# Conductors



## Aurelian (Sep 9, 2011)

At a live concert, how distracting do you find a conductor who swings his body around, forcefully points at musicians, and generally acts like his own theatrical production?

Among past conductors, Bernstein was the best example of this. Szell, in contrast, was restrained. And there was C. Kleiber's mysterious non-conducting conducting.

Gergiev and Dudamel seem expressive. Fischer seems more restrained.

Please share your thoughts about how conductors act on the podium.


----------



## larold (Jul 20, 2017)

As a concert listener if I am paying any attention to the conductor s/he is too expressive. I watch the orchestra and singers. If I am watching the conductor it is either because they are playing lousy or the conductor is distracting me.

As a singer in a chorus and as a soloist, if a conductor is very expressive this is also distracting. The thing a conductor should do is give entry cues, diminuendos, stops and starts. If s/he is swinging his/her body, hips or arms around there is no way to determine when to enter, get louder or softer, or stop.

As a musician I also find it best for conductors to look at you, eyes open, when they want you to enter.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

It's musical results that matter. Within reason, I don't care how the conductor gets them. But I'd agree that extreme gesticulations can be distracting. Generally I didn't find Bernstein too extreme.

Pianists and other instrumentalists, too, can distract with excessive gesturing, weird facial expressions, skimpy clothing, and floppy hair.


----------



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

"Actually you never eyeball a horn player. That’s one of the real rules. You just don’t. They’re stuntmen. You don’t eyeball stuntmen just before they’re about to go near death. That’s really true. You also never tell a horn player you played beautifully last time just before a concert. You see that look. They look at you and they’re always thinking, I could die now. And you know there’s something else behind the eyes. That’s really a truth. And so you have to let them do their very difficult thing without too much disturbing." ... Sir Simon Rattle


----------



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

And then there is the story of the conductor who told one of his students "Go out there and don't disturb the orchestra."


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

Leonard Bernstein and Dmitri Mitropoulos both said that the arm-waving, body jerking, near-histrionic method was necessary - they were acting out the music and wanted to convey meaning, attitude and excitement to the orchestra. And it worked. That same acting out is also received by the audience. A lot of audience members will think a concert is better than it really was because of the acting out of the conductor. On the other hand, a restrained, almost boring-to-watch conductor like Andre Previn or Boulez may be thought of as less than stellar simply because they don't flagellate all over the place. I liked Boult's retort to Rattle, calling him "one of the sweaty ones". Some restrained conductors get extraordinary results using their eyes, a certain tenseness in the baton, and something close to ESP. The quality of the orchestra matters a lot. Bernstein was a lot more calm with the Vienna Philharmonic than with New York.

As a performer I expect a lot from a conductor: if you're going to get up there on the podium, take the credit for a good performance and put the blame on the orchestra for a bad one, you'd better know what the heck you're doing. Frankly, there aren't a lot of good ones. There are a lot of people who want to have power, who want the glory and respect, but don't have the skill. My simple list of what the guy (or gal) must be able to do:
1) Know the music so well - however complex - that you can conduct without looking at the score. I play with one bozo who buries his head in the score on the downbeat and doesn't come up until the last note has sounded.
2) Respect the composer. Get the tempos correct, don't make cuts, don't reorchestrate.
3) Have a clear, precise beat. Putting all the beats in the same place is really annoying. And if you don't know how to really use a baton (most don't), then don't use one. Boult and Maazel had awesome baton technique. Bernstein's was actually quite good, learning it from Reiner. Mitropoulos, Stokowski, Boulez all got great results without a baton. Whichever way you go, just be very, very good at it.
4) Don't stop to lecture us and tell us how something should be played. If you are a conductor (leader), use that skill and conduct the music the way you want it played. But just shut up!


----------



## Auntie Lynn (Feb 23, 2014)

MTT is leaving SF soon - agitating for them to hire Krzsyzstof Urbanski or Vladimir Janowki (London)...LOVE these guys...


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Wasn't it Beecham who said to the players: "I know it, and you know it. So let's just PLAY it!"


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Becca said:


> "Actually you never eyeball a horn player..."


"Never look at the trombones, it only encourages them." --Richard Strauss


----------



## Dimace (Oct 19, 2018)

It is crazy! I love the hyper kinetic Lenny or Dimi, I love the same the slow moving Sergiu and Leif...


----------



## Olias (Nov 18, 2010)

Bernstein conducted the orchestra the same way that Matt Smith played The Doctor (lots of movement and every gesture meant something).


----------



## MarkW (Feb 16, 2015)

It's fun to watch how different conductors get the results they do, but mostly I'm listening and watching the players. (The most demonic I ever saw was Solti.


----------



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

The real key to finding out how different conductors get their results is to be able to see them in rehearsal where the heavy lifting is done ... or at least where it should be done!


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

MarkW said:


> It's fun to watch how different conductors get the results they do, but mostly I'm listening and watching the players. (The most demonic I ever saw was Solti.


The Screaming Skull. Some 40 years ago there was quite a scene at Bayreuth. The orchestra couldn't follow his so-called conducting and things were going badly. Took much more time to rehearse with him than someone like Sawallisch or Varviso, both of whom had terrific baton skills needed in opera.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

mbhaub said:


> The Screaming Skull. Some 40 years ago there was quite a scene at Bayreuth. The orchestra couldn't follow his so-called conducting and things were going badly. Took much more time to rehearse with him than someone like Sawallisch or Varviso, both of whom had terrific baton skills needed in opera.


It wasn't quite like that. The enormous problems in Siegfried were caused by Reiner Goldberg not being able to act and sing at the same time and had to be replaced.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Like Woodduck it is the musical results that matter to me. I _am _interested in what different conductors do to achieve the results they get but have never noticed much of a pattern between particular physical styles and the type of results they lead to. I guess what conductors do physically is just what they need to do and if the orchestra plays well for them then they must at least be doing no harm. I do sometimes wonder, though, how an orchestra can take some faces seriously as communicating anything profound. Obviously I can't name names but often it is a well-trimmed beard that makes me think this! I wonder if there are careers that have not flowered as they might have done because of a weak face?!

By the by, watching him on TV a few months ago, I did think that Sakari Oramo seemed to be enjoying the music, and his role in it, and also to genuinely like his players. He made the casual watcher feel "what a nice guy". As far as I can remember, this accompanied a pretty good performance of something.


----------



## larold (Jul 20, 2017)

_"Never look at the trombones, it only encourages them." --Richard Strauss _

There are oodles of quotes like this about brass; that's because three trombones can cover an entire orchestra. I saw it done one night in a Tchaikovsky symphony. This is the reason not many composers wrote a lot for brass.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

larold said:


> _"Never look at the trombones, it only encourages them." --Richard Strauss _
> 
> There are oodles of quotes like this about brass; that's because three trombones can cover an entire orchestra. I saw it done one night in a Tchaikovsky symphony. This is the reason not many composers wrote a lot for brass.


There are such things as dynamic markings to curb brassy excess, but the conductor has to enforce them. Hall design can help: singers like to perform at Bayreuth partly because in Wagner's covered orchestra pit the brass are actually located under the stage. (And, a propos the thread topic, the conductor can dance around to his heart's content and the audience won't see him.)


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

I'm going to post a 2-part response to this thread - 1.) famous, well-known conductors; and 2.) conductors from my own experience of 50+ years as an orchestral musician.
Conductors can be judged and evaluated on many different levels, and on many different facets of the job they perform - I will address my comments to their approach to actual performance - how they present the music to the audience:
Roughly speaking - what is the conductor's primary emphasis?? Is it precision, accuracy, perfection of ensemble?? Is it dramatic effect?? The big picture?? Or is it both?? The overall impact on the listener??
*There are some famous conductors who were most concerned with precision, perfect accuracy* - Szell certainly springs to mind, his precision with Cleveland was legendary [tho when he let the orchestra go full throttle, the results are quite thrilling- Beethoven 7, Leonore #3, Walton #2] - but he demanded, and achieved tremendous precision and unity of ensemble - Cleveland under Szell was a great sounding orchestra…von Karajan is another example - he demanded a unanimity of tone, articulation and ensemble - superbly controlled - expressive liberty tightly restricted within a narrow scope - he was once said that if you work out all the details, the overall picture will take care of itself….maybe?? - not imo, but more on that later….

*Some very famous conductors went for the big dramatic effect, with the perfection of ensemble taking a back seat* - these conductors may be more common - Mitropoulos, Beecham, Munch, Knappertsbusch are some, ottomh - Mitropoulos can be most exciting, tho at times, amazingly sloppy; Munch hated to rehearse - always looking for the spontaneity and immediate energy - at which he excelled in achieving, tho precision is often lacking; Kna also hated to rehearse, went for the big moment - famous story about Kna being forced to rehearse a Mozart symphony - at performance half the orchestra took a repeat, the other half didn't - Kna: <<_that's what comes of your damned rehearsing_>>


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

Not sure what happened to the last part of my post - apologies if this 2ble posts, or repeats in some way -

<<in his "Memoirs" - Solti equates him [Kna} with Beecham….powerful personality; recounts listening to Kna's rehearsals and concerts - his control of the orchestra was amazing - crescendi that nearly blew the house down….tho he didn't seem to have mastery of the entire score [??] -Sir Georg certainly took the volume with him into his long career!! For me, Furtwangler would fit into this category - he always strived for the big dramatic effect….tho often the precision was lacking in his frequent tempo fluctuations and emphasis on the "big moments" - others may, of course, disagree.
There are those conductors who combined both - powerful, dramatic effect, with extreme precision and accuracy - and these tend to be my favorite conductors: Reiner, Toscanini, Solti are prime examples - Mravinsky, also….It is said by some critics that Mravinsky tolerated a degree of sloppiness and imprecision - but I don't buy it - live performances?? Maybe…but that doesn't really count- his studio recordings show tremendous precision and stunning orchestra power and accuracy. 
These conductors were indeed sticklers for precision, but also "swung for the fences" dramatically - they'd give the orchestra full "Green Light" at the big climaxes - absolutely shattering blasts of sound, coming from extreme pianissimo dynamics - full range of articulations, huge dynamic power - fortississimo sostenuto…the orchestra playing right at the limit of control and accuracy. These conductors are real "drivers" - they push the orchestra to the limits - play ultra-soft, play ultra-loud…..it is a great challenge to play for them….a musician must have the finest training and ability, the finest equipment to perform successfully. One can all too easily settle into the <<always soft, always loud, always mezzo-mezzo>> mode and coast thru….not with the great ones on the podium….

I'll add my own personal conductor experiences in the near future -


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

Woodduck said:


> the conductor can dance around to his heart's content and the audience won't see him.)


It is most interesting to see Bernstein conduct in different settings - he could be extremely [excessively??] demonstrative on the podium in the concert hall...but in the studio - quite different - the video of his recording of "West Side Story" is quite remarkable - he is very restrained, conservative in his gestures with tremendous control on the orchestra, and vocalists - probably the Reiner influence - just gives a small downbeat, the sound simply explodes from the performers....no audience to view his histrionics!! lol!! 
Lenny would certainly put on a show - but he always gave clear signals to the orchestra...musicians don't mind the podi80um theatrics [it sells tickets], as long as the signals to the orchestra remain clear...


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

Then there are the hard-working conductors who have a clean stick technic, a good ear, a sense of style, a familiarity with performance traditions. These are the men (and some women) who don't ever make it to the big time, never see their names in the limelight. They work in smaller cities, out of the way places and are amazingly content to do what they do, for a small fraction of the gigantic salaries of the maestros in Boston, New York, Philadelphia, Cleveland and especially Los Angeles. The performances may not be one for the ages, but they are perfectly acceptable: well played, in tune, well paced. They aren't screamers, they don't put players down. And I love playing for these conductors as much as I enjoy their concerts as an audience member. That's the saddest thing about the classical music biz today: too many people seem to think that only the rich and famous conductors are good. Trust me, there are fine orchestral concerts in places like Las Vegas, Tucson, Albuquerque, Lubbock, Cheyenne, Des Moines, Omaha, Erie, Reading, Tulsa, Little Rock, Grand Rapids, and so many places in the eastern states. Portland, Maine - another winner. The Virginia Symphony - wonderful.


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

mbhaub said:


> Then there are the hard-working conductors who have a clean stick technic, a good ear, a sense of style, a familiarity with performance traditions. These are the men (and some women) who don't ever make it to the big time, never see their names in the limelight.


most definitely - I'm going to address my own experiences with these conductors on part 2 of my posting...there are some very fine conductors on the regional or local level who produce fine performances ....there are also some real turkeys....


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Worth repeating here.
-----------------------------------------------
That sweat-drenched face was bearing down upon us like the archangel of vengeance himself as we almost disemboweled ourselves with feverish effort. Then suddenly, a spine-chilling wail: "Pi-a-a-a-n-o-o! Bassi! Contrabassi! You grunt away like pigs! You sound as if you were scratching your bellies -- szshrump! szshrump!" he would bellow, while, tearing at his clothes, he viciously pantomined the scratching. "Corpo del vostro Dio! PI-A-A-NO!"

"But Maestro," a player would sometimes protest in a small, hesitant, and resentful voice. "My part is printed 'forte.' " "What you say?" the Old Man would growl menacingly, unbelievingly, distracted for the moment from his tirade. "It says 'forte,' " the player would reply, this time in an even smaller, more apologetic voice.

"What? Forte? FORTE?" with an air of incredulity. "What means 'forte'? Ignorante! Is a stupid word -- as stupid as you! Is a thousand fortes--all kinds of fortes. Sometimes forte is pia-a-a-no, piano is forte! Accidenti! [Damn it!] You call yourself a musician? O, per Dio santissimo! You play here in THIS orchestra? In a village cafe house you belong! You don't listen to what others play. Your nose in the music -- szshrump! szshrump! You hear nothing! You cover up the oboe solo! One poor oboe -- one! -- and you szshrump! szshrump! Where are your ears? Look at me! Contra-ba-a-ss-i!" in a long, drawn-out wail. "Tutti! Tutti! Vergogna! [Shame!]"

-- Quoted from Samuel Antek, "This Was Toscanini", 1963


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

the funny thing is.....take away the histrionics and the vitriol...Toscanini was right!! he makes valid points....
also- Toscanini, tyrannical and verbally abusive, was not known for summary firings of musicians....some others - Rodzinski, Reiner, Stokowski were much nastier...Szell, too...not a nice person....


----------



## Larkenfield (Jun 5, 2017)

_"Please share your thoughts about how conductors act on the podium."_

Furtwangler was fascinating to watch because he seemed to be reacting to the music like a puppet on a string being shocked with electricity, with his left hand always dangling and dancing. I believe that's why he was known for never playing the same piece twice in the same way because he was always reacting and responding to something going on at the moment. I've never seen anything like it and I doubt that I ever will. He was loose and relaxed on the podium. He never choked off the music at the source, strangled it, like some of the other controlling tyrants did who had to manage everything down to its last jot and tittle. Furtwangler appeared completely at-one with the music and orchestra and I believe that's why so many of his performances continue to amaze with their immediacy, vitality, and life... and I've always enjoyed watching him being shot through with electricity like an animated puppet.






There could also be a relaxed inner stillness about him in the way he moved on the podium. There was a quiet sense of space around him energetically. It's just a shame that he didn't make it into the stereo era:


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

Follow-up to previouous posting -rre conductors

2.) In my own experience, I've played for many conductors, some great, some very good, many OK/so-so, and some really lame….
*2 of the best I played for - Walter Hendl and Boris Goldovsky - had very clear concepts of what they needed to hear, where the music was going, and how to get it from the performers*….they had absolutely clear visons of the drama, the unfolding development of a work…Goldovsky knew where it was going long before we ever got there…it was quite amazing….
*I tend to enjoy those conductors who stressed the drama, the dramatic effect, the total experience to be conveyed to the audience*…one conductor, for whom I played over 25 years, always had in mind the big effect - the big climax….and he wanted lots of sound…at times, esp as he aged, he got lax on the precision and ensemble, and perhaps let the orchestra play too loud as an habit…but his performances always came off BIG…with rousing climaxes and huge orchestral sonority…I always felt that, at the end of the concert, we had really "sent it home" to the audience…
His successor was quite the opposite -* he very much worked on precision, ensemble, and unity between sections, and the orchestra improved significantly in these areas*. He was a stickler for soft dynamics, which is good, providing the loud dynamics do not diminish in the process. Unfortunately, that was not the case…the orchestra kept playing softer and softer, in fact, at times I wondered if the sound was even projecting to the audience…it was almost as if the concert were being presented solely for the benefit of those on stage - a kind of snooty, exclusive approach that ignored the audience, who had paid for tickets to the event!! "play as absolutely soft as possible!!" was the watch phrase, to the point that some musicians would drop notes, have notes not speak because so little air was being used…Sorry, gang - dropped, missed notes are, in my book, by my training, mistakes…..goofs…this guy actually told me that it was ok if the first note of the Tchaikovsky #6 bassoon solo - the opening low "E" solo did not speak!! Really?? No, it is not OK, not OK with me, probably not ok with Tchaikovsky!! I frequently left the concert hall feeling a bit empty, as tho we really hadn't put the music across….yes, it was accurate, precision was generally quite good, but the oomph, the wallop, the sonic "trip" had not been achieved, that we could have done more…that we hadn't left it all in the concert hall…. 
*Another conductor I really enjoyed, was a long-time BSO cellist - very clear technique, and very consistent…he always had the musical flow in mind, and what you saw at rehearsal, was what you got at the concert -* same preparatory beats, same tempi, same changes of tempo….he was extremely good with the strings, he knew many bowing techniques and strokes to achieve just the sound he wanted. He was not so familiar with woodwinds and brass, but to his credit, would frequently ask for advice and tips on how to achieve certain results…fine conductor, excellent musician….
* I've played for some conductors who were quite fine musicians, very good ears for pitch and balance, etc, but simply lacked the power of personality to control the orchestra.* They would whine, or plead with the orchestra to comply with their wishes…No, this does not work!!
* I've also played for some who had huge egos, but virtually no musical talent, and these types are usually really annoying*…insecure, pompous and overbearing, without a trace of the talent or genius displayed by such as Reiner, Toscanini or Szell…one guy programmed Hanson's Symphony #2 "Romantic"….I work I had performed with the composer while at Eastman…Never, not once, did this jerk ever ask me about it, what approach, what sort of things did the composer do, what did he stress. In fact, this jerk actually seemed to resent the fact that I'd had a musical experience exceeding his own….the aforementioned conductor, for whom I played for over 25 years, programmed the same work - was delighted that I had played with Hanson, asked all sorts of questions, and proudly announced the affiliation at a pre-concert talk to the prospective audience…
Conductors like musicians, and those of all professions, come in all sorts of varieties, with various strengths and weaknesses…I guess the final judgment is - how well do these conductors inspire their musicians, how well do they know their music, and ultimately, how do these performances come across to the audience


----------



## Quartetfore (May 19, 2010)

the Harold Schoenberg a long time critic at the NY Times called Bernstein " the Peter Pan of music". By this I think he was writing about his antics while conducting. I did hear him several time during his last year with the NY Phil, and yes he did jump around a great deal. I made it a practice to close my eyes. He did calm down in his later years when he conducted the Vienna Phil. I have seen several film clips with this band, and it was not the Lenny Of yore.


----------



## Quartetfore (May 19, 2010)

I left out the late writing about Harold Schoenberg. He was a man of strong opinions, and could make or break an artist. For the Times those days are gone,since they now give more space to "pop" and "rap" then classical music


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

I don't find conductors movements extreme from what I've seen. Lang Lang is the only performer I find that takes gestures to the extreme. Quite the opposite of Richter who later lit only a small lamp on the score so the audience would focus on the music rather than the physical gestures.


----------



## Frank Freaking Sinatra (Dec 6, 2018)

mbhaub said:


> The Screaming Skull. Some 40 years ago there was quite a scene at Bayreuth. The orchestra couldn't follow his so-called conducting and things were going badly. Took much more time to rehearse with him than someone like Sawallisch or Varviso, both of whom had terrific baton skills needed in opera.


Interesting views of Solti during rehearsals -


----------



## Frank Freaking Sinatra (Dec 6, 2018)

A link to 91 videos of conductors during rehearsals -

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLD008F5680B568D7F


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

interesting, I wouldn't dream of equating the staid, stodgy Sawallisch with the fiery, brilliant Solti....heard them both conduct live. Solti many times....riveting, exciting,; Sawallisch = a snoozefest.


----------



## Ras (Oct 6, 2017)

Heck148 said:


> interesting, I wouldn't dream of equating the staid, stodgy Sawallisch with the fiery, brilliant Solti....heard them both conduct live. Solti many times....riveting, exciting,; Sawallisch = a snoozefest.


Sawallisch is actually one of the few conductors who - for me - can save Schumann from being a "snoozefest".
Sawallisch's Brahms isn't half bad etiher.

Solti is the greater conductor though - I agree.


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

Quartetfore said:


> the Harold Schoenberg a long time critic at the NY Times called Bernstein " the Peter Pan of music". By this I think he was writing about his antics while conducting.


Lenny,in his NY years, was definitely putting on a show for the audience - he knew it, the musicians knew it, but they didn't mind - he still gave clear signals to the orchestra, and his wild histrionics sold lots of tickets and recordings. 
Keep in mind, , Bernstein was a great conductor, he could be wild or very restrained- he got the point across. Check out the video of his studio recording of _West Side Story _[Te Kanawa, Carreras, etc]...very conservative movements [no audience] but crystal clear and decisive signals to the orchestra....also - check out the well-known video of Haydn Sym #88/IV with VPO...he starts them off, and basically stops conducting....no arm movement at all - of course, all sorts of eye movement, and subtle body language going on...the orchestra just plays, zips along, [tho Lenny is always overseeing it]...
This was Reiner style - Bernstein was a Reiner student, like Hendl and Goldovsky [both of whom frequently simply stopped conducting with arm motion]. if the orchestra is alert, the musicians will be very aware of these subtle signals from the podium.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Ras said:


> Sawallisch is actually one of the few conductors who - for me - can save Schumann from being a "snoozefest".
> Sawallisch's Brahms isn't half bad etiher.
> 
> Solti is the greater conductor though - I agree.


Yes - the Sawalisch Schumann set gives the lie to the suggestion he is boring: he plays the Schumann symphonies at white heat.


----------



## WildThing (Feb 21, 2017)

Enthusiast said:


> Yes - the Sawalisch Schumann set gives the lie to the suggestion he is boring: he plays the Schumann symphonies at white heat.


He became more tempid at the later end of his career...his performances of several Wagner operas from the late 50s and early 60s at the Bayreuth festival are also intense and passionate.


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

Yes, those old Bayreuth recordings on Philips show a thrilling Sawallisch. Like other conductors, as he got old he did slow down and gave more staid performances. But you should have heard the Schmidt 2nd he did in Carnegie Hall in his farewell season with Philadelphia - stunning.


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

Sawallisch had a long active career...maybe I just caught him on "off days".
My experiences with Sawallisch were definitely negative....I heard live a very tepid, low-key rendition of Brahms Sym #2....with, IIRC, Vienna SO?? really quite subdued and lacking energy....the contrast was quite striking to 2 subsequent performances of Brahms 2 I heard within the next few years - Steinberg/PittsSO [very good] and Ormandy/PhilaqOrch [magnificent!! really thrilling!!]...sounded like a different work....
I did acquire his recordings of some Mendelssohn symphonies - 3 and 4 [??] - and again, was not impressed with the subdued, low energy performances....I looked elsewhere....Bernstein, Solti, Maag[lp which I no longer possess]


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Phil loves classical said:


> I don't find conductors movements extreme from what I've seen. Lang Lang is the only performer I find that takes gestures to the extreme.* Quite the opposite of Richter who later lit only a small lamp on the score so the audience would focus on the music rather than the physical gestures.*


In doing so Richter was taking his own 'gestures' to an extreme


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

There is a lot of tripe written about Karajan and his so-called 'control'. According to those who played under him (of which I was never one, of course!) his concerts tended to be like playing chamber music as once they had rehearsed it, he felt he could allow the players to express themselves. One interesting story recounted by an orchestra member (not sure VPO or BPO) when Karajan asked him to play a certain passage of a Richard Strauss tone poem differently, the guy said 'NO'. When Karajan asked why the horn player replied, "I played it that way for Richard Strauss and I'm not changing it for you!" Karajan said, "From the horses mouth!" and carried on rehearsing


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Frank Freaking Sinatra said:


> Interesting views of Solti during rehearsals -


Fascinating videos!


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

There are some skills beyond the basic techniques that the aspiring conductor must master if he/she hopes to advance in the field...certainly, the ability to clearly establish beat patterns, maintain tempo, to know the score, to instantly detect flaws, to correct inaccuracies are a bare minimum of skills needed.

but many conductors fail on further issues - efficient use of rehearsal time, ability to clearly indicate tempo, style, phrasing thru the stick technique...
failure to use rehearsal time efficiently is a major problem with some conductors, and it is extremely frustrating for the orchestra musicians...
David Zinman, when he was in Rochester, once gave a master class to conducting students - he made a good point - he said that 
<<you [the conductor] should never pull things apart past the point that you have time to put things back together>>
This is wise. if you are rehearsing details, good, but you still need to out it back into the context of the entire performance...I remember one guy, who was so extremely nit-picky, that after the entire first part of rehearsal [1.5 hours] we had not even gotten thru 1/3 of one piece!! [there were 4 works on the program] - gawd - one measure, stop - yakety-yak; another measure, stop, yakety-yak, on and on ad nauseam....the musicians are wondering if we're even going to see the other works by concert time....of course, this type of inefficiency yields inferior results - the nit-picky, constant blabbering does not produce favorable results, IME, and it usually means other works on the program will be woefully under-rehearsed....
I also remember one conductor who always wanted a pre-concert rehearsal, just before the concert performance, same day...this can really be annoying if done wrong, or it can be effective if used wisely...generally musicians don't like it - it's concert day, let's get down to business....they don't want to waste their best performance on a dress rehearsal the day of the concert. One conductor I worked with for years, contracted his orchestras, would use this rehearsal to start each piece, go over any tempo changes, fermati, starts, stops, transitions, etc....good, wise use of time...another guy would rehearse frantically, still tearing things apart, nit-picking over details, going over exposed solos, difficult parts....tearing things down far beyond the point of putting them back together again....this did not yield positive results, needless to say.

In general, orchestra musicians do not like the podium "talkers" - various famous conductors were noted talkers [Mengelberg, early Klemperer, Paray, Kertesz to name a few] - and of course, this has led to some famous stories - the well-known Klemperer-Labate scene at NYPO, and the Paray/Chicago incident are but two...
Kertesz could be quite a talker, but apparently he could get away with it.. generally popular with musicians, he was the Cleveland orchestra's pick to succeed Szell. His untimely death was a great loss to the music world.

Another key point for conductors is actual stick, conducting technique....I remember playing for one conductor who simply could not understand the relationship between beat size, and style, with what he wanted to hear. We were playing Verdi Overture to "Nabucco" - the fast section can move right along, and this guy wanted to go really fast - fine - except, that to go faster, he kept making a larger beat pattern!! the stick made a bigger pattern for each measure....No, to go faster, make a smaller beat, a tiny beat if necessary...watch videos of Monteux or Reiner, two masters...very small beat, very fast, with the orchestra right on top of it...no delayed beat stuff...an interesting related story - Frederick Fennell [a fine conductor] was conducting a summer band program, and a circus march was next up - something by Fillmore of Karl King. IIRC - these are really fast, breakneck speed with lots of notes [you didn't know trombones could play clarinet parts!! :lol:] anyway,Fennell gave tiny, rapid preparatory beat and took off, leaving the band in the dust....when asked if he could take it slower, he declined, stating that he didn't want to slow down, because then the band would try to hammer, to pound out every note, and he'd never get it back up to desired speed...play cleanly,fast, lightly,the notes will speak...but keep it moving....he got what he wanted - his "Screamers" [EWE Mercury] disc is a classic...Fennell knew how to conduct fast tempo!!
also - if you want long, singing lines, the beat pattern must indicate that, smooth, connected, flowing...if you conduct with a short, choppy beat, the orchestra will play short and choppy....it seems pretty obvious, common sense, but some just don't get it..

So, the basic skills of conducting are indeed considerable, and much talent, study and practice is needed to develop them....but these are not enough - there are skills needed when one actually gets a conducting position, and the ability to master these skills - use of rehearsal time, appropriate stick technique, ability to quickly correct problems - will usually separate the sheep from the goats - the real masters from the journeymen......


----------



## GAJ (Oct 15, 2016)

I get as much enjoyment analysing a conductor's style (restrained or over the top) as dissecting his or hers interpretation. 

However, I must include collecting anecdotes from conductor's views of their music they perform. 

An example: Josef Krips words to the Royal Philharmonic Orchestra as he raised his baton to begin recording Haydn's Symphony No. 104: " Please smile when you play the first note, gentlemen, it gives it a certain shine".


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

GAJ said:


> I get as much enjoyment analysing a conductor's style (restrained or over the top) as dissecting his or hers interpretation.
> 
> However, I must include collecting anecdotes from conductor's views of their music they perform.
> 
> An example: Josef Krips words to the Royal Philharmonic Orchestra as he raised his baton to begin recording Haydn's Symphony No. 104: " Please smile when you play the first note, gentlemen, it gives it a certain shine".


That's good!! another anecdote about a famed podium "talker" - again, I think it was Klemperer...
[side note - orchestra musicians can be a pretty cynical lot - generally, they like simple, direct instructions - as in:
Faster/Slower, Higher/Lower, Louder/Softer, more/less.....flowery descriptions, poetic diatribes do not go over too well :lol:]

Brahms Sym #1 - last movement - big buildup, wonderfully famous horn solo begins - OK stops - addresses principal horn, goes into poetic description of sunrise, the magnificence of the new light brightening the new day, blah, blah, blah.....
another musician to Horn player: <<Hey, Jimmy, I think he wants it louder!!>> :lol::lol:


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

Instead of starting a whole new thread, I thought I'd just continue this one:

The current HIP, Beethoven #5 and Mahler 6 threads have spun long traces, and have generated some interesting issues worth discussing on their own threads....

I'm certainly a product of my generation - and I freely admit to favoring many of the older recordings as my favorite versions of standard works...there was something about those old podium dictators [I played for a few of them] that produced great performances on a regular basis....there was tremendous orchestra control - a freedom for orchestra soloists combined with an unshakable ability to maintain a steady "hand on the tiller" for the entire ensemble....
These guys had an absolutely clear idea, concept, of what they wanted to hear - they knew what they wanted, how to get it, how to fix things to get it.... 
Reiner, Toscanini, Solti, Stokowski, Walter, Bernstein, Monteux, Mravinsky, Furtwangler, Karajan. - they all had towering podium presence and personality...their performances and recordings are rightly held in high esteem....they set a very high mark for succeeding generations to follow...
I was fortunate to hear great live concerts conducted by such as Solti, Abbado, Stokowski, Szell, Bernstein, Ormandy,... 
Some of the Solti/CSO concerts defied belief, but Ormandy/PhilaOrch, Stokowski, Abbado, Szell were truly memorable as well. So many great Ormandy/Phila concertts....

That said - I've heard some very fine live performances from present conductors and orchestras:
Salonen, Levine, Nelsons, van Zweden, Oramo, Bychkov, Masur. Mehta....these were primarily with CSO, BSO, and NYPO...

Really great, thrilling performances, with terrific playing, and superb conducting...i would rank some of the Salonen, van Zweden, and Nelsons performances as among the finest I've ever heard...most enjoyable....CSO and BSO are sounding great, go hear them!!

I'd like very much to hear Honeck/PittsSO live!! I have one of their recordings and it is very good:

http://www.arkivmusic.com/classical...=56124&name_role2=3&bcorder=31&comp_id=618958

[sorry, I tried to copy the image, but messed it up - maybe somebody can help me with posting images??]

This is a Strauss disc - with Honeck's arrangement of _Elektra_ Orchestral music {sans voce] and a standard version of _Der Rosenkavalier _suite...
This is a fine disc, recommended - great sound - Reference Recordings.... [their Dallas Wind Symphony, and Chicago Pro Musica recordings are outstanding - you feel you're right in the middle of the stage] 
this disc features very good playing, and good conducting....my comparison recordings present formidable competition, however - 
Elektra: Solti/VPO/Decca with Nilsson, Reiner, Excerpts, with CSO/Borkh...
Honeck/Pitts acquit themselves well, fine playing, great recorded sound - perhaps they don't match the electric alertness and spontaneity of Solti's VPO [remember, Honeck is _sans voce_]; and nobody, nobody, matches the blood-curdling savagery of Reiner's 1956 excerpts - a performance that veritably drips with the psychotic blood-vengeance of the tortured heroine...some of the shattering blasts from the orchestra are astounding in their vicious intensity!! [can't imagine what this sounded like live] Reiner must have p--sed the orchestra off big-time that day, they are simply carnivorous!!

But Honeck/PittsSO acquit themselves very well - and are definitely honorable mention, at least....the orchestra plays splendidly, great sound, solid conducting...I would definitely recommend this disc

the _Rosenkavalier _Suite is very well done...perhaps without the flowing, long, lines of Solti or Reiner, but very good, nonetheless - the horns sound fine, maybe not the soaring panache of the CSO, VPO or Philadelphia sections, but they do sound fine....the orchestra obviously has good depth in the wind sections....

Honeck/PittSO is a combo that I want to check out more - I'd like to catch them live, and the favorable comments regarding their Beethoven symphony recordings makes me want to explore further....

HvK ?? always a topic of discussion - to me, he is to conducting as John Wayne is to acting...


----------



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

I am currently watching a recent Berlin Philharmonic concert with Valery Gergiev where he seems to spending at least a third of the time with his eyes closed. Has he caught a case of HvKitis?

...and what's with all the finger fluttering? I can see the point in some parts but...!


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

Becca said:


> I am currently watching a recent Berlin Philharmonic concert with Valery Gergiev where he seems to spending at least a third of the time with his eyes closed. Has he caught a case of HvKitis?
> 
> ...and what's with all the finger fluttering? I can see the point in some parts but...!


Finger fluttering is his trademark. That, and only shaving once a week.


----------



## superhorn (Mar 23, 2010)

Karl Bohm was possibly had the most minimalist baton technique I've seen , even less movement than Reiner . If you watch videos of him . He just stands there quietly , his face expression deadpan , and almost nothing moves but his right wrist . he never flails both arms like so many conductors . 
In the orchestra pit conducting opera , he would sometimes rise out of his seat at climatic moments , though . But somehow , he managed to achieve terrifically exciting performances .


----------



## flamencosketches (Jan 4, 2019)

superhorn said:


> Karl Bohm was possibly had the most minimalist baton technique I've seen , even less movement than Reiner . If you watch videos of him . He just stands there quietly , his face expression deadpan , and almost nothing moves but his right wrist . he never flails both arms like so many conductors .
> In the orchestra pit conducting opera , he would sometimes rise out of his seat at climatic moments , though . But somehow , he managed to achieve terrifically exciting performances .


I heard someone once describe that Böhm's conducting "technique" (not sure how one would measure that, having no experience studying conducting myself) was terrible, that he couldn't keep time to save his life, etc. I find that hard to believe, as I'm a huge fan of his incredible recordings (especially Mozart, and Schubert). I'm going to pull up a video of him conducting and see what I think.


----------



## Larkenfield (Jun 5, 2017)

Richard Strauss as the most bored-looking, indifferent conductor in the world. 
It's hard not to nod off just looking at him. If he'd not been the composer.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

I recall reading long ago that Knappertsbusch "conducted with his cufflinks."

In those far-away days, perhaps it was thought that a conductor wildly leaping about on the podium, Lenny-style, was frantically trying to communicate with an orchestra he had failed to rehearse adequately.


----------



## flamencosketches (Jan 4, 2019)

:lol:

He doesn't seem to give a **** about what's going on... at all. The orchestra sounds great, somehow  

By the way, I like Böhm's conducting. It's austere, but looks efficient. His musicians clearly respect him a lot. Or maybe he just managed to only work with extremely talented orchestras and took all the credit.


----------



## paulbest (Apr 18, 2019)

Aurelian said:


> At a live concert, how distracting do you find a conductor who swings his body around, forcefully points at musicians, and generally acts like his own theatrical production?
> 
> Among past conductors, Bernstein was the best example of this. Szell, in contrast, was restrained. And there was C. Kleiber's mysterious non-conducting conducting.
> 
> ...


Notice how expressive Christian Lindberg is when conducting Pettersson. 
It has to be with this intensity of expression, its is the nature of the music. 
I believe this is why most conductors do not go near Pettersson, they just don't have it in them. A conductor has to connect with the music, otherwise the performance will be a dud. 
Not many conductors are willing to embarrass themselves in discovering Pettersson is way out their league. 
Hypothetically, if Stokowski were alive today, he'd be recording complete Pettersson cycle and drop dead cold every other project on his schedule. 
Such was the great Stokowski.


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

paulbest said:


> Hypothetically, if Stokowski were alive today, he'd be recording complete Pettersson cycle and drop dead cold every other project on his schedule. Such was the great Stokowski.


You really think so? I don't. Stokie may have been a great conductor, but he wallowed in flashy, colorful music and rarely ventured into more introspective, profound music. He did like modern, really progressive stuff too, as long as it showed off the variegated colors of his orchestra. That's not Pettersson. He avoided Bruckner for the same reason, although as an organist it would seem Stokowski would have been interested in at least some of it. Pettersson's music is never going to be popular and it will never be the applause-getter that a showman like Stokowski wanted. And he would have changed the orchestration anyway...


----------



## paulbest (Apr 18, 2019)

mbhaub said:


> You really think so? I don't. Stokie may have been a great conductor, but he wallowed in flashy, colorful music and rarely ventured into more introspective, profound music. He did like modern, really progressive stuff too, as long as it showed off the variegated colors of his orchestra. That's not Pettersson. He avoided Bruckner for the same reason, although as an organist it would seem Stokowski would have been interested in at least some of it. Pettersson's music is never going to be popular and it will never be the applause-getter that a showman like Stokowski wanted. And he would have changed the orchestration anyway...


Interesting comments.

Obviously you are much more familiar with Stokowski than my limited, very limited exposure to his records. 
I am only basing my opinion, on 3 of his records, The RVW 4/6 syms, Thomas tallis fantasia, his incredible transcription of Debussy's Engelique piano score, and last but not least, he recorded in 1976 the definitive Sibelius 1st sym with the London SO

I had heard rumors that Stokowski did tinker with some scores, He was a high genius you know.

His catalogue is extensive, but most I am not interested in. He did not live long enough to witness the finer orchestras to come along today.
What I am getting at , is the fact Stokowski would have seen Pettersson before any of the other great conductors. I believe he went for the more unusual, the most beautiful. Which is why he shunned Bruckner as old fashioned. 
Did Stokowski record Beethoven, this is what I need to know. 
If he did not, then he most certainly would have been a solid supporter of Pettersson, as he knew where genius was, when he heard it.

But all this is hypothetical of course.


----------



## Ras (Oct 6, 2017)

Aurelian said:


> At a live concert, how distracting do you find a conductor who swings his body around, forcefully points at musicians, and generally acts like his own theatrical production?.


I don't give a flying hoot as long as the music is played well.


----------



## paulbest (Apr 18, 2019)

Speaking of conducting styles. 
Certain music requires passion, Bohm could never had any success in Pettersson, he is too laid back. 
And yet , we all know Bohm has masterful recordings, his Mozart is only equaled by Bruno Walter;s Colombia recordings. 
Bohm's Mozart Requiem is the finest on record. But you will not see much passionate expressions in his conducting. 
Here is music which, w/o intensity exuding from the conductor, it is very unlikely the performance will be a success.
Such is a requirement for some music.


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

superhorn said:


> Karl Bohm was possibly had the most minimalist baton technique I've seen , even less movement than Reiner . If you watch videos of him . He just stands there quietly , his face expression deadpan , and almost nothing moves but his right wrist . he never flails both arms like so many conductors .
> In the orchestra pit conducting opera , he would sometimes rise out of his seat at climatic moments , though . But somehow , he managed to achieve terrifically exciting performances .


Pierre Monteux had a very reserved technique, also - extremely accurate and precise...with Monteux and Reiner, we do not see much of the "delayed beat" phenomenon that is seen frequently with many conductors


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

paulbest said:


> ....and last but not least, he recorded in 1976 the definitive Sibelius 1st sym with the London SO
> I had heard rumors that Stokowski did tinker with some scores, He was a high genius you know.


Stoki's Sibelius #1 with National PO is very good, surpassed onyl by Bernstein/NYPO superb version.



> He did not live long enough to witness the finer orchestras to come along today.


Stoki??!!  He conducted all of the finest orchestras in the world, well and often. Great, great orchestras...



> Did Stokowski record Beethoven, this is what I need to know.


Yes,many recordings


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

Heck148 said:


> Stoki's Sibelius #1 with National PO is very good, surpassed onyl by Bernstein/NYPO superb version.
> 
> Stoki??!!  He conducted all of the finest orchestras in the world, well and often. Great, great orchestras...
> 
> Yes,many recordings


Stokowski basically invented what would become the Philadelphia Orchestra. There was a wonderful Andante anthology which document his Philly years that anyone with an interest in the conductor or orchestra should hear. He was a fine orchestra builder, the likes of which we don't have anywhere today. He did record with some lesser orchestras, but by and large he worked with only the best. He left many recordings which are still highly rated and some unbeatable. And yes, he tampered with scores without hesitation. Such as the Beethoven 9th. I know that Mahler and Weingartner also made revisions, but Stoki goes overboard. Just the last few bars with that ridiculous trumpet scale matching the winds and strings is enough evidence of his questionable taste. Cuts and re-ordering right and left in Tchaikovsky. Complete loss of ensemble in the Mahler 2 --- so many reasons to not appreciate Stokowski.


----------



## fluteman (Dec 7, 2015)

Heck148 said:


> Stoki's Sibelius #1 with National PO is very good, surpassed onyl by Bernstein/NYPO superb version.
> 
> Stoki??!!  He conducted all of the finest orchestras in the world, well and often. Great, great orchestras...
> 
> Yes,many recordings


It was such a thrill seeing Stokowski conduct in person when I was a young 'un (this was when he was leading his American Symphony Orchestra), not to mention meeting him afterwards. He loved to see children in the green room, the more the better.

A family friend not only played in the NBC Symphony under Toscanini, but also under Stokowski in some of the many recordings he made for RCA in New York in the late 40s and 50s. The orchestra in these is referred to as "The Leopold Stokowski Symphony Orchestra", but it is actually made up almost entirely of members, or past or future members, of the NBC Symphony and NY Philharmonic, and to a lesser extent, the Metropolitan Opera and Philadelphia Orchestras. Some of these LPs even credited the principal players in the notes on the back of the cover, nearly all of whom were principal players in one of these orchestras. The players often didn't know what they would be playing that day when they arrived at the studio, but they whip through the Stokowski standards with gusto. I highly recommend these despite the dated sound. Nearly all have been reissued on CD, but I haven't checked availability recently.


----------



## paulbest (Apr 18, 2019)

This is as good a time as any, to bring up the Stokowski's masterful transcription of Debussy's masterpiece, 
the Prelude from Bk 1, La Cathedrale Englloutie, uploaded in 2011, so I am sure everyone has already heard it by now. 
For those newbies to classical music, you are in for a real treat.

This was recorded in 1966 with Stokowski's hand picked orchestra, thus you are hearing all virtuoso performers.


----------



## paulbest (Apr 18, 2019)

Heck148 said:


> Stoki's Sibelius #1 with National PO is very good, surpassed onyl by Bernstein/NYPO superb version.


Yes it was the National SO, not the LSO. 
Bernstein/NYP? 
If you say so.

many others equal Bernsteins I am sure, others perhaps not, But as to definitive, that belongs only to Stokowski /National/1976. What precision, what intensity, what perfection. Not clinical at all, , though its not a difficult work to perform, it is difficult to master the tempos, phrasing, colors all working for a final perfection. Only Stokowski could manage this feat in this sym. Bohmdid the same perfection in the Mozart Requiem. \
There is a such thing as perfection in recordings. Elusive, but can be found on rare occasions. 
This would be a perfect title for the next topic. 
Please someone.....


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

paulbest said:


> ... though its not a difficult work to perform, it is difficult to master the tempos, phrasing, colors all working for a final perfection...


Have you ever played it? I have. It may not be as hard as Stravinsky, Schoenberg, or even Mahler, but it's no walk in the park. The string parts are frightful. That scherzo is a son of a gun for everyone.


----------



## paulbest (Apr 18, 2019)

mbhaub said:


> Have you ever played it? I have. It may not be as hard as Stravinsky, Schoenberg, or even Mahler, but it's no walk in the park. The string parts are frightful. That scherzo is a son of a gun for everyone.


Comparable, its not a difficult work. 
I mmean next to Pettersson's nonstop sym, with spirals, and twists, all over the place, its not as dif as Pettersson or Schnittke, This is what I am trying to get at.
I would guess its more dif than say the Beethoven syms, which are a walk in the park. Straight simply , lines that extend at times, no big deal. Even a kids orchestra can have success in any Beethoven sym. 
Trust me, that's the truth.


----------



## paulbest (Apr 18, 2019)

Let me see Furtwangler or Klemperer, even Bruno Walter top this youth orch performing Beethoven.


----------



## paulbest (Apr 18, 2019)

Here is another performance of Beethoven;s great 5th sym. 
All orch members are under the ages of 22, maybe under 20 yrs of age.

Performing superior to the Vienna under Bohm, at least in this Beethoven.

This is why I do not find most music from that era, of interest , as even youth orchestra (younger than here I'm sure has played/able to play any Beethoven sym) can perform that era's music. Schubert, Schumnan, Brahms, Dvorak, all can be performed with a orch from the earliest ages.


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

Stoki/National PO is a fine Sibelius #1, the 2nd best Ive heard...Lenny really takes the prize here...Sibelius #1 is not easy to play, quite challenging, but most rewarding
When Stokowski is on, he's quite magnificent...try his live Shostakovich 10 with Chicago from '66..amazing...
sometimes he's off the wall...his Tchaik #4 with NBC, and his various idiosyncratic renditions of Firebird


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

I got to see/hear Stokowski conduct live a few times...my mother was from Philadelphia, and a huge Stoki fan...i remember hearing him conduct the American SO - Also Sprach Zarathustra, Ives Sym #4 [he recorded it right around that time], works by Hovhaness and Rorem, iirc...great concert.. a real thrill.


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

Envy alert!!! I've seen/heard my fair share of the great conductors of the past. But Stokowski! Impressed and jealous. Is there any conductor working today who will be as legendary that future generations will be so impressed?


----------



## Pat Fairlea (Dec 9, 2015)

paulbest said:


> This is as good a time as any, to bring up the Stokowski's masterful transcription of Debussy's masterpiece,
> the Prelude from Bk 1, La Cathedrale Englloutie, uploaded in 2011, so I am sure everyone has already heard it by now.
> For those newbies to classical music, you are in for a real treat.
> 
> This was recorded in 1966 with Stokowski's hand picked orchestra, thus you are hearing all virtuoso performers.


Virtuoso performances for sure, but the orchestration absolutely murders the piece, in my opinion.


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

paulbest said:


> Comparable, its not a difficult work.
> I mmean next to Pettersson's nonstop sym, with spirals, and twists, all over the place, its not as dif as Pettersson or Schnittke, This is what I am trying to get at.
> I would guess its more dif than say the Beethoven syms, which are a walk in the park. Straight simply , lines that extend at times, no big deal. Even a kids orchestra can have success in any Beethoven sym.
> Trust me, that's the truth.


I don't trust you - and that's the truth!  Beethoven is hardly a "walk in the park". You play the first bassoon part in the finale of no. 4. The 7th is fiendishly difficult. The Eroica requires virtuosity top to bottom. Lenore Overture #3 is staggeringly difficult. Youth orchestras can tackle symphonies 1, 2, 5, 6 without too much problem. The rest...forget it! BTW - as a bassoonist/contrabassoonist I've played them all. Several times. There's no such thing as an "easy" Beethoven symphony.

Yes, Sibelius 1 is easier than the likes of Petterrson, Schnittke and a lot of other modern composers. But it's HARD!


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

the whole part of LvB #4 is demanding for the first bassoon...major part...Leonore #3 is loaded with audition licks for many instruments - all strings!! flute, bassoon, trumpet...amazing demands that are still tough to play...great piece, tho!!


----------



## Larkenfield (Jun 5, 2017)

paulbest said:


> Let me see Furtwangler or Klemperer, even Bruno Walter top this youth orch performing Beethoven.


Here they are ... and these conductors have taken the 5th more times than the late Jimmy Hoffa (hat over heart) and played it better than a group of teenage: 











Surely a discriminating listener can tell the difference in their respective richness, depth, and maturity, except perhaps someone who is trying to make a point and so casually dismisses them to extol the virtues of an enthusiastic but artistically immature youth orchestra. They are not in the same league and I find such comparisons misguided and disappointing that they're even proposed.






Tremendous recordings.


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

The Zander and YOA is very good. Better than most amateur orchestras. Better than a lot of semi-pro orchestras. But not in the class of Walter, Klemperer or others for an obvious reason: the intonation. It's nowhere near the exactness of an orchestra like Berlin or Cleveland. There are other issues, but given the recording venue, hard to discuss. At 8:47 there's a horn flub (typical) and do my ears detect someone jumping in early? It's a good performance, just not world class. Zander is a great conductor who for some reason never made it to the top ranks. I'm going to hear him do the Mahler 9th at Round Top this summer. He works wonders with less than world class orchestras.


----------



## paulbest (Apr 18, 2019)

Heck148 said:


> the whole part of LvB #4 is demanding for the first bassoon...major part...Leonore #3 is loaded with audition licks for many instruments - all strings!! flute, bassoon, trumpet...amazing demands that are still tough to play...great piece, tho!!


The 4th is really a thundering work, has dynamics going on in the 1st, 4 th movements. I can seer the 4th as the most arduous , still nothing like say a Schnittke, Carter, Pettersson score.

A youth orch could work outa descent 4th,,but never a Schnittke, Pettersson sym. Heck, neither major orchestars want to tackle a Schnittke or Pettersson, too much work involved,,better stay with the old standards and play it safe. 
Its embrasssing for a orch to call it quits ina work , they tried, over and over and just can't do it, Which is why conductors never bring to the table a wo9rk they know the orch is not up to.

This is my point in all this. 
Gives us a deeper reverence for those orchestras willing to take on modern complex works, and makea success. 
The Norrepoking is superior orch vs the Vienna. Now the Berliners, yes, they have it in them to pull off Pettersson, The geramnic orchestras do very well with Pettersson. 
American orchestras might be up to the task , but we will never know, as none are familiar with Pettersson's scores.


----------



## paulbest (Apr 18, 2019)

mbhaub said:


> The Zander and YOA is very good. Better than most amateur orchestras. Better than a lot of semi-pro orchestras. But not in the class of Walter, Klemperer or others for an obvious reason: the intonation. It's nowhere near the exactness of an orchestra like Berlin or Cleveland. There are other issues, but given the recording venue, hard to discuss. At 8:47 there's a horn flub (typical) and do my ears detect someone jumping in early? It's a good performance, just not world class. Zander is a great conductor who for some reason never made it to the top ranks. I'm going to hear him do the Mahler 9th at Round Top this summer. He works wonders with less than world class orchestras.


I had a few cds , 2nd Viennese , with Zander, no thanks.

Agree this is a OK performandce, read my post above for my point of the discussion.


----------



## MarkW (Feb 16, 2015)

mbhaub said:


> The Zander and YOA is very good. Better than most amateur orchestras. Better than a lot of semi-pro orchestras. But not in the class of Walter, Klemperer or others for an obvious reason: the intonation. It's nowhere near the exactness of an orchestra like Berlin or Cleveland. There are other issues, but given the recording venue, hard to discuss. At 8:47 there's a horn flub (typical) and do my ears detect someone jumping in early? It's a good performance, just not world class. Zander is a great conductor who for some reason never made it to the top ranks. I'm going to hear him do the Mahler 9th at Round Top this summer. He works wonders with less than world class orchestras.


Zander is an interesting phenomenon. For years he conducted ther semi-pro Boston Philharmonic and the players worshipped him. Then he had a falling out with the Board and for a few years organized a Boston pick-up orchestra for Short seasons, until he got some major league recordings and hit the (semi) big time. I don't know what real pro players think of him.


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

MarkW said:


> Zander is an interesting phenomenon. For years he conducted ther semi-pro Boston Philharmonic and the players worshipped him. Then he had a falling out with the Board and for a few years organized a Boston pick-up orchestra for Short seasons, until he got some major league recordings and hit the (semi) big time. I don't know what real pro players think of him.


professionals tolerate Zander, but are leery of him....he got into trouble with the union, trying to gouge freebies, extra rehearsals, non-payment or lower payment from musicians...i think they finally got things worked out...Zander's "other" career is motivational speaker...his approach to music and rehearsing is a bit suspect, and does not generate huge respect in the musical community...he once told a young orchestra to play accents in Shostakovich like "you are bashing someone over the head with a 2 × 4"!! [interesting concept!!] one musician offered the following criticism of Zander's conducting...<lots of special, highlighted effects, interesting moments, but not a lot of connecting tissue there to bind them together>> whatever.....


----------



## paulbest (Apr 18, 2019)

~Furtwangler,~ Keilberth ~, Mravinsky,~ Bohm.~, Walter~. Knappertsbusch ~Martinon~ Boulez 


There are 1 or 2 others, which I thinking of,,,but can't quite recall.....anyone help me out with the missing 2 which belong in this group...


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

paulbest said:


> ~Furtwangler,~ Keilberth ~, Mravinsky,~ Bohm.~, Walter~. Knappertsbusch ~Martinon~ Boulez
> 
> There are 1 or 2 others, which I thinking of,,,but can't quite recall.....anyone help me out with the missing 2 which belong in this group...


for me, Mravinsky, Walter, Martinon, Boulez all very good, but any list of greats must include Reiner, and Monteux,..also Toscanini, Solti...


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

Conductors - details v. the Big Picture -

Conductors come in all shapes and sizes with many different approaches to the art of conducting...
One particular aspect seems to separate many conductors into contrasting camps, with of course, a lot of gray area in between - 
on one hand, those conductors who are looking, aiming for the "big picture" - the Grand Concept of the whole work, in its entirety - "deliver the message" - not so concerned with exact precision and perfection of performance
on the other - those conductors who stress details, precision, ensemble perfection over the big picture...

in the former category - I'd place Furtwangler, Tennstedt, Munch as examples - all have different aesthetic approaches, of course, but the big picture seemed more important - even a spontaneity, spur of the moment, at times was more important than exact ensemble perfection....rhythmic imprecision and occasional sloppiness are to be heard at times with this approach....

in the latter class I'd put von Karajan, Celibidache, Leinsdorf as examples. HvK once said something like -<<take care of all the details, and the rest will work itself out>>...well, maybe, often not. Celibidache always wanted extra rehearsal time to work out every detail of his concept. Leinsdorf was noted for being nit-picky, really occupied with details and immediate accuracy....clean performance, ensemble precision are very evident with these podium maestros, but, to me, the big picture, the overall flow and sweep of the work often does not come thru....

I favor the conductors who stressed, and achieved both - to me, these are the great masters - remarkable precision and accuracy, with a gripping concept of the overall work presented - in this group I'd place conductors such as Toscanini, Reiner, Solti, Monteux ...Conductors like Walter and Szell might fit somewhere in between - Szell could be a real micro-managing stickler for ensemble perfection...but he often excels at presenting the big concept most convincingly..Walter always seemed to have the big picture in his mind and ear, sometimes, precision was not so perfect....
I'm sure there are as many variations as there are conductors, but this one aspect provides a standard of comparison.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

^ I'm not sure I can relate to that. The idea of the bigger picture vs. the detail seems to ring true but by the end of your post I was feeling that it might be at best one of many axes that conductors differ along.

It was the examples you gave that lost me! I am not sure that Karajan neglected the bigger picture in his best work and I am certain that the Celibidache of the Munich years did not. Indeed, his more unusual (some would say perverse) details often only make sense in the light of the whole (something you might also recognise as you refer to his wanting time to work out the details in the light of his "concept").

A difference I am sometimes aware of between conductors (but don't ask me for examples off the top of my head!) are those who have the music communicating with me (like being in a conversation) and those who make it a performance (_sit back and let me take you somewhere_). I have a soft spot for the former but enjoy both approaches.


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

Nowadays, the technical prowess of players everywhere is astonishing. In professional orchestras the conductor rarely has to spend any time on things like intonation, rhythm, or just the notes. The conductor should be able to envision the big picture, but often can't. Many of the idolized conductors today are blessed (spoiled?) with having fine orchestras to work with, and never paid their dues. What would be most fascinating is to see how long someone like Dudamel would last if he had to work with a third-class group (no names!). Could he, would he, be able to fix tuning, rhythm, balance, etc? There are many, many professional conductors whose names aren't known who work out these issues all the time and are paid a pittance compared to the "stars". I've been concerned for years at the lack of great orchestra-builders. There used to be many. To name a few: Dorati, Szell, Monteux, Rodzinski. Where are their counterparts today?


----------



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

mbhaub said:


> Many of the idolized conductors today are blessed (spoiled?) with having fine orchestras to work with, and never paid their dues. What would be most fascinating is to see how long* someone like Dudamel would last if he had to work with a third-class group* (no names!). Could he, would he, be able to fix tuning, rhythm, balance, etc?


Hmm ... Simon Bolivar [Youth] Orchestra where he built his early reputation.


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

That's true - I have a recording of them doing the Mahler 7th that is astonishing. But then those players all were coached in "the system", and it was certainly no third-class group. Put one of the supposed great conductors out there in some out-of-the-way place. Would their magic work? Could they cope? Or would they just walk away like Szell famously did in Adelaide, AU once?


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

Enthusiast said:


> ^ I'm not sure I can relate to that. The idea of the bigger picture vs. the detail seems to ring true but by the end of your post I was feeling that it might be at best one of many axes that conductors differ along.


there are many different axes of comparison for conductors, I agree.


> It was the examples you gave that lost me! I am not sure that Karajan neglected the bigger picture in his best work and I am certain that the Celibidache of the Munich years did not. Indeed, his more unusual...


my examples certainly work for me, HvK never sells me on the whole project....polished, mannered, everything round, smooth, etc, but I never feel that I've gotten 100% of the package...maybe 85 or so....with Celi, it seems, fussy, fastidious, and glacially slow....it's well played, well drilled, but again, I'm impressed by the detail, not the whole....


> A difference I am sometimes aware of between conductors (but don't ask me for examples off the top of my head!) are those who have the music communicating with me (like being in a conversation) and those who make it a performance (_sit back and let me take you somewhere_). I have a soft spot for the former but enjoy both approaches.


those two possibilities sound very much identical to one another, and they are good things...the music is being communicated, and I'm going along for the ride...I don't perceive a difference.


----------



## superhorn (Mar 23, 2010)

One of the most interesting things about conductors is they way different top orchestras will react to the same famous conductor . One will hate his guts and consider him to be a rude, pompous, insulting ***** and another absolutely adores him and looks forward to his every appearance as a guest conductor with them . 
I've heard such conflicting stories about many different famous conductors . It's all a matter of chemistry . And this chemistry, or lack of it, is a mysterious thing . 
However, the notion that you can become a world famous conductor and regularly appear with the world's top orchestras and opera companies and become music director of one of them with little or no talent is a myth . 
Unlike pop music , conducting is a meritocracy . If you don't know what you're doing in front of even a less than top notch orchestra , aren't prepared , can't beat time clearly enough , your ear is not so terrific etc , you are not going to make a big career as a conductor . Orchestras just will not invite you back . 
And if you don't have the talent, no eminent conductor is going to take you on as a protege . And you certainly won't get admitted into the conducting program at Juilliard for other top music schools . 
In pop music , slick publicity and having a pretty face CAN make a career .


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Heck148 said:


> there are many different axes of comparison for conductors, I agree.
> 
> my examples certainly work for me, HvK never sells me on the whole project....polished, mannered, everything round, smooth, etc, but I never feel that I've gotten 100% of the package...maybe 85 or so....with Celi, it seems, fussy, fastidious, and glacially slow....it's well played, well drilled, but again, I'm impressed by the detail, not the whole....
> 
> those two possibilities sound very much identical to one another, and they are good things...the music is being communicated, and I'm going along for the ride...I don't perceive a difference.


There seem to be a large number of ways that experienced listeners can hear things differently and going on to describe or even theorise about those things probably adds to the variety of ways that we differ! Karajan and Celibidache certainly don't sound to me as they do to you! But what is 100% of the package? Is there any performance of great music that gives you all there is in that music?

My own example of two different types of presenting music is a very real difference to me and one that I am frequently aware of. The one is more intimate (perhaps like a seminar), the other is more like a lecture. It doesn't really matter if it is not a difference that is meaningful to you.


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

Enthusiast said:


> .....But what is 100% of the package? Is there any performance of great music that gives you all there is in that music?


occasionally it happens....but the important thing is the effort, the energy...have the performers "left it all" on the stage, in the hall?? or is it subdued, suppressed, lacking in spirit energy, drama?? are difficult parts played with confidence, with gusto, or are they approached, timidly, cautiously??
let me relate this on a personal basis - I played in one orchestra for 36 years as principal...we had several different conductors, but one I esp liked was incumbent for c 25 years....he always went for the big picture, the overall concept, the big tune...he didn't obsess over precision and dynamics, and in his later years, did become too lax in these areas...however, we always delivered an exciting, thrilling performance..maybe not so tidy and precise, but it definitely had spirit, and we put out a very huge sound [once - the conclusion of Shostakovich #7 measured an industrial strength 117 db on stage!!] 
His successor came on board - and he was quite different - very much concentrated on ensemble, precision, accuracy, precision between sections - which are all good things. the orchestra improved quite noticeably in these areas..also - he was obsessed with everything being played ultra-soft, pianissimo, as soft as possible, constantly!! sometimes so soft that notes wouldn't speak, or they'd be so soft as to be inaudible in the hall...I suppose that approach has its advocates, I'm not one of them...we lost the big picture, the overall concept of the works....this conductor was so intent on the trees that he didn't see the forest as a whole...
With the former conductor, I'd leave the hall feeling spent, exhilarated, pleased, but mentally and occasionally, physically exhausted....I knew we had left it all in the hall for the audience...they heard the best, the "mostest" we could do that day, we had given 100%....I never really experienced that thrill with the latter conductor...I knew we had done some very good things, and certain passages or sections had been performed very well, but I was never sold on the idea that we had exhausted ourselves, really given it all, that we had blown the audience away with excitement....85, maybe 90%....



> My own example of two different types of presenting music is a very real difference to me and one that I am frequently aware of. The one is more intimate (perhaps like a seminar), the other is more like a lecture. It doesn't really matter if it is not a difference that is meaningful to you.


I wasn't criticizing your different experiences - they both sound quite similar to me, and both are good, because you as the listener are involved in both cases....


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Heck148 said:


> occasionally it happens....but the important thing is the effort, the energy...have the performers "left it all" on the stage, in the hall??


Ah. OK. I know of recordings that fit your description. They can be exhilarating. But, you know, they often turn out not to be the most satisfying or fulfilling for me. Incidentally, though, I feel sure that there are a good number of Karajan recordings (particularly live ones) that fit your description (I have a foggy memory of a Brahms 1 of his that might fit). It is rare that I find myself defending Karajan!



Heck148 said:


> ... or is it subdued, suppressed, lacking in spirit energy, drama?? are difficult parts played with confidence, with gusto, or are they approached, timidly, cautiously??


I know far fewer that fit this description but they do, of course, happen. But there is surely a gulf between your two descriptions? Most performances fall between them.

What is getting left out here is any consideration of interpretation. Questions like _what does the conductor (or performer) tell you about the work?_ seem more important to me.


----------



## Guest (Dec 12, 2019)

Daniel Harding seems over dramatic...and those excess cuffs!


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

Enthusiast said:


> Ah. OK. I know of recordings that fit your description. They can be exhilarating. But, you know, they often turn out not to be the most satisfying or fulfilling for me.


A live performance that has lots of energy can be very exciting and thrilling, but on recording, glaring mistakes and ensemble problems can become quickly annoying on repeated listening.



> Incidentally, though, I feel sure that there are a good number of Karajan recordings (particularly live ones) that fit your description ..... It is rare that I find myself defending Karajan!


I've not heard many, and I've tried many, many times over the years


> But there is surely a gulf between your two descriptions? Most performances fall between them.


yes, agreed



> What is getting left out here is any consideration of interpretation. Questions like _what does the conductor (or performer) tell you about the work?_ seem more important to me.


Interpretation is essential to the whole picture...the orchestra can be doing its best, but if style, tempo are way off the mark, stellar execution isn't going to save the day...


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

Heck148 said:


> Interpretation is essential to the whole picture...the orchestra can be doing its best, but if style, tempo are way off the mark, stellar execution isn't going to save the day...


But even if style, tempo and everything is done with scrupulous attention, note perfect and everything else "correct", the performance can still fall flat for some vague reason. One example I know well is Andre Previn's recording of the Elgar 2nd. Reading along with a score, it's flawless - but somehow it just doesn't work. Many people find perfection the goal and the mark of a great performance - not so! There's that certain something else and it's what separates a great conductor from a merely good one.


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

mbhaub said:


> But even if style, tempo and everything is done with scrupulous attention, note perfect and everything else "correct", the performance can still fall flat for some vague reason. One example I know well is Andre Previn's recording of the Elgar 2nd. Reading along with a score, it's flawless - but somehow it just doesn't work. Many people find perfection the goal and the mark of a great performance - not so! There's that certain something else and it's what separates a great conductor from a merely good one.


I agree, technical perfection does not ensure a great performance....there's more - drama, flow, an energy, or spirit that propels the music along, no matter what the tempo, and compels the listener's attention. the conductor must instill the excitement, the alertness from the orchestra...


----------



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

MacLeod said:


> Daniel Harding seems over dramatic...and *those excess cuffs*!


:lol: - I will have tell him, he will probably get a kick out of it!


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

> David Zinman, when he was in Rochester, once gave a master class to conducting students - he made a good point - he said that
> <<you [the conductor] should never pull things apart past the point that you have time to put things back together


I had the pleasure of attending a Zinman concert at the Skaneateles Festival this past summer. A modest gentleman, very personable with no ego. I thought he did a great job premiering a brand new modern work by Pierre Jalbert which was sandwiched between a Mozart horn concerto, and Mendelssohn's Italian symphony. And Jalbert was sitting a few seats away enjoying the sound of the orchestra playing his new piece.


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

There are several conductors who for reasons unknown aren't admitted into the tier of the so-called "greats". Zinman, Slatkin, Seaman, Jarvi, and others. It's so stupid. They are all skilled professionals; they run rehearsals well; they pay attention to the the composer wrote - they are very "musical". All of them have made recordings that are equal to and oft times greater than the work of the over-hyped greats. It's a shame that Zinman had to go to Europe to continue his career. He did great work in Baltimore and there are many US orchestras who could have benefited from his expertise.


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

mbhaub said:


> There are several conductors who for reasons unknown aren't admitted into the tier of the so-called "greats". Zinman, Slatkin, Seaman, Jarvi, and others. It's so stupid. They are all skilled professionals; they run rehearsals well; they pay attention to the the composer wrote - they are very "musical". All of them have made recordings that are equal to and oft times greater than the work of the over-hyped greats. It's a shame that Zinman had to go to Europe to continue his career. He did great work in Baltimore and there are many US orchestras who could have benefited from his expertise.


Zinman did well in Rochester, putting that orchestra back together after the very nasty labor-management conflict in the early 70s. He inherited a very tough situation...
another American conductor who I've found to be very fine is James Conlon....I heard a Mahler #9 he did wit Chicago - outstanding, one of the best I've heard....also a Meistersinger Overture Act 1 which was dynamite - very "Reiner-esque" [that's very good!!] again, tho, he had to go to Europe to make his career....silly, rather shameful....


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

Yes, Conlon! I've hear him at the LA Opera several times. An especially memorable Der Zwerg by Zemlinsky. There is no doubt a bias against American conductors in this country and it's ridiculous. Even my local, semi-pro group. We did a conductor search a year ago, and one candidate was from Europe, has a heavy accent, and for many on the board that was enough - hire him! He's good, no doubt about it, but honestly no better than several other candidates who didn't have the European pedigree. Same thing with Zinman, Conlon and company.


----------



## Guest (Dec 15, 2019)

Becca said:


> :lol: - I will have tell him, he will probably get a kick out of it!


Well, while you're at it, ...

Where will you be seeing him, btw?


----------

