What's wrong with Rattle?

[Bonehelm]

I don't know what people liked in Rattle, his style of conducting is extremely eccentric; exaggerated highlighting of details and terribly lack attention on the "big picture" or architecture of the work. He made Berlin Philharmonic sounded like an amateur orchestra nowadays. I compared his conducting of Strauss' Ein Heldenleben with Mariss Jansson's one with Royal Concertgebouw and the difference was like Heaven and Hell. Both conductor's podium technique were obvious as well (at least Janssons doesn't look like an autistic kid suffering from spasms).

omg...ROFL

[Brian]

I have always been a bit suspicious of Rattle since my brother saw him arrive for a Roundhouse Prom in a sports jacket and change into a velvet T Shirt by the time of the concert.

However, I enjoy his Sibelius recordings, especially Symphony 3 and No 5. I was disappointed with the highly praised Walton Symphony 1 and Shostakovich Symphony 4.

He apparently has a very good relationship with his orchestras, who seem to enjoy playing for him.

Indeed, his Sibelius Five is the only Rattle I have - a live performance from GMG sources , and I love it. But generally am wholly unqualified to judge the guy. His hair is cool, though Steven Pinker's style is better.

[Daedalus]

There seems to be a lot of negativity regarding Rattle on here so I thought I would even things up a bit.

One point I wanted to raise was that I thought that Rattle was supposed to have worked wonders with the CBSO during his time at the helm? This is what I have read and heard. Being a neophyte to classical I am not that aware of the history there.

Anyway, I'm not especially qualified to judge Rattle seeing as I have only really heard some of his Mahler cycle but I have really enjoyed the following performances/recordings by Rattle & CBSO:

Mahler Symphony No. 1 - this isn't the main recording of the 1st that I have listened to but I have enjoyed listening to it two or three times... highlights for me are the opening movement, in which the opening itself is beautifully orchestrated and the colours and textures of the whole first movement are captured wonderfully. The funeral march third movement is played slower than the average recording (in my experience) which lends to it a sinister feel. The finale is absolutely fantastic too, in my opinion.

Mahler Symphony No. 2 - one of the main recordings I have listened to of the 2nd. Really excellent - I think Rattle chooses the right parts of each movement to highlight and gives the whole thing an absolutely wonderful feel.

Mahler Symphony No. 7 - I have heard people call this a Rattle-kind of symphony (or words to that effect). Again, I think this is terrifically done. I had several versions of the 7th on the go when first listening to it and it didn't really capture my imagination until this Rattle recording.

By the sound of things on this thread so far, I imagine everyone will completely disagree with me, but I would recommend these recordings.

[Anne]

Rattle conducted Guerreleider at Philadelphia a couple of years back that I thought was very good.  At least it equaled Chailly and definitely beat Ozawa's performance of that work.  Such a shame that of the 3 recordings, Ozawa had the best singers.

[helios]

Rattle's primary "crime" amongst avid Classical fans is one of popularity.

The same reason that the likes of Karajan,  Pavarotti,  Argerich, Kissin, Pollini, Ashkenazy etc. have many negative comments directed towards them on sites like this..... being known by casual listeners (or even worse, non Classical fans!) is terrible eh?

[Daedalus]

Rattle's primary "crime" amongst avid Classical fans is one of popularity.

The same reason that the likes of Karajan,  Pavarotti,  Argerich, Kissin, Pollini, Ashkenazy etc. have many negative comments directed towards them on sites like this..... being known by casual listeners (or even worse, non Classical fans!) is terrible eh?

I think you might be right about that. 

By the way, I like your picture (avatar, is that what people call them?) 

D.

[helios]

By the way, I like your picture (avatar, is that what people call them?) 

Thanks. 

[drogulus]

Rattle's primary "crime" amongst avid Classical fans is one of popularity.

The same reason that the likes of Karajan,  Pavarotti,  Argerich, Kissin, Pollini, Ashkenazy etc. have many negative comments directed towards them on sites like this..... being known by casual listeners (or even worse, non Classical fans!) is terrible eh?

      That's part of it, I think. He's like an art-punk band that signed with a major label and is now "commercial" whatever they do. That plus Britishness is unforgivable.

   

What does Simon Rattle represent?  Is there tradition behind him?

     That's what I mean. Even his devotion to modern music won't mollify the unmollifiable. I have his recordings of Britten's Sinfonia da Requiem and both Mahler 10th Sympony discs, as well as the Shostakovich 10th. All are worth having (I prefer the CBSO Mahler to the BPO). His Mahler 6th is pretty good but not a favorite (the Szell is).

[Renfield]

Though I've yet to elaborate on my own position, I do think all this talk of "mollifying", and keeping to "tradition" is rather insecurely conservative without reason.

Note that I do not mean personal offence to anyone with this view; but if we were to only consider "good" those who are able to capably stick to the paradigm, paradigm shifts sound like they would be the province of the "bad", don't they?


Although of course "being different" and "being good/effective" are two different concepts entirely. I'm just saying the former isn't necessarily a reason for the latter to be impossible, nor something demanding mollification of the audience, in a creative profession.

Or so I think, of course.

[drogulus]

   Renfield, I'm in complete agreement with you. I was trying to show how the wierd attitude towards Rattle seems to be more about whether he's entitled to be what he is than whether he's any good at it. He's good enough to make a number of fine recordings and conduct the BSO in what may be the best Mahler 10th ever played here (if it has been played at all previously). There had been talk for years about Rattle replacing Ozawa (the local reaction was "oh please, please..." in the music columns). Others named were Haitink and Colin Davis, but Rattle was not a lesser choice by any means. If he had been chosen there would have been plenty of griping about tradition and what needs to be behind him (tails?) but there was no need to spoil things in advance. It's more fun to spoil things after.

[Wanderer]

Rattle's primary "crime" ... is one of popularity.

I don't believe any of the negative opinions so far expressed here are based on such a frivolous reason.
Generally speaking, though, we do live in a superficial world, so assuming a general distaste for Rattle does exist and also assuming his musical interpretations have nothing to do with it, you may indeed be right.

[Bunny]

The biggest problem with Rattle is that he was very over-rated by Gramophone for too many years.  No one could have lived up to their worship unless he also came down from the the Cross and rose on the 3rd day.

I've heard him in concert with both good and awful results.  His devotion to modern music can really go wrong.  A performance of Kyburz' Noësis was probably the most painful musical experience of my life, while his performance of Adès was quite enjoyable.  His Mahler 4th (with his dreadfully miscast paramour singing) was an abomination, while his Mahler 5th merely ordinary.  Then, after I am ready to stigmatize his Mahler as the enemy of true music, I hear him conduct DLVE with Quasthoff and Heppner and I am completely surprised again.  Somewhere under that ugly, frizzy, gray hair (badly, very badly in need of trimming), is a brain that at times forgets his own hype.  However, I think that most of the success of the DLVE that I heard came from the elegance of Quasthoff's voice and musical sensibilities.  His artistry took everything, and everyone up a notch.

I also have to agree about his Mozart.  Mozart is as close to bulletproof as a piece of music can be, but even there the conductor's quirks can annoy.  At best, Rattle's Mozart is unremarkable; it's never great or transcendent.

In the end, I just can't like the man as a musician.  I am convinced that when he conducts he is more interested in putting his stamp on things than in transmitting the greatness of the music. 

[Bunny]

   Renfield, I'm in complete agreement with you. I was trying to show how the wierd attitude towards Rattle seems to be more about whether he's entitled to be what he is than whether he's any good at it. He's good enough to make a number of fine recordings and conduct the BSO in what may be the best Mahler 10th ever played here (if it has been played at all previously). There had been talk for years about Rattle replacing Ozawa (the local reaction was "oh please, please..." in the music columns). Others named were Haitink and Colin Davis, but Rattle was not a lesser choice by any means. If he had been chosen there would have been plenty of griping about tradition and what needs to be behind him (tails?) but there was no need to spoil things in advance. It's more fun to spoil things after.

Boston is lucky to have escaped!  They have Jimmy Levine now and at least they don't have to worry about their orchestra sounding thin to the point of anorexia.

[eyeresist]

The biggest problem with Rattle is that he was very over-rated by Gramophone for too many years.  No one could have lived up to their worship unless he also came down from the the Cross and rose on the 3rd day.

Is Berlin his Golgotha? 

[Anne]

Bunny:

"His Mahler 4th (with his dreadfully miscast paramour singing) was an abomination, while his Mahler 5th merely ordinary."

Toscanini did the same thing with his paramour of the day and she was an abomination too.  There are so many Toscanini recordings that been spoiled by that woman.

I hope that modern day audiences will not let history repeat itself but will instead complain loudly about their dissatisfaction with that singing.

[Bunny]

Bunny:

"His Mahler 4th (with his dreadfully miscast paramour singing) was an abomination, while his Mahler 5th merely ordinary."

Toscanini did the same thing with his paramour of the day and she was an abomination too.  There are so many Toscanini recordings that been spoiled by that woman.

I hope that modern day audiences will not let history repeat itself but will instead complain loudly about their dissatisfaction with that singing.

In Rattle's recording of the 4th (before he met Kozena), he used the mature voiced Amanda Roocroft -- also stunningly miscast!  Kozena is at her best in Opera Seria; her voice is far from the silvery, almost childlike sound Mahler wanted.  Fwiw, I think Netanya Devrath probably came closest to the Mahler ideal in the 4th.  Unfortunately, there is only one recording with her, Abravanel with the Utah SO, and that recording is not otherwise among the elite Mahler 4ths.  It is worth hearing just for her singing. 

However, the singing was only one of many problems with Rattle's Mahler 4th.  Listen to the recording of the 4th with the CBSO and you will immediately appreciate the problems with his interpretation.

As for Toscanini, although I don't really know much about his love life, I'm sure you are correct about the singer.  Love and desire have a way of distorting reality for those deeply in the throes.  Thankfully the only Toscanini recordings I still listen to are his Beethoven cycle, and the singing in the Ninth is certainly good enough.

[BorisG]

Miss Farrar

[eyeresist]

Courting popularity among illiterates most certainly is.
And, BTW, listening to good music requires preparedness and concentration.

You make the concert hall sound like the study hall....

[BorisG]

You make the concert hall sound like the study hall....

I was thinking laboratory.

[Bunny]

Miss Farrar

Well!  She's much more beautiful than Magdalena Kozena.  I never heard Farrar sing, but my grandmother adored her.  She had all of her recordings, went to the opera whenever she could get tickets to hear her, and actually named my aunt "Geraldine" after her.