Buona Mattina, Maestro Karl! Do you ever feel even in the least a bit gloomy, listening to such sometimes-infinitely-dark Shostakovich pieces?
I love the 5th with all my heart. (Not as much as #10, mind you)
I know this must come as a terrible shock to a lot of people (cough), but I really like the light touch of Ancerl in this symphony. Plus it comes with an unconventional--but IMO very effective--interpretation of the 5th symphony.
How unconventional, Edward?Well, I find that Ancerl's reading makes no attempt to foreground the drama in the work. (Very different from, say, a Kondrashin or Mravinsky.)
Well, I find that Ancerl's reading makes no attempt to foreground the drama in the work. (Very different from, say, a Kondrashin or Mravinsky.)
To me it works extremely well throughout...just letting the music speak for itself, but I've spoken to and read quite a few people who absolutely hated the recording for the selfsame reason that I like it so much.
Yes indeed, the 2nd VC is a great work, and its conclusion is one of the most violent/powerful/'modernist' things in DSCH.The Passacaglia in the First concerto is perhaps my favorite movement of his entire output (Competing with the first movement of the 10th symphony), but as a whole I enjoy the 2nd concerto more.
But then again in this piece there is no really emotional sweeping lyricism like in the Passacaglia of the 1st VC. But perhaps it's just more subtle. I can't at the moment recall much of the slow movement of VC2...
Very interesting, Danny! I haven't thought about this in a while, but I agree that in general there is something a little more 'classicist' in Prokofiev's work, in general.
I'll join in the chorus of wondering why the Second Violin Concerto gets so little love (without turning our musical backs upon the First).Could it be that it's so much darker then the first, like the 2nd Cello concerto is darker than the first?
The Passacaglia in the First concerto is perhaps my favorite movement of his entire output
Same feelings here. I can hardly think of another piece of music that would stir my feelings to such an extent. And every single time too!
Agreed. That "Passacaglia" is one of the highlights of the First, which is my favorite violin concerto (by a slight margin, of many). I just heard it again last Saturday night by Lisa Batiashvili (with Oramo and the NY Phil), who played it with steely assurance. Her performance was distinguished by her ability to project: every single note was audible in the orchestral mix. Sometimes you can see performers executing the furious runs in the "Scherzo" or the final "Burlesca" but you can't really hear what they're playing. That wasn't a problem here.Sounds like a good concert :)
--Bruce
Sounds like a good concert :)
I still remember the trip I took last year to see the NYPO play that (and Shosty 10) with Venegrov and Rostropovich conducting
Don, have you heard Olli Mustonen's series interleaving JS Bach and the Shostakovich Opus 87?
Agreed. That "Passacaglia" is one of the highlights of the First, which is my favorite violin concerto (by a slight margin, of many). I just heard it again last Saturday night by Lisa Batiashvili (with Oramo and the NY Phil), who played it with steely assurance. Her performance was distinguished by her ability to project: every single note was audible in the orchestral mix. Sometimes you can see performers executing the furious runs in the "Scherzo" or the final "Burlesca" but you can't really hear what they're playing. That wasn't a problem here.
--Bruce
Yesterday, I spent perhaps forty minutes leafing through David Hurwitz's Shostakovich Symphonies and Concertos - An Owner's Manual at the School Street Borders. As the spirit of the title promises (and, to be sure, as one expects from Hurwitz), this is a book oriented not to experienced musicians, but to the amateur trying to make sense of It All. It really isn't bad, all in all; though there is the odd attitude, and the occasional trotting out of an idée reçue which prompts one, not to want to strangle Hurwitz (which would be distastefully extreme), but to leisurely bung some rotten fruit at him. Against that, he's made some earnest attempt at illustrating the form and musical content of many of the works, which is a matter entirely different to the shallow rantage customary in many of his recordings reviews. In some respects, really an interesting read, though from this senator's standpoint, a book I might browse at the bookstore, but not one I need on the shelf at home.
Now can somebody confirm what I suspect that these two issues are the same but £80 price difference? ;D
Now can somebody confirm what I suspect that these two issues are the same but £80 price difference? ;D
Thanks Guys for your confirmation, the set duly snapped up for £13 delivered.
Happy to see the UK supplier still had 5 copies left.
ukdirectoffers part of UK Amazon ;D
Cheers
Thanks Guys for your confirmation, the set duly snapped up for £13 delivered.
Happy to see the UK supplier still had 5 copies left.
ukdirectoffers part of UK Amazon ;D
Cheers
Can you post a link to that. Only found this:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Shostakovich-Complete-Quartets-Borodin-Qt/dp/B000HXE5BK (http://www.amazon.co.uk/Shostakovich-Complete-Quartets-Borodin-Qt/dp/B000HXE5BK)
so either there is a multiple listing or you bought all six copies :o
720 Russian rubles = 14.0572641 British pounds
I saw this at amazon, but never heard of the conductor Bobritskaia. It sells at $120.00 new and for $36.00 used. No information on the orchestra! It's on the Russian Label.The list of works on this disc is impressive, but before I spend 36 bucks I would like to know more about it. I have the Chailly recording of Jazz Suite No. 1.
http://www.amazon.com/Shostakovich-Suite-Jazz-Orchestra-No/dp/B00000JQGL/ref=sr_1_7/102-2657591-8498530?ie=UTF8&s=music&qid=1180110827&sr=1-7
Intensive research showed me that Bobritskaia is a pianist! No conductor is every mentioned. Could this mean he plays the entire selection on the piano, a piano version of each piece? Very puzzling indeed, but thanks for your input!
And all this confusion and search and effort by you, about music shunned by some as irrelevant but I see as an important aide to understanding Shostakovich.
There's certainly enough advice for a new Shostakovich fan around this forum, but if anyone wants to recommend a better way to spend that amount of money, don't hesitate to say so.
For some reason, since I started collecting classical music, I have avoided Shostakovich as if he were the devil himself. For some reason, I just expected his music to be crap. I really don't know why, but I did. I think it may be because all the praise he received seemed to be celebrating things that I didn't particularly care about, and any criticism seemed to be about things that were truly important to me musically...
..Well, earlier today, I was on YouTube, and the thought struck me out of nowhere "Hey, maybe I should find a video of that Shostakovich guy everyone seems to like, see what all the fuss is about". So I did a search and clicked on Mravinsky conducting the finale of his fifth symphony. Well, if you didn't see where this story was going already, I've listened to just about every Shostakovich piece that has been posted on YouTube, and it still isn't enough. I'm already hooked, and I don't even own a single CD. Since I have no money to spend on music at present, and when I do I'll probably not be able to swing more than about sixty dollars, I think my next purchase may be the Jansons set of Shostakovich symphonies, since that's just in my price range, and I've heard good things about it around here.
There's certainly enough advice for a new Shostakovich fan around this forum, but if anyone wants to recommend a better way to spend that amount of money, don't hesitate to say so.
You could spend much less on the Virgin budget two-fer of the Borodin playing a number of the quartets.
I think the quartets is a great place to start for this composer. :)
Nos. 2, 3, 7, 8 & 12, I believe.
George is right, you know 8)
D Minor! How goes the Quest?
......... Refresh my recollection .......... What am I questing for again? ............
Shostakovich Symphony Cycles (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,576.0.html), naturally!
naturelement !
I have Jansons and Barshai complete sets (both of which are entirely satisfying) ........ but I haven't decided on my next set (if any) ........... I'm debating between Maxim Shostakovich's and Kiril Kondrashin's .........
What I've heard of Maxim's cycle - I remember No. 5 in particular - has been terribly uninspiring and drab
Oh, I don't think so at all, at all.
naturelement !
I have Jansons and Barshai complete sets (both of which are entirely satisfying) ........ but I haven't decided on my next set (if any) ........... I'm debating between Maxim Shostakovich's and Kiril Kondrashin's .........
(back then, in the 1990s, it was Previn's Chicago SO which I enjoyed)
The other day I heard on the radio Leif Ove Andsnes play a hilarious polka by our man, but what more I dont know.
Very interesting, Cato!
And that second movement, "Humor," is cousin to one of the Opus 62 Romances in verse by Burns, Raleigh & Shakespeare, originally composed in 1942 (hence, while Prokofiev yet abode).
I saw this on youtube. It's amazing; sounds like the soundtrack of a madman's mind, absolutely grim.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=iAKLKokYDso
The sound is weak. Listen with headphones.
Haven't heard this before, it's so Shosty, love it, so dark, loveeeee it!
Is there any cd with a recording of this movement?
Oh, tomorrow will have to be an all-Mitya-all-the-time listening queue!
Fantastic piece this new string quartet... They say that the manuscript was destroyed but presumably they can still publish as they have the separate parts. Exciting stuff.yeah, what are you talking about?
The BSO played the Fourth last night, only the second time ever that they have played the piece. Very fine performance.
Does anyone around here have Rozhdestvensky's recording of Babi Yar?
I'm looking for certain bit of info about it.
Does anyone around here have Rozhdestvensky's recording of Babi Yar?me too....... but what would you like to know? ???
I'm looking for certain bit of info about it.
I've bolded the two verses that got altered afterwards (the first and the penultimate verse for the soloist in the first, title poem) so it shouldn't be too difficult to figure out if Rozhdestvensky's soloist is singing this or something else.
Check out this cool cover of Shosty's 10th symphony second movement.
I always said Shostakovich is METAL! ahah
http://www.mediafire.com/?13nsm2j4nlp
I'm sorry I have not responded earlier, but I have neither had access to a stable internet connection nor the CD during my Easter vacation. I listen to the CD at the moment, and I can confirm that Rozhdestvensky uses the original version of the text. It was easy to hear, as they phrase the words clearly. Insresting story BTW!
Terrific new CD of Symphony 4: Staatskapelle Dresden, Kondrashin, German Premiere 1963 (midprice Profil label). This in my favourite Shostakovich symphony and I must have heard nearly all available CDs. This one is my favourite now. It is the most manically intense of the lot (even better I think than Konrashin's wonderful melodiya recording). Furthermore, the booket is crammed full of fascinating photos of Shostakovich: A great release.
Out of curiousity, have you heard Rozhdestvensky? I've heard interesting things about his Shostakovich, but his cycle seems to be out of print. I have a recording of the first Cello Concerto he did with Rostropovich and it's fantastic.
Out of curiousity, have you heard Rozhdestvensky? I've heard interesting things about his Shostakovich, but his cycle seems to be out of print. I have a recording of the first Cello Concerto he did with Rostropovich and it's fantastic.
Something weird happened today.
I decided to play a Shostakovich symphony. It pissed me off so much that i'm still angry. It was the first time that i reacted this way to music.
I dont know how is that, or, rather, how to explain it (i use to like this music). I felt it was (the music) exagerated and unconvincing, like a clown who's doing all he can to be funny in vain, except here we're talking about a man who tries to convince a feeling of tragedy.
Words fail me. All i can say is that i'll never listen to Shostakovich again; i am that much disgusted.
Judging by your avatar, I'd assume you like Pettersson? But not Shostakovich? ??? ???
Maybe try the string quartets, if you like that genre. Either way, it's good that you at least had a strong reaction to his music. It took me a long time to appreciate his symphonies, and I'm just getting into them now. Some I find a little too programmatic, but perhaps I'll learn to enjoy them. Right now my favorites are 4,8,13 and 14 (Kondrashin set).
BTW, which symphony did you listen to?
Did Paulb change his name to Varg? ???
Something weird happened today.
I decided to play a Shostakovich symphony. It pissed me off so much that i'm still angry. It was the first time that i reacted this way to music.
I dont know how is that, or, rather, how to explain it (i use to like this music). I felt it was (the music) exagerated and unconvincing, like a clown who's doing all he can to be funny in vain, except here we're talking about a man who tries to convince a feeling of tragedy.
Words fail me. All i can say is that i'll never listen to Shostakovich again; i am that much disgusted.
Something weird happened today.
I decided to play a Shostakovich symphony. It pissed me off so much that i'm still angry. It was the first time that i reacted this way to music.
I dont know how is that, or, rather, how to explain it (i use to like this music). I felt it was (the music) exagerated and unconvincing, like a clown who's doing all he can to be funny in vain, except here we're talking about a man who tries to convince a feeling of tragedy.
Words fail me. All i can say is that i'll never listen to Shostakovich again; i am that much disgusted.
I can sort of understand this reaction. I never quite know whether to love DSCH or to be exasperated by him. All of his "angry circus music," as I call his supposedly "ironic" or satirical bits, can grate when you just want an honest, straightforward expression of emotion--which he's fully capable of. It's like someone cracking a joke right after they say something personally revealing or emotionally direct in order to cover it up. (In this regard, I so far find Pettersson superior: he sounds utterly open, direct, honest, and intense.)
I can sort of understand this reaction. I never quite know whether to love DSCH or to be exasperated by him. All of his "angry circus music," as I call his supposedly "ironic" or satirical bits, can grate when you just want an honest, straightforward expression of emotion--which he's fully capable of. It's like someone cracking a joke right after they say something personally revealing or emotionally direct in order to cover it up. (In this regard, I so far find Pettersson superior: he sounds utterly open, direct, honest, and intense.)
If you're looking for straightforward emotional expression, it's understandable that Pettersson would appeal more. There's little chance of misinterpreting a Pettersson symphony. I find Shostakovich much more ambiguous and challenging, with plenty of room in his works for humor, wit, and (God Forbid!) lightheartedness, alongside all the gloom and intensity.Extremely well put.
I love Pettersson too, but sometimes I just want to yell, "For God sakes man, life isn't that bad! You didn't even live under Stalin!"
If you're looking for straightforward emotional expression, it's understandable that Pettersson would appeal more. There's little chance of misinterpreting a Pettersson symphony. I find Shostakovich much more ambiguous and challenging, with plenty of room in his works for humor, wit, and (God Forbid!) lightheartedness, alongside all the gloom and intensity.
I love Pettersson too, but sometimes I just want to yell, "For God sakes man, life isn't that bad! You didn't even live under Stalin!"
And where would Mahler fit into those two composers?
Anyone is entitled not to like the piece for whatever reason or bouquet of reasons, of course.
But I like the Eighth Symphony a great deal. Especially the evolving instrumentation of the motto theme in the first movement; both the scherzi (and I love how he puts the trombones through their paces with those rapid arpeggios); the exquisitely colored passacaglia; and just plain everything about the last movement . . . the insouciant bassoon solo which exposes the first theme; the retransition to a blistering restatement of the motto theme from the first movement; the 'ghostly' quiet of the coda (which is a wonderful 'inversion' of the close of the Fourth Symphony.
Varg, it is a pity you that decided to couch your inability to like the Eighth in terms of the supposed superiority of Pettersson, whose work I do not find at all either as characterful, or as consistently well made as Shostakovich's.
I agree Karl; there are great, great moments in Shostakovich. The problem is that they are only moments.
You are mistaken if you think we are in agreement here, Varg. Although I immediately thought of "moments" (since there was little point in writing a 2,000-word post which specifies what I admire in each and every measure), Shostakovich's Eighth works in toto. I am sorry you don't get the piece, and I am puzzled that you prefer Pettersson; but please, don't try to 'convince' me that Shostakovich is only a composer of "moments." That is a question of your attention/perception, and not any question of "flaws" in the Shostakovich Opus 65.
I love just about all the symphonies--even the Second, Third and Twelfth (the finale is a special favorite). For some reason the Fourtheenth eludes me, and for right now that's fine with me.
To that extent, perhaps Shostakovich is a fair reflection of what passed for intelligent expression in Stalinist Russia (which largely formed him, for better or worse); it was usually dangerous to say anything unambiguous in a world where one party line was quickly replaced by another year after year, sometimes in a matter of months. In a world where official 'truth' was as sturdy as a sandcastle, one could only signal ones true feelings while at the same time wearing a mask of some kind. Shostakovich often parroted current official slogans in his letters to close friends as if to signal, at the very least, 'that's the way we're supposed to behave', so underlining its falsity. I think in the same way Shostakovich had to assume certain grimaces - of triumph, 'optimism', what have you - because it was expected of him. To have expressed unambiguous emotion - except in the brief window provided by the German invasion of Russia - could be in effect signing your own death certificate. To expect him to express himself as freely as the Swedish Pettersson is plainly absurd.
If you're looking for straightforward emotional expression, it's understandable that Pettersson would appeal more. There's little chance of misinterpreting a Pettersson symphony. I find Shostakovich much more ambiguous and challenging, with plenty of room in his works for humor, wit, and (God Forbid!) lightheartedness, alongside all the gloom and intensity.
I love Pettersson too, but sometimes I just want to yell, "For God sakes man, life isn't that bad! You didn't even live under Stalin!"
The fourteenth is worth pursuing. In fact, I just changed my name in honor of it!
(DSCH's symphonic textures can seem relatively Spartan, which I actually find an interesting and welcome contrast to more than a few 20th-century symphonies!)
As for humor and wit and high spirits, I there turn to composers like Haydn or Mozart, but any humor and lightheartedness I hear in Shostakovich can come across not necessarily as forced--to go back to Varg's earlier post--but as an ugly sort of humor or levity designed to mask, mock, or subvert.
It is not not a technical issue i have with Shostakovich, it is an emotional one. For instance, he would get really close of giving me great pleasure, but then he would screw it up buy throwing in there something that is totally unecessary or by "going elsewhere". He really is a teaser; he promess me great things, and then he takes them away from me. His music just goes against my nature, i guess; my whole being protest against it, and my mind is far from being my biggest/only "judgement factor".This is something that I've actually noticed a bit, too.... it feels like he's about to going into something very deep and profound and then he just changes direction completely, which maybe some chromatic woodwinds or something.
Isn't this clip just freaking awesome?!Greg which symphony is that? This is what I"m talking about...Shosty is so chaotic to me I don't get his style of expression. Mahler on the other hand seems controlled and logical, even when it is full-blown by a 150 piece orchestra with a 80-stop organ blasting triple fortissimo over it.
[mp3=200,20,0,center]http://www.fileden.com/files/2007/8/14/1346899/sym4%20clip.mp3[/mp3]
This is Rozhdestvensky's recording, I love how the string have some kind of echo, makes it sound even bigger. Then the strings eventually play his signature gallop, while the brass comes in, and it ends up in, i guess explosions!
This is truly falling in love for me..... 0:)
I wonder how his "comrade composers" compare in that regard. I've just started exploring Miaskovsky, and the few works I've heard so far seem rather unambiguous (in the positive sense) in their emotional content/appeal.
Greg which symphony is that? This is what I'm talking about...Shosty is so chaotic to me I don't get his style of expression.
Shosty is so chaotic to me I don't get his style of expression.Well, at least for me, it developed a lot just by listening again and again. Certain things become familiar and when you hear them again, it just becomes more and more likeable..... such as the galloping rhythms, the DSCH (D Eb C B) motive, etc. Then again, you just might not have the capacity to enjoy heavily dissonant music, or haven't developed the taste yet.
This thread has reminded me to listen to Shostakovich again, and I have not listened to a single note from him since 2002. Lots of CDs, but for some reason I have been listening to others.2002? :o
First up, symphony #14.
And to be sure, Greg, the entire Fourth Symphony is (probably a reasonably apt use of this much-abused adjective) awesome. I could not vouch for its freaking, at all.
Perfect FIFTH, I will say that the first couple of times I listened to the Fourth Symphony, I didn't "get" it. After a long interval, I went back to it, and now about half the time it is my favorite Shostakovich symphony, and well up in my Top Ten Symphonies of All Time.
First up, symphony #14.
I do remember . . . we were rehearsing the Eighth Symphony for a forthcoming performance in the concert season. Dmitri Dmitriyevich had come up to Leningrad as usual for the rehearsal. In the break Mravinsky turned round to us and said, ‘Do you know, I have this impression that here in this place Dmitri Dmitriyevich has omitted something; there’s a discrepancy between the harmonies of these chords as they appear here and where they occur elsewhere. I’ve always wanted to ask Dmitri Dmitriyevich about this point, but somehow I have never got round to it.’
Just at this moment, Dmitri Dmitriyevich himself came up to Mravinsky, who put the question to him without further ado. Dmitri Dmitriyevich glanced at the score: ‘Oh dear, what a terrible omission, what an error I have committed. But you know what, let’s leave it as it is, just let things stay as they are.’ We then understood that this ‘error’ was deliberate.
New string quartet, Guido?
When I take my DSCH symphonic plunges, it almost always ends up involving #4, #14 and #15.
I want listeners to reflect upon my new symphony ... to realise that they must lead pure and fruitful lives for the glory of their Motherland, their people and the most progressive ideas motivating our socialist society. That is what I was thinking about as I wrote my new work. I want my listeners, as they leave the hall after hearing my symphony, to think that life is truly beautiful
". . . for the glory of [...] the most progressive ideas motivating our socialist society" is certainly tongue-in-cheek.
Well obviously, but does that render the rest of that sentence also a mockery, in which case what are we to make of the 'life is truly beautiful'. Is that really what he is trying to say in this work?
What do people make of this passage that Shostakovich wrote in the Preface to the Fourteenth Symphony. Is the whole thing an example of his dark humour and irony, or is some of it genuinely meant?Wow.
Concerto day yesterday. "Neue Philharmonie Westfalen" (Cond. Amos Talmon - He has Bernsteinian expressive qualities) with Borodin, Tchaikovsky and Shostakovich. Borodin: The obvious (Polovetsian Dances), a Tchaikovsky Violin Concerto op.35 and Shostakovich Symphony No. 1.
I don't like any Violin concertos yet. I didn't find the violin soloists parts to be part of the music. Too extroverted, too artificially exaggerated. It's disturbing the flow of the music rather than supporting it. People seem to like it. Don't know exactly why. Maybe the wish of everybody, to become the center of the world just for one day.
Now the Shostakovich 1. I have only loosely listened to the symphony twice. I must say I was really impressed yesterday. It's very modern, creative and working well. An exciting and tense piece of music. No weak spots for me in the Symphony. I loved the lento, it is of a disturbing beauty. It has some kind abyss shining through. MORE MORE MORE! :) The Piano was hardly audible in the ending of the symphony.
It's interesting a lot of you like the Fourth. I have a very special relationship with it.Bad experience, good music. Haven't listened a lot yet to #4, but I remember it was soo interesting. The whole music, also last movement somewhat reminded me of Mahler, e.g. the "Tamboursg'sell" (translated as 'little drummer boy') would go well with the last mvmt.
Haven't listened a lot yet to #4, but I remember it was soo interesting. The whole music, also last movement somewhat reminded me of Mahler, e.g. the "Tamboursg'sell" (translated as 'little drummer boy') would go well with the last mvmt.In another thread, we identified several Mahler quotes (from the symphonies) in that third movement, so you may be right as well.
In another thread, we identified several Mahler quotes (from the symphonies) in that third movement, so you may be right as well.
Lacking the structural inevitability of Bruckner or the prolific invention of Mahler . . . .
Could you recap those for us here?
Dumbest thing I have yet seen said of the Leningrad Symphony:
the structural inevitability of Bruckner
The only inevitability in Bruckner is that he will inevitably put me to sleep. 8)
In the strange page scored for harp, bass clarinet, alto flute and two ordinary flutes, the balance of sonorities and easy tightness of execution was the kind of work that defines a world-class orchestra.
We can turn this into a positive 8)I have myself recently (after starting out with the same feelings). All it took for me was time and repeated listenings and now he's my favorite composer to listen to while in class.
I have myself recently (after starting out with the same feelings). All it took for me was time and repeated listenings and now he's my favorite composer to listen to while in class.
Could you recap those for us here?Weren't you in that thread (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,7682.40.html) at that time?
What I didn't catch about this symphony until recently were the quotations from one of the main motives of Mahler's 4th. Pretty easy to miss, very subtle and most likely he did have it in mind although it could also have been just pure chance, being only a few notes (unless someone can prove this wrong).
I didn't notice references to Mahler's 4th, but I did notice the trumpet motif from the first movt of the 7th (the "Star Trek" fanfare), plus the reoccurring chord modulating from major to minor, from the 6th.
Quote from: eyeresistI didn't notice references to Mahler's 4th,It's extremely easy to miss. It's just 4 notes plus two that are similar, a few minutes into the 3rd movement, and the flute plays this.......Quote from: eyeresistbut I did notice the trumpet motif from the first movt of the 7th (the "Star Trek" fanfare), plus the reoccurring chord modulating from major to minor, from the 6thVery interesting! This is what i like to hear in discussion about this symphony....... didn't even recognize this.
Sounds like you're making the most of your educational experience. ;DThat's the cool part about what I'm doing. During the weekdays, I have time for 3 CDs+ a day during class, so in the long run that equals a huge amount of music consumption. Just a couple days ago, I listened to Bruckner's 0-3rd symphonies all in one day, for the first time (and now I've officially heard them all, besides 00).
Shosta's op.87 is patchy imo (doesn't matter who plays it) and it ain't JSB that's for sure.
Anyone in the Boston area going to see Opera Boston's production of The Nose? More info here (http://www.operaboston.org/operas_nose.php?MD=102&PID=6723&AID=VEN000123500).
I am curious to know what the GMG's thoughts are on Shostakovich's early Piano Trio in A Minor, Op. 50. I find moments of bliss sandwiched between moments of dissonance. It is not considered by many to be a mature work, it seems; though I think it is among his best. Any thoughts?
Any recommendations for great recordings of Shostakovich's Piano Quintet in G minor, op. 57?
Normally, I don't like multiple composer discs, but I noticed at least a few pairings with Schnittke's Piano Quintet, which sound really tempting, as I found Schnittke's PQ to be extremely haunting! 0:)
The Naxos coupling (http://www.amazon.com/Piano-Quintets/dp/B00006GO41/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=music&qid=1236020334&sr=8-1) of those two is a successful recording. The Shostakovich in particular is a fine performance in clear sound.
Anyone in the Boston area going to see Opera Boston's production of The Nose? . . .
Hmm . . . most interesting, Jeffrey! The bits of (for instance) Moskva-Cheryomushki which are an extra on a DVD are charming, interesting, though I don't think I need it in the home library. I do really like the Odna score for what it is.
A friend recommended a new Naxos release of 'The Girlfriends' (film score) etc by Shostakovich, which I listened to today. I strongly recommend it - it is a most quirky but engaging score alternating between string quartet, orchestra, chorus and featuring a mad theremin passage (like something out of the score for the film Ed Wood). It is like nothing else I have heard by Shostakovich but it works and the sad end is moving - if you like Shostakovich and fancy something a bit different you should enjoy this CD. It also features an equally strange theatre score for 'Rule, Britannia!' (never published as the play's author was executed in the purges). However, of enormous interest is the original opening seven minutes of Shostakovich's 9th Symphony, which is nothing like the actual 9th Symphony and more in keeping with the spirit of the Leningrad Symphony and Symphony No 8 - it has a great sense of urgency and I immediately wanted to hear it again (it is called 'Symphonic Movement' - 1945 unfinished). Part of me wishes that Shostakovich had continued with this work:
What an intriguing recording! Thanks so much for the comments and I will probably see if I can find it over the weekend.
--Bruce
Shostakovich is the Led Zeppelin of classical music.
Shostakovich is the Led Zeppelin of classical music.
but I did notice the trumpet motif from the first movt of the 7th (the "Star Trek" fanfare), plus the reoccurring chord modulating from major to minor, from the 6th
I have a co-worker who loves music, generally likes classical music, but somehow, he thinks he hates Shostakovich.Either the first violin concerto or the second piano concerto, depending on his taste in music, I think.
Of course, that may simply be The Case. But if you had to select one piece to wean him away from distaste for Shostakovich: Which would it be?
I have a co-worker who loves music, generally likes classical music, but somehow, he thinks he hates Shostakovich.
Of course, that may simply be The Case. But if you had to select one piece to wean him away from distaste for Shostakovich: Which would it be?
I have a co-worker who loves music, generally likes classical music, but somehow, he thinks he hates Shostakovich.
Of course, that may simply be The Case. But if you had to select one piece to wean him away from distaste for Shostakovich: Which would it be?
The best way to awaken someone to DSCH is take him or her to a concert.
Violin Concerto № 1
Piano Concerto № 2
Jazz Suite № 2
Piano Quintet
Symphony № 5
String Quartet № 8
Can we list Shostakovich's Passacaglias here? The most obvious one is the one from the first violin concerto - maybe the most beautiful thing that Shostakovich ever wrote. Which other ones are there?
I have a co-worker who loves music, generally likes classical music, but somehow, he thinks he hates Shostakovich.
New recording due out June 9th:
Gergiev/Mariinsky in The Nose.
Judging by Gergiev's past successes in opera this ought to be a recording to get. While the work itself of course is fully worthy of anyone's attention.
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41W5z6LJetL._SS400_.jpg)
Well, after seeing Lady Macbeth of Mtsensk, I'd be interested in seeing this one!To get your nose in you mean? Don't expect anything similar.
To get your nose in you mean? Don't expect anything similar.
It has to be the most depressing thing I've ever heard though...Never heard Pettersson?
Never heard Pettersson?
SQ No.8 Op.110 is definitely my least fav Shosty bar none.
Can anyone wax poetic over any really really special recordings of SQ No.15?.....I really just want the most monumental No.15 I can find
Why? What turns you off about it?
"Monumental" in what way? I've heard several recordings of it (Fitzwilliam, Emerson, Shosty, coupla others) and liked all of them. My intro to the piece though was a recording by the Taneyev Quartet, an LP that I think has never appeared on CD. I recall it being "special," but maybe that's just because it was the first time I heard the 4tet and it was the music itself that struck me as special...
Can anyone wax poetic over any really really special recordings of SQ No.15?
This is the only thing I can get from youtube, since they took down that full recording of the 7th. Also, the 8th is worth listening to- even more tragic and hypnotic- really takes you down the depths of the subconscious like nothing else does.Don't forget No. 6. Highlights: Sheer sad beauty after the 35 min. mark (CPO release) and a very sad and tragic ending. The ending of #7 is remarkable, but I think the ones of #6 and also 9 even more (9 has a loooong -5 minutes- string lamento in the end - also an almost persistent note which we know of Shosty 4/15 ending).
Probably, the metronome marking that Shostakovich inked for the second movement is impossibly fast for any orchestras.
What would be the movement timing if Shostakovich metronome markings would be observed?
Mitropoulos drove NewYork Philharmonic through utterly breakneck speed to about three and a half minutes iirc.
Not sure (that's a relatively simple math problem I can do later when I fetch the score from upstairs). Maksim Dmitiyevich's Allegro runs 4:18, Kondrashin's, 4:09. Ančerl's runs a mighty brisk 3:51, and that is likely the fastest I've ever heard an orchestra manage it.
Probably, the metronome marking that Shostakovich inked for the second movement is impossibly fast for any orchestra. But Ančerl and the Czech Phil make an exhilirating attempt at it!
. . . Maksim Dmitriyevich's Allegro runs 4:18, Kondrashin's, 4:09. Ančerl's runs a mighty brisk 3:51, and that is likely the fastest I've ever heard an orchestra manage it.
yeah, let's all go back to the Dmitri Dacha
so i'm locking this thread
bye Greg's Shosty thread.....
i won't miss you.........
:'(
i said i wuzn't gunna cwy......
>:D
The second movement, Allegro, of the Symphony № 10 in E Minor, Opus 93, bears a tempo marking.....
Thanks! Scarcely more than two minutes to me looks completely impossible, it has to be mistake. While 4:05 seems perfectly logical. Evgeny Aleksandrovich, whose overall pacing of the symphony is very much to my liking (first movement at around 22:20) takes it at 4:00-4:07 and it sounds pretty convincing. That being said the Ancerl is still big favorite (inspite being trifle quick).
I wonder how fast Dmitri Dmitriyevich &al. take that Allegro in the archival two-piano recording (and what the overall timing is)....
Thanks! Scarcely more than two minutes to me looks completely impossible, it has to be mistake. While 4:05 seems perfectly logical. Evgeny Aleksandrovich, whose overall pacing of the symphony is very much to my liking (first movement at around 22:20) takes it at 4:00-4:07 and it sounds pretty convincing. That being said the Ancerl is still big favorite (inspite being trifle quick).:D
For the fun of it here is Mitropoulos, whipping NewYorkers into frenzy, live october 1955 in Athens. Clocking at hard to believe 3:25
[mp3=200,20,0,left]http://www.fileden.com/files/2008/7/24/2018019/dsch10mitrnypathens55.mp3[/mp3]
At the other end, Sanderling with his BSO takes 4:39. EDIT: It's 4:34 without silence. This is what I'm used to.
We talked abou timing. This is the final moment of Sym#15, IV. Adagio. The following differences are ridiculous. I feel Sanderling (19:41) is way too slow and Barshai (13:56)way too fast. I like the Sanderling, still.
Mravinsky - 13.48 (discounting post-track silence)Well, Barshai minus post-tack silence is at the same length.
Can anyone beat that?
We talked abou timing. This is the final moment of Sym#15, IV. Adagio. The following differences are ridiculous. I feel Sanderling (19:41) is way too slow and Barshai (13:56)way too fast. I like slow version the Sanderling, still [Edit: And it has superb quality]. Also, the Timpani in the Barshai recording seems out of pitch.
You're both including some after-echo time in the space, following the last chord? 8)No, the Venezia release of the Mravinsky has about 20 seconds of dead air after the audio track has ceased.
Since the Gergiev recording of The Nose has been released, I've been considering buying that one, as I don't have a recording of that opera yet.
But what I want to know how it compares to the Rozhdestvensky version of the piece. I think the Rozhdestvensky might be better, especially because it also comes with The Gamblers op. 63b But I really don't know either, and I would love some opinions before I buy either version. (They are roughly the same price on arkiv)
Thanks!
Well, personally I wouldn't be so quick to declare Rozhdestvensky's recording as "better" if you haven't heard it. :) ;) :)Well, I worded what I meant to say wrongly. I meant that it would be a better deal for the money with the Gambler's op. 63b along with The Nose. I didn't mean better musically or what not.
I have - I've had it for quite a while now on LP. I also have the only other recording of The Nose to have ever been issued on recordings before the new Gergiev: Armin Jordan's on Cascavelle from Lausanne (in Russian). Alas, it's already OOP.
Personally my preference is by quite a margin in favor of the Jordan.
To me Rozhdestvensky's is heavy-ish, a bit sluggish, lacking in detail (despite the fine sound) and, well, extremely "Russian". Confused by this? Don't be. Because The Nose isn't much of a "Russian" work to begin with. It's perhaps the most "European" work of Shostakovich's I've ever heard. It's almost as if he's throwing his hat into the ring with all the other Big Dogs from the Second Viennese school, like Berg, Webern, and such, and having a go at all manner extreme experimentalism. The work is that zany in conception (musically).
This 'extremism' of course is why the work was so quick to be condemned by the Soviet commissars. "Formalist" they called it. A western trait. The Nose is perhaps the first link in a chain of works which eventually lead to Shostakovich's public trouncing.
Sad.
Anyway, Jordan's is the type of performance that plays up all the extravagance in the work and presents it squarely as the experimental work it is.
Not that Rozhdestvensky is exactly bad, mind you, and I might come across as overly harsh above (it's really not a catastrophe), but it's just that in comparison with Jordan it really doesn't have the life and energy - the flair - the work clearly needs. At least to me.
Which leads me to the Gergiev recording. I haven't heard it yet but despite the seeming niggling here and there about Gergiev's merits as a conductor (nothing explicit, however, that I've ever read) he's mighty fine in the opera pit. And for the purposes of this post I'll just stick to the closest contemporary of Shostakovich who Gergiev has recorded operas of: Prokofiev. All four of the Gergiev-led Prokofiev operas I have (on Philips) show him to have a keen understanding of the dramatic and lyric potential of each respective work. He seems to be completely inside the music with every detail and phrase well thought-out, culminating in a type of 'stage presence' that resonates right into my little listening room. Dazzling!
So, with this in mind, my personal impressions are that the new Gergiev Nose should be a splendid affair. In every way I'm anticipating a performance perfectly in keeping with the spirit of the work: "western decadent" all the way. ;D
(Just when I'll get it I don't know. I already have two recordings of the work :-\ ).
Well, I worded what I meant to say wrongly. I meant that it would be a better deal for the money with the Gambler's op. 63b along with The Nose. I didn't mean better musically or what not.
Thanks for the advice!
Whatever you choose let us know your impressions. There aren't a whole lot of folks who know this work.I ended up ordering the Gergiev recording. When I get a chance to listen to it, I will report my impressions. I am looking forward to it :)
I ended up ordering the Gergiev recording. When I get a chance to listen to it, I will report my impressions. I am looking forward to it :)
Can anyone recommend a good collection of orchestral music that is not symphonies or concertos?
Any good disc or two packed to the brim with suites, overtures, odes, marches, variations, concert allegros/scherzos and whatnot will be of interest.
Can anyone recommend a good collection of orchestral music that is not symphonies or concertos?
Any good disc or two packed to the brim with suites, overtures, odes, marches, variations, concert allegros/scherzos and whatnot will be of interest.
Can anyone recommend a good collection of orchestral music that is not symphonies or concertos?Easy: Brilliant Classics has a 3 CD set of all the jazz suites, ballet suites, and a few other things besides.
Any good disc or two packed to the brim with suites, overtures, odes, marches, variations, concert allegros/scherzos and whatnot will be of interest.
That is so creepy. It's pretty much impossible to tell them apart. I wonder what the Harry Potter actor would look like when he's 40?
Finally, I like Dmitri's music much more than his movies.
I wonder what the Harry Potter actor would look like when he's 40?
. . . but you do like the Kozintsev films with Shostakovich soundtracks, yes?
Never heard of those.
We only know about Harry Potter how he looks like when he's 68.Nice. He looks like a zombie. Makes me wanna play Resident Evil, and throw incendiary grenades at crowds of those dumb zombies and then watch them catch on fire and die. 8)
(http://www.fileden.com/files/2007/9/21/1446950/hp70.jpg)
Never heard of those. But Gadfly music is lovely.
While I do not foresee the Eleventh gaining on the racecourse (so to speak) against other symphonies as my favorites, I find myself increasingly appreciative of its virtues.
I can see this becoming my favorite, as I'm listening to it now. Someday. 8)
It's definitely one of mine. How is that recording you're listening to? I'm not familiar with that conductor at all.
--Bruce
I am old enough to remember Shostakovich's death in 1975. At the time there were reports in some newspapers that he had been working on his 16th Symphony at the time of his death. I have never heard any mention of it since. Does anyone know if this is true?
I was 3 in 1975... Vandermolen, not much is known afaics. I've asked for the Symphony No. 16 at GMG here. (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,12442.0.html)...
Hey. Is that Dmitri in the new Pixar movie "Up"? ;)
(http://larryfire.files.wordpress.com/2009/05/pixar_up.jpg)
Where have you and Bogey been living the past 15 years? In a bubble? You have never seen or heard of this recording?
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41PMTSR849L._SL500_AA240_.jpg)
If you buy one recording a decade I hope it is this one. The recording of the Leningrad not only is the greatest recording of this piece on record (and I have 10 plus versions of this work), it is one of the greatest recordings of anything by anyone.
Which ten? :)I have to check my shelf but some of them I can think of:
Which two do you like the least, and why? And thank you for your answer and indulgence.The least? I can't really say, they are all good in their own ways. But the ones that didn't really interest me as much as the others are probably Jansons and Temirkanov, which even surprises me since they are both with the St. Petersburg/Leningrad PO. Maybe it's the expectations, I expected the LPO under Jansons and Temirkanov to sound like the LPO under Mravinsky, the same kind of frightening spectrum of sounds from the faintest ppp to the loudest fff and the same frenzy everytime there is a stringendo. Instead what I got from Jansons and Temirkanov is terrific playing, razor-sharp ensemble, but no real SOUL behind the music. If you like this approach you are better off with Barshai or Kitayenko, where the WDR play every bit as well as it's more famous Russian counterpart.
The least? I can't really say, they are all good in their own ways.
To me Lenny just plays the closing pages with those walls and walls of bras swells like nobody else.
I'm having problems picturing "walls of bras". Not sure whether that was DSCH's intention. Kinda like this?
(http://www.sarahlouisedesigns.co.uk/images/favours/mini_bras_large.jpg)
I almost forget, there is one that I failed to mentioned that is a complete dud - Gergiev. This one is just a complete disaster from rather murky balance to no real concept of the work. It sounds like Solti conducting Wagner, sections of music just glossed over aiming for the few orchestral moments where you can just milk it.
Huh huh, I mean't brass. But I do like bras better, especially what is usually underneath them ;D
But I do like bras better, especially what is usually underneath them ;D
The least? I can't really say, they are all good in their own ways. But the ones that didn't really interest me as much as the others are probably Jansons and Temirkanov, which even surprises me since they are both with the St. Petersburg/Leningrad PO. Maybe it's the expectations, I expected the LPO under Jansons and Temirkanov to sound like the LPO under Mravinsky, the same kind of frightening spectrum of sounds from the faintest ppp to the loudest fff and the same frenzy everytime there is a stringendo. Instead what I got from Jansons and Temirkanov is terrific playing, razor-sharp ensemble, but no real SOUL behind the music. If you like this approach you are better off with Barshai or Kitayenko, where the WDR play every bit as well as it's more famous Russian counterpart.
I also think the Masur is a terrific performance. THe raw, edgy sound of the NYPO fits this music perfectly, more so than the rather smooth and mellow sounding WDR. I am a bit undecided on the M. Shostakovich. The Prague players have a rather unique sound, a bit wobbly at times, that tend to be an acquired taste. Right now I am not in the taste for it.
What he said. ;DNobody have done a bra's quintet then?
What I put in bold in your message is the reason why I'm surprised you did not make mention of that
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41UYTZEdK%2BL._SL500_AA240_.jpg)
among your other 11 ones.
OK, I'm very biased as far as Mravinsky is concerned, but this is the most non complacent, implacable interpretation of this particular symphony on records that I know.
Landed today:
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/31UqRNI6A4L._SL500_AA240_.jpg)
Shostakovich: Symphony No. 4 [Includes DVD]
Haitink & the CSO (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B001BBSE6Y/goodmusicguide-20)
This I have put off listening to for... well, ever since it came out. I don't know why... I liked all the other CSO Resound stuff. I didn't even know it contained a DVD. Watching it now. Finally.
Last night's production of The Nose was pretty amazing, and I still can't quite believe that Shostakovich was only 22 when he wrote it. (The program observes that neither Mozart nor Rossini had completed operas of comparable stature at that age.) The production is designed by South African artist William Kentridge, who uses a combination of live action and animation to extraordinary effect. I don't think I've ever seen such complex animation used on a stage this large. Many sequences are very funny, with the giant nose running all over the stage, across catwalks, etc.yeah, the production was amazing. I am glad I was able to fit the show into my schedule, even if it meant flying to NYC from Buffalo for just a total of 2 days there! The set itself was really something. I tried to explain it to people, but couldn't quite find the right words for it. It was just a really fun score.
Valery Gergiev conducted, magnificently, and Paulo Szot is the lead character who wakes up to find his nose missing. Szot was excellent, making his Met debut after winning a Tony award for South Pacific. The rest of the cast are all wonderful but too numerous too name; the opera has some 80 roles, sung by about 30 people--a huge cast.
But the real star is the score, which (at least on first hearing) uses a gigantic orchestra with Webern-like precision and lightness. The percussion section has a field day, with lots of gongs, more uses of the ratchet than in any piece I've ever heard, and near the end, a plaintive passage for the flexatone (sounds sort of like a musical saw). It is one of the most radical, experimental scores I've heard from this composer. (I'll be getting the Gergiev/Mariinsky recording at some point, which came out last year and got great reviews.)
The sold-out house (!) saved its biggest cheers for Kentridge, who came out at the very end. Usually in a new production, the designers come out only during the opening night, but I hope they will have him come out for all the remaining performances. He certainly deserves it.
The opera will be broadcast on the radio (and various Internet outlets) during the regular Met Saturday afternoon broadcast tomorrow, for anyone interested--although a pity that one can't experience Kentridge's amazing vision that way.
--Bruce
On boogers, Shostakovich, and dangerous first impressions: (http://www.weta.org/fmblog/?p=1875)
http://www.weta.org/fmblog/?p=1875 (http://www.weta.org/fmblog/?p=1875)
Regarding the Borodin Quartet, there is this Virgin double disc with five quartets on it. What do you call a third of a cycle?
Listened to the first two movements of Shostakovich's sole viola sonata.
The recording by Bashmet is apparently out of print.
It's on Regis:
(http://www.mdt.co.uk/public/pictures/products/standard/RRC1128.jpg)
this ought to be good ... so .. what's your problem with Richter's musicianship?
I would not hesitate to rank it one of the great symphonies of all time, alongside contenders like Beethoven 5 and Brahms 4.
I don't particularly find it useful to see Shostakovich's symphonies as reactions to, or depictions of, or portraits of, Communism; when I first began to get "into" the Tenth, it was cool to imagine the scherzo as "Stalin himself," or the third movement as "Shostakovich versus the oppressors." Now that interpretation is not as interesting as it had been.
Karajan recorded it twice, in the 60's and in the 80's. Which one are you listening to?
EDIT: Oh, and I've never listened to Brahms #4!?! Well, I'm 39, so maybe there'll be some time left.
My Shosta collection:
Haitink Complete Decca Symphonies
Karajan 10
Bernstein 5 and 9
Fitzwilliam SQs
I've got the Fugues but I can't remember who the heck it is.
A couple of incidental, but good, performances of the symphonies (Barshai)
I'm really off topic now, because I'm listening to Whitesnake's In the Heart of the City. Sorry!
. . . may I suggest the Piano Quintet in g minor, Opus 57; Piano Trio № 2 in e minor, Opus 67...
Okay, I'm being ganged up on :)
A work by Shostakovich that has been haunting me is the viola sonata. The first movement in particular has a reserved, dark melodic invention that I keep coming back to over and over again.
Okay, I'm being ganged up on :).
I can replay, and listen attentively.
Now that I've finished writing my own (viola sonata), I am keen to revisit the Shostakovich Opus 147.
TTTI didn't. Real life demanded my full attention. Brahms 4 is still on my schedule. Detention?
All right, your assignment: Listen to the Brahms Fourth before the end of August.
You can do it!
I must play it.
It will have to be on a cello I'm afraid... but I'll try and play it as much in the right register as possible, I promise. :-*
@Mirror Image: If you can't love #15, you're lost. OK I admit, this is maybe quite subjective ;) You need to love the darkness. And it must be the Sanderling/BSO. Sloooow.
AndyD will be disappointed. :(
I agree. Sanderling is unique in this symphony--insanely dark. But his Cleveland peformance is even better...and even slower!Yes, in the Berlin recording the percussive ending is played much faster. I don't know the reason why - I always preferred the Berlin over Cleveland performance. Need to give it a try again. I maybe listened to Berlin 30 times and 3 times Cleveland. The quality of the Cleveland is better. Maybe the best #15 ever 8)
One more note. Shostakovich is famous for his emotionally ambiguous endings, but this, in my opinion, is not one of them. The Tenth Symphony, written and premiered at last after the death of Stalin, is capped off by Shostakovich’s victory dance on the grave of his oppressor. In these final bars, in this performance, I can hear the composer shouting with a wild joy: You thought you had me caged up; you thought you could control what music I write; you thought you could intimidate a generation of creative minds by threatening them with labour and torture and death; but you thought wrong. The creative spirit always wins! The individual always wins! Art always wins!
The highest praise I can lavish upon this new Naxos release is that I hadn’t quite thought of the Tenth Symphony that way before. It was one of my favorite symphonies, but Vasily Petrenko and the Royal Liverpool Philharmonic still managed to find within it something entirely new. This symphony isn’t about Stalin. It isn’t about the totalitarian Soviet state. It’s about anybody who needs to be told, or who needs to be reassured: Art always wins.
Feedback is welcome. Am I making sense? Am I off-base?End of the 10th, that's the part where the DSCH theme gets hammered out by the timpani while the rest of the orchestra makes an uproarious commotion. You had to wait for the Petrenko recording to decide that passage is up-beat? What have you been listening to, for god' sake. Is there a Klemperer recording of Shostakovich 10 that I don't know about. ;D
End of the 10th, that's the part where the DSCH theme gets hammered out by the timpani while the rest of the orchestra makes an uproarious commotion. You had to wait for the Petrenko recording to decide that passage is up-beat? What have you been listening to, for god' sake. Is there a Klemperer recording of Shostakovich 10 that I don't know about. ;D;D ;D ;D
End of the 10th, that's the part where the DSCH theme gets hammered out by the timpani while the rest of the orchestra makes an uproarious commotion. You had to wait for the Petrenko recording to decide that passage is up-beat? What have you been listening to, for god' sake. Is there a Klemperer recording of Shostakovich 10 that I don't know about. ;D
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51GLdTscuVL._SL500_AA300_.jpg)This is probably one of the glaring holes in my CD collection. Yet it's a disc I don't see mentioned often--opinions on it?
This is probably one of the glaring holes in my CD collection. Yet it's a disc I don't see mentioned often--opinions on it?
I have that disk and enjoy it both as a testament to the music and as an historical document. The playing is first rate, and the sense of occasion is there in both concerts. If it ain't a million dollars (in a manner of saying), then it's worth the investment. :)
This is probably one of the glaring holes in my CD collection. Yet it's a disc I don't see mentioned often--opinions on it?
I have that disk and enjoy it both as a testament to the music and as an historical document. The playing is first rate, and the sense of occasion is there in both concerts. If it ain't a million dollars (in a manner of saying), then it's worth the investment. :)
8)
Incidentally, the very last piece in the 10-CD Kondrashin 'spectacles' box is the Vn Cto № 2, again played by the violinist for whom it was written: Oistrakh. Recorded in 1967.
Hey... say, do you know if this is in the Koran edition on aulos as well?
No, it doesn't. It's a 10-CD set... spectacles is 11. (BTW, Koran edition?)
No, it doesn't. It's a 10-CD set... spectacles is 11. (BTW, Koran edition?)CD11 is South Koran then.
Just saw this fascinating bit of news from Musical America:
"Orango, a long lost opera by Shostakovich, is scheduled to have its world premiere, in concert, in December 2011 by Esa-Pekka Salonen and the Los Angeles Philharmonic. The reconstructed prologue, about 40 minutes long, concerns a half-man, half-ape and is said to be “blisteringly satirical,” according to the Los Angeles Times. Peter Sellars will direct the work, which has been reconstructed and orchestrated from the composer’s piano sketches by British composer Gerard McBurney at the request of the Russian composer’s widow. The opera dates to 1932 and was written with librettists Alexei Tolstoy and Alexander Starchakov, apparently in the midst of the composer’s work on Lady MacBeth of the Mtsensk District."
--Bruce
Can anyone wax poetic over any really really special recordings of SQ No.15?
I'm listening to Fitzwilliam now, and I'm not really taken: sounds kind of unsure (which is understandable). I've had "most" of the SQ sets out there (of the old guard), but I sold the Emerson last year (the last to go) to start fresh. So now I have zero Shosty SQs, and I really just want the most monumental No.15 I can find (I hope it's not the Emerson, otherwise I probably should have kept it!: they WERE pretty good, actually).
I remember the Brodsky disc, "End Games", with DSCH 15 and LvB 16, an interesting concept, but I don't remember the performance. One that I haven't heard is the Sony disc with Yo-Yo Ma (w/ Gubaidulina "Rejoice"). Perhaps that's a good one? Are there any other "mix" cds with only No.15?
I also seem to recall enjoying the Shostakovich Qrt./Olympia in the late SQs.
Been listening to Shostakovich's viola sonata again recently. The first two movements are amazing. The first expecially, has the most astonishing development of a few melodic cells, and such a sustained mood of bemused irony, a gem. I've never been able to get through the third, final movement without my attention drifting off. There's the paraphrase of the Moonlight sonata, and I find myself thinking about whether the car needs an oil change. :(Then I suggest you change the oil and listen again. ;D
Which recording, in your opinion, contains the wildest, all-Hell-breaking-loose ending of the 11th symphony? (Thanks in advance.)Not much experience with #11, sorry. My choice is Haitink/RCO, I prefer it over Janssons (from the cycle). Least I can say about Haitink: both wild scenes (endings of mvmt2 and 4) are a very powerful experience.
Which recording, in your opinion, contains the wildest, all-Hell-breaking-loose ending of the 11th symphony? (Thanks in advance.)
I have the Rostropovich/LSO Live CD, and the ending is pretty overwhelming. The bells are REALLY loud and clear, and the side-drummer is hammering away like a maniac.
The nice thing at the very end is that despite it being a live recording, the audience are absolutely silent as the reverberation of the bells fades slowly away. The spell is not broken .....
Whilst we are on the topic of awesome endings in Shostakovich Symphonies (his speciality I think ....), what do you think of the ending of the 4th Symphony? For me, this is the "creme de la creme". Not only an apocalyptic climax, but a bizzare and unearthly epilogue. ...
From: http://ionarts.blogspot.com/2008/01/when-heldenleben-orchestra-stops-at.html (http://ionarts.blogspot.com/2008/01/when-heldenleben-orchestra-stops-at.html)
...Beautiful the tic-tocs into the false calm of the third movement’s opening – only to proceed to delve deeply into this strange, enervating, beautifully bizarre world that makes the Mahler-influenced first movement seem perfectly normal. Bychkov managed to tighten the music’s thumbscrews anew at every new start after an intermittent lull or (faux-) lyrical passage.
If someone ever felt compelled to make a film of Griffins having S&M sex, this would be the soundtrack for it: The shrieks, the brutality, the claws, the exhaustion, the climaxes and the pounding, and the relentlessness are harrowing and were particularly so in this performance. There could not be a more appropriate description of it, even if it risks being clichéd: Bychkov and orchestra were playing the hell out of the finale. But more distressing still, because of all that which preceded it, was the ensuing dreamy delicacy of the ticking-away of the symphony... the final breath and that mourning trumpet that sounded like a death knell ringing over a blood soaked battlefield on a Winter dawn … a comment on a victory everyone knows to have been a defeat.
No wonder Shostakovich kept the symphony in the drawer until de-Stalinization was under way. It would otherwise not only have been his fourth, but also his last symphony.
Whilst we are on the topic of awesome endings in Shostakovich Symphonies (his speciality I think ....), what do you think of the ending of the 4th Symphony? For me, this is the "creme de la creme".This. Without any doubt. You may want to try Mariss Jansons with the Bavarians here. Very important is the trumpet for me, it makes me shudder. In the Jansons you can clearly hear it. There are other performances where it's too much in the background.
For the 5th, my favourite is Sanderling ..... if you have never heard it before, it is quite a shock. The total opposite to every other recording I know. But for me, very convincing.The recordings with the Berliner SO? They're all my favourites except maybe for the 8th and 10th. As for the fifth and that particular recording: IMHO the first movement starting from 13:00 pretty well sums up, what Shostakovich Symphonies are about.
Sanderling also for the end of the 15th ..... this is the most spine-chilling music I know ....Yes. Yes. Yes. Absolutely. I prefer both of his recordings. Other conductors play the percussive ending way faster, but I don't like that-.
Sanderling also for the end of the 15th ..... this is the most spine-chilling music I know ....
I only have the 3 film CDs on Chandos. I think it's some of his best work.
Add Rostropovich to the debate........
Sarge
Has anyone heard Kitajenko's cycle? I've read mixed opinions of his set.
I'm not sure if I can pick a favorite symphony cycle I own (so far): Barshai, Haitink, Ashkenazy, Rostropovich, and Jansons. I'm really enjoying the ongoing cycle with Petrenko. This might be some of the exciting Shostakovich I've heard yet. Has anyone heard Kitajenko's cycle? I've read mixed opinions of his set.
But it's not only greatness in the endings of the whole work, but also endings of movements. In particular I'm thinking of the ending of No. 5 mvmt I, or the second movement of 11. Both share some bizarre, unearthy elements, and fear.
I have the Rostropovich/LSO Live CD, and the ending is pretty overwhelming. The bells are REALLY loud and clear, and the side-drummer is hammering away like a maniac. The nice thing at the very end is that despite it being a live recording, the audience are absolutely silent as the reverberation of the bells fades slowly away. The spell is not broken .....
This didn't happen at the LPO live 11th I went to earlier this month. There was a burst of hugely enthusiastic applause, then sudden silence as everyone realized the bells were still audible. After a while everyone started clapping again, but kind of awkwardly. The sound engineers were probably kicking themselves.
I find it extraordinary, especially when I'm in the mood for excellent sound. But I have no "favorites" in Shostakovich, somehow... not in the same way I do in other composers, at least.
Haven't got many cycles, just Barshai in fact, but I've heard quite a few Tenths in the past 6 weeks and would rank them in this order:
(No 10)
=outstanding [these three can change places depending on my mood]=
1. Petrenko
2. Jansons
3. Sanderling (sound is dated, sure, but the playing superb)
=very, very good=
4. Karajan 80s
5. Barshai
=flawed in some way=
6. Skrowaczewski
7. M. Shostakovich, LSO (probably the Supraphon is better)
8. Wigglesworth (sound too low-level)
9. Kitajenko (though his third movement is in the top 3, the finale is very plain)
I recently auditioned the scherzo from Ancerl's legendary performance and, despite my love for Ancerl and high expectations, found it a major letdown. It's so fast it loses a lot of intensity. Petrenko and Karajan are best there.
The ends of the first movements of 5, 6, and 10 are all different angles on that same insight.
=flawed in some way=
6. Skrowaczewski
I recently auditioned the scherzo from Ancerl's legendary performance and, despite my love for Ancerl and high expectations, found it a major letdown. It's so fast it loses a lot of intensity.
Important note: I hereby declare Kurt Sanderling to be my personal "Hero of Shostakovich". I have all the Berlin SO CDs with him conducting and I love them all (Sym. Nos. 1, 5, 6, 8, 10 and 15). I now tried No. 8 with Haitink, but happily returned to Sanderling. He's still alive BTW, heading towards 100 years of age :o .
I seldom listen to Shostakovich. Not out of personal dislike or anything, because he composed some very good music, but I just don't find myself connecting to his music as much as I do other composers.
That said, I do enjoy Symphonies Nos. 4, 7, and 10 the most of his symphonies. I also really enjoyed "Violin Concerto No. 1" and "Piano Concerto No. 1."
Other than these works, I'm just not moved by his sound-world or what it is he's trying to convey in his music. Given his history, it's hard to know how really felt, but I know this is just my own opinion and obviously doesn't reflect how other's feel about his music.
MI, you describe what many of us experience, at least me. Oh well, prejudices. They prevented me listening to Brahms. Because this nasty guy insulted my little tiny Bruckner and it was a question of revenge not to listen to Brahms! A mistake... I enjoy his 4th (didn't try other symphonies of his).
Do you know DSCHs 1st symphony? It's a very remarkable first Symphony IMO. I heard it first in the concert hall and was immediately impressed. Only the final movement is still a problem for me. Don't like it as much as the first three.
I'm currently on the Shostakovich trip as well. After a lot of listens to his fifth, I'll listen more properly to the tenth. I already did, but didn't see the point yet why soo many people would prefer it over the fifth. It didn't touch me. Yet. Future will tell....
BTW, Sanderlings Berlin Orchestra produced some flaws, did you notice? There's a scary (flute?) part at the end of 5/mvmt1, the flute in the end did not produce a proper sound, but rather you hear only the blowing... Also at the bombast Sym 5/mvmt4 finale, cymbal and timpany are not synchronous. Anyway it's the best fifth for me.
What do you all you Shostakovich lovers think of the ballet The Golden Age?
That Naxos recording is on my To Listen To list : )
I've only heard the Suite, nor am I sure that I've heard that complete.
What do you think about that strange passage in Symphony No. 8, 3rd movement, Allegro? What was the intention behind it?
Video starts where I mean:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sYfliiuj4-c&feature=player_detailpage#t=194s (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sYfliiuj4-c&feature=player_detailpage#t=194s)
Humta Humta Humtataaaa ;) - Music for german "Schützenvereine"
(http://www.garstedt.de/Bilder/BilderMax/1236259220-Schuetzenverein-2003-1.jpg)
Nobody knows why he added this demonic waltz hereMusic question: is the above passage a Waltz? I think this 1-2 1-2 is a 2/4 - Polka? Not sure.
At the first listen of the 8th, I was really surprised to hear something like that. I knew he made some really "easy" music which I didn't like (there's a lot of silly stuff with trumpets)- but I was surprised to find it in the eigth. From what I read, (western?) positive critics quickly tend to talk about a) concessions he made or b) music being ironical/hidden criticism. All in order to pull him on the politically "good" side. Which is too easy for me.
Music question: is the above passage a Waltz? I think this 1-2 1-2 is a 2/4 - Polka? Not sure.
P.S. I have not idea about whether that except is a waltz or polka. I was just using the phrase demonic waltz as an expression to describe how Shostakovich can, with almost the flip of a coin, change musical styles in just one movement.I see. BTW, the Wikipedia S8 article says: "It [the 3rd mvmt.] features an interesting quote of the Sabre Dance from Aram Khachaturian, composed the year before."
I see. BTW, the Wikipedia S8 article says: "It [the 3rd mvmt.] features an interesting quote of the Sabre Dance from Aram Khachaturian, composed the year before."
Is it the part we're talking about?
I see. BTW, the Wikipedia S8 article says: "It [the 3rd mvmt.] features an interesting quote of the Sabre Dance from Aram Khachaturian, composed the year before."
Is it the part we're talking about?
I don't know whether it's an exact quote but 3:40 and 4:00, lasting for about 5 seconds in each case, sounds like it might have been taken from the Sabre Dance. But that "background" (please pardon me for the loose/inaccurate terminology) with the bassoon (?) and some kind of cymbal (?) is very similar.You're right. The aforementioned passage is not an exact quote of the Khatchaturian Sabre Dance, but it's obviously what they are referring to in the Wikipedia article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symphony_No._8_(Shostakovich)).
Hey, maybe DCSH even liked marches and waltzes, why not.... :)
Last night I was listening to the Suite for Varied Orchestra (a.k.a. Jazz Suite No. 2), and it's almost full of those things.
As Shostakovich, Britten and Hindemith as well as other great composers said almost fifty years ago, 12-tone composers can't write a whistleable tune that one can remember when exiting the concert hall.
In his high-profile role as model young Soviet composer during the year leading up to the condemnation of Lady Macbeth, Shostakovich had been candid about the influence the music of such contemporary composers as Berg, Schoenberg, Krenek, Hindemith, and especially Stravinsky had exerted on his development, especially in the three years after completing Conservatory. Just a few weeks before “Muddle Instead of Music” appeared, Shostakovich commiserated with Sollertinsky on the recent death of Alban Berg: “His passing grieved me no less than you. The deceased was a genius. I am convinced that sooner or later he will be appreciated.”
When, after several trying and ludicrous speeches, his turn came to speak he began to read his prepared talk in a nervous and shaky voice. After a few sentences he broke off, and the speech was continued in English by a suave baritone. In all the equivocation of that conference, Shostakovich's speech was the least direct. Written in the style of the Agitprop speeches, it was quite obviously prepared by the 'party organs' in charge of the Waldorf-Astoria conference, on the Soviet side of the picture. In it these 'organs', through their mouthpiece Shostakovich, condemned most Western music as decadent and bourgeois, painted the glories of the rising Soviet music culture, attacked the demon Stravinsky as the corrupter of Western art (with a dig at Prokofiev) and urged upon the 'progressive Americans' of the conference the necessity of fighting against the reactionaries and warmongers of America and . . . and admitted that the 'mouthpiece' (Mr Shostakovich) had itself often erred and sinned against the decrees of the Party.
I sat in my seat petrified by this spectacle of human misery and degradation. It was crystal clear to me that what I had suspected from the day that I heard that Shostakovich was going to be among the delegates representing the Soviet government was true: this speech of his, this whole peace-making mission was part of a punishment, part of a ritual redemption he had to go through before he could be pardoned again. He was to tell, in person, to all the dupes in the Waldorf conference and to the whole decadent bourgeois world that loved him so much that he, Shostakovich, the famous Russian composer, is not a free man, but an obedient tool of his government. He told in effect that every time the Party found flaws in his art, the Party was right, and every time the Party put him on ice, he was grateful to the Party, because it helped him to recognize the flaws and mistakes.
After his speech I felt I had to ask him publicly a few questions. I had to do it, not in order to embarrass a wretched human being who had just given me the most flagrant example of what it is to be a composer in the Soviet Union, but because of the several thousand people that sat in the hall, because of those that perhaps still could not or did not wish to understand the sinister game that was being played before their eyes. I asked him simple factual questions concerning modern music, questions that should be of interest to all musicians. I asked him whether he, personally, the composer Shostakovich, not the delegate of Stalin's government, subscribed to the wholesale condemnation of Western music as it had been expounded daily by the Soviet press and as it appeared in the official pronouncements of the Soviet Government. I asked him whether he, personally, agreed with the condemnation of the music of Stravinsky, Schoenberg, and Hindemith. To these questions he acquiesced: 'Yes," he said, 'I completely subscribe to the views as expressed by . . . etc. . . .' When he finished answering my questions the dupes in the audience gave him a new and prolonged ovation.
Another theme raised repeatedly during their American visit [22 Oct - 21 Nov 1959], according to an account attributed jointly to Shostakovich and Khrennikov, was the Soviet attitude toward dodecaphony, with the (preposterous, so they claimed) allegations that not only was it not performed in the Soviet Union but Soviet composers were officially forbidden to compose dodecaphonic music and, therefore, were denied artistic freedom. The opening of channels for cultural exchange had ushered in a new era of cultural competition. On his return from Italy and France the previous year, Shostakovich had reported that "the leading French masters are deeply troubled about the future of music in the West. They are troubled by the dissemination of false 'avant-garde' trends — like the notorious dodecaphony or 'concrete music' — among their youth. This still-born art gains no recognition from the broad public, it attests to the ideological impasse, the crisis of bourgeois culture." Such phrases, coupled with tributes to the adherents of genuinely "progressive" music responsive to the needs of the broad listening public, figured increasingly in Shostakovich's lexicon, as mouthpiece of official Soviet aesthetic policy.
In an interview given to a Polish journalist during the Warsaw Autumn Festival but published subsequently in Sovetskaya muzyka, Shostakovich preached at length of the perils of dodecaphony, which he felt had unreasonably monopolized the programs of the festival:Quote from: Dmitri DmitriyevichI am firmly convinced that in music, as in every other human endeavor, it is always necessary to seek new paths. But it seems to me that those who see these new paths in dodecaphony are seriously deluding themselves. The narrow dogmatism of this artificially invented system rigidly fetters the creative imagination of composers and deprives them of individuality. It is no accident that in the entire legacy of Schoenberg's dodecaphonic system there is not a single work that has gained wide acceptance.... Dodecaphony not only has no future, it doesn't even have a present. It is just a "fad" that is already passing.
Soviet music, he asserted by contrast, was evaluated not by its degree of experimentation or by its deviation from tonality but by whether it was good, that is, whether it was rich in substance and artistically consummate.
This is not the place to debate the Soviet failure to acknowledge the aesthetic "inevitability" of the Second Viennese School and Serialism. In hindsight, the stance, though dogmatic, seems considerably less wrong-headed and regressive than it was thought to be in the West. At least in Shostakovich's case, it should not be assumed that he was ignorant of the musical styles he was condemning. Nor can it be taken for granted that the official line he was obliged to toe was completely alien to his real preferences and convictions. Shostakovich was an exceptionally sensitive and literate musician. In Warsaw, in America, and on his frequent foreign jaunts, he was provided with ample opportunity to meet composers, listen to their music, and assess the international picture. He stocked up on recordings whenever he traveled.
His son Maxim has recalled that scores sent by composers or musical organizations could always be found in their home and that Boulez's Le marteau sans maître, the late works of Stravinsky, and a couple of pieces by Xenakis were among the works he admired. In March 1959, as it happens, Shostakovich presented his old friend Shebalin with a score of Le marteau for his birthday. Denisov recorded in a diary entry for 1957 Shostakovich's private comments about his dislike of the music of Schoenberg and his feeling that Messiaen's Trois petites liturgies were rather saccharine. After having been singled out in one of Shostakovich's speeches as the "arch-representative of 'decadent capitalist culture,'" Karlheinz Stockhausen subsequently received a private letter from the composer professing admiration for his music and encouraging him to visit. Still, if his tastes in music were more catholic than his sometimes strident rhetoric might suggest, Shostakovich nonetheless favored more conservative contemporary idioms, the music of Benjamin Britten, for instance. His distaste for dry, inepressive music and his opposition to composition by rational system of mathematical formula were genuine. Direct engagement with his listener, the need to connect through his music with ordinary people remained a central concern for Shostakovich.
Critics remarked on the novelty in form, language, and technical means in the new quartet [the Twelfth], on the composer's unique ability to remain himself while exploring new horizons. There was, indeed, a great deal here that was new and unexpected for Shostakovich's music, not least of which was the considerable dependence on twelve-tone rows for its thematic material, within a broadly tonal context. This was not the cutting edge in Soviet music. Though revered as its elder statesman, a living legend, by now Shostakovich was no longer seen as a pioneer. From the late 1950s through the years of official bluster by the leadership of the Union of Composers—including Shostakovich himself—proclaiming the dangers of dodecaphony and alien avant-garde styles, genuine interest among Soviet musicians in the contemporary trends filtering in from the West had increased steadily, especially among young composers and performers. So had the volume of homegrown "experimental" scores. Shostakovich was not oblivious to these developments. Composer Nilolai Karetnikov even credited him with lending his support and authority to overcome the resistance of the orchestra of the Bolshoi Theatre, one of the most conservative bastions of musical tradition, to the staging of Karetnikov's twelve-tone ballet score, Vanina Vanini in 1962.
Shostakovich's adaptation of aspects of twelve-tone writing was not an aesthetic volte-face. Isolated examples of twelve-tone rows had already appeared in Seven Verses of A. Blok and in the Second Violin Concerto. His propensity for chromatic melody writing was longstanding. Queried by Tsyganov about the serial elements in his Twelfth Quartet, the composer is said to have commented: "They can also be found in Mozart." In an interview concerning young composers that appeared just before the Twelfth Quartet received its initial screening, Shostakovich's comments highlighted the consistency of his present practice with his lifelong principles:Quote from: Dmitri DmitriyevichAs far as the use of strictly technical devices from such musical "systems" as dodecaphony or aleatory is concerned ... everything in good measure. If, let's say, a composer sets himself the obligatory task of writing dodecaphonic music, then he artificially limits his his possibilities, his ideas. The use of elements from these complex systems is fully justified if it is dictated by the concept of the composition.... You know, to a certain extent I think the formula "the end justifies the means" is valid in music. All means? All of them, if they contribute to the end objective.
Found a wonderful 11th Tocsin: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HYSNJr4-1kk (Jang Yun-Sung/ KBS Symphony Orchestra)
Are both the same recordings?
Thanks for the link. The actual Tocsin was a bit fast for my taste, and I could barely hear the "bell" (in-ear, plain-vanilla headphones).Too fast - I think you mean from 14:00 onwards.. Yes, true. Haitink is slower here and he used my favourite timing.
I just wish the 'I-want-to-shout-bravo-first-or-clap-as-soon-as-the-sound-stops' guy would have waited for a few more seconds. >:(Oh yes, what a coward. I thought "Where is the asian restraint"?
Yes.
The first image is the reissue.
Looking forward to the next installment of the Petrenko recordings of Shostakovich's symphonies, coming out March 29th:A quick look on Amazon reveals, he already did the big tunes, 5 and 8-11. Usually I like Sanderling/Berlin - slower tempi-, in case of 11 Haitink/Concertgebouw. Is there a reason why I should try Petrenko? TIA.
A quick look on Amazon reveals, he already did the big tunes, 5 and 8-11.
Looking forward to the next installment of the Petrenko recordings of Shostakovich's symphonies, coming out March 29th:Hmm, I've already seen the CD in Saturn, Dortmund (http://www2.saturn.de/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/main?storeId=16572&catalogId=20106&langId=-3&ok=T_MYOUTLET&uk=S_DATA), but didn't buy.
But, wait a minute . . . that means that Nos. 4 & 7 are yet to be released. I'm not surprised that these were not in the 'first wave': they are pieces for which excellence of execution depends greatly on how well the orchestra trusts the conductor, and the degree to which the conductor understands the demands he can make of the band.
Here you can see the list on 34 films which music he composed for. You can also watch 23 public-domain vids and 2 ones with Japanese subscriptions.
People. Shostakovich as a part of the GMG username is NOT mandatory here. Just wanted to let you know ;)
Philoctetes Dmitriyevich Shostakovich would be fine.
Best regards,
a jackass.
I guess I could call myself David W. Joseph Haydn. :D
Did Kurt Sanderling ever conduct Symphony No. 11 and is it available on CD?
I think everyone knows who you are. I don't think anyone comes close to having as many posts as you. :-*
Karl has 10x the post count. He is our prolific poster. :)
BTW, the Jansons cycle was mostly disappointing, but I do very much like his discs of 1/15 and 9/10. Pick them up if they become available separately.
Good luck finding this thread if you search by "Shostakovich"...I find the thread best if a) I'm being on top forum level and b) search for "dmitri".
Good luck finding this thread if you search by "Shostakovich"...
I find the thread best if a) I'm being on top forum level and b) search for "dmitri".Searching dmitri didn't work for me :(
Not much experience with Janssons, because in my favourite Symphonies I prefer Sanderling (1,5,8,15), Karajan (10) and Haitink (11). I've got Janssons 4th, but the 4th itself is yet to be cracked by me.
But my god it's a long bloody symphony - or sounds that way, having no structure I can discern. I looked through some different CD liner notes and got no clue from them.Exactly my problem. I'm sure understanding of the structure and pleasure will come with repeated listenings, so the 4th will require time - more than other symphonies of his. Currently I could only enjoy the mysterious and frightening finale of the 4th... Shostakovich was so good at movements endings... (Why wasn't Bruckner?...) The 4th requires so much time which I cannot afford currently... So until July I'll play his 11th and 10th back and forth, and his 8th SQ :)
One listening group at a time Karl. :D
July? What if we do a Listener Group on the Fourth in June?I'll not be part of it because I introduce an IT System which has to be finished until 06-30 with spare time already. I'm already lagging with my clarinet exercises :( Or maybe, at a weekend?! Hmm. Hmm. Hmm. Where's the listening group thread?
I'll not be part of it because I introduce an IT System which has to be finished until 06-30 with spare time already. I'm already lagging with my clarinet exercises :(
All right, we'll set it for July; don't want to leave you out![DSCH 4/Listening group]
All right, we'll set it for July; don't want to leave you out!
You still in, Davey?
(Should think of something else for June . . . .)
[DSCH 4/Listening group]
If in July, I'm in. It's a welcome reason to listen to #4 properly. Is there a dedicated thread? Rules? Etc.?
OT, buddy! ; )
Overtime? ;)
OT=MI (More Interesting, not Mirror Image)
STRING QUARTETS
The Borodins [yaddayaddayadda] have made three recordings of the complete cycle.
The latter was written in 1960 but inspired by the firebombing of Dresden, a disaster that was also a source for Strauss's Metamorphosen. Unlike Metamorphosen, however, this is a bleak creation that offers no sense of hope or reconciliation.
I've never been mad for the "chamber symphonies." I'm inclined simply to listen to the source quartets.
I've never been mad for the "chamber symphonies." I'm inclined simply to listen to the source quartets.
Well, the symphonies are perfect for me, as the sound of the string quartet (or similar group) has never sat well upon my ears. Too shrill, too timbrally monotonous.
I bought these two Shostakovich operas last night:
(http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B002N4DZ44.01.L.jpg)
A friend who's writing her master's dissertation on Lady Macbeth played me a few YouTube clips of highlights from the opera, and they were absolutely riveting. I remember especially a scene where a drunk peasant finds a body, being written and played as if the score and musicians were all on fire. Truly a wild, electric opera if those highlights were indicative. I have my eyes on that CD.
The Petrenko 10th has landed (on my doormat). I'll spin it sometime between now and tomorrow afternoon, and report back.
http://www.quartets.de/
A website dedicated to the string quartets of Shostakovich. A cursory glance at the write-ups seems to suggest a slightly technical discussion of the works, but I'm sure that a layman can pick up a thing or two also.
So far, do you have a particular favourite among Shostakovich's quartets, Nav?
I browsed that book once, it sort of rubbed me mildly the wrong way for some reason(s) or other . . . .
Karl Henning...have you heard Rozhdestvensky's recording of The Bolt?might work...
I've not.
I . . . might almost say that I prefer a fan who writes well to, oh, any number of real music critics ; )
Have anyone heard any of these?
The Järvi 10th is really good - one of the best versions I've heard.
The Fourth is recorded in too reverberant a space, so that too many passages are rather muddy. Easily the worst recording of the symphony that I've heard.Was that one of the ones recorded in Glasgow City Hall? It was an acoustic nightmare when I lived in Glasgow in the mid-to-late 90s, though I read that it's had a major refurbishment since then.
Aye, that's the venue, EdwardRandom Glasgow City Hall trivia: I was told by one of the orchestra players that when the BBC Scottish Symphony did Nielsen's 5th there in the '90s, they had to place the side-drummer on a balcony far above the orchestra to make sure it cut clearly enough through the aural mess in the hall.
The Fourth is recorded in too reverberant a space, so that too many passages are rather muddy. Easily the worst recording of the symphony that I've heard.
I do not own any Chandos Shostakovich. I own the DG 11th. I was very unhappy with this performance so, I never bothered getting any more of his Shostakovich. Prokofiev is another story. .
I've never been too impressed with Jarvi's DG recordings for some reason, but I think apart of this comes from his usual choice of orchestra for this label: the Gothenburg Symphony, which lack a certain rawness I like in Shostakovich.
[/quote
The only set I own is by Kondrachine w/ Orch Philarmonique de Moscow on Melodia U.S.S. R. I do own many of his symphonies by Bernstein, Ormandy, Jansons and Wigglesworth....I never felt Jarvi had that rawness,
which he didn't need in Prokofiev.....
The only set I own is by Kondrashin w/ Orch Philarmonique de Moscow on Melodia U.S.S. R. I do own many of his symphonies by Bernstein, Ormandy, Jansons and Wigglesworth....I never felt Jarvi had that rawness, which he didn't need in Prokofiev.....
his usual choice of orchestra for this label: the Gothenburg Symphony
...which were his "usual choice" because he was their Chief Conductor for many, many years.
What does everybody think of the Haitink set?
I've heard several of the performances in the set. The 8th is a powerful and relentless performance, with awesome playing by the Conc'bouw. The 15th is also very good. The 5th is pretty good, but middle-of-the-road. I can't recall hearing anything else, but the set as a whole seems to get mostly positive reviews.Agreed regarding the 15th; it's a very fine performance, as is the 14th if you can deal with Fischer-Dieskau barking his way through his vocal parts. Generally, what I've heard I would describe as very well-executed, sympathetic mainstream readings. Whether the listener prefers their Shostakovich in this manner or, say, the approach of a Kondrashin, is likely to come down to individual preference, I think.
I like the Seventh and Thirteenth in the Haitink cycle, as well.
What does everybody think of the Haitink set?
(http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B000F3T7RO.01.L.jpg)
It has been a few years since I listened to this set. I can't remember the pros/cons of it. I'm thinking about digging it back out, what do you think I should listen to first or what, in your opinion, is one of the better performances of the set?
John,
Have you heard any Jansons??.
You didn't ask me . . . but the Eighth, Tenth and Fifteenth are particularly outstanding in the Jansons cycle.
You didn't ask me . . . but the Eighth, Tenth and Fifteenth are particularly outstanding in the Jansons cycle.If I recall it correctly (Haven't listened to it in a while) his Thirteenth is also very good in my opinion
John,
Have you heard any Jansons??.
You didn't ask me . . . but the Eighth, Tenth and Fifteenth are particularly outstanding in the Jansons cycle.
I like the Seventh and Thirteenth in the Haitink cycle, as well.The one and only Eleventh is with Haitink. I know I've already mentioned that, but I can't resist.
Yes, I own and heard the Jansons cycle. I don't remember it though. :-[
Morning John,
I take this to mean you found nothing memorable about his conducting. Which Shostakovich symphony conductor or conductors do you remember. Can you identify them just by listening to them.
Morning Robert,
I took Sanderling, Petrenko, Rattle, and Rostropovich when I first heard them. I can recognize each of these conductors interpretations by the sound of the orchestra and by how they accent different phrases. Haitink and Jansons I seem to can't remember a note. I don't know why.
The one and only Eleventh is with Haitink. I know I've already mentioned that, but I can't resist.
Yes I understand. The one thing I hear in Haitink is his intense detail to sound....It sucks you right in......I also enjoy Rostropovich....
Forgetting the age of the recording, Stokowski give him some stiff competition...
I'm going to try and give Haitink another trial, because it has been many years since I've listened to any performance from his cycle.
John
Did you mean Jansons a trial? If you meant Haitink start with 10, 8 & 11.
No, I'm talking about Haitink. I will give these a listen, Robert. Thanks.
John
If you ever consider looking at Jansons again try his 3 7 15. I never really liked his 2 & 3 until I heard Jansons.
I have not listened to much Shostakovich, but recently heard a bit of the C minor quartet performed and liked it. Can anyone tell me what they think of the quartets in general and perhaps suggest some nice complete sets?
Love Shostakovich's string quartets. They are amazing works. Every single one of them very unique from the other.
If you ever consider looking at Jansons again try his 3 7 15. I never really liked his 2 & 3 until I heard Jansons.
String arrangements were always difficult for me, I'm preferring full orchestra over any kind of chamber like music. But that may change... That being said, I'm really into the SQ8 now, listened a lot of times to it. Which one would you recommend me to try next?
As does, Rostropovich. What a scorching performance with the LSO. He also did a good earlier one with National Symphony Orchestra on Teldec.
Shosty is a composer I never 'got'. UNTIL NOW! Here is an extract from my journal last night...music notes have been written in my journal given the absence of GMG as I've been tussling with broadband provider problems for months...(now resolved)
"...Re Music: I never got Shotakovich. I got Bruckner alright, despite his symphonic massiveness, even some conductors find Bruckner heavy going, but I got him ok. Shostakovich has always been a hard one for me, I could not sit with his difficult changing tempos and textures, something always felt jarring about his stuff. Well, tonight I laid back and listened to his 8th Symphony in full, and got it straight away. It was brilliant. His 8th is a Masterpiece. I switched on to it somewhat easier than ever, and this means more Shosty for the future! (Version was from the Rostropovich set)..."
You can't go wrong with Rostropovich in Shostakovich whether he's conducting or performing the Cello Concertos, he was dedicated to this composer's vision.
Yes. I watched a documentary a few months ago about Rostropovich. He was very close to Shosty, and Shosty likewise. It would be hard for any other conductor to get as close to an interpretation as Shosty wanted than Rostropovich. I am currently seeking Rostropovich doing the Bach Cello Concertos. If I had known about the likes of Rostropovich, Du Pre, Starker, Cassals and the like when I was learning Cello at secondary school, I would not have been so quick to 'lose' the damn Cello in favour of football...pah! :-[
You mean the Bach Cello Suites, don't you? The Bach Cello Concertos are, to put it mildly, extremely hard to locate :) (And Rostropovich's take on the Suites seems to be one of the less favored ones here at GMG.)
Almost the first recordings of Shostakovich I heard were Rostropovich conducting Symphonies 8 and 11 on LSO Live, and they remain my favorite recordings of those symphonies.
Yes. I watched a documentary a few months ago about Rostropovich. He was very close to Shosty, and Shosty likewise. It would be hard for any other conductor to get as close to an interpretation as Shosty wanted than Rostropovich.Kurt Sanderling? I prefer his recordings with Berlin Symphony Orchestra almost entirely.
Shosty is a composer I never 'got'. UNTIL NOW! Here is an extract from my journal last night...music notes have been written in my journal given the absence of GMG as I've been tussling with broadband provider problems for months...(now resolved)
"...Re Music: I never got Shotakovich. I got Bruckner alright, despite his symphonic massiveness, even some conductors find Bruckner heavy going, but I got him ok. Shostakovich has always been a hard one for me, I could not sit with his difficult changing tempos and textures, something always felt jarring about his stuff. Well, tonight I laid back and listened to his 8th Symphony in full, and got it straight away. It was brilliant. His 8th is a Masterpiece. I switched on to it somewhat easier than ever, and this means more Shosty for the future! (Version was from the Rostropovich set)..."
Kurt Sanderling? I prefer his recordings with Berlin Symphony Orchestra almost entirely.
:D
The latest development is a listening to Shosty 5 again from the Rostropovich set. It seems something went wrong all those years of avoiding Shosty. He was right when I studied him but wrong when I heard him. Now, all of a sudden, his music makes perfect sense. Couple of nights ago, the moody 5th was right on the money. It is fair to say that Shosty is now my friend, and I'll go a long way with him this year. I am concerned about the Babi Yar though. I will have to find out what Babi Yar is all about.
Oh, how I love the 5th. A wonderful symphony through and through. The Rostropovich performance is great. I own both of his recordings. The one with the LSO is especially good.
Both of the three? ;)
Whoops..you're so right, Opus. I forgot he did one on DG with the National Symphony Orchestra. I don't own this one. Is it good?
Can't say, since I haven't heard the other two.
Hmmm....looks like I won't be getting this performance any time soon as it's out-of-print and quite expensive.
I have it as a part of the 8-CD set shown below:
You should definitely listen to it as soon as possible, Karl. Have you heard this work before? The only other recording of this ballet in its complete form is on Chandos with Rozhdestvensky.
Re: John's Shostakovian Progression
John, have you heard Shosty's Symphony No. 8 yet? This is one hell of a symphony. I'm also curious as to which recordings you own or do you own a symphony cycle?
You should change your name to psychoticaboutshostakovich.
:P
You certainly couldn't be shyaboutshostakovich - and nor could I.
May I recommend kookooforkoechlin?
You certainly couldn't be shyaboutshostakovich - and nor could I.
May I recommend kookooforkoechlin?
The one I am hankerin’ for is «Новый Вавилон».
I'm real excited to hear these Wigglesworth recordings as I've heard good things about them. Anyone familar with them? Also, the film music is of particular interest to me as well.
I have Wiggle-8, 9, 12.
http://ionarts.blogspot.com/2006/01/shostakovichs-eighth-symphony.html (http://ionarts.blogspot.com/2006/01/shostakovichs-eighth-symphony.html)
Hum-ho...
I'm excited about the Wigglesworth and get a British slant on Shostakovich. I've never been too impressed with Gergiev's Shostakovich recordings, but have you heard his newer recordings on the Mariinsky label?
But then Gergiev is unpredictable... and just when you expect a dud, he comes up with a real hit.
I'm not sure if this has been asked, but what are your top 10 favorite works by Shosty?In no particular order*:
In no particular order*:
1. Symphony #10
2. Violin Concerto #1
3. Lady Macbeth of the Mstensk District
4. Cello Concerto #1
5. String Quartert #13
6. Execution of Stepin Razin
7. Piano Trio #2 in E Minor
8. Suite on Words of Michelangelo
9. Symphony #7
10. Violin Concerto #2
*Subject to Change
I'm not sure if this has been asked, but what are your top 10 favorite works by Shosty?
I have yet to listen to The Execution of Stepin Razin. I hope to change this very soon. Lady Macbeth is great. Haven't listening to Piano Trio No. 2 yet, but of Shosty's chamber works I really like his Piano Quintet. I like all of the concerti but really need to revisit the ones for cello as it's been too long since I listened to them. Symphony No. 7 is an interesting choice. I like the work but it hasn't completely won me over yet. What is it about this symphony that you enjoy?Some of my choices are changeable with other works, and sometimes are captive to what I am listening to....
Some of my choices are changeable with other works, and sometimes are captive to what I am listening to....
But the 7th, I find that the 3rd movement is one of the most beautiful movements in his music, especially with the form, sort of ABA, where the first section is very calm, beautiful, where the 2nd section is hectic.
I may be alone on this, but I love the first movement, specifically the march theme, and when it gets out of that theme. I just think there's something magical about that part, even though it is Bolero-like (Though done much better than Bolero, IMO), as it gets to the point of tension with being a bit of annoyance, there's just something I really like about that section.
And the transition between the third and fourth movements......
Yeah, I like third movement is quite beautiful I agree. The first movement is very cool and, yes, it outdoes Bolero, which I never have liked. Good to read your comments. I always found the first movement of the 6th especially moving, especially towards the end. Quite a contrast to the 5th, which is what Shosty wanted.On the Bernstein DVD of the 6th, he describes the first movement as a sort of sequel to Tchaik 6. Interesting comparison there.
On the Bernstein DVD of the 6th, he describes the first movement as a sort of sequel to Tchaik 6. Interesting comparison there.
On the Bernstein DVD of the 6th, he describes the first movement as a sort of sequel to Tchaik 6. Interesting comparison there.
String Quartet #3
Much same as Sarge's;
Neither of you like the 10th symphony!? One of the greatest symphonies of the 20th century!?! :o
Piano Concerto No.2
I can't post a top ten yet because I have yet to hear half the symphonies (still to go: 2-4, 8, 12-15)
DavidW: but choosing only ten Shosty works is so hard!
Wow, you've got a lot of listening to do then. Symphony No. 8 is an astonishing work. This should be the next symphony you hear, Brian. But I warn you, it's quite ominus and brooding, but not without it's moments of radiant light. The first movement alone contains some of the most haunting music Shostakovich has ever written.
Awesome! Good to find another symphony #8 lover. It took me awhile to crack that nut but it became one of my favorite symphonies when I did. I think Mravinsky got me into that. I like it even more than the 5th!
I like it even more than the 5th!
Hmm, I like 6, 9, and 10 more than the 5th!
I do have a complete cycle (Barshai) and V. Petrenko's 8th as well. I think I have Previn's 4th around, too.
Awesome! Good to find another symphony #8 lover. It took me awhile to crack that nut but it became one of my favorite symphonies when I did. I think Mravinsky got me into that. I like it even more than the 5th!the 8th is consistently of the rotation of what is my second favorite Shostakovich statement :D
the 8th is consistently of the rotation of what is my second favorite Shostakovich statement :D
Neither of you like the 10th symphony!? One of the greatest symphonies of the 20th century!?! :o
Awesome! Good to find another symphony #8 lover.
DavidW: but choosing only ten Shosty works is so hard!
This.
. . . I think I have Previn's 4th around, too.
True. It is much easier for me to pick, say, my two least favorite Shostakovich symphonies than pick two favorites.
I am astonied that the opening movement of the Tenth eludes you, Sarge! We can still be mates, of course . . . but I cain't figger it . . . .
I'm not sure if this has been asked, but what are your top 10 favorite works by Shosty?Very likely it has been asked :). Top 4:
. . . Why the Tenth eludes me, bores me for most of its length, is a puzzle.
...there is so much more to Shostakovich.
I've heard good things about this but am waiting for a bargain issue :(
This same orchestra recorded the chamber symphonies under Barshai, though I suspect the audio is nowhere near the current release.
Haitink+Concertgebouw are really great with Symphonies Nos. 11 (my favorite #11) and 8, but someone mentioned #5. Well, I don't like it. Especially when it comes to the endings of the first and last movement, the tempi are just - strange. Too variable, to insanely fast, also I recognized some instruments entering not exactly at the right time. No - Sanderling/BSO rocks.
So CC No. 2 is very interesting. I'd like to know a bit more about the many things going on in it, where do I start reading? :D
Thank you. I assume the Concise Grove isn't worth a damn for this kind of stuff outside of the most major composers?
My general advice with concise stuff is that it depends on your starting knowledge base, how much detail you want and how much you expect your interest to grow in the future. My recollection is that the new edition of Grove came out around ten years ago - in 20 or so volumes - but that the latest concise Grove was quite a few years before then. In other words, the latest Grove concise preceded the current full work. If you really want the concise Grove, go for it - it is reasonably priced - but be aware of the date.
There are other options for the concise approach, especially if you are happy with a Kindle edition. I bought the 5 volume Oxford history of western music for the Kindle - a bargain at around GBP30 from the UK Kindle store. Much lighter than the five volumes which come in at around 3,500 pages in print!
You can also look at individual volumes of the full Cambridge or Oxford histories - perhaps the 20th century Cambridge if you really want to read up on that period. But they tend to be print only, and not cheap. I'd really advise looking at a selection of these in a library or bookstore before investing too much cash.
Haitink+Concertgebouw are really great with Symphonies Nos. 11 (my favorite #11) and 8, but someone mentioned #5. Well, I don't like it. Especially when it comes to the endings of the first and last movement, the tempi are just - strange. Too variable, to insanely fast, also I recognized some instruments entering not exactly at the right time. No - Sanderling/BSO rocks.
That is an excellent price. I forget now just what I paid for it . . . might have been $79 incl. shipping.
That is an excellent price. I forget now just what I paid for it . . . might have been $79 incl. shipping.
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41ITXXeJpaL._SL500_AA300_.jpg)
Bought this set for $57 + shipping. A far cry from the $100+ price tag! Can't wait to hear these legendary performances!
And in terrible sound! ;)It's a Melodiya recording: can't expect anything else. ;)
And in terrible sound! ;)
I have the Venezia issue, which I think is now OOP.
Well it's my ninth Shostakovich symphony cycle. Kondrashin and Rozhdestvensky were the ones I was missing. Now, I'm only missing one. 8)With those two, I'd say you might have saved (performance-wise; most definitely not sonically) the best for last.
With those two, I'd say you might have saved (performance-wise; most definitely not sonically) the best for last.
With those two, I'd say you might have saved (performance-wise; most definitely not sonically) the best for last.
I'm afraid I found Rozhdestvensky's cycle strangely underwhelming for the most part. Not as hardbitten as Kondrashin, that's for sure.
What cycles do you own, eyeresist?
Kondrashin
Mravinsky (incomplete)
Jansons
Barshai
Rozhdestvensky
Slovak (it was cheap!)
- in order of preference. I think that's all of them. I always give preference to the Russians.
I know Haitink has a good reputation in this music, but based on my limited experience he is not for me. I have a disc of him in the 5th and 9th - great playing and sound, but I felt the 5th lacked drive. I just want something more manic, more hysterical, more tasteless in these symphonies (the other works are a separate case). Is this a limited view? Maybe....
I will acquire further cycles when the opportunity presents.
I listened to some of Jansons's cycle last week and it almost made me want to throw the box set through the window! I really hate that cycle. I got it for free so I can't complain, but still I mean talk about uninspired....
Haitink's 8th and 11th are some of the best around IMHO. I also really dig his 2nd and 6th. I agree that his 5th isn't that great, especially after hearing Bernstein's 1979 performance with the New York Philharmonic. Haitink sounds uninspired by comparison. Yes, I think just hearing Haitink's 5th and 9th gives you a limited view of his overall cycle especially considering those are two of the weakest performances of the whole cycle.
I listened to some of Jansons's cycle last week and it almost made me want to throw the box set through the window! I really hate that cycle. I got it for free so I can't complain, but still I mean talk about uninspired....
It's a Melodiya recording: can't expect anything else. ;)
. . . I just want something more manic, more hysterical, more tasteless in these symphonies . . . .
Oh, feel free to complain, it's what we're here for :D
Yes, I think this set was discussed earlier, which I guess convinced you to get it. As I said then, I thought 1, 9, 10 and 15 were good, but the rest insipid. Maybe give the numbers I mentioned another go some time (unless they were the ones you especially hated).
Wait! Ill be in Atlanta in 2 weeks, then you can throw it out of the window!!! I'll catch it!! ;D
Yes, that Tenth with the Phila Orchestra is one of my favorite recordings of the piece, John.
:P
The only problem is I don't live in Atlanta, Greg. I just use Atlanta as a point of reference when somebody from out of state or in another country asks me where I'm from. I'm actually 45 miles NE of Atlanta.
:P
The only problem is I don't live in Atlanta, Greg. I just use Atlanta as a point of reference when somebody from out of state or in another country asks me where I'm from. I'm actually 45 miles NE of Atlanta.
Well, some day you'll meet in the middle and hear some live Henningmusick.
And same here, I'll be in Tyrone, GA which is about 25 miles south of ATL.
I like aquaria, sounds like fun even if Greg is not really a sock monkey . . . .
Bought this (Gergiev, 5 CD set) for $29 + shipping through Arkivmusic (first time using their site):
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-fQnm-r7zLX8/Tfjq4MJUJcI/AAAAAAAAB00/9Lomb5fWkpc/s1600/Front%252843%2529.jpg)
I'm not a big Gergiev fan, as everybody knows, but I couldn't pass on this great offer.
I have that series in the form of the original issues (as well as the Maryiinsky DSCH recordings), and the Fourth (which was both the first of the series I purchased and the first recording of the Fourth I ever heard) remains a particular favorite of mine. I would in fact say it's the best performance in this set (his recording of the 11th is also good, but that's in the Maryiinsky series).
This is good to hear, Jeffrey. I've heard many negative things about Gergiev's Mariinsky Shostakovich recordings. I'm typically not a fan of Gergiev's approach to music these days, but I have been finding myself enjoying his earlier recordings more and more. I think his approach was broader in his earlier days. I look forward to hearing this set.I do like Gergiev's recording of The Nose though.
I do like Gergiev's recording of The Nose though.
I also generally prefer him in operatic music anyways.
I should have been more specific. Yes, his recording of The Nose was very good.I feel his operatic attempts are much stronger than his symphonic side in general though, in my opinion of course
I feel his operatic attempts are much stronger than his symphonic side in general though, in my opinion of course
This is good to hear, Jeffrey. I've heard many negative things about Gergiev's Mariinsky Shostakovich recordings. I'm typically not a fan of Gergiev's approach to music these days, but I have been finding myself enjoying his earlier recordings more and more. I think his approach was broader in his earlier days. I look forward to hearing this set.
just to clarify: while I like the Mariinsky recordings (The Nose is in transit to me now), I still prefer the Rostropovich/LSO Live as the best I've heard for the 11th. It's the performances of 2 and 3 that I think may qualify as the best performances of those works.
Haitink's 8th and 11th are some of the best around IMHO. I also really dig his 2nd and 6th. I agree that his 5th isn't that great, especially after hearing Bernstein's 1979 performance with the New York Philharmonic. Haitink sounds uninspired by comparison. Yes, I think just hearing Haitink's 5th and 9th gives you a limited view of his overall cycle especially considering those are two of the weakest performances of the whole cycle.
just wanted to observe that (a) I don't believe that Shostakovich is at all well served with a tasteless interpretational bent, and (b) "more manic, more hysterical, more tasteless" is just exactly what he was not trying to achieve with the Fifth, as it is just exactly what would have got him packed onto a cattle car headed east into Siberia.
If you've not noted afore, I am profoundly out of sympathy with any demand for lurid Shostakovich interpretation. Strikes me as little better than voyeurism. YMMV . . . .
Mravinsky is sometimes accused of political cowardice or even personal betrayal for the fact that he didn't conduct the premiere of Shostakovich's 13th symphony. As is usual in these cases, there is no evidence to back these accusations. Nonetheless, I've been wondering over the years why Mravinsky didn't conduct the work.
I had theorised that Mrav had a personal aversion to choral work: the single choral work in his discography is Shosty's Song of the Forest, which Mrav premiered and recorded in 1949.
More recently I became curious about the chronology of the premiers and noticed that while Mrav conducted the first 12th in October 1961, the belated first performance of the 4th was given in December of that same year, not by Mrav but by Kondrashin. Since Mrav had conducted all but two premiers (7 and 11) since and including the 5th, is it possible he was angry at being overlooked for this important event, and refused the 13th for this reason?
Gregor Tassie, author of only english language Mravinsky biography (which I haven't read) argues in an article in Gramophone that the reason was purely personal, namely that Mravinsky's wife was on her death bed at that time and that Mravinsky hasn't conducted much at all, let alone premieres of new pieces, even canceled some tours.This is very interesting, thank you.
Is any of these views correct I have no idea.
That's also something I noticed, lack of recordings of choral music is very prominent in Mravinsky's discography. But then I run across some of his concert listings on some Russian site. How much are those correct I can't tell but they do list a number of choral pieces he performed, including Beethoven's 9th and Missa Solemnis, Berlioz Requiem, Prokofiev's Nevsky.
Sure, London Treasury US-New York pressings are pretty miserable. And yeah, there are much better modern recordings of the London FFF albums that I have on CD. The Karajan was a straight DDD so that was an easy transfer to CD. Still, I will love these records!
Kertesz and Shostys 5th? That sounds very interesting indeed. I'd love to hear the Largo from that!
Could you link to that site of Mrav's live performances? I'd like to know if he ever conducted the 4th (no recording exists as far as I know).
Sure, but it's in Cyrillic
http://www.mravinsky.org/pages/op-list.htm
I wrote down some:
http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,11288.msg280443.html#msg280443
Many thanks, Drasko! According to the site (translated by Google), composers Mrav performed included A. Stomachs and M. Deaf.
So, is this any good?
So, is this any good?
Since this thread gets a lot of traffic I have to post this, for those Shostakovich fans out there that don't own the Kondrashin box, now here's your chance to buy for $58 with free shipping if you have an account with Amazon:
http://www.amazon.com/Shostakovich-Complete-Symphonies-Dmitry/dp/B000IONEZG/ref=sr_1_12?s=music&ie=UTF8&qid=1330121957&sr=1-12
This is an incredible deal since this set is going for $134 under another listing on Amazon. Don't hesitate to buy this set!
Yes, so far, but I've only read the first chapter. I don't own this edition, I own the original.
Very good. In fact, I consider it obligatory reading.
Separately: no interest in the review of a live performance of the Fifth? That's all right, of course … but surprises me a touch.
The new edition is certainly value added.
Sure. They do unload outdated editions at a pittance. (Games Publishers Play)
Sure, ask while I'm a 6-hr flight from home ; )
Separately: no interest in the review of a live performance of the Fifth? That's all right, of course … but surprises me a touch.[/font]I'll read it, but I'm also jealous - except the First I've never heard/seen a Shostakovich Symphony performed live. I hopefully will see and listen to #4,5,7,8,9,10,11,15... one day.
I'll read it, but I'm also jealous - except the First I've never heard/seen a Shostakovich Symphony performed live. I hopefully will see and listen to #4,5,7,8,9,10,11,15... one day.
I hopefully will see and listen to #4,5,7,8,9,10,11,15... one day.YES YES YES!!! Symphony #5 pretty close to where I live in MAY! OMFG! I WILL BE THERE!!! Plus Tchaikovsky #4 - I love the Andantino so much.[1] EXCELLENT! http://www.duisburger-philharmoniker.de/Konzerte/triumph-des-lebens/
YES YES YES!!! Symphony #5 pretty close to where I live in MAY! OMFG! I WILL BE THERE!!! Plus Tchaikovsky #4 - I love the Andantino so much.[1] EXCELLENT! http://www.duisburger-philharmoniker.de/Konzerte/triumph-des-lebens/
It's always difficult for me to find concerts of specific composers, I don't know of any german web site who has information and the possibility to search for all the concert action that's taking place in germany.
[1] Just having the idea to play it on the clarinet - it's so beautiful.
Can anyone tell me what the timings are for the Borodins in the middle movement of the string quartet No. 5? I was just listening to my new Shostakovich Quartet recording, and their take on this andante really did not seem slow enough (8:39). Thanks for any help.- 8:11 in the Chandos cycle
- 8:11 in the Chandos cycle
- 9:06 in the Melodiya cycle
Shostakovich is one of my absolute favourite russian composers, I've loved his music since I listened to the 1st movement of Piano Concerto No.2 on Fantasia 2000. :)
His music is extremely powerful, passionate and thrilling, with sharp contrasts, but also rich of beauty and chromaticism; I think it can fully express that poetical tragedy of the russian spirit, with its great expressive strenght, wonderful harmony and the colourful orchestration, absolutely brilliant and moving.
Piano Concerto No.2 was my favourite Shostakovich's piece for much time, now his symphonies are my favourite works (especially No.5, No.7, No.9, No.10, No.11, No.12 and No.13); other Shostakovich's compositions I love include the Piano Concerto No.1, Violin and Cello Concertos, the String Quartets and 24 Preludes and Fugues.
Read Testiment about three times.Testimony. A waste of time.
Well said, Ilaria. :) I agree with everything you said. I think the more time a listener spends with Shostakovich, the more rewards the listener will receive because his music is just so personal and tragic. Have you heard The Golden Age yet?
Shostakovich is one of my absolute favourite russian composers, I've loved his music since I listened to the 1st movement of Piano Concerto No.2 on Fantasia 2000. :)
His music is extremely powerful, passionate and thrilling, with sharp contrasts, but also rich of beauty and chromaticism; I think it can fully express that poetical tragedy of the russian spirit, with its great expressive strenght, wonderful harmony and the colourful orchestration, absolutely brilliant and moving.
Piano Concerto No.2 was my favourite Shostakovich's piece for much time, now his symphonies are my favourite works (especially No.5, No.7, No.9, No.10, No.11, No.12 and No.13); other Shostakovich's compositions I love include the Piano Concerto No.1, Violin and Cello Concertos, the String Quartets and 24 Preludes and Fugues.
You certainly want to make the acquaintance of the e minor piano trio, Ilaria!
Thanks, John :) I'm afraid not, I've heard just excerpts from the ballet; but I would really like to buy the complete work, it sounds so amazing! I saw both Serebrier and Rozhdestvensky recorded the ballet, but is there any other recording though?
You certainly want to make the acquaintance of the e minor piano trio, Ilaria!Yes, a superb piece, that one.
There are three complete recordings of The Golden Age: Rozhdestvensky/Royal Stockholm, Simonov/Bolshoi, and Serebrier/RSNO. The best one is Serebrier IMHO. I think Serebrier has the better orchestra and the audio quality is great. It can also be bought a lot cheaper than the other two recordings which are more or less full-priced.
It sounds great, thanks for the feedback, John :)
The 8th string quartet has such a memorable tune that I can still recall it with ease.
A fact which, I should think, comes close to ranking the piece with the Beethoven Fifth Symphony.
A fact which, I should think, comes close to ranking the piece with the Beethoven Fifth Symphony.
Gergiev's Munich Shostakovich - Symphonies 6 & 10
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-8lfTdFUMcVU/T60Y5FAzGjI/AAAAAAAAB-s/UK2Yc3JAXF4/s400/Shostakovich_Cycle_Gergiev_.png)
http://ionarts.blogspot.com/2012/05/gergievs-munich-shostakovich-symphonies.html (http://ionarts.blogspot.com/2012/05/gergievs-munich-shostakovich-symphonies.html)
sounds like, yet again, he did a better job in concert than in the recording studio.
The Clevelanders will be doing the 10th here in Miami with Welser-Most next year.
And, relative to DSCH, I gave a first listen to the Petrenko recording of 2 and 15 this afternoon; it seems to keep to the high quality of the earlier issues in that series. Just have to cross our fingers that he completes the cycle for EMI if he doesn't do it for Naxos.
Testimony. A waste of time.
Why? Is Volkov a fraud? I heard a lot of favorable opinions about him, but certain people feel he was cashing in on a famous biography.
Why? Is Volkov a fraud? I heard a lot of favorable opinions about him, but certain people feel he was cashing in on a famous biography.
Volkov and 'Testimony'
During interviews, I am often asked about the veracity of the book "Testimony" by Solomon Volkov, published as Shostakovich's memoirs. Here is what I think.
Mr. Volkov worked for Sovetskaya Muzyka magazine, where Shostakovich was a member of the editorial board. As a favor to Boris Tishchenko, his pupil and colleague, Shostakovich agreed to be interviewed by Mr. Volkov, whom he knew little about, for an article to be published in Sovetskaya Muzyka. There were three interviews; each lasted two to two and a half hours, no longer, since Shostakovich grew tired of extensive chat and lost interest in the conversation. Two of the interviews were held in the presence of Mr. Tishchenko. The interviews were not taped.
Mr. Volkov arrived at the second interview with a camera (Mr. Volkov's wife, a professional photographer, always took pictures of Mr. Volkov with anyone who might become useful in the future) and asked Mr. Tishchenko and me to take pictures "as a keepsake." He brought a photograph to the third interview and asked Shostakovich to sign it. Shostakovich wrote his usual words: "To dear Solomon Maseyevich Volkov, in fond remembrance. D. Shostakovich 13.XI.1974." Then, as if sensing something amiss, he asked for the photograph back and, according to Mr. Volkov himself, added: "In memory of our talks on Glazunov, Zoshchenko and Meyerhold. D. Sh."
That was a list of the topics covered during the interviews. It shows that the conversation was about musical and literary life in prewar Leningrad (now St. Petersburg) and nothing more. Some time later, Mr. Volkov brought Shostakovich a typed version of their conversations and asked him to sign every page at the bottom. It was a thin sheaf of papers, and Shostakovich, presuming he was going to see the proof sheets, did not read them. I came into Shostakovich's study as he was standing at his desk signing those pages without reading them. Mr. Volkov took the pages and left.
I asked Shostakovich why he had been signing every page, as it seemed unusual. He replied that Mr. Volkov had told him about some new censorship rules according to which his material would not be accepted by the publishers without a signature. I later learned that Mr. Volkov had already applied for an exit visa to leave the country and was planning to use that material as soon as he was abroad.
Soon after that, Shostakovich died, and Mr. Volkov put his plans into further action.
Mr. Volkov had told a lot of people about those pages, boasting his journalist's luck. This threatened to complicate his exit. It seems that he managed to contrive an audience with Enrico Berlinguer, secretary of the Italian Communist Party, who happened to be visiting Moscow, showed him the photograph signed by Shostakovich and complained that he, Mr. Volkov, a friend of Shostakovich's, was not allowed to leave the country for political reasons. In any case, an article about Mr. Volkov and the same photograph appeared in the Italian Communist newspaper La Stampa. Apparently, it did the trick.
I met Mr. Volkov at a concert and asked him to come and see me (but without his wife, as he had wanted) and leave me a copy of the material he had, which was unauthorized (since it had never been read by Shostakovich). Mr. Volkov replied that the material had already been sent abroad, and if Mr. Volkov was not allowed to leave, the material would be published with additions. He soon left the country, and I never saw him again.
Later on, I read in a booklet that came with the phonograph record of the opera "Lady Macbeth of the Mtsensk District" conducted by Mstislav Rostropovich, which was released abroad, that Mr. Volkov was Shostakovich's assistant with whom he had written his memoirs. Elsewhere I read that when Shostakovich was at home alone, he would phone Mr. Volkov and they would see each other in secret.
Only someone with rich fantasy could invent something like that; it was not true, if only because at that time Shostakovich was very ill and was never left on his own. And we lived outside Moscow at the dacha. There was no opportunity for secret meetings. Mr. Volkov's name is nowhere to be found in Shostakovich's correspondence of the time, in his letters to Isaak Glikman, for example.
Mr. Volkov found a publisher in the United States, and the advertising campaign began. Extracts from the book appeared in a German magazine and reached Russia, where at that time there was state monopoly on intellectual property. VAAP, the Soviet copyright agency, asked for verification of Shostakovich's signature. American experts confirmed its authenticity. The book was published. Each chapter of the book was preceded by words written in Shostakovich's hand: "Have read. Shostakovich."
I can vouch that this was how Shostakovich signed articles by different authors planned for publication. Such material was regularly delivered to him from Sovetskaya Muzyka magazine for review, then the material was returned to the editorial department, where Mr. Volkov was employed. Unfortunately, the American experts, who did not speak Russian, were unable and certainly had no need to correlate Shostakovich's words with the contents of the text.
As for the additions, Mr. Volkov himself told me that he had spoken to a lot of different people about Shostakovich, in particular to Lev Lebedinsky, who later became an inaccurate memoirist and with whom Shostakovich had ended all relations a long time before. A friend of Shostakovich's, Leo Arnshtam, a cinema director, saw Mr. Volkov on his request, and Arnshtam later regretted it. A story about a telephone conversation with Stalin was written from his words. All this was included in the book as though it were coming from Shostakovich himself.
The book was translated into many languages and published in a number of countries, except Russia. Mr. Volkov at first claimed that the American publishers were against the Russian edition, then that the royalties in Russia were not high enough, then that those offering to publish it in Russia were crooks and, finally, that he had sold his manuscript to a private archive and it was not available anymore. Retranslation into Russian relieves the author of responsibility and permits new liberties.
Why? Is Volkov a fraud? I heard a lot of favorable opinions about him, but certain people feel he was cashing in on a famous biography.
JLaurson recommended Barshai's recording of the 4th symphony in another thread, so I listened to it last night (I have the Brilliant box set). This is definitely one of the greats. In this admittedly meandering work, conductors too often let the music sound rote, but Barshai has obviously attended to every bar. I just wish I liked the sound of the recording a bit more....
JLaurson recommended Barshai's recording of the 4th symphony in another thread...
I did so by way of actually, really, recommending Mariss Jansons (http://ionarts.blogspot.com/2005/04/mariss-jansonss-dsch-4.html), though. :-)
Heard the finest live DSCH 5th last week -- with the 90 year old (!) and totally limber Skrowaczewski conducting the BRSO.
I own the Skrowaczewski recordings of Shosty's 1, 5, 6, and 10 with Halle Orchestra and they are all excellent performances. Much better than any of the Gergiev recordings I've heard.
When it rains, it pours. Raining Shostakovich in this case, not the most regularly performed composer in Munich, and now the fifth Symphony in as many days! And incidentally the Fifth Symphony this time – part of the regular Bavarian Radio Symphony Orchestra season with veteran conductor Polish Stanisław Skrowaczewski on the rostrum.
Stanisław Skrowaczewski is one of those fascinating cases of great, acknowledged, prize-winning, Pulitzer-nominated achievement that yet manages to remain underestimated. The one-time Nadia Boulanger student has worked with the perfectly underestimatable Hallé and Minnesota orchestras. He has recorded superb, but of course underestimated Shostakovich Symphonies (1 & 6, 5 & 10) with the former. And his is by far the best underrated Bruckner Symphony Cycle (with the Saarbrücken RSO on Oehms. Quote Skrowaczewski: "For me, Bruckner is one of the greatest composers, even though I cannot exactly say why." A man after my own heart!)...
Eyeresist asked for a debriefing after I gave a first listen to my trio of newly acquired Fourths.
Eyeresist asked for a debriefing after I gave a first listen to my trio of newly acquired Fourths.
To recap, three different recordings of the Symphony No. 4 in c minor, Op. 43
--Scottish National Orchestra, N. Jarvi cond.
--Bavarian Radio Symphony Orchestra, M. Jansons cond.
--City of Birmingham Symphony Orchestra, S. Rattle cond. (with Britten's Russian Funeral for brass and percussion as an add on)
I was least impressed by the Jarvi--did not sound as intense as the others. In part this seemed to be because of some less than first rate audio--the sound did not seem as clear as it does on the other two recordings.
Thanks for this, Jeffrey! I am still making my acquaintance with the Rattle, and (curiously) have yet to listen at all to the Jansons . . . but the Järvi truly is impossibly tubby of sound, partly a result of the over-reverberant space in which (what were they thinking?) they elected to record . . . .Good question. I never liked the acoustics in the Glasgow City Hall--depending on where you sat different frequency ranges came through either dry or muddy. I suppose the Caird Hall in Dundee (which IIRC at the time was Chandos' recording venue of preference for the RSNO) may have been booked up.
I have probably stated this before, either in this thread or in the other forum, but I just want to emphasize one of the aspects I really like in the Eight Symphony: The delayed use of the percussion instruments in the first movement.
Tangential to this: I really like how, in many of the symphonies, he starts out with ye olde string choir, both because he had such a talent for writing richly for the strings, and because as a result (as you observe here, Paul) part of the drama of the unfolding sonata design is, the entrance of other parts of the orchestra, like characters entering upon the stage.Not only strings in general, but how he also uses the low strings. Thinking especially of the 10th symphony. The atmosphere, along with the use of the higher strings in their lower positions with a more earthy sound, that it creates really sets up the clarinet when the instrument enters. The clarinet has the perfect timbre for this opening of the movement (and throughout the piece). I think it's the best opening statement he wrote, at least, in a symphony.
And: Leningrad party (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,20577.msg633676/topicseen.html#msg633676) at Bruce's! : )
There's nought wrong with the Tenth being your favorite symphony, lad! : )
I do find myself thinking continually better of the Eleventh; it helped, chancing to catch a bit of a live broadcast yesterday of the Houston Symphony playing it at Carnegie Hall under the baton of Hans Graf.
It was, and Bruce corrected me: the actual concert was something like a month ago.
Them Houstonians have a good band.It's funny, they always draw great acclaim on the road - but then, I only ever see them at Jones Hall, which is acoustically deadening. It's not a great place to see a concert.
Brian, how does the Petrenko account of the Eleventh compare, do you know? I was thinking of giving that instalment in his ongoing series a miss, but this taste of the piece as your home band gave it out has me wondering . . . .
So I've been revisiting the VCs, what spectacular works these are! I'm trying to get a better understanding of the 2nd, which obviously is late-Shostakovich as it is Op. 167. Anybody got any suggestions or thoughts that could help me understand 2nd VC better?
. . . as it is Op. 167.
Oh, not Op.167! That's impossibly high.
It's a wonderful, and wonderfully elusive, piece. Not even sure how to "pitch" such a piece. My only suggestion, John (and it may well be that others have a better) is: live with the concerto, do an intensive course with it, for a week. I didn't find it the sort of piece which I could fathom, just playing it a few times as part of a regular flood of rotation. It's a piece of surprising, compelling quietude which requires close attention.
And: it might be the leverage for you which illuminates Schnittke.
Maybe.
It's been a really long time since I've heard op 129, so I should rectify this soon. Karl's 'elusive' is of course a very good description of the piece; I'd characterize it as one of the more understated works in DSCH's late period. I could be wrong, but I seem to recall there being a few sly half-references to the violin concerto from Hindemith's Kammermusik in the piece.
As for the Schnittke comment: I'm going from memory here, but I seem to recall reading that Schnittke listed the second violin and cello concerti and the 14th quartet as amongst the Shostakovich works that meant the most to his generation of composers in the USSR. It's easy for me (at least) to see how, given the expressively ambivalent nature of all three.
. . . I'm just not as crazy about as I am Op. 77 (or 99 ???)
At this point there are enough recordings and/or concert program notes out there with the wrong number, that the error may never be completely eradicated, but yes: the First Vn Cto is Op.77.
If I was a professor of music, I would make my students remember Op. 77 NOT Op. 99!!! :DI would be the nice professor and accept both answers :P (As long as the hypothetical student labels Op. 99 as the Violin Concerto*)
The only time (thus far) that I've heard the Op.77 live, it was Repin, Masur, and our band here in Boston. Dynamite!
Jens, did I imagine it, or did you express a low opinion of Slava's account of the Op.43? I can see your point, and yet . . . and yet . . . well, I should really compose a proper paragraph or two on that . . . .
Of his Shostakovich symphonies (the complete set - largely with the NSO - is available on Teldec), I cannot recommend many when there is always an interpretation that I'd much rather hear. The early recordings are uneven, lacking in the necessary tension, and are often let down by the NSO's lack of will or ability. Any complete set I know is preferable, be it Jansons (EMI), Barshai (Brilliant), Kitajenko (Capriccio), Kondrashin (Aulos/Melodiya) or Haitkink (Decca). The LSO recordings on the orchestras' own label are better, by-and-large, but hugely overrated. His Eighth on that label, though, is a worthy contender. Slowness in that symphony is no detriment to the grim and stark atmosphere and I rate his account above Gergiev (Philips) and Wiggelsworth (BIS), alongside Barshai and Kitajenko and only marginally behind Jansons.
To keep the audience members in their seats until the end (Britten and Dutilleux are not acceptable Washington fare), Dvořák’s 8th Symphony was programmed. Possibly as good as the overplayed “From the New World,” it is a work that is easy on the ears, occasionally grandiose, rightly popular with concert-goers. Until tonight, that was. Listening to what Rostropovich did with this work was puzzling. Literally and metaphorically speaking, he turned it into the longest Dvořák symphony I ever had to sit through. Plodding along at insufferably slow speeds, he made sure that musical lines disappeared and that any sense of rhythm here or heroism there were fastidiously excised; emotional subtleties plowed under. The brass fanfare opening the last movement smacked of tin, the following strings sounded better. But the orchestra should not be blamed for this. (Except that they should not only not have looked at Rostropovich, they should have outright ignored his instructions.) Anyone to attend today, Friday, or tomorrow, Saturday, at 8PM will come away with a greater appreciation for Leonard Slatkin.
You're probably right, since i have a low opinion of most of Slava's DSCH recordings... especially the symphonies. He wasn't a good conductor and he didn't have a good orchestra and he used DSCH to further his conducting career.
Ha, just read the review of his last concert in the US, which ends on the nastiest little zinger I may have ever penned.
While I think Slava's NSO 4th is a relatively poor performance, and based on that have never been interested in listening to the rest of his NSO recordings, I have to say that his 8th and 11th on LSO Live are my favorite performances of those symphonies. They were among my first DSCH recordings, and my introductions to those symphonies, and I have yet to find a performance that equals, much less excels them (this refers to such recordings as Gergiev and Haitink but not some standards I haven't heard such as Barshai and Kondrashin).
the Volkov Finale: it's pure torture, grinning through the agony, and not everyone is going to respond to it positively. (It's the opposite of Lenny's triumphalism.) Some younger conductor's play it the same way now, so Slava has been influential.
You're probably right, since i have a low opinion of most of Slava's DSCH recordings... especially the symphonies. He wasn't a good conductor and he didn't have a good orchestra and he used DSCH to further his conducting career.
Well, and now I am curious (a) to hear the Masur-led Thirteenth (thanks especially toMiró's Sock MonkeyGreg) and (b) to revisit the Slava/NSO Thirteenth, which I am sure was the first I heard the entire piece, long ago . . . .
The only time (thus far) that I've heard the Op.77 live, it was Repin, Masur, and our band here in Boston. Dynamite!
Not the best conductor of not the best orchestra is inarguable (and something which we might observe of the Barshai set, meseems).
Just curious, are we discussing Rostropovich's physical conducting style? As in how he looked when he conducted? Or his interpretation of the music and communication with the orchestra he was conducting?
If these are my favorite recordings with the cellist Rostropovich, there are some that are worth noting where he conducts. His undeniable understanding of the music was, when coupled with outstanding collaborators, enough to overcome his limitations as a conductor. His recordings with Maxim Vengerov and the London Symphony Orchestra of the Prokofiev and Shostakovich Violin Concertos (one of each on two Telarc CDs – lest you find the European Warner/Apex re-issue with the two Shostakovich concertos extracted unto one disc) are superb for either composer – and despite ever-stiffening competition in the Shostakovich (last year alone I’ve heard excellent new recordings of Daniel Hope, Leila Josefowicz, Arabella Steinbacher, and Sergey Khachatryan) they are still the recordings to judge all others against.
Prokofiev/Rachmaninov PCs #3 (SACD)
Another double-Russian/Russian combination is very appealing: Prokofiev/Rachmaninov with Rostropovich/Pletnev. Piano Concertos No.3 of both composers make as compelling a combination as an odd one – and the excellent playing, filled with excitement and delightful accents and exclamation marks, all in stunning sound from DG, make this a most worthy traversal of both concertos, even if you already have them in other versions.
DSCH: Sy. #8 (SACD)
Of his Shostakovich symphonies (the complete set – largely with the NSO – is available on Teldec), I cannot recommend many when there is always an interpretation that I’d much rather hear. The early recordings are uneven, lacking in the necessary tension, and are often let down by the NSO’s lack of will or ability. Any complete set I know is preferable, be it Jansons (EMI), Barshai (Brilliant), Kitajenko (Capriccio), Kondrashin (Aulos/Melodiya) or Haitkink (Decca). The LSO recordings on the orchestras’ own label are better, by-and-large, but hugely overrated. His Eighth on that label, though, is a worthy contender. Slowness in that symphony is no detriment to the grim and stark atmosphere and I rate his account above Gergiev (Philips) and Wiggelsworth (BIS), alongside Barshai and Kitajenko and only marginally behind Jansons.
DSCH: Lady Macbeth
If Rostropovich had recorded nothing but Shostakovich’s Lady Macbeth of the Mtensk District, he’d have done the world of music – and the composer – a service enough to forget all the gratuitous boasting I’ve griped about before. With his wife, Galina Vishnevskaya as Katerina Izmailova, this is the recording that put the opera firmly back on the map (though still not firmly enough for the masterpiece it is) and it is the only recording you need to think of acquiring, if you are looking for Audio-only, at least. Any and all of these recordings serve his memory in the best possible way.
I bought the Masur 7th and 13th, so I'm really anxious to hear them. I heard both were great performances. I've come to really enjoy the 13th. I'm still wrapping my mind around the 14th.
As a composer, I am useless as a guide for the general listening public . . . but the Fourteenth grabbed right from the start.
from the WETA column, which seemingly has received its final death blow (http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:Jowb37ixL2MJ:www.weta.org/oldfmblog/%3Fp%3D116+&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&lr=lang_de%7Clang_en):
And (FWIW) I find Slava's Fourth thoughtfully weighed, bar by bar [....]
I think Rostropovich is just fine in Shostakovich's music. The man knew Shostakovich so who better than somebody who was friends with him conduct his music? I may share an outsider's opinion in this regard, but I can't help but admire the man and what he's done whether on the podium, onstage with cello in hand, or away from the lighted stage.
I'm friends with a few composers. You can bet they don't want me to conduct their work. ;) (But I know what you mean, obviously.)
Rediscovering how keen I am for the Thirteenth Symphony (which was one of the first I heard, back when I was a mere slip of an undergraduate). This comparative listening of the first movement is eye- and ear-opening in unforeseen ways.
Keen to do this again, and taking a deep breath, all the same:
Дмитри Дмитриевич [ Dmitri Dmitriyevich (Shostakovich) ]
Symphony № 13 « Babi Yar », Op.113
Mvt i. Babi Yar. Adagio
Nicola Ghiuselev; Men of the Choral Arts Society of Washington; National Symphony Orchestra; Slava
Sergei Leiferkus; Men of the New York Choral Artists; New York Philharmonic Orchestra: Masur
Artur Eizen; Basses of the Russian State Choral Cappella; Moscow Philharmonic Orchestra; Kondrashin (a prior acquisition)
Peter Mikulá; Male Choruses of the Prague Philharmonic Choir and of the Kühn Mixed Choruses; Prague Symphony Orchestra; Максим Дмитриевич [ Maksim Dmitriyevich (Shostakovich) ] (a prior acquisition)
So far, just the first movement, John:
So far, just the first movement, John
The back of yet another envelope . . . .
...
I’ve got to give Slava the palme d’argent here, largely for an extra degree of poetry, that musical intangible.
(http://www.brikcius.com/Images/MstislavRostropovich.conductor.jpg)
So far I'm greatly impressed with Previn's Shostakovich. Listening to his 4th performance right now.
I have singles of Previn's 4 and 5, and recall the sound being pretty harsh. Possibly you have remasters?
I bought the Masur 7th and 13th, so I'm really anxious to hear them. I heard both were great performances. I've come to really enjoy the 13th. I'm still wrapping my mind around the 14th.
Part of the temptation at BRO to which I yielded yesterday was another recording of the Fourteenth, with Kremerata Baltica, and a singleton from your well-liked Caetani cycle, John: the Ninth & Tenth. At $3.99, I couldn't ask for a better risk:reward profile ; )
Cool, Karl. Let me know your thoughts of the Caetani once you've heard it.
Yes, definitely looking forward to a second opinion on this. :)
Finished a first run through of the Fitzwilliam SQ box of the Quartets. First impression is that, other than the last CD of the set (SQs 14 and 15), I'll be reaching for my other boxes (Emerson, Mandelring) more than I will this one. The last two quartets, however, better performed than I remember from the other two cycles, although now of course I'll need to go back to those to be sure.
And I still have (possibly) tomorrow, the second installment of the Pacifica Quartet cycle in progress to listen to.
And after that I have the box of song cycles/Lady Macbeth to go through, although there are other things in the listening pile that have been waiting longer for my attention. But I haven't forgotten you, Eyeresist.
How is the Mandelring Quartet box set, Jeffrey? I own the Emerson'sand the partial cycle from the original members of the Borodin Quartet on Chandos.I'm not a big fan of SQs, but the Mandelring has had me intrigued for awhile.
Mandelring DSCH:
First Impressions and Shostakovich (http://ionarts.blogspot.com/2011/08/first-impressions-and-shostakovich.html)
Shostakovich with the Mandelring Quartett (http://ionarts.blogspot.com/2008/05/shostakovich-with-mandelring-quartett.html)
Best Recordings of 2011 (#9) (http://ionarts.blogspot.com/2011/12/best-recordings-of-2011-9.html)
Notes from the 2011 Salzburg Festival ( 18 )
Shostakovich Cycle (http://ionarts.blogspot.com/2011/09/notes-from-2011-salzburg-festival-18.html)
In summary: They are a luxury edition to your collection, easy to enjoy... and I find them highly recommendable, but I'd never suggest that they are essential to a DSCH-SQ4t collection... certainly not given the few parameters you mention. They are, however, sufficiently different from the Emersons (and very, very different from the Borodins -- whose first or second set are the touchstone -- of course). First they're not live, no applause, better sound, broadly speaking with a rounder and smoother, more emotive beauty... less cool stringency. Speckless, for better or worse.
I grew up listening to Shostakovich and knew most of his symphonies and other major works from my teens but for some reason I never listened to the Leningrad Symphony until this week. As I was listening to it I was struck by how completely unpropagandistic and unpatriotic a work it was, I was amazed, I had expected some piece of political music and instead here was a symphony that sounded pretty much like 4 and 6, grumpy, oppositional and definitely not 'soviet', with the famous war-theme depicting anything other than the Wehrmacht. (For my money 8 is much more of a war symphony, though the ending is hardly triumphant).
How did Shostakovich get away with it? I suppose his symphonies 2, 3, 11 and 12 are official works, but the rest are anything but, even 5 (which, objectively, is just as disaffected as 4, only put in a tighter form). If Shostakovich had been a poet or a novelist he would have been shot round about 1933. I'd be interested in people's thoughts on this.
How did Shostakovich get away with it?
I think he also got away with it because he was generally acknowledged to be the greatest composer in the USSR. If he was gone, who was there to fill that vacancy? As a matter of national prestige, they couldn't do away with him.
I read a good quote from writer/composer Nicolas Nabokov the other day that said:
"To me, he seemed like a trapped man, whose only wish was to be left alone, to the peace of his own art and to the tragic destiny to which he had been forced to resign himself."
That describes me too :D
Somebody asked me the other day what is about Shostakovich's music that I relate to? I would say his struggle to conform to the rigid rules of the Soviet regime. He had to find a way to be himself just like we all have to find a way to be ourself in the narrow confines of the society we live in.
Somebody asked me the other day what is about Shostakovich's music that I relate to?
Hmm. Depends what you mean by "conform". Did he want to believe, did he want to be the New Soviet Man? Or did he want to be himself, and only put up a show of conformity in order to survive?
He grew up under Soviet rule, and with symphonies 2 and 3 did appear to be reconciling himself to the dominant ideology, after a fashion. But the criticism he encountered seemed to be not really based on ideology, but upon people cynically gaming the system, casting aspersions on rivals and objects of dislike. I've read (somewhere) that Shostakovich remained to some extent a believer in the ideals of Communism, but after the Terror he must have realised that the USSR was only a travesty of these ideals.
From this, I would say the conformity of his later years was only a shield, a survival tool. But then, it is also true that the man becomes the mask he wears....
In conclusion: Dmitri was not a happy bunny.
I don't think the 9th had any sort of program. It's an exercise in contrasting moods.
Evidently, the Soviet authorities thought differently since it was a work that got Shostakovich into a lot of hot water.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symphony_No._9_(Shostakovich) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symphony_No._9_(Shostakovich))
Who am I to contradict the Politburo? 0:) The response of the New York World-Telegram is hilarious: "The Russian composer should not have expressed his feelings about the defeat of Nazism in such a childish manner". Yes, Mom!
Listening to the 9th now (Kondrashin). It reminds me of the string quartets, particularly the early ones, with its mix of folksy dance rhythms and pathos. I think it might do well in a quartet arrangement.
I don't think the 9th had any sort of program. It's an exercise in contrasting moods.
...At a symposium earlier that day, Gergiev grumbled that to ignore the humor in DSCH was to miss the point of his music entirely. That’s particularly true for the Ninth Symphony, coy and glittery and frivolously charming, with a brass section that sounds like the Keystone Kops at band-camp. Dainty ballet-girls and beer hall oompah-bands never existed in such harmonious proximity. Deliberately undercutting the mythical status that Beethoven set for a “Ninth Symphony” already made a (musical) statement in and of itself. Doing so in the summer of 1945, following the defeat of Nazi Germany and after announcements in the press had suggested a “Victory Symphony”, added another, political, dimension. Imagine collective expectations of a high-holy paean to Stalin, vanquisher of evil and preserver of the people. And then you get the symphonic equivalent of “Ding Dong the Witch is Dead.” In a place and at a time where being apolitical (never mind wrong-political) was a crime, that was strong stuff.
I find it amusing that the Soviet authorities reacted so negatively towards it. The whole work is a joke and cartoonish, but this, of course, doesn't make it any less fun to listen to. I need to revisit it. I've neglected it for too long, although it's a work I've always enjoyed.
I find it amusing that the Soviet authorities reacted so negatively towards it.
Shosty, it seems, was quite happy to drop little dittys and daft wee tunes into his major symphonic works.
(https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-sd4H9AkTX4E/T_LrQMgK52I/AAAAAAAAACQ/ZnssnvR-1wk/s576/hg.jpg)
Well, it was rather serious business, actually, and (not to seem to brow-beat you) I'm not sure amusement is quite an apt response. It would not be until Stalin had died, that Dmitri Dmitriyevich would write another symphony. In that interval, he eschewed that genre for a reason.
http://ionarts.blogspot.com/2012/05/gergievs-munich-shostakovich-symphonies_11.html (http://ionarts.blogspot.com/2012/05/gergievs-munich-shostakovich-symphonies_11.html)
I find it amusing that the Soviet authorities reacted so negatively towards it. The whole work is a joke and cartoonish, but this, of course, doesn't make it any less fun to listen to. I need to revisit it. I've neglected it for too long, although it's a work I've always enjoyed.I'm not sure it's all a joke, though. Much of the 9th may be light-hearted but my favourite performances tend to be ones that let the listener know that yes, we're having a good time, but nonetheless there's something nasty in the woodshed. (Kosler would be a prime example of this--IMO one of the great DSCH recordings.)
I'm not sure it's all a joke, though. Much of the 9th may be light-hearted but my favourite performances tend to be ones that let the listener know that yes, we're having a good time, but nonetheless there's something nasty in the woodshed. (Kosler would be a prime example of this--IMO one of the great DSCH recordings.)
Noob question:
Recommended listening order for Shostakovich's String Quartets?
I listened to them in sequence (1, 2, 3 etc..) - theres a nice progression in style and mood from somewhat playful/traditional in the early works to more serious/experimental in the later quartets. If you want to start with highlights for me that would be 8th and I also like the 15th too :)
Edit: Have you heard the Piano Trios yet? - I think you would find them appealing as well and both are very worthwhile!
Edit: Have you heard the Piano Trios yet? - I think you would find them appealing as well and both are very worthwhile!
Just no. 2. :)
I have this set which i think very highly of - it has both Piano Trios, the Quintet, Cello Sonata and a couple of String Quartets as well and is only 5 quid off the Amazon marketplace if you are interested.
I would recommend a full set of the String Quartets in future though - they are wonderful works and work exploring in full! 8)
>
I have the Emerson Quartet set of the string quartets already. :)Listen to that in order, then. No bad pieces there, and nothing composed just to please Stalin.
Noob question:
Recommended listening order for Shostakovich's String Quartets?
Hey Jens,
You mentioned in a post to me that you really enjoyed this recording:
(http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B007ZEG3Z0.01.L.jpg)
The only thing holding me back from this recording is the expensive price tag.
I did, I did... but I'll go over it again and compare to another one (Gergiev / Matsuev) that stood out of recent DSCH-PC recordings (incl. Gulda / Gramola and yet two more that don't come to mind) to see if one has a clear edge over the other.
No need to do that Jens. I see that the Matsuev/Gergiev isn't very highly recommended. O
Hmm... for what it's worth, I think it's one of the few Matsuev-and-or-Gergiev recordings that I think are quite outstanding. Also best coupling since Hamelin / Litton.
any one familiar with Gianandrea Noseda with the Danish National Symphony Orchestra and the cellist Enrico Dindo's recording of the cello concertos on Chandos? I'm thinking about getting that CD.
Haven't heard this Noseda recording but I haven't heard much feedback about it either. Anyway, I'm curious which performances do you own of Shostakovich's VCs?Venegrov/Rostropovich/LSO (Both), Oistrakh/NYPO/Mitropolous for #1, Oistrakh/Kondrashin/MPSO for #2, Hope/Maxim Shostakovich/BBC Symphony Orchestra, Khachatryan/Masur/ONF
Venegrov/Rostropovich/LSO (Both), Oistrakh/NYPO/Mitropolous for #1, Oistrakh/Kondrashin/MPSO for #2, Hope/Maxim Shostakovich/BBC Symphony Orchestra, Khachatryan/Masur/ONF
Everybody talks about how great Oistrakh's performance was and honestly I don't think much of it. I'm beginning to dislike Vengerov's approach altogether to the violin. I haven't heard Hope/M. Shostakovich yet, but I didn't like Hope's recording of Berg/Britten concerti. His tone just isn't there. Khachatryan is one of my favorites. Outstanding performance IMHO. Josefowicz/Oramo was awful. I'm beginning to dislike Mullova/Previn. Steinbacher/Nelsons, aside from the Khachatryan/Masur, is another top choice of mine. I also just listened to Batiashvili/Salonen and was incredibly impressed with it. I'll be listening to this one a lot as well.You're hard to please :P
You're hard to please :P
Well, you're probably right. I am pretty hard to please, but let's bear in mind that all of the violinists who are well-known who tackle Shosty's VCs are top-notch musicians. I may disagree with his/her interpretation, but this doesn't change my opinion of them as great musicians. They wouldn't be where they are today had they not put in the necessary work to be recognized. Like, for example, Josefowicz is a good musician, but I don't care for her style, especially in Shosty's VC No. 1. I think she's too edgy and I don't care for her tone on violin at all. The same with Mordkovitch, which is another performance I listened to recently and found distasteful. It all comes down to what you admire most in a performance. I look for 1. a collaborative effort from the soloist/conductor (i. e. both are on the same page interpretatively), 2. a warm tone from the violinist, 3. all the technical demands of the concerto to be met, and 4. both the soloist's and conductor's attention to the subtleties and details of the music.I'm currently listening to the Khachatryan/Masur, enjoying his playing, but I am not totally convinced of Masur leading the orchestra.
I'm currently listening to the Khachatryan/Masur, enjoying his playing, but I am not totally convinced of Masur leading the orchestra.
EDIT: Not sure I care for the opening of the Passacaglia. Seems far too quiet, far too polished to my ears.
I understand this as I feel this way as well. I thought more energy from Masur from the podium could have been beneficial to the performance, but I suppose we have to take what we get. I do find it a bit strange Khachatryan picked Masur as his collaborator, but I do think both of them saw eye-to-eye. What Masur may lack in energy, he makes up for in providing an eerie backdrop. I like the way Masur let Khachatryan shine and be heard. I admire that kind of egoless generosity.It seems to me that Masur takes this up as a typical violin concerto, with bursts of energy when the Khachatryan isn't doing much, but, as I said in the WAYLT thread, I find this to be more of a symphonic concerto than usual in how it is constructed, and Masur makes too much of an effort to lo let Khachatryan shine that hinders the performance.
I thought this Passacaglia was handled beautifully. It's not as heart-wrenching as say Vengerov/Rostropovich, but I just don't like Vengerov's tone and approach to the violin, which, for me, is a deal-breaker.I was merely talking about the opening of the movement, I loved Rostropovich's handling of the opening.
Well, you're probably right. I am pretty hard to please, but let's bear in mind that all of the violinists who are well-known who tackle Shosty's VCs are top-notch musicians. I may disagree with his/her interpretation, but this doesn't change my opinion of them as great musicians. They wouldn't be where they are today had they not put in the necessary work to be recognized. Like, for example, Josefowicz is a good musician, but I don't care for her style, especially in Shosty's VC No. 1. I think she's too edgy and I don't care for her tone on violin at all. The same with Mordkovitch, which is another performance I listened to recently and found distasteful. It all comes down to what you admire most in a performance. I look for 1. a collaborative effort from the soloist/conductor (i. e. both are on the same page interpretatively), 2. a warm tone from the violinist, 3. all the technical demands of the concerto to be met, and 4. both the soloist's and conductor's attention to the subtleties and details of the music.
It seems to me that Masur takes this up as a typical violin concerto, with bursts of energy when the Khachatryan isn't doing much, but, as I said in the WAYLT thread, I find this to be more of a symphonic concerto than usual in how it is constructed, and Masur makes too much of an effort to lo let Khachatryan shine that hinders the performance.
Then you're obviously not a fan of Gould/Berstein's version of Brahms piano concerto.
Here's an interesting article on concerto conducting...
http://www.nytimes.com/1988/01/10/arts/music-view-special-gift-of-concerto-conducting.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm
Not sure what this has to do with Shostakovich's Violin Concerto Nos. 1 & 2, but I haven't heard and don't want to hear the Gould/Bernstein performance of Brahms' Piano Concerto No. 1.
I actually think Masur does very well accompanying the concerti, whether live (he was here in Boston's Symphony Hall) or on the disc with Khatchatryan.I don't want to make it seem that I think he doesn't, it was merely my own thinking of what the first VC is, and some minor quibbles about the interpretation.
The first part was a joke that must have not been understood.
And the link is an interesting article on concerto conducting, which you and PaulR have filled a page here discussing, it doesn't directly reference DSCH's VCs, but it focuses on areas of soloist/conductor.
I don't want to make it seem that I think he doesn't, it was merely my own thinking of what the first VC is, and some minor quibbles about the interpretation.
Everybody talks about how great Oistrakh's performance was and honestly I don't think much of it. I'm beginning to dislike Vengerov's approach altogether to the violin. I haven't heard Hope/M. Shostakovich yet, but I didn't like Hope's recording of Berg/Britten concerti. His tone just isn't there. Khachatryan is one of my favorites. Outstanding performance IMHO. Josefowicz/Oramo was awful. I'm beginning to dislike Mullova/Previn. Steinbacher/Nelsons, aside from the Khachatryan/Masur, is another top choice of mine. I also just listened to Batiashvili/Salonen and was incredibly impressed with it. I'll be listening to this one a lot as well.
This is interesting, thanks. I agree about Oistrakh and Vengerov - Oistrakh has a lot of cred but I've never heard him really dig into the music. Vengerov's vibrato and timbre nauseate me - I don't know how anyone else can stand it! The little I've heard of Mullova I didn't like either - too hard-toned and insensitive. I don't know if you have the Sitkovetsky set of Shost and Prok violin concertos - he's okay but too reticent and lacklustre. I do appreciate that he's not trying to overpower the music, but he goes too far the other way.
So I think I will have to look into Khachatryan, Steinbacher, and Batiashvili.
*Lopes off to Amazon.*
Very good ear. Shostakovich's 2nd and 3rd are generally regarded as his weakest symphonies. They're almost nothing in the world but propaganda works. Like of today's radio jingle for example. They're trying to sell something [....]
There is the fact that the composer himself had his son promise that he would never conduct those works. (A promise which Maksim Dmitriyevich has obviously broken, in the interests of keeping deeper artistic faith with his dad.) On the face of it, this appears like the composer “disowning” the musical objects. I think the sounder argument is, that long experience had embittered him to the Party, that this experience made all of his (necessary, to at least some reasonable degree) apparent compromises over the years loathsome to him. He may well have been sharply critical, at that later date, of his apparent naïveté in ‘playing along’ in that earlier epoch; and if I remember the timing correctly, at the time of that conversation with his son, he may well have rued his apparent ‘cave-in’ in the 60s, when he at last actually joined the Party.
The other aspect of the Second and Third Symphonies which my ears treasure are, they are an important part of the limited view we have of the precocious talent to which Shostakovich gave rein before the necessity of self-policing came into force, after the notorious Pravda editorial.
Karl, you made a good post, but it doesn't change my view of the works too much. I understand you're trying to defend music you like which there's nothing wrong with that.
Thanks, John. I don't believe that it was so much a matter of defending music I like (on the whole, these two early symphonies do not break into my 30 Favorite Shostakovich Pieces list), as (viz. my early indication in the WAYLT thread) inviting a richer understanding of the pieces. I certainly entertained no dream of convincing you to like them better (is such an external process of conviction even possible?)
So, I am content that my post is reasonably good ; )
New Babylon ... someday, I'm going to listen to it!
I still have not, yet. I mean, not most of it . . . two numbers from it, I think.
That sort of direct question I do not mind; it's relevant : )
Another obvious fact about the two symphonies is that they were commissions as ‘public works’, and (to be sure) the final choral fooferaw was in both cases the raison d’être for the commission. Does the fact of the public commission invalidate the entire artistic endeavor?
...
For my ears personally, the flaws of the choral texts (mediocrity of both style and content . . . third-pressing Mayakovsky, if you like) are of less import than the panache of the choral writing. (I could even consider the texts of a certain type of interest, as historical artifacts, but set that aside at present.) There is a musical élan in the execution of both these symphonies which, on its own merit, I find worthwhile.
...
The other aspect of the Second and Third Symphonies which my ears treasure are, they are an important part of the limited view we have of the precocious talent to which Shostakovich gave rein before the necessity of self-policing came into force, after the notorious Pravda editorial.
I have a recording of Sitkovetsky performing Bartok's VCs and I didn't enjoy his playing at all. I've pretty avoided anything recorded by him ever since. Try out Khachatryan, Steinbacher, and Batiashvili. I'm sure you'll enjoy at least one of these performances.
Another obvious example of a propaganda piece would be Alexander NevskyI think you'll find yourself in a small minority with that opinion! Nevsky is more an example of a work which wasn't troubled too much by the censors because it was on a patriotic subject.
Also added Kaler/Wit and Mordkovitch/Jarvi to this list. Can you recall exactly what you disliked about the Mordkovitch?
I think you'll find yourself in a small minority with that opinion! Nevsky is more an example of a work which wasn't troubled too much by the censors because it was on a patriotic subject.
Regarding the commissions, as I recall from the Wilson book, one of the remarkable things about the 3rd is that it was NOT commissioned but written "on spec". In late 20s Russia it was still possible for a young Shostakovich to buy into the potential of communism for positive social change.
Musically the two symphonies contain some of the most avant garde stuff he ever wrote. The choral finales aren't great but I don't think they invalidate what comes before. The real problem for me with these works is that they don't hang together structurally. If Shosty wasn't such a giant, I could almost imagine someone taking the best bits of 2 and 3 and rearranging them into a "proper" symphonic work (or a ballet?).
But how does this differ from Shosty's 2nd and 3rd?
It's a 5 CD set; the fourth and fifth CDs are taken up by Lady Macbeth of Mtsensk in the Chung/Bastille Opera recording. I found myself more interested and more emotionally involved by the Rostropovich recording on EMI.Perhaps the high estimation of the Rostro is yet another example of reality not matching received wisdom?
Perhaps the high estimation of the Rostro is yet another example of reality not matching received wisdom?
I already have the Chung recording, so now there is the pained question of duplication to consider....
Perhaps the high estimation of the Rostro is yet another example of reality not matching received wisdom?
I already have the Chung recording, so now there is the pained question of duplication to consider....
. . . It's the DFD that's the main stumbling block.
I don't think DF-D would have committed that offense upon the Capt. Lebyadkin Verses if he had actually read the Dostoyevsky.
No, no, I like the Rostropovich better!
As for this box, since you already have 40% of it--I'd suggest looking for the first two CDs as individual items, and alternate versions of the songs with piano--although the 7 Romances on Poems of A. Blok (which has a vocalist and chamber ensemble) has a good performance on that CD. It's the DFD that's the main stumbling block.
This (http://ir.canterbury.ac.nz/bitstream/10092/5342/1/ShostakovichThesis.pdf) is four years old already, but I found it a most high-value read yesterday, when I chanced upon it.
Wonder if any of the Shostaposse here have heard this disc. I've heard Calefax Reed Quintet's Rameau disc and just recently discovered their Goldberg Variations, along with this DSCH disc of preludes and fugues (one of my favorites from DSCH) looks interesting but haven't found any samples or write ups.
Also, might be my favorite DSCH photo/cover art.
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51rn0KJywpL._SL500_AA500_.jpg) (http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/518-kUu%2BFmL._AA500_.jpg)
Wonder if any of the Shostaposse here have heard this disc. I've heard Calefax Reed Quintet's Rameau disc and just recently discovered their Goldberg Variations, along with this DSCH disc of preludes and fugues (one of my favorites from DSCH) looks interesting but haven't found any samples or write ups.They have samples of it on iTunes, not sure what to think about it. Judging only by the samples that they give, I think it is a mixed bag. Some work well with the wind quintet, one example of this would be #3. But some others (such as #2), do not work well with the scoring. But these are my own opinions only based off of short samples.
Also, might be my favorite DSCH photo/cover art.
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51rn0KJywpL._SL500_AA500_.jpg) (http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/518-kUu%2BFmL._AA500_.jpg)
They have samples of it on iTunes, not sure what to think about it. Judging only by the samples that they give, I think it is a mixed bag. Some work well with the wind quintet, one example of this would be #3. But some others (such as #2), do not work well with the scoring. But these are my own opinions only based off of short samples.
I may investigate further in the future.
Greg, do you perchance know the two Scarlatti transcriptions Shostakovich did for wind ensemble? (I should have guessed that they would be right up your street.)
Man, I've been so bad about locating samples lately. Thanks Paul.It is no problem. I'm not great at locating samples, I basically only have 3 sources for samples--arkiv, amazon, and iTunes.
And thank you for your comments. I will add my own once I listen. I have an infatuation with wind ensembles or pieces for winds so I'm anxious for hearing it
Have not, Karl. But I'm intrigued, will start looking for them. Are you familiar with them? Thanks!
Couple of months ago or so I ventured forth to Amazon and bought a set of Shostakovich symphonies on recommendation. Not knowing too much and not having much Stravinsky, I was quickly happy with my set, Haitink with the RCO. Yesterday, whilst gawklily browsing tunes on Youtube, there was plenty to sample of from Barshai's Shostakovich set. In fact, the whole set is there to listen to. So I dutifully sampled, and sampled some more. I soon sampled myself daft with the Barshai Shostakovich, discovering it to be something better (for me) than the one I already bought, AND it was considerably less expensive.
Haaarrrumph! :-[ :'(
I sense much more depth of understanding in what I have heard of the Barshai set, things seem much bigger and graver without being played as such. The sound (albeit from online source and listened to through headphones from my laptop) also seems to be better. The silly tunes Shostakovich opened some of his symphonies with are somehow more transparent. I am uber impressed by what I have heard (Barshai) although unfortunately this will mean Haitinks little red set can sit well away for a while as I investigate and pound the table with Rudolph and the West German Radio Symphony Orchestra... :D
Do be aware that the Barshai is included as part of Brilliant's 100 CD Symphonies box--so if you have any interest at all in some of the other sets included there--it's sort of a super set of Brilliant sets, including their Mozart, Haydn, Beethoven, Schubert, Mahler, etc--it may be worth getting that way. (I got if as a bargain, for less than what I would have paid for the Haydn and Shostakovich cycles I was principally interested in.)
Man, this was buried back at the bottom of page 5. People, you are letting the side down! ; )
The birthday boy plays his own Prelude & Fugue in C, Op.87 № 1
http://www.youtube.com/v/Uuj5uzgmB5A
The birthday boy plays his own Prelude & Fugue in C, Op.87 № 1Not in Germany, but that's not unusual.
The 51 CS Dmitri collection is preannounced at 60 Euro (less Vat outside the EU) here:
http://www.abeillemusique.com/CD/Classique/BRIL9245/5029365924528/Brilliant-Classics/Dimitri-Chostakovitch/edition-Chostakovitch/cleart-65057.html (http://www.abeillemusique.com/CD/Classique/BRIL9245/5029365924528/Brilliant-Classics/Dimitri-Chostakovitch/edition-Chostakovitch/cleart-65057.html)
(http://www.abeillemusique.com/images/references/bril9245.jpg)
For the third time, I saw the Violin Concerto #1 in A Minor op. 77 live. This time with the NYPO under Andrey Boreyko conducting with Frank Peter Zimmerman as the soloist. It was really well done, I thought. Perhaps the best experience I have had with that piece in a live setting.
One thing I want to mention about the piece, the tutti pizzicato with the timpani is such a cool effect and fits that piece very well. I've known it was there, but was the first time I heard it and thought it was a wonderful moment.
Nice, Paul! I bet it was a great performance. Boreyko is becoming quite the Shostakovian having recorded Symphonies Nos. 4, 9, & 15 already. Zimmerman is also an awesome violinist. I'm jealous! How was the Passacaglia?Extremely well done, but a little too fast of a tempo for my taste.
Extremely well done, but a little too fast of a tempo for my taste.
For the third time, I saw the Violin Concerto #1 in A Minor op. 77 live. This time with the NYPO under Andrey Boreyko conducting with Frank Peter Zimmerman as the soloist. It was really well done, I thought. Perhaps the best experience I have had with that piece in a live setting.
One thing I want to mention about the piece, the tutti pizzicato with the timpani is such a cool effect and fits that piece very well. I've known it was there, but was the first time I heard it and thought it was a wonderful moment.
Does anyone know Shostakovich's opinion of Schnittke? I can't seem to find anything online where Shostakovich talks about Schnittke. Thanks.
I know of none. I am doubtful that he expressed any; he was, as you know, tight-lipped as a rule.
I've discovered something rather interesting today: Shostakovich makes a quotation from Bartok's The Wooden Prince in opening of the first movement of his famous Symphony No. 5. The movement from Bartok's The Wooden Prince I'm referring to is the Fourth Dance. Obviously, Shostakvoich resolved it in a completely different way, but it's still very similar.
I wonder if Shostakovich was a fan of Bartok's music? Anybody? Maybe I'm just clutching at straws here. They just happen to use similar musical phrasings, but that comparison ends there.
John, I come across this scenario several times over my course of music listening. Whenever I try and bring it up, it inevitably gets shot down, or not commented on. Perhaps, it is a situation where "I'm clutching at straws".
I tried to pick out the comparison in your case, and I could not catch it. :( I will try again later on though.
Perhaps comparison was the wrong word to use. Right at the start of Shostakovich's Symphony No. 5 is similar to a musical passage in this Bartok's The Wooden Prince. As I mentioned, listen to the Bartok video at the 7:54 mark and then listen to the very beginning of Shostakovich's 5th, which I also posted here. There are similar musical patterns used but both composers obviously resolve them in completely different ways. I'm just inquiring to see if by chance Shostakovich picked up on this little motif and incorporated it into the first movement of his 5th? The way Bartok used the motif was quite subdued and he basically repeated it over and over again whereas Shostakovich took part of it and did something different with the idea.So.. this would be like the Leningrad & Intermezzo interrotto in reverse?
So.. this would be like the Leningrad & Intermezzo interrotto in reverse?
I don't know, Karlo. Did you hear the phrase I'm talking about?No, I'll check it in the morning.
But there are a lot of composers who have done this kind of thing, I don't know why I've made such a big deal about it. It's just an observation more than anything.
I'm inclined to chalk it up to coincidence. When I was a teenager and just joined GMG I would post all sorts of stuff accusing composers of outright theft and everyone sort of laughed at me. Great ideas come to people separately sometimes, I guess.
I'm inclined to chalk it up to coincidence. When I was a teenager and just joined GMG I would post all sorts of stuff accusing composers of outright theft and everyone sort of laughed at me. Great ideas come to people separately sometimes, I guess.
I've learned that, unless you have a Masters degree in Musicology or are a 'so called' expert in Classical Music, bringing up musical themes/ideas that bear similarities (unless it's already been written about), it's better to not even mention it.
They'll just say 'no, you are wrong'.
Yes, I suppose expressing a positive opinion of Schnittke could get him into some trouble with the Soviet authorities. :)I don't think Shostakovich was ever close to Schnittke: apparently--to paraphrase Ivashkin on the subject--they did spend some time together at a near-compulsory holiday retreat organized by Khrennikov in the '60s; neither spoke much, Schnittke being too overawed and Shostakovich disinclined to say anything to anyone. I think Schnittke's musical closeness to Shostakovich (at least after the mid-'60s) has often been overstated: I hear his musical language as more coming from Mahler, Berg, B. A. Zimmermann and even late Nono than from DSCH (Mahler and Berg were of course key influences on both composers).
I don't think Shostakovich was ever close to Schnittke: apparently--to paraphrase Ivashkin on the subject--they did spend some time together at a near-compulsory holiday retreat organized by Khrennikov in the '60s; neither spoke much, Schnittke being too overawed and Shostakovich disinclined to say anything to anyone. I think Schnittke's musical closeness to Shostakovich (at least after the mid-'60s) has often been overstated: I hear his musical language as more coming from Mahler, Berg, B. A. Zimmermann and even late Nono than from DSCH (Mahler and Berg were of course key influences on both composers).
Shostakovich certainly publicly praised the music of two of the other prominent figures of Schnittke's generation--however, both Denisov and Gubaidulina were students of his, and DSCH seems to have taken his responsibility to his students seriously (I'm not aware of what, if any, opinions of these composers DSCH is supposed to have expressed privately*). I'm inclined to take his praise for Denisov seriously if only because I think the last movement of the 14th symphony refers to--without directly quoting--the last movement of the younger composer's cantata The Sun of the Incas.
*It'd be interesting to collect some of DSCH's private comments from sources like Richter's conversation books, since those I've seen tend to suggest a man with considerably more wide-ranging tastes than his comparatively conservative musical language might lead one to expect: if I remember correctly he expressed clear interest (not uncritical, it has to be said) in Xenakis and the earlier works of Stockhausen and Boulez.
Bought these two 7th recordings yesterday:
(http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B009NEP3II.01.L.jpg)
I'm very interested in Nelsons Shostakovich output; I have seen him conducting the 8th in Lucerne (on Television) and it was great. Do you already have an opinion about the 7th, MI?
Yesterday, I spent perhaps forty minutes leafing through David Hurwitz's Shostakovich Symphonies and Concertos - An Owner's Manual at the School Street Borders. As the spirit of the title promises (and, to be sure, as one expects from Hurwitz), this is a book oriented not to experienced musicians, but to the amateur trying to make sense of It All. It really isn't bad, all in all; though there is the odd attitude, and the occasional trotting out of an idée reçue which prompts one, not to want to strangle Hurwitz (which would be distastefully extreme), but to leisurely bung some rotten fruit at him. Against that, he's made some earnest attempt at illustrating the form and musical content of many of the works, which is a matter entirely different to the shallow rantage customary in many of his recordings reviews. In some respects, really an interesting read, though from this senator's standpoint, a book I might browse at the bookstore, but not one I need on the shelf at home.
On Re-hearing the Tenth after 365 Days
I've just finished listening to Shostakovich's Tenth Symphony. The last time I heard it was on June 30, 2009, on my iPod, in the car on my family's return from a road trip out to Utah and the Grand Canyon. Location: somewhere on Interstate 10 in rural west Texas. Over the course of the road trip I had heard the Tenth twice (the other time was in Albuquerque), the Fifth several times in different performances, and Khachaturian's Cello Concerto on six (!) occasions. I was all Russianed out.
Then for a while I just didn't listen to the Tenth. It wasn't intentional; it just slipped the mind. I went to college in the fall and planned to give it a play to celebrate going back, but didn't have the time. Eventually I decided to save it for a special occasion. By December I decided to just wait until June 30 rolled around again. June 30 came. I listened to a CD for MusicWeb and went to bed early. Finally carved out an hour for the Tenth tonight, starring Herbert von Karajan and the Berlin Philharmonic Orchestra.
I should note that my familiarity with the symphony is purely from listening; I have never seen a score.
Impressions
First of all, how'd I go this long without listening to one of my favorite pieces? I just wanted to curl up in every minute of it ... thought a few times that I could just as easily have listened to it every day for a year. (This is, of course, not actually true.) This felt like Hemingway on his first day back from a year of shaving. Or something.
The Tenth Symphony is the culmination of the "Russian Romantic" symphonic tradition; it is the apotheosis of same. Had Rachmaninov, Lyapunov, Glazunov and Bortkiewicz seen it to its grave? No, they'd merely set up this fearsome volley. This symphony is, like Tchaikovsky's Fifth or Rachmaninov's Second (much more like the latter), based entirely on a simple motif stated at the outset. The first movement is built entirely on that motif, and I was really impressed at how much of the first seven to eight minutes of the symphony Shostakovich was able to repeat at and after the climax. Except for the interjection of the flute tune at 6:00, which serves as a catalyst for the huge central upheaval and provides just a tiny bit of contrast, this movement is really just one huge arc repeated, the second statement different enough from the first to make the double-arc combine for one.
A joke I'd been repeating during my Year of No Tenth was, "There oughta be a law of orchestration stating that the piccolo is expressly prohibited unless you are Shostakovich." It grew out of my frustration at how lesser composers fail to understand how to use the instrument: an unnecessary piccolo line, only about four seconds long, tarnishes the otherwise glorious opening movement Atterberg's Eighth; Johann Strauss' piccolos drive me up the wall just as much as his gift for melodies makes me sigh with pleasure; the piccolo at the end of Dvorak's Second has a great musical idea but is just too lightweight to penetrate the texture.
There are, of course, good uses of the piccolo. The two-note part in the storm of Beethoven's Sixth. Schulhoff's Concertino. Dorman's Piccolo Concerto. And all the other examples I can think of, all of them, are in Shostakovich. The Fifth. The Ninth. Others I am forgetting at the moment. And then there's the end of the first movement here. I Googled "best piccolo solo" and all the results said, "Stars and Stripes Forever." Undoubtedly a contender. I GMG-searched for "best piccolo solo" and there weren't any results. Now the Tenth is the first. Except, of course, that it's a piccolo duo, isn't it? And it is so darn good!
I was surprised by the third movement. Basically, it has three themes, the opening string tune (which is exactly the same theme as that of the second movement, which is in turn just the opening motif of the first movement extended a bit - this is one of the most tightly argued symphonies since Beethoven's Fifth, despite its length), the DSCH theme, and that weird foreign horn call. What surprised me about this movement, coming back after a year, is that it basically just alternates between the three in whatever order it pleases, and there's basically nothing else to it. It just bounces from motif to motif the whole time and yet rather than sounding senseless or academic or hopelessly confused, it's remarkably cohesive. I was also surprised and impressed to hear the first minute of the symphony replayed almost verbatim and as originally orchestrated, providing the base line to stuff which is easier to notice. Wow!
In Rachmaninov's Symphony No 2, the finale is the first movement to feature a melody that's not based on stair-step ascending intervals: that huge sweeping romantic Hollywood tune that breaks the symphony's mold and carries it over the threshold to a happy ending. Shostakovich's Tenth pre-empts this somewhat by introducing DSCH and the horn call into the third movement - but DSCH is the real challenger to the symphony's motto, and of course it wins. He's dancing on Stalin's grave, isn't he? Emphasis on dancing; this might be the most conventional of the movements, even down to the Return of the Scary Opening Motif right before the final coda (think Tchaikovsky Four). But the Scary Opening Motif has already been defeated: it is in that melancholy, wistful sigh of the (muted?) violins which serves as centerpiece to the introduction's reprise. And then, having laid the opening motif to rest once and for all, DSCH gets up and dances on the grave.
Conclusion
I chose Karajan because the final bars on his recording sound rich and full and gloriously final; on Barshai, they seem to just taper up into the bright acoustic. The flip side of the coin is that Barshai's clarinet solo in mvt. I is much more darkly brooding. I've got Skrowaczewski, too, but don't remember it very well.
All in all, as glorious an experience as it ever was, and I'm glad this symphony is back in my listening. I would not hesitate to rank it one of the great symphonies of all time, alongside contenders like Beethoven 5 and Brahms 4. It is, to my mind, surely not just a great symphony by a Russian, but the great triumph of the fate-obsessed, heart-on-sleeve Russian symphonic tradition which began with Rubinstein and Balakirev, achieved concert-hall popularity with Tchaikovsky and Rachmaninov, and reached its raison d'être in 1953, when a composer turned to this seemingly burnt-out form to create some of his most personal music - and some of his most explicitly Russian outrage against the climate in which he was trapped.
I don't particularly find it useful to see Shostakovich's symphonies as reactions to, or depictions of, or portraits of, Communism; when I first began to get "into" the Tenth, it was cool to imagine the scherzo as "Stalin himself," or the third movement as "Shostakovich versus the oppressors." Now that interpretation is not as interesting as it had been. The only serious interest it has for me is its implications for the argument that this was the inevitable product of a flexible and tortured artistic genius, and for the hope, maybe the delusion, that had Shostakovich been given free rein to write whatever he wanted wherever he wanted, such a masterwork as this would not have been lost.
(http://www.classicalmusicclubtoronto.org/shostakovich_1975_1.jpg)
. . . I can't post a top ten yet because I have yet to hear many of the quartets, half the symphonies (still to go: 2-4, 8, 12-15), and Lady Macbeth, though I saw a scene of Lady on YouTube and thought it was astonishing.
I just went for a very long run (it is finally 60 degrees in Wisconsin!!) and listened to the 4th Symphony. Oh wow. That is all I can say.
I seldom listen to Shostakovich. Not out of personal dislike or anything, because he composed some very good music, but I just don't find myself connecting to his music as much as I do other composers.
Shostakovich = brilliant composer. My absolute favorite of the whole lot.
November on Naxos (http://www.naxos.com/catalogue/item.asp?item_code=8.572824-25):
(http://cdn.naxos.com/SharedFiles/images/cds/others/8.572824-25.gif)
"This recording of New Babylon, one of Shostakovichs most inventive and truly symphonic film scores, is the first complete recording of all the surviving music from the original lost manuscript full score and the first to use five solo string players only, as conceived by the composer. A remarkable collage of marches, can-cans, carnival music, tumultuous rhythms and musical quotations, New Babylon bristles with witty dissonance and brassy ebullience, emphasizing the films content rather than its visual surface. Mark Fitz-Geralds two previous Naxos world première recordings of Shostakovichs film scores for Alone (8.570316) and The Girlfriends (8.572138) have been highly acclaimed."
Before and After . . . .
Finally pulled the trigger on this.I'll be interested to hear your reaction. I listened to the full New Babylon last year, but apparently didn't post about it here. :(
Say, Brian, do we know when Petrenko will do the Opus 43?
Say, Brian, do we know when Petrenko will do the Opus 43?
Say, Brian, do we know when Petrenko will do the Opus 43?
Well performed certainly but that's just not enough for me.
[DSCH 7/Nelsons]
Thanks MI, appreciate your opinion.
Guys, is:
technically the same recording as original release:
I wanted to download as FLAC first, but well, EUR 20 for a digital download :( So I'm thinking about buying an available physical release.
EDIT: The first one is available as FLAC for ~EUR 10, which is alright for me.
Hopefully its not a crappy remaster with terrible dynamics compression or something like that, but exactly the same release as the old one.
There are items in your basket that are currently not available in your country. For more information on product availability and country restrictions, please visit our help section.
I tried to buy the FLAC at DGG shop (they link to Universal Music download shop) and the result is, they do not want my money. I'll have to find other ways.
http://www.deutschegrammophon.com/cat/single?sort=newest_rec&PRODUCT_NR=4777587
->
FLAC files don't reach the German interwebbs.
To close out the year (and inspired by the ongoing String Quartet Gala) I've pulled the trigger at last on The Nose (Rozhdestvensky, Leningrad Phil & al. — also included is The Gamblers, which I think I may already have, though not sure that I've listened to it), The Song of the Forests (Misha Jurowski, the Cologne Radio Symphony & al. — disc also includes a suite from The Nose), vol. 2 of Olli Mustonen's interesting JS Bach/Op.87 interleaving. Oh, and New Babylon, which I had already mentioned, I think. Quite a serious effort at eradicating some lacunae.
I know John will wonder what's keeping me from The Bolt, and there will be some general dismay perhaps at how I'm neglecting some of the (many) film scores. But I've longed, somehow, for New Babylon in a way which for whatever reason The Bolt has not attracted me; and with the wonderful Naxos issues of The Fall of Berlin, Girlfriends, and Alone (in addition to my already well-documented enthusiasm for the music for Hamlet and King Lear), I find myself quite sated w/r/t the film scores.
Just checking a list of works . . . very interesting that he worked on the (unfinished) opera The Gamblers in 1942. Memory of the Ledi Makbet affair would have been quite green, and one wonders what hopes/plans he had for such an opera after Dostoyevsky.
Rather, they don't reach interwebs anywhere outside of a tiny island north of France. (http://store.universal-music.co.uk/restofworld/Customer-Services/Digital-Product-Terms-and-Conditions-of-Sale/page/terms_digital#3)
The Nose is fabulous, indeed; I saw the first (thus far, only, of course) Boston production a couple of seasons ago. If the Melodiya sonics for this recording prove to be on the lower end of their scale, I shall have to snap up some more recent CD . . . .
The Nose is fabulous, indeed; I saw the first (thus far, only, of course) Boston production a couple of seasons ago. If the Melodiya sonics for this recording prove to be on the lower end of their scale, I shall have to snap up some more recent CD . . . .
The Nose is fabulous, indeed; I saw the first (thus far, only, of course) Boston production a couple of seasons ago. If the Melodiya sonics for this recording prove to be on the lower end of their scale, I shall have to snap up some more recent CD . . . .
To close out the year (and inspired by the ongoing String Quartet Gala) I've pulled the trigger at last on The Nose (Rozhdestvensky, Leningrad Phil & al. also included is The Gamblers, which I think I may already have, though not sure that I've listened to it) [....]
Hey Karl, John, Ray and others, I got a reply from the Liverpool Philharmonic about the continuation of the Shostakovich symphonies with Vasily Petrenko.
"No definite dates but there are more in the pipeline."
Hey Karl, John, Ray and others, I got a reply from the Liverpool Philharmonic about the continuation of the Shostakovich symphonies with Vasily Petrenko.
"No definite dates but there are more in the pipeline."
Excellent news, Brian. Thank you for the update! :) I've really enjoyed pretty much all of the Petrenko/RLPO recordings, the only 'lukewarm' recording for me is the too slow 5th symphony. However, I still enjoy it.
The others recordings for me, I think, are all fantastic, especially the 10th and 9th.
It will not be a true first listen, but I am going to crank The Song of the Forests this afternoon!
Lenny's Wiener Philharmoniker recording of the Sixth & Ninth: CD or DVD? What is the consensus?
Ray, John, etc.: The Royal Liverpool Philharmonic and Vasily Petrenko are rehearsing for a live performance of the Fourth Symphony, and will subsequently be recording it.
Ray, John, etc.: The Royal Liverpool Philharmonic and Vasily Petrenko are rehearsing for a live performance of the Fourth Symphony, and will subsequently be recording it.
Ray, John, etc.: The Royal Liverpool Philharmonic and Vasily Petrenko are rehearsing for a live performance of the Fourth Symphony, and will subsequently be recording it.
It's not a competition. It is perfectly right that a piece be continually performed. We don't retire the jersey just because there's been a signally good recording. Music is a performing art, not a bloody museum piece!
Nobody says, Gosh, there's just no point in performing Beethoven, since von Karajan did it about as good as anyone could.
but as a listener I can't help to compare them with past performances.
Forgot your medication today, Karl? :-\ I'm all for new performances, but as a listener I can't help to compare them with past performances. Petrenko is good conductor, no doubt, but I've already got many favorites in the 4th. So with this in mind, we'll see how his performance goes. I hope it's not another dud like his 2nd, 3rd, 5th, and 15th.
Forgot your medication today, Karl?
Between this and your Holmboe rant last night, you're really making an effort to be likeable, right?
it seems to me you are talking about the recording of the performance, while karl is talking about the performance itself. a performance isn't judged by recordings... it's judged by the moment (and judged in light of other performances... with, possibly, being further informed by recordings.
you infer, understandably, that this performance (or a studio run-through that is part of that particular run of performances) will be turned into a recording. then it will stand next to the aforementioned. and even then, each generation needs their DSCH, just as each generation needs their LvB.
(or a studio run-through that is part of that particular run of performances)
Very excited that the Op.43 is in the pipeline! (Brian, do I recall aright that this is a symphony you've not yet heard?)
Brian & Jens, what opinions do you hold of the Petrenko account of the Op.103?
1. Yes, it is a symphony I've not yet heard! I own Previn, Barshai, and I think one other recording in some giant box set somewhere; between Previn and Barshai, which for a first listen?
2. Very favorable, wish the sound quality could hold the gigantic climax to the massacre, but not sure any CD yet can. But it compares well with others I've heard. I am somewhat prejudiced against it because I saw V. Petrenko do the "Year 1905" live with the London Philharmonic, a stunning/amazing experience that can't be repeated.
And I had a closely corresponding experience with Gergiev & the Leningrad . . . heard him lead the Mariinka band live in Worcester's Mechanics Hall, just a shattering experience, with which listening to no CD could possibly compare.
My opinion of Petrenko has been hit/miss mostly miss. I liked his 8th, 10th, and 11th, but thought very little of his other performances. There's something missing in his conducting of the others. His 5th was a monstrosity. He must have fallen asleep at the wheel on this one. Where's the guts? That Largo sounds completely comatose. One of the worst performances I've ever heard of this symphony. His 15th lacked any real excitement or at least that I got from listening to his performance and Kondrashin back-to-back. But every cycle has good/bad performances and none of them are going to be 100% without flaws.
Gergiev is more overrated than Petrenko. That guy has always had too many irons in the fire. Not very consistent, so excuse my skepticism when I say that I highly doubt Gergiev's performance was a "shattering experience."Well... Karl was there for it.
Yes, exactly that feeling. Who would you suggest for a starter? Perhaps my mystery performer is one of them ;D
Petrenko's Fifth was a disappointment for me as well, but nowhere near as bad as you make it appear. I did not like Kreizberg very much, but I only listened to it once. I'll have to compare the two.
I rather like Petrenko's Fifteenth and I really like his 6th/12th.
Speaking of Kreizberg, have you heard his 11th with the Monte Carlo Philharmonic, Brian? Not too shabby.
(http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2013/Jan13/Shostakovich_sy11_OPMC005.jpg)
This was one of the last recordings Yakov Kreizberg made before passing away at the age 51. He had previously made his mark in Shostakovich with a truly distinctive pairing of the Fifth and Ninth symphonies, conducting the Russian National Orchestra; my colleague Tony Haywood was not as fond of it as I was. This excellent Eleventh makes clear yet again what a loss to the musical world it was when he died in 2011. Kreizberg has the Orchestre Philharmonique de Monte-Carlo sounding perfectly suited to this music, in an interpretation which brings the symphony across with conviction and power.
The program, as put forth by Shostakovich - or to him by the authorities? - necessitates an adagio first movement (‘The Palace Square’) of eerie and hushed suspense. It sets out a few motifs which will recur through the whole symphony: the violins’ opening line, the ominously distant drumbeat, the equally disembodied-sounding trumpet tune. The atmosphere in this performance is terrific, although compared to the Liverpool Philharmonic under Vasily Petrenko, the Monte Carlo trumpeter seems a bit too chipper, too forward. Then comes the massive second movement, with its depiction of a bloody massacre by the tsarists. There’s really no way to bring this off on CD due to the movement’s enormous dynamic range: if you can hear it live - as I was lucky enough to do when Petrenko presented it with the London Philharmonic - the sheer bloody violence and loudness of the climax are more or less the most terrifying thing one can hear in a concert hall. On disc it’s hard to get the dynamic range of the piece done right, and this recording is no exception. The playing is superbly bone-chilling and the orchestra sounds possessed, but I yearn for the gut-punch that the massacre really only delivers live.
The adagio which follows, a lyrical “In Memoriam,” is another story: here Kreizberg brings a flowing account which briefly even permits beauty and hope to rise to the surface. It’s the highlight of a very good performance. After that, there are passages in the middle of the finale, including a reprise of the first movement, which do, here, feel overlong and outstay their welcome; it’s a minute longer than Petrenko in the same section. Then we get the final “twist,” as Shostakovich’s coda returns to the terrifying horror-music of the tsarist oppressors. Kreizberg paces this perfectly and builds the coda with tremendous power, the orchestra giving him exactly what he wants. Again, the CD medium just can’t contain the full force of this music.
Nobody is going to listen to the Orchestre Philharmonique de Monte Carlo here and think they sound anything but Russian. That alone is a tribute to Kreizberg’s skill as a musician, but throw in the excellence of this account and we have a really worthy tribute. Vasily Petrenko’s accomplishment with the Royal Liverpool Philharmonic is similar, though - transforming an unexpected orchestra into a Shostakovich powerhouse - and, among recent recordings by émigrés, his more concise reading may be preferred. Even Naxos is a bit frustrated by how to record the symphony, though.
This may not have been his very finest, but I wish Yakov Kreizberg could have given us much, much more.
Brian Reinhart
http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2013/Jan13/Shostakovich_sy11_OPMC005.htm#ixzz2KEZ9pYk9
. . . Who would you suggest for a starter? Perhaps my mystery performer is one of them ;D
Well... Karl was there for it.
Why should that fact prevent John from spouting fatuity? ; )