# I hate you Wilhelm Furtwängler



## Xaltotun

Now look, dear sir. After hearing your passionate, transcendental versions of my favourite symphonies, all the other versions by other conductors now seem second-rate, dry and lackluster to me. What that means, is that you've ruined a huge pile of music to me forever! There's a big pile of CDs and vinyls over there in the corner, and I'm not sure if I'll ever be able to find any enjoyment on those, because your superior versions are, well, superior. Before I listened to your versions, I didn't know how much drama and conflict there can be in a symphony. Most of those other conductors don't seem to be able to grasp those concepts - drama and conflict - like you do, Mr. Furtwängler. So now, their records sound to me like they are missing a central element of the music. They don't seem to "see time itself", like you almost supernaturally and effortlessly seem to do.

So yeah, "thanks" a lot dear sir!


----------



## Sid James

Ha ha, when I read this thread title, I thought it would be something about Furtwangler staying in Germany during the Nazi era (some people still blame him for toadying to the Nazis, but others just see it as water under the bridge, he was just being pragmatic like millions of other Germans at the time).

Political considerations aside, yes he was a great conductor, and a great musician of the c20th. In his day, there was a sharp contrast between his more liberal and intuitive approach to the art, and the more pedantic and strict approaches of people like Arturo Toscanini.

I suppose that the listener has to be flexible to a degree to get some enjoyment out of a variety of interpretations. Everyone seems to have their favourite soloists, conductors, string quartets, choral ensembles, etc. but the crux of the matter for me is adapting myself to the interpretation (as well as the music being performed of course), rather than expecting it to adapt itself to what I expect, if that makes sense. Yes, this can be quite difficult to do if you have a favourite interpreter of certain repertoire, but it matters less if you are listening to music that is off the beaten track. Eg. I have discs of Harry Partch's _Delusion of the Fury_ and Stanford's _Requiem_ & there have only been those single recordings made of those so far. I find there's a certain amount of liberation when I listen to music like this, there's no other performances to compare them to, so you are forced to accept the one recording that is on offer. Maybe an idea for you is to listen to repertoire that Furtwangler didn't record, which can't be that difficult, because he tended to stick to the core repertoire, as well as conducting his own music...


----------



## Weston

I am angry with Furtwangler for being born in a time when recording technology wasn't quite up to parr. Decades ago I had some vinyls of his Strauss Til Eulanspeigal and Death and Transfiguration. They sounded okay until you played them after a 1970's stereo recording. I can still listen to 1960's and 70's recording with no difficulty, but too much before that and it sounds like telephone holding music. 

@ Andre. I have that Stanford Requiem and find it quite amazing. A very nice recording, but as you say, what do I have to compare it too?


----------



## Curiosity

I hate Furtwangler for taking the allegro con brio of the Eroica at largo.


----------



## Art Rock

There is a Naxos CD with the Stanford requiem by the way - have not heard it.


----------



## Lysistratus

Weston said:


> I can still listen to 1960's and 70's recording with no difficulty, but too much before that and it sounds like telephone holding music.


The pristine Classical remasters have been mentioned on the http://www.talkclassical.com/15814-furtwangler-great-hes-supposed.html thread. I have just listened to the Bruckner 7 and the sound is pleasant, not great but not grating either. Better than any other Furtwangler I've heard yet and it's the '49 recording. I can't speak for www.furtwanglersound.com, but some have also reviewed their sound favourably. I have heard some samples, and so far I prefer the Pristine sound.

Anyway both these sites are worth investigating. Good luck.


----------



## Ukko

Weston said:


> I am angry with Furtwangler for being born in a time when recording technology wasn't quite up to parr. Decades ago I had some vinyls of his Strauss Til Eulanspeigal and Death and Transfiguration. They sounded okay until you played them after a 1970's stereo recording. I can still listen to 1960's and 70's recording with no difficulty, but too much before that and it sounds like telephone holding music.
> 
> @ Andre. I have that Stanford Requiem and find it quite amazing. A very nice recording, but as you say, what do I have to compare it too?


I must have dodged this thread because of its title. I am with the members who are annoyed with Furtwängler's recordings because their technology isn't up to 1960s level. But then, I have the same complaint with the recordings of several other musicians; don't hate any of the musicians involved though. (That last bit is missing a pronoun, but makes an admonition.)


----------



## sharik

i wasn't impresed by Furtwanglers take on Tchakovsky's 6th.


----------



## DavidA

I must confess not being able to join the plaudits for the Bayreuth Beethoven ninth.


----------



## DiesIraeCX

DavidA said:


> I must confess not being able to join the plaudits for the Bayreuth Beethoven ninth.


Yup, me neither. Furthermore, I must confess I'm not the biggest fan of Furtwängler's Beethoven in general. I fully recognize his greatness, yet, I just don't care for his Beethoven, with the fluctuating and broaaaaaaad tempi. It just doesn't do it for me like it does for others. The 1954 performance is undoubtedly great, but not in my top 5 Ninths.

Vive la différence.

That said, I love his 1942 Beethoven 9th. It's a one of a kind performance. His Schubert 9th is pretty great, too.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

I hate any version of his Beethoven 7 "Allegretto" movement becuase it ain't even a real "allegretto" any more. I don't think german dude knows Italian, I put my money with Toscanini.........but then again I think Toscanini's Eroica and 5th are always too slow!


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

Furtwangler has actually recorded my least favourite recording of any piece of music ever. Has anyone heard his rendition of Bach's 3rd orchestral suite? It's like my ears are wallowing in cowpat.


----------



## Brahmsian Colors

DiesIraeCX said:


> I must confess I'm not the biggest fan of Furtwängler's Beethoven in general. I fully recognize his greatness, yet, I just don't care for his Beethoven, with the fluctuating and broaaaaaaad tempi. It just doesn't do it for me like it does for others.


I can say no more, except DITTO.


----------



## 13hm13

For me, the best thing about WF are his _own_ symphonies (i.e., 1-3), which I own on CD. 
I can't say if/how his renditions of Beethoven, Bruckner, et. al, are different/superior to others'. I simply can't get into those 1940s/early 1950s tinny-sounding recordings no matter how good the conductor/performance.
If someone can provide a direct example of one of really good WF performances the thread-starter had in mind -- e.g., via YouTube link --, that'd help me (perhaps) better appreciate the guy.


----------



## Pugg

Hating is such a wast of time.


----------



## 13hm13

*Furtwängler Documentary*

Furtwängler Documentary


----------



## Manxfeeder

Here's an interesting discussion of The Furtwangler Principle, regardless of what you think of Lyndon LaRouche. The video doesn't work, but there is a link for the transcript below it.

http://archive.larouchepac.com/node/22992


----------



## 13hm13

*Furtwangler Symphonic Piano Concerto*

...Just discovered this gem, and it ROCKS.

Wilhelm Furtwängler - Symphonic Piano Concerto - Daniel Barenboim, Zubin Mehta, LAPhil (1971)

A lo-fi LP rip is on -- where else -- YouTube...






I don't think the uploader (or whomever) ripped the vinyl had the best equipment (know-how) -- it sounds pretty lo-fi.

Surprised that with that "celebrity" cast -- LA Phil/Mehta/Barenboim -- it has never been reissued on LP or CD. I can find almost zip info on the orig. live LP release.


----------



## 13hm13

13hm13 said:


> Wilhelm Furtwängler - Symphonic Piano Concerto - Daniel Barenboim, Zubin Mehta, LAPhil (1971)
> 
> Surprised that with that "celebrity" cast -- LA Phil/Mehta/Barenboim -- it has never been reissued on LP or CD. .


Digging on Wiki (and after listening to the WHOLE concerto), I can kinda see why there are lack of performances/recordings:
"Furtwängler's Symphonic Concerto received mixed reviews, and has, *as a very difficult piece for both pianists and orchestras, rarely been performed in public*."


----------



## Merl

I don't mind some of Furtwangler's Beethoven but the sound is pretty poor, even on the better recordings. I find that hard to get past (see also Toscanini's recordings).


----------



## 13hm13

Merl said:


> I don't mind some of Furtwangler's Beethoven but the sound is pretty poor, even on the better recordings. I find that hard to get past (see also Toscanini's recordings).


...about those early lo-fi recordings. It has been suggested by some vinyl "experts" that playing the records back using _true mono cartridges_ (and/or cartridges with certain characteristics, like stylus shape) can restore some fidelity*. And then--using mono cart./turntable system--a vinyl rip can be made. 
I'm not sure how far some of the CD re-issuers (using the 'remastered' slogan) go thru ALL that effort.
All that being said, I'm not sure another Beethoven 9th -- even if the conductor was Toscanini or Furtwangler -- is worth remastering.

*Somewhere on the Internet is a file-sharing site of dedicated vinyl rippers -- rippers who specialize in older recordings. If I think of that forum, I'll post it.


----------



## bigshot

I don't think there is any one definitive performance of a work. When I was first starting out, finding that one perfect version was my goal. But as I learned more about music, I realized that unique distinctiveness is the mark of a great performance, not appropriate perfection. My favorite conductors now are the ones that I can hear playing and know it's them without even looking at the conductor credit... Stokowski, Bernstein, Karajan, Toscanini... and yes, Furwangler all fit that bill.

By the way, the solution for Toscanini recordings is to play them on a 5.1 system using a concert hall DSP. It takes away the dry acoustic and makes them sound like live performances. My Yamaha receiver has a DSP that was created using the measurements of the Berlin Philharmonic Hall. It makes Toscanini recordings sound fresh and new.


----------



## 13hm13

Gonna eat my own words!! ...



13hm13 said:


> For me, the best thing about WF are his _own_ symphonies (i.e., 1-3), which I own on CD.


And then I discovered WF's own piano concerto ... which is my fave WF composition and one of my fave PC's of all time....
2009 recording:





1971 recording:







> I can't say if/how his renditions of Beethoven, Bruckner, et. al, are different/superior to others'. I simply can't get into those 1940s/early 1950s tinny-sounding recordings no matter how good the conductor/performance.
> .


I wrote that a couple of mos. ago. Thx to YouTube, I've sampled quite a few WF recording. And purch'd some downloads as well. 
All I can say is it's hard to go back to non-WF versions. As far as my comment about "tinny-sounding recordings" ... well, I'll _live_!


----------



## Heck148

DavidA said:


> I must confess not being able to join the plaudits for the Bayreuth Beethoven ninth.


Which is the Furtwangler LvB 9th recording that ends with a complete train wreck?? orchestra scattered all over the page in complete ensemble dissolution in the final section??


----------

