# Favorite recording of Petrushka



## adriesba

I couldn't find a thread about this. Which _Petrushka_ recording is your favorite?


----------



## david johnson

Stravinsky/Columbia Symphony, Boulez/NYPO, Ansermet/LPO.


----------



## chill782002

Stokowski's 1937 recording with the Philadelphia Orchestra. However, if old mono recordings taken from 78s aren't your thing, Dutoit's 1986 recording with the Montreal Symphony Orchestra is excellent and also uses the original 1911 score.


----------



## adriesba

chill782002 said:


> Stokowski's 1937 recording with the Philadelphia Orchestra. However, if old mono recordings taken from 78s aren't your thing, Dutoit's 1986 recording with the Montreal Symphony Orchestra is excellent and also uses the original 1911 score.


Which score do you think is better?


----------



## Heck148

Levine/CSO
Mitropoulos/NYPO


----------



## chill782002

adriesba said:


> Which score do you think is better?


I prefer the original 1911 score as it was devised for a larger orchestra than Stravinsky's 1947 revision and seems to me richer and fuller. However, Stravinsky revised many of his early works later in his life so I guess it's a matter of personal taste.


----------



## Becca

chill782002 said:


> I prefer the original 1911 score as it was devised for a larger orchestra than Stravinsky's 1947 revision and seems to me richer and fuller. However, Stravinsky revised many of his early works later in his life so I guess it's a matter of personal taste.


IIRC Stravinsky revised scores in the late 1940s primarily in order to keep them in copyright and keep his royalty stream coming in!


----------



## Heck148

Petrushka, to me, is much like Sheherazade - ie - a performance lives or dies by the orchestra soloists..there are many exposed solos, that really need to come off with "panache", bravura, a free-wheeling style...there are, of course, many big orchestral passages that require accurate rhythm and execution, but it's the solos that make it or break it for me...I realize others may see it much differently...


----------



## D Smith

My favourite remains the record I first listened to - Pierre Monteux, Boston Symphony.


----------



## Heck148

D Smith said:


> My favourite remains the record I first listened to - Pierre Monteux, Boston Symphony.


Ok, very well conducted...but the solos sound stiff, a little tense to me...I like a lot more swagger, panache..


----------



## Dirge

:: Stokowski/LSSO [RCA '50] Testament or Naxos
:: Ancerl/CzPO [Supraphon '62]

Stokowski's is the _Mr. Toad's Wild Ride_ of _Petrushka_ performances, reveling in the carnival aspects of the score and bringing them out in cinematic/Technicolor glory-even via RCA's primitive 1950 mono recorded sound. Stokowski & orchestra tread the precipitous ridge between inspired madness and just plain madness with the skill of a mountain goat, somehow managing to hold everything together and make it coalesce-how they do it, I don't know, but there's clearly an underlying method to the madness at work here. Paladins of the score and listeners with delicate constitutions will want to steer clear, but hale and hearty listeners in search of interpretive adventure will find it here. (The Leopold Stokowski Symphony Orchestra is essentially the NYPO in contractual disguise and features Leonid Hambro on piano.) Ancerl, on the other hand, adopts a scrupulously conceived modern high-fidelity approach to the score, which his orchestra executes the bejeezus out of, yielding the most rhythmically keen and astute account of the work that I know. Stokowski uses the original 1911 version (more or less) of the score, Ancerl the revised 1947 version.


----------



## Merl

I'm with Heck on this. Levine's Petrushka is in a class of its own on this one. I like Dohnanyi too but Levine gets it all right.


----------



## adriesba

Merl said:


> I'm with Heck on this. Levine's Petrushka is in a class of its own on this one. I like Dohnanyi too but Levine gets it all right.
> 
> View attachment 134885


Is there a CD release?


----------



## Heck148

I'd like to hear that Stokowski recording...Petrushka could be right up his alley...and "His" Symphony Orchestra recordings tend to be very free-swinging affairs.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

‘37 Stokowski recording sounds great in the Dutton remastering. That’s my fav. There’s also a great Ansermet from the 40s.

In modern sound I really like Dorati/Detroit


----------



## Knorf

Aside from the excellent recommendations already made, I have another. Ozawa doesn't get a lot of credit outside of far East Asia, but his 1969 _Petrushka_, with the Boston Symphony and Michael Tilson Thomas on piano, is excellent, and one of my favorite Stravinsky recordings.


----------



## Heck148

Brahmsianhorn said:


> '37 Stokowski recording sounds great in the Dutton remastering.


Is that '37 Stoki with Philadelphia??


----------



## Simplicissimus

Ormandy/Philadelphia, 1964. It’s a well done Sony digital remastering of a sonically excellent stereo master tape. I also love the Monteux/Boston SO, 1959 Living Stereo recording, which was my first one. This is one of my favorite pieces of music so I’m paying close attention here with a plan to add a third recording to my collection.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

Heck148 said:


> Is that '37 Stoki with Philadelphia??


Yes, coupled with the '35 Firebird suite


----------



## Heck148

Brahmsianhorn said:


> Yes, coupled with the '35 Firebird suite


I have that '37 Petruska on an RCA disc with the '29 "Le Sacre"...

I must check out the newer disc with '35 Firebird.....Great bassoon playing on Firebird - J. Walter Guetter - legendary player who died way too young [age 42] from cancer...Stokowski called him the "Heifetz of the bassoon"!!


----------



## Merl

adriesba said:


> Is there a CD release?


Not that I'm aware of. It's well out of print. I've got an LP rip of this one. I did have the original LP many years ago. I forgot to mention Jarvi in this recording. Its a wonderful disc.


----------



## Rogerx

Stravinsky: Petrushka & la Sacre de Printemps

Philadelphia Orchestra/ Riccardo Muti.


----------



## adriesba

Merl said:


> Not that I'm aware of. It's well out of print. I've got an LP rip of this one. I did have the original LP many years ago. I forgot to mention Jarvi in this recording. Its a wonderful disc.


This looks like maybe a Japanese CD release, but it's unavailable: https://www.amazon.com/Stravinsky-Petrouchka-James-Levine/dp/B000063E8C

That is if the listing is correct.


----------



## Merl

adriesba said:


> This looks like maybe a Japanese CD release, but it's unavailable: https://www.amazon.com/Stravinsky-Petrouchka-James-Levine/dp/B000063E8C
> 
> That is if the listing is correct.


It would have been one of those limited pressing jobs from Japan, of which some are not legit. Its never (AFAIK) han an official CD release over here. Surprising as it was Gramophone's (and many other critics and listeners') reference recording. Even Hurwitz loved it. If anyone wants a lossless LP rip....... A good one.....


----------



## Heck148

adriesba said:


> This looks like maybe a Japanese CD release, but it's unavailable: https://www.amazon.com/Stravinsky-Petrouchka-James-Levine/dp/B000063E8C
> 
> That is if the listing is correct.


IIRC, I got my CD from Japan....along with the great RCA Levine/CSO Mahler Sym #3


----------



## adriesba

How is the one on this set?

View attachment 135293


----------



## CnC Bartok

^^^ I am starting to enjoy Ansermet in Stravinsky. He's far more lively than perhaps I would have given him credit for, and although I have read comments about the SRO not being the sharpest of orchestras, certainly cannot hear anything scrappy here.

The sound on my 8CD Decca box of Ansermet/Stravinsky is a bit dry, though.....not bad for its age, mind.


----------



## Merl

adriesba said:


> How is the one on this set?
> 
> View attachment 135293


I've never heard it, tbh, but if it's like many other Ansermet recording it's bound to be lively and entertaining.


----------



## perdido34

Ozawa/Boston (originally released on RCA) is a wonderful performance of the 1947 version.


----------



## adriesba

I now have the Ozawa recording on CD and very much enjoy it, though I still want to explore other recordings. 

By the way, what is the preferred spelling? I've seen _Petrushka_, _Petrouchka_, _Petroushka_, and _Petruchka_. The most common spelling seems to be _Petrushka _with _Petrouchka _ being second most common, but what is proper?


----------



## Knorf

Петру́шка is how it is spelled. 
"Petrushka" is the most common transliteration in English.
"Petruschka" is the most common transliteration in German.
"Pétrouchka" is the most common transliteration in French.

"PyehTROOSHka" would be a close literal transliteration in English.
IPA: [pʲɪtˈruʂkə]


----------



## NLAdriaan

At least interesting that Petrushka doesn't have the usual suspects as its preferred interpreters. It is quite another piece of music compared to the Firebird and le Sacre. Less spectacular, not particularly a showstopper. Would this be why it is only scarcely recorded? And why we end up with Ozawa as one of the gold medalists?


----------



## jmtocali

The recording of the 1947 version by the Concertgebouw under Chailly is my favourite.


----------



## premont

Mine is Hermann Scherchens recording with the London SO from ca 1960 (Westminster stereo).
But there are many other excellent recordings.


----------



## Geoff48

Ansermet. I first heard Petrushka on his Decca Ace of Clubs vinyl and whilst I had never really been a fan of Stravinsky, with the possible exception of the Firebird, it was a present from a relative who thought I should try and listen to more modern music and it didn’t seem too bad.


----------



## Knorf

NLAdriaan said:


> At least interesting that Petrushka doesn't have the usual suspects as its preferred interpreters. It is quite another piece of music compared to the Firebird and le Sacre. Less spectacular, not particularly a showstopper. Would this be why it is only scarcely recorded?


"Scarcely" recorded?  There are many dozens of recordings of _Petrushka_!

As for "usual suspects," I have no idea what you mean, but certainly it has been well recording by plenty of well-known Stravinsky conductors, such as Dutoit, Abbado, Chailly, Bernstein, Boulez, Haitink, Markevitch, Ansermet, Monteaux, Salonen, etc.

Not Kleiber, obviously, but to my knowledge he never conducted Stravinsky at all...



> And why we end up with Ozawa as one of the gold medalists?


Because his is really freakin' excellent!

You might have the impression that everything Ozawa did was rubbish, but that impression may reasonably be described as erroneous.


----------



## Melodymaker

Oscar Danon, RPO, for performance + sound. From the venerable Readers Digest/RCA box. I believe reissued on Chesky, not sure. 

Ansermet is terrific. Sound is killer of course. Survives most repressings, always at least good.

Also Eugene Goossens/LSO. Great Everest recording (but big Yikes on the vinyl). Reissued by Radio Shack (!!!), Sine Qua Non, and Sweet Thunder.


----------



## Jimmbo

Knorf said:


> You might have the impression that everything Ozawa did was rubbish, but that impression may reasonably be described as erroneous.


Knorf, I know you're dispelling that assessment, so this isn't to you personally. It's just FYI for the thread FWIW.

There are few realms where the practitioners are so firewalled from the aficionados as classical music.

I was a jazz professional with a classical education (Eastman, Tanglewood), so while I'm not a distinguished principal instrumentalist from a major symphony, I've known lots of those folks.

So, fwiw (and admitting I'm a random anon on the Internet), let me offer the musician's view...which I'm by no means claiming to be superior:

1. Musicians (including BSO) were in awe of Ozawa. A bunch of them had personal and biz nits with him, and might have publicly trash-talked him just to be shmucky (he had a drinking problem; they had drinking problems...). And, sure, he had some quirks that annoyed knowledgable players and listeners. But re: "everything he did was rubbish", I can assure you that players you've heard of and respected would have been _angered_ by such a statement. I'm not one to glibly play the race card, but I suspect that's where this comes from.

2. Biggest chasm is re: Bernstein. He was IDOLIZED by musicians. Not because of star power/celebrity. I've heard again and again that he brought out playing in them that no other conductor ever could. Music fans (at least back in the day) mumbled about how he's a showboat. Musicians did NOT (of course there are exceptions to every rule, plus, bear in mind that I'm describing what musicians say when reporters and fans are not around).

Anyway, that's the view from the warmup room, fwiw.


----------



## CnC Bartok

Personally, I don't have anything against Ozawa, but beyond his Gurrelieder on Philips, can't think of a first choice in many places....

My three Petrushkas that get themost frequent airing would probably be:
Old: Karel Ančerl on Supraphon. Something about Ančerl and the right emphasis on rhythm.....
Oldish: Antal Dorati on Mercury 
Modern-ish: Charles Dutoit on Decca. The sound quality on his Montreal Stravinsky survey is eye-wateringly good!

I'm possibly a bit weird (!) but I see Petrushka as the finest of those three "early" ballets, it's certainly my favourite of them, and alongside Apollo, it's my favourite Stravinsky ballet.


----------



## Jimmbo

CnC Bartok said:


> Personally, I don't have anything against Ozawa, but beyond his Gurrelieder on Philips, can't think of a first choice in many places....


That's fine and understandable. There are a lot of great conductors out there, plus standards of musicianship have been quite high since the dawn of the recording era, making conductors icing on awfully nice cake. The fourth or ninth best conductor (or violist or harpsichordist) is far from a slouch!

Since we're squatting in an old thread, maybe the admins won't mind if I ask, given your Bartok handle, whether the Takacs box is still considered, among aficionados, the sine qua non of Bartok string quartets recordings?


----------



## CnC Bartok

Jimmbo said:


> Since we're squatting in an old thread, maybe the admins won't mind if I ask, given your Bartok handle, whether the Takacs box is still considered, among aficionados, the sine qua non of Bartok string quartets recordings?



There are a couple of threads here on Bartok and on the quartets, so do have a little search....!
I'm not too keen on summarising what others think, and there are people here better able to answer you, as I am not a musician, just an avid listener; but I reckon the Decca Takacs set do still come close to the top of most recommended lists. And include me in that! I have a couple of dozen sets of the quartets, and my top handful would include BOTH Takacs sets, with a preference for the - admittedly rougher - earlier Hungaroton set, with a very very different quartet line-up too. My top three sets are all Hungaroton, add the Tatrai set (possibly the best, but very closely rivalled by.....) plus the wonderfully fresh Mikrokosmos Quartet set in the discontinued New Edition.

Edit: I've bumped a couple of threads for you, one here, and one in the composer guestbooks section! Petrushka will be relieved....!


----------



## Jimmbo

CnC Bartok said:


> BOTH Takacs sets, with a preference for the - admittedly rougher - earlier Hungaroton set


Ah, I did not know Takacs re-recorded this. I have their earlier 1984 recording, and complacently feel like I don't need any other. It sounds like I can maintain that complacency!



CnC Bartok said:


> with a very very different quartet line-up


I find the "brand name" concept applied to ever-changing music groups annoying. With sports teams, fans root for an abstract banner, despite slippery rosters. But in music, the roster's everything! I guess this is one way conductors have become so important to the public. The Cleveland Orchestra sounds very different in different eras, but there is (in theory at least) quality assurance having Szell's name on the record jacket...


----------



## CnC Bartok

Jimmbo said:


> Ah, I did not know Takacs re-recorded this. I have their earlier 1984 recording, and complacently feel like I don't need any other. It sounds like I can maintain that complacency!
> 
> 
> 
> I find the "brand name" concept applied to ever-changing music groups annoying. With sports teams, fans root for an abstract banner, despite slippery rosters. But in music, the roster's everything! I guess this is one way conductors have become so important to the public. The Cleveland Orchestra sounds very different in different eras, but there is (in theory at least) quality assurance having Szell's name on the record jacket...


I think they just evolve to be honest....
Hungaroton line-up (1984): Takacs-Nagy, Schranz, Ormai, Fejer 
Decca line-up (1996): Dusinberre, Schranz, Tapping, Fejer, 50%, so maybe a bit of an exaggeration on my part...! Dedicated to Ormai, who died in 1995....


----------



## Jimmbo

CnC Bartok said:


> I think they just evolve to be honest....
> Hungaroton line-up (1984): Takacs-Nagy, Schranz, Ormai, Fejer
> Decca line-up (1996): Dusinberre, Schranz, Tapping, Fejer, 50%, so maybe a bit of an exaggeration on my part...! Dedicated to Ormai, who died in 1995....


Sure, it's evolution. But a group name is only as meaningful as the constituent players. A string quartet with 50% new players is another string quartet, period. Maybe a better one! But not the same.

I'd argue that the legacy factor is near-zero...aside from new-arriving musicians feeling they need to live up to a certain brand reputation. But top musicians do their best, anyway. They don't need extra motivation!


----------



## jegreenwood

Jimmbo said:


> Sure, it's evolution. But a group name is only as meaningful as the constituent players. A string quartet with 50% new players is another string quartet, period. Maybe a better one! But not the same.
> 
> I'd argue that the legacy factor is near-zero...aside from new-arriving musicians feeling they need to live up to a certain brand reputation. But top musicians do their best, anyway. They don't need extra motivation!


I dunno. Worked for me in a legal dispute. Adverse party wanted to break a contract with my client, a corporation, because a change of management meant it was no longer the same company. As an example they argued that the Juilliard Quartet would not be the same if the members changed. I replied that at the time of writing there were NO original members, but it was still the Juilliard Quartet. 😁


----------



## Jimmbo

jegreenwood said:


> I dunno. Worked for me in a legal dispute. Adverse party wanted to break a contract with my client, a corporation, because a change of management meant it was no longer the same company. As an example they argued that the Juilliard Quartet would not be the same if the members changed. I replied that at the time of writing there were NO original members, but it was still the Juilliard Quartet. 😁


*Ship of Theseus (aka "George Washington's Axe")*
(An example of legal thinking (necessarily) divorced from practical thinking.)


----------



## Becca

Legal thinking is a classic oxymoron 😁


----------



## 89Koechel

CnC Bartok said:


> Personally, I don't have anything against Ozawa, but beyond his Gurrelieder on Philips, can't think of a first choice in many places....
> 
> My three Petrushkas that get themost frequent airing would probably be:
> Old: Karel Ančerl on Supraphon. Something about Ančerl and the right emphasis on rhythm.....
> Oldish: Antal Dorati on Mercury
> Modern-ish: Charles Dutoit on Decca. The sound quality on his Montreal Stravinsky survey is eye-wateringly good!
> 
> I'm possibly a bit weird (!) but I see Petrushka as the finest of those three "early" ballets, it's certainly my favourite of them, and alongside Apollo, it's my favourite Stravinsky ballet.


CnC Bartok - (your #39, in posts) - Well, Ozawa certainly wasn't "ideal" in certain recordings/performances, but I agree about his Schoenberg "Gurrelieder", and I have a concert performance that's very-fine, also. Also, one of my favorites is Ozawa/BSO in that great, Bartok "Miraculous Mandarin" recording! Also, thanks for mentioning Dutoit, Dorati ... and the excellent Ancerl ... as favorites. ... One might disagree, though, about Stravinsky's "Apollo', as a true favorite, although I'm sure it shares the virtues of other Stravinsky-type ballets, in certain ways. To one listener, it seems that Igor S repeated some certain melodic elements, and didn't, quite develop them ... esp. in the extraordinary ways of that earlier ballet - The Rite of Spring. In certain ways, I think The Rite goes BEYOND, substantially, the "boundaries" of older ballet compositions, and simply stands, on it's OWN, as one of the greatest, most-original works of all music of the last 150 years, more or less. ... Anyway, Petrouchka is a truly excellent ballet ... and one of it's best representations, in video, is one from the 1970s, with Rudolf Nureyev. Thanks!


----------

