Comparison - this time of Bach's Sonatas & Partitas for solo violin.
(And for anyone wondering, the blind of Bartok's Music for String, Percussion and Celesta, which I started here on 11th October, didn't attract enough interest to be viable, so has been stopped - with thanks and apologies to those few who did want to take part. :-[ )
So here we'll have 18 recordings in 3 groups of 6 initially. Each group of 6 contains several recordings that have had favourable mention in GMG's extensive Bach S&P thread (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php?topic=4964.100) including, in each group, at least one 'golden age' recording (more than 30 years old) but mostly more recent recordings, and at least one 'joker' (not mentioned yet in the Bach S&P thread). (Remember, that it was a 'joker' that emerged on top, in the Cello Suites comparison - here (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,23936.0.html).)
The music for round 1 will be the Adagio and Fugue from Sonata No.1 in G minor - in most recorded sets these would be the first two tracks - plus optionally, for a bit of lighter relief, the Menuets and Gigue from Partita No.3 in E major. If you're time-poor by all means just use the first two tracks to make your judgement, but if you can, I'd recommend adding the two quicker, lighter, shorter, major-key movements into the mix, if only for a bit of relief from some otherwise rather serious-minded music.
The first two tracks average about 9:30 minutes, so 6x = around an hour of listening in total.
The 3rd and 4th tracks (which will be an optional separate download) add about another 6 minutes so totalling around 1h35.
For the first 2 tracks, the files are all high-bit 1st-generation mp3 - either from reputable download sources or converted from lossless/CD.
Most of the dance tracks are the same, but a few (6 out of the 18 recordings) are from lower-grade sources (ie streamed).
The downloads are ZIP files, with each containing a number of anonymised mp3 files. All files are named and tracked to sort themselves into the 'right' order.
Round 2 (which is unlikely to start before next year) will feature the Gigue and Chaconne from Partita No.2, and the Final will be Sonata No.2
If you want to take part, please reply to this thread (preferred) or PM me, and I'll reply by PM with download links to one of the 3 groups, and a few more instructions.
In the (rather unlikely) event that there's enough interest, I'll be able to add a 4th group into this round 1. I do have the materials ready - but really it would need at least 3 people listening to each of the first 3 groups, before I could consider adding a 4th.
Timing may be unfortunate (Christmas coming up) so there's no deadline, for now.
Wonderful! I am interested in joining, aukhawk! :)
Quote from: aukhawk on November 18, 2015, 04:39:18 AM
I'm proposing a new Blind Comparison - this time of Bach's Sonatas & Partitas for solo violin.
If you want to take part, please reply to this thread (preferred) or PM me, and I'll reply by PM with download links to one of the 3 groups, and a few more instructions.
Count me in.
Count me in as well please.
I am game for this. Just remember that I work in retail, and therefore the next five weeks will be a little hectic. Of course, Bach would be a good remedy for that!
Yes, please. I'll play.
I really, really hate these blind comparisons, they are complete waste of time and the source of irritation because of continuous changing one's mind while voting and lack of any sense in results.
Please count me in.
Quote from: mszczuj on November 19, 2015, 01:25:23 AM
... and lack of any sense in results.
;D
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on November 18, 2015, 07:02:15 PM
I am game for this. Just remember that I work in retail, and therefore the next five weeks will be a little hectic. Of course, Bach would be a good remedy for that!
Yes, I know the timing's bad, sorry! I don't really expect to be moving on to the next round before next year, so this first round can just take as long as it takes.
Though if it didn't seem a bit disrespectful to all concerned I'd suggest that it's possible to take a view just by listening to the
first 5 seconds of the first movement. Most performers seem to treat this opening note/chord as a real statement of intent. The range of different approaches to be heard is quite remarkable.
i'm in!
I don't know if I'll have enough time, but I'm interested.
Quote from: aukhawk on November 19, 2015, 04:31:37 AM
Though if it didn't seem a bit disrespectful to all concerned I'd suggest that it's possible to take a view just by listening to the first 5 seconds of the first movement. Most performers seem to treat this opening note/chord as a real statement of intent. The range of different approaches to be heard is quite remarkable.
That has made me interested, I'm up for it.
Quote
Timing may be unfortunate (Christmas coming up) so there's no deadline, for now.
No, actually, that is good for me, a teacher in a grade school!
Back to
Bach!
Yes, add me to the list: we can compare things
Bach to
Bach! :o ???
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51pjWz1lE9L.jpg)
;)
Quote from: Mandryka on November 19, 2015, 12:43:27 PM
That has made me interested, I'm up for it.
Try for example, the opening notes of B4, against the same for B5.
Yes please!
Well I think we've achieved critical mass. 8) Links have been sent out to 12 of you, split evenly over the 3 groups.
Shall I add a 4th group of 6 recordings, what do you think? Although it might at first sight seem like sweepings from the cutting room floor, this 4th group would include:
3 recordings that have been praised in GMG's Bach S&P thread.
3 recordings by acknowledged baroque specialists.
1 recording that has unanimous 5* reviews on Amazon.
1 recording on a label favoured by audiophiles.
They are all names that you'd expect to see in any comprehensive survey - make no mistake, there are versions here that could well make it to the final.
So what do you think - add 6 more performances into the mix, or not?
Quote from: aukhawk on November 20, 2015, 04:34:59 AM
Well I think we've achieved critical mass. 8) Links have been sent out to 12 of you, split evenly over the 3 groups.
Shall I add a 4th group of 6 recordings, what do you think? Although it might at first sight seem like sweepings from the cutting room floor, this 4th group would include:
3 recordings that have been praised in GMG's Bach S&P thread.
3 recordings by acknowledged baroque specialists.
1 recording that has unanimous 5* reviews on Amazon.
1 recording on a label favoured by audiophiles.
They are all names that you'd expect to see in any comprehensive survey - make no mistake, there are versions here that could well make it to the final.
So what do you think - add 6 more performances into the mix, or not?
I say yes! :)
Quote from: aukhawk on November 20, 2015, 04:34:59 AM
Well I think we've achieved critical mass. 8) Links have been sent out to 12 of you, split evenly over the 3 groups...
Would it upset the carefully balanced apple cart if I joined in and made it a baker's dozen? In any case, I'd be happy to participate, if there's still room. (Or I could make up a group of one. ;D)
I would like to join, but...
Conscience: You are too busy - say no.
Me: See, I am busy, but I really enjoy these things
Conscience: You can't possibly do it before the holidays
Me: It's true - time is an issue and I am really busy lately, though I have done all of them to date (the completed ones anyway)
Conscience: And look at all the time you should have used towards something else. Go on. Admit it
Me: It's true, I should have and now there is this, a chance to learn a piece I don't know well. it's for personal betterment! How can you say no to that?!?
Conscience: You're going to say yes, aren't you? Sighs...
Me: I can do it! :)
Okay, I have listened to A1 and A2: I found both dreadful, with A2 awarded a special prize for bizarre rubato. A1 to my ears was flaccid.
A3 was much better in comparison! Energetic, dramatic, and even enigmatic at times! 0:)
Quote from: jfdrex on November 20, 2015, 08:25:29 AM
Would it upset the carefully balanced apple cart if I joined in and made it a baker's dozen? In any case, I'd be happy to participate, if there's still room. (Or I could make up a group of one. ;D)
You're in. We need all the help we can get! ;)
Anyone else joining - please be sure to read the first message in this thread, which explains how it is to work.
Quote from: mc ukrneal on November 20, 2015, 08:44:24 AM
I would like to join, but...
Welcome. Please don't worry about how long - as long as the thread stays alive (ie on the top page) it will obviously take a while to get this first round done.
Quote from: Cato on November 20, 2015, 10:58:24 AM
Okay, I have listened to A1 and A2: I found both dreadful, with A2 awarded a special prize for bizarre rubato. A1 to my ears was flaccid.
A3 was much better in comparison! Energetic, dramatic, and even enigmatic at times! 0:)
A1 - oh dear. :( A2 - oh dear oh dear :o A3 - yesss! (https://yacf.co.uk/forum/Smileys/classic/thumbsup.gif)
All three of those are firm GMG favourites, from the Bach S&P thread. This is what the blind comparisons are all about!! (https://yacf.co.uk/forum/Smileys/classic/thumbsup.gif)
Please keep it coming, folks.
Here is the opening of the 1st Sonata, from an early manuscript:
(http://www.aukadia.net/pix/onenote.jpg)
Well I know very little about musical notation, and a whole lot less than that about violin playing - but it seems to me that the performer is faced with something of a conundrum.
The most obvious approach might be to play two double-stops in very rapid succession. Since the top note must be held, then obviously the two lower notes must be played first - and a later printed edition of the score seems to suggest this approach:
(http://www.aukadia.net/pix/one-note.jpg)
Very few of the violinists in the blind comparison actually go down this route - the most notable ones are A5 and D2 and, to a lesser degree, B5.
At the other extreme would be performers who arpeggiate all four notes evenly and without haste - the effect of this is rather akin to an Indian musician picking out the notes of his raga for the audience, before starting on his improvisation. It can be a very calming and lovely moment. The most notable exponent of this is A6.
However the most common approach is to arpeggiate unevenly, playing some notes faster than others, with or without overlapping them. The variations are endless but often the first three notes become little more than an ornamentation before the held high G, while a few avoid this by putting it all into the first low G, which seems hard to justify from the notation but it can sound very musical.
Fascinating - and that's just the start!
Okay, I have listened to A4, A5, and A6.
A4 tries to make the opening mysterious, but instead it comes across as languid, somewhat similar to A1. The rest of the sonata is there, but not much comes through.
A6 succeeds where A4 fails: the opening is very well played with a great sense of mystery of enigma about it, and I had great hopes that the second part would equal the intensity of the opening. Unfortunately, things were taken too slowly, and the music at times seems to fall apart as a result, needing the gravity of some speed to hold together.
A5 does well with both parts: the opening has drama rather than mystery, and the last section is never in danger of collapsing from lack of centrifugal force. ;)
So my rankings right now:
A3
A5
A6
A4
A1
A2
If it's not too late yet, I'd be happy to join!
So, the Menuet and Gigue:
A1: The opening sounds too delicate, timid, even precious. The middle part is similar, but things do improve at the end.
A2: The strangeness continues: overuse of rubato again being the main problem in the opening sections, and just a clumsy sound in general for the final part, as if the performer were holding a cello under his chin.
Thanks Cato, for your feedback and very interesting comments.
Not too late Pim, I've sent you some links in a PM. This is obviously going to be a slow process, especially with Christmas and New Year coming up, so I'm hoping we can gain a bit more momentum in January.
In the mean time, keep 'em coming folks!
Quote from: Cato on November 30, 2015, 11:11:29 AM
So, the Menuet and Gigue:
A1: The opening sounds too delicate, timid, even precious. The middle part is similar, but things do improve at the end.
A2: The strangeness continues: overuse of rubato again being the main problem in the opening sections, and just a clumsy sound in general for the final part, as if the performer were holding a cello under his chin.
A3: The Menuet is played like it actually is a menuet, and the Gigue comes across as a very merry Gigue! Joy is present throughout the performance!
A4: The Gigue outshines the opening, which I found lackluster. In contrast, in the Gigue the performer almost makes it sound like a cadenza in a concerto.
A5: A slow pace for the opening, deliberate, and uninteresting, as if the performer were practicing scales. Things improve a little in the middle, but not much. The Gigue is played competently enough, but again things sound rather careful, rather than carefree.
A6: This performance gives the Menuet a bigger sound, and at times a bit of humor. The Gigue has a slow-down-speed-up aspect which gives it a roller-coaster feel.
So, for this section, the rankings are:
A3
A6
A4
A5
A1
A2
Thanks. I'm inclined to give more weight to the Adagio and Fugue because this music is much more representative of the Sonatas & Partitas as a whole, both in terms of tempo and because of the minor key. That's why I suggest, if people really are short of listening time, they concentrate on those first two movements.
So-o-o-o - combining your rankings but leaning a bit towards the first, and reading your comments, I'd suggest you've got:
A3 - - - A6/A5 - A4 - - -A1 - A2
Which of those is the established GMG favourite??
Which is the Grand Master from yesteryear?
Which is the thinking man's crumpet?
Which is the new kid on the block?
Answers to all these questions and more - may take a while ;)
Quote from: aukhawk on December 01, 2015, 02:40:34 AM
Not too late Pim, I've sent you some links in a PM. This is obviously going to be a slow process, especially with Christmas and New Year coming up, so I'm hoping we can gain a bit more momentum in January.
In the mean time, keep 'em coming folks!
There was a problem with the attachments unfortunately, could you resend them please? Thanks!
Aargh, shouldn't do this, no time, will probably forget about it and realise two months from now that I had work to do for a blind comparison....
Please send me some links. :)
Sooooo Group C.
There are two modern-instrument performances in this group (C1 and C5). Of those two, C5 is the superior performance in many respects, and I'm sure is many people's favourite. Particularly notable is the last minute or so of the fugue. At the same time a lot of little things about it rub me the wrong way. Recessed sound, too much vibrato, certain agogic decisions (eg hesitating too much on certain notes in the Minuets) and bowings (eg occasional violent scrunches that don't sit in the right places for me). C1 actually has more vibrato, I think, but it's not as obtrusive somehow. The violin playing in C1 comes across as really physical, though, which I like a lot—one gets a real sense of how Bach's writing engages with the physicality of performance and I can almost visualise the arm, hand and finger movements the violinist is going through.
Both adagios are a bit too overdramatised and romantic, with not much of a sense of emotional engagement. The fugues are better. They take somewhat different approaches: C1 keeps us engaged from the start with a sense of architecture not reliant on a gradual build towards a climax, whereas C5 starts out as a continuation of the emotional world of the adagio (not well evoked here, so this start is somewhat noncommittal and therefore the accents C5 throws into the mix seem out of place) but gradually develops towards this incredibly intense conclusion.
It's interesting to note that both of these MI accounts play the opening chord as shown in aukhawk's second example.
Our 4 period-instrument performances are a mixed bag but for the most part have the opposite problem: really strong adagios followed by fugues that don't really hold attention. In C2 the adagio unfolds almost outside of time, like an improvisation; the fugue is disciplined, but neither exciting nor cosmic. C3 has a middle-of-the-road but perfectly paced adagio and a middle-of-the-road fugue that starts out as a more successful version of C5, but never really reaches a payoff. In the end, it is dry. C4 I'll come back to. C6 has a resonant, long-breathed adagio that seems longer than it is (it is in fact the shortest one in this group, along with C4) and an intensely propulsive fugue, even dance-like in places, which comes to a very satisfying conclusion despite lacking the drama of C5.
C4 is my favourite in this group. It's also the token eccentric. I have no idea why things always work that way for me, btw. >.> The adagio possesses the surface of a calm stream disturbed by unpredictable currents, not as sleepy as C2 or C6 (and even more improvisatory than the former) but without the overt romanticisation of the modern-instrument accounts. The fugue sounds convincingly contrapuntal to start with—not always an easy task with this particular fugue—which retains interest while the intensity gradually builds. (I believe this is the slowest fugue in the group, and about a minute and a half longer than one recording I own.) This fugue is slightly underpowered, which I imagine will be the main criticism of C4 in general, but this in no way blunts the emotional effect for me. The dance movements served to solidify it—the minuets are very danceable despite being slow (also notes inégales or whatever the german version is called) and the gigue is decent. I actually prefer the slightly faster, more propulsive gigue in C6, but C4 is equally good and full of joie de vivre.
So C4 is first and C6 not far behind. The remaining places are a little bit harder to figure out but I think I would put C1 third, C2 fourth (despite its moments of magic, it remains a bit too low-energy. A shame as I'd hoped I would rate this recording higher), C3 fifth and C5 decidedly last. I should emphasise though that I would definitely listen to all of C6, C1 and C2, and possibly the Chaconne from C3 in the hope of a deeply reverential reading. C5 is the only obvious "wrong answer"; I know it's a good performance, but it annoys me in ways that become more pronounced the more I re-listen to it.
Thankyou so much
amw, for that detailed and fascinating commentary.
Quote from: amw on December 10, 2015, 01:33:14 AM
... (I believe this is the slowest fugue in the group, and about a minute and a half longer than one recording I own.)
... though there are a few equal or slower ones in the comparison overall, including one which is over 40 seconds longer. :-X
Quote
... A shame as I'd hoped I would rate this recording higher) ...
Me too! Going into this project I'd have rated this recording among my top favourites, though in the process of compiling the groups I discovered a couple of others that were new to me, that I like even better. Though as you say - I would listen to them all ...
Quote from: amw on December 10, 2015, 01:33:14 AM
Sooooo Group C....
So C4 is first and C6 not far behind. The remaining places are a little bit harder to figure out but I think I would put C1 third, C2 fourth (despite its moments of magic, it remains a bit too low-energy. A shame as I'd hoped I would rate this recording higher), C3 fifth and C5 decidedly last. I should emphasise though that I would definitely listen to all of C6, C1 and C2, and possibly the Chaconne from C3 in the hope of a deeply reverential reading. C5 is the only obvious "wrong answer"; I know it's a good performance, but it annoys me in ways that become more pronounced the more I re-listen to it.
You have kindled a desire to hear these now! 0:) 0:) 0:)
PM(s) sent.
This is the advantage of having the responses not concealed. I know it's a little less 'pure' in terms of being a blind comparison, but I think from my point of view the pluses outweigh the minuses.
Happy listening! ;)
Quote from: aukhawk on December 18, 2015, 02:31:51 AM
PM(s) sent.
This is the advantage of having the responses not concealed. I know it's a little less 'pure' in terms of being a blind comparison, but I think from my point of view the pluses outweigh the minuses.
Happy listening! ;)
Many thanks! I will try to start listening tomorrow morning!
Here we go with D 1: the opening of the Adagio struck me as immediately dramatic, mysterious, and intriguing. After a minute or so, the performer seemed to slow down even more, and I had the impression that Bach was turning into a member der Neuen Wiener Schule! 8) In the end, the performer made things hang together.
The Fugue was somewhat too slow for my taste, as if the performer were still learning the piece and seemed uncomfortable with it. The Presto, on the other hand, gave me the impression that the violinist was more comfortable with it.
Today I unwrapped D 2 and D 3 and then D 4 as Christmas presents to myself... at 6:00 A.M. ???
D 2
The Adagio starts off well, delicate yet dramatic, and about halfway through I was feeling a great sense of emotion coming through the playing. The speed was not so "Adagio" that things fell apart, as it seems to happen sometimes in some of these performances.
The opening of the Fugue is a quite different story: it struck me as more of a Chugue. The performer seemed to struggle and at times was sawing wood instead of giving us a flight of dancing. The Fugue resembled an overloaded airplane, with a sputtering motor, slowly rumbling down the runway, barely able to take off into the clouds until the last minute or so.
In great contrast, the Presto flew into the air immediately, a high-powered rocket!
And then...because I was rather disappointed by the contradictions in D 2, I continued on to...
D 3
Incredible Adagio: not just dramatic, but tragic, a sad tale told by an ancient looking back at something pivotal, something central, and sighingly sinking down into gloom. And it was very interesting to hear the Fugue, which is probably as slow as the one in D 2: but in contrast to a struggle of technique, the performer turned the violin into a voice of many colors, presenting a microcosmic novel in a few minutes.
The Presto was a little slower than in D 1 or D 2, but again there was a greater subtlety, an impression of a somewhat breathless story being related.
And then...
D 4,
Wondering whether the next version could measure up to D 3, I hear another incredible Adagio in D 4! Slower than the others, wistful and melancholy, but again "novelistic" in that the violin has become a voice telling us a tale from long ago, just not as raw as in D 3. A filigree of long-ago memories, recalled in a lingering way, and full of might-have-beens. The Fugue again was not very fast, but gave us a story with ups and downs and knotty complications which somehow resolve themselves. If one can call D 3 the story of an old man telling about some vile twist of fate ruining his life, then D 4 is his wife relating her point of view with resignation, rather than gloom.
The Presto, similar to D 3, was a little slower, with the joy of an autumn leaf being blown in the wind.
VERY DIFFICULT to rank, especially D 3 and D 4.
D 3
D 4
D 2
D 1
Depending on mood, one could easily switch D 4 to the top. The Presto - today - gave D 3 an edge.
I'm glad you're enjoying them. Group D is a very interesting group, I think.
Group A
I would be glad to listen to five of them multiple times.
Top rank
1,3, 5
Second rank
2,4
Needs to get off the island
6
Don't know why my ears clumped the odd numbered choices together like that, but there is not really much difference in the degree to which I liked any of the five. I listen sort of holistically, so this a general impression of the performance.
A6 seemed to have intonation issues (or else it was the way in which he arpeggiated the chords), a sinus infection, and a large but empty church as recording location.
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on December 27, 2015, 01:02:54 PM
... a sinus infection ...
;D
Thanks for your rankings, Jeffrey.
A partial review for the time being because of download issues suddenly:
C 4: Adagio and Fugue
I found the opening Adagio to be fine, but not particularly "grabbing." The beginning of the Fugue similar to several others - conveys a sense of struggle, but not in the good sense, i.e. it seemed as if the performer were wrestling with the notes because of a deficit in technique. Eventually the violinist seems to pull things together and things take off.
C 5: Adagio and Fugue
A big sound, due to the venue (church? empty concert hall?) gives the fine playing even more drama, and I was reminded of the drama in the opening of the D minor Organ Toccata and Fugue. However, I found the Fugue frustrating, for there were moments when it took flight, but then there were too many moments of sloshing through mud while sawing wood.
C 6: Adagio and Fugue
This one grabbed my attention with its delicacy and subtlety in the Adagio which created an almost mystical atmosphere throughout. The light, delicate touch continues in the Fugue, with little to no impression of hacking one's way through a jungle of notes, and again an idea of a journey of uncovering mysteries comes through...at least to my ears.
No ranking, until I hear the others!
Aukhawk: I sent you a message about the download problem. 0:)
Reply sent, sorry you had problems downloading. I'm glad you like C6 - very much one of my favourites. Likewise D3 that you also liked.
By the way - maybe I missed something - you commented on D1-D4, but D5 and D6 ?? (No pressure of course!)
Happy New Year everyone. :-*
Quote from: aukhawk on January 01, 2016, 07:30:14 AM
Reply sent, sorry you had problems downloading. I'm glad you like C6 - very much one of my favourites. Likewise D3 that you also liked.
By the way - maybe I missed something - you commented on D1-D4, but D5 and D6 ?? (No pressure of course!)
Happy New Year everyone. :-*
Those (D 5 and 6) are on the list for tomorrow! 0:) And everything is working again!
Quote from: Cato on December 25, 2015, 03:39:32 AM
Today I unwrapped D 2 and D 3 and then D 4 as Christmas presents to myself... at 6:00 A.M. ???
D 2
The Adagio starts off well, delicate yet dramatic, and about halfway through I was feeling a great sense of emotion coming through the playing. The speed was not so "Adagio" that things fell apart, as it seems to happen sometimes in some of these performances.
The opening of the Fugue is a quite different story: it struck me as more of a Chugue. The performer seemed to struggle and at times was sawing wood instead of giving us a flight of dancing. The Fugue resembled an overloaded airplane, with a sputtering motor, slowly rumbling down the runway, barely able to take off into the clouds until the last minute or so.
In great contrast, the Presto flew into the air immediately, a high-powered rocket!
And then...because I was rather disappointed by the contradictions in D 2, I continued on to...
D 3
Incredible Adagio: not just dramatic, but tragic, a sad tale told by an ancient looking back at something pivotal, something central, and sighingly sinking down into gloom. And it was very interesting to hear the Fugue, which is probably as slow as the one in D 2: but in contrast to a struggle of technique, the performer turned the violin into a voice of many colors, presenting a microcosmic novel in a few minutes.
The Presto was a little slower than in D 1 or D 2, but again there was a greater subtlety, an impression of a somewhat breathless story being related.
And then...
D 4,
Wondering whether the next version could measure up to D 3, I hear another incredible Adagio in D 4! Slower than the others, wistful and melancholy, but again "novelistic" in that the violin has become a voice telling us a tale from long ago, just not as raw as in D 3. A filigree of long-ago memories, recalled in a lingering way, and full of might-have-beens. The Fugue again was not very fast, but gave us a story with ups and downs and knotty complications which somehow resolve themselves. If one can call D 3 the story of an old man telling about some vile twist of fate ruining his life, then D 4 is his wife relating her point of view with resignation, rather than gloom.
The Presto, similar to D 3, was a little slower, with the joy of an autumn leaf being blown in the wind.
VERY DIFFICULT to rank, especially D 3 and D 4.
D 3
D 4
D 2
D 1
Depending on mood, one could easily switch D 4 to the top. The Presto - today - gave D 3 an edge.
To complete the rankings, I have today heard
D 5 and
D 6.
D 5 has a rather languid
Adagio, with a speed-up-slow-down interpretation which was quasi-balletic. The
Fugue was eccentric: the speed-up-slow-down idea did not work in it. At one point the player almost stopped completely. The violin sounded occasionally harsh, wheezy, and even out-of-tune. The
Presto, however, sounded quite nice, as if a different player had taken over. ;)
D 6 seemed to have trouble with the chords at the beginning, somewhat rough and slightly out-of-tune a couple times. The interpretation itself did have a story-like feel which kept one's attention. The first half of the
Fugue was too slow for my taste, and occasionally some notes are not quite right. The final part was better, but again I found it a bit lacking. But then, as with
D 5, the performer handled the
Presto nicely.
Final rankings for the
D Group: again, very difficult:
D 5 and
D 6 are somewhat tied, like
D 3 and
D 4 at the top.
D 3
D 4
D 2
D 1
D 6
D 5
Thanks for that ranking, Cato. Yes D5 does have some tendencies towards the weird :)
For what it's worth folks, there's not a lot of point in worrying about the ranking order of the also-rans in any group - placing 4th, 5th or 6th out of 6 isn't going to make any real difference when the results are totted up.
Okay, here we go with all of Group C!
C 1: A sense of struggling to intone the notes properly distracted me throughout both sections, with the performer at times sliding into or off the notes. At other times it sounded perfunctory, and squeaky, and during the Fugue for about 5 seconds it seemed as if the performer had simply become lost. A slower performance, with occasional signs of some expression. The "dance" movements were nicely played, and at first I found the opening Menuet much too slow. On the other hand, there was perhaps a little story being told through it, as a result of the slower speed.
C 2: Another variable speed Adagio, which comes across as sleepy at times, and with chords which occasionally are just clunks. The Fugue opens very slowly, but eventually picks up speed, only to slow down later. Again, squeaks and a few "clunky" chords distracted my ears. The Menuet came across as very polite and deliberate, with an occasional hint of a smile. Then in the Gigue some modest fun came through!
C 3: The opening of the Adagio is smoothly, delicately handled, and comes across almost as languid, but tinged with melancholy. The Fugue is too slow and deliberate, but despite that the various aspects do "gel" and never fall apart. For the dancing movements, the Menuet starts off well, but then becomes a little uneven in speed and energy. The Gigue however is quite fine: one hears the expected joy from such a dance.
From earlier, but now with reviews of the "dance" movements:
C 4: Adagio and Fugue
I found the opening Adagio to be fine, but not particularly "grabbing." The beginning of the Fugue - similar to several others - conveys a sense of struggle, but not in the good sense, i.e. it seemed as if the performer were wrestling with the notes because of a deficit in technique. Eventually the violinist seems to pull things together and things take off.
The Menuet has a fine start, and one feels a "naturalness" in the playing, but then the performer seemed to lose focus for 20 seconds or so. The second section, however, was quite fine. The Gigue is nicely played, fairly fast and happy!
C 5: Adagio and Fugue
A big sound, due to the venue (church? empty concert hall?) gives the fine playing even more drama, and I was reminded of the drama in the opening of the D minor Organ Toccata and Fugue. However, I found the Fugue frustrating, for there were moments when it took flight, but then there were too many moments of sloshing through mud while sawing wood.
Absolutely dreadful Menuet: it would be impossible to dance to this mess! Squeaky, hammered chords, poor intonation at times, rubato beyond belief, as if the performer were having mini-episodes of manic depression. The Gigue, however, was fairly good.
C 6: Adagio and Fugue
This one grabbed my attention with its delicacy and subtlety in the Adagio which created an almost mystical atmosphere throughout. The light, delicate touch continues in the Fugue, with little to no impression of hacking one's way through a jungle of notes, and again an idea of a journey of uncovering mysteries comes through...at least to my ears.
The Menuet seemed a little too slow, but as with C 1, a story of some sort began to percolate upward. The Gigue had energy and the performer brought out the "hin-und-her" in the music.
Rankings? Well, last place is easy, as AMW wrote earlier! ;) C 5 wins last place with a Brown Ribbon...especially because the performer threw the Menuet into a wood-chipper! ???
In general, not as strong a group as the others. Between C 6 and C 5 I could be talked into various arrangements.
C 6
C 3
C 4
C 2
C 1
;D ;D ;D
C 5
Some time has passed, since I last listened to any substantial part of the recordings of the S&P´s I own, and I do not intend to do it now, only to put names on some of the recordings, which aukhawk has chosen for this game. So the following isn´t but short notes after listening to Group B no.1 - 6.
B1) Period instrument. Thin sounding violin tone, the playing better than the interpretation, which I find bland.
B2) Modern instrument. Nice broad phrasing in the Adagio, but the Fugue hurried and often a bit hectic.
B3) Period instrument. Beautiful relaxed and noble Adagio. Fugue rather slow and a bit pedestrian and too interventionist to my taste.
B4) Period instrument. Slow and very excentric.
B5) Modern instrument. Very extrovert. Too much fiddeling with dynamics and rubato. The interpreter makes an immature impression.
B6) Modern instrument. Beautiful, introspective Adagio. Fuge with nice balanced playing, at least compared to B1-5.
Actually I do not really like any of these interpretations, and none of them strikes me as well-known (to me).
>>>> B6 >>>>> B3 >>> B2>B4>>>>>>B5=B1.
Quote from: (: premont :) on January 09, 2016, 11:40:58 AM
Some time has passed, since I last listened to any substantial part of the recordings of the S&P´s I own, and I do not intend to do it now, only to put names on some of the recordings, which aukhawk has chosen for this game. So the following isn´t but short notes after listening to Group B no.1 - 6.
B1) Period instrument. Thin sounding violin tone, the playing better than the interpretation, which I find blend.
B2) Modern instrument. Nice broad phrasing in the Adagio, but the Fugue hurried and often a bit hectic.
B3) Period instrument. Beautiful relaxed and noble Adagio. Fugue rather slow and a bit pedestrian and too interventionist to my taste.
B4) Period instrument. Slow and very excentric.
B5) Modern instrument. Very extrovert. Too much fiddeling with dynamics and rubato. The interpreter makes an immature impression.
B6) Modern instrument. Beautiful, introspective Adagio. Fuge with nice balanced playing, at least compared to B1-5.
Actually I do not really like any of these interpretations, and none of them strikes me as well-known (to me).
>>>> B6 >>>>> B3 >>> B2>B4>>>>>>B5=B1.
I felt somewhat similar after listening to Group C: Groups A and D have better recordings.
Quote from: Cato on January 09, 2016, 03:35:32 PM
I felt somewhat similar after listening to Group C: Groups A and D have better recordings.
I shall try to persuade aukhawk to send me Group A and/or D.
Thanks. I've sent you links for Group D, as that is lagging behind the other 3 a bit. I'm hoping one or two other people will be able to take it on as a 2nd group, as we go on.
Quote from: (: premont :) on January 09, 2016, 11:40:58 AM
Actually I do not really like any of these interpretations, and none of them strikes me as well-known (to me).
Each of the four groups contains at least 2 recordings that have had repeated favourable comments in the GMG Sonatas & Partitas thread, and at least 1 recording by an older-generation 'name' of high renown - and at least one unknown or should I say unacknowledged recording - and Group B is no exception :-X (Likewise Group C, Cato)
Thanks for your comments and rankings by the way - and personally I pretty much approve of your rankings!! ;)
If it turns out there's a concensus about one group or other not being generally liked as much, there will be scope to take this into account a bit, going forward to the next round.
Quote from: aukhawk on January 10, 2016, 09:53:24 AM
Thanks. I've sent you links for Group D, as that is lagging behind the other 3 a bit.
I am the one to thank you. :)
Quote from: aukhawk
Each of the four groups contains at least 2 recordings that have had repeated favourable comments in the GMG Sonatas & Partitas thread, and at least 1 recording by an older-generation 'name' of high renown - and at least one unknown or should I say unacknowledged recording - and Group B is no exception :-X (Likewise Group C, Cato)
I do not doubt this. But but hopefully it does not oblige me to like them. ;)
Indeed - and you were (relatively) kind in your comments about the 'joker' in pack B :-X
Starting Group B today:
B 1 - A not bad Adagio: it was played fairly nicely, but not a great amount of emotion could be heard. The Fugue started out decently enough, but then fell apart in the last half, both technically and as an interpretation. The Menuet sounded dance-like and jaunty, although again a few rough patches here and there spoiled things. The Gigue was the best played out of all the pieces.
I hope to listen sometime this week....I haven't forgotten....
Quote from: Cato on January 11, 2016, 03:43:48 AM
Starting Group B today:
B 1 - A not bad Adagio: it was played fairly nicely, but not a great amount of emotion could be heard. The Fugue started out decently enough, but then fell apart in the last half, both technically and as an interpretation. The Menuet sounded dance-like and jaunty, although again a few rough patches here and there spoiled things. The Gigue was the best played out of all the pieces.
B 2 - A nice sound in the
Adagio, but again, similar to B 1, not a great deal of expression came through. The
Fugue was much more dramatic than the
Adagio, and it had a good deal of drive. Occasional bumps here and there, but one went along for the ride. The
Menuet and
Gigue were both fine to my ears.
B 3 - The
Adagio is marked by some hurry-up-slow-down rubato at the beginning, along with a curiosity or two in the chords: does it work? I would say yes: the effect is vocal, at the end there is a sense of a dramatic tenor singing. The first half of the
Fugue does not fugue! It nearly stops more than once, and sounds like a river almost dammed and in danger of stagnating or flowing backward. Toward the middle it picked up a little speed, but then stagnated again, and seemed to last forever. It spoiled the
Adagio for me.
More straightforward were the
Menuet and
Gigue with the latter sounding quite nice.
Quote from: Cato on January 11, 2016, 03:43:48 AM
Starting Group B today:
B 1 - A not bad Adagio: it was played fairly nicely, but not a great amount of emotion could be heard. The Fugue started out decently enough, but then fell apart in the last half, both technically and as an interpretation. The Menuet sounded dance-like and jaunty, although again a few rough patches here and there spoiled things. The Gigue was the best played out of all the pieces.
B 2 - A nice sound in the Adagio, but again, similar to B 1, not a great deal of expression came through. The Fugue was much more dramatic than the Adagio, and it had a good deal of drive. Occasional bumps here and there, but one went along for the ride. The Menuet and Gigue were both fine to my ears.
B 3 - The Adagio is marked by some hurry-up-slow-down rubato at the beginning, along with a curiosity or two in the chords: does it work? I would say yes: the effect is vocal, at the end there is a sense of a dramatic tenor singing. The first half of the Fugue does not fugue! It nearly stops more than once, and sounds like a river almost dammed and in danger of stagnating or flowing backward. Toward the middle it picked up a little speed, but then stagnated again, and seemed to last forever. It spoiled the Adagio for me.
More straightforward were the Menuet and Gigue with the latter sounding quite nice.
And now...
B 4 - Our fellow reviewer
Premont called this very slow and eccentric. Yes, it is so slow that the sense of any cohesion is almost lost. The chords are handled like arpeggios from another planet, and their intonation at times is "iffy." The
Fugue is also slow, so slow and nearly formless that one might believe the performer to be a second-year violin student struggling through the piece. ??? The
Menuet again is so slow that the piece tends to fall apart, as the performer makes us think he is struggling up Mount Everest. The
Gigue at least moves and dances fairly well.
Quote from: Cato on January 11, 2016, 07:12:40 AM
B 1 - A not bad Adagio: it was played fairly nicely, but not a great amount of emotion could be heard. The Fugue started out decently enough, but then fell apart in the last half, both technically and as an interpretation. The Menuet sounded dance-like and jaunty, although again a few rough patches here and there spoiled things. The Gigue was the best played out of all the pieces.
B 2 - A nice sound in the
Adagio, but again, similar to B 1, not a great deal of expression came through. The
Fugue was much more dramatic than the
Adagio, and it had a good deal of drive. Occasional bumps here and there, but one went along for the ride. The
Menuet and
Gigue were both fine to my ears.
B 3 - The
Adagio is marked by some hurry-up-slow-down rubato at the beginning, along with a curiosity or two in the chords: does it work? I would say yes: the effect is vocal, at the end there is a sense of a dramatic tenor singing. The first half of the
Fugue does not fugue! It nearly stops more than once, and sounds like a river almost dammed and in danger of stagnating or flowing backward. Toward the middle it picked up a little speed, but then stagnated again, and seemed to last forever. It spoiled the
Adagio for me.
More straightforward were the
Menuet and
Gigue with the latter sounding quite nice.
B 4 - Our fellow reviewer
Premont called this very slow and eccentric. Yes, it is so slow that the sense of any cohesion is almost lost. The chords are handled like arpeggios from another planet, and their intonation at times is "iffy." The
Fugue is also slow, so slow and nearly formless that one might believe the performer to be a second-year violin student struggling through the piece. ??? The
Menuet again is so slow that the piece tends to fall apart, as the performer makes us think he is struggling up Mount Everest. The
Gigue at least moves and dances fairly well.
[/quote]
B 5 For about 5 seconds I thought that this performance might be at least halfway decent, until the performer started slapping his violin around like an abused wife. ??? There is a good amount of "interpretation" in dynamics and tempo, but they are incoherent.
Premont called it "immature," to which I would add "arrogant," as in the arrogance of adolescence. The
Menuet is played sprightly at first, but again a great deal of dithering with dynamics, attack, and rubato, so that one loses sight of the dance-like nature of the piece. The
Gigue tends to be given a more straight-forward reading.
Drop the other shoe, dammit! ;D ;D :laugh:
Quote from: aukhawk on January 12, 2016, 02:04:07 PM
Drop the other shoe, dammit! ;D ;D :laugh:
Our computer system crashed at school, so I had to write this from home! ;)
B 6: Another rather eccentric performance, with notes fading in and out, and the intonation rather iffy at times. Despite that, the
Adagio had some okay moments, but I found the
Fugue even more eccentric, and too full of a willful interpretation drawing attention to itself. The
Menuet showed some of these same problems, but, as in other problematic performances, the
Gigue was nicely done!
So...
VERY difficult, mainly because, as
Premont has mentioned also, none of them are particularly enticing! Certainly
B 5 in last place is appropriate, otherwise...
B 2
B 3
B 1
B 6
B4
B 5
Thanks - great comments as always, you can rest now, having listened to all 4 groups! :blank:
Thats two rankings in for each of groups A,B,C - when we start to get the third ones in, I'll set a deadline for the round - though each of 4 groups will have to have at least 3 rankings (preferably more of course) before we can move on.
Quote from: aukhawk on January 13, 2016, 01:44:47 AM
Thanks - great comments as always, you can rest now, having listened to all 4 groups! :blank:
Thats two rankings in for each of groups A,B,C - when we start to get the third ones in, I'll set a deadline for the round - though each of 4 groups will have to have at least 3 rankings (preferably more of course) before we can move on.
If there are problems, I am willing to listen to the other groops too.
Quote from: (: premont :) on January 13, 2016, 05:09:07 AM
If there are problems, I am willing to listen to the other groops too.
Thanks. It may come to that but things do seem to be picking up a bit so I'm hopeful of a few more 'results' in due course. All of groups A,B,C have been linked to at least 6 people each (if anyone has lost the information and needs a reminder, do let me know), and group D is there for anyone coming back for afters.
Now I have listened three times to Group D, and I have to listen to them a couple of times more in the weekend to do a sensible rating, because all items in Group D are much to my taste. So the problem is the opposite of the problem with Group B, where I had to find the version I disliked the least. :)
Quote from: (: premont :) on January 14, 2016, 02:03:15 PM
Now I have listened three times to Group D, and I have to listen to them a couple of times more in the weekend to do a sensible rating, because all items in Group D are much to my taste. So the problem is the opposite of the problem with Group B, where I had to find the version I disliked the least. :)
Yes,
Group D was difficult to rate, because most of the recordings were very good, and even the ones I placed at the bottom were better than the ones in e.g.
B!
Finally got around to this:
B1 - Thin sound and dull playing. The interpretation was fragmented, often starting and stopping for no good reason. Tempo was all over the place (inconsistent). And if this were a wind instrument, I'd say it has a lot of hesitations, which was frustrating.
B2 - Better sounding instrument, but the interpretation has many of the same problems as B1. One doesn't feel the structure of the piece (again), though there are moments the player shows he/she could do this if it had been desired. Another maddening listen, but what 'could have been' is clearly written all over this one. The second half of the first file (the fugue) is much better simply by being faster, and some of the problems are avoided (though still there if you listen carefully).
B3 - Better opening, but still has a hard time keeping my attention. Instrument is ok, not great, but ok. B2 best so far in that category. Does give a better idea of the structure of the piece, but the fugue is pretty problematic. It seems to me a catastrophic failure in technique or interpretation (or perhaps a mixture of the two) at times. Structure completely obliterated. Ending finally seems to pick up some of the pieces, but by then the damage is done.
Half way through and none of these are really any good. Here's hoping for a savior in the second half...
B4 - Nicer sound in some ways. Older recording I wonder? Slow, but here one feels there is more thought behind it. Is it too slow? Well, I am not sure. It works better than the first three, and at least I felt like the performer had something to say. But then the second portion is played with such tempo manipulation that I wanted to scream. Whatever structure there was has now evaporated. So no solace here. Moving on...
B5 - Better. A bit willful, but better. That is, it feels like the performer is trying to inject too much passion into it instead of allowing it to come out naturally. But overall, I felt the piece as a whole. Then the tempo is manipulated in the fugue. Would it be so hard to play this straight!?! Still better I guess, but would never be a first choice in this music for me.
B6 - Another better start. Liked the sound of the instrument (B5 was ok in this respect as well). Another one not played straight, but this was at least more interesting. Tempo is less manipulated in the fugue, but the performer seems like they are sawing away at times. Overall, the best one though.
Before posting the order, let me be clear - I'll be surprised if any of these make it to the final round. I did listen to all the music, but only commented on the first file. No real changes to my opinion in any case. So B6 is the best of the group. And really, not much difference among the last four.
B6
B2
B5
B4
B1
B3
PS - Before posting, but after ordering them, I put on the one version I have and WHAT A DIFFERENCE! What was particularly noticeable was the rhythm consistency, which drove the interpretation, and thus there was less histrionics (with more natural turns of phrase). Basically, it turns out I was being generous in my reviews above. What I should have said is B6 is bad, but perhaps tolerable. B2 is worse. And the rest stink something bad. :)
Quote from: (: premont :) on January 14, 2016, 02:03:15 PM
Now I have listened three times to Group D, and I have to listen to them a couple of times more in the weekend to do a sensible rating, because all items in Group D are much to my taste. So the problem is the opposite of the problem with Group B, where I had to find the version I disliked the least. :)
Quote from: Cato on January 14, 2016, 02:25:09 PM
Yes, Group D was difficult to rate, because most of the recordings were very good, and even the ones I placed at the bottom were better than the ones in e.g. B!
Well, we had some differences in the ordering, but we all thought the interpretations in group B were pretty weak. I wish I had time to try out one of the other groups, but as it is, I simply stayed up late last night to listen to these. So I will need to wait until the next round, where hopefully none in B will make it! :)
Thanks for your rankings, and your very interesting comments. I'm sorry you didn't like group B (which, it so happens, contains my own 1st and 2nd favourites out of all 24 in this comparison :( ) - from the comments it seems to me that you might have enjoyed Group A more - I'm sorry you don't have time to give it a try but I won't push.
Like cato and premont you've down-marked the whole group and I have noted this and adjusted the scoring accordingly. No-one in Group B is scoring better than 75% whereas the other groups each have recordings in the 90%-100% range. But it's still rather early days.
Nominally, the next round would be 12 survivors, but I'm going to be flexible about that and simply drop the axe wherever there is a clear gap in the scoring. Even so, in all probability 2 will go through from group B.
Quote from: aukhawk on January 21, 2016, 04:46:11 AM
Thanks for your rankings, and your very interesting comments. I'm sorry you didn't like group B (which, it so happens, contains my own 1st and 2nd favourites out of all 24 in this comparison :( ) - from the comments it seems to me that you might have enjoyed Group A more - I'm sorry you don't have time to give it a try but I won't push.
Like cato and premont you've down-marked the whole group and I have noted this and adjusted the scoring accordingly. No-one in Group B is scoring better than 75% whereas the other groups each have recordings in the 90%-100% range. But it's still rather early days.
Nominally, the next round would be 12 survivors, but I'm going to be flexible about that and simply drop the axe wherever there is a clear gap in the scoring. Even so, in all probability 2 will go through from group B.
Well all comments should be taken with a grain of salt, because we are only hearing smaller portions. That said, I will admit to a certain preference in Bach. I dislike it when the tempo in Bach is manipulated too much. I like it to be straight and this has long been a critical criteria for me when listening to any solo Bach, whether it is the Violin Partitas, the piano partitas, or more popular pieces like the WTC. For me, the consistency of the tempo and minimizing of the rubato is quite important. In group B, there is a lot of pulling of stretching of tempo, and thus, it was always unlikely I would like these particular versions. My votes and comments reflect that. I'll just mention that the reason I like it this way is that I think the natural flow of the music is enhanced, and the structure is made clear. As a result of all that, the phrasing sounds to me more natural as well - it's all connected.
Quote from: mc ukrneal on January 21, 2016, 08:15:50 AM
... I like it to be straight and this has long been a critical criteria for me when listening to any solo Bach, ...
Yes. You know,
my head says that, 100%. I completely know where you're coming from. And in the mainstream orchestral repertoire, I want Boulez as my conductor, not Bernstein.
But then actually when I listen to the music, something strange and
irrational happens, and I like exactly the opposite approach. So my desert island Bach S&P is actually B3, which you placed last out of a bad bunch. :o I can't explain it, but there it is.
No accounting for taste! 8)
Quote from: mc ukrneal on January 20, 2016, 06:20:12 PM
Finally got around to this:
B1 - Thin sound and dull playing. The interpretation was fragmented, often starting and stopping for no good reason. Tempo was all over the place (inconsistent). And if this were a wind instrument, I'd say it has a lot of hesitations, which was frustrating.
B2 - Better sounding instrument, but the interpretation has many of the same problems as B1. One doesn't feel the structure of the piece (again), though there are moments the player shows he/she could do this if it had been desired. Another maddening listen, but what 'could have been' is clearly written all over this one. The second half of the first file (the fugue) is much better simply by being faster, and some of the problems are avoided (though still there if you listen carefully).
B3 - Better opening, but still has a hard time keeping my attention. Instrument is ok, not great, but ok. B2 best so far in that category. Does give a better idea of the structure of the piece, but the fugue is pretty problematic. It seems to me a catastrophic failure in technique or interpretation (or perhaps a mixture of the two) at times. Structure completely obliterated. Ending finally seems to pick up some of the pieces, but by then the damage is done.
Half way through and none of these are really any good. Here's hoping for a savior in the second half...
B4 - Nicer sound in some ways. Older recording I wonder? Slow, but here one feels there is more thought behind it. Is it too slow? Well, I am not sure. It works better than the first three, and at least I felt like the performer had something to say. But then the second portion is played with such tempo manipulation that I wanted to scream. Whatever structure there was has now evaporated. So no solace here. Moving on...
B5 - Better. A bit willful, but better. That is, it feels like the performer is trying to inject too much passion into it instead of allowing it to come out naturally. But overall, I felt the piece as a whole. Then the tempo is manipulated in the fugue. Would it be so hard to play this straight!?! Still better I guess, but would never be a first choice in this music for me.
B6 - Another better start. Liked the sound of the instrument (B5 was ok in this respect as well). Another one not played straight, but this was at least more interesting. Tempo is less manipulated in the fugue, but the performer seems like they are sawing away at times. Overall, the best one though.
Before posting the order, let me be clear - I'll be surprised if any of these make it to the final round. I did listen to all the music, but only commented on the first file. No real changes to my opinion in any case. So B6 is the best of the group. And really, not much difference among the last four.
B6
B2
B5
B4
B1
B3
PS - Before posting, but after ordering them, I put on the one version I have and WHAT A DIFFERENCE! What was particularly noticeable was the rhythm consistency, which drove the interpretation, and thus there was less histrionics (with more natural turns of phrase). Basically, it turns out I was being generous in my reviews above. What I should have said is B6 is bad, but perhaps tolerable. B2 is worse. And the rest stink something bad. :)
Quote from: Cato on January 12, 2016, 02:28:19 PM
VERY difficult, mainly because, as Premont has mentioned also, none of them are particularly enticing! Certainly B 5 in last place is appropriate, otherwise...
B 2
B 3
B 1
B 6
B4
B 5
Thanks for the comments!
Quote from: aukhawk on January 21, 2016, 01:44:14 PM
So my desert island Bach S&P is actually B3, which you placed last out of a bad bunch. :o I can't explain it, but there it is.
No accounting for taste! 8)
Quote from: Cato on January 12, 2016, 08:21:49 AM
B 3 - The Adagio is marked by some hurry-up-slow-down rubato at the beginning, along with a curiosity or two in the chords: does it work? I would say yes: the effect is vocal, at the end there is a sense of a dramatic tenor singing. The first half of the Fugue does not fugue! It nearly stops more than once, and sounds like a river almost dammed and in danger of stagnating or flowing backward. Toward the middle it picked up a little speed, but then stagnated again, and seemed to last forever. It spoiled the Adagio for me.
More straightforward were the Menuet and Gigue with the latter sounding quite nice
Perhaps what I liked about
B 3 is also what you like!
Quote from: aukhawk on January 21, 2016, 01:44:14 PM
Yes. You know, my head says that, 100%. I completely know where you're coming from. And in the mainstream orchestral repertoire, I want Boulez as my conductor, not Bernstein.
But then actually when I listen to the music, something strange and irrational happens, and I like exactly the opposite approach. So my desert island Bach S&P is actually B3, which you placed last out of a bad bunch. :o I can't explain it, but there it is.
No accounting for taste! 8)
We like what we like. it is a funny thing though, isn't it? Don't fight it - just enjoy it!
Quote from: Cato on January 21, 2016, 02:01:36 PM
Perhaps what I liked about B 3 is also what you like!
Perhaps it's just the 'violin babe' cover art - [mysterious] or is it? :-X [/mysterious]
Quote from: aukhawk on January 21, 2016, 01:44:14 PM
Yes. You know, my head says that, 100%. I completely know where you're coming from. And in the mainstream orchestral repertoire, I want Boulez as my conductor, not Bernstein.
But then actually when I listen to the music, something strange and irrational happens, and I like exactly the opposite approach. So my desert island Bach S&P is actually B3, which you placed last out of a bad bunch. :o I can't explain it, but there it is.
No accounting for taste! 8)
Chaconne a son gout.
Quote from: aukhawk on January 22, 2016, 01:36:57 AM
Perhaps it's just the 'violin babe' cover art - [mysterious] or is it? :-X [/mysterious]
Since we are still "blind," 8) I suspect it must be something else!
We do have a good number of violin babes these days!
http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,18140.180.html (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,18140.180.html)
I don't think it'll break anything if I say that of the 24 starters here, we have 40% more female artist(e)s than male.
On current projection, going forward to round 2 females will outnumber males by more than 2 to 1.
[edit] A heartfelt thankyou to Cato for directing me to a thread I hadn't seen before ... :)
Several listenings to the items from Group D were needed, before I could rank them in a sensible way. One common trait though is, that they all are more to my taste, than any of the items in Group B.
D1) P.I. Adagio broad and singing, tempo in the Fugue somewhat unstable and generally clumsy handling of the multi-stops. Presto willful with much agogic.
D2) M.I. Adagio very expressive but dragging. Fugue aggressive and hectic. Presto sweeping, too fast - the tempo-indication is not Prestissimo.
D3) P.I. Also very expressive but a bit faster than D2, accordingly the ornamentation is a bit unsecure. Fugue and Presto nice flowing and well controlled as to expression.
D4) M.I. Adagio reminds of D2, but it is slower and better controlled. Fugue and Presto beneficially relaxed with time and technique to let the music speak.
D5) M.I. Subdued but expressive. But in the Fugue the expressive means are far too exagerrated. Presto played a la Paganini.
D6) P.I. Adagio broad and opulent sounding, well balanced expression. Fugue and Presto equally balanced.
D6>D3>D4>>D2=D5=D1
Thanks : premont : that rounds things out nicely. Funnily enough I don't know D6 at all - I only included it because something in the back of my mind told me 'I should'. Obviously I need to go away and give this a listen ;)
I've PM'd you the links to the other 2 groups as you suggested above, I wouldn't say either one is more or less clear in outcome at this stage, and of the two Group A has attracted the more positive comments so far. However see also my 'State of the Comparison' following ...
First - is there anyone out there please, currently in the process of auditioning a group?
Is there anyone who would be willing to take on Group A, C or D, and return within the next 2 weeks or so? Please?
As things stand, if I were to assume another round of results coming in for all groups, there are already 6 recordings that will definitely NOT go through - in other words, another round however perverse, couldn't save them.
Likewise there are 7 recordings that definitely WILL go through - another round however perverse, wouldn't knock them out. That's 7 already out of a likely 2nd round of 10.
Furthermore, there are 3 and only 3 other recordings that currently are scoring clearly above average. However if further rankings come in they are not 'secure' and some other recording could be elevated. But if the axe were to fall right now, it would fall at quite a clear divide. But that is, after only 2 rankings in many cases, which of course isn't really enough - I was hoping for 4 per group. :-X
So, the upshot of all that is, I'll set a tentative deadline for this round of 14th February. But if it becomes clear that no-one is auditioning, or alternatively that someone wants more time, that may move either earlier or later.
Thanks everyone for your efforts so far.
Quote from: aukhawk on January 24, 2016, 02:17:03 AM
Thanks : premont : that rounds things out nicely. Funnily enough I don't know D6 at all - I only included it because something in the back of my mind told me 'I should'. Obviously I need to go away and give this a listen ;)
I've PM'd you the links to the other 2 groups as you suggested above, I wouldn't say either one is more or less clear in outcome at this stage, and of the two Group A has attracted the more positive comments so far. However see also my 'State of the Comparison' following ...
Thanks. I think I can keep your deadline 14. marts.
Will do my best.
Quote from: (: premont :) on January 24, 2016, 03:42:15 AM
Thanks. I think I can keep your deadline 14. marts.
Will do my best.
Ooh.. 14. february of course. :-[
Quote from: (: premont :) on January 31, 2016, 07:05:13 AM
Ooh.. 14. february of course. :-[
Saint Valentine's Day! Let's hear the love for Performance....? 8)
Does it help if I mention that none of the violinists in this comparison is Heifetz ? ;)
(https://www.pristineclassical.com/media/Pictures/CDs150/PACM075.jpg)
Pristine Classical (https://www.pristineclassical.com/pacm075.html)
Mainly because, in the Cello Suites comparison I did include Casals, but it wasn't a great success. And Casals' Cello Suites are to my ears more interesting, and modern-sounding, than Heifetz' Sonata No.1, which I've just had a listen to, to remind myself. Even though it's not that old a recording - 1952. Somewhat metronomic, no-nonsense, declamatory, and such a distinctive vibrato.
The deadline approacheth.
Quote from: (: premont :) on January 31, 2016, 07:05:13 AM
Ooh.. 14. february of course. :-[
:premont: - can I ask, are you in the process of listening, to either group A or C ? And if so, which, and how are you getting on?
(If not, I'll move things on to round 2 in a few days' time.)
Quote from: aukhawk on February 13, 2016, 02:28:58 AM
The deadline approacheth.
:premont: - can I ask, are you in the process of listening, to either group A or C ? And if so, which, and how are you getting on?
(If not, I'll move things on to round 2 in a few days' time.)
At the moment Group A.
But I hope to listen to Group C too.
Quote from: aukhawk on February 06, 2016, 04:39:30 AM
Does it help if I mention that none of the violinists in this comparison is Heifetz ? ;)
(https://www.pristineclassical.com/media/Pictures/CDs150/PACM075.jpg)
Pristine Classical (https://www.pristineclassical.com/pacm075.html)
Even though it's not that old a recording - 1952. Somewhat metronomic, no-nonsense, declamatory, and such a distinctive vibrato.
No-nonsense has been one of the best words to describe
Jascha Heifetz.
Quote from: Cato on February 13, 2016, 03:56:51 AM
No-nonsense has been one of the best words to describe Jascha Heifetz.
I like a bit of nonsense in my Bach 8)
Sarge
Here is my rating for Group A:
A1) MI. Adagio beautiful and poetic, expresses sadness. Fugue good if not quite up to the expectations induced by the Adagio.
A2) PI. Noble and stylish. The best of a group with many duds.
A3) MI. Brash, wiry sounding, hysterical hypervibrato, the music is almost trumpeted. I think I was impressed by this interpretation once, but I have become tired of it.
A4) MI. Oldfashioned and konventional, rather unremarkable.
A5) MI. Nice flowing Adagio in konventional style. The Fugue more individualistic, romantic almost Beethovenízed.
A6) PI. After a beautiful Adagio comes a forced Fugue with strange accents and signs of technical shortcomings.
So this is: A2> A1>>>>>>>>>>A5>A4=A3=A6
Edit caused by some typo's
Since 90%+ of our signups seem to be MIA, I can try to rate a second group in the next few days, if you want.
And my ratings for group C:
C1) MI. Oldfashioned, romantic when worst.
C2) PI. Much too willful to my taste.
C3) PI. Adagio singing, much in the way I like it. Fugue relatively good.
C4) PI. A bit too dramatised, particularly the Adagio, which I find erratic as to the affect of the piece.
C5) MI. Nice Adagio. Fugue on the other hand overdramatized.
C6) PI. The best of the group. Expresses what I think is the right affect, and the agogics are well judged.
So this is C6>C3>>>C5>C4>C2>>>C1
Quote from: (: premont :) on February 14, 2016, 03:45:23 AM
And my ratings for group C:
C1) MI. Oldfashioned, romantic when worst.
C2) PI. Much too willful to my taste.
C3) PI. Adagio singing, much in the way I like it. Fugue relatively good.
C4) PI. A bit too dramatised, particularly the Adagio, which I find erratic as to the affect of the piece.
C5) MI. Nice Adagio. Fugue on the other hand overdramatized.
C6) PI. The best of the group. Expresses what I think is the right affect, and the agogics are well judged.
So this is C6>C3>>>C5>C4>C2>>>C1
Very similar to mine: 6-3-4-2-1-5
Quote from: (: premont :) on February 14, 2016, 03:22:47 AM
Here is my rating for Group A:
So this is: A2> A1>>>>>>>>>>A5>A4=A3=A6
Quite different from mine! :D 3-5-6-4-1-2 We agree on #4!
Quote from: Cato on February 14, 2016, 04:16:20 AM
Very similar to mine: 6-3-4-2-1-5
Quite different from mine! :D 3-5-6-4-1-2 We agree on #4!
I did not study your ratings before I did my own, so the similarity/dissimilarity is quite coincidental.
Now I am very curious to see, who the "loosers" of this round are.
Quote from: (: premont :) on February 14, 2016, 04:50:23 AM
Now I am very curious to see, who the "loosers" of this round are.
Yes! And if anybody else needs to review a group, please do so soon! ;)
Group C from most favored to least:
C3 > C4 > C2 > C6 > C5 > C1
I liked them all pretty well except for C1. I'll try to write up some more comments later, but wanted to go ahead and submit my ranking now.
Sorry for not chiming in ... didn't really fit with my listening schedule, but I've had one group (A) on my smartphone for a while and have also listened to all recordings - the thing that struck me most: how great the music is ... and how wonderful that it can be approached in such different ways that each, on its own terms, more or less makes sense.
Indeed - I think it's quite difficult to listen to any version of this music and not get pleasure from it.
Thanks very much :premont: and Pat. So ...
Davai, topor.
(I don't know why, I felt like tossing in a cross-cultural reference to Shostakovich there, or rather, to Yevtushenko)
OK I'll post some results later today, although there are one or two big falls, I think by and large the 'right' recordings have gone through to the next round.
Links for round 2 will be ready later today too, please raise your hands those who want to carry on.
Round 2 will be 2 groups of 5, and the music will be parts 4 & 5, the Giga and Ciaccona, from Partita No.2. (The final, if we ever get that far ;D will be Suite No.2)
Again the files are split so that you can choose between a shorter or a longer listen - that nice Herr Johann Sebastian thoughtfully provided a perfect edit point halfway through the Ciaccona and most performers turn it into a complete pause for breath - the second part is therefore arguably just more of the same, though with a change from minor to major.
Stop press:
Round 2 will consist of 11 recordings - so there will be one group of 5 and one of 6 - please say if you would prefer the larger or smaller group.
Round 2 Group E (5 recordings) is available now on request - the other group will take me a day or so to prep.
Results from round 1 later today.
Quote from: aukhawk on February 15, 2016, 12:29:00 AM
Round 2 will consist of 11 recordings - so there will be one group of 5 and one of 6 - please say if you would prefer the larger or smaller group.
Round 2 Group E (5 recordings) is available now on request - the other group will take me a day or so to prep.
As you may guess I would like to listen to the group with the 6 recordings (first). :)
Round 1 eliminations
So, a total of 13 fallers (out of 24) at the first hurdle. unlucky for some. They include 2 of GMG's biggest favourites in this repertoire, plus several others who have attracted a fair share of favourable comment in other threads - on the other hand most of the 'jokers' have been accurately cut out from the pack without ceremony.
This first group all scored 15% or less (bearing in mind that the lowest score to get through to round 2 is 60%).
No surprise that most of these came from Group B ... :(
24th and plumb last, with a score of just 7%
B5
"The interpreter makes an immature impression."
"it feels like the performer is trying to inject too much passion into it instead of allowing it to come out naturally."
this was
...
GMG whipping-boy, Thomas Zehetmair
[asin]B000MM0OI4[/asin]
22nd ==, with 13%
B1
"The Fugue started out decently enough, but then fell apart in the last half, both technically and as an interpretation"
"fragmented, often starting and stopping for no good reason"
this was
...
Sigiswald Kuijken
[asin]B000001TWH[/asin]
22nd ==, with 13%
B4
"Slow and very eccentric"
"one might believe the performer to be a second-year violin student struggling through the piece"
this was
...
Monica Huggett
[asin]B00018ZRYA[/asin]
21st, with 15% an equally dismal showing
D5
this is a 'joker' and I must admit I rather like this one, though the cover art is truly apalling :o
"a speed-up-slow-down interpretation which was quasi-balletic."
"in the Fugue the expressive means are far too exagerrated. Presto played a la Paganini."
this was
...
Lara St John
[asin]B000VZAVSU[/asin]
Still 7 more to come ...
19th==, with 20%
C1
"the performer at times sliding into or off the notes"
"The violin playing in C1 comes across as really physical"
This one is quite a favourite though, on the GMG Bach Sonatas & Partitas thread (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php?topic=4964.100) ...
this is
...
Nathan Milstein
[asin]B000001H00[/asin]
19th==, with 20%
C5
"a lot of little things about it rub me the wrong way"
"A big sound ... I was reminded of the drama in the opening of the D minor Organ Toccata and Fugue."
This was, I think, the most recent recording in the comparison, and included largely for that reason,
possibly it is also only available as a download
it is
...
Paolo Ghidoni
(https://images-eu.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/61InM10xvjL._SS280.jpg)
18th with 35%
D1
"I had the impression that Bach was turning into a member der Neuen Wiener Schule!"
"tempo in the Fugue somewhat unstable and generally clumsy handling of the multi-stops"
this may be hard to find at present, it is
...
Richard Tognetti
(https://images-eu.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51dd-%2BrApuL._SS280.jpg)
17th with 37%
A6
"the opening is very well played with a great sense of mystery of enigma about it"
"seemed to have intonation issues ... a sinus infection, and a large but empty church as recording location"
:laugh:
This one is quite well-liked on the GMG Bach S&P thread (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php?topic=4964.100) ...
this is
...
Helene Schmitt
[asin]B000A0HFZI[/asin]
14th== with a respectable 40% score
A4
"Oldfashioned and conventional, rather unremarkable."
"in the Gigue the performer almost makes it sound like a cadenza in a concerto."
this is
...
Christian Tetzlaff
[asin]B000O5B52I[/asin]
14th== with 40%
C2
"the adagio unfolds almost outside of time, like an improvisation"
"squeaks and a few "clunky" chords distracted my ears"
Liked elsewhere in GMG, though mainly I suspect for the cover art ...
I must say here that this is one of my 3 favourite versions :(
it is
...
Amandine Beyer
[asin]B005H3HXQE[/asin]
14th== with 40%
B3
"The first half of the Fugue does not fugue!"
"Beautiful relaxed and noble Adagio. Fugue rather slow and a bit pedestrian and too interventionist to my taste."
And this is another one of my 3 favourite versions :( :( in fact probably currently my out-and-out fave :(
it is
...
Sirkka-Liisa Kaakinen-Pilch
[asin]B00EJPYRG0[/asin]
13th with 45%
D2
"about halfway through I was feeling a great sense of emotion coming through the playing"
"Adagio very expressive but dragging. Fugue aggressive and hectic. Presto sweeping, too fast"
Another well liked verion in GMG circles,
this is
...
Gideon Kremer
[asin]B0000040YB[/asin]
12th with 50%
A2
:premont: did his best to save this one -
"Noble and stylish. The best of a group with many duds."
However, it was already too late -
"awarded a special prize for bizarre rubato"
"just a clumsy sound in general for the final part, as if the performer were holding a cello under his chin."
A firm GMG favourite -
this is
...
Rachel Podger
[asin]B00006JQU1[/asin]
The remainder, with scores ranging from 60% to 90%, go through to round 2. There is still one joker in the pack ...
I do wonder: how many of those who (heavily) criticized these recordings here have praised them in the other threads? ;D ;D ;D
Comments:
C1. This might have been very popular in the 1950s. To me it sounds ridiculously big and melodramatic, with some of the trills sounding ostentatious and the fugue played as melody with accompaniment as opposed to simultaneous lines.
C5. The other MI performance, this one was much more varied, but surprisingly harsh at many points. Most of the first clip was good enough to place in the middle of the pack but the high notes from 8:39-8:42 really bugged me.
The other 4 made similar overall impressions.
C6. I liked this one initially because of the fugue's fastish tempo, and had it at #3 for the first clip, but the minuet, a bit slow with exaggerated phrasing, knocked it down a spot.
C2. Generally pretty good. From 1:54-2:20 in the fugue these arpeggios are not very clear in the middle (not all performers play these as arpeggios, but for the ones who do, I'm kind of a stickler for clarity). This violinist swings some of the rhythms in the minuet which strikes me as unconventional, not necessarily good or bad.
C4. This one sounded the most severely HIP, but that could just be the recording. I noticed some great trills in the Adagio, each one played a bit differently. There's a tricky spot several seconds into the fugue that sounds spliced. From 1:20-1:30 in the fugue this violinist leans on some notes but makes it sound natural -- I'm impressed. Then at 1:55 in the fugue there is a crisply staccato lower line with legato on top; this is either brilliant playing or more studio trickery. The following section is arpeggiated clearly, with a great build to the next section that is subtly pulled back right before it gets there. The minuet is swung like C2.
C3. The initial impression is of an excellence that I can't quite put my finger on. Nothing jumps out or is exaggerated, but when I compare smaller clips I notice lots of great details. For example, just 10 seconds into the Adagio is a chord change that is better than anybody else's, in a way that's hard to put into words. There is a lot of that here. Did you all do the Cello Suites blind comparison? C3 is the Queyras of this group.
Quote from: Florestan on February 15, 2016, 07:22:19 AM
I do wonder: how many of those who (heavily) criticized these recordings here have praised them in the other threads? ;D ;D ;D
That's part of the fun! I have praised Milstein among MI recordings and was fairly surprised to see that he was C1. I recalled him being more tasteful than this.
Similarly in the Cello Suites I was shocked by how meh Casals was.
I just spotified Huggett's Fugue and can say that while it is too slow and has some annoying Huggettisms, it decidedly does
not sound like a 2nd-year student -- or a 10th-year student for that matter.
Kuijken recorded these twice. I believe the one aukhawk posted was his first.
Quote from: Pat B on February 15, 2016, 07:44:57 AM
That's part of the fun! I have praised Milstein among MI recordings and was fairly surprised to see that he was C1. I recalled him being more tasteful than this.
Similarly in the Cello Suites I was shocked by how meh Casals was.
I just spotified Huggett's Fugue and can say that while it is too slow and has some annoying Huggettisms, it decidedly does not sound like a 2nd-year student -- or a 10th-year student for that matter.
Kuijken recorded these twice. I believe the one aukhawk posted was his first.
Did you vote out something that you praised elsewhere?
Quote from: Florestan on February 15, 2016, 07:22:19 AM
I do wonder: how many of those who (heavily) criticized these recordings here have praised them in the other threads? ;D ;D ;D
Not involved! I am lucky to have time to visit here! 0:)
Milstein and
Kremer bite the dust: very interesting!
Round II: I am ready! $:)
Quote from: Florestan on February 15, 2016, 07:46:33 AM
Did you vote out something that you praised elsewhere?
I don't remember if I have written anything on GMG about Milstein, but if I did, it was positive (within the realm of traditional versions, at least). Here I put him solidly last in group C, though in my defense, he was the only Old Master in the group. I just spotified a bit of Grumiaux and he makes a nearly identical impression, including tone, tempos, and phrasing choices -- if I didn't know otherwise, I would believe these were different takes by a single violinist.
Then I spotified Heifetz. He is more distinct but I don't like him any better.
So probably the message is that I much prefer newer/HIP versions of this music.
Quote from: aukhawk on February 15, 2016, 07:16:44 AM
14th== with 40%
B3
"The first half of the Fugue does not fugue!"
"Beautiful relaxed and noble Adagio. Fugue rather slow and a bit pedestrian and too interventionist to my taste."
And this is another one of my 3 favourite versions :( :( in fact probably currently my out-and-out fave :(
it is
...
Sirkka-Liisa Kaakinen-Pilch
[asin]B00EJPYRG0[/asin]
What attracts you to this one? Why do you like it so much? I'd never heard of her before...
Quote from: Pat B on February 15, 2016, 07:28:18 AM
C5. The other MI performance, this one was much more varied, but surprisingly harsh at many points. Most of the first clip was good enough to place in the middle of the pack but the high notes from 8:39-8:42 really bugged me.
I must emphasise that what you heard here was 1st-generation mp3 as downloaded from Amazon. And it appears to be a very recent recording - issued July 2015 although the dates Amazon gives are often unreliable, it could be a re-issue of a wax cylinder for all I know ... ;)
Quote
C3. The initial impression is of an excellence that I can't quite put my finger on. ... C3 is the Queyras of this group.
Good thing you came along then
Pat - because it was your ranking that 'saved' C3 from the chop! :o
Quote from: mc ukrneal on February 15, 2016, 09:31:37 AM
What attracts you to this one? [Kaakinen] Why do you like it so much? I'd never heard of her before...
Generally quite far towards the slow end of the spectrum (only Huggett is consistently slower, and there is another one in round 2 that is a similar pace) - contemplative and 'free', rather like an Indian musician playing an
Alap (I listen to quite a lot of Indian music, when I can tear myself away from Bach). Not that I am any kind of expert, on either.
I seem to have acquired this taste, in the last couple of years, for the 'free-er' versions - probably also why I like
Beyer, described by one person as "
outside of time, like an improvisation".
(Well, at least my 3rd and last horse is still running :-X )
And I had never come across Kaakinen before either, until I was trawling around last autumn looking for 'jokers' to sprinkle into the comparison - but have listened several times since then, she's definitely my 'go to' for this music at the moment.
Quote from: aukhawk on February 15, 2016, 09:33:23 AM
I must emphasise that what you heard here was 1st-generation mp3 as downloaded from Amazon. And it appears to be a very recent recording - issued July 2015 although the dates Amazon gives are often unreliable, it could be a re-issue of a wax cylinder for all I know ... ;)
Good thing you came along then Pat - because it was your ranking that 'saved' C3 from the chop! :o
Well, Cato and I also liked it and ranked it as no. 2 in Group C.
Quote from: mc ukrneal on February 15, 2016, 09:31:37 AM
What attracts you to this one? Why do you like it so much? I'd never heard of her before...
She (Kaakinen) has been leader of several HIP ensembles.
The only surprise for me in this round is, that I described Kuijken I. as being bland. This is not my general impression of his recording.
Quote from: aukhawk on February 15, 2016, 07:16:44 AM
Sirkka-Liisa Kaakinen-Pilch
[asin]B00EJPYRG0[/asin]
I've heard good things about this recording. I liked her Mystery Sonatas a fair bit, I think, but don't remember why.
I will be glad to listen to whatever you send me. Once I get over my tantrum from seeing the best recording get the axe so early.
(http://www.bach-cantatas.com/Pic-Bio-P-BIG/Podger-Rachel-14.jpg)
Quote from: aukhawk on February 15, 2016, 09:33:23 AM
I must emphasise that what you heard here was 1st-generation mp3 as downloaded from Amazon. And it appears to be a very recent recording - issued July 2015 although the dates Amazon gives are often unreliable, it could be a re-issue of a wax cylinder for all I know ... ;)
Understood. In this case my comments (which I now see were ambiguous) were about the playing, not the sound quality.
Quote
Good thing you came along then Pat - because it was your ranking that 'saved' C3 from the chop! :o
:)
BTW thanks for running this and for allowing my very late entry. I don't care whether I get 5 or 6 for the next round.
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on February 15, 2016, 05:46:25 PM
Once I get over my tantrum from seeing the best recording get the axe so early.
Nice picture! :)
I'm just hoping now, no-one comes along with their pin-up of
Milstein ...
Links for round 2 have been sent out to two people, for each group.
We'll need more - please reply on this thread if you would like to take part. The music lasts about 11 minutes so to audition the complete group takes around an hour (though I don't really recommend doing it all in one session).
(http://jrlawoffice.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Appeal-or-Re-file.jpg)
Yes, I'm still in.
Quote from: amw on February 17, 2016, 12:51:21 AM
Yes, I'm still in.
Me too. No need to ask again. I am in it to the end! :)
I think you should just assume that anyone in round 1 will continue...
Thanks both, PMs sent.
Time to enjoy some of Bach's violin doodles! 0:)
Impressions of E 1: A clear and crisp joy dances and flies very easily throughout the opening Giga, and in the Ciaconna I found a narrative and dialogue of interest. The opening of the Ciaconna is played with mystery and with delicacy, as if two people were gently revealing secrets. Accelerating and then slowing down, and playing with the dynamics, the performer found great drama in the notes.
E 2: The performance takes place in a large space and is rather deliberate. The opening of the Ciaconna sounded like a student carefully practicing scales rather than a performance of anything of substance. This changes finally in the last minutes, where some delicate mystery is expressed.
E 3: Similar to E 2 in that the Giga is a bit slower than in E 1, but here a dialogue of sorts is heard. The Ciaconna contained more of interest than in E 2.
E 4: A performance beginning with some interest in the Giga, delicate and cautious, but then in the Ciaconna deteriorating and falling apart at times: the impression of scale-practicing as in E 2 popped up now and then.
E 5: A "big sound" from the violin, faster and more nuanced than in E 2, 3, and 4. The Ciaconna has much more interest and even drama in it than the previous three. The player can be heard breathing or sniffing now and then, as if s/he needed huge breaths to play the next section.
Rankings as of now (I will need to hear the "extras" later):
E 1 by far!
E 5
E 3
E 4
E 2
Thanks Cato - that's a great start!
Quote from: Cato on February 28, 2016, 04:08:52 AM
Time to enjoy some of Bach's violin doodles! 0:)
Impressions of E 1: A clear and crisp joy dances and flies very easily throughout the opening Giga, and in the Ciaconna I found a narrative and dialogue of interest. The opening of the Ciaconna is played with mystery and with delicacy, as if two people were gently revealing secrets. Accelerating and then slowing down, and playing with the dynamics, the performer found great drama in the notes.
E 2: The performance takes place in a large space and is rather deliberate. The opening of the Ciaconna sounded like a student carefully practicing scales rather than a performance of anything of substance. This changes finally in the last minutes, where some delicate mystery is expressed.
E 3: Similar to E 2 in that the Giga is a bit slower than in E 1, but here a dialogue of sorts is heard. The Ciaconna contained more of interest than in E 2.
E 4: A performance beginning with some interest in the Giga, delicate and cautious, but then in the Ciaconna deteriorating and falling apart at times: the impression of scale-practicing as in E 2 popped up now and then.
E 5: A "big sound" from the violin, faster and more nuanced than in E 2, 3, and 4. The Ciaconna has much more interest and even drama in it than the previous three. The player can be heard breathing or sniffing now and then, as if s/he needed huge breaths to play the next section.
Rankings as of now (I will need to hear the "extras" later):
E 1 by far!
E 5
E 3
E 4
E 2
Just listened to the "extras" which
Aukhawk has not mandated to be part of the judging, but... ;)
Will it change the rankings above? The "extra" is the last c. 7 minutes of the
CiaconnaE 1: There is something of a "raw" sound at the beginning, and things are rather slow and very hushed. The conception is for the drama to build all the way toward the end.
E 2 It has a smoother opening than E 1, and that big, echoing sound noted above is present. In general, a better experience than in the previous examples, with a dramatic build-up toward the end.
E 3 The opening is somewhat in between the previous contenders. Dynamics are fairly static throughout, until the last 3 minutes, where the volume decreases now and then. The "dialogue" is emphasized rather than understated. There is an occasional tendency to "saw" through the notes.
E 4: A "raw" sound again for the opening leads to another dialogue which is played with energy, and a dramatic back and forth is developed fairly well. A "twang" in the last 30 (6:06 to be precise for those reviewing here) seconds startled me, and must have been deliberate for some reason...unless it was a glitch in the download.
E 5: Again the "big sound" mentioned above is present, and the movement takes off fairly quickly accompanied by highly annoying nasal congestion. Dynamics are fairly static until about the halfway point, where things slow down a bit, but not much. A swift and dramatic performance marred by the constant sniffing or asthmatic breathing.
I think the rankings will stay as they are. 0:)
Thanks Cato.
I had a listen to the 'twang' (E4) in my copy but it sounds OK - just the violinist sounding a particularly plangent note I think. However I will admit that the E4 Ciaccona is not as well-sourced as all the other samples on review, from a sound quality point of view. (Streamed, where all the others are direct downloads or CD rips.)
And the heavy breather (E5) isn't the same as Jeffrey's "a sinus infection, and a large but empty church" ;D from the previous round, because that performer has already been revealed as Helene Schmitt.
Still, I wouldn't argue with your rankings, seem very reasonable to me for this group, which incidentally includes the only real 'joker' left in the process. :-X
Quote from: aukhawk on March 05, 2016, 09:48:20 AM
Thanks Cato.
I had a listen to the 'twang' (E4) in my copy but it sounds OK - just the violinist sounding a particularly plangent note I think. However I will admit that the E4 Ciaccona is not as well-sourced as all the other samples on review, from a sound quality point of view. (Streamed, where all the others are direct downloads or CD rips.)
And the heavy breather (E5) isn't the same as Jeffrey's "a sinus infection, and a large but empty church" ;D from the previous round, because that performer has already been revealed as Helene Schmitt.
Still, I wouldn't argue with your rankings, seem very reasonable to me for this group, which incidentally includes the only real 'joker' left in the process. :-X
Hello out there?! :D
Aukhawk: I could rate another group!
er .. wazzat? oops, must have dozed off there ;)
Group F links sent to you Cato and thanks for bumping the thread.
Obviously we'll need a minimum of 3 responses for each group to get anywhere, so this could take quite a while ...
I recently came across an orchestrated version of the 3rd Partita, which was enjoyable but emphasised to me how even the most metronomic of these violinists is able to perform with so much more freedom than a good baroque-style band. That's why I like Bach's solo instrumental music so much.
Quote from: aukhawk on March 22, 2016, 01:04:16 AM
er .. wazzat? oops, must have dozed off there ;)
Group F links sent to you Cato and thanks for bumping the thread.
Obviously we'll need a minimum of 3 responses for each group to get anywhere, so this could take quite a while ...
I recently came across an orchestrated version of the 3rd Partita, which was enjoyable but emphasised to me how even the most metronomic of these violinists is able to perform with so much more freedom than a good baroque-style band. That's why I like Bach's solo instrumental music so much.
Yes. This morning while getting dressed I had Music Choice on, as alternative to a squad of news channels announcing that Brussels had suffered a terrorist attack but there was as of yet no actual information to be offered...
What was I saying? Oh, yes...they played Raff's orchestration of the Chaconne, which sounded wierd....rather jolly in parts, actually. Nothing like what one expects of the Chaconne in its solitary glory....
Comments on F 1, 2, and 3! No rankings yet, since I need to hear the other 3 in Group F, but I thought I would catalyze and tantalize my fellow listeners! :D
In general, all of them are fine, but quite different at times in tempo and emphasis.
F 1: the opening movement is the fastest of the three, with the least variation in dynamics. As a result, one might call this a "straight-forward" interpretation. The Chaconne, however, seemed not to hang together too well, possibly because it is played in a rather straight-forward manner. Nevertheless, it is elegantly and beautifully played!
F 2: the opening is not as fast as with F 1, but has a little more variation in dynamics, showing a back-and-forth in the music. The big difference is in the Chaconne which has a much more dramatic, narrative interpretation, with the chords near the beginning being almost slashed and beaten, and there is a dialogue of sorts, as if an outraged husband has come home to deal with his wayward, pleading wife! 0:)
F 3: a moderate speed is heard in the opening, with much more variation in dynamics than in the other two. The Chaconne, in contrast to F 2, sounds rather sedate and delicate. Again, the soloist brings out a kind of dialogue at times, a slow one, and at times one thinks the violinist may just slow down completely and stop in the middle for no particularly good reason.
More later! 0:) Happy Easter! 0:)
Okay, time for F 4!
It has a fairly moderate tempo, and is played with little dynamic variation, much like F 1. There is a good deal of echo in the recording, giving it a "big" sound. The Chaconne is rather slow, almost cautious, and at a generally constant volume, although during the fast contrapuntal figurations toward the middle there is a kind of crescendo. The last part of the Chaconne continues with a moderate, "cautious" sound both in tempo and dynamics.
Quote from: Cato on March 27, 2016, 04:35:36 AM
Comments on F 1, 2, and 3! No rankings yet, since I need to hear the other 3 in Group F, but I thought I would catalyze and tantalize my fellow listeners! :D
In general, all of them are fine, but quite different at times in tempo and emphasis.
F 1: the opening movement is the fastest of the three, with the least variation in dynamics. As a result, one might call this a "straight-forward" interpretation. The Chaconne, however, seemed not to hang together too well, possibly because it is played in a rather straight-forward manner. Nevertheless, it is elegantly and beautifully played!
F 2: the opening is not as fast as with F 1, but has a little more variation in dynamics, showing a back-and-forth in the music. The big difference is in the Chaconne which has a much more dramatic, narrative interpretation, with the chords near the beginning being almost slashed and beaten, and there is a dialogue of sorts, as if an outraged husband has come home to deal with his wayward, pleading wife! 0:)
F 3: a moderate speed is heard in the opening, with much more variation in dynamics than in the other two. The Chaconne, in contrast to F 2, sounds rather sedate and delicate. Again, the soloist brings out a kind of dialogue at times, a slow one, and at times one thinks the violinist may just slow down completely and stop in the middle for no particularly good reason.
More later! 0:) Happy Easter! 0:)
Quote from: Cato on March 27, 2016, 07:35:18 AM
Okay, time for F 4!
It has a fairly moderate tempo, and is played with little dynamic variation, much like F 1. There is a good deal of echo in the recording, giving it a "big" sound. The Chaconne is rather slow, almost cautious, and at a generally constant volume, although during the fast contrapuntal figurations toward the middle there is a kind of crescendo. The last part of the Chaconne continues with a moderate, "cautious" sound both in tempo and dynamics.
And now...
F 5: The opening has energy and a modicum of dynamic variation to complement the joy in the music. The
Chaconne is played mainly at
forte or even
ff. A kind of dramatic dialogue eventually develops toward the middle and reappears toward the end, where about the only soft section is heard.
F 6: The
Gigue has a modest amount of dynamic variation, similar to
F 5 and
F 2. The
Chaconne is very slow at the beginning, with the chords being played majestically, rather than slashed violently as in
F 2. Dynamic variation, bowing, and rubato offer contrasts in and among the sections of the
Chaconne.
I want to relisten to everything, but
F 6 right now is leading!
Thanks for all those comments, I'll await the rankings with interest ...
Quote from: Cato on March 27, 2016, 04:35:36 AM
Comments on F 1, 2, and 3! No rankings yet, since I need to hear the other 3 in Group F, but I thought I would catalyze and tantalize my fellow listeners! :D
In general, all of them are fine, but quite different at times in tempo and emphasis.
F 1: the opening movement is the fastest of the three, with the least variation in dynamics. As a result, one might call this a "straight-forward" interpretation. The Chaconne, however, seemed not to hang together too well, possibly because it is played in a rather straight-forward manner. Nevertheless, it is elegantly and beautifully played!
F 2: the opening is not as fast as with F 1, but has a little more variation in dynamics, showing a back-and-forth in the music. The big difference is in the Chaconne which has a much more dramatic, narrative interpretation, with the chords near the beginning being almost slashed and beaten, and there is a dialogue of sorts, as if an outraged husband has come home to deal with his wayward, pleading wife! 0:)
F 3: a moderate speed is heard in the opening, with much more variation in dynamics than in the other two. The Chaconne, in contrast to F 2, sounds rather sedate and delicate. Again, the soloist brings out a kind of dialogue at times, a slow one, and at times one thinks the violinist may just slow down completely and stop in the middle for no particularly good reason.
More later! 0:) Happy Easter! 0:)
Quote from: Cato on March 27, 2016, 07:35:18 AM
Okay, time for F 4!
It has a fairly moderate tempo, and is played with little dynamic variation, much like F 1. There is a good deal of echo in the recording, giving it a "big" sound. The Chaconne is rather slow, almost cautious, and at a generally constant volume, although during the fast contrapuntal figurations toward the middle there is a kind of crescendo. The last part of the Chaconne continues with a moderate, "cautious" sound both in tempo and dynamics.
Quote from: Cato on March 29, 2016, 04:53:05 AM
And now...
F 5: The opening has energy and a modicum of dynamic variation to complement the joy in the music. The Chaconne is played mainly at forte or even ff. A kind of dramatic dialogue eventually develops toward the middle and reappears toward the end, where about the only soft section is heard.
F 6: The Gigue has a modest amount of dynamic variation, similar to F 5 and F 2. The Chaconne is very slow at the beginning, with the chords being played majestically, rather than slashed violently as in F 2. Dynamic variation, bowing, and rubato offer contrasts in and among the sections of the Chaconne.
I want to relisten to everything, but F 6 right now is leading!
Further thoughts:
F 1 surely does zip through the opening, and at the beginning the
Chaconne one hears either some heavy breathing or rustling clothes.
F 2: This remains the leader in drama for the
Chaconne, as the player finds an emotional aspect missing in some of the others.
F 3: My initial impressions remain the same.
F 4: Again, not much else to say. The dynamics in the Chaconne allow for a slow crescendo toward the ending. A few minor squeaks here and there.
F 5: The
Chaconne is fairly slow until the end, and can seem at times methodical rather than expressive.
F 6: Combines one of the best
Gigues with one of the best
Chaconnes.
Very difficult, and the last one is not a bad choice: they are all good choices, depending on what you might prefer at the moment or in general.
I believe I will declare a tie for #1:
F 6 =
F 2
F 1
F 3
F 4
F 5
Quote from: Cato on April 04, 2016, 10:22:30 AM
Very difficult, and the last one is not a bad choice: they are all good choices, depending on what you might prefer at the moment or in general.
And, to illustrate that point, your top choices F6 and F2, are recordings that, in round 1, you rated as last and next-to-last in their groups. :-X ;)
Fascinating. And looking back, your group E rankings were similarly topsy-turvy, so I wonder if this is more about the different styles of music featured in the two rounds so far.
Thanks for all your comments so far.
Quote from: aukhawk on April 05, 2016, 01:33:06 AM
And, to illustrate that point, your top choices F6 and F2, are recordings that, in round 1, you rated as last and next-to-last in their groups. :-X ;)
Fascinating. And looking back, your group E rankings were similarly topsy-turvy, so I wonder if this is more about the different styles of music featured in the two rounds so far.
Thanks for all your comments so far.
Yes, I would think that would explain it: Violinist X might not play to one's liking in Composition Y, but then be outstanding in the performance of Composition Z.
Hello? Any other reviewers out there? :laugh:
Quote from: Cato on April 11, 2016, 04:39:54 PM
Hello? Any other reviewers out there? :laugh:
Waves hand.
I have a tentative ranking, a top two and a trailing trio, but need to listen at least once more.
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on April 11, 2016, 05:51:48 PM
Waves hand.
I have a tentative ranking, a top two and a trailing trio, but need to listen at least once more.
As opposed to earlier blind listenings, this one needed a second run-through! 0:)
Quote from: Cato on April 11, 2016, 04:39:54 PM
Hello? Any other reviewers out there? :laugh:
Yes. But I need a due date. I have been busy for this one, but I want to do it. If there is even a tentative date, it would help.
Quote from: mc ukrneal on April 11, 2016, 06:52:26 PM
Yes. But I need a due date. I have been busy for this one, but I want to do it. If there is even a tentative date, it would help.
The same with me.
Hmm. Well - no pressure, is all I can say.
We really need a minimum of 3 rankings for each of the 2 groups, and we're not close to that yet. I've taken to listening to Vivaldi for pleasure - it's that bad ;D ;D
My copy of Rachel Barton Pine landed today. It is not issued by Cedille, her label heretofore: it is on Avie, with the cooyright held by her through a corporate entity (RBP Music LLC)
Quote from: aukhawk on April 13, 2016, 01:26:05 PM
Hmm. Well - no pressure, is all I can say.
We really need a minimum of 3 rankings for each of the 2 groups, and we're not close to that yet.
Are we close yet? 0:)
Jascha Heifetz on television (late 1960's/early '70's ?):
https://www.youtube.com/v/6q-Zqz7mNjQ
That actually sounds much better than the RCA recording (circa 1952) which I have in the Pristine remaster - and not included in the blind comparison.
Thanks for sharing, Cato :)
"Is anybody there? Does anybody care?" :laugh:
(Waves)
I hope to give in my results sometime soon.
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on June 01, 2016, 05:10:17 PM
(Waves)
I hope to give in my results sometime soon.
So do I.
I admit, that I had forgotten about it.
Me too! ;D
Testing, testing, 1,2,3! 8)
The Bach...anyone?...anyone?...Violin....anyone?....Sonatas and...anyone?...Partitas?
https://www.youtube.com/v/wl0HKVDFKHQ
Quote from: Cato on June 22, 2016, 09:02:49 AM
Testing, testing, 1,2,3! 8)
Testing, testing, 1,2,3! 8)
Presently moving to another living place i shall be unable to listen to anything for the next two weeks or so.
Bump. aukhawk hasn't visited in a month and I am finally listening to round 2.
Please do go ahead I'm right here :)
Quote from: aukhawk on August 26, 2016, 06:28:43 AM
Please do go ahead I'm right here :)
YAY! 8)
This might be of interest:
https://www.youtube.com/v/tA2V2JHczLE
The reason I hadn't responded for a while is that there was nothing to add, and with the blind comparison apparently stalled, the best thing was to simply let the thread die.
I decided to leave it until December 1st, and if there was no apparent progress by that time, I'd pull the plug, and reveal what is known about the remaining 11 recordings. After round 1 there were 3 outstanding versions, all getting a near-100% approval rating, and all three quite different styles and recordings to my ears. Two of them would come as no surprise to GMGers, while the third is as far as I can tell not mentioned at all in these fora. What little data I have from round 2 (thankyou Cato) does nothing to diminish these three, and if we were to go to a final round right now it would be these three fighting it out. But I need more data before going on so Pat B's thoughts and anyone else would be most welcome. Otherwise as I say, the plug is pulled December 1st.
The links are still available for download, please let me know if you want them to be re-sent to you, and just a reminder that the music for round 2 is from the 2nd Partita, the Gigue and the first half of the Chaconne.
The final, if we ever get that far, will be the 2nd Sonata.
I have been hemming and hawing all this time because I like all five candidates in group E about the same, and my choice keeps shifting.
But E1 and E5 sound more PI to me, so I seem to prefer them slightly to E2/3/4.
How far are we in? Is there still time to enter? :D
"We has all the time in the world ..." </Louis>
You have PM.
Thankyou Jeffrey - so shall we say E1/E5 joint 1st, E2/3/4 joint 3rd? It so happens a previous vote placed E1/5 1st and 2nd so that would only confirm what is already shaping up ...
QuoteImpressions of E 1: A clear and crisp joy dances and flies very easily throughout the opening Giga, and in the Ciaconna I found a narrative and dialogue of interest. The opening of the Ciaconna is played with mystery and with delicacy, as if two people were gently revealing secrets. Accelerating and then slowing down, and playing with the dynamics, the performer found great drama in the notes.
E 2: The performance takes place in a large space and is rather deliberate. The opening of the Ciaconna sounded like a student carefully practicing scales rather than a performance of anything of substance. This changes finally in the last minutes, where some delicate mystery is expressed.
E 3: Similar to E 2 in that the Giga is a bit slower than in E 1, but here a dialogue of sorts is heard. The Ciaconna contained more of interest than in E 2.
E 4: A performance beginning with some interest in the Giga, delicate and cautious, but then in the Ciaconna deteriorating and falling apart at times: the impression of scale-practicing as in E 2 popped up now and then.
E 5: A "big sound" from the violin, faster and more nuanced than in E 2, 3, and 4. The Ciaconna has much more interest and even drama in it than the previous three. The player can be heard breathing or sniffing now and then, as if s/he needed huge breaths to play the next section.
Rankings as of now (I will need to hear the "extras" later):
E 1 by far!
E 5
E 3
E 4
E 2
Quote from: Cato on March 04, 2016, 08:13:04 AM
Just listened to the "extras" which Aukhawk has not mandated to be part of the judging, but... ;)
Will it change the rankings above? The "extra" is the last c. 7 minutes of the Ciaconna
E 1: There is something of a "raw" sound at the beginning, and things are rather slow and very hushed. The conception is for the drama to build all the way toward the end.
E 2 It has a smoother opening than E 1, and that big, echoing sound noted above is present. In general, a better experience than in the previous examples, with a dramatic build-up toward the end.
E 3 The opening is somewhat in between the previous contenders. Dynamics are fairly static throughout, until the last 3 minutes, where the volume decreases now and then. The "dialogue" is emphasized rather than understated. There is an occasional tendency to "saw" through the notes.
E 4: A "raw" sound again for the opening leads to another dialogue which is played with energy, and a dramatic back and forth is developed fairly well. A "twang" in the last 30 (6:06 to be precise for those reviewing here) seconds startled me, and must have been deliberate for some reason...unless it was a glitch in the download.
E 5: Again the "big sound" mentioned above is present, and the movement takes off fairly quickly accompanied by highly annoying nasal congestion. Dynamics are fairly static until about the halfway point, where things slow down a bit, but not much. A swift and dramatic performance marred by the constant sniffing or asthmatic breathing.
I think the rankings will stay as they are. 0:)
My opinions on
Group E from earlier.
Quote from: aukhawk on August 28, 2016, 01:01:47 AM
The reason I hadn't responded for a while is that there was nothing to add, and with the blind comparison apparently stalled, the best thing was to simply let the thread die.
I decided to leave it until December 1st, and if there was no apparent progress by that time, I'd pull the plug, and reveal what is known about the remaining 11 recordings. After round 1 there were 3 outstanding versions, all getting a near-100% approval rating, and all three quite different styles and recordings to my ears. Two of them would come as no surprise to GMGers, while the third is as far as I can tell not mentioned at all in these fora. What little data I have from round 2 (thankyou Cato) does nothing to diminish these three, and if we were to go to a final round right now it would be these three fighting it out. But I need more data before going on so Pat B's thoughts and anyone else would be most welcome. Otherwise as I say, the plug is pulled December 1st.
The links are still available for download, please let me know if you want them to be re-sent to you, and just a reminder that the music for round 2 is from the 2nd Partita, the Gigue and the first half of the Chaconne.
The final, if we ever get that far, will be the 2nd Sonata.
Can I (again) suggest you just put a date out there by which time they all need to be done rather than just waiting? This would work much better (say, September 30). Then, you won't have this limbo period and people can choose to listen or not. I think this thread will die the death you describe if you do not. But if you do, and remind people with a PM (those who agreed to do it), I think you'll get a result.
No.1
E1: Fast and singular, almost thin – without much reverb... threading its way with icy clarity through the work.
E5: Back to old and almost-perfect (after No.3) – emphasis on almost. Considerably more thick tone, but varyingly applied... also with great speed and, though intermittently with variety, ultimately noodling through.
This isn't perfect, but it's nice how it climbs through the corners and edges in the first part and how it tackles the rest, hard... making the ugly sound ugly; unafraid of edges and wrinkles. I suspect some interesting musicianship behind this. If this should turn out to be Perlman, take me to the back of the house and put me out of other people's misery. Another step (or 2, re: E3) lower than the others. Violesque.
No.3
E2: Light, fairly racy and yet trying to play everything legato. I'm not sure that works. Much breezier than, say Shlomo Mintz, but in that direction. It's not slow, unless listened to directly after E1, in which case it can feel that way.
E4: Light, much more on target, compared to E3. lower pitch, better touch, more variety... livelier. Decent enough beginning, but fiddling, eventually... and then (E4-2) ending up as tedious, crawling and academic... and then it sneaks up on me again and is being all enjoyable and subcutaneously clever. Rat!
No.5
E3: Clear and dry, no-nonsense. Direct and reasonably clean sound. High-pitched Not 100% intonation secure, but very, very secure. Prepared not to like it on second listening, but there's something in it that carries the performance through... even if much of the outer garb wouldn't be to my obvious or immediate liking. Good is not good enough. Not worse than E2 or E4, perhaps, but bland does get demerits; there are more points of interest -- even if it is annoyance -- in the other two versions.
Very nice commentary! We are fairly close in our rankings: I understand switching #3 to the bottom, but all 5 performances are worthwhile, no matter where they are.
I have a large collection of the Bach Sonatas and Partitas for solo violin and the best of them, in my opinion, completely non-HIP, by the way, is the set on DGG by Nathan Milstein. He communicates this music to me more convincingly than anyone I've ever heard. His technical playing is astonishing, by the way. Nobody plays the great C Major Sonata's fugue on Milstein's level, in my experience.
Quote from: hpowders on September 14, 2016, 03:19:22 PM
I have a large collection of the Bach Sonatas and Partitas for solo violin and the best of them, in my opinion, completely non-HIP, by the way, is the set on DGG by Nathan Milstein. He communicates this music to me more convincingly than anyone I've ever heard. His technical playing is astonishing, by the way. Nobody plays the great C Major Sonata's fugue on Milstein's level, in my experience.
Check with
Aukhawk: perhaps you can still do some of the blind listening! 0:)
Quote from: Cato on September 14, 2016, 04:41:36 PM
Check with Aukhawk: perhaps you can still do some of the blind listening! 0:)
I would be able to pick out Milstein whether dumb, blind or one hand tied behind my back.
Quote from: El Píthi on September 15, 2016, 06:11:40 AM
I would be able to pick out Milstein whether dumb, blind or one hand tied behind my back.
Famous last words! >:D
Quote from: El Píthi on September 14, 2016, 03:19:22 PM
I have a large collection of the Bach Sonatas and Partitas for solo violin and the best of them, in my opinion, completely non-HIP, by the way, is the set on DGG by Nathan Milstein. He communicates this music to me more convincingly than anyone I've ever heard. His technical playing is astonishing, by the way. Nobody plays the great C Major Sonata's fugue on Milstein's level, in my experience.
Eliminated in round 1! (With my assistance and to my surprise.)
Quote from: Pat B on September 15, 2016, 02:02:36 PM
Eliminated in round 1! (With my assistance and to my surprise.)
You had a contest here and Milstein was eliminated?
I thought you dudes were music lovers. :(
Quote from: El Píthi on September 15, 2016, 02:09:11 PM
You had a contest here and Milstein was eliminated?
I thought you dudes were music lovers. :(
Like I said, I was surprised. But strange things happen in blind comparisons, and that's part of the point.
Quote from: Pat B on September 15, 2016, 04:30:42 PM
Like I said, I was surprised. But strange things happen in blind comparisons, and that's part of the point.
I would have loved to participate in a blind comparison of a work I love. Fascinating! :)
Quote from: El Píthi on September 15, 2016, 02:09:11 PM
You had a contest here and Milstein was eliminated?
I thought you dudes were music lovers. :(
A similar thing happened with a blind comparison on Bach's cello suites...
I think several factors lead to bias:
a) which of the forum members participate, obviously
b) the fact that the impression based on a particular fragment is not representative of the artistic value of the whole
c) somehow listening "through a magnifying glass" (so to speak) creates an increased emphasis on recording quality with many
d) the voting system creates a bias towards "middle of the road" interpretations
So, a predictable outcome of these comparisons is a modern recording of a middle of the road interpretation that nobody dislikes but only few love... 8)
Q
Quote from: Que on September 16, 2016, 04:36:16 AM
A similar thing happened with a blind comparison on Bach's cello suites...
I think several factors lead to bias:
a) which of the forum members participate, obviously
b) the fact that the impression based on a particular fragment is not representative of the artistic value of the whole
c) somehow listening "through a magnifying glass" (so to speak) creates an increased emphasis on recording quality with many
d) the voting system creates a bias towards "middle of the road" interpretations
So, a predictable outcome of these comparisons is a modern recording of a middle of the road interpretation that nobody dislikes but only few love... 8)
Q
I would love to participate in something like that. I have 11 sets of the cello suites. Middle of the road? The first Ma would probably score highly.
Quote from: El Píthi on September 16, 2016, 05:12:18 AM
I would love to participate in something like that. I have 11 sets of the cello suites. Middle of the road? The first Ma would probably score highly.
Just for the record: a middle of the road interpretation can be excellent artistically, it just typically combines elements of different approaches with a specific musical perspective. A perfect fit for some.
I am sorry to lead this thread astray, see for more information on the winner here: http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,23936.msg902243.html#msg902243
Q
Quote from: Que on September 16, 2016, 05:27:09 AM
Just for the record: a middle of the road interpretation can be excellent artistically, it just typically combines elements of different approaches with a specific musical perspective. A perfect fit for some.
I am sorry to lead this thread astray, see for more information on the winner here: http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,23936.msg902243.html#msg902243
Q
I have the Schiff. Very fine. Of the 11, I possess, the only clinker I have is by a Chinese cellist named Wu.
Quote from: Que on September 16, 2016, 04:36:16 AM
A similar thing happened with a blind comparison on Bach's cello suites...
I think several factors lead to bias:
a) which of the forum members participate, obviously
b) the fact that the impression based on a particular fragment is not representative of the artistic value of the whole
c) somehow listening "through a magnifying glass" (so to speak) creates an increased emphasis on recording quality with many
d) the voting system creates a bias towards "middle of the road" interpretations
So, a predictable outcome of these comparisons is a modern recording of a middle of the road interpretation that nobody dislikes but only few love... 8)
Q
Is that really what happened with Cello Suites? I followed that thread with great interest, and was surprised by the end result. But as I recall, the 'winning' recording was very much liked by several people - I think four voters placed it 1st in the final round. And I'm glad they did - I bought the recording on the strength of the recommendation, and did not regret it all. Apologies for the off-topic digression. I'm eagerly awaiting the resumption of the Sonatas & Partitas comparison.
Quote from: El Píthi on September 16, 2016, 05:12:18 AM
I would love to participate in something like that.
Check out the epic, and I mean absolutely EPIC ??? ??? ???
Sturm und Drang topic for a Blind Comparison involving
Bruckner's Sixth Symphony!!!
http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,23157.0.html (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,23157.0.html)
Dudes! That was almost two years ago already!
Quote from: Cato on September 16, 2016, 06:42:02 AM
Check out the epic, and I mean absolutely EPIC ??? ??? ??? Sturm und Drang topic for a Blind Comparison involving Bruckner's Sixth Symphony!!!
http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,23157.0.html (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,23157.0.html)
Dudes! That was almost two years ago already!
Thank you!
The perfect job for me. Blind classical music comparative listening!
Quote from: JCBuckley on September 16, 2016, 06:06:28 AM
Is that really what happened with Cello Suites? I followed that thread with great interest, and was surprised by the end result. But as I recall, the 'winning' recording was very much liked by several people - I think four voters placed it 1st in the final round. And I'm glad they did - I bought the recording on the strength of the recommendation, and did not regret it all. Apologies for the off-topic digression. I'm eagerly awaiting the resumption of the Sonatas & Partitas comparison.
Good question. :) And the blame for the digression is entirely on me.. :-[
I do think that the recording that won fitted the bill of being a perfect mixture of conventional ("Romantic") and Historically Informed traditions, combined with excellent musicianship. I did find it very
agreeable sounding interpretation, but neither here nor there, lacking in intensity.
But you are right, I also recall several declarations of admiration for the recording. I might biased myself.... :D
Then again....I can't remember encountering it again very often on these pages?
Q
Quote from: Que on September 16, 2016, 09:21:32 AM
I do think that the recording that won fitted the bill of being a perfect mixture of conventional ("Romantic") and Historically Informed traditions, combined with excellent musicianship. I did find it very agreeable sounding interpretation, but neither here nor there, lacking in intensity.
Perhaps I was overly impressed because my knowledge of recordings of the Cello Suites is nowhere near that of many people on this forum. I have only Casals, Bylsma and Starker, plus Isserlis. After buying the last of these, I decided I would never again pay any attention to Gramophone reviews. GMG forum is a far better guide.
Now, back to the Sonatas & Partitas. I have only Grumiaux and Podger, so expect to have my horizons widened again.
Quote from: JCBuckley on September 16, 2016, 06:06:28 AM
Is that really what happened with Cello Suites? I followed that thread with great interest, and was surprised by the end result. But as I recall, the 'winning' recording was very much liked by several people - I think four voters placed it 1st in the final round. And I'm glad they did - I bought the recording on the strength of the recommendation, and did not regret it all. Apologies for the off-topic digression. I'm eagerly awaiting the resumption of the Sonatas & Partitas comparison.
Yes, actually, I thought that the Cello Blind Listening very neatly dovetailed with my prejudices and, conveniently, reviews. :-) And the one recording that was new to me, the winner, has made its way into my collection. Terrific, indeed, if almost too perfect, sound-wise.
Quote from: El Píthi on September 16, 2016, 07:23:12 AM
Thank you!
The perfect job for me. Blind classical music comparative listening!
Great! Feel free to set up your own topic and I will gladly join!
Beethoven Seventh recordings? 0:)
Tchaikovsky Manfred Symphony versions? ???
Ring cycles? ::) ;)
Quote from: Cato on September 16, 2016, 11:31:37 AM
Great! Feel free to set up your own topic and I will gladly join!
Beethoven Seventh recordings? 0:) Tchaikovsky Manfred Symphony versions? ???
Ring cycles? ::) ;)
One of those will have to go. I HATE Tchaikovsky's Manfred! 8)
Quote from: hpowders on September 16, 2016, 05:58:56 AM
I have the Schiff. Very fine. Of the 11, I possess, the only clinker I have is by a Chinese cellist named Wu.
IMO Wu's interpretation is first and foremost sober but also rather introvert. My experience is, that it stands repetition and even grows with repetition.
Quote from: (: premont :) on September 17, 2016, 12:42:51 AM
IMO Wu's interpretation is first and foremost sober but also rather introvert. My experience is, that it stands repetition and even grows with repetition.
The review I read in Fanfare praised the Wu for its "danceability". After listening, I come to the complete opposite conclusion. I disagree. It is the most introverted of my 11 Bach Cello Suites. Very slow, in general.
There are a few intonation slips, but they don't bother me.
I'm due to play it again. :)
Quote from: Que on September 16, 2016, 04:36:16 AM
A similar thing happened with a blind comparison on Bach's cello suites...
I think several factors lead to bias:
a) which of the forum members participate, obviously
b) the fact that the impression based on a particular fragment is not representative of the artistic value of the whole
c) somehow listening "through a magnifying glass" (so to speak) creates an increased emphasis on recording quality with many
d) the voting system creates a bias towards "middle of the road" interpretations
So, a predictable outcome of these comparisons is a modern recording of a middle of the road interpretation that nobody dislikes but only few love... 8)
Q
I have a quibble, or perhaps an addendum (to) your list. In the early rounds (particularly first round), I think the more unusual choices are rewarded over the 'middle of the road', but as we get closer to the end and listen to longer snippets (and finally the whole piece), the more mainstream versions take over. But then sometimes, it is just 'luck of the draw' where one first round group will have even six excellent interpretations, while another group, one is not even satisfied with one. But then who can predict when the reputations of many discs are quite high.
I thought someone posted a list once of all the links to the blind listening threads. If I find it, I'll post it.
Yes I did _ but I'm away at the moment and fumbling on this tablet _ I,ll post a link next week and also update progress on this thread.
A link to a list of all (as far as I've found) blind comparisons on
GMG is now included as a sig line in my posts, including this one.
A belated thanks to
jlaurson for his rankings and interesting comments on Group E.
The situation now is that I await just one (at least) further set of rankings for
Group F - and then we can proceed to the final round, which will be 4, or maybe 5, or possibly only 3, recordings.
Pat B at least has indicated that he is listening to these. If anyone else thinks they could help out here by listening to this group (of 6) within say a month, please let me know and I'll supply links. The music to be listened to is about 11 minutes per candidate, on average (with an extra 7 minutes as an option). So only about 1 hour 10 in total (though I wouldn't recommend doing it all in one session).
Quote from: mc ukrneal on September 04, 2016, 05:10:12 PM
Can I (again) suggest you just put a date out there by which time they all need to be done rather than just waiting?
I did note your suggestion, thanks - but my observation from several previous blind comparisons here is that arbitrary deadlines are futile - they simply result in people replying to say "oh I just need another week" and so it goes on. No-one's going anywhere though there is a risk that by the end some of the recordings surveyed will be out of print ;) or there will be a new kid on the block that should have been included :-\
The data so far is obviously far more sketchy than would be ideal, but on the other hand the selections (in Group E) are very clear indeed and I have plenty of confidence in those. Actually no possible further ranking or pair of rankings could alter who goes through. Group F it's a bit early to say but it could very well turn out to be the same there.
So I do have 3 more firm eliminations at this point - I could announce those to maintain thread interest, but the downside is this might slightly 'un-blind' the listening for anyone tackling Group F - I'm not sure that really matters much at this stage, what do people think?
Cello Suite discussions are best followed up in the excellent Cello Suites thread:
http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php?topic=3719.280
though I will just say that in retrospect I regret not including 2 versions in particular in the blind comparison -
Kirschbaum and
Dieltiens (2nd recording).
Quote from: aukhawk on September 26, 2016, 03:29:20 AM
The situation now is that I await just one (at least) further set of rankings for Group F - and then we can proceed to the final round, which will be 4, or maybe 5, or possibly only 3, recordings.
It is precisely group F, which you sent me, and which I haven't rated yet.
I was delayed by a series of upheavals in my life, not serious things but time consuming - moving to another place among them.
Now I shall try to find group F on my backup and listen to it again.
Quote from: aukhawk on September 26, 2016, 03:29:20 AM
A link to a list of all (as far as I've found) blind comparisons on GMG is now included as a sig line in my posts, including this one.
The data so far is obviously far more sketchy than would be ideal, but on the other hand the selections (in Group E) are very clear indeed and I have plenty of confidence in those. Actually no possible further ranking or pair of rankings could alter who goes through. Group F it's a bit early to say but it could very well turn out to be the same there.
So I do have 3 more firm eliminations at this point - I could announce those to maintain thread interest, but the downside is this might slightly 'un-blind' the listening for anyone tackling Group F - I'm not sure that really matters much at this stage, what do people think?
Keep it blind! 8)
Quote from: (: premont :) on September 26, 2016, 01:21:38 PM
Now I shall try to find group F on my backup and listen to it again.
Nice to know! 0:) It will be interesting to see the most recent results!
This is to announce that I will close this blind comparison :( on November 30th, and then reveal what can be said about the 11 remaining recordings.
They can, at least, be divided into three broad categories:
* recordings that did well enough to get to round 2 (that is, that were liked more than Podger >:D ) - but haven't really shone in either round. 5 of these.
* recordings that did extremely well in one round, but not in both. 4 of these. Unsurprisingly including several GMG favourites, but also one 'joker'.
* recordings that did extremely well in both rounds, and so for want of a better option are our joint winners, 2 of these. One of them would be no surprise at all to GMG-ers, but the other one I think will be unexpected.
However each of these three categories includes 1 or more from Group F :-X - and since I have received only one response for that group, you'll be free to take the results with a large pinch of salt. I know I would! Just one more result for that group could give a lot more meaning - and very likely elevate another favourite to the top table.
Until the 30th then ...
Quote from: aukhawk on November 18, 2016, 09:46:46 AM
However each of these three categories includes 1 or more from Group F :-X - and since I have received only one response for that group, you'll be free to take the results with a large pinch of salt. I know I would! Just one more result for that group could give a lot more meaning - and very likely elevate another favourite to the top table.
Until the 30th then ...
Calling 8)
Premont 0:) !
Quote from: Cato on November 18, 2016, 10:15:53 AM
Calling 8)Premont 0:) !
Well - here are the votes of the Danish jury, concerning group F. Excuse the delay.
F 1: MI. Brilliant, fast, not that much vibrato. Playing straightforward and not that deep. Seems to favor perfection higher than expression. Sounds like a young player.
F 2: MI. Might be a player from a generation older or a little more than F 1. More expression. End result rather conventional though.
F 3: PI. In all respects a nice and satisfying performance.
F 4: PI. Much like F3, but a little more concerned about the agogic details giving the playing more life.
F 5: PI. Noble and expressive. Every detail seems well mastered. By far the most impressive performance in this group.
F 6: MI. Old fashioned as to quality of tone and dynamic shading. Not ny cup of tea.
That makes:
F 5 >> F 4 > F 3 >> F 2 > F 1 >> F 6.
THanks very much Premont - well actually that has muddied the waters cosiderably! - being an almost exact inverse of Cato's previous rankings! ;D
We need a tie-breaker - please can anyone else give these a listen before the end of the month?
The music (Partita 2, Giga and Ciaccona part 1) is approximately 11 minutes long, with the Ciaccona starting about 4 minutes in, on average, and there are 6 to listen to.
Here are the links - (the files and these public links will be taken down at the end of this month)
FILES:
(links removed at end of November)
Quote from: aukhawk on November 20, 2016, 03:16:08 AM
THanks very much Premont - well actually that has muddied the waters cosiderably! - being an almost exact inverse of Cato's previous rankings! ;D
Yes, I was aware of that. But it does not change my mind.
Cato is apparently not as HIP-minded as I am.
You may let both F 5 and F 6 continue to the next round.
To review my comments on Group F:
Quote from: Cato on March 27, 2016, 04:35:36 AM
Comments on F 1, 2, and 3! No rankings yet, since I need to hear the other 3 in Group F, but I thought I would catalyze and tantalize my fellow listeners! :D
In general, all of them are fine, but quite different at times in tempo and emphasis.
F 1: the opening movement is the fastest of the three, with the least variation in dynamics. As a result, one might call this a "straight-forward" interpretation. The Chaconne, however, seemed not to hang together too well, possibly because it is played in a rather straight-forward manner. Nevertheless, it is elegantly and beautifully played!
F 2: the opening is not as fast as with F 1, but has a little more variation in dynamics, showing a back-and-forth in the music. The big difference is in the Chaconne which has a much more dramatic, narrative interpretation, with the chords near the beginning being almost slashed and beaten, and there is a dialogue of sorts, as if an outraged husband has come home to deal with his wayward, pleading wife! 0:)
F 3: a moderate speed is heard in the opening, with much more variation in dynamics than in the other two. The Chaconne, in contrast to F 2, sounds rather sedate and delicate. Again, the soloist brings out a kind of dialogue at times, a slow one, and at times one thinks the violinist may just slow down completely and stop in the middle for no particularly good reason.
Quote from: Cato on March 27, 2016, 07:35:18 AM
Okay, time for F 4!
It has a fairly moderate tempo, and is played with little dynamic variation, much like F 1. There is a good deal of echo in the recording, giving it a "big" sound. The Chaconne is rather slow, almost cautious, and at a generally constant volume, although during the fast contrapuntal figurations toward the middle there is a kind of crescendo. The last part of the Chaconne continues with a moderate, "cautious" sound both in tempo and dynamics.
Quote from: Cato on March 29, 2016, 04:53:05 AM
And now...
F 5: The opening has energy and a modicum of dynamic variation to complement the joy in the music. The Chaconne is played mainly at forte or even ff. A kind of dramatic dialogue eventually develops toward the middle and reappears toward the end, where about the only soft section is heard.
F 6: The Gigue has a modest amount of dynamic variation, similar to F 5 and F 2. The Chaconne is very slow at the beginning, with the chords being played majestically, rather than slashed violently as in F 2. Dynamic variation, bowing, and rubato offer contrasts in and among the sections of the Chaconne.
I want to relisten to everything, but F 6 right now is leading!
Quote from: Cato on April 04, 2016, 10:22:30 AM
Further thoughts: F 1 surely does zip through the opening, and at the beginning the Chaconne one hears either some heavy breathing or rustling clothes.
F 2: This remains the leader in drama for the Chaconne, as the player finds an emotional aspect missing in some of the others.
F 3: My initial impressions remain the same.
F 4: Again, not much else to say. The dynamics in the Chaconne allow for a slow crescendo toward the ending. A few minor squeaks here and there.
F 5: The Chaconne is fairly slow until the end, and can seem at times methodical rather than expressive.
F 6: Combines one of the best Gigues with one of the best Chaconnes.
Very difficult, and the last one is not a bad choice: they are all good choices, depending on what you might prefer at the moment or in general.
I believe I will declare a tie for #1:
F 6 = F 2
F 1
F 3
F 4
F 5
Many Thanks to
Premont for listening to Group F !
Quote from: (: premont :) on November 20, 2016, 04:40:27 AM
You may let both F 5 and F 6 continue to the next round.
Well you see - if there is a next round - neither of those will qualify. (Due to other contenders profiting while F5/F6 cancel each other out.)
If someone else can listen to and assess Group F, that may help.
Quote from: aukhawk on November 20, 2016, 03:02:30 PM
Well you see - if there is a next round - neither of those will qualify. (Due to other contenders profiting while F5/F6 cancel each other out.)
If someone else can listen to and assess Group F, that may help.
I should be able to do so before the deadline...
Quote from: aukhawk on November 20, 2016, 03:16:08 AM
We need a tie-breaker - please can anyone else give these a listen before the end of the month?
I'll get my Group F rankings in by then.
Here are my thoughts (brief) and rankings:
F1 - Opening is wonderfully full and crisp. Occasional rubato (or unsteady beat) seems to be unplanned, but after a couple early appearances, settles down. Static sounding in terms of dynamics. At times seems to be showing off! But overall I liked it. Second part is less to my liking, The harshness, which is tamed in the opening, is allowed too much reign here. Dynamics are again not ideal. While I liked it overall, there are flaws.
F2 - Less ideal sound - even harsher than #1. More exact in tempo. Phrasing is less staccato than #1 (which is not hard to be). Found it a bit wearying. Dynamics just too unchanging. Stronger second portion, as it seems more forward moving. Still a bit fatiguing.
F3 - Ah, here we have something a bit more nuanced. And the dynamic movement makes a HUGE difference. Finally a performer who makes me feel something. Second portion is softer and less harsh than the others. I like this performance a lot.
F4 - A playful opening to some degree, with more variance of phrasing (and mix). But not always successful - for example dynamics are not as varied compared to #3 - more like #1 and #2. Still, more good than bad. The second portion seems a bit lifeless to me. Lacks cohesion (long line is lost). Irritating phrasing. Some ugly sounds. Not my favorite.
F5 - A bit stilted to start, and some unevenness in tempo in moments. Dynamics are better, but it comes across as too inconsistent at the start. Still, the sound is closer to #3 than the others and I like this aspect. And it picks up (tighter - which is good) as it moves along. Second portion is static (dynamics again, and wearying), but has moments that stand out.
F6 - A brilliant start. Not harsh sounding at all. Tempo not always consistent. Dynamics bring greater interest. I am simply drawn in by this performer. The second portion opens and it is masterful. Real drama here. Varied sound. Wonderful interpretive elements. I love it.
To sum up, I find #1, #2, #4 a bit wearying at times, despite some very positive aspects to their performances. Of these, I liked #1 best I suppose. F5 is a difficult one - I liked the first part more than those, but the second part doesn't always compare favorably. I know what I think of it, the question is how to rank it. I enjoyed F3 and F6 tremendously. Both have similarities for why I like it - more variation in sounds, a beautiful sound produced by the instrument, and a clear road map to the piece from start to finish. Tough choice!
So here is the ranking:
F6 (by a hair)
F3 (happily live with this one too)
------------
F1
------------
F5
F4
F2 ( I think the sound just wore me out in the end - would not want to listen to this much)
I would pick only the first two to move through. I am eager now to look at the others to see what they wrote...
First, a summary of results
Cato Premont Ukrneal
F1: 3rd 5th 3rd
F2: 1st 4th 6th
F3: 4th 3rd 2nd
F4: 5th 2nd 5th
F5: 6th 1st 4th
F6: 1st 6th 1st
Very interesting. I have agreed with Cato about F6 (good) and F4 and F5 (not so good). But I have also agreed with Premont on F2 (not so good), which Cato had tied for first. At the moment, it looks best for F6 and F3 to move forward (not knowing how previous rounds may/may not affect it), but another vote could blow that out of the water. I found it interesting that my view agrees more with Cato (considering some past blind listening we've done), but with a pretty major divergence in F2.
Quote from: mc ukrneal on November 22, 2016, 06:25:50 PM
I enjoyed F3 and F6 tremendously. Both have similarities for why I like it - more variation in sounds, a beautiful sound produced by the instrument, and a clear road map to the piece from start to finish. Tough choice!
So here is the ranking:
F6 (by a hair)
F3 (happily live with this one too)
Thank you sir. Great effort, and perceptive comments. I'll await
Pat B with interest, but
The
Axe will fall at the end of the month. And yes, there will be some weight accorded to the Round 1 rankings when deciding on the finalists, and the final may consist of 3, or 4, or possibly 5 musicians, it depends where the natural gap seems to fall.
Quote from: mc ukrneal on November 22, 2016, 06:44:19 PM
First, a summary of results
Cato Premont Ukrneal
F1: 3rd 5th 3rd
F2: 1st 4th 6th
F3: 4th 3rd 2nd
F4: 5th 2nd 5th
F5: 6th 1st 4th
F6: 1st 6th 1st
Very interesting. I have agreed with Cato about F6 (good) and F4 and F5 (not so good). But I have also agreed with Premont on F2 (not so good), which Cato had tied for first. At the moment, it looks best for F6 and F3 to move forward (not knowing how previous rounds may/may not affect it), but another vote could blow that out of the water. I found it interesting that my view agrees more with Cato (considering some past blind listening we've done), but with a pretty major divergence in F2.
Yes, really interesting chart! Many thanks!
The excitement builds...
Pat B. ? We await your opinion! 8)
(http://f.tqn.com/y/europeanhistory/1/L/3/K/134362323.jpg)
Details of 6 more also-rans will follow very shortly.
For the eliminations so far out of 24 recordings initially surveyed, I refer you to reply #96 on page 5 of this thread. There we lost several high-profile names such as Milstein, Kuijken, Huggett and Podger, along with less well-known recordings from such as Beyer and Kaakinen (both of which happen to be among my personal favourite versions).
winner of my
Best of the rest award:
Last to be eliminated, to the sound of much wailing and gnashing of teeth,
and scoring 50% in round 1 and occupying 12th place overall, was GMG favourite
Rachel Podger
[asin]B00006JQU1[/asin]
Remarkably, of these 11 recordings to reach the 2nd round, only one improved on their 1st-round score, while just two others maintained their level. All the rest scored less well in the 2nd round than in the 1st.
Everyone arrived here having scored 60% or more in round 1 - but no-one outside the top 4 scored more than 47% in round 2. Tough round!
In the results presented below, the score is shown as a percentage across both rounds - quite simply, 100% would mean that everyone who had auditioned that recording so far, had placed it 1st in group every time they heard it. Looked at like that, a score of 80% or 90% would be very convincing indeed. Two of the recordings have scores that good.
Because we haven't had as many people auditioning and ranking these recordings as would be ideal, the score can not be taken as absolute - the figures in brackets are attempts to indicate possible margins for error.
The second bracketed figure after the score shows the probable effect if one more person were to audition and rank that recording. The first bracketed figures show the possible (but less likely) range of effects.
Comments below are prefaced R1 (from round 1, 1st Sonata) or R2 (from round 2, 2nd Partita)
11th is E2 with 48% (-8+9)(0) over 2 rounds
Showed promise in round 1, drifted away in round 2. I had expected her to do better, but the competition is very strong, and arguably the Ciaccona didn't play to her strengths.
R1 "I hear another incredible Adagio ... Slower than the others, wistful and melancholy,"
R1 "Fugue and Presto beneficially relaxed with time and technique to let the music speak."
BUT
R2 "The opening of the Ciaconna sounded like a student carefully practicing scales"
R2 "Light, fairly racy and yet trying to play everything legato. I'm not sure that works."
E2/d4 was ...
Christiane Edinger
[asin]B0000013U4[/asin]
The next five really can't be separated - that is, they are five very different performances certainly, with a style to suite everyone.
If you like what the comments suggest, then that recording is surely worth a listen.
6th== is F5 with 52% (-9+8)(0) over 2 rounds
Premont's favourite in both rounds, was ranked top twice but also last once, in individual rankings.
R1 "Adagio broad and opulent sounding, well balanced expression. Fugue and Presto equally balanced."
R2 "Noble and expressive. Every detail seems well mastered."
R2 "The opening has energy and a modicum of dynamic variation to complement the joy in the music. The Chaconne is played mainly at forte or even ff."
BUT
R1 "seemed to have trouble with the chords at the beginning, somewhat rough and slightly out-of-tune a couple times."
R2 "Second portion is static (dynamics again, and wearying)"
F5/d6 was ...
John Holloway
[asin]B000HWXS1O[/asin]
6th== is F1 with 53% (-7+7)(0) over 2 rounds
Was joint top of group in round 1 - but that was the much-reviled group B. Did OK in round 2 (47%) - but just not OK enough.
R1 "Nice broad phrasing in the Adagio, but the Fugue hurried and often a bit hectic."
R1 "The Fugue was much more dramatic than the Adagio, and it had a good deal of drive."
BUT
R2 "the fastest of the three, with the least variation in dynamics. As a result, one might call this a "straight-forward" interpretation"
R2 "Playing straightforward and not that deep. Seems to favor perfection higher than expression."
R2 "The harshness, which is tamed in the opening, is allowed too much reign here."
R1 "Another maddening listen"
No surprise maybe, that F1/b2 was ...
Isabelle Faust
[asin]B003122HEG[/asin]
6th== is E3 with 55% (-8+6)(-2) over 2 rounds
Was joint top of the highly-regarded group A in round 1 but last overall in round 2 with a miserable 30%.
R1 "the opening has drama rather than mystery, and the last section is never in danger of collapsing from lack of centrifugal force."
R1 "Nice flowing Adagio in conventional style. The Fugue more individualistic, romantic almost Beethovenízed."
R2 "Clear and dry, no-nonsense"
BUT
R1 "again things sound rather careful, rather than carefree"
R2 "There is an occasional tendency to "saw" through the notes."
A joker in the pack, E3/a5 was ...
Masayuki Kino
(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51sTYsYanNL._SS500.jpg)
6th== is E4 with 56% (-7+5)(-2) over 2 rounds
Did quite well in round 1 but failed to shine in round 2, this one is a cult favourite among certain GMG-ers
R1 "my favourite in this group. It's also the token eccentric."
R1 "This one sounded the most severely HIP"
BUT
R1 "The beginning of the Fugue - similar to several others - conveys a sense of struggle, but not in the good sense,"
R2 "A performance beginning with some interest in the Giga, delicate and cautious, but then in the Ciaconna deteriorating and falling apart at times"
R2 "Decent enough beginning, but fiddling, eventually... and then ... ending up as tedious, crawling and academic... and then it sneaks up on me again and is being all enjoyable and subcutaneously clever. Rat!"
E4/c4 was ...
Ingrid Matthews
[asin]B00004SR1H[/asin]
6th== is F4 with 56% (-7+5)(-2) over 2 rounds
Good comments below, but despite those, scoring no better than Matthews in either round, and last in her group in round 2.
R1 "The opening of the Adagio is smoothly, delicately handled,"
R1 "Adagio singing, much in the way I like it. Fugue relatively good."
R1 "The initial impression is of an excellence that I can't quite put my finger on."
R2 "Much like F3 ("In all respects a nice and satisfying performance"), but a little more concerned about the agogic details giving the playing more life."
R2 "A playful opening to some degree, with more variance of phrasing (and mix). But not always successful"
BUT
R2 "The Chaconne is rather slow, almost cautious"
In view of these comments, a cut above the rest perhaps, and winner of my
Close but no cigar award
F4/c3 was ...
Christine Busch
[asin]B009YYNUZK[/asin]
That leaves five, of which more later.
No real surprises in round 2 group F, at least not for me.
I await the continuation eagerly.
Which one was Podger?
Looking forward to the finale...
Quote from: (: premont :) on December 02, 2016, 04:18:13 AM
I await the continuation eagerly.
Quote from: mc ukrneal on December 02, 2016, 06:06:32 AM
Looking forward to the finale...
Amen!
Many thanks to
Aukhawk for all the work involved here!
For those who might have missed
Jascha Heifetz earlier: a TV performance, apparently not available on a CD or download (?):
https://www.youtube.com/v/6q-Zqz7mNjQ
Quote from: mc ukrneal on December 02, 2016, 06:06:32 AM
Which one was Podger?
Looking forward to the finale...
None of them - she failed to get past round 1, coming 4th out of 6 in her group (though some listeners did remark that it seemed a very strong group).
Do we really want a final?
Here (anonymised for now) are the remaining 5 and how they stand so far. You'll see there is already a bit of a pecking order. You may feel further pain is unnecessary, and we could then move on to some other blind comparison that maybe more people will enjoy. And I'm not sure we need to put all 5 through - bearing in mind the final would be a Sonata (like round 1) but in a minor key (like round 2) - I don't see
P, maybe not
Q either, making it to the top now ...
The bold percentage score is combined over 2 rounds, for reference the individual rounds scores are added in brackets.
P 63% (80%)(47%) Joint top of highly-regarded group A in R1, fell away a bit in R2
Q 68% (70%)(67%) Top of group F in R2, middling in R1
R 73% (80%)(63%) Top of group C in R1, pipped by
Q in R2
S 80% (60%)(100%) Joint top of reviled** group B in R1,
top of R2 overall T 90% (90%)(90%)
Top of R1 overall, pipped by
S in R2.
**
hence the low R1 score for S - every time anyone said group B as a whole was awful, each candidate was docked 10%. This happened 3 times! :-\
Quote from: aukhawk on December 02, 2016, 10:32:12 AM
.
Do we really want a final?
I will participate! 0:)
Many thanks for the chart!
Work is very heavy for me because of Christmas, and if there is a next round, I won't be able to listen, or possibly even download, the files until January.
I realize, given how long it took to finish Round 2, this may not be important.
Quote from: aukhawk on December 02, 2016, 10:32:12 AM
Do we really want a final?
Yes, we need a final round. Now it is becoming really interesting. 8)
Quote from: aukhawk on December 02, 2016, 10:32:12 AM
None of them - she failed to get past round 1, coming 4th out of 6 in her group (though some listeners did remark that it seemed a very strong group).
Do we really want a final?
Here (anonymised for now) are the remaining 5 and how they stand so far. You'll see there is already a bit of a pecking order. You may feel further pain is unnecessary, and we could then move on to some other blind comparison that maybe more people will enjoy. And I'm not sure we need to put all 5 through - bearing in mind the final would be a Sonata (like round 1) but in a minor key (like round 2) - I don't see P, maybe not Q either, making it to the top now ...
The bold percentage score is combined over 2 rounds, for reference the individual rounds scores are added in brackets.
P 63% (80%)(47%) Joint top of highly-regarded group A in R1, fell away a bit in R2
Q 68% (70%)(67%) Top of group F in R2, middling in R1
R 73% (80%)(63%) Top of group C in R1, pipped by Q in R2
S 80% (60%)(100%) Joint top of reviled** group B in R1, top of R2 overall
T 90% (90%)(90%) Top of R1 overall, pipped by S in R2.
** hence the low R1 score for S - every time anyone said group B as a whole was awful, each candidate was docked 10%. This happened 3 times! :-\
I would participate, although December is always a bit challenging to find the time. But it's up to you really.
OK links for the final round files have been PM'd to Cato, mc ukrneal, and :premont:
if anyone else wishes to listen to these five finalists please just PM me and I'll send the links. The music provided is the whole of Suite 2, but you're welcome to only listen to part of it for comparison purposes if that makes it easier. The files are named and tracked to make this easy. I'll aim to finish this off by the end of January.
Incidentally, in the last few months I've listened to Rachel Barton Pine a time or two. This recording has been issued since the blind comparison started and so not included obviously. To my ears she fits right in to the Busch/Matthews/Faust group above, and probably at the top end. As an over-simple and crude potted description, I'd say she is serious-minded like Matthews, yet quick like Faust, and with a full violin tone well recorded - if a bit on the close side.
Rachel Barton Pine
[asin]B01AYPMSF0[/asin]
After a long time of lurking this forum as guest I would like to participate the last round. For me Bach's pieces for violin solo are one of the most facinating pieces I know. Unfortunately 2 of the 3 recordings I own crashed already during this race (Podger and Beyer) :(. I cannot imagine that the remaining one is not part of the finale! Can one send me the links?
Quote from: aukhawk on December 05, 2016, 07:41:43 AM
OK links for the final round files have been PM'd to Cato, mc ukrneal, and :premont:
Thanks so much for this and for your efforts in general. :)
Quote from: (: premont :) on December 05, 2016, 11:00:59 AM
Thanks so much for this and for your efforts in general. :)
Amen! 0:)
My pleasure, folks.
Quote from: Martie on December 05, 2016, 10:00:58 AM
Unfortunately 2 of the 3 recordings I own crashed already during this race (Podger and Beyer) :(. I cannot imagine that the remaining one is not part of the finale! Can one send me the links?
Welcome, and the links have been sent to you in a
PM (look under 'My Messages' near the top of the page).
If you haven't already, you might want to dip into the parallel thread here on GMG - Bach's Violin Sonatas & Partitas (solo) (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,4964.120.html) - where many favourite and un-favourite versions are mentioned, and yes, Podger is certainly a big GMG favourite to judge by that thread. Beyer is, IMHO, under-rated there - but as I say, the competition is very stiff.
Also you might be interested to leaf through a similar blind comparison that was done of the Cello Suites, a year or so ago - here (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,23936.0.html)
And yes, it's probably not too difficult at this point to imagine who some of the 5 finalists might be ... :-X
Can I participate as well, please? Thanks.
Quote from: MishaK on December 07, 2016, 06:10:36 AM
Can I participate as well, please? Thanks.
You have PM
I have listened to the first two, but want to give them a second hearing, because this week I was surrounded by the Demons known as Foolishness, Stupidity, Idiocy, Moronism, Cretinism, Dumbism, and Schmuckism. ??? :o
Usually I am fairly certain that my generally Stoic outlook can counterbalance such things and assure that they will not affect my outlook on other things. 0:)
But, just to be sure... ;)
Impressions of the first three so far, but with the caveat that I listened to #3 with headphones:
X3 - Very expressive in contrast to X1 and X2, both of which I found too restrained. However, I intend to re-listen to them with my headphones, just to be sure.
Quote from: Cato on December 17, 2016, 02:25:56 AM
Impressions of the first three so far, but with the caveat that I listened to #3 with headphones:
X3 - Very expressive in contrast to X1 and X2, both of which I found too restrained. However, I intend to re-listen to them with my headphones, just to be sure.
Second listening of
X1 this time with headphones: I feel more positive about it now, finding it to be "different" rather than cautiously boring, which was my first impression. The opening movement comes across as wanting to be highly mysterious, and in general it does. Yet at times it falls off the precipice of mystery and into the abyss of incoherence, because things at times become too slow, too soft for a cohesive effect. The second movement comes across as the weakest of the three, played well, but without much "oomph." The last movement is perhaps the best, where the opening is reminiscent of the first movement's mystery, and the last section with the echo effect shows good energy.
Second listening of
X2 this time with headphones: as with
X1, my impression now is more positive. The opening delivers, toward the end especially, a sense of resignation, or of mystery, to which
X1 aspired. The second movement
at fleeting times conveys a sense of struggle, and uses the echo effect much more often. At too many other times, I felt things were fragmented by a rather sedate approach, although things become stronger in the last minute or so. The opening of the third movement is restrained, as if the violinist is looking with waning hope through a rainy window in late October. The last section exorcises the gloom with a vigorous proclamation of triumph.
Tanks Cato. One of these five performers has cited that 3rd movement as her favourite out of all the S&Ps.
Just to re-emphasise what I mentioned before - beware of the level differences between these recordings - X1 is mastered rather quiet, and X3 rather loud, in comparison with the others. You will need to compensate.
Quote from: Cato on December 17, 2016, 03:33:15 AM
Second listening of X1 this time with headphones: I feel more positive about it now, finding it to be "different" rather than cautiously boring, which was my first impression. The opening movement comes across as wanting to be highly mysterious, and in general it does. Yet at times it falls off the precipice of mystery and into the abyss of incoherence, because things at times become too slow, too soft for a cohesive effect. The second movement comes across as the weakest of the three, played well, but without much "oomph." The last movement is perhaps the best, where the opening is reminiscent of the first movement's mystery, and the last section with the echo effect shows good energy.
Second listening of X2 this time with headphones: as with X1, my impression now is more positive. The opening delivers, toward the end especially, a sense of resignation, or of mystery, to which X1 aspired. The second movement at fleeting times conveys a sense of struggle, and uses the echo effect much more often. At too many other times, I felt things were fragmented by a rather sedate approach, although things become stronger in the last minute or so. The opening of the third movement is restrained, as if the violinist is looking with waning hope through a rainy window in late October. The last section exorcises the gloom with a vigorous proclamation of triumph.
X3 starts out very well, with a certain melancholy, as if
Bach were a Romantic from the 19th century. The second movement starts out strong, but somehow I did not find it as strong as things progressed: the playing became less interesting, bland almost. The third movement again began well, and in the final section things went well, but again things became a little less interesting as they went on.
X4 was obviously played by French violinist
Sniffles du Nez whose breathing problems detracted from his playing. The music in the opening was well done, and the next two movements had their moments: again, a nice interpretation for the openings of the first and third movements. But I must admit that the sniffing did not help anything!
X5!!! So, I had not yet been "grabbed" by the previous four performances: they were all competent enough, and in some cases very good, or parts of them were very good, or even exceptional.
But
X5 "grabbed" me from the very first seconds. The first movement is the best of the five, and the second movement is exceptional throughout: I felt as if
Bach were taking me on a hyper-dimensional stroll which, despite all kinds of tangents, were nevertheless all connected to a central conception! The third movement is cohesive and a real adventure all the way through.
Here we go: they all have performances which are at least good, even the one by
Sniffles du Nez, if you can ignore the noise/nose.
However...
X5X3X2X4X1
Thanks
Cato - a very interesting read, as ever.
I'll post a reminder here shortly after New Year, to say that we have one month left for any further contributions.
Meantime, have a good Christmas everyone.
Quote from: Cato on December 20, 2016, 05:17:10 AM
... they all have performances which are at least good, even the one by Sniffles du Nez
Well I should hope so, seeing as we're in the final round - phew! ;D
Just a reminder to say that this blind comparison will be finished at the end of this month, and the final five revealed, regardless. Four of the finalists are of course established GMG favourites, but one is not.
As things currently stand, it would be hard to decide between 1st and 2nd (though they are very different) or between 3rd, 4th and 5th.
You can still PM me for links to the five sample files, if you wish.
Quote from: aukhawk on January 04, 2017, 12:22:39 AM
Just a reminder to say that this blind comparison will be finished at the end of this month, and the final five revealed, regardless. Four of the finalists are of course established GMG favourites, but one is not.
As things currently stand, it would be hard to decide between 1st and 2nd (though they are very different) or between 3rd, 4th and 5th.
You can still PM me for links to the five sample files, if you wish.
Many thanks to
Aukhawk for arranging everything!
Does
X5 "grab" anyone else? 0:)
Quote from: Cato on January 04, 2017, 12:06:06 PM
Many thanks to Aukhawk for arranging everything!
Does X5 "grab" anyone else? 0:)
Just a gentle reminder to the members out there...the clock is ticking!
Having just received a 'result' by PM reminded me - 10 days to go folks.
I'll put these links out here in case that helps with any last-minute auditions, you don't have to listen to all the music if that takes too long, each file is split into 3 to help break it up, if you just listened to part 2 (the fugue) that would take 8 minutes or so, x5.
The links and the files will be removed at the end of the month.
(files and links removed)
Ooh, thanks for posting these - this will be interesting. I usually listen to HIP versions of the S&P (Kuijken #1, Onofri, Terakado, and Huggett are my favorites), but I know that
for X1
The first impression I got from this was... cat-like and sensual! Strange - the person plays on a modern violin, but doesn't use much vibrato, and manages to make it sound good, which is quite a great feat. It's an interesting approach, but might tire out towards the end, as the notes don't "swirl," as in a 17th century unmeasured prelude.
The second part is astonishing, after the hearing the first - the player rises to emotional hights, something that I didn't expect he/she was capable of based on the 4st. Still rather polite and well-mannered, but we can hear some grit in the playing.
3~4, back to his/her mellow self, which permeates even the usually aggressive allegro (one of my favorite movements in the S&P). Bringing a bit of sexiness into the allegro might be quite a great feat, but it's rather different from my own concept of the movement.
Verdict: quite a unique approach, sensual, mysterious, snail-like (?), but sometimes tiring, and definitely not one that I would click "Buy" on.
I have no idea about modern violinists, so I won't try to guess who this is. Recording quality is quite nice, though - catches both gravelly lows and silvery highs.
X2: Ooh, Vibrato! Violin sounds broad, throaty, trumpet-like. Noble and stately; Sophoclean emotions which try to, but still tastefully never go overboard. The end of the 1st movement is almost solipsistic?
2. I love the dance-like "drive" and the stark little chords. Goes slightly overboard in pathos, especially in the end, but not by too much and still well within common decency.
3~4. For some reason, the 3rd movement doesn't do much for me - I don't know why. I like the 4th though, with the plenty of drive and dance.
However, it doesn't have much of the the sense of bleak, frantic despair that my favorite recording (i.e. Kuijken) has.
Has quite a lot of emotion, but emotion for what? I can't figure.
Verdict: The 1st and 2nd are the best; last two are OK. Greek-tragedy like emotions in both of them, and a sense of great nobility in the playing. But again, not a unanimous "Buy."
This is the type of sound I associate with the older generation of violinists, in a good way. Recording is again, crystal clear.
Quote from: bioluminescentsquid on January 22, 2017, 11:23:16 AM
Ooh, thanks for posting these - this will be interesting. I usually listen to HIP versions of the S&P (Kuijken #1, Onofri, Terakado, and Huggett are my favorites), but I know that
for X1
Verdict: quite a unique approach, sensual, mysterious, snail-like (?), but definitely not one that I would click "Buy" on.
I have no idea about modern violinists, so I won't try to guess who this is. Recording quality is quite nice, though - catches both gravelly lows and silvery highs.
Many thanks for the comments! See my comments on
X1 above: the least favorite of the Final Five, but still, a not bad performance.
Thanks for those comments bioluminescentsquid - please do try to find the time to sample the other three, that would be really useful!
At the moment, we have 2 vying for 1st place - one of them may be a surprise to some - then one just a little behind those 2, then 2 together in 4th/5th. One or two further auditions could still change the pecking order.
I will get it done before the end of the month - so you will have at least one more....
X1 – Compared to the rest, this tone is a bit more shrill, less rounded and full. I didn't like this. I also find the interpretation a bit slack in the opening. I couldn't always feel the long line and where it was going. The middle clip was better. And overall, dull. If I could only have one, this wouldn't be it. I found it unengaging.
X2 – A much nicer sound than X1. The first movement doesn't do it for me, but the rest of it has some wonderful moments with much nuance, though attacks tend to uniformity. Tone in third clip was less to my liking. Overall, I liked it, but didn't love it.
X3 – Loved this beginning, especially the vibrato in a couple moments. Ok, shoot me if you like, but it adds something which is otherwise too unchanging. This opening was gripping. Oh darn, second clip strikes me as a bit heavy. That said, some wonderful moments here too, though it becomes fatiguing to listen to as it goes on. The third starts better, as the performer brings out some wonderful lightness, but the heaviness of the playing sometimes clashes with the music. An interesting version, with some flaws, but more good than bad.
X4 – Is this Gould in disguise? Hard to ignore the...errrr....ummm....loud breathing. And is the opening note a step down? Does this mean it's a period performance? Anyway, I didn't like the approach at all. Reminds me of X1 – totally lacks the direction that was so evident in X3. Too stiff in second movement. Tone sometimes tends to flatness. Third clip like a cat on a blackboard. I think I liked it less than X1.
X5 – Ok. Now we're talking. I liked the tone (though again a step down?), and there is a direction to it all. Though, I think I still preferred X3 here. But X5 really excels in the rest. The sound is not fatiguing and there is a wonderful lightness that none of the others seems to capture. This just continues into the final clip.
Really, this is a two person race: X3 and X5. The rest are way back. In the end, I think it's X5. As much as I enjoyed some parts of X3, I think it's just too fatiguing for me in the end.
X5
X3
-------
X2
X1
X4
Very good, thankyou for that. Hmm, looks like X5 and X3 are having a strong round.
Quote from: mc ukrneal on January 25, 2017, 03:30:09 AM
Really, this is a two person race: X3 and X5. The rest are way back. In the end, I think it's X5. As much as I enjoyed some parts of X3, I think it's just too fatiguing for me in the end.
X5
X3
-------
X2
X1
X4
Quote from: Cato on December 20, 2016, 05:17:10 AM
X3
Here we go: they all have performances which are at least good, even the one by Sniffles du Nez, if you can ignore the noise/nose.
However...
X5
X3
X2
X4
X1
Wow! We almost match: I can certainly understand dropping
X4 to last (highly annoying sniffing!) ;) .
My take (I'll post the notes later)
From first to last,
4, 3, 5, 2, 1
Thanks for joining in - every extra data point is most valuable, but we'll certainly look forward to reading your comments as well.
My ranking with some listening notes:
Place 5: X3
I don't like vibrato at all for this music :-). So X3 and X2 are on the bottom of my list at place 5 and 4. awkward ornamentation, like a student who avoids trillers. Scholastic. Ugly finish at fugue with ugly pause.
Place 4: X2
'Nicer' vibrato than X3.
Also better dynamics.
Place 3: X4
Nice, even despite the breathing noise. If it had not this noise this would be my nr 2!
Place 2: X1
I like this pure, minimalistic reading. Intruguing finish of part one. Rather static fugue.
Place 1: X5
This is the one to go for! Magic, dancing, and very carefully shaped notes and phrases. Grabbing pulse in the fugue. Both lightness and tension in the fugue.
Quote from: Martie on January 27, 2017, 02:39:28 PM
My ranking with some listening notes:
Place 5: X3
I don't like vibrato at all for this music :-). So X3 and X2 are on the bottom of my list at place 5 and 4. awkward ornamentation, like a student who avoids trillers. Scholastic. Ugly finish at fugue with ugly pause.
Place 4: X2
'Nicer' vibrato than X3.
Also better dynamics.
Place 3: X4
Nice, even despite the breathing noise. If it had not this noise this would be my nr 2!
Place 2: X1
I like this pure, minimalistic reading. Intruguing finish of part one. Rather static fugue.
Place 1: X5
This is the one to go for! Magic, dancing, and very carefully shaped notes and phrases. Grabbing pulse in the fugue. Both lightness and tension in the fugue.
Another person grabbed by
X5 ! 0:) Many thanks for your efforts!
X5 did very well in round 1 as well, but faltered in round 2 (the Ciaccona), scoring lower than all the other finalists except X3.
Thanks for your rankings and comments Martie, that put the cat among the pigeons was a big help. :)
Well, without comments my rating is
X 5 >> X 2 > X 4 > X 3 > X 1
I may add a few comments in the course of the weekend.
Wow - thanks!
Quote from: (: premont :) on January 28, 2017, 04:06:33 AM
Well, without comments my rating is
X 5 >> X 2 > X 4 > X 3 > X 1
I may add a few comments in the course of the weekend.
A few supplementary comments.
X 1 : MI. Sounds like a relatively young player, who has learnt to master the violin completely and plays informed with very pure intonation and no vibrato, but who's interpretation has not matured to the same degree. And there are some idiosyncratic use of dynamics and rubato. All in all I find the interpretation lacking in depth.
X 2 : MI. A violinist maybe a generation older than X 1 and playing in a middle-of-the-road preauthentic style and with moderate vibrato and informed execution of ornamentation.. This was the best we had in the 1960es and 1970es. I think the interpretation is rather good, both expressive and coherent.
X 3 : MI. More oldfashioned than X 2 (more vibrato and uninformed execution of ornamentation). I am not that keen on this kind of playing.
X 4 : PI. After a suitably meditative Grave the Fugue fast becomes incoherent and lacking in direction. The following Andante is not sufficiently fluent. The concluding allegro is good enough.
X 5 : PI. This is a fine integrated and expressive performance. Clearly the best of the batch.
Thankyou - you know, sometimes when I read your perceptive comments I feel as though you've got the sleevenotes in front of you 8)
All will be revealed Tuesday or Wednesday. What has been rather interesting about this final round is that the recordings that did best in round 2 have been the least liked in round 3, and vice versa. For example X1 scored 100% (always ranked top) in round 2 (music from the 2nd Partita), but has totally bombed in round 3. X5 who has clearly triumphed in round 3 (2nd Sonata), and X3 who has also done well, were behind the other 3 finalists in round 2. They both also did particularly well back in round 1, when the listening was again centred on a fugal movement.
Does this perhaps suggest that no-one has a complete grip on all six Sonatas and Partitas? There is at least a bit of horses for courses going on.
Quote from: aukhawk on January 30, 2017, 01:24:57 AM
Thankyou - you know, sometimes when I read your perceptive comments I feel as though you've got the sleevenotes in front of you 8)
But this is certainly not the case. It is true, that I own many recordings of these works, but I haven't listened to them (or read the booklets) since long due to other interests at the moment. And much of the attraction (at least from my point of view) of this blind listening "test" would fade, if I made actual comparisons to identify the players. Instead I rely upon the style of the players and my memory. And of course I make myself an idea of who they are. Now I am very interested to see if I was wrong or not.
Quote from: (: premont :) on January 29, 2017, 10:55:03 AM
A few supplementary comments.
X 1 : MI. Sounds like a relatively young player, who has learnt to master the violin completely and plays informed with very pure intonation and no vibrato, but who's interpretation has not matured to the same degree. And there are some idiosyncratic use of dynamics and rubato. All in all I find the interpretation lacking in depth.
X 2 : MI. A violinist maybe a generation older than X 1 and playing in a middle-of-the-road preauthentic style and with moderate vibrato and informed execution of ornamentation.. This was the best we had in the 1960es and 1970es. I think the interpretation is rather good, both expressive and coherent.
X 3 : MI. More oldfashioned than X 2 (more vibrato and uninformed execution of ornamentation). I am not that keen on this kind of playing.
X 4 : PI. After a suitably meditative Grave the Fugue fast becomes incoherent and lacking in direction. The following Andante is not sufficiently fluent. The concluding allegro is good enough.
X 5 : PI. This is a fine integrated and expressive performance. Clearly the best of the batch.
Many thanks for the comments and rankings!
X5 seems to be the favorite this time! 0:)
Quote from: aukhawk on January 30, 2017, 01:24:57 AM
Does this perhaps suggest that no-one has a complete grip on all six Sonatas and Partitas?
It would seem so: how about the violinists of yore, e.g.
Heifetz, Stern, Grumiaux: did they ever record all 6?
Heifetz and Grumiaux certainly did, not sure about Stern though. Nor Oistrakh sadly. I could have included both Heifetz and Ida Haendel, but the competition is very stiff and I didn't think either would get past round 1. I did include a token 3 or 4 golden age fiddlers though.
A few others from the older generations who recorded them: Menuhin, Enescu, Szeryng, Milstein, Szigeti, Suk, Ricci, Shumsky
Results of the final round of the blind comparison, Bach's Violin Sonatas & Partitas.
24 started out, 5 made it to this final.
In the results presented below, the score is shown as a percentage across all three rounds, with the final round carrying twice the weight of each of the previous 2 rounds. (More music in the final round, and more of you listened and responded.)
We have now auditioned these recordings sufficient times (12 times in most cases) that the scores are reasonably reliable and stable - the most likely outcome had someone else come up with a ranking at the last minute, would be zero or 1% of movement, and at the extreme not more than 3%.
Your comments are prefaced R1 (from round 1, 1st Sonata) or R2 (from round 2, 2nd Partita inc. Ciaccona) or R3 (final round, 2nd Sonata)
5th (by a whisker) is X1 with 60% - R1 60%, R2 100%, R3 40%
Was running a close 2nd coming into the final, but dismal here. Joint top of the despised group B in round 1, only just scraped into the next round.
Top of round 2 (the Ciaccona) overall scoring 100%. Has been individually ranked 1st 5 times, all in the first 2 rounds - and last 3 times, all in the final.
R3 "I have to say all five [finalists] could satisfy me as top of the heap."
R1 "Beautiful, introspective Adagio. Fugue with nice balanced playing"
R2 "A clear and crisp joy dances and flies very easily throughout the opening Giga, and in the Ciaconna I found a narrative and dialogue of interest."
R2 "threading its way with icy clarity through the work"
R3 "I like this pure, minimalistic reading."
BUT
R3 "Yet at times it falls off the precipice of mystery and into the abyss of incoherence"
R1 "rather eccentric performance, with notes fading in and out, and the intonation rather iffy at times ... I found the Fugue even more eccentric, and too full of a willful interpretation drawing attention to itself."
R3 "If I could only have one, this wouldn't be it. I found it unengaging."
R1 (group B) "Actually I do not really like any of these interpretations"
R1 "I'll be surprised if any of these make it to the final round."
X1/e1/b6 was ...
...
Alina Ibragimova
[asin]B002KUZBBG[/asin]
Recording note: the most recently-recorded of the finalists (2009) this is a good recording, but mastered at a strangely low level - which I suspect may have subconsciously impacted on some of the assessments in the final round.
I'm going to rank the next two equal and therefore joint 3rd.
3rd== is X2 with 63% - R1 70%, R2 67%, R3 57%
Didn't really shine in round 1 or in this final, but was top of a tough group in round 2 ahead of X5 and X3. Has been individually ranked 1st 3 times, all in the earlier rounds.
R1 "Adagio beautiful and poetic, expresses sadness."
R2 "Dynamic variation, bowing, and rubato offer contrasts in and among the sections of the Chaconne."
R2 "I am simply drawn in by this performer. ... Real drama here. Varied sound. Wonderful interpretive elements."
R3 "'Nicer' vibrato than X3. Also better dynamics."
R3 "I think the interpretation is rather good, both expressive and coherent."
BUT
R2 "Old fashioned as to quality of tone and dynamic shading."
R1 "to my ears was flaccid."
R3 "At too many other times, I felt things were fragmented by a rather sedate approach"
X2/f6/a1 was ...
... a GMG favourite ...
Julia Fischer
[asin]B00097HE8U[/asin]
Recording note: dating from 2004, this is the best-recorded of the five versions in the final (though none of them are bad) - quite possibly the best-recorded of all available versions - and is commonly available as a high-resolution download.
3rd== is X3 with 63% - R1 80%, R2 47%, R3 62%
Joint top of group in round 1 with 80%, but self-destructed in round 2, scoring only the same as Faust and Holloway who were both eliminated - so was lucky to get into the final. Having got here, it's another good showing and if the rankings were judged on this final alone, X3 would be placed a clear 2nd (though still a long way behind the winner).
R1 "Energetic, dramatic, and even enigmatic at times!"
R1 "The Menuet is played like it actually is a menuet, and the Gigue comes across as a very merry Gigue! Joy is present throughout the performance!"
R3 "starts out very well, with a certain melancholy, as if Bach were a Romantic from the 19th century."
R3 "An interesting version, with some flaws, but more good than bad."
R3 "Loved this beginning, especially the vibrato in a couple moments. Ok, shoot me if you like, but it adds something which is otherwise too unchanging. This opening was gripping."
BUT
R1 "Brash, wiry sounding, hysterical hypervibrato, the music is almost trumpeted."
R2 "The big difference is in the Chaconne which has a much more dramatic, narrative interpretation, with the chords near the beginning being almost slashed and beaten, and there is a dialogue of sorts, as if an outraged husband has come home to deal with his wayward, pleading wife! 0:)"
R2 "Found it a bit wearying. Dynamics just too unchanging."
R3 "awkward ornamentation, like a student who avoids trillers."
R3 "it becomes fatiguing to listen to as it goes on."
Of course, X3/f2/a3 was ...
... firm GMG favourite ...
Arthur Grumiaux
[asin]B000E6EH18[/asin]
Recording note: this is the oldest recording of those included in the entire comparison, dating from 1960/61 it's over 35 years older than any of the other finalists, but stands up well enough. The samples I presented were from an old Philips Duo CD set which sounds a bit hard-edged to me. I'd recommend the later remastered version illustrated here, which may (or may not, but I think it does) offer somewhat improved sound.
2nd is X4 with 74% - R1 90%, R2 90%, R3 57%
Started this final as the clear leader but fell away. Top of round 1 overall, and also very strong in round 2,
If all rounds had been weighted equally in the scoring, this would be the winner.
The only one to have been individually ranked 1st by someone in each of the 3 rounds. 3rd in the final round behind Grumiaux but clearly 2nd when judged overall.
R1 "Incredible Adagio: not just dramatic, but tragic, a sad tale told by an ancient looking back at something pivotal, something central, and sighingly sinking down into gloom."
R1 "Fugue and Presto nice flowing and well controlled as to expression."
R2 "Back to old and almost-perfect ... I suspect some interesting musicianship behind this."
R3 "a nice interpretation for the openings of the first and third movements"
R3 "Nice, even despite the breathing noise."
BUT
R3 "But I must admit that the sniffing did not help anything!"
R2 "A "big sound" from the violin ... A swift and dramatic performance marred by the constant sniffing or asthmatic breathing."
R3 "After a suitably meditative Grave the Fugue fast becomes incoherent and lacking in direction."
R3 "Tone sometimes tends to flatness. Third clip like a cat on a blackboard."
X4/e5/d3 was ...
... a stranger to GMG ...
Sniffles du Nez
Lucy van Dael
[asin]B00000J8XV[/asin]
Recording note: dating from the last millennium (1996), the tubby acoustic somehow makes this digital-era recording sound older than it is. It's not actually bad at all, but maybe it doesn't do this artiste any favours. Personally I don't notice the sniffling by the way, even listening on headphones. Call me deaf as a post, if you like.
1st is X5 with 81% - R1 80%, R2 63%, R3 90%
Clearly coming out top in this final, and top on aggregate as well, though NB scored lower than Fischer in round 2. Was only running 3rd before the final started.
Individually ranked 1st 6 times (4 in the final), and is the only finalist never to have been ranked last by any listener. Recording date, 2007.
R1 "a resonant, long-breathed adagio ... and an intensely propulsive fugue, even dance-like in places, which comes to a very satisfying conclusion"
R1 "This one grabbed my attention with its delicacy and subtlety in the Adagio which created an almost mystical atmosphere throughout."
R1 "Expresses what I think is the right affect, and the agogics are well judged."
R2 "Finally a performer who makes me feel something. ... I like this performance a lot."
R3 "grabbed" me from the very first seconds ... and the second movement is exceptional throughout"
R3 "The sound is not fatiguing and there is a wonderful lightness that none of the others seems to capture"
R3 "This is a fine integrated and expressive performance"
BUT
R2 "at times one thinks the violinist may just slow down completely and stop in the middle for no particularly good reason."
No surprise at all, X5/f3/c6 was ...
... firm GMG favourite ...
Viktoria Mullova
[asin]B001SB1KHW[/asin]
Recording note: it's very good.
Well, no real surprises there. My thanks to everyone for taking part, and especially to Cato for booting things along when it seemed easier to just give up - and for auditioning every performer, in every round. :o
I look forward to the next GMG blind comparison, whatever it may be.
Francis
Thanks for all your hard effort in keeping this going. I really enjoyed it. I wish Martzy had been included - it's the one I have, but I think it likely I might pick up the Mullova.
It was interesting to me that Ibragimova irritated me in both rounds I heard her. I wonder if I would like her in anything...
Quote from: mc ukrneal on January 31, 2017, 02:22:37 AM
Thanks for all your hard effort in keeping this going. I really enjoyed it. I wish Martzy had been included - it's the one I have, but I think it likely I might pick up the Mullova.
It was interesting to me that Ibragimova irritated me in both rounds I heard her. I wonder if I would like her in anything...
Yes,
Martzy's is certainly one of the most interesting of the older recordings. Meanwhile, I can happily continue with the
Mullova as the only recording I own. 8)
Quote from: aukhawk on January 31, 2017, 01:39:37 AM
Well, no real surprises there. My thanks to everyone for taking part...
Francis
And many thanks to you,
Francis, for arranging all this. :)
Well, I had spotted Ibragimova and Mullova and suspected van Dael.
The biggest surprise to me in the last round is, that Grumiaux sounds so old-fashioned. I haven't listened to this recording for more than twenty years, but I got a more pre-authentic impression by then. BTW time and habits change fast.
My pleasure. And going back to your comments for a moment - Ibragimova is playing an instrument dating from 1738 and Fischer and Mullova could - possibly - both be playing the same instrument, dated 1750. [edit to add - val Dael is playing a 'baroque violin' and Grumiaux's instrument is undocumented.]
According to the sleevenotes, Fischer's earliest inspiration was Menuhin, and this maybe shows a bit?
Quote from: mc ukrneal on January 31, 2017, 02:22:37 AM
It was interesting to me that Ibragimova irritated me in both rounds I heard her. I wonder if I would like her in anything...
Up to 3 weeks ago I honestly expected she would come out on top - she was running a very close 2nd to van Dael. It was a bit hard on her in the end to place her 5th on her own, really all 3 of Grumiaux/Fischer/Ibra are level, scoring within 3% of each other which just isn't significant.
Of this group, she's probably my favourite, though to be honest I'd be very happy also with Fischer, and to my own shortlist I'd want to add Beyer and Kaakinen from earlier rounds, and maybe Pine who as a recent recording wasn't included.
I was like "why does this thread keep showing up in my mentions, was I participating in it???" and checked and apparently I said I was in... sorry for completely dropping the ball lol, I guess I forgot about this. 2016 was a busy year. Also this took over a year to reach the final round?? I guess GMG really doesn't like blind comparisons anymore, lol.
A few months ago I obtained a copy of the Mullova set whilst working through her discography. I still haven't taken it out of the shrinkwrap, but since I apparently gave it pretty good marks back when it was C6, and GMG agrees with me, apparently made a good choice >.> Also guess I gotta check out Ingrid Matthews. Amandine Beyer is still a favourite here as well.
Quote from: (: premont :) on January 31, 2017, 03:23:57 AM
And many thanks to you, Francis, for arranging all this. :)
Yes, many thanks again!
QuoteWell, no real surprises there. My thanks to everyone for taking part, and especially to Cato for booting things along when it seemed easier to just give up - and for auditioning every performer, in every round. :o
Shucks, 'twarn't nuthin' ! ;)
Julia Fischer ! A few years ago I heard her in concert when she played the
Dvorak Violin Concerto with the
Cincinnati Symphony, and she gave a great performance.
And this was another epic Blind Comparison! The tradition continues! 8)
Thanks to everyone for making this a really fascinating exercise. Delighted that Mullova & Grumiaux were there at the finish - two of my favourites, along with Podger.
Quote from: aukhawk on January 31, 2017, 03:34:21 AM
My pleasure. And going back to your comments for a moment - Ibragimova is playing an instrument dating from 1738 and Fischer and Mullova could - possibly - both be playing the same instrument, dated 1750. [edit to add - val Dael is playing a 'baroque violin' and Grumiaux's instrument is undocumented.]
Mullova plays her 1750 Guadagnini that she owned before her Stradivarius and which she had later returned to original baroque setup. I doubt that Fischer plays the same violin, although it does indeed appear that she has a Guadagnini of the same vintage.
Thanks for your hard work!
Out of the final five, I have four. Only Ms. Van Dael is missing. Might have to rectify that.
Quote from: aukhawk on January 31, 2017, 03:34:21 AM
My pleasure. And going back to your comments for a moment - Ibragimova is playing an instrument dating from 1738 and Fischer and Mullova could - possibly - both be playing the same instrument, dated 1750. [edit to add - val Dael is playing a 'baroque violin' and Grumiaux's instrument is undocumented.]
Grumiaux had a 1744 Guarnerius "la Rose", which he played on the Bach recordings.
He also had a 1727 Strad, "General Dupont".
Quote from: Herman on February 22, 2017, 11:11:32 AM
Grumiaux had a 1744 Guarnerius "la Rose", which he played on the Bach recordings.
He also had a 1727 Strad, "General Dupont".
But these instruments were certainly not in their original state, and could not be called period instruments.
Still, useful additional info for this thread, thanks Herman.
(http://www.aukadia.net/pix/onenote.jpg)
The clarion call that opens Sonata 1.
Since the runners and riders were picked for this blind comparison - back at the start of 2016 - new recordings of the Sonatas & Partitas have come along at the rate of almost one per month. The following clip, which lasts about 50 seconds, includes 8 recordings issued from 2017 or 2018 (alright, one of them was late 2016) plus two of the finalists from the blind test, playing this statement-making opening chord. The biggest contrast is perhaps between nos.3 and 4.
[audio]https://drive.google.com/open?id=1FKm0WpkXCxYtn-kdTGhPFpLDFKI_BO6v[/audio] 10 samples (https://drive.google.com/open?id=1FKm0WpkXCxYtn-kdTGhPFpLDFKI_BO6v)
(I don't seem to be able to get the Flash player widget to work any more, or maybe it's just my browser and others will be able to see it. Failing that, the right-hand link labelled '10 samples' should open a player if clicked.)
Some of the new versions that I've listened to seem to me to fit right in among the top 10 of those blind-tested, and some of them have already been mentioned in other threads on GMG, so I have it in mind to run a new mini-blind (short music samples, but not quite as short as above!!) pitting 12 of the new arrivals against 4 of the previous finalists.
What can one make of such short samples ? The first impression I get is that some players seem to uncover/highlight hidden harmonics. My preference goes to simpler, purer expression: nos 3 and 5.