# Recordings I need to know?



## Hermastersvoice (Oct 15, 2018)

In the main, music is much less about what is being played, more about who is playing it. Are there recordings I need to know and why? Please I don’t need yet another list of pet hates or loves, so the Why is important.


----------



## flamencosketches (Jan 4, 2019)

Depends on what you like. There are hundreds or thousands of arguably essential recordings, one can't possibly hear them all!


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

Hermastersvoice said:


> In the main, music is much less about what is being played, more about who is playing it. Are there recordings I need to know and why? Please I don't need yet another list of pet hates or loves, so the Why is important.


Sometimes there are indeed moments on record where the creative imaginations of the musicians combine to produce something special. An example which comes to mind is Furtwangler and Edwin Fischer playing the Brahms second piano concerto. Terrible sound. Old fashioned performance. But there's some of the magic electricity of the event caught to enjoy today.


----------



## flamencosketches (Jan 4, 2019)

Mandryka said:


> Sometimes there are indeed moments on record where the creative imaginations of the musicians combine to produce something special. An example which comes to mind is Furtwangler and Edwin Fischer playing the Brahms second piano concerto. Terrible sound. Old fashioned performance. But there's some of the magic electricity of the event caught to enjoy today.












Is this the one you mean?


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

I suggest the OP browse a couple of the threads/blogs here that address what are the best recordings such as,

https://www.talkclassical.com/blogs/trout/1624-recommended-recordings-intro-entry.html


----------



## Olias (Nov 18, 2010)

Hermastersvoice said:


> In the main, music is much less about what is being played, more about who is playing it. Are there recordings I need to know and why? Please I don't need yet another list of pet hates or loves, so the Why is important.


You simply MUST get the DVDs of Leonard Bernstein doing the Beethoven Symphonies with the Vienna Philharmonic. Whether you personally think they are the best recordings or not is a matter of opinion, but one cannot deny that Bernstein was a major part of the 20th century Art Music scene and his "love of life" style is an experience that must be witnessed visually as well as aurally.


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

Several record companies have tried to suggest these so-called "essential" recordings. EMI did a good job of it, what with Furtwangler, Beecham, Callas for example - the Great Recordings of the Century. Early on in the CD era, Sony/CBS did much the same, repackaging some of their classic recordings. There's even thick, heavy book 1000 Classical Records You Should Hear Before You Die, but I really think they omit some truly outstanding ones, and include a lot of so-so records. And if I were to include my own list of essential recordings, others on this site would vehemently disagree - with all of them! And they may not be the "best", whatever that means, but they are recordings that are well known and talked about. Just a few:

Rimsky-Korsakov: Scheherazade. Sir Thomas Beecham on EMI. A classic and mentioned in any survey of this great music. Beecham had a way of getting an orchestra to play sensually and seductively like no one else ever.

Dvorak: New World Symphony (no. 9): Toscanini with NBC Symphony on RCA. Thrilling, electrifying, and tender where needed. Too bad the sound is so dated.

Beethoven: Symphonies 5 & 7 with Carlos Kleiber on DG. For decades has been the reference for both works. 

Puccini: Tosca with Callas on EMI. No Tosca has even come close since. When opera singing was really important and the conductor really gets the mood right.

Sibelius: Symphony 2. Barbirolli with Royal Philharmonic. One of the most blazing, thrilling things on record. Not sure if Sibelius would have approved, but it works so well. Red hot performance and an intensity that blazes through the speakers.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

flamencosketches said:


> Is this the one you mean?


I'm not sure, I think there's only one.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

Hermastersvoice said:


> In the main, music is much less about what is being played, more about who is playing it. Are there recordings I need to know and why? Please I don't need yet another list of pet hates or loves, so the Why is important.


The search engine is a very useful tool. You can type in the composer, the work, and recordings and read through the threads. There are hundreds of them stored at this site. Just click on Advanced Search and then click on titles only. It's all there.


----------



## Dirge (Apr 10, 2012)

Were it not for this particular recorded performance, I'm not sure that this music would have ever struck a chord with me …

Alfred SCHNITTKE: String Trio (1985)
:: Gidon Kremer, Tabea Zimmermann & Heinrich Schiff [live from Lockenhaus '87] Philips




 (same recording reissued by Neos as part of an hommage to Heinrich Schiff)

I was never completely sold on Schnittke's String Trio until I heard this ultra-intense live recording from the 1987 Lockenhaus Festival. The pace of the performance is rather slow, but the Lockenhausers inhabit the music with every fiber of their collective being and play with a fanatical conviction and commitment and a level of focus and concentration that are truly awe inspiring. In those respects, I'm not sure that I've heard another performance (of anything) to match this one. This inspired advocacy is manifested through superb execution of a savvy interpretation, making for a once-in-a-lifetime Schnittke String Trio event. Indeed, the performing experience was so intense that when asked about it several years later in a _Fanfare_ interview, Schiff was unable to discuss it: "I can't, I can't talk of this. (…) If I _think_ about playing it, I become weak."


----------



## billeames (Jan 17, 2014)

*Some Pieces I found that are profound.*

Hello

I would say there are many. Given what kind of composer you like. And how you like it played. I can list a few that I have found profound.

I like the pieces played with intensity. Sometimes slowness enhances it, but it can be fast and intense too. (Beethoven 9th Furtwangler 1942 BPO)
I dont really like the average modern playing of symphonies.

The following are appropriately or beyond intense. There are some exceptions.

For me the important readings are
Beethoven 3 1944 Furtwangler (intense)
Beethoven 7, the humanity that comes across with Casals is really refreshing. 
Beethoven 9th: Isserstedt due to a great quartet of singers, and commitment to playing. Fricsay is I would say more intense plus a great choir. Decent sound for the time. The Great ones of the past are well known. Furtwangler 1942 fast and intense, I go for latest mastering. Furtwangler 1951 also as well paced.

Berlioz Symphony Fantastic, I really cant say I have a favorite, but Muti, Davis (LSO and RCGO), Dutoit, Karajan are all good. 
Berlioz Requiem, Colin Davis has the intensity needed. Munch Boston too. 
Damnation of Faust Markevitch and Munch plus Davis have good flair. What a piece!

Brahms 1 Ozawa BSO (Japanese DG) (lean, intense, dramatic), Furtwangler 1952 BPO, bone crushing intensity. Furtwangler NDR 1951 same except sound a bit better. There are many others I like also (Levine CSO, VPO intense, Giulini LAPO, intense, Beinum RCGO intense and well paced. Sawallisch LPO tasteful. Knappertsbusch Brahms 1 Dresden is slow but intense, and imperfect playing, compared to modern playing is superior in my opinion. 
Brahms 2. The intensity of Giulini LAPO and Karajan last DG one are nice.
Brahms 4: Furtwangler BPO 1943, others are intense too. Giulini is slow but intense (DG VPO). Bernstein also.

Bruckner Te Deum Karajan BPO 1976 for total intensity. Sound not great though for the time.I go for Original image bit processing, which helps a little. 
Bruckner 8 Karajan for its total commitment BPO. Haitink for commitment and good sound (VPO and RCGO 1981).

In my opinion Mahler is easier to pull off than Brahms, so there are a lot of good performances beyond what is mentioned below.
Mahler 1: Abbado CSO good orchestra and not overdone. Others are Tennstedt, Bernstein (any orchestra), Ozawa, Sinopoli well balanced.
Mahler 2: Bernstein NYPO (CBS and DG) and London SO. Intensity good agogic, or rubato.
Mahler 3: Abbado VPO maintains a steady tempo, which is hard to do here.
Mahler 5: Sinopoli My first CD ever. Intensity and somewhat reasonable sound. 
Mahler 6: Favorites are Bernstein, Tennstedt. (Bernstein intense)
Mahler 7. Tennstedt mysterious, which can be said of Bernstein too.
Mahler 8: Bernstein LSO in later masterings, like 1999 and later. So intense. Sinopoli also with better sound.
Mahler 9: Bernstein RCGO and BPO such slowness and understanding. Karajan good too, 1980 and 1982. 
Mahler 10, I like the Chailly, as some parts are very intense.

Im worn out now. Maybe more later.

Bill


----------



## Rogerx (Apr 27, 2018)

Hermastersvoice said:


> In the main, music is much less about what is being played, more about who is playing it. Are there recordings I need to know and why? Please I don't need yet another list of pet hates or loves, so the Why is important.


Just browse the forum, endless threads for good and bad.


----------



## Oldhoosierdude (May 29, 2016)

Hermastersvoice said:


> In the main, music is much less about what is being played, more about who is playing it. Are there recordings I need to know and why? Please I don't need yet another list of pet hates or loves, so the Why is important.


Your statement makes little sense to me. You state the who plays is important then that why is important. I don't know what that means. 
You say music is about who plays it not about what they play, I disagree with the premise. I venture to say that composers might disagree also. 
Truthfully I don't know what you are looking for here.


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

Hermastersvoice said:


> In the main, music is much less about what is being played, more about who is playing it. Are there recordings I need to know and why? Please I don't need yet another list of pet hates or loves, so the Why is important.


A substantiation of your first sentence would be interesting Hermastersvoice. If it were true then the pieces one dislikes the most would probably just be waiting for the right performance - but I doubt that very much.

Perhaps you were just speaking subjectively.


----------



## Merl (Jul 28, 2016)

Hermastersvoice said:


> In the main, music is much less about what is being played, more about who is playing it....


I'd argue the exact opposite of this. I don't care who's playing the music. If I think it's a great performance or if it resonates with me, that's all that matters. I've heard great artists make rubbish music and amateurs make incredible music. That's why I like the blind comparisons on here because we are just listening to music without any bias (which is why the fanboys never take part, lol). The only recordings you NEED to know are the ones that float your boat. Doesn't matter who they're by. Listen without prejudice and, as others have said, have a look around the site. There are plenty of recommendations of works by people with a great deal of knowledge and experience of classical music. You may agree with them or you may not but there's only one way to find out...... Listen!


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Hermastersvoice said:


> In the main, music is much less about what is being played, more about who is playing it. Are there recordings I need to know and why? Please I don't need yet another list of pet hates or loves, so the Why is important.


I'd say both are important. Of primary importance is the music. If I don't like the music then however good the performance one is on a loser. On the other hand a poor performance can make great music seem mediocre while a great performance can bring something so special as to be a revelation. I remember hearing Mendelssohn's symphony 2 under Abbado and it struck me as very ordinary but then hearing it under Karajan was a revelation as to how good it was.


----------



## Xisten267 (Sep 2, 2018)

To complement the other answers, I highly suggest you to take a look at this *channel on youtube*. It's dedicated to recordings that have been deemed as reference by experts and critics alike, and that deserve to be listened. I've been slowly listening to these recordings over the last years and I agree that all of them are very good.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

Hermastersvoice said:


> In the main, music is much less about what is being played, more about who is playing it. Are there recordings I need to know and why? Please I don't need yet another list of pet hates or loves, so the Why is important.


What is being played is very important to me. Then I like to get a recording I can enjoy; hence, decent orchestra, vocals, and sound quality.


----------



## Hermastersvoice (Oct 15, 2018)

My main concern is if there’s recordings I am missing out on. Yes, there are the classics such as the de Sabata Tosca or the Klemperer Beethoven. I wasn’t looking for anybody to reiterate well known virtues of those. On the other hand there’s the Rattle Beethoven which means an awful lot less than Orff’s Der Mond because Rattle had little to say but Sawallisch invested his considerable talents in Orff’s music.


----------

