# Blind Comparison - Holst op. 32 The Planets: Mars



## MatthewWeflen (Jan 24, 2019)

Hey everybody, here is a set of renditions of Holst op. 32 "The Planets," Mars movement, for a blind comparison without knowing or being influenced by pre-existing opinions of conductors and orchestras. If anyone knows the performances and would like to guess, please PM me for the answers. Otherwise, try to confine discussion to the pieces themselves - what do you like, what do you dislike, and how would you rank them? I will post the "answers" in a few days. Here are the mp3 files on pCloud, which can be listened to online or downloaded.

A - https://my.pcloud.com/publink/show?code=XZV9qkkZ9PW6XiP8k00p293PUQlsgHCFiLbV
B - https://my.pcloud.com/publink/show?code=XZ7MqkkZnRh6JiicBmyFtX8qoTraK4R5pDhy
C - https://my.pcloud.com/publink/show?code=XZIMqkkZOR38AwamCpmaHhNLte7KcHXEN4e7
D - https://my.pcloud.com/publink/show?code=XZcMqkkZgwIYyR5YcMbPLzVFoTGOA5jWMOmk
E - https://my.pcloud.com/publink/show?code=XZkTqkkZB28eA7WUKBRU3rgJuBnlNjTkCSLV


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

A. Great - exciting, good tempo. Love the tam tam in this recording.
B. Too slow - this is not Allegro. Dynamics not wide enough. Has trouble maintaining a steady tempo.
C. Ominous and suspenseful. I do not like the clipping short of the dotted halves!
D. Too fast. The dark, ominous feel is missing. 
E. Kinda quick - but acceptable. Builds to a nice first climax. 

I would rate them: A, E, C, B, D.


----------



## Merl (Jul 28, 2016)

Oooh, I have loads of Planets recordings so looking forward to ploughing thru these later. Pretty sure I know at least one just from a skip thru this morning. I'll comment later.


----------



## Oldhoosierdude (May 29, 2016)

A, C, B, E, D. Quite a fan of this piece. I think I know A, but lost on the others. Interesting.


----------



## Merl (Jul 28, 2016)

I reckon I know 3 (possibly 4) and have them (I'll pm you to see if I'm right, Matty). Regardless, here's my ranking.

1st: A
Masterful performance and I reckon I've recommended this one over on the Planets thread. A reading where everything is right. Great dynamics and I'm sure this was my favourite for years. Best by a whisker (see below) 
2nd: E
Another stellar account. Love the power and the pacing. Absolutely sure I've got this one. A classic CD back in the day and still sounds fresh. Hope I'm right. 
3rd: B A really good account. I don't agree with you about the tempo, mbhaub. I think it sounds great. Love that brass! This is a class orchestra but they do make a few mistakes.
4th: C
Another I definitely know. Broad Reading but plenty of darkness.
5th: D
No idea about this one. Lacks feeling and dynamically a bit stifled. Weedy brass and the only recording here I don't particularly like.

So 4 really good recordings and one underwhelming one.


----------



## fluteman (Dec 7, 2015)

Thanks for setting this up, Matthew. I've only had time to listen to the first one so far but I agree with others here that it's very good and will be tough to beat. When I compare various versions of The Planets, the movement I like to start with is Neptune. That turns out to be quite difficult to do convincingly imo, both in terms of performance and recording.


----------



## MatthewWeflen (Jan 24, 2019)

I agree with Merl that B does not sound slow to me. 

I don't want to prejudice anyone with my ranking just yet.


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

A quick observation: I first listened to these late night yesterday. Relistening today, B doesn't sound as slow, and hear it differently. Body rhythms can effect your reaction to music.


----------



## Merl (Jul 28, 2016)

After finding out the answers, I was initially surprised at the identity of A which I was sure was Handley). I first heard recording A 20 years ago and it made no impression on me. Listening to all of it today via streaming its a really good, exciting Planets, slightly let down by the recording, but with excellent pacing and orchestral playing. It still doesn't replace my all-time favourite (Ozawa's utterly spellbinding Boston recording) and doesn't, as a complete recording, replace recording E or the aforementioned Handley in my Top 3 but it is a damn fine Planets and is deffo in my Top Ten. Thanks for reintroducing me to it, Matt. I recognised recordings E and C straight away but I'm quite proud that I recognised B too. If you'd have used Jupiter I would have found it easier as that's the movement I know best in all the recordings I have. Excellent blind comparison, mate. Had a quick listen to D again today to see if I was a little harsh after my first hearing. If anything it sounded worse. Very poor account.


----------



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

I have only had the time/opportunity to listen to the first two of the recordings but I am a bit surprised at one thing ... recording B which is described as 'slow' is actually over 20 seconds faster than the highly rated recording A! It just goes to show that timings do not necessarily match perceptions.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

A – A fine performance but I found it a little controlled and even prosaic. I would have liked more menace. At one stage it was almost jaunty (which can’t be right). I don’t know if it makes sense, but I felt this was a performance of the music rather than the music itself! 
B – Does seem to start more slowly, with brooding and a greater sense of menace than A … and when it gets going it makes something of this menace. 
C – Broader. As others have said, there is darkness there (bubbling under the surface) but not so much menace. A slightly routine feel to some of it. It builds quite nicely. 
D – I join others in finding this feeble. The Bringer of War? More like the bringer of a Morris Dance.
E – Starts dark and brooding and with an intimation of menace …. And then it catches fire! There is even a hint of heroism. Almost every bar has something to say about the music. 

My preference from this hearing? E > B > A & C > D


----------



## MatthewWeflen (Jan 24, 2019)

Here are my impressions:

A is beautifully controlled, and well modulated in terms of volume and tempo. Aggressive and clean. The voices of the instruments are easily separable and are quite nice.

B sounds like the seams could fly apart at any moment. I think this is because frequently the rhythm part seems ever so slightly out of phase with the melody. The intensity is volcanic. Where A is rhythmically sharp as a pin and well modulated, B is tumultuous and well modulated.

C is stately, almost noble. The tempo just feels too slow after hearing the first two. It is certainly well played. 

D plays with tempo the most. The slow parts are quite slow, the fast parts quite fast. The brass is very pleasingly delineated for me, but the slow parts drag this down a bit.

E starts out a bit mushy, but when the crescendo hits, it's off to the races, very intense, with some excellent brass.

I think A, B and E are in the top tier, C and D lesser performances. The one that makes me feel the most uneasy and tense is B, for the reasons mentioned above. It gives me the feeling of having skipped a heartbeat, trying to catch my breath. A is close, and I think I appreciate it more on an intellectual level. 

So I would go B > A > E > D > C


----------



## Merl (Jul 28, 2016)

MatthewWeflen said:


> The one that makes me feel the most uneasy and tense is B, for the reasons mentioned above. It gives me the feeling of having skipped a heartbeat, trying to catch my breath. A is close, and I think I appreciate it more on an intellectual level.
> 
> So I would go B > A > E > D > C


On first listen, I had a niggling feeling I'd heard B before. That raspy, almost off-kilter brass was so familiar but I couldn't place it. Eventually I looked through my recordings, had a hunch and played the one I thought it was. My hunch was right. I'd not played that one in some years so it was great to reacquaint myself with it. I'm glad you didn't pick that conductor's 2nd account of the same piece. That was pretty poor. Lol


----------



## MatthewWeflen (Jan 24, 2019)

Posts have slowed considerably, so here are the answers:

A Levine CSO 1991
B Karajan VPO 1961
C Boult LPO 1979
D Susanna Mälkki BBC Proms 2015 (live)
E Dutoit OSM 1987


----------



## Oldhoosierdude (May 29, 2016)

Interesting. I suspected A was Levine but was lost on the others.


----------



## Merl (Jul 28, 2016)

I've listened to Levine's Planets twice, since I PM'd you, Matt, and it is indeed a terrificly exciting recording. Its brilliantly played and conducted and works as a whole but iit has 2 minor drawbacks. The first is the recording, which I find sounds clipped and a little shallow (DG tampering) . The other is that whilst it is exciting and fun, it lacks some emotional depth. Don't get me wrong, it's a class Planets but it doesn't supplant Dutoit, Ozawa and Handley (who it is very similar to) in my estimation. Didn't stop me buying it though. :lol:


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

I thought I recognised E and suspected that C could be Boult (although I can't remember ever hearing his Planets). Good to know that Karajan did a nicely wild one. Levine is not a conductor I have listened to a lot but nothing in A convinced me I was missing that much as the control and "distance from the heart of the music" are not qualities I value particularly. 

Thanks - a fun blind comparison.


----------



## Merl (Jul 28, 2016)

Enthusiast said:


> I Good to know that Karajan did a nicely wild one. .


Yep, that Vienna Planets is excellent, as opposed to his later Berlin remake which sucked


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

I had only heard the BPO one. I must search that earlier one out.


----------



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

I never got to listen to all of them (been dealing with some stubborn system programming issues) but FWIW I still have a stubborn preference for the Boughton/Philharmonia/Nimbus recording made in, of all places, the Royal Albert Hall!


----------

