Shostakovich Symphonies, Cycles & Otherwise

[Karl Henning]

The Op.43 . . .

Listened to the first 5-1/2 minutes of the first movement.  Advantage: Jansons.  More energy and direction.  On its own, probably I should have had no quarrel with the Rattle;  only given this side-by-side comparison, the comparative stateliness of the pace felt just on the verge of languor.

Listened to a patch of the third movement, from the keening oboes at the end of the marcia funebre, through the massive "extended hocket" tutti, through to the orchestral bells and timpani fortissimo, and the big unison trombone peroration.  Advantage: Jansons.  Rattle whipped the Birminghamers quicker, at least at first, and it felt like a borderline-unmusical strain;  and in fact the momentum wore down, so that at the last it felt a little tired, oom-pah-pah-ish.  Then at the orchestral bells &c. passage, he ratcheted the tempo back up, and it felt unmotivated.

Listened to the last 8-ish minutes of the third movement, the waltz, and then its dissolution, the grand pealing brass, and the aftershock.  Man, the Bavarians sound terrific with Jansons.  For the waltz, there was a grace to Jansons's take;  Rattle sounded in a hurry, and I'm not sure why.  For the big brass bit, there was a bit of a sourness to the intonation of the Birmingham brass, times when there was a bit of dispute in the pitch among the horns.  Not at all a genuinely bad performance, but (again) hearing the two orchestras in succession, this is the sort of difference which stands out.  Advantage: Jansons.

Listened to a patch of the second movement, the Trio, and the retransition into the Scherzo, the fugato.  Love how the Bavarian strings dig in at the succeeding entrances of the fugato.  Curious to report, there is a moment of dodgy intonation in the Birmingham strings near the start of the Trio.  The string entrances in the fugato, a little wishy-washy among the Birminghamers.  Once again, and overall--Advantage: Jansons.

[snyprrr]

The Op.43 . . .

Listened to the first 5-1/2 minutes of the first movement.  Advantage: Jansons.  More energy and direction.  On its own, probably I should have had no quarrel with the Rattle;  only given this side-by-side comparison, the comparative stateliness of the pace felt just on the verge of languor.

Listened to a patch of the third movement, from the keening oboes at the end of the marcia funebre, through the massive "extended hocket" tutti, through to the orchestral bells and timpani fortissimo, and the big unison trombone peroration.  Advantage: Jansons.  Rattle whipped the Birminghamers quicker, at least at first, and it felt like a borderline-unmusical strain;  and in fact the momentum wore down, so that at the last it felt a little tired, oom-pah-pah-ish.  Then at the orchestral bells &c. passage, he ratcheted the tempo back up, and it felt unmotivated.

Listened to the last 8-ish minutes of the third movement, the waltz, and then its dissolution, the grand pealing brass, and the aftershock.  Man, the Bavarians sound terrific with Jansons.  For the waltz, there was a grace to Jansons's take;  Rattle sounded in a hurry, and I'm not sure why.  For the big brass bit, there was a bit of a sourness to the intonation of the Birmingham brass, times when there was a bit of dispute in the pitch among the horns.  Not at all a genuinely bad performance, but (again) hearing the two orchestras in succession, this is the sort of difference which stands out.  Advantage: Jansons.

Listened to a patch of the second movement, the Trio, and the retransition into the Scherzo, the fugato.  Love how the Bavarian strings dig in at the succeeding entrances of the fugato.  Curious to report, there is a moment of dodgy intonation in the Birmingham strings near the start of the Trio.  The string entrances in the fugato, a little wishy-washy among the Birminghamers.  Once again, and overall--Advantage: Jansons.

You had me at hello, Karl! ok, that settles THAT! See how easy that is?

You passed up Jansons, Rattle, Kondrashin, Rozhdestvensky, Previn and Slava for...Järvi? 

I'm so disappointed 

Sarge

1) Well, like I said, I'm listening to the library Slava as my FirstListen, and it's very very good but shows me there can be more, and people are holding up Jarvi as quite one of the brutal ones.

2) Karl just settled the JansonsvsRattle Debate for me. Won't last the night...

3) I'll get Previn if I can find the cheap one.

4) I have to make Rozh a "later on" decision because of the sound/tutti issues "wooly bassdrum"

5) Kondrashin overcomes any sonic limitations with zesty vigor,- and the sonic limitations didn't sound too bad (but I do seek to eliminate sound considerations, that's why I like to focus on Teldec, Philips, Decca, Virgin, bla bla,... I know, that makes me a bitch, but, I DEMAND that in this day and age I should be able to EXPECT Sound+Vision without any added charge!)


I mean, there's some ANAL people out there is DSCH Review-land, haha,... and, you know, you can tell with some of these reviews if they're in to it or not. Sometimes you can see them frothing as they type. But, then there's the problem when eeeveryone is saying one thing, and this one, lone dissenter comes and brings out some obvious point that makes you wonder everyone else's capability. It's quite maddening, but,... frankly, Jarvi came out smelling like roses, with most of the competition having killed each other off in the preliminaries! kARL, AND EVERYONE ELSE, HAS AT LEAST CONVINCED ME THAT(gaaah) Jansons is "lisenable" enough (oh, we are so spoiled, haha)!

It does sadden me that Rozh & Co. usually come with Desire Inducing Sound. Anyhow,... haha, I'm also convinced that it is alcohol that allows you to listen to scratchy old records- an essential "listening aid", haha??!!??!!

"This Vodka Sounds Great"

Anyhow, the Best 4th Is the Next One!

[Brahmsian]

Is he daemonic enough though? Do you like someone better?. If this were 'The Matrix', and...

I'll admit I almost had my finger on the trigger, but went a' review huntin', and the one guy reeeally let Petrenko have it (which, granted, was pretty much only that, in such broad tempi, he missed "something or other"haha).

Well, get your finger back on it. 

Of the 4ths I've heard (only 3 performances), I like best (in order):

*Petrenko/RLPO
*Ormandy/Philadelphia (American premiere) - close second
*Barshai/WDR Kolner[/list]

[Karl Henning]

Of the 4ths I've heard (only 3 performances), I like best (in order):

*Petrenko/RLPO
*Ormandy/Philadelphia (American premiere) - close second
*Barshai/WDR Kolner

Of that list, your ranking strikes me as sound

[snyprrr]

Well, get your finger back on it. 

Of the 4ths I've heard (only 3 performances), I like best (in order):

*Petrenko/RLPO
*Ormandy/Philadelphia (American premiere) - close second
*Barshai/WDR Kolner

But, don't you NEEEED at least one of the SuperMightyDigitalWonders to at least compare?


We need some rules here... tap tap tap....

ok, this is how it goes. When we meet, say, a Prokofiev or DSCH Symphony, this is what we MUST do:

1) Get whatever is the LEAST negatively criticized, most standard issue FirstListen type of performance that most all can agree to. (here it was Jarvi)

2) Get one of 'The Originals'- usually in bad sound,- everyone always raves about the Russians in bad sound. (mRAV, kONDR, Gauk, etc.,...)

3) Get one of the NewSuperDigitalWonders (in the 4th here- Chung, Salonen, Rattle, Jansons, etc.)

4) Get one crappy version- or GuiltyPleasure,- or XXXtreme- or something to bounce of off. (Slatkin?)

5) By this time you should be able to get a fifth version all by yourself, seeing as you've probably spent weeks researching this Symphony to death!

6) 6??? Now we're starting to go overboard!!!!STOP HERE for now and move on to another Symphony.

[Karl Henning]

snypsss, have you thought about Caetani in the Op.43? . . .

[Karl Henning]

Some say Rattle is too Mahlerian here. I don't even know what that means . . .

As I revisited that one yesterday, I suppose what is meant is the "mood-swing manner" (which I don't suppose is fair either to Mahler or to ДШ) . . . but (while not to the exaggerated degree of Gergiev) Rattle seems determined to exaggerate certain contrasts, which to my mind sacrifices The Grand Arc of the piece.

[Archaic Torso of Apollo]

Rattle seems determined to exaggerate certain contrasts, which to my mind sacrifices The Grand Arc of the piece.

I think this is the crux of most critiques against Rattle - not just in this piece, but in general. It shows up to greater effect in music where there's a lot of competing versions, and seems to annoy people largely on that basis (see any Hurwitz critique of Rattle in Mahler, Beethoven or similar much-recorded composer). In music where there's not a lot of competition (Adams, Messiaen, Szymanowski), either he's doing less of it because there's no need to make the interpretation self-consciously "stand out," or the music isn't familiar enough to notice it.

It's also something that's more effective live than in the studio. Every Rattle concert I've been to has been good or great, but there are a lot of misfires in his discography.

[snyprrr]

snypsss, have you thought about Caetani in the Op.43? . . .

On Amazon, they have a listing for the MDG, but when you click on to hear samples, the Caetani is there. If those are Caetani's samples, yes, the 1stmvmt sample really had some bite to it (reminding of the Raiskin review "most lacerating").


What I'm getting out of the actual music is is that, as they say, it is either a meditation of Mahlerian procedures, or it is the soundtrack to an imaginary movie. I'd say both- the music to me simply seems like he choose a tempo, and then bopped along, putting in whatever came into his mind, whilst continuing to keep the metronome going in the background- it's just a virtuoso display...

but it's more than that, because this virtuoso display is married to a musical language rich in paranoiac and 'The Fugitive' type atmosphere (which it keeps up for the whole thing). This music almost reminds me of a kind of prog-rock from the '70s, where they just adopted a tempo, and then built section upon section until they were done- of course DSCH does this with quite a better idea of line and trajectory!!


I could start a whole 70min Symphony off with simply  EEE EDDD (one-two-three) one (one-two-three)

DSCH was big on this "motto" theme thingy, and it reminds me of Pettersson too, and they just string the whole thing together like a pearl necklace? Yes or no?



Symphony 4- to me- in it's simplest form- reminds me of an imaginary b+w British TV Spy Thriller- with the main picture being some cool imaginary British car racing (cartoon like) across a bridge with threatening skies and a threatening British countryside (because- they're NOT threatening... like in 'Hot Fuzz')... persued, or not...

the dashing hero


the villian


what's that 2nd mvmt melody???                  g  f#  g  c#      ??     That's 'The Theme' (the plucky hero's theme) or     g  f#  g  c   -  g  f#  g  Bb

[Karl Henning]

3) I'll get Previn if I can find the cheap one.

The Previn/CSO is overall very good.  I remember feeling that he didn't quite carry the "extended hocket" tutti of the third movement, but:  I should go back, listen again, and see if my ear has reconsidered.  I also have an impossibly niggling quarrel (which scarcely anyone else on GMG will care about) with one of the recurring rhythms in the big Pealing Brass passage, but I do not find that a Fatal Flaw.  The band sounds good, it cannot be denied.

[snyprrr]

Symphony No.10 Op.93 (1953)

I haven't touched my DSCH CDs that I do have (only Karajan 10, Stokowski 11, and Haitink 13 left) since I began recently, so, I thought it was time to break out the Karajan '81. Now first, let me get this question out of the way: I have a pretty early CD,- in what way does 'The Originals' improve this, to my ears, strange sounding CD, that my ears then get used to (I mean, I put on the Allegro first, and the sound was just odd compared to my recent listening). Also, it was noted that this recording has some aggravating dynamic ranges which I noticed in the 3rd mvmt. (too soft/too loud)

Anyhow, I skipped the Moderato just to hear the Allegro. Is there really any need to comment? Listening to Karajan the pleasure is in the incisiveness, but I wonder what a truly unhinged performance sounds like (will check that Mrav).

But, the last two movements are what I really wanted to discuss. I seem to recall (this CD may actually be the first I ever bought, it's that old) not particularly having an impression of these, and now I see why. I don't know if it's this DG recording, but much of the music resides in that ghostly waltzland type of the 'grotesque' that one finds in Prokofiev- but here DSCH is really eerie- but- I don't get it.

I see that the 3rd is (is it?) the first instance of the DSCH motif- and there is some of the paranoia of the 9th Symphony here- looking over your shoulder music- with the grotesque cariacature of Stalin plainly visible for the hearing. But I haven't gotten a grip on the sections yet. I do like the lightning fast (I think) clarinet in the 4th.

So- fourth time through the last two movements.




So, this Karajan sounds 'small', like it's a small orchestra. What's up with that? Is it just such a polished DG first go at Digital that it's tighter than a duck's ass? The 10th sounds to me like it needs a BigHall (the booklet doesn't say; Gunter Hermanns is the engineer) and this record really sounds like it was conceived in a studio. Still, very incisive, quite razor like. Again, does 'The Originals' address any of these issues?

[snyprrr]

Symphony No.5

I must have first heard the old Haitink from the library, and Penguin recommended the new Ashkenzy- which they convinced me was perfect (the "icy Adagio"- I like ice!), saying the low wattage opening was on purpose. And hey, who was I to know?m it was my first! And, frankly, I like the Ashkenazy, all 'perfect' and everything- sorry SantaFe!

So, currently we have the library's Lenny (there's only One?), and I went straight for the Finale. I couldn't remember, Does he take it too fast or too slow? My first impression is of the rough-to-my-ears recording- and yes, he's a bit fast, but not ridiculously so (and I thought this was going to be 15 mins! is that Sanderlinf again?). But, I hear nothing extra super special here- it's fast.


Anyhow, before I take the plunge to give the opening the Five-Note-Challenge- OH I'M DREADING THIS!!!- THOSE 4 NOTES!!!! AAAAHHHHH!!!!- is Lenny gonna massacre it?? I recall liking Ashkenazy's frozen approach (apparently this was their first recording and they were all somewhat scared), and I thought I remember Haitink being a little to fast. I mean... uh... anyhow.... LENNY PASSES 5 NOTE INTRO TEST!!!! NICE & MEASURED

1) Don't hassle me about Mravinsky,... please! We'll get around to him, but I'm interested in the wider consensus right now. Reviewland is a difficult place concerning Op.47.

2) Jansons has two?..........eh?

3) Rosty has two................eh? some just haaaaaaaate both (DG gets higher marks)

4) Maxim/Collins? gets "special performance" reviews

5) Jarvi very polarizing

6) Temirkanov actually gets a GOOD review!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

7) right before the very very end, I want that triangle/celesta bit to come out of another world

Bychkov gets "wish Karajan would have done it- but still ok if just to hear the band"- default contender?

9) Berglund? Andrew Davis? Mackerras?

10) Sound for Lenny is totally uninspiring for this music            (listening- could he be just a shade slower in the 1st mvmt- listen to that "piano march")

11) Previn a non contender?

12) Rattle vs Jansons?

13) finally- Petrenko?

[Brahmsian]

Symphony No.5

13) finally- Petrenko?

I am a HUGE fan of Petrenko, but this is a 'no'.    Although, I've warmed up to it, I think it is perhaps the weakest link in the cycle.  Having said that, this disc of the 5th is paired up with a kick ass performance of the 9th! 

I vastly prefer Barshai/WDR Koln for the 5th.

[Brahmsian]

Symphony No.5

So, currently we have the library's Lenny (there's only One?), and I went straight for the Finale. I couldn't remember, Does he take it too fast or too slow? My first impression is of the rough-to-my-ears recording- and yes, he's a bit fast, but not ridiculously so (and I thought this was going to be 15 mins! is that Sanderlinf again?). But, I hear nothing extra super special here- it's fast.

The one performance I have heard of Lenny's 5th (young Lenny?), the finale is so super rapid fast, that I find it renders the symphony unrecognizable.

[snyprrr]

I am a HUGE fan of Petrenko, but this is a 'no'.    Although, I've warmed up to it, I think it is perhaps the weakest link in the cycle.  Having said that, this disc of the 5th is paired up with a kick ass performance of the 9th! 

I vastly prefer Barshai/WDR Koln for the 5th.

Shirley you have 9-10 metastystations of the grand olde Fifthe? I want soundSoundSOUND but I fear someone like Levi/Atlanta may sound synthetic? I need someone else to conduct the Haitink/Concertgebouw! That's all!

I have absolutely subconsciously rejected any thought of Barshai (though there is an early Virgin 10th?) AT THIS TIME because there are too many factors- I just refuse to believe there isn't another Haitink 5-styled recording that's just.... er.... proper! You know....you know!!!!

Is it always easier to say from whom to stay away?



(I'm finding Lenny's tempi fairly ok, nothing jarring so far (except the finale was just a bit fast))

The one performance I have heard of Lenny's 5th (young Lenny?), the finale is so super rapid fast, that I find it renders the symphony unrecognizable.

The one performance I have heard of Lenny's 5th (young Lenny?), the finale is so super rapid fast, that I find it renders the symphony unrecognizable.

The Sony w/9 'Bernstein Century' - same as early one right? What's "the other one"?

[Sergeant Rock]

The Sony w/9 'Bernstein Century' - same as early one right? What's "the other one"?

A live recording from Tokyo...one of my Top Twos (Slava and the NSO is the other). It was recorded in 1979. I think his studio Fifth was recorded 20 years earlier. The last movement is still fast but slower than the earlier recording (10:10 vs 8:55)




Sarge

[Brahmsian]

Re:  Symphony No. 5 Finale - Think of the 3 bears, and their porridge.  One is too hot, another is too cold, and the third one is 'just right'.   

Lenny - Too fast

Petrenko - Too slow

Barshai - Just right.   


....runs away

[trung224]

A live recording from Tokyo...one of my Top Twos (Slava and the NSO is the other). It was recorded in 1979. I think his studio Fifth was recorded 20 years earlier. The last movement is still fast but slower than the earlier recording (10:10 vs 8:55)




Sarge

Fully agree with Sarge about Bernstein II or Slava I. But I can add two more , Silvestri with VPO and Sanderling with RCO (better played than the one with Berlin Symphony Orchestra on Berlin Classics).

[kaergaard]

Not a cycle, - I wish there would be one - : No. 10, op 93, Pavel Kogan with the Moscow State Symphony Orchestra.

[snyprrr]

Symphony No.8

I think the Haitink was my very first classical music i chose to hear (library). c minor? What was there not to take a chance? So, I see the 8th is STILL fairly slim pickins', - the last one I remember coming out (in-the-day) was Bychkov on Philips, and it seems like most of the competition is quite fresh.

1) Bychkov/Philips?- anyone?- with Berlin!!

2) Jarvi gets high marks

3) Slatkin is the one I'm really curious about-mm??

4) Temirkanov also tempts, but of course with him I could be wary- anyone?

5) Petrenko sounds good, but does he not open with baH-BAAAH???

6) Mravinsky- not right now, please

7) Rattle vs Jansons MACH2

8- Gergiev's sound is highly criticized


Slim Pickins- but