GMG Classical Music Forum

Welcome to "Mystery Orchestra"!

Those of you who also frequent the RMCR newsgroup already know and love this. It is a blind listening and reviewing "game" I started a while ago in RMCR, in the wake of all the consternation about "Hattogate". It amused me to no small degree how upset a lot of people were by that, and how hard it was for many to admit that they had been totally fooled. Of course, it was not easy, especially for those who had reviewed both the original recordings and the "Hatto" versions and, almost invariably, found the "Hatto" versions vastly superior.

Oops.

I think we will all admit that our reactions to musical performances and recordings are to a certain degree influenced not just by what we are actually hearing, but also by our expectations and preconceptions about the performers. It has long been shown that the only really at least somewhat "objective" or "unbiased" way to test and review both sound equipment and recordings is blind testing. I have "subjected" myself to a lot of blind tests, and I find them both very fun and instructive. They tell us a lot not only about the object of the test, but also about ourselves, our preconceptions and how our perceptions are influenced by the surrounding information we have - or don't have.

I call this a "game" because it is not a serious "test". Nobody is "tested" and "passes" or "fails". The test objects of the game are not the players, but the recordings. Nobody "wins or looses".


These are the rules:

- there are really no rules; you can say about the clips whatever you want; any kind of comment about the playing, interpretation, sound quality or whatever else you want to contribute is welcome; whatever comes to mind as you are listening to the clips.

- you can try to identify the performers based on the particular sound and playing style of the orchestra, but you don't have to; this is very difficult, and in some cases it is simply not possible to positively identify the orchestra since so many of them sound rather similar these days; but in some cases, it may actually be possible to point to a specific orchestra or at least in its general direction, namely what regional playing and sound style seems to be at work here; it may also be very difficult to guess the condctors unless the interpretation is extremely "typical" and somehow "unique".

- again, you don't "have to" guess the performers, but it adds an extra element of fun to the game.

- click on the links I provide, they will take you to a tinyurl preview of the download location (yousendit.com), then proceed to the location and save the file; listen to it, preferably on good sound equipment, and post your comments. No, there is no risk of viruses because all the files come directly from the original CDs, I only recode and upload them; all the files are in high quality 320kbps mp3, so some of them are a bit chunky, but download from yousendit is typically very fast if you have a good connection.

- one tip: do not try to figure out why I chose particular clips from particular perfomers; I select them more or less randomly; the only criterion is that I think they may be somehow interesting and good for a discussion, but for what reasons, or if I like them myself or not, you can not know; so do not waste your time trying to figure out why my evil mastermind chose a particular clip; you can check the file info, but you won't find anything since I recode the files myself and make sure there is nothing there which gives away the MO performers.


OK, on to the game. Since it has been going on in RMCR for a while, this is already round 15!

It is a long clip (the first 12 minutes or so) from Strauss' "Also sprach Zarathustra".
Here is the download link (28MB):

http://preview.tinyurl.com/yqw9ex

Here are the bonus clips. Both clips are alternative versions of the same stretch of music, the first 12 minutes or so of "Also sprach Zarathustra". You can listen to all 3 clips and compare them, or just comment on any single of them:

MO15 bonus 1
http://preview.tinyurl.com/3xpujt

MO15 bonus 2
http://preview.tinyurl.com/33aqt3

This should be fun. I don't know the piece very well - I hardly ever listen to it. And I have only one recording: Kempe, which I didn't check as not to spoil the fun. ;D Listened to the clips on my computer.

Clip I
Agree with George that this is slow, too slow and lacks the necessary tension. On the other hand execution is very good. Very finely detailed string playing - especially in the strings passage after the opening. The performance has a French flavour to me: there is much emphasis on the "sound picture" indulging in the lushness of Strauss' writing - a bit of Berlioz/Debussy flavours are highlighted. But it all sound too detached and relaxed. Like I said, a good orchestra, but which? If I would pick one: the Chicago Symphony Orchestra.

Clip II
I don't like it. The beginning is nice upbeat and the timpani fierce (but sounding cheap & awful, with ugly tone BTW! Compare with clip III). This performance is too glossy, creamy and overtly sentimental and sweet IMO. Lacks in refinement and inner tension. I can understand George mentioning Karajan - the string playing reminds my of him, but I would rate Karajan's Strauss better than this. Because of all this creaminess I would guess a British orchestra, possibly even with a British conductor.

Clip III
I like this the best. Top orchestra with beautiful string tone and woodwinds. I'm sticking my neck out here, but it immediately evoked a Concertgebouw Orchestra feel with me. But it could also be the Gewandhausorchester. Touching but not sentimental, nicely balanced, finely grained. A bit emotionally "objective" - let's guess the appropriate conductor: Haitink? (Don't know that recording BTW).

OK, let me have it! ;D  I'm very curious what others will make of it.

Q

Hey M! ;) We had a lot of fun with this game at the newsgroup. I like the Mystery Comparison element, with several clips, I started one of those games at RMCR and it was quite interesting!

I'll be back to post comments after I've had the chance to give them a good listen...

Hi M,

Thanks for moving this here. RMCR is a kindergarten and the interface stinks. I'm reposting below my comments from RMCR on the first clip. Will try to find some time tonight to listen to the other two. Cheers.

I find the opening very perfunctory, a bit sloppy both in terms of coordination as well as intonation, and not well balanced. In the fff tutti section, middle voices in the brass almost drown out the top and bottom voices that should anchor the harmony. Horns are too loud and
not well blended in a number of other places as well. The following slow string passage is very idiomatically and beautifully played (perhaps almost too sweet, just this side of cheesy). Too bad the string soloists have trouble with intonation. So does the brass. The recording is rather boomy and bass heavy. No comments yet on the orchestra. Having trouble placing this. I can rule out quite a number as well as ruling out a number of conductors. It doesn't sound like a
band that I have ever heard live.

For original clip...
A wild guess: Zinman - Zurich Tonhalle Orchestra

Quote from: M forever on June 21, 2007, 06:50:33 PM

I think we will all admit that our reactions to musical performances and recordings are to a certain degree influenced not just by what we are actually hearing, but also by our expectations and preconceptions about the performers.

In that sense another sensible recommendation would be to download and listen to these files BEFORE reading any of the replies, as they cause some type of pre-conditioning as well. Now I am looking for a sluggish/slow introduction from the first clip without having listened to it yet  :-\

True, but that is also up to you. You can still disagree with those views. In any case, your views won't be colored by your knowledge of the interpreters. Unless you can identify them, of course.
I am just wondering why you read the posts when you are aware of that "danger".

There is one other thing I forgot to mention: obviously, I want to take part in the discussion, too, but equally obviously, I can't voice my opinions until the very end, when the Mystery Performers get revealed. And just as obviously, those views won't be "blind".

But I still want to take part in the discussion, so I sometimes make comments and ask players questions, but, believe it or not, these questions are not meant to influence them, make them reconsider, suggest what answers I would like to hear. But I like to ask questions here and there, but more in a "moderating" or "hosting" function. Don't think if I ask a question, it is an additional "test". It isn't, and the questions I ask won't tell you anything about if the player I reply to is near the "truth" or far away.

Typically, I just ask players to clarify or elaborate points. So, if I ask johnshade "why?", it doesn't "mean anything" except for something like "can you tell us more about what led you to that conclusion?" It doesn't mean "you are right - did you know or guess?" or "you are totally wrong - please dig a deep hole for yourself!". Again, it's not about being "right or wrong", or "winning or loosing". It's all about the discussion.

Quote from: johnshade on June 22, 2007, 09:20:55 AM
For original clip...
A wild guess: Zinman - Zurich Tonhalle Orchestra

Why? Can you tell us more about what led you to that conclusion?

Quote from: M forever on June 22, 2007, 10:35:37 AM
Why? Can you tell us more about what led you to that conclusion?

Yes, the journey is more than the destination! :-)

You are very right, karlhenning, so please take the journey and post your travel diary.

Speaking of which, is "Sean" still posting here?

Q and George must be Reiner fans if they think the first clip is too slow. I didn't think it was slow at all. In fact, it's too fast for my taste (not as fast as Reiner, though--he should have been given a speeding ticket). When the orchestra cuts out of the introduction, leaving the organ alone, it doesn't sound like an integral part of the orchestra but tacked on and cheesy. It's too short also. I like the organ to carry on for three, four, even five seconds.

Now the second clip: That's the way I want to hear this music. Intensely dramatic, completely over-the-top and majestically slow--but supercharged too. If this isn't Sinopoli and the NY Phil, its close enough to be a twin.

The third clip I haven't downloaded.

Sarge

I listened to the original clip. The first impression is I like it soundwise.
It is a bit slow in the opening passage, but what puts me off there is not the tempo but the small pause between the E and the E flat (I guess these are the notes). I am accustomed to this piece through Previn and VPO who cut the E short and move onto E flat in legato which makes a better declaration of the subject for me. Woodwinds following that are a bit quiet, but the string section that follows is very well executed and in very good tone although I am always looking for a little bit more vibrato there (again due to my familiarity with Previn perhaps).
With the full orchestra the overall sound is very enjoyable and the dance theme is well played out.
Overall, although this is probably 1/3 of the piece, I'd be interested to find out who it is, but would still go with Previn/VPO (at least until I listen to the other two)

Quote from: George on June 22, 2007, 01:49:26 PM
Indeed.  :)

I really admire your courage...using the "I" word so blatantly, not even tucked away, out of sight, in the middle of a sentence but right out there, where no one can miss it. Brave man indeed.  ;D

Sarge

Thanks for the highly interesting posts so far. I am very tempted to make a few comments, but at this point, I don't want to influence the listening and reviewing. Maybe a little later.

I am also very tempted to reward all the many good commentators above above with a few more bonus clips, and indeed, there are a number of interesting Zarathustra CDs sitting right next to my keyboard. But I think I will wait a little with that, too, because at some point, with too many clips out, the discussion can get a little confusing.

Let's hear more about the first three clips first. In the meantime, I will make up my mind which other recordings to post.

I forgot one more thing: typically, at the end of each round, I make the complete recording(s) available for download in lossless quality, but, of course, only to those who participated in the round, as a reward. It doesn't matter if you guessed "right or wrong". All players can download it. In this case, I may upload all three or let you chose which one you would like to have.

Quote from: M forever on June 21, 2007, 06:50:33 PM
It is a long clip (the first 12 minutes or so) from Strauss' "Also sprach Zarathustra".
Here is the download link (28MB):

http://preview.tinyurl.com/yqw9ex

Have you heard Asahina?

Maybe. Or maybe not. Is that a trick question? Do you think one of the clips might be Asahina? Then go ahead and post your views. I can't answer any questions at this point. In any case, I ask the questions here!  ;D  $:)

I'm gonna take a wild stab in the dark and suggest that the original clip is Maazel/VPO.

Quote from: Mark on June 23, 2007, 03:38:53 AM
I'm gonna take a wild stab in the dark and suggest that the original clip is Maazel/VPO.

I seriously considered the VPO for the first clip, thought it sounded a bit too straight and "clean" for that, but it might well be. :) 

Q

Quote from: Mark on June 23, 2007, 03:38:53 AM
I'm gonna take a wild stab in the dark and suggest that the original clip is Maazel/VPO.

No, I retract this first guess. It's not the VPO. It lacks their controlled mastery. It's almost certainly a US orchestra ... though a few moments make me want to hazard a guess that it might be the LSO in an earlier incarnation.

Quote from: Que on June 23, 2007, 03:53:39 AM
I seriously considered the VPO for the first clip, thought it sounded a bit too straight and "clean" for that, but it might well be. :) 
Q

But Q, you originally said, there is a French sounding element to the interpetation, but you would still guess CSO, that and the WP are two quite different sounding orchestras, aren't they? Somebody else said WP, too (I think that was orbital), another poster said TOZ. Mark retracted his WP guess and now points to more Western shores.
Very interesting! Should I give some hints? Let me think about it.

Remember, y'all don't have to guess, you can also simply review the clips and post your general impressions.

Quote from: Mark on June 23, 2007, 04:08:26 AM
No, I retract this first guess. It's not the VPO. It lacks their controlled mastery. It's almost certainly a US orchestra ... though a few moments make me want to hazard a guess that it might be the LSO in an earlier incarnation.

What do you mean by "controlled mastery" here?

Quote from: M forever on June 23, 2007, 04:14:07 AM
What do you mean by "controlled mastery" here?

Whenever I've heard recordings by the VPO, the music has always sounded to me very taut, very precise, never 'Oh f**k it, let's just let our hair down'. ;D It's like the VPO seem to think they have this prim and proper reputation to uphold, so everythng has to be just so. I find that most US orchestras I've listened to on recordings tend to take a slightly more relaxed (though not unstructured) approach; while British bands seem, again to me, to fall somewhere between their US and European counterparts.

All conjecture and subjectivity on my part, of course. :)

It's a pity you didn't take part in one of the earlier MO rounds in RMCR in which I had a very "wild" and "exciting", very "hair down" clip of Le Sacre, and people guessed all sorts of orchestras, but not the right one - namely the WP (with Zubin Mehta).
Actually, one poster, immediately identified the orchestra - but less by the "attitude", which as we have seen, can be very deceiving, but simply by the uniqe sound of the orchestras, some of the wind groups in particular. But he emailed his reply in, so the guessing could continue for a while.
Apparently, you never heard the WP conducted by Leonard Bernstein. You should do that sometime.

Aren't those things more influenced by the conductor, or rather the "chemistry" (or lack thereof, that can also happen...) between orchestra and conductor?

But that much only about those kind of preconceptions - again, it doesn't mean I am saying your corrected guess is right or wrong, just general remarks from me here.

Let us know what you think about the two bonus clips.

Quote from: M forever on June 23, 2007, 04:31:07 AM
Apparently, you never heard the WP conducted by Leonard Bernstein. You should do that sometime.

Hmm ... I'll take some persuading to voluntarily listen to Lenny. What little I've heard of his work (and it is very little indeed) makes me grit my teeth, or else makes me want to punch nuns in the face. I've found my early encounters with him highly frustrating - he just doesn't do things the way I like them done. But, as I say, my experience of Lenny is very narrow indeed.

Quote from: M forever on June 23, 2007, 04:14:07 AM
But Q, you originally said, there is a French sounding element to the interpetation, but you would still guess CSO, that and the WP are two quite different sounding orchestras, aren't they?

Yes, they are. :) But there's always the interpretation by the conductor - and I think the French flavours would be a matter of the musical interpretation, although another source could be the tradition of the orchestra. I find it difficult to distinguish these elements - the ultimate sound seems a result of the interplay of the orchestra & conductor. I chose for an American orchestra because of the "objective", technically "polished" feel of the orchestra, for the CSO because of the French flavours - having their collaborations with Monteux and Munch in mind.

Q

I think Munch is generally more associated with the BSO, not the CSO. But that just as an aside, that doesn't have much to do with your observations which are interesting.
A lot of people also associate "spectacularly" good and rather prominent, bright brass playing with the CSO. Do you hear something like that here? Or maybe in the other clips? Or maybe not? Once again, just general questions, I am not trying to "steer" you.



BTW, I also wanted to say that I am impressed that most posters here concentrate on musical aspects and if they mention the quality of the recorded sound, they treat it as a different aspect - which it indeed is. Over in RMCR, most people simply equated "good modern" or "bright and shiny" sound with "great orchestra" and "not so great sound" with "second rate orchestra". Which doesn't make sense.

A performance can obviously be played extremely well, technically and musically, and still be recorded in less good, even bad sound. The overall impression of the recording as a whole will no doubt suffer, but one should be able to differentiate interpretation and playing on the one, technical aspects of the recording on the other hand.

The first cllip has the tempos so stretched that I immediately start thinking of which conductors liked stretching things out that way.  Celibadache and Sinopoli were the first ones who came to mind, but Sidoze's elliptical reference to Asahina is also appropriate.  I also know that Sinopoli recorded this about 20 years ago with the NYPO and that he did stretch out the tempos in the slower parts.  I also think the organ was put in later by DG in the recording, but that isn't apparent when you listen to it.  So far, I can say that it's not Bernstein's recording with the NYPO, nor is it Karajan's with the BP, nor Solti's, nor Reiner's.  I also doubt it's Ormandy's with the PO because he never played with tempos to such an extreme.  I think he would have been run out of Philly if he had, especially coming in after Stokowski.

On to the next two clips. :)

Quote from: M forever on June 23, 2007, 04:51:06 AM
I think Munch is generally more associated with the BSO, not the CSO. But that just as an aside, that doesn't have much to do with your observations which are interesting.
A lot of people also associate "spectacularly" good and rather prominent, bright brass playing with the CSO. Do you hear something like that here? Or maybe in the other clips? Or maybe not? Once again, just general questions, I am not trying to "steer" you.



BTW, I also wanted to say that I am impressed that most posters here concentrate on musical aspects and if they mention the quality of the recorded sound, they treat it as a different aspect - which it indeed is. Over in RMCR, most people simply equated "good modern" or "bright and shiny" sound with "great orchestra" and "not so great sound" with "second rate orchestra". Which doesn't make sense.

A performance can obviously be played extremely well, technically and musically, and still be recorded in less good, even bad sound. The overall impression of the recording as a whole will no doubt suffer, but one should be able to differentiate interpretation and playing on the one, technical aspects of the recording on the other hand.

The first clip didn't sound like the Chicago brass to me, but it's hard work making this decision "blind." 8)

On the subject of sound quality (and, by extension, age of recording), I'm going to say that the first clip in this thread was recorded in the early 1980s. There's just a hint of hiss, however, which could well place it a little earlier, before those first digital recordings.

Quote from: Mark on June 23, 2007, 04:08:26 AM
No, I retract this first guess. It's not the VPO. It lacks their controlled mastery. It's almost certainly a US orchestra ... though a few moments make me want to hazard a guess that it might be the LSO in an earlier incarnation.

How can you know that it has to be American?  Controlled mastery?  whatever does that mean?

Que,

French sounding orchestra?  The Boston Symphony under Munch was one of the most French sounding orchestras outside France in his day.  Leinsdorf was also famous for defusing musical tension, so could this be the BSO under Leinsdorf?  I believe he also recorded this piece with them at one point, but it's probably long oop. 

Quote from: Mark on June 23, 2007, 05:15:10 AM
On the subject of sound quality (and, by extension, age of recording), I'm going to say that the first clip in this thread was recorded in the early 1980s. There's just a hint of hiss, however, which could well place it a little earlier, before those first digital recordings.

I have recordings with hiss that were made in the mid '80s as well. 

Hey, Bunny - chill! ;D

I'm just taking potshots here. ;)

That said, the more I hear that first clip, it does sound American to me. Can't pinpoint why, though. East Coast? West Coast? Somewhere in the middle? No idea. ???

Quote from: Bunny on June 23, 2007, 05:14:15 AM
The first clip didn't sound like the Chicago brass to me, but it's hard work making this decision "blind." 8)

No bright brass....M's hint been taken! ;D

Not to cheat or spoil the fun or anything- but I just checked two conductors who came to my mind, it being a fairly modern recording and thinking of a combination of "objective" and "French": Seiji Ozawa (not French, but I consider his style very much French influenced/orientated) and Pierre Boulez.
I checked check if they recorded this piece with either BSO or CSO. And guess what? Ozawa recorded with the BSO, Boulez with the CSO. I didn't listen to on line samples btw - that definitely would spoil the fun. 8)
No brass  ;D and Boulez being the more analytical of the two (more analytical than the sound of this clip) and Ozawa the more "indulging" one , my (very) wild guess would be: Ozawa with the BSO.

Q

Apart from the "lack of controlled mastery" (I am just quoting here, not making fun of the expression), what makes you think this could be an American orchestra? Specifically, which elements of sound and playing style give you that impression?

Quote from: Bunny on June 23, 2007, 05:14:15 AM
The first clip didn't sound like the Chicago brass to me, but it's hard work making this decision "blind." 8)

Welcome to Mystery Orchestra. That is basically the main point here.

A lot of people find it *extremely easy* to declare this or that is "the best orchestra in the world" though, and become extremely upset if others don't share that "opinion" and they make all these nonsensical polls, and a lot of people click there.
In a lot of discussions, people also "hear" all sorts of things in the interpretations, how the music in in this orchestra's "blood" - or "not" - or how this orchestra is "unfamiliar" with that repertoire because they allegedly never play it or at least "don't want to" and all that other nonsense.
They also "hear" a lot in certain conductors' interpretations, usually based on whatever preconceptions they have about the artist.

But only if they *know* who they are listening to. When they don't, all that changes rather quickly and drastically.

And the most interesting thing is that typically, the people with the most radical "opinions" stay away completely from these threads.

Hmm...I wonder why?

Quote from: Bunny on June 23, 2007, 05:19:40 AM
Leinsdorf was also famous for defusing musical tension, so could this be the BSO under Leinsdorf?  I believe he also recorded this piece with them at one point, but it's probably long oop. 

Maybe he did. Or maybe not. Maybe it is OOP. Or maybe not. But - do you have any currently OOP recordings at home? I do. A lot. How can you know what I have? Don't worry about that.

I noticed you only concentrated on questions of tempo, but not really musical style or orchestral sound.

Quote from: Que on June 23, 2007, 05:46:05 AM
No bright brass....M's hint been taken! ;D

I said this several times over, including in bold.

Once again:

I do not give hints. I ask questions.

Unless I specifically say "here is a hint for you". All questions are not meant to "steer" you or anyone in any directions. I just pick up points people make and ask them to elaborate or investigate them further. Which does *not* mean "you may be on the right" or "do you really think so, maybe you should think again".

It simply means, "please tell us more about why you think this or that". Nothing else.

The game is played with the clips, not the players.

Quote from: Que on June 23, 2007, 05:46:05 AM
Not to cheat or spoil the fun or anything- but I just checked two conductors who came to my mind, it being a fairly modern recording and thinking of a combination of "objective" and "French": Seiji Ozawa (not French, but I consider his style very much French influenced/orientated) and Pierre Boulez.
I checked check if they recorded this piece with either BSO or CSO. And guess what? Ozawa recorded with the BSO, Boulez with the CSO. I didn't listen to on line samples btw - that definitely would spoil the fun. 8)

Of course you can listen to clips or recordings you have and compare them. But that's totally up to you. Checking who made which recordings with whom already goes into that direction. And that's totally OK. It's developing a theory and trying to put it into context. We automatically do that, even in "blind" situations. There is no way around that. Unless you can gather absolutely no information from the blind listening - but then it doesn't matter anyway. I just think that listening to those massively compressed online clips is waste of time.

Quote from: Que on June 23, 2007, 05:46:05 AM
No brass  ;D and Boulez being the more analytical of the two (more analytical than the sound of this clip) and Ozawa the more "indulging" one , my (very) wild guess would be: Ozawa with the BSO.

So you think the BSO has no prominent brass? And the brass here is neither bright nor prominent? That's a question, not a "hint". Or actually, it's two questions, but still 0 hints.

Quote from: Mark on June 23, 2007, 05:29:40 AM
Hey, Bunny - chill! ;D

I'm just taking potshots here. ;)

That said, the more I hear that first clip, it does sound American to me. Can't pinpoint why, though. East Coast? West Coast? Somewhere in the middle? No idea. ???

Sorry!  I've  had a strange morning and the coffee doesn't seem to be doing its job. ::)  I still don't know why you think it's an American orchestra, especially as you are basing the assumption on a lack of precision in the playing. Certainly there was no more precise orchestra than the Cleveland under Szell; and the Chicago under Abbado and Barenboim played in as mature and elegant a fashion as any European orchestra.

One of the problems trying to identify an orchestra by timbre is the fact that much of the sound is actually from the hall where the orchestra plays.  I don't think there is much difference in orchestra sounds nowadays, especially when they are in a recording studio.  Certainly the Chicago's brass and the WP's horns are singular, as well as the darker tone of the SK Dresden (and I don't know precisely what is responsible for that tone).  For the rest, I don't know if I could hear a difference between the orchestras as they all seem to use similar manufature instruments (although I think some of the Concertgebouw's tympani use leather tops). 

Quote from: Que on June 23, 2007, 05:46:05 AM
No bright brass....M's hint been taken! ;D

Not to cheat or spoil the fun or anything- but I just checked two conductors who came to my mind, it being a fairly modern recording and thinking of a combination of "objective" and "French": Seiji Ozawa (not French, but I consider his style very much French influenced/orientated) and Pierre Boulez.
I checked check if they recorded this piece with either BSO or CSO. And guess what? Ozawa recorded with the BSO, Boulez with the CSO. I didn't listen to on line samples btw - that definitely would spoil the fun. 8)
No brass  ;D and Boulez being the more analytical of the two (more analytical than the sound of this clip) and Ozawa the more "indulging" one , my (very) wild guess would be: Ozawa with the BSO.

Q

The Boston SO hasn't sounded French since the middle of Leinsdorf's tenure -- sometime in the 1950s.  I'm not that familiar with Ozawa's work, but I never heard that he was one to stretch out tempos so idiosyncratically as on the first clip.  I'm still trying to figure out if Celibidache actually recorded Also Sprach Zarathustra.  It doesn't sound objective enough for Boulez.  Abbado, however seems to love understated performances.  He can get so buttoned up emotionally; however, I also don't see him stretching out the tempos this way.

OK. Full report.

Clip No.1:

Again, I'm not very fond of this performance. Ensemble is not very tight and balances are not good. The middle brass keep piercing through in crescendos thereby creating lopsided chords. The brass rather drowns out everyone else in many places. The organ is a joke. In general, this seems to be a conductor who doesn't enforce balances or dynamic distinctions very well, which would therefore exclude Maazel and Haitink, which some people guessed earlier. While the Introduction is played rather perfunctorily and without much distinction (it's rather fast, not slow as some have said), the "von den Hinterweltlern" section is very idiomatically played, but the soloists don't have the most solid intonation and the rest of the string section isn't as warm or smooth as it would be with some of the finest orchestras. This would thereby rule out for me the BPO, VPO or Concertgebouw all of which have very different string sounds, but our clip matches neither one in any case. The solo horn in "von den Hinterweltlern" also protrudes rather too much and has a different opinion on intonation than the strings. "Von der grossen Sehnsucht" again sounds a little ragged, but here finally both conductor and orchestra seem to be warming up to the music and really getting into the performance where they were a bit detached before. On the whole this sounds like a live broadcast recording, though I didn't notice any audience noise. Whoever said this is the CSO has never heard the CSO. It is most definitely not the CSO. Somebody guessed Tonhalle/Zinman which I find very plausible, given what I have heard of Zinman's style. I have, however, never heard the Tonhalle, so I can't identify them. The orchestra in this clip seems to rather have a certain edge and bite that is not typical of continental Europe. My guess here would be this is the BSO during the Ozawa era. The loose cannon brass and the general lack of enthusiasm rather remind me of it. But I am not entirely certain of my guess here. I wouldn't be surprised if this were an orchestra I have never heard live.

Clip No.2:

Lovely sound, lovely dynamics. Wish the brass attacks in the intro were more together, but you can't have everything. But what a great opening! Puts No.1 to shame. Far better dynamic range and balances. More secure string soloists in the "von den Hinterweltlern" section, but on the other hand slightly less charm than No.1. But what grand landscapes! Perhaps just a tad too lush. "Von der grossen Sehnsucht" describes some truly enormous "Sehnsucht". Great playing and direction here. The contrasts in this performance are really amazing. Brass, string and woodwinds sound American, but with some warmth and graininess and the solo trumpet does sound like Philip Smith, so I am going to join Sarge in the NYPO guess. It sounds plausibly Sinopolian but I wouldn't be entirely shocked if this turned out to be Mehta.

Clip No.3:

In your face miking! Short but succinct and compelling intro. Compare to 1 which is almost as brief but feels much less taut. Great balances, clear but warm sound. "Von den Hinterweltlern" is perhaps best played here from a technical perspective. Feels like I am listening to accomplished chamber musicians in the initial section, but with a distinctly German portamento. These guys, unlike No.2 did not learn string playing at Juilliard. Woodwinds are nicely prominent in this recording. They barely figure in 1 and blend nicely in 2, but here they really have definition even in the climaxes. "von der grossen Sehnsucht" is very interesting. Compared to 2, the conductor here cooks up a great storm with his quick pace and ferocity, but it is a different storm than 2 which is slower paced initially and gains an inexorable momentum. Both are far more compelling than 1, but so different! At first I thought this could be Maazel/SOBR, as it seemed like the sort of no-nonsense interpretation he would favor. But the chamber-like character of the "Hinterweltler opening should have been obvious. This is the BPO. Based on the in your face miking and the lean but impactive interpretation, I am nearly certain this is Solti on Decca.

Thanks, M. This has been the most interesting MO so far. The comparisons are far better than just having a single clip.

Quote from: George on June 23, 2007, 05:51:48 AM
Can you say a bit about why they are included?

The main subject here is the first one, no?

Not necessarily. I usually just start with one clip, and then add more later. Normally just one, sometimes two, depending on how the discussion goes. But this discussion has only been going on for a day or so, and there are already a lot of interesting posts. So I will probably add some more later.

You can listen to as many or as few and comment on as many as you like or none, listen to the whole clip or just spotcheck. If you listen to a clip and don't find anything worth sharing or discussing in the clip, just ignore it or say "I have nothing to say about this".
Which means you don't have to review each one in order to take part. You don't have to compare them. You can just comment on them individually. Although I think the comparing happens "automatically", and most people will chose one or two which appeal more to them and say why.
That is one of the main points of this website in general, I think.

If you wonder why and how I chose the clips, the original and the bonuses (or "boni), like I said, there is really no system or "agenda". I just chose recordings which I think make for interesting listening and reviewing, and possibly comparing. Why? Because I think they are totally awesome? Because they completely suck? No. I usually do try to chose somehow contrasting performances, but that doesn't mean much beyond that.
What *I* think about the clips will be revealed at the end of each round, when I reveal the MO performers' identities. But my comments are possibly the least interesting in this contexts, since I do not test them "blindly".

Along the way, I try to "moderate" or "host", but not "steer". I try to clarify and sum up, otherwise, it can get confusing very quickly, but I do not try to make people reconsider what they said. That would completely defeat the purpose of this game and spoil the fun, for me asmuch as for everyone else.

Quote from: M forever on June 23, 2007, 06:03:15 AM
I said this several times over, including in bold.

Once again:

I do not give hints. I ask questions.

Unless I specifically say "here is a hint for you". All questions are not meant to "steer" you or anyone in any directions. I just pick up points people make and ask them to elaborate or investigate them further. Which does *not* mean "you may be on the right" or "do you really think so, maybe you should think again".

It simply means, "please tell us more about why you think this or that". Nothing else.

The game is played with the clips, not the players.

M, your point is taken. 8)

QuoteSo you think the BSO has no prominent brass? And the brass here is neither bright nor prominent? That's a question, not a "hint". Or actually, it's two questions, but still 0 hints.

I think most American orchestras have relatively "bright" (a bit "steely") brass. But, the BSO orchestral sound is generally softer edged in my impression (in comparison with the CSO), and I overlooked the BSO's "French credentials", so the BSO seems a good candidate. :)

Q

O Mensch, clip 1 sounds much more stretched in the beginning than any other recording of this that I've heard.  While the rest of it isn't slower, the opening was stretched out.  Just listen to the rumble of the gong (or tamtam) and how it just bleeds for seconds and seconds.  Also, the fact that the organ is so miserable is what made me think of the Sinopoli recording.  The organ in that recording was added by DG after the production because the NYPO only had a crappy organ imitation at that time.  It was also recorded in Avery Fisher Hall where the acoustics were notorious for unbalanced sound.  However, I'm just an amateur -- not really an expert on this and you actually know what you are talking about, so I suspect you've probably nailed it.  (sigh)  Another factor was the rough play, also a characteristic of the NYPO when they don't care for what the conductor is doing. 

The second clip was a little less stretched than the first, but still very  luxurious opening without sacrificing tension the way the first one did.

I've heard Zinman's Beethoven and Schumann with the Zurich Tonhalle, and that orchestra doesn't sound like this (first) one.  It's a far cleaner sound and the play is very good.  If Zinman was the conductor, it must have been while he was still in Baltimore, and I'm not sure if he even recorded it then.  It does not sound like his recordings in Zurich which have a very different sound signature.

Third clip is very dynamic.  Solti does come to mind first.


Edit: I want to add this without reading anything else that's been posted --

Thinking about the clips, I realized that the first clip is a lot older than I first supposed.  I feel it has to be from the early days of stereo -- possibly the early 1960s.  The orchestra playing is very rough and there are parts that fall apart.  I don't think M would post something very obscure, so now I'm thinking in terms of Horenstein, Barbirolli or even klemperer, with less than stellar orchestra.  Sorry, but to me the sound doesn't sound quintessentially American.  I do think it does sounds more like a provincial orchestra rather than one in a major center of musical culture, though and I'll bet that that's not correct either.

Quote from: M forever on June 23, 2007, 04:51:06 AM
Over in RMCR, most people simply equated "good modern" or "bright and shiny" sound with "great orchestra" and "not so great sound" with "second rate orchestra". Which doesn't make sense.

Related to this orchestral quality - sound quality equation I think that first clip features very good orchestra in not so very good sound which is somewhat distant and hazy in quieter sections.
As for orchestra, some previous speculations mentioned VPO, I don't feel it is, that oboe at around 5:45 doesn't sound particularly Viennese to me (nor french for that matter).
Also would be surprised if it turns out to be Asahina conducting. Haven't heard his Zarathustra but based on some other things there is certain very controlled and slightly understated aspect to his interpretations that I don't hear in this clip.
It does on the other hand fit Sinopoli's interpretative profile but then the sound provided for some of his other New York recordings by DG is more immediate with greater presence that this (again I haven't heard his Zarathustra).
But I wouldn't exclude the New York as an option, did Mehta record the piece second time with them?

Haven't listened to the other two clips, way too much Zarathustra sprachen for me.

Quote from: O Mensch on June 23, 2007, 06:08:34 AM
Clip No.3:

In your face miking! Short but succinct and compelling intro. Compare to 1 which is almost as brief but feels much less taut. Great balances, clear but warm sound. "Von den Hinterweltlern" is perhaps best played here from a technical perspective. Feels like I am listening to accomplished chamber musicians in the initial section, but with a distinctly German portamento. These guys, unlike No.2 did not learn string playing at Juilliard. Woodwinds are nicely prominent in this recording. They barely figure in 1 and blend nicely in 2, but here they really have definition even in the climaxes. "von der grossen Sehnsucht" is very interesting. Compared to 2, the conductor here cooks up a great storm with his quick pace and ferocity, but it is a different storm than 2 which is slower paced initially and gains an inexorable momentum. Both are far more compelling than 1, but so different! At first I thought this could be Maazel/SOBR, as it seemed like the sort of no-nonsense interpretation he would favor. But the chamber-like character of the "Hinterweltler opening should have been obvious. This is the BPO. Based on the in your face miking and the lean but impactive interpretation, I am nearly certain this is Solti on Decca.

O Mensch, precisely the points you mention led me to believe we're dealing with the Concertgebouw Orchestra. Being: some "old fashioned" characteristics of the string playing (thought HvK ironed those out with the BPO?), the prominent woodwinds - and I would add: the dark "mahogany" sound colour, the perfect blending of strings and woodwinds, and the chamber music-like character. Also a moderate quick pace fits in - things are generally not dragged in the Concertgebouw.
I would be surprised if it was Solti. Like you said: it has a no-nonsensical quality, something I wouldn't associate with Solti. And it's not bold enough for Solti IMO. :)

I forgot to mention that the organ in clip 3 also reminded me of the organ at the Concertgebouw, especially because it fits in with the orchestral playing in a natural way.

Q

Quote from: Bunny on June 23, 2007, 06:35:04 AM
O Mensch, clip 1 sounds much more stretched in the beginning than any other recording of this that I've heard.  While the rest of it isn't slower, the opening was stretched out.  Just listen to the rumble of the gong (or tamtam) and how it just bleeds for seconds and seconds. 

I think you mean something else by intro than I do. The "Einleitung" of this work is the whole first minute and a half until the final climactic chord with the held out organ afterwards. I wasn't particularly paying attentionto how long the initial rumble is being held out. I was talking more about the pace of the actual trumpet solo and the following chords. Those are rather brief and perfunctory in the first clip.

Quote from: Bunny on June 23, 2007, 06:35:04 AMAlso, the fact that the organ is so miserable is what made me think of the Sinopoli recording. The organ in that recording was added by DG after the production because the NYPO only had a crappy organ imitation at that time.  It was also recorded in Avery Fisher Hall where the acoustics were notorious for unbalanced sound. 

So are you saying this sounds like Sinopoli to you? I don't have his recording, but I would have expected better control of dynamics and better ensemble from him.

Quote from: Bunny on June 23, 2007, 06:35:04 AMHowever, I'm just an amateur -- not really an expert on this and you actually know what you are talking about, so I suspect you've probably nailed it.  (sigh)  Another factor was the rough play, also a characteristic of the NYPO when they don't care for what the conductor is doing. 

Don't be so humble. I could be completely off. M has confused me once before with a very unidiomatic performance of Ravel that completely threw me off. The first clip is very difficult to place for me.

Quote from: Que on June 23, 2007, 06:40:24 AM
O Mensch, precisely the points you mention led me to believe we're dealing with the Concertgebouw Orchestra. Being: some "old fashioned" characteristics of the string playing (thought HvK ironed those out with the BPO?), the prominent woodwinds - and I would add: the dark "mahogany" sound colour, the perfect blending of strings and woodwinds, and the chamber music-like character. Also a moderate quick pace fits in - things are generally not dragged in the Concertgebouw.
I would be surprised if it was Solti. Like you said: it has a no-nonsensical quality, something I wouldn't associate with Solti. And it's not bold enough for Solti IMO. :)

I thought very briefly too that this could be Concertgebouw, but Peter Masseurs has an entirely different trumpet sound and the acoustics aren't right. There is none of the reverb you normally get from that hall. It should have been very noticeable at the abrupt ending of the big organ chord at the end of the Einleitung. The Concertgebouw also has a tad more transparency than the BPO, which is more blended. Karajan is old history. You have to forget that sound completely when listening to today's BPO. The BPO under Abbado developed this chamber like intimacy which I am hearing here. Solti was rather high octane in certain repertoire, but he could be sedate and boring in other (Schubert, e.g.). Whatever you want to say about Solti, he was one darn fine Straussian, as his opera cycle with the VPO attests. He rather knew what he was doing with Strauss. He also developed far more of a sense of color and gave much more rounded performances later in his life compared to his early days. This BPO appearance would have been very late in his life, so it would fit the profile. I am far less certain of my guesses for the other clips, but I'd be astounded if this isn't BPO/Solti.

Quote from: O Mensch on June 23, 2007, 06:43:55 AM
I think you mean something else by intro than I do. The "Einleitung" of this work is the whole first minute and a half until the final climactic chord with the held out organ afterwards. I wasn't particularly paying attentionto how long the initial rumble is being held out. I was talking more about the pace of the actual trumpet solo and the following chords. Those are rather brief and perfunctory in the first clip.

So are you saying this sounds like Sinopoli to you? I don't have his recording, but I would have expected better control of dynamics and better ensemble from him.

Don't be so humble. I could be completely off. M has confused me once before with a very unidiomatic performance of Ravel that completely threw me off. The first clip is very difficult to place for me.

Thanks for the kind words, but the more I think about it the more confused I am getting.  (I wish there were an emoticon with crossed eyes!)

I edited my post to reflect the thoughts that occured to me while I was away from the computer.  I see some similarities between the first two clips, and am tempted to speculate that these are all clips of the same orchestra under different conductors and with different recording venues over a period of time.  Except -- the orchestra in each clip sounds so different.  If only orchestras maintained the same sound signature over time, but they don't.  The BP sounds completely different now than it did under Karajan and Böhm, and the NYPO sounds so different now than under Bernstein.  the Philadelphia has maintained their silky string sound, but everything else seems different since Ormandy left. So, I have difficulties just going by the orchestra sound.  I do know that whatever the first one is, it's not Zinman and Tonhalle.  All of their recordings have such great sound quality and the orchestra plays very well with a wonderful quality of ensemble -- whether you like Zinman's interpretations or not.  Just on sound alone, I suspect the first clip is pretty old.  Older than the 1980s at least.

Hi there M, you're still out there then- somehow so am I on and off, trying to stay off but noticed your interesting thread and had to have a go. My initial thoughts on this powerhouse of a strange and inventive score-

I got to know it from the Mehta/ LAPO (not NYPO) on LP, coupled then with Marche slave and Bolero), the one with the outrageously yet entirely convincing slow opening tempo, a sectional approach underlining the strangeness and compulsion, emphasized as ever by the detailed Decca recording: none of the clips are as slow as this. I've also heard the superb Karajan and its near equal possibly inspired by it, the Haitink, one of his finest recordings.

Clip 1- Could well be an American orchestra, the brass with that prairie horn call light and space to it; the ensemble isn't perfect and the dated hard recording adds to a blurred and recessed effect. There's some passion in the strings though and a readiness to linger in Straussian style over the more relaxed ideas: maybe Ozawa/BPO: whatever it is I don't much like it.

Clip 2- A newer recording with better brass and a percussive edge to the timpani: the slight punchiness and dynamic control reminded me of Mackerras (Royal Phil) and his Janacek, along with an Australian/ English timidity in the section after the opening, becoming so slow the momentum is lost and gaining an uncertain and strained air.

Clip 3- Muscular, powerful and a class apart, I'd be surprised if this isn't Karajan/ BPO: another modern recording but with especially rich and blended digital sound, a hazy Germanic inwardness in the slow music and imposing low strings; there's a stature and magnificently measured grip over the whole canvass that few others find, and was the only one I could be bothered to hear all the way through.

Quote from: Bunny on June 23, 2007, 07:30:58 AM
Thanks for the kind words, but the more I think about it the more confused I am getting.  (I wish there were an emoticon with crossed eyes!)

See, that is the "problem". You assume a lot of things, instead of just listening and then sharing your views.

Remember, you are not playing "against" O Mensch or anyone else here. There are no winners or losers here. There is no need to declare yourself a loser like here:

Quote from: Bunny on June 23, 2007, 06:35:04 AM
However, I'm just an amateur -- not really an expert on this and you actually know what you are talking about, so I suspect you've probably nailed it.  (sigh)

As he says himself:

Quote from: O Mensch on June 23, 2007, 06:43:55 AM
I could be completely off. M has confused me once before with a very unidiomatic performance of Ravel that completely threw me off.

And not just that one. But I didn't confuse O Mensch - he confused himself. Which is OK, we all do sometimes. Or actually, a lot of the time.

So Bunny, just post what *you* think and don't worry if it's "right" or "wrong". Again, you are not playing "against" anyone here.

I know O Mensch thinks he plays against *me*, but that's not the case either.

O Mensch, I must take issue with the Solti opera cycle (Salome to Die Frau plus Arabella)- he presses onwardly as in his worst Wagner, bringing out a truly manic array of colour and impulse, and entirely missing the music's inner peace and refinement. I've recently been listening to his Rosenkavalier & Arabella and they're hard work, when they should be indulgent, happy and luxurious. He needed to calm down sometimes (I bought his Salome & Elekra).

M, two Strauss threads of mine recently (both no replies)-

http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,1412.0.html
http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,1416.0.html

I'll be at the Strauss conference in Oxford on Friday: a long way from you but with a few US scholars there...

Please, no chitchat here about conductors we don't even know yet if they are subject of this thread, and pieces which most definitely aren't. Let's stick to the Mystery Orchestra reviews.

Quote from: O Mensch on June 23, 2007, 06:43:55 AM
The first clip is very difficult to place for me.

Not just for you. It seems that basically everyone is mystified and confused by the first clip.

There is also a major contradiction there because Bunny thinks what she perceives as its deficiencies in sound, organ, and ensemble could point to the NYP while you and Sarge and somebody else, IIRC, think Bonus 1 (the second clip) could be the NYP, for exactly opposite reasons, namely big sound and very confident playing.

There is definitely potential for discussion there.


Since this round is really interesting with so many stimulating posts, I prepared another 3 (!) bonus clips. So we will have 6 clips, the original Mystery Orchestra 15, and Bonus 1-5. That could easily get confusing. I think in the future, I will just start with 2 or 3 clips and name them alphabetically.

This many clips could easily lead to Zarathustra overdose, but then again, we have so many fanatic collectors here who have 30 recordings of the same piece and compare them against each other, so I will just go ahead and post the links to the additional bonus clips. And then everybody can decide whether they want to attack them, too, or not.

However, at this point I will actually drop a hint!

Of the total of the 6 clips, 2 are actually with the same orchestra, and one conductor also appears twice. That doesn't mean it has to be the same conductor/orchestra combination in two different recordings.

So, here are the new bonus clips. I may reveal the first 3 while the discussion of the last 3 is still going on, that depends on how it goes.

MO15 bonus 3
http://preview.tinyurl.com/37egbn


MO15 bonus 4
http://preview.tinyurl.com/2my7dt


MO15 bonus 5
http://preview.tinyurl.com/2oxstn



For your convenience, here are the first 3 links once more:


Mystery Orchestra 15
http://preview.tinyurl.com/yqw9ex


MO15 bonus 1
http://preview.tinyurl.com/3xpujt


MO15 bonus 2
http://preview.tinyurl.com/33aqt3

By the way I've heard Mehta's Rite, an appropriately heated yet collected Indian perspective.

Quote from: M forever on June 23, 2007, 07:55:41 AM
And not just that one. But I didn't confuse O Mensch - he confused himself. Which is OK, we all do sometimes. Or actually, a lot of the time.

No, just that one. Seeing that I had nailed Leipzig/Blomstedt last time correctly and guessed correctly on IPO.

Quote from: M forever on June 23, 2007, 07:55:41 AMI know O Mensch thinks he plays against *me*, but that's not the case either.

I am not. Follow your own advice here: stop making so many assumptions. You don't know what I think. I am not playing against you. That would make no sense at all. However, it would be interesting to see your comments in a blind listening comparison. I would suggest in a variation of established procedure from RMCR that whoever gets closest to the correct answer should post the next MO clips, so that it's not just you all the time and so that we get to hear some of your input, free of prior knowledge of the clip.

Jeff identified the Gewandhausorchester, you just seconded him. Please don't get started about the Israel thing again, you guessed wildly but based on wrong assumptions, then backpedalled off into a rather different direction. And then totally freaked out at me when I pointed out that some of your technical criticism wasn't that accurate. Which Jeff also confirmed.

You *do* really seem to think this is a competition or a test in which I test people, and you don't seem to be able to handle it when I contradict what you say. There is no reason for you to be that self-conscious and thin-skinned because a lot of the comments you make are very good, and I usually acknowledge that.

I did take part in some of the blind listening tests hosted by others in the wake of MO, although only for a short time unfortunatley, and I nailed several of them down to the spot immediately.

Anyone can start their own Mystery thread anytime. It's not that the "winner" or "close winner" gets to "test everybody else. You don't seem to understand what I am trying to do here, providing an interesting and often surprising discussion environment as a change from all the same over-and-over top this and top that threads in which we get treated to the same biased nonsense over and over.

It does take quite a bit of work to select, pepare, upload the files and post all that stuff. Please respect that. If you have a problem with my threads, please do not take part in them.

I want to keep this in a light and relaxed athmosphere. Go on contributing detailed observations like you did, if you want, or leave the discussion, if you don't want.

Quote from: M forever on June 23, 2007, 08:50:44 AM
Jeff identified the Gewandhausorchester, you just seconded him. Please don't get started about the Israel thing again, you guessed wildly but based on wrong assumptions, then backpedalled off into a rather different direction. And then totally freaked out at me when I pointed out that some of your technical criticism wasn't that accurate. Which Jeff also confirmed.

Don't know what this was all about, but could we leave this at rmcr, please?
Indulge me. :)

Q

Regarding the first clip:

Seems to me to be either the VPO or the BPO. It's the warmth, grandeur, and strength of the strings that point to central European. As to conductors, well, haven't a clue. Maybe the VPO with Karajan or the BPO sans Karajan.

Second clip:

Sounds American to me. Tutties are more impactful with a bit of an inflated profile compared to the first clip. Sound quality seems to indicate either Avery Fisher Hall or maybe someting of 60's vintage. I'd guess NYP. Conductor...?


Third clip:

Really unable to determine here. Measured it isn't. A bit quick. Can't imagine who'd take this piece at such a clip. Solti is propulsive but seldom zippy. Maybe an Italian orchestra? 0:)

Quote from: Que on June 23, 2007, 09:08:57 AM
Don't know what this was all about, but could we leave this at rmcr, please?

That's basically what I mean, too. Let's just continue on with this discussion here. Nobody gets forced to participate. Anybody can start their own listening threads.

Quote from: donwyn on June 23, 2007, 09:17:30 AM
Regarding the first clip:

Seems to me to be either the VPO or the BPO. It's the warmth, grandeur, and strength of the strings that point to central European. As to conductors, well, haven't a clue. Maybe the VPO with Karajan or the BPO sans Karajan.

Looks like you are in the minority here with that view. Most seem to hate that clip and find the orchestral playing rather bad. I think it's good that you aren't impressed by that and post your own opinion. What I personally think I can't obviously say at this point, it would spoil everything.

Bonus 3 (clip 4)- I suggest an earlier Karajan: it reminds me of 2001 (1969), though not seen that in years. Poorer sound but a patrician, mellow dignity redolent of his Metamorphosen strings. It lacks the last degree of edge and bite though... Perhaps also Tennstedt, but I'm beginning to guess.

Bonus 4 (clip 5)- possibly the Mehta I mentioned?! Sorry, it's been 20 years...

On hearing it all I don't think it's his old LAPO: the opening's slow but it's a little more mellow beyond that.

Bonus 5 (clip 6)- another polished effort from what seems like VPO...

I'm officially retracting my earlier guesses. It's not the VPO. It's not an American orchestra. I don't think it's a Scandinavian band. I'm becoming more confident that it's either a British or a German orchestra. But which, which ... ???

Clip 4 (bonus 3):

To my ears the VPO finally entered the stage - opulent sonorities, very refined strings, highly idiomatic playing. It's conducted by a true Straussian - possibly HvK? My favourite with clip 3.


Clip 5 (bonus 4):
This sound is less opulent, and has a kind of soberness. Ditto for the conducting. Munich? Staatskapelle Dresden? No clue about the conductor.

Clip 6 (bonus 5):
This one comes on too strong, makes a good impression at first but then it falls apart. Longer musical lines are not sustained, tension is not kept. Conducting seems erratic. Big, solid, strong sound. Is this the BPO?

Q

Quote from: Mark on June 23, 2007, 10:06:51 AM
I'm officially retracting my earlier guesses. It's not the VPO. It's not an American orchestra. I don't think it's a Scandinavian band. I'm becoming more confident that it's either a British or a German orchestra. But which, which ... ???

I understand you are talking about the first clip? Why a British or German orchestra?

Quote from: Que on June 23, 2007, 09:08:57 AM
Don't know what this was all about, but could we leave this at rmcr, please?
Indulge me. :)

Fully agreed.

M,

You just rejoined, so let's not get nasty so quickly. We like you here and even I don't have any animosity against you. That's just your imagination. Let me just say that if you want to keep these discussions open and without pressure in order to elicit interesting responses you shouldn't hold earlier guesses against people as subsequent guesses don't necessarily negate them. I am not treating this as a competition and if you don't want it treated that way you shouldn't gloat over perceived (and wholly imagined) wrong assumptions of others.

Also my suggestion to have different people host these wasn't meant as a challenge. It doesn't have to be the "winner" or whatever. That was just a suggestion. It wasn't meant as an attempt at throwing down the gauntlet and challenging you to a duel. I just think it would be interesting to see what you listen for when you're not a priori aware of what the orchestra is.

So can we now shake hands and chill out a little?

Now on to the new clips:

No.4 (which is bonus clip No.3):

This sounds like the orchestra in the first clip. Sounds very much like the same trumpets and the brass have the same coordination problems in the same places. Better intonation, though. Equally weak organ. Similar balance problems (the too loud horn at the beginning of Hinterweltler), but generally a far more taut performance in better sound, though still not ideal. Still sounds a bit cavernous. Sounds live. There is a cough in there after the intro. The intro is a little odd in that the 16th notes on the upbeats are very short and abrupt and very accented, almost reduced to grace notes. The grosse Sehnsucht is slightly less involving and not as clearly articulated as some of the other clips (notably No.2/bonus1 and No.3/bonus2). But generally it is a far more convincing performance than the original first clip. Again, I find this one difficult to place. I may have been too harsh in my initial assessment of clip 1.

No.5 (bonus4):

Interesting opening. Some very smooth legatos, not typical in this place. Full rich tutti sound. Very warm and broad Hinterweltler, a little too mushy for me. Very indulgent. Articulation and balances suffer a little in places. Those trombones in grosse Sehnsucht rip unbelievably through all the texture. A very powerful orchestra for sure. Massive basses. Sounds West German to me. Possibly one of the radio orchestras.

No.6 (bonus5):

Somebody is vocalizing in Hinterweltler. Very edgy, intense and precise playing throughout, though the percussion isn't always exactly in the same place as the rest of the orchestra. Very intense concertmaster as well in von den Freuden- und Leidenschaften, who sounds like it could be Sam Magad or Victor Aitay (certainly a Heifetz acolyte). This sounds like the CSO of the 80s to me, with Frank Miller principal cello, who could be the vocalizer here (he was infamous for that). Horns very much sound like CSO, too. Definitely American brass section.

Quote from: M forever on June 23, 2007, 10:53:09 AM
I understand you are talking about the first clip? Why a British or German orchestra?

Well, it could just be the engineering on the recording, but the warmth of the sound image coupled with some beautiful details put me in mind of either the RPO (based on another recording I have featuring this band), or ... I want to say the Staatskapelle Dresden (based on the sound of both Barenboim's and Davis' Beethoven Symphonies with this orchestra).

I'm wrong though, aren't I?

I also don't know this piece that well, but have been meaning to revisit Strauss since I've been listening to a ton of Mahler recently. I think parts of this piece share things in common with Mahler's 5th and 6th.

I typed most of the comments for the first 3 yesterday but didn't post yet as I wanted to add to them. I have only skimmed the thread to make sure M didn't reveal them yet. (I'm tempted to go give Amazon a cursory run down, but nope not gonna, so I may well guess an improbable team!)

I love to participate in these, but feel rather inadequate as my amount of experience of listening to orchestral recordings pales in comparison to most here. So mine are just purely subjective reactions and wild guesses.  ;)

1 - Nice opening. Trombone sticks out unmercifully. 1st trpt as well. Tuning almost sketchy at this loud dynamic. Strings seem reined in, restrained. The string vibrato makes me think this is a rather older performance. Well played. The solo trumpet, yeah, tone makes me think 60s for some reason. So at times certain sections stick out, especially the brass, the balance and blend could be better. Very good playing techically. But a bit timid, the strings could really cry out and sweep more. I don't care for the string tone in the final minutes, too watery and wavery. Who would have recorded a big Also Sprach back then? Lenny/NYP? I think I would recognize them... But I do feel this is a very specific style of playing (think old movie soundtracks), and I think it's an American band. Boston?

2 - Quite a dramatic beginning. God, the timpani player! Too much caffeine? Very embarrassing. The timbre of the timpani is shallow, heads sound trash. Fantastic brass, better balance overall, lead trpt. still sticks out. Orchestral sound is a bit bass light. The lyrical string section seems to go on for-ev-er. Pretty playing but too mushy. Nice blend and tuning in winds. I like the transition to the stormy section! Exciting. Brass sound great here, especially the horns. (This section reminds me so much of Mahler!) Lot of detail (nice harp!). Strings really cry out. Works up a good sweat through here. String section following lovely and sad, though the strings sound thin at times. I don't think this is American. Bass light, who knows, could be British. The Philharmonia comes to mind. And that would put me at Sinopoli, with the flexible tempos.

3 - Now this is primordial goo! Good beginning. I like how the trumpets are restrained at first before lashing out. Timpani is dull and thuddy here, ick. Good orchestral balance from top to bottom. Truly massive sound, even a bit brash. The winds have this round tone that says Europe. Ohhh, the strings. That sound and the phrasing is to die for. May not be to everyone's taste though. Berlin Phil? Intensity sags before the modulation and low string runs. The actual transition feels like going for the notes as opposed to the longer line, with the last two notes of each run slightly accented to keep time. Not fond of that. Good playing, but it's not emotionally involving me. Too technical, perfect playing seems the goal. Definitely a cool reading. The low brass, and brass in general are superb. I wouldn't rule out the Concertgebouw. I like the last lyrical section, it feels confused and desolate. Karajan/Berlin or maybe Vienna, I thought. But so cool. I wonder if this could be Haitink/RCO.

Quote from: Mark on June 23, 2007, 11:37:01 AM
... I want to say the Staatskapelle Dresden (based on the sound of both Barenboim's and Davis' Beethoven Symphonies with this orchestra).

Barenboim's cycle is with the Staatskapelle Berlin, not Dresden.

Bonus clip 3:

I'd go for the Concertgebouw. The warm spread coupled with a fine architectural grip lead me to think this. Not sure of the conductor. The few coughs at the beginning indicate a live recording. I'd almost say Haitink but he didn't record this live that I'm aware. In any case it sounds a bit too 'loose' for Haitink.  

Bonus clip 4:

Perhaps the LSO or LPO? Very dramatic and bold so could be the LSO under the direction of Solti. Tennstedt is dramatic like this, yet controlled. And he teamed with the LPO frequently.

Bonus clip 5:

Hard to tell. What I detect here is an orchestra completely dissected and put back together in keeping with the conductors vision...but I mean to an unusual degree, here. A bit like what Sinopoli achieved on some of his recordings: extreme orchestral detail and fine, whispery contours. I'd almost hazard Sinopoli for conductor but I'm not sure if he ever recorded the piece. As for orchestra...?

Quote from: O Mensch on June 23, 2007, 11:59:20 AM
Barenboim's cycle is with the Staatskapelle Berlin, not Dresden.

My bad. Yes, of course it is. But it's still the Dresden that I'm thinking of.

When is the answer going to be revealed? I'm just curious  :)

4 - I hear extraneous movement over the beginning note. ;D I like this opening. Rattled the floor. Absolutely HUGE dynamic range. What's nice is the trumpets truly sound in unison until they break apart. The balance is darn near perfection. (Ooh, my neighbors are going to hate me for today) Ah, a cough, so this is live. The strings of the Hinterwletern are muted and well, otherworldly, with a great purity of tone, the 8va isn't overly sweet, and this section is very searching. The tempo is slow but not overly, he keeps the suspense and it works marvelously as you can savor the details. Sennsucht is totally impassioned and a spot on build up to the next section. Ah, much Leidenschaften, this is how I wanted this to sound all along. It's marvelous, full of that wanton fire you often find in live recordings. The low brass, my god. Makes me give a passing thought to Chicago. Violin solo out of tune sometimes in the final minutes. Not much else in the way of blemishes. I couldn't guess at the orchestra. How tantalizing this is. I'm not going to cheat and look at the other answers, Vienna could sound like this, they sound fabulous on the Previn recording I have. Karajan possibly, I'm sure he recorded this piece a few times. Spectacular peformance.

5 - An alternative to above, also a fine opening. I like the weight given to the first chord in the opening statements. Interesting that the brass play with an almost uniformly straight tone and the top trumpet suddenly has a lot of vibrato on the first long major chord. He also cuts off a note there rather abruptly. But I like in general the legato style of the moving notes and stretched tempo. Well, now this is really a stretched tempo in the Hinterwelten. It's beautiful but also tedious. Leidenschaften seems quite fast. Strings are also pretty dominant here. This performance doesn't grab me somehow. The orchestra's playing is technically fantastic, but it all feels carefully planned, with little spontaneity. More cerebral perhaps, still a graceful and elegant, lithe performance. Orchestra European possibly, could be the Concertgebouw but under who I really don't know.

6 - Strong opening that also takes its time, solid intonation. Timpani seems dry. Nice string pizzicati. Crisp, clear recording. Strings tender, but this section could linger more. Horns in the midst of the Leidenschaften sound curiously muffled. Some occasionally messy playing from the brass in this section. But very sweeping and passionate. So quick though! The strings are the standout in this orchestra, lush, expressive, and have the quality of sounding like a very large number of players. I think this is an older recording. Sound is kind of glassy, and something about the fast string vibrato on the high notes as the Leidenschaften winds down. Outside chance of Ormandy/Philadelphia, but only based on the strings. Though on an MO game I once set up Ormandy was the dark horse, because he had a very fast tempo. I think it's an American orchestra. I personally like this performance because it's kind of wild and very romantic. Bernstein/NYP would be my other guess.

Original clip - hm. This seems to be fairly olden; I do like the opening quite a bit (though the organ doesn't have much force). Following this things are slow, but oddly I find that (maybe it's my computer's volume) some of the music's detail is lost ~ especially compared to my favorite recording, Kempe's. So unlike George, I dislike this peaceful passage - maybe it's the acoustics? Until the bassoon enters at 2:00, this interlude is shabby indeed. At the brass's re-entrance around 4:30 there's no magic to it; the sections of the orchestra seem more like distinct entities with clashing wills than a unified "organism". They just aren't together. Or maybe I'm speaking in BS.

The more climactic passage starting at 7:30 seems a little clumsy - not climactic, not very vivid. It's well played (though the strings sound a little weak) but it's not particularly exciting. Overall this one seemed mediocre - the performance was not as committed as I would hope for.

The second one (bonus #1) was passable; I put it on in the background and honestly didn't notice it at all until the track ended. Put it back on now. I like very much how well the build-up is done from immediately after the opening all the way to the big set-piece at 8:15. Steady and well-executed pacing and intensity! The wind-down was good too. I'm glad I listened again: another old performance, perhaps, slightly newer, but well done. Distinctly unflashy - more of an "architectural" style. Not something I'd buy, but it is well done.

Bonus #2. Dang, none of these so far matches my dad's Karajan CD. And none is Kempe. I'm not going to be good at guessing artists; but then again that's the point, isn't it? I think it's fun to review these things blindly; that way we might find out our favorite recording is the Obscure Gobbledegook Orchestra (or, as my dad is fond of saying, the Bratislava Kitchen Ensemble), and our least favorite is Karajan or someone famous.

The opening on this one is fabulous, though I wasn't a big fan of the first two trumpet notes (no idea why - they seemed wrong). The chamber atmosphere afterwards is very nice. If you force me to guess an ensemble, I go with a south German or central European orchestra. Just impulse. Wow, beautiful solo string work in the 3 minute area. I like hearing the flute at 5:10 - unique touch. This scene is impressively well handled *glares at the conductor of the original clip*. Oh how wonderful! Of the recordings so far, this has caught my fancy quite the most. Hm - the more impassioned scene (7:00ish) "jumped" on me, wasn't expecting it, and honestly it doesn't seen impassioned, more like a less personal extension of the prior goings-on. As things wind down to the last seconds, however, I have to say: wow. Terrific. Some shortcomings but more than made up for.

Is seventeen seconds a bit long for Bonus #3 to go before the trumpet solo? Never mind. The timpani is odd, but generally okay. AAHH! What is this trend of not letting anyone hear any of the detail that comes after the big intro? Now we're at 2:20 and the conductor is finally bringing a little detail out. This must be the same conductor as in the original clip. I agree with O Mensch too: cavernous sound. Much better than the original clip, and the strings are wonderful at 4:00-4:10ish, but ... not in the same league as Bonus #2. Cellos caught my attention from 4:42-4:44. Very pretty  :) .

I know I am not being as technical or musicological as many other reviewers, but to quote the Pope in the Monty Python scene - "I may not be an artist, but I know what I like!" Oh, as bonus 3 / clip 4 moves along it gets better and better. Now I'm really liking it. Okay, I take that back: it's good, but not exhibiting greatness. Oh, and lots of chair squeaks. And the wind-down seemed kind of dull. I am now suffering Also Sprach Burnout and will listen to Bonus clips 4 and 5 later.

What fun this has been, though!

Quote from: Bonehelm on June 23, 2007, 03:32:24 PM
When is the answer going to be revealed? I'm just curious  :)

Dunno. Depends on how the discussion goes. Right now, it seems to be running at full steam. I am thinking about maybe dropping a few hints - but it's difficult to decide what type of hints are helpful, which ones just cause more confusion, and which ones lead people off in the wrong direction. I don't want it to become too much of a quiz game. It's really more about blind reviewing and discussing. OTOH, people also enjoy quiz games, so maybe towards the end of the discussion, when all the views have been posted and talked about, I will introduce a few hints to add a quiz game fun element to it. Let me think about it.

Quote from: M forever on June 23, 2007, 07:35:27 PM
Dunno. Depends on how the discussion goes. Right now, it seems to be running at full steam. I am thinking about maybe dropping a few hints - but it's difficult to decide what type of hints are helpful, which ones just cause more confusion, and which ones lead people off in the wrong direction. I don't want it to become too much of a quiz game. It's really more about blind reviewing and discussing. OTOH, people also enjoy quiz games, so maybe towards the end of the discussion, when all the views have been posted and talked about, I will introduce a few hints to add a quiz game fun element to it. Let me think about it.

When we're flat run out of discussion, one possible quiz game would be to simply list the performers in random order and say "match them to the clips" - but for some people on here that would be just too easy, I suppose.

Clip 1

I enjoyed this clip. The playing is lush, romantic, and yet the playing is not a "wall of sound" and the colors of Strauss's orchestration shine through. The brass is bright and has a lot of "umph;" the playing is mostly without any vibrato. The orchestra seems very polished overall and a lot of power is dissipated from the entire band, but the playing is not without dynamics; the big and bold sections are loud and full, and the calmer, more lyrical sections are often very delicately taken. On the slow side, maybe, but I don't feel the music was "drawn out". The interpretation seems rather conservative but not impassioned or dull. The orchestra sounds like one of the "big" (ie., well known, reputable) ones.

Clip 2

At first this recording seemed more drawn out than the first, but as the piece developed I got a sense of structure that wasn't there in the first clip, and the music gradually builds beautifully on what came before. As for the orchestra, it sounds less polished than the first, but the playing is certainly very good. A lot less brass in the face and the strings are a bit edgier and less uniform (in timbre, not playing), perhaps due to a lot more vibrato. The wind instruments at times used a lot of vibrato (ie., noticeable at 2:20). Interpretively I enjoyed this recording the most.

Clip 3

The string section often sounds distinctly separate from the rest of the orchestra in this clip, and at times almost chamber-like. The brass gives a lot of power when needed, but leaves plenty of room for everything else. A lot of details come out when this orchestra plays, even at the climactic, full-power moments. Overall, I think the playing is excellent. If it makes any difference, I had to listen to this one twice to solidify my impressions, unlike the other recordings which I listened to once each.


--CS

Another view which "dares" to oppose the majority opinion which seems to like neither the playing nor the interpretation in the original clip. Very interesting.

Just to make sure there is no confusion, you did refer to the *original* three clip (MO15, MO15 bonus 1 ans bonus 2), not the three last bonus ones (bonus 3-5) I posted later?

Quote from: M forever on June 23, 2007, 09:33:48 PM
Just to make sure there is no confusion, you did refer to the *original* three clip (MO15, MO15 bonus 1 ans bonus 2), not the three last bonus ones (bonus 3-5) I posted later?

Right.

--CS

What're the answers then M?

(http://www.hedweb.com/animimag/ostrich-head.jpg)

Quote from: Sean on June 24, 2007, 01:34:29 PM
What're the answers then M?

Aggh! I want to do the last two  :(

;D ;D  sorry, that's kind of selfish of me.
That was a very expressive post, Sean...

You still have time to review the other ones!

To get back in the mood for the last two clips, I listened to bonus #2 again, but to my surprise I didn't like the chamber scene nearly as much this time around.

Now to bonus #4. The trumpet kind of hangs in the open for a second in the middle of the intro, doesn't it? (The intro starts after 27 seconds ... that's just a little bit of waiting to do for it to begin!) I now am at 5:00 and this clip, like bonus #1, is growing on me slowly. Check that ... it seems to be losing momentum. This feels a bit like sitting in a quiet stand of trees when nobody else is around.

Hey! The orchestra doesn't have a harp! I feel cheated.  >:(  The climax of this section went by really quickly and I hardly noticed anything to it. This was really dispassionate, wasn't it? Calculated, a little dull - no, I'm overstating the case. It just was academic, or something. Haha - judging by reputation alone, must be Haitink!  ;D  Or maybe it's Neeme Jarvi?

Bonus #5 opens well, with problems. There was a little technical problem near the end of the intro which I've already forgotten; the diminuendo-crescendo end of the intro was overblown a bit. Oooh! Contrabassoon do I hear in the primordial soup following it? The chamber music scene is now beginning - engineered for an exceptional atmosphere, sounds wonderful, though a touch quick, maybe? Yes, certainly.

My gosh the string section is beautiful! (4:20-4:30 ish) . This was a good performance. The best? Not quite - not sure which one I liked most. They all had their problems, and I will have to give a relisten to bonus clips 1, 2, and 5 to see which I like most. But in the end, do they beat Kempe and Dresden? No.

This is an awesome game and I look forward to learning the performers and playing in the future!  8)  It's been fun. Dang it ... now I'm addicted to Richard Strauss.

OK, looks like we got ina lot of great reviews and interesting posts, I don't want to draw it out too long. Let's quiz a little. That's more fun than just posting a list.

What kind of hints would you like?

Quote from: M forever on June 25, 2007, 04:36:22 AM
What kind of hints would you like?

Where in the world is the orchestra in the very first clip from?

Quote from: M forever on June 25, 2007, 04:36:22 AM
OK, looks like we got ina lot of great reviews and interesting posts, I don't want to draw it out too long. Let's quiz a little. That's more fun than just posting a list.

What kind of hints would you like?

Drop a few names of orchestras and/or conductors. (Without telling which name goes with which (clip)).

Q

Quote from: Que on June 25, 2007, 08:20:22 AM
Drop a few names of orchestras and/or conductors. (Without telling which name goes with which (clip)).

No, that's already giving away too much. I, like Mark, would just be curious to have confirmation of the general provenance of the first orchestra. We can then still debate from there, especially if a number of us were considerably off.

Allright, I'll give my uneducated opinion, even though I have never heard the piece before this. I listened to bonus#2 (clip 3) and bonus#3 (clip 4).

Bonus#2 (clip 3). There really is something wrong with the two first trumpet notes. I doubt that I would have noticed it, had I not read it first. Didn't like the timpani, especially where there was a crescendo in the opening for that instrument it seemed awkward. Same goes for the violin solo around 10 minutes into the piece. This also reminded me why I generally dislike the organ - a horrid, ugly sound.  >:(  For big parts of the piece, I found the woodwinds way to loud, when compared to the other parts of the orchestra (Is that what is called "bad balance"?).

Bonus#3 (clip 4). The opening was much better. The timpanist did a better job, and the first two trumpet notes were completely normal.  :) The organ sound was actually OK, a nice surprise there. Overall, the balance was perfect (if I am using the word "balance" correctly?), much more expression, passion, feeling, much more music. The ending was perfectly controlled. On the negative side, I did find some minor climaxes to be a somewhat lacking of that last "push". Nevertheless, I pick this one as my favourite of the two.

Now, I know nothing about any conductor or orchestra, but I want to play too, so I'll make a wild guess  :) For bonus#3 (clip 4), I pick Solti. He impressed me mightily with Mozart's requiem, so why shouldn't he impress me with Also Sprach Zarathustra?  ;D (A bit of research shows that Solti recorded this with three different orchestras (VPO, CSO and Berliner Philharmoniker), so I'm not making any guesses there)

edit: I wrote "horn" instead of trumpet"  :-[

Quote from: Mark on June 25, 2007, 05:02:12 AM
Where in the world is the orchestra in the very first clip from?

The venue would certainly help, especially if it's a city like Leipzig or Dresden. ;)

Quote from: Black Knight on June 25, 2007, 11:23:34 AM
Bonus#2 (clip 3). There really is something wrong with the two first horn notes.

Horn notes?

Quote from: Black Knight on June 25, 2007, 11:23:34 AM
Bonus#3 (clip 4). The opening was much better. The timpanist did a better job, and the first two horn notes were completely normal.  :)

Horn notes?

Quote from: M forever on June 25, 2007, 11:38:06 PM
Horn notes?

Horn notes?

I hereby change that into trumpet notes!  :P  :-[

Quote from: Black Knight on June 26, 2007, 02:37:01 AM
I hereby change that into trumpet notes!  :P  :-[

I thought you had a time machine, but it looks more like you edited your post, but without going back in time. It still says "horns" in the quote in my posts. Actually, that post wouldn't even be there if you had gone back in time. Nor would this one here...uh...

Quote from: Bunny on June 25, 2007, 02:44:53 PM
The venue would certainly help, especially if it's a city like Leipzig or Dresden. ;)

You are very correct, the original Mystery Orchestra is indeed based in a venue which, like Leipzig or Dresden, can be described as "a city".

This is Mystery Orchestra 15:

Well, that tells me absolutely nothing!  ;D

Just listened to bonus#1 (clip 2). I found the balance between wind instruments and the rest of the orchestra to be somewhere in between of bonus 2 and 3, which was kind of nice. Now I can't decide wether I like this one or bonus#3 better...

OK, how about this:

Since I know how much y'all love all these silly polls and votes and all that, while you try to figure out who the nice people in the picture are, decide which of the 6 clips you like best and second best, and those two will be revealed first, plus I will post the entire performances for you.

Quote from: M forever on June 26, 2007, 02:52:19 AM
I thought you had a time machine, but it looks more like you edited your post, but without going back in time. It still says "horns" in the quote in my posts. Actually, that post wouldn't even be there if you had gone back in time. Nor would this one here...uh...

You are very correct, the original Mystery Orchestra is indeed based in a venue which, like Leipzig or Dresden, can be described as "a city".

This is Mystery Orchestra 15:

We already knew that the orchestra was located in what would be described as a city.  There are very few orchestras (if any at all) that are located in areas that are not urbanized.  Please let me know how many orchestras are located in the depths of forests or the middle of cow fields.

Interesting question really. I would have to look into that.

OK, here are more clues in addition to the pic: MO15 was founded in 1918 and it is indeed located in a city, in a country which has 4 official languages.

Quote from: M forever on June 26, 2007, 01:24:14 PM
Interesting question really. I would have to look into that.

OK, here are more clues in addition to the pic: MO15 was founded in 1918 and it is indeed located in a city, in a country which has 4 official languages.

Orchestre de la Suisse Romande. That explains why I had so much trouble with that. I have not heard any recent recordings of them, nor seen them live, and never in German repertoire. Explains the ensemble problems, though. From when is this recording and who's conducting?

Quote from: Bunny on June 26, 2007, 01:03:56 PM
Please let me know how many orchestras are located in the depths of forests or the middle of cow fields.

Academy of St.Martin-in-the Fields.  ;D

This perhaps?

(http://ec1.images-amazon.com/images/I/611EFN98TEL._AA240_.jpg)

Quote from: Drasko on June 26, 2007, 01:58:27 PM
This perhaps?

(http://ec1.images-amazon.com/images/I/611EFN98TEL._AA240_.jpg)

That would also explain the atrocious sound. What is it with Denon? Do they bury their microphones in the fabric of the seats in the last row of the auditorium? I just got Blomstedt's Leipzig Bruckner 4 on Denon which has the same sound problems.

Quote from: O Mensch on June 26, 2007, 02:00:17 PM
I just got Blomstedt's Leipzig Bruckner 4 on Denon which has the same sound problems.

OT: Blomstedt's Strauss disc on Denon is a demonstration disc IMO.

Quote from: O Mensch on June 26, 2007, 02:00:17 PM
That would also explain the atrocious sound. What is it with Denon? Do they bury their microphones in the fabric of the seats in the last row of the auditorium? I just got Blomstedt's Leipzig Bruckner 4 on Denon which has the same sound problems.

Don't know, I've heard from mor than one person completely opposite opinions on Denon engineering; that their soundpicture is very natural and that sounds great on high-end equipment. On my lo-end only thing bothering me about that clip was distant sounding quieter sections.

Quote from: O Mensch on June 26, 2007, 01:38:09 PM
Academy of St.Martin-in-the Fields.  ;D

The last time I looked those fields of daisies had become fields of motor cars. ;)

Quote from: O Mensch on June 26, 2007, 02:00:17 PM
That would also explain the atrocious sound. What is it with Denon? Do they bury their microphones in the fabric of the seats in the last row of the auditorium? I just got Blomstedt's Leipzig Bruckner 4 on Denon which has the same sound problems.

I have to agree with you on that.  Denon had a reputation for excellent, top quality, digital sound, but I always have to bump up the volume considerably just to hear the music on all of the Denon recordings I have -- including Inbal's Mahler cycle.  Almost all of their recordings sound recessed to me.

Well, they do indeed generally make very good and natural and undoctored recordings - but they do make them for good equipment. Not to listen to in the SUV.

Quote from: O Mensch on June 26, 2007, 01:28:32 PM
Orchestre de la Suisse Romande. That explains why I had so much trouble with that. I have not heard any recent recordings of them, nor seen them live, and never in German repertoire. Explains the ensemble problems, though. From when is this recording and who's conducting?

Oui, Orchestre de la Suisse Romande. That may explain why it mystified so many people (I will explain below why I chose it, not for that reason, though).

But it does not "explain ensemble problems". It's not a bad orchestra at all. There aren't any serious ensemble problems here. Yes, the first trumpet entry could be a tiny little bit better and tune, and you are correct, there is an out of tune horn moment in "Hinterwäldler", although I think it's not the first, but one of the other horns which play the chromatic "Durchgang" (whatever that is called in English). I am not entirely sure either how much it really is out of tune or how much Inbal (yes, it is Eliahu Inbal) just brings out that second clash that most other conductors drown out.
And maybe a few other minor blemishes, but no "ensemble problems". Quite the contrary. But these are just tiny nitpicks. I can hear stuff like that on any given recording, on most recordings, live or studio, and much more than that on a lot of recordings, including by "top" orchestras.

The reason I chose it was because I discovered this little series of recordings with the OSR and Inbal which I had not known about. I generally appreciate Inbal's work, and I wanted to hear this orchestra in that repertoire, especially because I have a really very good live Mahler 3 with them already.

Honestly, I think it's totally awesome. Apparently that opinion is not shared by too many here, though.

I was immediately fascinated by the sound quality of the beginning pedal note. It has a deep, slightly snarly and very dark texture and you can just hear the basses tremolo stirring in the dark. On many recordings, I hear a low rumbling. Here, I "see" night. If you can't hear all that, then you have equipment problems.
Then the first trumpet entry - it could have been a little better in tune, but at least they come in really soft and without plop. This is a horribly difficult moment, and there are extremely few recordings which get that really right, and many which get ittotally wrong. I love the sound of the trumpets, too. A little slender, but luminous and with depth of tone and a gilded quality to it. Obviously piston trumpets, but sounding as "authentic" as few manage to do.
The three entries are also very nicely dynamically tiered, and the last one sounds just magnificent - not blaring trumpets drawing attention to themselves with how loud they can play, but a brigh beam of sonic light.
I also love the way Eliahu illuminates the chord structures of the tutti entries, how he microcontrols the dynamics of individual sections to shed changing lights on the crescendo chords, how he briefly lets the trombones "light up" in the lst tutti entry, like someone turning a reflecting object in his hands.
I think the final chord of the introduction sounds a little compressed, and the organ could indeed be a bit more "majestic". Or should it? But apparently Denon chose to record things here as they sounded in the hall, without "dramatizing" them sonically, and the way Inbal treats the organ here made me get a new idea of why Strauss chose to hold it over for a few moments. That is an interesting, somewhat puzzling idea. Maybe he wanted to achieve not a "majestic organ", but a kind of "composed reverb" effect here, to suggest a larger sonic space, a little cathedral like? If so, then the way Inbal treats it here is just "right" - if not the most "spacy" way.

I like the fine stranded and highly articulated string playing in the following "Hinterwäldler" section, and the way he opens textures and brings out inner structures in the following sections. The section beginning areound 5'45 has a sense of calm and at the same time tension which I sense rarely when I listen to this far-too-often-heard piece. A lot of interpreters just want to go on to the next "spectacular" section, not build tension. The passage around 6'30 also brings out a rarely heard effect, how you seem to have two sepearate time layers going on at the same time, with the calm motion suddenly invaded by the rising fixtures in the lower strings (here played with great impact and tone, and excellent articulation), and you can hear for a few moments how the first tempo layer gets slowly "sucked in" by the other layer.

Then great textural clarity in the following "Leidenschaften" section with careful highlighting of vital harmonic points. Inbal obviously has really studied the score. There is pleanty of fine detail and silky string strands in "Grablied", too, which reminded me how "new" this must have sounded when it was first heard. And it goes on and on like that. Plenty of detail and at the same time carefully layered textures. What I find most fascinating about the whole interpretation is Inbal's long-line control, the way he builds and keeps tension and moves fluently between the sections.

This is actually one of my favorite AsZ recordings now.

But apparently, the majority here do not agree with me, so I guess this will not be voted the favorite recording.

Let me know what you think about my observations. And, how much did I hear and how much did I "want" to hear? After all, I did not test blindly. Although I really had no "expectations" at all except that I know and value some of Inbal (actually very many) other recordings, and a certain curiosity about how the OSR would play this.


But which are the other Mystery Orchestras? Actually, although there are 5 clips left, there are only 3 more: in alphabetical order, Berliner Philharmoniker, Chicago Symphony, Philharmonia Orchestra. Yes, two of them appear twice. But which ones? And which clips are which orchestras?

Quote from: M forever on June 26, 2007, 06:19:59 PM
Honestly, I think it's totally awesome. Apparently that opinion is not shared by too many here, though.

Yes, I had my say earlier. I rather liked it.


Well, from your list of remaining orchestras:


Clip 2:

Originally I had chosen American w/ the NYP. I'll stick with American and go with the CSO.

Clip 3:

Originally had no clue. Now CSO.

Bonus clip 3:

Originally Concertgebouw. Now BPO.

Bonus clip 4:

Originally LSO/LPO. Now Philharmonia.

Bonus clip 5:

Originally no clue. Now Philharmonia.

Quote from: M forever on June 26, 2007, 06:19:59 PM
Oui, Orchestre de la Suisse Romande.

Ah, well, I missed that one, but I did at least choose central European...but by way of the VPO or BPO, though. ;D

Quote from: M forever on June 26, 2007, 06:19:59 PM
Well, they do indeed generally make very good and natural and undoctored recordings - but they do make them for good equipment. Not to listen to in the SUV.

They do sound natural, I agree, but just a bit too far away. I'd like to feel like I'm in a good seat in the hall, not somewhere in the back.

Quote from: M forever on June 26, 2007, 06:19:59 PMBut it does not "explain ensemble problems". It's not a bad orchestra at all. There aren't any serious ensemble problems here.

All true. Obviously we are nitpicking here. But the OSR does exhibit certain, shall we say, differences of opinion amongst its players here and there, more so in older recordings. I have a Symphonie fantastique with Ansermet that is quite inspired, but you can tell that the orchestra is being pushed beyond its limits. I'm a little more easiliy irritated by that than you prehaps, which also explains our different views on the Lamoureux, which I can only take in small doses.

Quote from: M forever on June 26, 2007, 06:19:59 PMThe reason I chose it was because I discovered this little series of recordings with the OSR and Inbal which I had not known about. I generally appreciate Inbal's work, and I wanted to hear this orchestra in that repertoire, especially because I have a really very good live Mahler 3 with them already.

Honestly, I think it's totally awesome. Apparently that opinion is not shared by too many here, though.

I was immediately fascinated by the sound quality of the beginning pedal note. It has a deep, slightly snarly and very dark texture and you can just hear the basses tremolo stirring in the dark. On many recordings, I hear a low rumbling. Here, I "see" night. If you can't hear all that, then you have equipment problems.
Then the first trumpet entry - it could have been a little better in tune, but at least they come in really soft and without plop. This is a horribly difficult moment, and there are extremely few recordings which get that really right, and many which get ittotally wrong. I love the sound of the trumpets, too. A little slender, but luminous and with depth of tone and a gilded quality to it. Obviously piston trumpets, but sounding as "authentic" as few manage to do.
The three entries are also very nicely dynamically tiered, and the last one sounds just magnificent - not blaring trumpets drawing attention to themselves with how loud they can play, but a brigh beam of sonic light.
I also love the way Eliahu illuminates the chord structures of the tutti entries, how he microcontrols the dynamics of individual sections to shed changing lights on the crescendo chords, how he briefly lets the trombones "light up" in the lst tutti entry, like someone turning a reflecting object in his hands.
I think the final chord of the introduction sounds a little compressed, and the organ could indeed be a bit more "majestic". Or should it? But apparently Denon chose to record things here as they sounded in the hall, without "dramatizing" them sonically, and the way Inbal treats the organ here made me get a new idea of why Strauss chose to hold it over for a few moments. That is an interesting, somewhat puzzling idea. Maybe he wanted to achieve not a "majestic organ", but a kind of "composed reverb" effect here, to suggest a larger sonic space, a little cathedral like? If so, then the way Inbal treats it here is just "right" - if not the most "spacy" way.

I like the fine stranded and highly articulated string playing in the following "Hinterwäldler" section, and the way he opens textures and brings out inner structures in the following sections. The section beginning areound 5'45 has a sense of calm and at the same time tension which I sense rarely when I listen to this far-too-often-heard piece. A lot of interpreters just want to go on to the next "spectacular" section, not build tension. The passage around 6'30 also brings out a rarely heard effect, how you seem to have two sepearate time layers going on at the same time, with the calm motion suddenly invaded by the rising fixtures in the lower strings (here played with great impact and tone, and excellent articulation), and you can hear for a few moments how the first tempo layer gets slowly "sucked in" by the other layer.

Then great textural clarity in the following "Leidenschaften" section with careful highlighting of vital harmonic points. Inbal obviously has really studied the score. There is pleanty of fine detail and silky string strands in "Grablied", too, which reminded me how "new" this must have sounded when it was first heard. And it goes on and on like that. Plenty of detail and at the same time carefully layered textures. What I find most fascinating about the whole interpretation is Inbal's long-line control, the way he builds and keeps tension and moves fluently between the sections.

I agree with you on the Hinterweltler string opening (BTW, I believe it's Hinterweltler, not -wäldler). As I commented initially, this is done very nicely and I agree with your observations here. I disagree on the opening. It feels to me like it's over before it has really begun. Strauss writes here "sehr breit" and I just don't get that from Inbal. No.2 is more on the mark here for me. Likewise, for the organ, Strauss writes "volles Werk", so I doubt this was merely intended as an echo to suggest a larger sonic space.

Quote from: M forever on June 26, 2007, 06:19:59 PM
But which are the other Mystery Orchestras? Actually, although there are 5 clips left, there are only 3 more: in alphabetical order, Berliner Philharmoniker, Chicago Symphony, Philharmonia Orchestra. Yes, two of them appear twice. But which ones? And which clips are which orchestras?

Bonus 1: I'm now gonna say this is the Philharmonia.

Bonus 2: This is still BPO/Solti, as per my initial impressions.

Bonus 3: Philharmonia again?

Bonus 4: These sound like German trombones, so I'm gonna say this is BPO again.

Bonus 5: This is still the CSO. 

I just noticed how extremely well balanced the orchestra in Bonus 4 is in Freuden- und Leidenschaften. You can clearly hear the woodwinds, but not as a separate unit, but rather complementing and timbrally enhancing the strings. Really well done. Please tell us who the conductors are as well.

Thanks for these guesses and thanks for replying to my revelation in a civilized manner. I will reply myself later, but I have to take a nap now, I had a few really rough days. And I mean, really rough, that's why I have to take a nap now. But I think I already said that. Anyway, I will reply later. I think I said that, too.

One other thing I wanted to say is that I look forward to more guesses, but don't let yourself be influenced by what O Mensch wrote. I mean about his Bonus clip guesses. Not about the original clip. Well, that, too. He only said these bad things because he hoped it would be the IPO again.

No, not really. I was just kidding. That's an insider joke. Don't worry about what that means. So I have to place a smiley here I guess:

;)

or maybe this one:

;D

No, what I meant is, don't let yourself be influenced by his guesses. He may be right. Or he may be wrong. In any case, post what *you* think. Remember, nobody wins or loses.

Or actually, all of you who did not like the original clip lose.

That was a joke, too. Therefore I will place another smiley here. How about this:

>:D

In any case, I have to take a nap now.



I have the feeling I already said that.

M, I think one factor is it's quite different when you know a piece very well as opposed to when it's quite new to someone. I really haven't listened to this piece a whole lot beyond the famous opening. Boy, was I missing out. After hearing it so many times, I have a whole new appreciation for the piece. I would love to study the score. There are a few pieces that I know very well whose now favorite recordings of mine have some frankly appaling ensemble moments, though when I first heard the piece I totally could not have appreciated those recordings.

I can definitely get past the somewhat minor tuning problems in the Inbal, and the few balance issues. Your post as tour guide helps to listen for things in this recording. I think the strings are in particular very fine, the runs at the end of the Sennsucht are perhaps the most clearly played in all these clips. The phrasing is lovely in the Hinterwelten, these contemplative sections are where this recording works best for me. Not overly done. The Leidenschaften doesn't grab me as much as others, but it's still very good. I like his opening interpretation wise. It moves along, he doesn't hang the brass out to dry by pushing them to the limit right at the opening.

I've listened to them all more in depth and my opinions have changed some. It's hard to have a favorite with several good performances and a cursory listening, but I'd say my personal favorite is Bonus Clip #1. The orchestral balance is wonderful, the tempos work for me, and it's a very musical and passionate performance. Especially Leidenschaften is really fantastic, which balances out the added sweetness in the Hinterweltern. It seems to gather a breathlessness and wonderful tension with each crest that is finally released in a very satisying way in the dying, keening Grablied. #2 is also extremely good, the opening I like a lot and nice clarity of the lines in the Leidenschaften. #5 is power plus and yes, fast, but also romantic and a rather impressive opening. Lovely nostalgia in the Hinterweltern.

Bonus Clip 3 - I'm curious about this live one. This one is niggling at me. I retract some of the hyperbole I used before, I actually feel Leidenschaften isn't as intense as in others. The playing of this orchestra is so fine though, a very lush sound and wonderful balance. I think this could be Berlin. But what is the provenance of this recording? I don't know the recordings well enough to know if this live performance is from a regularly distributed CD. Possibly even a lesser known Philharmonia recording.

Checking possibilities at Amazon, #4 I think is Berlin. By the way, #4 is my least favorite. I am sure this is heresy. Wouldn't be surprised if it's Karajan. The playing is gorgeous. But Hinterweltern is too slow and Leidenschaften too fast compared. Can't get past that. #5 I really think Chicago. I think Solti appears twice. And possibly Maazel with the Philharmonia. I said before they were the orchestra of my favorite clip, so  I'll go with that team for #1. Wondering if #2 isn't Boulez and Chicago. 

My preview of this post says several new replies have been posted since you typed this. So I have not read, whatever M said to not see from O Mensch.  0:)

Quote from: Greta on June 26, 2007, 08:31:48 PM
I can definitely get past the somewhat minor tuning problems in the Inbal, and the few balance issues. Your post as tour guide helps to listen for things in this recording.

Yes, but it is also definitely influencing. The exact opposite of blind testing.

I find it very interesting that you originally said this sounds like a 60s recording. Some other posters also commented negatively on the sound quality. That puzzled me somewhat since this is no doubt one of the best recorded Zarathustras from a (sound) technical point of view. But, as has also been said, some recordings, like many Denon recordings, are not made for mediocre equipment. Some good recordings fare well on mediocre and good equipment, some less so.

The recording style Denon uses is definitely not made to work well on bad equipment. It makes me shudder to think on what kind of equipment some people listen and then comment on "sound quality". Not necessarily here, I mean in general. There are recordings which are made to "impress" even on bad equipment, like a lot of the "in your face" Decca stuff, especially some of their 70s recordings. But they really don't sound that "great" by any standard.

Of course, we have to take into account that there are a number of different strategies for how to squeeze the huge sound of an orchestra into the small acoustical frame of a recording, just like there are different strategies to photograph or film big sceneries. And several of these strategies work well in their own ways. My main criterion is that a recording should sound more or less "natural". Yes, I know, no recording really sounds "natural", just like no pictures represents a view "correctly".
But some come fairly close, some sound completely "artificial". That's a very complex subject. In any case, I think this Denon recording sounds very, very good from a recorded sound point of view, and that's something I don't quite see as an "opinion" like musical questions. It really depends more on good equipment and trained ears. The perception of sound and how we hear it is obviously highly subjective and very hard to describe and discuss, but it can be learned to perceive sound very precisely. Otherwise, musicians couldn't play together with matched sounds.

Quote from: Greta on June 26, 2007, 08:31:48 PM
I can definitely get past the somewhat minor tuning problems in the Inbal, and the few balance issues.

My point wasn't that one should not mind a few little booboos here and there if the recording is otherwise "worth it", kind of liking making unpleasant compromises. My point was whatever small blemishes there are here technically, there aren't any more or any more grave than on basically any other given recording, including those by "top" orchestras. On the contrary, there is some very outstanding, well sounding and beautifully phased playing here, and not just in one or two places. This is a "top shelf" performance from an orchestral technique point of view, no doubt. But some completely focused on the small blemishes, to a degee which puzzled me very much.

For me, it is also very interesting to see the comments while they are still blind and think about why this or that comment is made. I am still thinking about this, but I am beginning to suspect (very strongly, actually) that a lot of people don't separate at all between the subjective perception of "sound quality" and the emotional impact the sound and playing make on them on the one hand, and the purely technical aspects of music making on the other. So I think what people mostly hated about this recording is not these small blemishes (and the more we talk about this, the more astounded I am by how much these were focused on), but the "lack of emotional impact" the complete product made on them, I part I have to say because their sound equipment is obviously not good enough.

Which is all perfectly OK. No one is "forced" to like anything, everybody can listen on whatever equipment they want, everyone can like or dislike any kind of sound or playing.

What I am most interested in this context is not who is "right" or "wrong", but *how* we perceive music and recordings, and why we do so, and most importantly, *how to we discuss these things*.

Quote from: Greta on June 26, 2007, 08:31:48 PM
I think this could be Berlin. But what is the provenance of this recording? I don't know the recordings well enough to know if this live performance is from a regularly distributed CD. Possibly even a lesser known Philharmonia recording.

Checking possibilities at Amazon, #4 I think is Berlin.

I said it many times before, I say it again, probably with no effect. Do what you like but I think you are totally completely wasting your time checking stuff like that on amazon. Do you have any idea how many recordings of this are floating around? I don't. But it must be *a lot*.

You have absolutely no way of knowing where I got the recording from. Maybe it is or was available through amazon. Or maybe not. Maybe it is only available in Europe. Or maybe not. Maybe it is from a CD I bought 23 years ago which has since then been OOP and shows up absolutely nowhere. Maybe it is a special Japan edition. Do you know how much stuff is available in Japan that is available nowhere else? Maybe it is a high quality live recording. Or maybe not.

I did not know until very recently that that Inbal recording did even exist. And neither did any of you. I just stumbled across it when I searched Inbal recordings on amazon because I had just listened to some of his nice Mahler recordings from the 80s.

Your time is much better spent just listening.

Quote from: Greta on June 26, 2007, 08:31:48 PM
My preview of this post says several new replies have been posted since you typed this. So I have not read, whatever M said to not see from O Mensch.  0:)

I did not say that. Please do not misrepresent me. I never said you shouldn't read his post. I said, just keep in mind he may or may not be right about individual guesses. He made a lot of very precise observations in some cases, so I am "concerned" some people might just piggyback on his views because they might think it might be better to follow him than to form their own opinion. Did you see how Bunny apologized for having a different opinion from him earlier? That is exactly what I don't want people to do.
Not that I mind if you do. That is your choice. I am just saying, everybody's input is valuable. Do not let yourself be influenced to much by what others write.

This is supposed to be a blind listening discussion, not a blind listening and blind posting thread. Then it wouldn't be a discussion. On the contrary, it is good if people read other people's views and start discussing them. Just don't blindly follow anybody. Only blindly follow your own opinions.

Quote from: sidoze on June 26, 2007, 02:04:52 PM
OT: Blomstedt's Strauss disc on Denon is a demonstration disc IMO.

Hmm, yes, hmm, it does sound really good, but I wouldn't go that far and call it demo quality. I also remembered it as very good, but I just listened to it again after a while, and that reminded me that it does have a certain "brightness" and "harshness" which is something a lot of "audiophiles" complained about a lot in the early years of digital, in many cases without justification, in this case probably correctly. There is also a certain "digital haziness" which you can hear set in when the sound gets bigger. Still, a rather good recording, better than many and incredible orchestral playing. Actually, it's the sheer crystalline and crisp beauty of orchestral sound that is overwhelming, when the first tutti entry comes in, that leaves such a great impression that one is immediately taken in and doesn't mind the other small objections I raised. Kind of like EMI's earlier recording with Kempe which is sonically not at all that great as a recordng either, but it still "sounds great".

Which one is the best sounding recording of Zarathustra? I don't know. They all have "problems". That sound is simply too big and complex for recording media.

But Blomstedt/SD is definitely one of the best, despite the small reservations I made above.

What I want now is Sony to record the Staatskapelle Dresden again with Luisi. They already did Don Quixote and Ein Heldenleben, so that is not at all unlikely.

Quote from: M forever on June 27, 2007, 06:21:12 AM
What I want now is Sony to record the Staatskapelle Dresden again with Luisi. They already did Don Quixote and Ein Heldenleben, so that is not at all unlikely.

Thanks for reminding me! I remember seeing the announcement for their new Strauss recording. It seems to be available only in Germany sofar, though.  :-\   

Yes, but I will have it soon because I ordered it to be sent to my mother, and she will send it with a ton of other stuff I ordered from amazon.de and other European sellers. I pay for the shipping of that package of course, but it is still much less than the often outrageous shipping costs to the US for individual items.

I will reply to your above points later. I didn't mean to ignore you. It's just that I like Greta much better than you  :D

BTW, I did not say "echo". I said "composed reverb", like the kind of reverb that you get in really large and reverberant spaces, like big cathedrals, when the sound seems to hover in the air for a moment, and then slowly disappears into the distance. You can hear that kind of reverb at the very end of Barenboim's "Organ Symphony" recording, although it sounds a little funny there since it is tacked on. It may be possible that Strauss intended a similar effect here. Some concert halls have really big organs, but few have as "majestic" organs as some large churches. Some have just good medium sized ones. I wonder what size Strauss had in his inner ear when he wrote this. In any case, it's somehow better with the organ hanging over. I can't really explain why. But I guess that's why Strauss was a genius and I am not.

Quote from: M forever on June 27, 2007, 06:53:35 AM
In any case, it's somehow better with the organ hanging over. I can't really explain why. But I guess that's why Strauss was a genius and I am not.

What's also interesting is how in the preceding decrescendo-crescendo, the orchestra disappears and melts into the organ and then rises back out of it, only to suddenly leave the organ all by itself.

M can be a tough customer, can't he?  ;D

QuoteI did not say that. Please do not misrepresent me. I never said you shouldn't read his post. I said, just keep in mind he may or may not be right about individual guesses.

I did not mean to misrepresent you. You said do not be influenced by his post. Which is for me extremely hard unless I do not read it at all. ;) If I see comments or guesses from others it can immediately make me question my own, so I try hard not read their comments until after I have posted mine.

QuoteI said it many times before, I say it again, probably with no effect. Do what you like but I think you are totally completely wasting your time checking stuff like that on amazon. Do you have any idea how many recordings of this are floating around?

Oh tons, I would imagine. I only checked to see who recorded a piece with who after the hints, I am not familiar at all with the discography of this piece and I find it interesting. At least I was honest. :D It's part of the fun for me, I become aware of recordings I did not realize existed. I think it's pretty common to check discographies at some point, Que also did...and your response to him illustrates why I would "waste my time" doing such a thing.

Quote

QuoteQuote from: Que on 23-06-2007, 08:46:05
Not to cheat or spoil the fun or anything- but I just checked two conductors who came to my mind, it being a fairly modern recording and thinking of a combination of "objective" and "French": Seiji Ozawa (not French, but I consider his style very much French influenced/orientated) and Pierre Boulez.
I checked check if they recorded this piece with either BSO or CSO. And guess what? Ozawa recorded with the BSO, Boulez with the CSO. I didn't listen to on line samples btw - that definitely would spoil the fun.

Of course you can listen to clips or recordings you have and compare them. But that's totally up to you. Checking who made which recordings with whom already goes into that direction. And that's totally OK. It's developing a theory and trying to put it into context. We automatically do that, even in "blind" situations. There is no way around that.

About the era of the first clip (when was that Inbal recorded BTW?):

QuoteI find it very interesting that you originally said this sounds like a 60s recording. Some other posters also commented negatively on the sound quality.

For me: The faster string vibrato, and that of the solo trumpet, I associate with an older era. Some also commented on it sounding "French". I am not well versed in the historically French style of playing. Is this because of the vibrato? What is it about the style that says French?

Bunny and brianrein also commented on it being an "older" performance. What was the reason? The playing style, the sound quality? Bunny also thought the "rough playing" pointed to an older recording. This is something interesting to discuss. Why does patchy ensemble = older and very good ensemble playing = newer?

As far as the sound quality, it didn't particularly bother me nor did I think it perfect, it wasn't an issue for me. Does sound quality have any influence on guessing?

Just some questions to ponder. :)

Quote from: Greta on June 27, 2007, 09:59:56 PM
About the era of the first clip (when was that Inbal recorded BTW?):

For me: The faster string vibrato, and that of the solo trumpet, I associate with an older era. Some also commented on it sounding "French". I am not well versed in the historically French style of playing. Is this because of the vibrato? What is it about the style that says French?

The recording was made in February of 1995 and I think it doesn't sound a day older than that. Very low, almost no hiss, very large dynamic range, basically no distortion, clarity and presence in all registers from the very bottom to the very top, good detail definition and placement. The fact that it is clearly audible that the organ comes from somewhere in the back, for instance, while it may not be "spectacular" enough for some (I am myself undecided, I like a bit more there, too, but I don't mind it the way it is in this recording either) speaks for it because it shows that it has a very realistic, deep sound picture (you can see in the picture I posted that the stage is indeed deep and narrow, and the organ pretty far back).
Some of these features are achievements of good recording engineering and are definitely present in older recordings as well, but the large and uncompressed dynamic range, the very clear lows and highs, the very low hiss and some other features "give away" that this can only be a rather recent recording.

Several posters pointed in the French direction, and I can only applaud them for their keen ears and sense of style, all the more since the OSR doesn't really sound "that French" anymore these days.
During the good old Ansermet days, they sounded very much more French, with some other elements such as maybe a bit darker and more solid brass and a bigger lower end to the strings than contemporary French orchestras. But that was decades ago, in a time when orchestras generally sounded much more "local".
Today, the OSR still retains some elements of that orchestral style, but they are also much more globalized than they used to be, like so many other orchestras. Some players also pointed in a very similar direction, to the Tonhalle-Orchester. I think they do indeed sound somewhat similar, not too surprisingly, the TOZ appears to me to have somewhat darker string sound and lean a little bit more in the "German direction" in general, but that can really just be an expectation I have and the difference may also be indeed caused by such factors as recording location and acoustics - I heard the TOZ a few times live, the OSR only once.

I would say that the hallmarks of the French style which can still be heard here are generally a somewhat leaner, brighter sound, more slender woodwinds and slightly brighter and more open brass, and rather silky strings with a silvery quality to it, I mean all that compared to the German orchestral style, although it is very hard to reduce both to just a few adjectives - these styles are really more spectrums than narrowly defineable styles.

Quote from: Greta on June 27, 2007, 09:59:56 PM
Bunny and brianrein also commented on it being an "older" performance. What was the reason? The playing style, the sound quality? Bunny also thought the "rough playing" pointed to an older recording. This is something interesting to discuss. Why does patchy ensemble = older and very good ensemble playing = newer?

Generally yes, one can say that the general level of orchestral playing is higher now than it used to be, say, several decades ago. There are more technically really good orchestras around these days. There were always really good orchestras, but "technical perfection" was definitely not as widespread as it is today up to the 60s and even 70s, maybe.
That is obviously a very good thing, in principle, but it also has flipsides. The aim to play "technically perfect" has led to a lot of compromises being made as far as sound quality and stylistic individuality is concerned. Instruments are more andmore engineered to be easy and safe to play first and have a rich and variable sound second. That in itself is another completely different subject.

Wat Bunny and brianrein really meant I can not tell you, we will have to ask them. Like I said earlier, I do not understand what they meant by "rough ensemble". I am not saying that I disagree with her reaction in general because that is obviously everyone's personal thing, I am saying that I simply don't understand the "rough ensemble" part. Not even remotely. Like I also said earlier, there are not more "bad spots" in this recording than in most, actually far less than in many, and the ensemble is generally very good to excellent, with outstanding group articulation and a fine sense of tone and some really exquisitely sounded textures, points I pointed to in my "listening guide". Like I also said, I am beginning more and more to suspect that some people listen to these clips - or indeed anything they discuss in these forums - on very...uh...modest...equipment and if it isn't one of those recordings which "jump out at you" they are underwhelmed and begin blaing that on the quality of the playing as such. That is what *I* seem to have learned from these discussions. But I am still thinking about this.

Quote from: O Mensch on June 26, 2007, 07:20:40 PM
They do sound natural, I agree, but just a bit too far away. I'd like to feel like I'm in a good seat in the hall, not somewhere in the back.

This recording puts you in row 11, seat J. Not any further back. We really have to discuss those listening setup questions. But let's do that in the other thread.

Quote from: O Mensch on June 26, 2007, 07:20:40 PM
All true. Obviously we are nitpicking here. But the OSR does exhibit certain, shall we say, differences of opinion amongst its players here and there, more so in older recordings. I have a Symphonie fantastique with Ansermet that is quite inspired, but you can tell that the orchestra is being pushed beyond its limits. I'm a little more easiliy irritated by that than you prehaps, which also explains our different views on the Lamoureux, which I can only take in small doses.

I agree about those Ansermet recordings, I mean about the technical side, musically, that's a completey different discussion which does not belong her, but...uh...those Ansermet recordings are 40-50 years old. This here is in many respects - in some, I think, unfortunately - not the same orchestra anymore. Some elements of the of style are left, but probably very few if any of the players from the Ansermet era are still there, I guess. There are some elements here in which the ensemble sound is less blended, more "individualistic" than commonly heard these days. Maybe that is what you actually meant, but that's more a stylistic than a technical question.

Quote from: O Mensch on June 26, 2007, 07:20:40 PM
I agree with you on the Hinterweltler string opening (BTW, I believe it's Hinterweltler, not -wäldler). As I commented initially, this is done very nicely and I agree with your observations here. I disagree on the opening. It feels to me like it's over before it has really begun. Strauss writes here "sehr breit" and I just don't get that from Inbal. No.2 is more on the mark here for me. Likewise, for the organ, Strauss writes "volles Werk", so I doubt this was merely intended as an echo to suggest a larger sonic space.

You are right, it is "Hinterweltler" although that is for me more or less the same thing. I think the word Hinterweltler doesn't really exist, although you never know in German, but I suspect Nietzsche made that up as variation of "Hinterwäldler" which is a very common word, with a fine and most likely intended change of meaning, but I am too shallow for such elaborate philosophical concepts, maybe that is why I confused that.
As for the tempo, Strauss actually conducted it faster, and IIRC, the tempo marking in the score is 1/4=60 (not sure though), so Inbal is actually "breiter" than that. But that doesn't mean it has to be played at Strauss' own tempo and you can of course have a different preference. I just love the way Inbal illuminates the structure of those chords, and how he keeps it "simple", no "entry of the gladiators" timpani, and the way those trumpets come in really softly, even though they are not 100% in tune the first time. Very few actually are in this place. It is horribly difficult, 4 trumpets all unisono coming in really softly on that fairly low note, completely open, a horror entry even for the best. Some are clearer here, but when they attack the notes too strongly, for me, they have already missed the music.

OK, now that I finally got around to reply to all the last posts and MO16 is fully under way, I think it is time to reveal the other Mystery Orchestras and Mystery Conductors who took part in this highly interesting round.

Thanks y'all for playing and lurking. I think this has been a fruitful and interesting discussion. But it is not necessarily over yet. I will post some thoughts on the clips and your comments later, and of course, you can continue the discussion, review the reviews, review your own opinions or just yell "I said that!" or "I wanted to say that, but then I changed my mind!!"

Also sprach Zarathustra is no doubt a very rewarding object for this kind of blind test, and Zarathustra will speak again here, but not right now. I have some more awesome recordings for you to listen to and review, be confused or fascinated by. But I think we need a little Zarathustra break now. For those who don't, I will upload the Inbal recording tomorrow, complete with the accompanying Till Eulenspiegel and Macbeth, as a reward for all who liked it, and as punishment for all who didn't...


Bonus 1
Philharmonia Orchestra
Semyon Bychkov
Recorded by Philips in 9/1989

Bonus 2
Berliner Philharmoniker
Georg Solti
Recorded by Decca live in concert in 1/1996

Bonus 3
Berliner Philarmoniker
Herbert von Karajan
From a TV recording of a concert on 5/1/1987

Bonus 4
Chicago Symphony Orchestra
Pierre Boulez
Recorded by DG in 12/1996

Bonus 5
Chicago Symphony Orchestra
Georg Solti
Recorded by Decca in 1975


Some of you made very close guesses, some guessed individual recordings correctly, some of you were very far off. But this game has only winners, no losers, and I am not going to give points. You all give points to yourselves as you feel you deserve them.

0:)

I just have to mention that O Mensch indeed correctly guessed the BP/Solti recording early on, if I don't mention that explicitly, he will get very upset. But then he also held the CSO for the BP in Bonus 4, and I think I will mention that at least 3-4 times in the near future.
;D  $:)  ;D

Quote from: M forever on June 28, 2007, 04:43:02 AM
Bonus 1
Philharmonia Orchestra
Semyon Bychkov
Recorded by Philips in 9/1989

Very interesting. I really liked this one, especially for its interpretive merits. Probably would have never considered it before, having virtually no Bychkov recordings in my collection. I think I'll put this on my wish list.

--CS

You wrote some very good and concise reviews earlier which I found very interesting to read, especially about this Bychkov recording. It made me think a lot because this is probably the one which I like least of the 6 clips. But only probably. I don't spend much time thinking about rankings and nonsense like that. Let's say it disappointed me for reasons I will point out later, but your points about the interpretation gave me some food for thought.

Please contribute similar reviews to MO16 which has just started.

Quote from: M forever on June 28, 2007, 04:43:02 AM
But then he also held the CSO for the BP in Bonus 4, and I think I will mention that at least 3-4 times in the near future.
;D  $:)  ;D

;D I indeed should have caught that. Then again, it's not entirely surprising, given how Barenboim changed the sound of the orchestra by the time that recording was made. I used to own that recording but culled it a while ago because it just didn't do it for me.

We need to get you to do some blind testing.  >:D

Re: Bychkov, I would have never guessed him as the conductor of that clip. Makes me sad that I missed his Alpensinfonie with the CSO this past season. I see why you would possibly have some issues with that recording as opposed to the other clips here, but I found his pacing really remarkable. Especially how the Freuden- und Leidenschaften very gradually buids into an inexorable storm.

Quote from: O Mensch on June 28, 2007, 06:28:43 AM
We need to get you to do some blind testing.  >:D

I have done that myself very often, with results which were very telling for me myself. Sometimes I was spot on, sometimes surprisingly off. In every case, I learned a lot about my perception of music and sound. That is the main point.
When I started MO in RMCR, some other people, for instance Steven de Mena, ran similar games for a while and I nailed most of the clips immediately. You can go back and look at that, since that seems to be so important for you.

I don't find that so important myself really, but you still don't get it. It's not the people who get tested here, it's the music and performances. If they get tested, they don't get tested by me. I just provide the environment. What people make of it is up to them. They can test themselves and learn from it. Or they can fool themselves and refuse to learn. It's up to them, not me. I don't give points and declare winners or losers. I make comments which I think may be helpful to critically reflect on the listening and evaluation process. I learn myself from what people tell me when they give blind opinions. I often go back and relisten to the clips after someone has made an interesting post.

All that is much more than posting a few clips to "test" people.

You really don't get that at all since you are in that phase in which you already know a lot, but your problem is you think you know it all, and you take it very personally if that idea is contradicted. Right now, you are stuck in that phase and it "blurs" your perceptions much more than you even begin to realize. Your tendency to not see the overall pictures, but zoom in mercilessly on fairly minor and irrelevant points, and that fairly randomly, too, or based on very set preconceptions, is a very typical symptom of that. I can understand that because I, like basically anyone, went through a lot of these phases myself. Maybe at some point you begin to realize you really don't know that much at all, and that will be good, because then, and only then, the real adventure only really starts for you.

I am trying very hard to provide a relaxed and pressure free blind testing environment for those who want to benefit from these exercises, hopefully with clips which make sense and are fun to listen to and review.

You keep bringing an aggressive element in here which is quite contrary to what I am trying to do. I suggest you set up your own Mystery Orchestra (but with a different name, please) in which you can "test people". I will probably also swing by and see what's going on, but for now, please stay away from my threads. You are not welcome here anymore.

I look forward to visiting your "testing arena". Then you can finally "test" me.

Oh dear... what is it that ticks you off so easily and fills your mind with nonsensical assumptions? As I said before, I am not trying to "test" you. What did I do that is so aggressive? Are you suffering from persecution anxiety again? I am just curious to see what you listen for when you don't know a priori what the band is. We all concentrate on different markers that for us define a given orchestral sound. If you are genuinely interested in the mutually educational purpose of this undertaking, then surely you will see the point in that, no? There is really no need for you to be so patronizing and condescending. It undermines your otherwise really interesting posts.

I also love the Bychov recording. The build, the pacing caught my ear, but also the orchestral playing which is a very high level. The strings are overly sweet at times, but otherwise, it's fantastic.

I liked Bonus 2 a lot too, and #5 had its merits, so I guess I like Solti's Strauss okay. The CSO sounds different under Boulez than Solti, #4 it's less in your face, they sound beautiful, and I prefer this sound to their sound in #5.

QuoteI have done that myself very often, with results which were very telling for me myself. Sometimes I was spot on, sometimes surprisingly off. In every case, I learned a lot about my perception of music and sound. That is the main point.

Yes, M has, in a game of mine at RMCR. Out of 3, he was spot on with one and made very astute observations about the other two. I planned to get back around to hosting another of those games, but never did. I would like to in the future here, perhaps after MO16 is over.  :)

Quote from: Greta on June 28, 2007, 10:50:41 AM
I liked Bonus 2 a lot too, and #5 had its merits, so I guess I like Solti's Strauss okay. The CSO sounds different under Boulez than Solti, #4 it's less in your face, they sound beautiful, and I prefer this sound to their sound in #5.

I fully agree with that. The orchestra changed a lot (those uncanny balances between strings and winds!), but Solti also changed a bit as well and mellowed out. I generally like his later recordings much better than his earlier ones. That BPO Strauss disc also has a very fine Till Eulenspiegel, BTW, that is wonderfully transparent.

Quote from: O Mensch on June 28, 2007, 07:51:09 AM
What did I do that is so aggressive? Are you suffering from persecution anxiety again?

Again? You have no idea what I "suffer from" or not. It is none of your business either. What  primitive and silly cheap shot. This kind of "half hidden" cowardly verbal attack is why I ignored you on this forum before. I came to a point where I had to that on another forum. Now I have to do it again. There are no more "ignore" buttons here, but I can at least ask you to stay out of "my" threads, and you could respect that. Don't boter replying to any of my posts elsewhere either, please.
You know a few things about music, but not nearly as much as you think, and you don't have the self-criticism needed to improve that, question yourself, and lead a real discussion. I gave you a few tips and pointed out things you said which were objectively not correct, that always ticks you off. Not my problem, though. So *please*, just stop replying here. I am asking you nicely. I don't want to lock the thread. You are not the center of the world. Let's keep it open for other people who are worth having a discussion with.

Bye.

Quote from: Greta on June 28, 2007, 10:50:41 AM
Yes, M has, in a game of mine at RMCR. Out of 3, he was spot on with one and made very astute observations about the other two. I planned to get back around to hosting another of those games, but never did. I would like to in the future here, perhaps after MO16 is over.  :)

Thanks for "confirming" that, but that is really not "necessary". I don't have to justify to "O" why I host these threads. He knows very well that I "scored" very high in some other people's blind listening threads because he took part in them, too, and he can start one of his own to "test" me and everybody else anytime. Maybe I will swing by that thread and guess "wrong" and then he finally "wins". Which he never could before, because he never scored that high himself. Sometimes very close, sometimes spot on, but often totally "wrong". But who cares? This is not about him, as much as that may pain him, it is about the blind listening and discussion.

Please host another game (but also please, next time with clips which are more diverse in musical material than the ones you used before, the "Classical Symphony" is great but it doesn't offer that much opportunities to "take a good look"at the orchestra). I would like that. You don't *have* to have tons of comparison clips. One or two are enough to start. Or even just one. If it is an orchestral piece which allows you to hear all the different sections well, which has a number of contrasting musical elements which can give you "clues", then that is totally enough for an interesting "blind" thread. And please, no less than 320kbps!

Quote from: Greta on June 28, 2007, 10:50:41 AM
I also love the Bychov recording. The build, the pacing caught my ear, but also the orchestral playing which is a very high level. The strings are overly sweet at times, but otherwise, it's fantastic.

Did you like the orchestral playing and recorded sound better in this than the original clip?

Quote from: Greta on June 28, 2007, 10:50:41 AM
I liked Bonus 2 a lot too, and #5 had its merits, so I guess I like Solti's Strauss okay. The CSO sounds different under Boulez than Solti, #4 it's less in your face, they sound beautiful, and I prefer this sound to their sound in #5.

I think most people would. the CSO/Boulez simply is much better, and much better played than the CSO/Solti. Although I do kind of like the rugged, edgy, expressionist quality of the Solti recording. Still, it gets old pretty fast, and there is more in your face highlighting going on than any depth of texture.

I found it interesting that some people hated the orchestral playing in the OSR clip and got hung up on two or three minor blemishes when the playing in this clip is so much more "rough" and uneven, often very unbalanced and just going from one moment to the next, without much musial context. And from a purely orchestral technique point of view, it is by far the worst of the three clips. Interesting that those who were bothered by the slightly sour intonation between the 4 OSR trumpets in their first entry didn't mind or even mention (or even notice?) how badly tuned both first tutti entries are in the Solti clip. The woodwind are very badly tuned. And what about the tuning between the contrabassoon and the trumpets before the last tutti entry? What interval is that? Is that supposed to be C-C?
Later, the solo string play OK, but they have a very wiry sound not good enough for whatever a real "top" orchestra should be. In "Leidenschaften", some of the horns have noticeable trouble playing the fast and rhythmically complicated passages. Some do OK, some just somehow muffledly regurgitate the notes, with curious on/off effects as the elements wander between the individual players. Here, the OSR play with a big and noble sound, and they play everything very precise and in long, musical phrases. Later, at the end of the clip, the really sour intonation in the solo clarinet. And there is some clarinet playing later in the same recording which will make the milk sour in your fridge.

Yet, that doesn't seem to have bothered many. Why? Because the recording is so harshly "brilliant" and in your face, because that makes it so "exciting"?

Active MO players only: PM me if you want the Inbal and/or the Bychkov recording.

Quote from: M forever on June 28, 2007, 08:04:58 PM
Again? You have no idea what I "suffer from" or not. It is none of your business either. What  primitive and silly cheap shot. This kind of "half hidden" cowardly verbal attack is why I ignored you on this forum before. I came to a point where I had to that on another forum. Now I have to do it again. There are no more "ignore" buttons here, but I can at least ask you to stay out of "my" threads, and you could respect that. Don't boter replying to any of my posts elsewhere either, please.
You know a few things about music, but not nearly as much as you think, and you don't have the self-criticism needed to improve that, question yourself, and lead a real discussion. I gave you a few tips and pointed out things you said which were objectively not correct, that always ticks you off. Not my problem, though. So *please*, just stop replying here. I am asking you nicely. I don't want to lock the thread. You are not the center of the world. Let's keep it open for other people who are worth having a discussion with.

Look, I said "We need to get you to do some blind testing." I even added a smiley for the avoidance of doubt. And you followed with completely unwarranted this tirade. When was I even "ticked off" about anything here? If you had half the self criticism you accuse others of lacking, you wouldn't have gone down this road at all. As I said before, I wasn't challenging you to a duel or anything. I am not trying to compete with you and I have no idea why you feel so threatened when I post perfectly inoffensive posts. I didn't follow the prior RMCR threads where you allegedly participated in blind testing. I am merely interested in what you pick up on when you don't have prior knowledge of the orchestra. You went from explicitly inviting me by email to join your MO threads at RMCR to these nonsensical tirades. Whatever, dude. You need to take a deep breath every now and then. The world indeed doesn't revolve around your ideals of orchestral sound. On blind listening, most people didn't like the OSR clip for the somewhat insecure playing but liked both of the CSO clips you posted. I suppose that "ticked you off" which is why you are mad at me for being the first to point to the execution problems in the OSR clip (as if I had invented them) so now you had to explain to everyone why exactly the CSO sucks. And that, BTW, is obviously the main reason you want me out of your other threads now: you'd prefer other people not to be "biased" by my observations of execution problems, since you are trying to convince people of the superiority of some of your favorite ensembles. Clearly you think you have better ears than anyone else here but you don't want to participate in a blind listening comparison yourself? Again: whatever.

And again: for the avoidance of doubt, to spell it out clearly and avoid any ambiguity: I greatly appreciate your participation here, your knowledge and the perspective you bring to discussions here. I am not competing against you, I am not ganging up on you, nor am I trying to irritate you or get you banned (I find the whole concept of banning very childish). If you on the other hand can't deal with disagreement, that's another matter. But it certainly doesn't give you much standing to lecture others on self-criticism. We probably will never agree on the CSO, but we don't have to.

How do I lock this thread? I thought I could lock a thread which I started myself. But I don't see a button for that anywhere. I didn't read what he said, but apparently O Mensch can not respect my nicely worded request to stay away from my Mystery threads. A pity, I don't want to lock it yet, but what can I do?

Moderators - can you please lock the thread? Thanks.

MO players - again, PM me if you are interested in either the Inbal or Bychkov recording.

Thanks again y'all for playing.

Oh, I see the check box for locking the thread now.