The EMI/Karajan megaboxes

[head-case]

I did not feel an overwhelming need to have all of Karajan's EMI recordings.  But my point of view is that if I buy these complete editions and sell off the individual CDs and sets I already have, I'll end up with more money and more room on my shelves than when I started (assuming that they ever manage to send the thing to me).

[PerfectWagnerite]

I did the same thing. I sold Meistersinger, Rosenkavalier and Ariadne and that was like 2/3 the price of the box already.

[Hector]

Quite possibly he's thinking of the withdrawal of Volume I.   For what it's worth, MDT's notice of the withdrawal of Volume I has been removed.

Possibly.

I've seen comments from buyers about faulty discs that range from the unplayeable to the wrong music.

However, how anyone could have listened to this vast bulk in so short a time surprises me!

[knight66]

http://www.europadisc.co.uk/classical/56449/The_Complete_EMI_Recordings_Vol.2_-_Opera_and_Vocal.htm

Here is the most complete list I can find of the contents of Volume 2. It is also at a very good price.

Mike

[head-case]

Well, my set finally came!

[knight66]

Mine too, I have only really just started on the journey. Some marvelous stuff in it. Quite a few I know, some from LP days. I will have to take a couple of weeks holiday to work through it.

Mike

[head-case]

Mine too, I have only really just started on the journey. Some marvelous stuff in it. Quite a few I know, some from LP days. I will have to take a couple of weeks holiday to work through it.

Mike

A couple of weeks?  I think it will take me a couple of years.

The first thing queued up is Disk 1, track 1-3.  Strauss Waltzes recorded in Vienna in 1946.  That the Vienna Philharmonic could play with such sweetness from the midst of the ruins of Europe is noteworthy in itself.

[Renfield]

*chuckles*

I bought the EMI sets as soon as they came out, and my Volume 1 is very much the one with the errors.

And I'm being so jolly about it because the only error I did mind was the disc with the random music, but which is identical to one of the earlier "Karajan Collection" releases, remastering and everything.

So that just leaves me with a box set with a story behind it, even beyond the importance of its actual content - with which I was delighted, naturally.

[head-case]

I've taken the seemingly absurd tack of going through the entire set disc by disc.  I'm not listening to it exclusively, but I always keep a disc from the set in my 5-disc changer and intersperse with other listening, when I'm inclined.  I made it though the first two discs of Waltzes and Polkas (rather dull) but disc 3 is very interesting.  A recording of Brahms symphony #2 from 1949 with the VPO which in some ways is similar to Karajan's later recordings, but is in other, fascinating ways, quite different.  There are some variations in tempo in the first movement that you would never hear in late Karajan (or from many modern performances).  The coda of the first movement is more charming than any other that I can recall.  The finale (particularly the coda) has a rushing, breathless but effortless quality that Karajan never matched in later recordings.  The recording of Mozart's masonic funeral musics that is included on the same disc is suprisingly heartfelt.  I haven't yet queued up the debut recording of Strauss' metamorphosen.

[marvinbrown]

  I keep coming back to this thread repeatedly but I can not seem to convince myself to buy the Karajan opera mega boxset  !  Why aren't the Don Giovanni and Manon Lescaut COMPLETE?  Also I can't seem to figure out what's going on with Die Zauberflote, are those the arias and ensembles only? Please Help!

  marvin   

[knight66]

Marvin,

Neither Don Giovanni nor Manon Lescaut are part of the set. However, Marriage of Figaro and Zauberflote are. In the former the secco recits are cut; in the latter the spoken dialogue is cut. This was probably down to Walter Legge the producer; as he insisted that when Klemperer subsequently recorded Zauberflote, that it be done without the dialogue to make it more sellable.

Karajan recorded a dead in the wated Giovanni years later for DGG and there is a terrific live Don from him on Orfeo.

There are lots of superb performances in the box.

Mike

[marvinbrown]

Marvin,

Neither Don Giovanni nor Manon Lescaut are part of the set. However, Marriage of Figaro and Zauberflote are. In the former the secco recits are cut; in the latter the spoken dialogue is cut. This was probably down to Walter Legge the producer; as he insisted that when Klemperer subsequently recorded Zauberflote, that it be done without the dialogue to make it more sellable.

Karajan recorded a dead in the wated Giovanni years later for DGG and there is a terrific live Don from him on Orfeo.

There are lots of superb performances in the box.

Mike

  Thanks for the clarification Mike  . I think I'll wait for now and see how this thread develops before I make my decision.

  marvin

[rubio]

I listened to CD20 from the orchestral box. First off is Brahms' symphony no. 2 with the Philharmonia from 1955. This is a very quiet, calm reading without too much emphasis on the rhythmic elements of the music. The climaxes are finely build up, but they do not off as monumental as they can be. The orchestral playing is very nice, and the balance between the orchestral sections is preferable for me compared to the 1964 BPO reading. After all, a nice, intimate and alternative reading from Karajan, even if not all the way up there.

The Schubert 8th (Philharmonia, 1955) on the same disc is a pleasant reading, but Karajan doesn't sound too involved. A lot of the same comments go for this performance, but it is quite a bit sleeker than the Brahms I think, and in the end there are many preferable recordings on the market.

Then I tried CD3 from the box. Here is the Brahms symphony no. 2 with the WP from 1949. This performance is more intense and dark than the Philharmonia recording. When it comes to the playing it can sound scrappy from time to time, or maybe it is the old recording. It is first and foremost interesting as an historical document to me.

But this disc also includes Karajans' classic performance of the Strauss' Metamorphosen with the same forces from 1947. I have not really fallen for this piece yet, but the most convincing rerading I have heard so far is clearly this one (partly it could be caused by gradually knowing the piece more). There is a lot emotion from the WP strings here and it is lovely phrased. I cannot remember that I got the same reaction from the Karajan's later DG recording of the same piece (which I heard quite recently). But this one is definately a keeper and a potential grower! It would now be interesting to hear Furtwangler's famous account asap.

[M forever]

But this disc also includes Karajans' classic performance of the Strauss' Metamorphosen with the same forces from 1947. I have not really fallen for this piece yet, but the most convincing rerading I have heard so far is clearly this one (partly it could be caused by gradually knowing the piece more). There is a lot emotion from the WP strings here and it is lovely phrased. I cannot remember that I got the same reaction from the Karajan's later DG recording of the same piece (which I heard quite recently). But this one is definately a keeper and a potential grower! It would now be interesting to hear Furtwangler's famous account asap.

You should watch/listen to this:



This is from an actual live concert in 1984 sand a much more "involved" performance than the DG studio recording. You should also try Kempe's and Sinopoli's recordings with the SD if you want to get more in touch with the piece.

[head-case]

But this disc also includes Karajans' classic performance of the Strauss' Metamorphosen with the same forces from 1947. I have not really fallen for this piece yet, but the most convincing rerading I have heard so far is clearly this one (partly it could be caused by gradually knowing the piece more). There is a lot emotion from the WP strings here and it is lovely phrased. I cannot remember that I got the same reaction from the Karajan's later DG recording of the same piece (which I heard quite recently). But this one is definately a keeper and a potential grower! It would now be interesting to hear Furtwangler's famous account asap.

I've also listened to this recording in the last few days.  It certainly makes a different impression than Karajan's later recording of the Metamorphosen.  In the old recording (originally issued on 78rpm discs, I don't know of the transfer is from a shellac master or an old magnetic tape) the lack of transparency makes it difficult to distinguish individual voices from within the string section.  What comes across is a melody with sort of amorphous harmonization.  The 80's digital recording brings out the courterpoint and voice leading a lot better (obviously) which really changes the impression made by the piece.  Independent of the technical aspects, I find the later recording to have a greater level of intensity, with greater dynamic contrasts, more dramatic modulation of string tone, seeming more distinctive shaping of phrasing, etc.  However, it is quite plausible that in 1947 Karajan had to moderate the dynamic contrasts to produce a performance that would record better with the limited technology of the time. 

I have also been listening to Karajan's Bruckner recordings recently and decided to listen the the Bruckner 4 from this set, which was recorded in 1970 in Berlin.  Again, it is interesting to see how much Karajan's apparent style is intermixed with the engineering.  The EMI recording has a more "glassy" tonal  balance, and more ambiance than the DG recordings of the same era.  The result is a recording where there is relatively more emphasis on the beauty of sound, with relatively less emphasis on dynamic impact.  There are times when I find the horns to be a bit weak in the mix, particularly compared with the brass.  I generally found this recording somewhat less memorable that Karajan's slightly later recording on DG.  The first, second and forth movements come off well in the EMI version, the Scherzo seems listless.  The close of the first movement comes off particularly nicely.  Overall the interpretation seems to have changed little between the two, I suspect audio engineering is the major contrast.

[M forever]

I have also been listening to Karajan's Bruckner recordings recently and decided to listen the the Bruckner 4 from this set, which was recorded in 1970 in Berlin.  Again, it is interesting to see how much Karajan's apparent style is intermixed with the engineering.  The EMI recording has a more "glassy" tonal  balance, and more ambiance than the DG recordings of the same era.  The result is a recording where there is relatively more emphasis on the beauty of sound, with relatively less emphasis on dynamic impact.

That's what it may appear like on recordings, but in reality, the sound the BP had under Karajan was basically the loudest and most dynamic orchestral sound I have ever heard. The dynamic contrasts were incredible, as were the weight and depth of the sound. But it also sounded very nice - the sound was usually round and rich, and the dynamic extremes were reached with carefuly controlled sound substance, not with whispering and blaring.

[head-case]

That's what it may appear like on recordings, but in reality, the sound the BP had under Karajan was basically the loudest and most dynamic orchestral sound I have ever heard. The dynamic contrasts were incredible, as were the weight and depth of the sound. But it also sounded very nice - the sound was usually round and rich, and the dynamic extremes were reached with carefuly controlled sound substance, not with whispering and blaring.

You conveniently cut off the part where I said essentially what you said, that the differences in the EMI and DG versions were an artifact of technical limitations of the recordings.  I have heard Karajan conduct Bruckner in concert and am well aware of what it was like in person.

[M forever]

Which peformances have you heard? I wasn't really addressing the differences between EMI and DG, but I think that EMI did generally much better than DG when they recorded the BP in the 70s and 80s, under Karajan as well as some other conductors (e.g. Maazel with Bruckner 7 and 8 in the later 80s, although some of the recordings they had made earlier with Tennstedt can also sound pretty nasty). I am not sure I understand what you mean by "glassy"- more transparent than DG (which is indeed often more "compacted")?

[head-case]

I heard Karajan conduct Bruckner 8 with the Vienna Philharmonic at Carnegie Hall in February 1989.  The timing corresponded closely with the DG recording and Sony video of the same piece.

I'm not sure if "glassy" has a precise definition.  I interpret as suggesting an acoustical environment with too much glass, perhaps associated with too much emphasis on frequencies in the upper-midrange or lower-treble, or with excessive early reflection.   The EMI recording is certainly more pleasant to listen to, a greater sense of space and more natural tonal balance, the DG is more congested, less transparent, but conveys the dynamic contrasts more strongly, in my opinion.

My enjoyment of a recording is tied to the volume control.  If it is a good recording as I turn the volume higher it seems to "bloom" but too far and it becomes uncomfortable.  The bad DG recordings have the property that they become uncomfortable before they have fully "bloomed."

Which peformances have you heard? I wasn't really addressing the differences between EMI and DG, but I think that EMI did generally much better than DG when they recorded the BP in the 70s and 80s, under Karajan as well as some other conductors (e.g. Maazel with Bruckner 7 and 8 in the later 80s, although some of the recordings they had made earlier with Tennstedt can also sound pretty nasty). I am not sure I understand what you mean by "glassy"- more transparent than DG (which is indeed often more "compacted")?

[BorisG]

I heard Karajan conduct Bruckner 8 with the Vienna Philharmonic at Carnegie Hall in February 1989.  The timing corresponded closely with the DG recording and Sony video of the same piece.

I'm not sure if "glassy" has a precise definition.  I interpret as suggesting an acoustical environment with too much glass, perhaps associated with too much emphasis on frequencies in the upper-midrange or lower-treble, or with excessive early reflection.   The EMI recording is certainly more pleasant to listen to, a greater sense of space and more natural tonal balance, the DG is more congested, less transparent, but conveys the dynamic contrasts more strongly, in my opinion.

My enjoyment of a recording is tied to the volume control.  If it is a good recording as I turn the volume higher it seems to "bloom" but too far and it becomes uncomfortable.  The bad DG recordings have the property that they become uncomfortable before they have fully "bloomed."

The EMI is warmer and less bright, but I would not refer to it as glassy. There may be, but I cannot remember hearing a glassy recording on EMI. That description is usually reserved (sometimes tiredly so) for DG Karajan. Anyway, that is not applicable for their 1975 Bruckner occasion, which is thinner sounding.

The only advantage I would give to this DG, is the time-saving of six minutes plus. I like the more urgent reading, though I do not find the final result as convincing as the 1970 EMI. Maybe poor sound swayed my judgment

It has been newly remastered for Japan, but I have not heard.