Just wanted your opinion on what you think are the four or five most "important" recordings in classical music. Not necessarily your favorites, but ones you consider landmark recordings that everyone, new or old to this genre should know about. Thanks!
Hmm, important historically speaking? "Important" in the sense that the recordings are, say, great or profound or the best interpretation ever made of something - or "important" in the sense that they were landmarks historically, that they ushered in a new era or a new style or changed everybody's perception of a piece?
Sorry to nitpick on your question :D
For the "historically important" definition, my second one, I think Karajan's '62-3 Beethoven cycle, Schnabel's Beethoven and Louis Kaufman's Four Seasons are contenders. All have been (arguably!) bettered, but they remain milestones in recording history and are still among the "references" for each piece.
EDIT: I think "most important recent recordings" could be an interesting question too. Vanska's Beethoven; things by Yevgeny Sudbin, Charles Mackerras, Rene Jacobs and Kemal Gekic, the Trio Campanella's Albeniz disc...
Four or five?
Why only four or five? (Is this another April Fool's post? >:D)
Quote from: Brian on April 01, 2008, 07:45:04 PM
Hmm, important historically speaking? "Important" in the sense that the recordings are, say, great or profound or the best interpretation ever made of something - or "important" in the sense that they were landmarks historically, that they ushered in a new era or a new style or changed everybody's perception of a piece?
Sorry to nitpick on your question :D
For the "historically important" definition, my second one, I think Karajan's '62-3 Beethoven cycle, Schnabel's Beethoven and Louis Kaufman's Four Seasons are contenders. All have been (arguably!) bettered, but they remain milestones in recording history and are still among the "references" for each piece.
Left "important" up to the reader Brian. Your definitions are fine and you can answer both ways. :)
Quote from: some guy on April 01, 2008, 07:46:46 PM
Four or five?
Why only four or five? (Is this another April Fool's post? >:D)
Just wanted to prevent the 1-100 type list and boil down to extremely key recordings some guy, therefore leaving room for the poster to justify their picks at some level. I truly do not know what I would list, so that is why I asked the question. :)
For example, you may say, historically speaking ______________ has to be in the conversation because_____________.
or
_____________ is a very important recording in the canon of classical recordings because ______________.
Quote from: Bogey on April 01, 2008, 07:38:53 PM
Just wanted your opinion on what you think are the four or five most "important" recordings in classical music. Not necessarily your favorites, but ones you consider landmark recordings that everyone, new or old to this genre should know about. Thanks!
Casals Bach Cello Suites
Gould Bach Goldberg Variations (1955)
Schnabel Beethoven Piano Sonatas
Karajan Beethoven Symphonies (1962)
Beethoven Qt. Shostakovich String Quartets
Schnabel Beethoven
Casals Bach
Gould Goldberg
Karajan Beethoven
Kleiber Beethoven
Quote from: Bogey on April 01, 2008, 07:38:53 PM
Just wanted your opinion on what you think are the four or five most "important" recordings in classical music. Not necessarily your favorites, but ones you consider landmark recordings that everyone, new or old to this genre should know about. Thanks!
This:
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41XST9HX1ZL._SS500_.jpg)
According to Penguin Guide to CDs the above recording is "One of the great achievements of the gramophone". According to marvinbrown 8) it is
THE greatest achievement of the gramophone!
EDIT: Sorry but I should have elaborated a bit more on why this recording is important. This is one of the very first studio recordings of the COMPLETE Ring Cycle. Solti was lucky, damn lucky, you can call it fate- kismet! He had the perfect cast, the perfect orchestra, everything came together so well that this recording has become the benchmark against which every other Ring Cycle has been measured. It has achieved the status of "UNSURPASSED" and in many ways it is "UNSURPASSED"!!
marvin
Gould Goldberg was my immediate reaction - for rejuvenating the Bach keyboard tradition (though I am well aware of Fischer, Landowska etc).
Harnoncourt/Leonhardt Bach cantata cycle is my other "nomination" - the first to do it complete (again I am aware of Richter, Werner and others substantial contributions): and for being a landmark in early HIP practice.
Tristan und Isolde qualifies. Also Pelleas et Melisande
Quote from: Anne on April 02, 2008, 07:58:31 AM
Tristan und Isolde qualifies. Also Pelleas et Melisande
Anne which CD recording of Tristan und Isolde do you consider "most important"- Bohm, Furtwangler or other?
marvin
Quote from: marvinbrown on April 02, 2008, 04:37:37 AM
This:
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41XST9HX1ZL._SS500_.jpg)
According to Penguin Guide to CDs the above recording is "One of the great achievements of the gramophone". According to marvinbrown 8) it is THE greatest achievement of the gramophone!
marvin
Agreed. Also:
Beethoven 9 Symphonien (Herbert Von Karajan 1962)
Joseph Haydn op. 20 (Quatuor Mosaiques)
Mozart Don Giovanni (1953 Furtwangler)
Verdi La Traviata (Solti,Gheorghiu)
(http://img215.imageshack.us/img215/9348/51vgno35bwlss500yr6.jpg) (http://imageshack.us)
One of the Personally very important - saved me from giving up on sung Wagner altogether -- historically also very important - reminder that Wagner singing can be beautiful.
Quote from: fl.traverso on April 02, 2008, 02:21:29 PM
(http://img215.imageshack.us/img215/9348/51vgno35bwlss500yr6.jpg) (http://imageshack.us)
One of the Personally very important - saved me from giving up on sung Wagner altogether -- historically also very important - reminder that Wagner singing can be beautiful.
HEYYYY. I
want!
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51U8bQBSC0L._SL500_AA240_.jpg)
music of the gods! 0:)
Quote from: GGGGRRREEG on April 02, 2008, 03:29:46 PM
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51U8bQBSC0L._SL500_AA240_.jpg)
music of the gods! 0:)
JAH-min'!
If any of you have not and have the time, I would like to know what makes some of your pick important. If they are histoically important, why? Was it the first complete cycle? Was it the first stereo recording? etc.
Quote from: Bogey on April 02, 2008, 03:41:29 PM
If any of you have not and have the time, I would like to know what makes some of your pick important. If they are histoically important, why? Was it the first complete cycle? Was it the first stereo recording? etc.
I think mine is important because it's Karajan doing something more "modern", instead of the classicists and Romantics. Instead of letting a bunch of unknown conductors (besides Boulez) performing unpopular music, get someone who's ultra popular to perform this good stuff!
Quote from: GGGGRRREEG on April 02, 2008, 03:46:52 PM
I think mine is important because it's Karajan doing something more "modern", instead of the classicists and Romantics. Instead of letting a bunch of unknown conductors (besides Boulez) performing unpopular music, get someone who's ultra popular to perform this good stuff!
Thank you Greg. This makes me want to hear it.
Quote from: Bogey on April 02, 2008, 03:51:16 PM
Thank you Greg. This makes me want to hear it.
It's time to get your Goth on, Bogey. 8)
( >:D)
Hmm... As a sketchy list:
1) Toscanini's 1939 Beethoven symphony cycle, with the NBC Symphony Orchestra
2) Furtwängler's 1951 recording of Beethoven's 9th at Bayreuth
2) Bernstein's 1960's Mahler symphony cycle, with the New York Philharmonic
3) Kondrashin's Shostakovich symphony cycle, with the Moscow Philharmonic
4) Karajan's Bruckner symphony cycle, with the Berlin Philharmonic
Notice how I restrict myself only to orchestral recordings: because if I included instrumental, it would be a fine mess of a list, and definitely longer than five entries - I've cheated as it is already, with all those symphony cycles. :P
But more seriously, I think all of the above did something that changed the general perception of a composer's music, or a style of performance, or both. And of course the Furtwängler Beethoven 9th at Bayreuth influenced the size of the compact disc, as well! ;)
Quote from: Bogey on April 02, 2008, 03:41:29 PM
If any of you have not and have the time, I would like to know what makes some of your pick important. If they are histoically important, why? Was it the first complete cycle? Was it the first stereo recording? etc.
The "Potted" Ring dates from 1927-32 and (arguably) records the last of great Wagner singers who had firsthand contact with late 19th-century styles of performing this music.
Quote from: fl.traverso on April 03, 2008, 03:04:12 AM
The "Potted" Ring dates from 1927-32 and (arguably) records the last of great Wagner singers who had firsthand contact with late 19th-century styles of performing this music.
hmmm.....It's INCOMPLETE :o!! Thanks but no thanks I think I'll pass on this one!
marvin
Quote from: marvinbrown on April 03, 2008, 03:18:48 AM
hmmm.....It's INCOMPLETE :o!! Thanks but no thanks I think I'll pass on this one!
marvin
Incomplete but INCOMPARABLE. Have it your way.
FL (Who's tired of slam-bang style Wagner in general)
Quote from: marvinbrown on April 03, 2008, 03:18:48 AM
hmmm.....It's INCOMPLETE :o!! Thanks but no thanks I think I'll pass on this one!
marvin
Don't! For once I am in absolute agreement with our resident HIPster. The Potted Ring is an incredible historical document of a style of Wagnerian performance that is sadly lacking in these fatted James Levine days. With singers like Frieda Leider, Lauritz Melchior, and Friedrich Schorr, and conductors like Albert Coates and Leo Blech, it deserves to be approached in the same spirit as one would the ruins of ancient Rome - as something incomplete but irreplaceably valuable. Just put on Melchior's Forging Song, ignore the dim and noisy sound, and tell me if you can find anything remotely comparable in modern performances.
http://www.allclassics.org/music/recs/reviews/p/prl09137a.html
Quote from: Sforzando on April 03, 2008, 08:32:07 AM
Don't! For once I am in absolute agreement with our resident HIPster. The Potted Ring is an incredible historical document of a style of Wagnerian performance that is sadly lacking in these fatted James Levine days. With singers like Frieda Leider, Lauritz Melchior, and Friedrich Schorr, and conductors like Albert Coates and Leo Blech, it deserves to be approached in the same spirit as one would the ruins of ancient Rome - as something incomplete but irreplaceably valuable. Just put on Melchior's Forging Song, ignore the dim and noisy sound, and tell me if you can find anything remotely comparable in modern performances.
http://www.allclassics.org/music/recs/reviews/p/prl09137a.html
Perhaps I misjudged it or rushed to a incorrect conclusion! Fair enough I'll have to sample it in the near future to see what the fuss is all about. Quick question though if you and FL have an answer to it- why isn't it complete??
Quote from: marvinbrown on April 03, 2008, 11:04:32 AM
Perhaps I misjudged it or rushed to a incorrect conclusion! Fair enough I'll have to sample it in the near future to see what the fuss is all about. Quick question though if you and FL have an answer to it- why isn't it complete??
FL can chime in as well (using his HIP chime), but OTTOMH I would say the reasons could include:
- Routine cuts were more commonly made in Wagnerian performance at that time
- A complete Wagnerian opera would have required some 3000 78 sides, which you would need a small mansion to store, and therefore small excerpts would have been more manageable to record.
- These excerpts were not intended as complete recordings, but are rather an anthology of what was recorded during the period, with multiple conductors and soloists; therefore the most popular music from the Ring was included, and other parts left out.
Quote from: Sforzando on April 03, 2008, 11:13:44 AM
FL can chime in as well (using his HIP chime), but OTTOMH I would say the reasons could include:
- Routine cuts were more commonly made in Wagnerian performance at that time
- A complete Wagnerian opera would have required some 3000 78 sides, which you would need a small mansion to store, and therefore small excerpts would have been more manageable to record.
- These excerpts were not intended as complete recordings, but are rather an anthology of what was recorded during the period, with multiple conductors and soloists; therefore the most popular music from the Ring was included, and other parts left out.
Thank You.
marvin
Quote from: marvinbrown on April 03, 2008, 11:20:05 AM
Thank You.
marvin
You've got me interested as well.
Very.
I'd have to say that the most important classical recordings came from 2 sources: Arthur Fiedler and Toscanini. No one introduced more people to the classics, albeit mostly light classics like Fiedler and the Boston Pops. Fiedler's performances were always meticulously prepared and his discs were brilliant in their programming. The Boston Pops under Fiedler were household names and a symbol of quality.
Toscanini's Beethoven Cycle from the 50's was a set that EVERYONE had to have. Again, Toscanini was a brand like Coca Cola and his Beethoven was the gold standard. Houses that were not classical music in orientation did have Toscanini's Beethoven and several Boston Pops discs.
In no particular order:
1. Furtwangler's Beethoven-Symphony No. 9 (Bayreuth , 1951)
2. Karajan's Beethoven-Complete Symphonies (1960s)
3. Casals' Bach-Cello Suites
Quote from: Keemun on April 03, 2008, 06:11:41 PM
In no particular order:
1. Furtwangler's Beethoven-Symphony No. 9 (Bayreuth , 1951)
2. Karajan's Beethoven-Complete Symphonies (1960s)
3. Casals' Bach-Cello Suites
Karajan's Beethoven-Complete Symphonies (1960s)Probably my favorite cycle that I have heard. Besides many enjoying them (some do not, but it seems many do) what makes them so important as they have been mentioned already?
Quote from: Bogey on April 01, 2008, 07:38:53 PM
Just wanted your opinion on what you think are the four or five most "important" recordings in classical music. Not necessarily your favorites, but ones you consider landmark recordings that everyone, new or old to this genre should know about. Thanks!
Antonio de Cabezón: Glosados, Diferencias, Tientos (Trio Unda Maris) on La mà de guido 2014. Cabezón was a pioneer in the field of variation, a musical staple ever since.
Léonin & Pérotin: Sacred Music from Notre-Dame Cathedral (Tonus Peregrinus). Early polyphony.
Wagner: Tristan and Isolde. I like the Karajan. The beginning of the end of conventional tonal harmony.
Monteverdi. L'Orfeo. No preference on recording as I'm not a big fan. The advent of musical drama.
Quote from: Haffner on April 02, 2008, 12:43:31 PM
Verdi La Traviata (Solti,Gheorghiu)
In what ways is this recording 'important'? Gheorghiu is certainly one of the best Violettas on disc, but Solti's leaden conducting, Nucci's wooden Germont and Lopardo's lightweight Alfredo put it out of court as a top recommendation. Furthermore there had been many other fine recordings of the work before its release, some more complete than this one. It may well be your
favourite recording of the work (nothing wrong with that), but
important? I think not.
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41ZPTMHT8PL._SS500_.jpg)
Quote from: Tsaraslondon on April 04, 2008, 02:02:34 AM
In what ways is this recording 'important'? Gheorghiu is certainly one of the best Violettas on disc, but Solti's leaden conducting, Nucci's wooden Germont and Lopardo's lightweight Alfredo put it out of court as a top recommendation. Furthermore there had been many other fine recordings of the work before its release, some more complete than this one. It may well be your favourite recording of the work (nothing wrong with that), but important? I think not.
You guessed it. It's more my favorite. I boo-booed and I apologize.
Quote from: marvinbrown on April 02, 2008, 12:32:13 PM
Anne which CD recording of Tristan und Isolde do you consider "most important"- Bohm, Furtwangler or other?
marvin
I like Furtwangler best. Before I got the Furtwangler, I liked Bohm the best. Furtwangler was the best or at least one of the best Wagnerian conductors. Listen to the love duet in the second act. He is pushing those singers and, as a result, the orchestra is unbelievable and the singing is without a doubt a true love fest. Once you've heard it, other conductors don't shine quite as brightly.
I think he brings out Wagner's true intent regarding lovemaking. The opera becomes exciting for the listener and it sets up Act 3 as such a "downer". Isolde's final music in Act 3 is so gorgeous and benefits from the love duet excitement, then depression for Tristan's death.
Quote from: marvinbrown on April 03, 2008, 11:04:32 AM
Perhaps I misjudged it or rushed to a incorrect conclusion! Fair enough I'll have to sample it in the near future to see what the fuss is all about. Quick question though if you and FL have an answer to it- why isn't it complete??
There's no "perhaps" about it. Any of the 1920s-1930s Wagnerian discography is worthy of serious examination. The Melchior
Siegfried excerpts, either on this set or elsewhere, for example, prove that there was once an all-round
Heldentenor who could both hit the notes and act for beans. If you're confining yourself to Georg Solti's set as the gold-standard of Wagnerian singing, then you might as well be living in Plato's cave. I can go on, but let it suffice to say that Wagnerian singing of the 1920s and 1930s was as good as it will ever get. Heck, either Melchior or Schorr sets the standard for his respective fach to this day.
Most important recordings?
Klemperer's Mahler 2nd
Mitropoulos' Mahler 6th (WDR)
Knappertsbusch's 1962
ParsifalKarajan's 1970
MeistersingerPeter Serkin's Beethoven sonatas 27-32
Wilhelm Backhaus' Beethoven sonata set
Glenn Gould's '55 and '81 Goldberg recordings
Beyond that, too many to count.
Quote from: PSmith08 on April 04, 2008, 08:58:53 PM
Peter Serkin's Beethoven sonatas 27-32
Yup. One listen and I was hooked. First 30-32 and now (upon its first CD release) 27-29, especially 29.
Quote from: fl.traverso on April 04, 2008, 11:29:37 PM
Yup. One listen and I was hooked. First 30-32 and now (upon its first CD release) 27-29, especially 29.
Pro Arte/Vox or Sony?
Quote from: erato on April 04, 2008, 11:38:13 PM
Pro Arte/Vox or Sony?
No...they are now on a private label called "musical concepts" but, yes, the original recordings were on ProArte CD and LP's before they went out of print.
(http://img510.imageshack.us/img510/1688/518pcuv1filss500xj8.jpg) (http://imageshack.us)
(http://img510.imageshack.us/img510/1688/518pcuv1filss500xj8.27dfc72231.jpg) (http://g.imageshack.us/g.php?h=510&i=518pcuv1filss500xj8.jpg)
mdt.co.uk have got it listed as a Vox issue.
Quote from: erato on April 05, 2008, 01:32:22 AM
mdt.co.uk have got it listed as a Vox issue.
Well so be it...my copy (ordred from US vendors) has no mention to "Vox" whatsoever. 0:)
Quote from: PSmith08 on April 04, 2008, 08:58:53 PM
Karajan's 1970 Meistersinger
May I please have a link to that recording? Amazon doesn't show the dates.
Quote from: Haffner on April 05, 2008, 03:38:06 AM
May I please have a link to that recording? Amazon doesn't show the dates.
This EMI recording is the 1970 one:
http://www.amazon.com/Wagner-Meistersinger-Nurnberg-Schreier-Riderbusch/dp/B00000K4GK/ref=pd_bbs_sr_2?ie=UTF8&s=music&qid=1207396008&sr=8-2
If you can read German, it has more details on the German Amazon:
http://www.amazon.de/Meistersinger-Nürnberg-Gesamtaufnahme-Herbert-Karajan/dp/B000026CJG
at least i think it's the 1970 one... :-[ ???
EDIT:Yes, it is definitely the 1970 recording, as is detailed here also:
http://www.wagnerdiscography.com/reviews/mei/mei70karajan.htm
Quote from: Anne on April 04, 2008, 05:32:51 PM
I like Furtwangler best. Before I got the Furtwangler, I liked Bohm the best. Furtwangler was the best or at least one of the best Wagnerian conductors. Listen to the love duet in the second act. He is pushing those singers and, as a result, the orchestra is unbelievable and the singing is without a doubt a true love fest. Once you've heard it, other conductors don't shine quite as brightly.
I think he brings out Wagner's true intent regarding lovemaking. The opera becomes exciting for the listener and it sets up Act 3 as such a "downer". Isolde's final music in Act 3 is so gorgeous and benefits from the love duet excitement, then depression for Tristan's death.
A wonderful write up Anne. I really enjoyed reading your review of the Furtwangler recording. I have both the Furtwangler and the Bohm and I find the Furtwangler recording quite exquisite- I love Flagstad as Isolde and under the baton of Furtwangler that recording is a must have indeed!
marvin
Quote from: lachlanbutch on April 05, 2008, 03:48:37 AM
This EMI recording is the 1970 one:
http://www.amazon.com/Wagner-Meistersinger-Nurnberg-Schreier-Riderbusch/dp/B00000K4GK/ref=pd_bbs_sr_2?ie=UTF8&s=music&qid=1207396008&sr=8-2
If you can read German, it has more details on the German Amazon:
http://www.amazon.de/Meistersinger-Nürnberg-Gesamtaufnahme-Herbert-Karajan/dp/B000026CJG
at least i think it's the 1970 one... :-[ ???
EDIT:
Yes, it is definitely the 1970 recording, as is detailed here also:
http://www.wagnerdiscography.com/reviews/mei/mei70karajan.htm
Thank you so much! Really helpful info.
Quote from: Bogey on April 03, 2008, 08:02:31 PM
Karajan's Beethoven-Complete Symphonies (1960s)
Probably my favorite cycle that I have heard. Besides many enjoying them (some do not, but it seems many do) what makes them so important as they have been mentioned already?
To answer your question I did some research on this and, to quote a review on The Flying Inkpot (http://inkpot.com/classical/beethsymkar.html), "It was the first recording of the Nine to be conceived, planned and sold as an integral set. The initial purchasers had to pay a subscription for the LPs which were sent to them symphony by symphony. Thirty-six years later, this cycle has become somewhat of a benchmark for these cornerstones of the symphonic repartoire."
Quote from: Keemun on April 05, 2008, 09:15:39 AM
To answer your question I did some research on this and, to quote a review on The Flying Inkpot (http://inkpot.com/classical/beethsymkar.html), "It was the first recording of the Nine to be conceived, planned and sold as an integral set. The initial purchasers had to pay a subscription for the LPs which were sent to them symphony by symphony. Thirty-six years later, this cycle has become somewhat of a benchmark for these cornerstones of the symphonic repartoire."
Thank you for digging that out Keemun. This was what I was hoping for from this thread. This way when I pull a certain cd off the shelf for a friend I can let them know, along with my musical views, if there is any "story" behind it as well.
Quote from: Bogey on April 05, 2008, 11:55:24 AM
Thank you for digging that out Keemun. This was what I was hoping for from this thread. This way when I pull a certain cd off the shelf for a friend I can let them know, along with my musical views, if there is any "story" behind it as well.
You're welcome. It's pretty cool to know the story behind the music. 8)
Quote from: fl.traverso on April 05, 2008, 01:26:03 AM
No...they are now on a private label called "musical concepts" but, yes, the original recordings were on ProArte CD and LP's before they went out of print.
I have the Hammerklavier on Lp. The acoustic is rather swimmy. He also recorded this on a Steinway, and I think I prefer that recording.
Quote from: Daverz on April 05, 2008, 07:17:58 PM
He also recorded this on a Steinway, and I think I prefer that recording.
I have heard the opposite elsewhere (someone whose ear I trust). Anyway, I prefer fortepianos. ;D
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/61TJXAKSR6L._SS500_.jpg)
The problem I have coming up with truly "important" recordings is that that word brings to mind so many recordings that I respect more than I love. And so many of the recordings that I love are really not all that "important".
The set below strikes me as truly important in the sense that it is the only complete cycle of the Miaskovsky symphones and contains the only recordings of many of them.
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51Z7Tn77MhL._SS500_.jpg)
(http://www.jpc.de/image/w600/front/0/0761203925025.jpg)
There's another Reicha quintet cycle that is either complete are nearly complete, but I think the Schweitzer Quintet is still the gold standard for these works.
Quote from: fl.traverso on April 06, 2008, 02:50:00 AM
I have heard the opposite elsewhere (someone whose ear I trust). Anyway, I prefer fortepianos. ;D
No problem. I'm definitely not the go to guy for Beethoven piano recommendations. Mainly I can't stand unfocused piano sound.
Quote from: fl.traverso on April 06, 2008, 02:50:00 AM
I have heard the opposite elsewhere (someone whose ear I trust). Anyway, I prefer fortepianos. ;D
No fortepiano is any better than the fortepianist who plays it.
On the whole, after reading some of these entries, I seriously wonder how many of these recordings are so much "important" as they are "recordings I particularly like." Seriously, guys, is Peter Serkin's Beethoven more "important" than Artur Schnabel's?
Quote from: Sforzando on April 07, 2008, 05:47:39 AM
No fortepiano is any better than the fortepianist who plays it.
All fortepianos are better than modern day Steinways in the appropriate repertories. IMO, of course.
Quote from: fl.traverso on April 07, 2008, 06:09:42 AM
All fortepianos are better than modern day Steinways in the appropriate repertories. IMO, of course.
The only answer I can give to that is to reiterate the post you replied to. Hardware is secondary.
Quote from: Sforzando on April 07, 2008, 06:25:00 AM
The only answer I can give to that is to reiterate the post you replied to. Hardware is secondary.
The instrument is more than hardware for me. ;)
Quote from: fl.traverso on April 07, 2008, 06:40:11 AM
The instrument is more than hardware for me. ;)
Yes, yes, I know. But you seem all too ready to jettison a magnificent tradition of pre-HIP recorded performance to justify this insistence on the "instrument."
Quote from: Sforzando on April 07, 2008, 06:48:49 AM
Yes, yes, I know. But you seem all too ready to jettison a magnificent tradition of pre-HIP recorded performance to justify this insistence on the "instrument."
No, I listen to pre-HIP recorded performances, but I also have a different set of priorities than you do.
For a profoundly disturbing but achingly beautiful listening experience......
http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2007/Feb07/Petterson_7772472.htm
http://www.prestoclassical.co.uk/r/CPO/7771992