# Multiple recordings of the same piece



## violadude (May 2, 2011)

I'm curious, how important is it for everyone to have multiple recordings of the same piece?
I know listening to various interpretations is good for you. But there is so so so much music out there that I haven't heard yet and with limited economic resources, I have to say that I would personally rather spend my money on as many new pieces that I could and then if I felt like I had absolutely all the music I wanted (which quite possibly might never happen  ) then I would start spending money on multiple recordings of the same piece. 
I am usually pretty happy with a performance unless it is absolutely dreadful, but I'm not too picky about that kind of thing. 

But what about you guys? Do you often get multiple recordings of the same piece?


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

I do not go for duplicates in general, but Mahler (at least 3 versions of all symphonies and major song cycles), and in particular Das Lied von der Erde is the exception:

- 5 versions of the standard setting (tenor, alto, orchestra)
- 2 versions of the main alternative (tenor, bariton, orchestra)
- 1 version pf the standard setting sung in Cantonese
- 1 version of the setting with chamber orchestra
- 1 version of the setting with piano

In the beginning I have bought a few duds in terms of performance (Brahms PC1 comes to mind) - replaced those with better versions.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

I usually never buy multiple performances of the same work. The only ones I have is ones by default due to me wanting works on discs coupled with works I already have. That's why I have three different performances of Bartok's _Concerto for Orchestra_. Usually, if I want to hear different performances, I just borrow them for free from my local library system. A friend of mine who is also a big classical buff also has a lot of works I know with different performers to the ones I have, so I end up listening to them often when he brings them round to my place. Of course, many times I go to live performances of works I know well, so that's a bit like comparing another performance to the one I have on disc...


----------



## superhorn (Mar 23, 2010)

I don't have a lot of duplication. There is so much interesting music on CD outside the standard repertoire I've tended to concentrate on interesting rarities.
So there are many great works I just don't have, not because I don't love them, but because I've heard them so many times I don't really feel a need for recordings of them at the moment. 
I have several Beethoven 7ths, but not other masterpieces by him such as the complete piano sonatas, the string quartets, the violin concerto , etc. I've heard these zillions of times. 
But I do have recordings of other Bs who wrote symphonies, such as Mily Balakirev, Franz Berwald, Arnold Bax, Havergal Brian, Arthur Bliss etc.
As well as Carlos Chavez, Nikolai Myaskovsky, Hans Pfitzner, Korngold, Nielsen, 
Walton, Tippett, Enescu, Zdenek Fibich, Reinhold Gliere,Glazunov, 
Szymanowski, Hugo Alfven, Vincent D'Indy, and others .
For operas, I have two Otellos, a live Salzburg performance on EMI with surprisingly, Furtwangler conducting , and the DG one with Domingo conducted by Myung Whun Chung.
But I also have rarely perfrmed but really cool operas by Roussel, Zemlinsky, 
Rimsky-Korsakov,Prokofiev,Smetana,Dvorak,Janacek, Riccardo Zandonai, Nielsen,
Pfitzner, Richard Strauss, Tippett, Walter Braunfels, Ernst Krenek, Pavel Haas,
Franz Schreker, Franz Schmidt, Peter Cornelius, and others.
Why eat at the same italian restaurant every time when you go to ones which serve Thai,Korean, Georgian, Vietnamese and other cool cuisines ?
Go for it, whether in music or food !


----------



## elgar's ghost (Aug 8, 2010)

Art Rock said:


> I do not go for duplicates in general, but Mahler (at least 3 versions of all symphonies and major song cycles), and in particular Das Lied von der Erde is the exception:
> 
> - 5 versions of the standard setting (tenor, alto, orchestra)
> - 2 versions of the main alternative (tenor, bariton, orchestra)
> ...


Art, is the recording you have of the piano version of Das Lied von der Erde the one featuring Fassbaender and Moser? I have my eye on it and any thoughts would be welcome.

Thanks, E.G.


----------



## crmoorhead (Apr 6, 2011)

I don't generally seek out multiple versions of the same piece, but occasionally will buy a second or third version of something if it is really good value or if it comes on a CD that has something else I really want on it. A while ago, I bought an MP3 download of all the Beethoven symphonies with toscanini conducting the NBC orchestra for £3.99. A great bargain and i found it interesting to make comparisons between it and the version of the symphonies I already owned. Now, I was very familiar with most of the symphonies but listening to some of them under different recording circumstances and with different tempi made me see a couple of them (in particular the 4th) in a different light and with some new life injected into them. 

I usually am very picky about what version of a piece I will buy, but price is also a big factor. I will generally go for the the cheapest version that is rated very highly if I am introducing myself to something new. I don't buy anything that is cheap if it hasnt been thouroughly reviewed. If I really like it, I will consider buying the version generally regarded as the 'ultimate' version at a more expensive price. I generally resell my CDs after i have copied them to my hard drive. 

With opera, however, I think it is almost necessary to own multiple versions. There are more factors when considering that genre, IMO. Not just the music, but the quality of the singers as individuals and as an ensemble and the creative vision of that particular production (if you are getting a DVD). Some vocal works are also not great when it comes to choruses and the words aren't as clear as they should be.


----------



## Manxfeeder (Oct 19, 2010)

If I like a piece, I'll get multiple recordings. It's amazing how different conductors, orchestras, or musicians can take a fully written-out piece and make it sound different/unique. That's part of the fun of art music, the breathing of life into dead notes on paper. As Debussy said, music is the space between the notes.


----------



## Olias (Nov 18, 2010)

I like having period and modern instrument versions of some works. Different experience altogether.


----------



## World Violist (May 31, 2007)

I have duplicates of some things because I like them a TON and it's interesting (and often revelatory) to see the differences, and the piece is multi-faceted enough to sustain them. Bach's cantatas and Bruckner's symphonies come to mind pretty quickly. I used to get tons of Mahler CDs, but now it's gotten to the point where I'm listening to the pieces and not the interpretation, and I often prefer just running them through in my mind to listening to what someone else does with them.

Otherwise, multiple recordings for me are either unnecessary or impossible (in the case of music by Per Norgard, Kalevi Aho, Arvo Part, etc.).


----------



## kv466 (May 18, 2011)

For me it was a combo of luck and timing...I heard Vladimir Feltsman in Miami performing the Fminor concerto of Bach and instantly fell in love with it so the next day I went to Coconuts and the only cd that had it was called: Glenn Gould - The Bach Piano Concerti and there it was...that glorious f minor but also the g minor and d minor and all the others...i'd never head such playing...so, because I had heard thousands upon thousands of hours of radio before this, I knew who my true piano master was...that is until I wanted to explore Rachmaninov because the first disc my hand grabbed was by the best pianist for this...Chandos' Recordings of the Earl Wild and The Royal Philharmonic Orchestra...sure, lots of folks do these justice but Earl is the only one who does it right...do give them a slooshy if you haven't already....so, for most piano works I already know what I like with various exceptions, of course...I do, however, feel the need to keep having multiple copies of the Beethoven and Brahms symphonies,...Rhapsody In Blue, Holst: The Planets altho I think I like Charles Dutoit's the best...and the complete Beethoven piano works,...i've got Brendelfly's but would really like to have a good Arrau set....of course, I wish GG had recorded them all but I cherish the ones he did...if not, the Tempest would never have been heard properly


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

superhorn said:


> ...Why eat at the same italian restaurant every time when you go to ones which serve Thai,Korean, Georgian, Vietnamese and other cool cuisines ?
> Go for it, whether in music or food !...


yes, "variety is the spice of life" as they say - i've been branching out into many areas of music, despite previously focusing on the c20th. there's so much out there to explore, even in the standard repertoire...


----------



## Guest (Jun 17, 2011)

I have 3 cycles of LvB St Qt's and about 4-5 further cycles yet to burn, 2 or 3 of The Messiah


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

elgars ghost said:


> Art, is the recording you have of the piano version of Das Lied von der Erde the one featuring Fassbaender and Moser? I have my eye on it and any thoughts would be welcome.
> 
> Thanks, E.G.


No. This one (from my blog):

Adapted version for tenor and alto and piano
My version: Vorzellner/Haselboeck/Berchtold (Cavi-Music, 2009, 65 min)
When I read that a version had been recorded where the piano replaces the orchestra, two thoughts crossed my mind: [1] that is utterly ridiculous; [2] I want to hear it. Well, the result is astonishing. The orchestral colours are translated surprisingly well to the piano, and the singing is even more clear than in the chamber version. Both singers are very good (if not superb) and the piano playing is excellent. If the orchestral version did not exist, this would definitely make it to my short list of hors concours compositions - as it is, I still deem it essential.


----------



## elgar's ghost (Aug 8, 2010)

Thanks for that, Art. I was curious as I like the piano reduction recording that I've got of Kindertotenlieder. 
I've occasionally thought of other orchestral vocal works that might sound interesting with reduced forces. DSCHs Symphony 14 - I wonder how that might come over with different combinations of three to five chamber musicians or simply a piano replacing the orchestra for the whole thing. I don't think it would sound all that one-dimensional despite most of the song texts dealing singularly with death.

Anyway, I digress - thanks again!


----------



## jaimsilva (Jun 1, 2011)

I have to confess that I am a compulsive collector. So I have lots of different versions of the same work. For instance, I have for the Beethoven piano concertos the follow sets:
Aimard-Harnoncourt, 
Anda-Fricsay,
Backhaus-Schmidt-Isserstedt,
Barenboim-Klemperer, 
Brendel-Rattle, 
Bronfman-Zinman, 
Gilels-Szell,
Glenn Gould,
Goode-Fischer,
Katchen-Gamba,
Kempff-van Kempen, 
Kempff-Leitner, 
Kissin-Davis,
Lupu-Mehta,
Perahia-Haitink,
Pletnev-Gansch, 
Pollini-Abbado, 
Serkin-Ozawa 
Uchida-Sanderling

on fortepiano Lubin-Hogwood

plus a bunch of uncoupled ones...


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

A great, great topic. I have a few thoughts on the matter: 

There is a class of recording collectors that considers the essence of listening to be comparing recordings. We can find them easily enough. I'm sure the industry loves this approach: they'd love us to buy fifteen cycles of Beethoven's symphonies. 

That approach is not entirely without merit. It is sometimes fun to compare recordings of a work you love and know very well. I have my doubts about some of the particular individuals making claims - take the famous Santa Fe Listener on amazon.com. Can he really know so many works so well? Is he really qualified to stand so flippantly in judgment of Gardiner, Karajan, Abbado, Solti, Pollini, Barenboim, Ashkenazy, Anda, and so on? Maybe. Really, maybe so. But it'd be surprising. 

In some cases, it's obvious to me that the opinions are not backed by real knowledge or insight. The fact is, most recordings are pretty good, most of the musicians involved are extremely talented and extremely well-prepared, etc. When someone says that, say, Karajan's tempo is too slow in the 3rd movement of Bruckner's 8th symphony: Well. 

I'm allergic to that kind of thing now, to tell the truth. It serves its purpose in a way: I generally do want to be assured that I'm buying a good recording. I like to hear famous or "great" recordings too. But the pretensions of a lot of the self-appointed experts turn me way off. 

Plus, as others have said, at least right now I'd rather spend my money on music that is totally new to me. I have a recording of Enescu's 3rd violin sonata, and it sounds fine to me. Do I really want another one just because some person says it's better than the one I have? Especially if their argument is some humbug like, "It is more passionate."

No, unless I have a good reason to suspect I really am missing something, I'd rather have something new to me - and especially while there are still works as famous as, say, Harold in Italy, which I've never heard. 

It makes me sick how people pretend to know everything, to be able to stand in judgment of everything, etc. The conclusion of the whole matter is: stay away from those people. You'll waste a lot of money, you'll have thirteen recordings of Chopin's Nocturnes, six of them in crackling old mono, and you'll listen to two or three of them repeatedly while the others go to rot. Worst of all, you'll have never heard Faure's Nocturnes.


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

Mea culpa: I am currently uploading a recording of Brahms' and Mendelssohn's violin concertos. I have at least 3, maybe even 5 or 6 recordings of each of these. The recordings I'm uploading are not in any way especially remarkable. I should've spent that money on the violin concertos of Elgar or Khachaturian or Korngold or Berg or Dvorak, none of which I'd heard when I bought this recording.


----------



## elgar's ghost (Aug 8, 2010)

I do enjoy buying multiple recordings of the symphonies of Beethoven, Mahler and Bruckner but space constraints will soon put an end to that. I will end up with 8 recordings of all of Mahler's symphonies and something similar with Bruckner so I think that will be enough. At least collecting a similar amount of Beethoven's symphonies take up less room!

On the involuntary side I seemed to have acquired 3 recordings of Dvorak's Czech and American Suites as fillers to other works. Ditto Bloch's Hebrew Suite and Ireland's Holy Boy but at least they are for different forces on each of the recordings.


----------



## Ravellian (Aug 17, 2009)

Given unlimited funds, I would gladly own multiple recordings of the same work, provided they are all of high quality and have some differences in interpretation. However, despite now having a good job, my funds are not unlimited, and I must settle for one recording per piece, usually chosen after sampling a few over the internet.

And luckily, I am an alumnus of Towson University which grants me free access to the Online Naxos Music Library 

Also, emiel, despite what you may think, conductors' and performers' egos _do_ get in the way of the music sometimes, often creating horrid effects that are in complete opposition to the goals of the composer. Performance creativity can be a good thing (e.g., Glenn Gould), but it must not be allowed to get out of hand. On the other hand, some performers (e.g., Alfred Brendel) think that they can just read the notes off the page and call it a performance. The best performances lie somewhere in the middle of these two extremes.


----------



## Comistra (Feb 27, 2010)

science said:


> In some cases, it's obvious to me that the opinions are not backed by real knowledge or insight. The fact is, most recordings are pretty good, most of the musicians involved are extremely talented and extremely well-prepared, etc. When someone says that, say, Karajan's tempo is too slow in the 3rd movement of Bruckner's 8th symphony: Well.


This generally covers how I feel about it as well. I have recordings from "obscure" orchestras that I find just as good as those from more well-known groups. There are really only two reasons I will actively search out a new recording:

First, if the recording I have is poor quality. I have Kubelík's recording of Smetana's Má Vlast with Chicago, and the sound is rather poor. I've replaced it with Kuchar / Janáček Philharmonic, and I never listen to the Kubelík any more.

Second, if it's a piece I have a special affinity for, as it were, I sometimes like to see how it can be differently interpreted. Despite the fact that I think Solti conducting Dvořák's "New World" symphony with Chicago is excellent, I bought Paavo Järvi and the Royal Philharmonic's version, and I'm glad I did: Järvi has a different take than Solti, and has allowed me to hear the symphony in a new light. For most pieces-those I simply like (or am indifferent to)-I don't have much desire to get multiple recordings. I'd rather spend my money on new music.


----------



## samurai (Apr 22, 2011)

Comistra said:


> This generally covers how I feel about it as well. I have recordings from "obscure" orchestras that I find just as good as those from more well-known groups. There are really only two reasons I will actively search out a new recording:
> 
> First, if the recording I have is poor quality. I have Kubelík's recording of Smetana's Má Vlast with Chicago, and the sound is rather poor. I've replaced it with Kuchar / Janáček Philharmonic, and I never listen to the Kubelík any more.
> 
> Second, if it's a piece I have a special affinity for, as it were, I sometimes like to see how it can be differently interpreted. Despite the fact that I think Solti conducting Dvořák's "New World" symphony with Chicago is excellent, I bought Paavo Järvi and the Royal Philharmonic's version, and I'm glad I did: Järvi has a different take than Solti, and has allowed me to hear the symphony in a new light. For most pieces-those I simply like (or am indifferent to)-I don't have much desire to get multiple recordings. I'd rather spend my money on new music.


@Comistra, I was interested in your observation apropos of Solti's and Jarvi's respective interpretations of Dvorak's 9th, as this is one of my favorite symphonies as well. I have the one with Giulini conducting the London Philharmonic Orchestra. Could you specify what you found the differences to be between the two readings, and which of the two--if either--you liked better?


----------



## Chi_townPhilly (Apr 21, 2007)

violadude said:


> I'm curious, how important is it for everyone to have multiple recordings of the same piece?


Well, there are really three questions for the price of one in this query, so I'll take each one in turn:
1) It's absolutely NOT important for _everyone_ to have multiple recordings of the same piece- so that question's sent to bed (without supper) easily enough.

2) Re: _How important is it for YOU to have multiple recordings of the same work?_ Now that's another thing entirely. That depends on whether or not, sometime in you music-listening journey, you absolutely fall in love with one of those great masterpieces of Western Art Music. If you have this kind of reaction- to the point when you listen repeatedly with intense focus- perhaps even imagine what it would be like to 'mock-conduct' the work, then you'll find that it'll become important FOR YOU to have more than one version of such a work.

3) _How important is it for ME to have multiple recordings of the same work?_ Pretty important, really. I suppose I have a sub-optimal assortment of duplicates in my collection. If I was generically advising someone, I'd probably counsel that multiples should be reserved for pieces that are so captivating that you feel impelled to acquire the relevant study-scores. Unfortunately, in a few cases, this proves to be a matter of "do-as-I-say/not-as-I-do!"

Ultimately, it's cool to broaden a collection first- and that way you have some reference comparisions between works you like and works you absolutely adore. Then you can make a more informed decision about possible multiple versions.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

@ science & chi town - i agree with what you have both said above.

I think that in today's world, we are just bombarded with hundreds of choices, not just in music, but virtually everything. Go down to your local supermarket (even a smaller one) and there are like 20 or more different types of breads there. Or milk, or butter, and those are only the basic necessities, this is not talking about more fancy things. It's the same with music, there's is just such a huge amount of recordings of the same classic - and even not so classic - works that we are really spoiled in this way. Compare this to earlier generations, and they didn't have these kinds of choices. Eg. I bumped into an elderly gent at a concert I was at a few weeks back, and he talked of how in the 1950's he heard a radio broadcast of a Russian performance of Prokofiev's opera _War and Peace _& really liked it & wanted to get it. He called the radio station (the ABC) but they said they were only able (due to licensing issues) to broadcast this opera recording once, and then they had to destroy the copy. So this guy went to the only specialist classical music record shop in Sydney and ordered that recording directly from the Soviet Union. It took many months to get here to Australia, but when he recieved it, he was very happy. It actually even wasn't the complete opera, just a disc or maybe two of the main highlights. So here we are in 2011, more than half a century later, and we have lost this simple happiness of that generation. A lot of us are not totally happy unless we have a recording of a work with "perfect" acoustics or sound, or even some of us who aren't fully satisfied until we own all of the recordings of things like _War and Peace _that are currently on the market (& some specialists even hunt down ancient vinyls and 48's, 78's of these things too). I think that in this era of too much choice, some of us have kind of lost sight of the "forest for the trees."...


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

There is some wisdom there. It's a kind of trap: we can't help but want more choice, and celebrate it when we have it, but then we lose something that comes with it. 

I know I've gone way overboard with the music purchasing, and it's hard to control myself. I really need to listen to my collection a few times.... But then there is also so much great music that I don't have yet. 

If, God forbid, I'm ever unemployed for about 8 months (I know a few people suffering from this), I won't have any trouble occupying myself! One disk after another baby.


----------



## haydnfan (Apr 13, 2011)

Some collect multiple recordings as a means to an end... they want to unlock all secrets of the work in question, or find the ultimate recording. I used to think like that.

Then I went through a period where one recording would suffice.

And now... one recording does suffice. But I buy multiple recordings. I enjoy the performances, and there is just as much artistry in performance as there is in composition. It's not necessarily for insight or to constantly compare, it is simply to enjoy music recordings in BOTH ways, the music itself and how it's played.


----------



## Comistra (Feb 27, 2010)

samurai said:


> @Comistra, I was interested in your observation apropos of Solti's and Jarvi's respective interpretations of Dvorak's 9th, as this is one of my favorite symphonies as well. I have the one with Giulini conducting the London Philharmonic Orchestra. Could you specify what you found the differences to be between the two readings, and which of the two--if either--you liked better?


Solti's interpretation is what I might call aggressively orthodox, which I do not mean as a pejorative. He does not try to bring attention to himself by playing with tempi, which, for me, is the best approach to this symphony. It's got enough twists and turns itself, so I don't see any real need to meddle, when meddling could easily get a conductor into trouble here. You won't hear any "surprises" with Solti. It also helps that the recording sounds great, and the Chicago brass are excellent.

So it may be a bit surprising when I say that Järvi's main attraction is his unorthodox approach. He draws out the tension in the first movement, which can be dangerous, because it could easily slip into something dull; but rather than just play the whole thing slowly, Järvi highlights the dramatic contrasts. After a similar Largo, the quick-paced Scherzo stands out even more than usual. The finale is much more straight-forward.

I wish I could explain it better, but the long and short of it is that Järvi's "personal stamp" on the symphony does not feel wrong, because it fits so perfectly with the heart-on-sleeve Romanticism of this work. Järvi does not say "look at me" but rather "listen to this symphony." So he meddles, but does so with a complete understanding of what he's doing.

I would _probably_ say I prefer the Solti, in part because it's the way I hear the symphony in my head. However, I've had the Solti for longer than the Järvi, so it might simply be a "familiarity" preference for the time being.


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

Regarding the buying of multiple versions of musical works.
I believe there is a group who buy every version they stumble across regardless of the suitability of the artists involved. The reason for this is to impress their friends or readers of these and other forums. You can recognise this crowd because
they buy the most ridiculous combination of artists doing composers they have no affinity with,you read their listings and wonder if somebodyishaving a laugh or did they really mean to aquire this junk. Also the recordings should preferably be in the highest of hi-fi released last week, and you should be able to hear the conductor's shoes squeaking. It really depends on the work in question, you don't really want twenty versions of the "1812" when none will suffice. Same with several versions of Ravel's "Bolero", one is boring enough but ten ? However, in the case of important works ( please don't start on the " whats an important work trail )one should have several because the myriad approaches to a great work are so fascinating. This
is taking into account the fact that you should have built up a basic collection first with plenty of variety.
This is my collection of Beethoven's "Emperor" concerto.

Schnabel.Philharmonia. Galliera. ( THE ONE).
Solomon.Philharmonia.Menges.
Kempff.Berlin Phil.van Kempen.
Gould.American Symph.Stokowski.
Edwin Fischer.Philharmonia.Furtwaengler.
Gulda.Vienna Phil.Stein.
Fleischer.Cleveland.Szell.
Gilels.Cleveland.Szell
Elly Ney.Nuremburg Symph.van Hoogstraten.
Horowitz.RCA Victor Symph.Reiner.
Rosen.Symphonica of London.Wyn Morris.
Casadesus.Phil.Symph. Orch. of NY. Mitropoulos.
Casadesus.Concertgebouw.Rosbaud.
Arrau.Concertgebouw.Haitink.
Gieseking.Berlin Radio Orch.Artur Rother.
Firkusny.RPO.Kempe.

It is not a question of who is best really all these artists have something to say. In the case of Gould/Stokowski I'm not sure what but it's fascinating all the same. It is like attending different versions of "Hamlet", one is not enough you need half-a-dozen.Mind you, these recordings have been collected over roughly 60 years.The Schnabel was recorded in 1947 and was no. five in the EMI Great Recordings of the Century reissues on LP in the 1950's.


----------



## Guest (Nov 24, 2011)

What no Murray Perahia??????


----------



## Taneyev (Jan 19, 2009)

I've several works on different versions, but nearly all of them are very little known/forgotten historical ones. Like Myron Poliakin Kreutzer, Brahm's v.c.by Ossy Renardi, Schubert's Death and the Maiden by the Kolisch Q, Brahm's v.sonatas by Goldstein and de Vito, Bach-Busoni by Horowitz on piano rolls, etc. When I found one of those, even for a piece I've 6 or 7 times already, I take it.


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

science said:


> A great, great topic. I have a few thoughts on the matter:
> 
> There is a class of recording collectors that considers the essence of listening to be comparing recordings. We can find them easily enough. I'm sure the industry loves this approach: they'd love us to buy fifteen cycles of Beethoven's symphonies.
> 
> ...


That was June? Five months ago?

My, how time flies.

Plus: Look how _right_ I was way back then! I should post this to the "confidence in your beliefs" thread....


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

Andante said:


> What no Murray Perahia??????


No way, Jose.


----------



## joen_cph (Jan 17, 2010)

> Schnabel.Philharmonia. Galliera. ( THE ONE).
> Solomon.Philharmonia.Menges.
> Kempff.Berlin Phil.van Kempen.
> Gould.American Symph.Stokowski.
> ...


A fine selection - and quite similar to mine, a mixture of CDs, LPs and digital material  :

/Schnabel,Galiera,Philh/
/Kempff,Leitner,BPO/
/Gieseking,Rother,RuFuO/
/Roll,Shelley,RPO/
/Yudina,Sanderling,SO/
/Lamond,Sargent,O/
/Pletnev,Gansch,RussNatO/
/Schnabel,Sargent,LSO/
/Ney,Hoogstraten,O/ 
/Casadesus,Mitropoulos,NYPO/
/Horowitz,Reiner,RCASO/
/Gould,Stokowski,AmSO/
/Brendel,Wallberg,WienProMusica/ (came in a box set)
/B-Skoda,Scherchen,WienStOp/
/Fleisher,Szell,ClevO/
/Firkusny,Kempe,RPO/
/Serkin,Ormandy,PhiladO (early mono issue)/

Had Perahia/Haitink complete, but only kept Cti 1+2.

The Gieseking/Rother is known for the sound of the German WWII anti-aircraft guns heard shooting during the performance. 
In a radio programme here it was chosen as perhaps the best version (the sound is early, original stereo), but I find it somewhat overrated.


----------



## Oskaar (Mar 17, 2011)

Maxfeeder said it. If I like a piece, I get multiple recordings. It is all about trying to find the ultimate! I have spotify, fixed price, so it is not about economy for me. Spotify is so enormous that I try to restrict and organize my listening a little. So I stick with fewer works, and listen to different versions. That listening habit suits me for the moment. It is not about having as many as posible, for me it is about finding the ultimate. I love to discover! And I love to see different interpretations of works that I like! 

And I often find works that I not like so much in the beginning, but other versions can open new doors! Sound is of course also an issue.


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

Great minds must think the same way! Joen--cph, but we have one missing that is Gliels / Ludwig , some think it the best of all. It has just been reissued and I must pick it up.


----------



## joen_cph (Jan 17, 2010)

> Great minds must think the same way! Joen--cph, but we have one missing that is Gliels / Ludwig , some think it the best of all. It has just been reissued and I must pick it up.


Yes, I noticed that a specialist on another forum praised it highly among his zillions of versions.


----------



## kv466 (May 18, 2011)

moody said:


> No way, Jose.


Haha, I feel the same...you know, Moody, the Gould/Stokowski recording is my absolute favorite because of the way they approached it and executed, of course.

Oh, and I sure do buy multiple recordings. All of my 'emperor's I've given away except my Gould and I have a Brendelfly lingering around which is so bad...

Anyway, I'm listening to Chopin's Complete Nocturnes right now by Earl Wild (my other favorite pianist) but someone posted the c#minor by Arrau and now I am very curious to hear his renditions. Ahhhhh...and right during black friday!


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

A number of times I've heard live recordings of pieces on the radio that aren't on a commercial recording. I'll go and buy a CD and not like the recording as much as the one that was broadcast. Then I usually try to find another recording that satisfies.

I've picked up a bunch of EMI 2-CD sets of 20th century composers lately, and I'm very happy with all of the performances. I'm glad I picked up the Schoenberg set, because I like Simon Rattle's recording of the Five Pieces For Orchestra better than the Boulez recording I have.

Sometimes I'm so thrilled by a recording that I don't ever want to hear a different version for fear of being let down. Two that come to mind are the Bartok piano concertos by Gyorgy Sandor, and Ives Symphony No.4 by Tilson Thomas and the CSO.


----------



## Vaneyes (May 11, 2010)

Re LvB PCs, do I need more than ABM for 1 & 3, Martha for 2, Fleisher for 4, and Gelber for 5?


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

Bumping this thread because the same topic has been brought up on another thread.



apricissimus said:


> Open question:
> 
> When you have several recordings of the same work, and you start thinking about acquiring another, does you also consider using your scarce resources to buy a recording of some work that you don't already have, or haven't heard yet?
> 
> My collection is probably pretty small compared to some people here, and the greatest number of recordings I have of any particular work is maybe 3 or 4 (probably some Shostakovich piece). But even if I had a large collection, it's hard for me to imagine owning even a dozen recordings of the same work, never mind 87! I'm imagining myself thinking, "Do I really want a 20th version of X's Symphony No. Y, or would I like to hear something new?"


One of the advantages of proof-reading one's own posts is that you get a chance to realize that you're posting absolutely nothing interesting and therefore to warn the reader and to apologize. So there you go, and I'm sorry.

Once upon a time I wrote:



science said:


> A great, great topic. I have a few thoughts on the matter:
> 
> There is a class of recording collectors that considers the essence of listening to be comparing recordings. We can find them easily enough. I'm sure the industry loves this approach: they'd love us to buy fifteen cycles of Beethoven's symphonies.
> 
> ...


Now I feel that I was unfairly harsh there, despite my overture of tolerance.

Before coming to talkclassical, I spent a lot of time on another forum where it seemed that the essence of listening to classical music was comparing recordings. I assumed a lot of the serious listeners were like that, but my time on talkclassical has called that into question: here it seems that the essence of listening to classical music is hearing as many different works as possible.

At least partially, the different appearance is a result of the way I've chosen to spend my time on this site, which threads I've chosen to participate in. But even so, I really think there is a difference here compared to the other boards I've been on.

There is of course no right approach - it's entirely a matter of a person's goals or preferences.

Under the influence of that other site, I'd been collecting multiple recordings of many things, until I realized I wasn't really appreciating them. For example, for a long time my only recording of Bruch's first violin concerto was the one by Aaron Rosand that remains my favorite. I listened to it so many times. When I finally got another recording (Zukerman on DVD) I hear a lot of differences, and I really enjoyed comparing them. I heard that a few times, and then I got four more versions (Mutter, Heifetz, Accardo, Oistrakh) in a fairly short amount of time. I've really tried to get into the Heifetz version, but I've just neglected the rest, and have never learned to really enjoy any of them.

So that was a waste of money, and I regret a lot of it. There is no earthly reason for me to have spent my own money on Gunzenhauser's Dvorak 9 or Alsop's Brahms 4. (I got the Gunzenhauswer because once upon a time I was poor and clueless; I got the Alsop because I had the idea that I ought to hear dozens of Brahms 4s and compare them all.)

For a time I became determined to buy only one recording of almost anything unless there was a really good reason to have more than one - an exception that almost only included room for a modern version and a HIPPI version of most works, or works like Mussorgsky's Pictures that exist in two or more fairly well-known transcriptions.

At that time my concern was to get the most famous or one of the most famous recordings of a work. That is not a perfect method, because I probably wouldn't even like Bruch's violin concerto if Heifetz's version were the only one I'd heard. I wonder if I'd like Schumann's symphonies better if I had a recording other than the one by Bernstein? I might never know!

That's the price of expanding horizontally (more works) rather than vertically (more recordings). I don't regret it yet.

But I'm beginning to go back in the other direction. I've greatly slowed my horizontal expansion. Five years ago, almost every time someone mentioned a work, I hadn't heard it. But now that happens much less often, and usually with works that seem obscure enough to me that I really don't mind saying I haven't heard it. So I'm growing complacent about that.

But now I want to get to know some music really, really well. Today I listened to Bernstein's Eroica symphony three times, and I bought that one largely because I felt I'd listened to Karajan '63, Gardiner, and Zinman more than enough times. I bought a new Liszt piano sonata (Yundi Li) the other day, mostly because I hadn't heard Liebestraum #3 yet and it's on there, but I really didn't mind getting another Sonata in B minor because I'd only heard Argerich, Pogorelich, and Zimerman (the latter is my favorite but I really enjoyed Li the time I listened to it). So that I'm starting to explore more recordings of works that I enjoy.

I still stick to really famous or popular recordings unless they come in box sets, but I have become a box set shopper. It was the DHM 50 box a few years back that did this to me. So much good music - some of it really great stuff that I was thrilled to get it so cheaply, some of it really random stuff that I'd never have paid for - at such a good price. Now I do the box set thing all the time, but of course a box like the Mercury Living Presence box I got a few months back is loaded with Tchaikovsky piano concertos and so on, with the result that I'm building up piles of that stuff. I haven't made myself listen to all of that, and I probably never would be able to anyway, but I'll certainly never be able to appreciate it all.

But I feel better about it because it doesn't seem like a waste of money to get Bachauer's recording of Beethoven's 2nd piano concerto in a box of 50 disks at $2/disk with 15 disks that I really did want. And I might turn out to really like it!


----------



## ahammel (Oct 10, 2012)

My collection is rather small, so I go for breadth rather than depth. I like to hear Bach's keyboard works on different instruments, though, and if there are radically different interpretations of a work I can see the case for owning a number of copies (HIP vs. modern instruments, Richter's vs. everybody else's idea of what _molto moderato_ is, etc.)

Before buying a work, I'll generally read some reviews comparing the different approaches in the different recordings (unless I'm familiar with and trust one particular interpreter). What I look for in a review is a summary of what different aspects of the work the different performances emphasize. What I definitely do _not_ look for in a review is a lot of pointless bellyaching about the tempi and which performer is more "passionate".


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

ahammel said:


> My collection is rather small, so I go for breadth rather than depth. I like to hear Bach's keyboard works on different instruments, though, and if there are radically different interpretations of a work I can see the case for owning a number of copies (HIP vs. modern instruments, Richter's vs. everybody else's idea of what _molto moderato_ is, etc.)
> 
> Before buying a work, I'll generally read some reviews comparing the different approaches in the different recordings (unless I'm familiar with and trust one particular interpreter). What I look for in a review is a summary of what different aspects of the work the different performances emphasize. What I definitely do _not_ look for in a review is a lot of pointless bellyaching about the tempi and which performer is more "passionate".


This is an interesting topic for me. Even though I hated Gardiner's Mozart's Requiem, I thought I was really openminded about tempi - until Celibidache. I thought I'd love it, but I just cannot easily take that guy's tempos. Maybe I'd enjoy it in a work I didn't know, but I've only heard him in recordings of works I know, and I felt like I was waiting too long for the next note, which I knew was coming, and then when it finally got there, that was nice, but then I had to wait again, and I couldn't stop the cycle of waiting. I needed deliverance!

Since then, though I used to be indifferent to most period/modern issues, and sometimes I love the stately old ways, I think I'm gradually coming to prefer the snappier, sharper HIPPI performances. I don't think I like period for anything Mozart or later, and a lot of Bach I like the old way too, but as far as I can remember just now, for about everything else before 1780 I prefer period stuff. With the exception of the Messiah, I don't think I would enjoy any Handel that wasn't HIPPI.

So those things have come to matter to me.

The "passionate" thing. I know what you're saying. Anyone could play two different recordings and say, "I liked this one because I felt it was more passionate." My issue is, are they serious? Because I feel that way sometimes too. If you asked why I like Rosand more than Heifetz in Bruch 1, the truest answer I could give is that Rosand is more emotional. I could talk about vibrato and tempos and dynamics, but mostly it's a feeling, and when I talk about vibrato and tempos and dynamics, I'm actually trying to figure out and then to explain why that feeling is there. So I'd be serious about "more passionate." But when someone else says it, someone I don't know.... I don't know how to take it. Uncharitably, some people just like to say things like that. Charitably, even at our best we're trying to describe the ineffable.

In the end, there's nothing to do but to figure out what we want to hear most, and listen to it!


----------



## Guest (May 21, 2013)

science said:


> I'd rather have something new to me - and especially while there are still works as famous as, say, Harold in Italy, which I've never heard.


@Science - You've probably heard Harold in Italy by now, but if you haven't, please check out Colin Davis's LSO Live recording with Tabea Zimmermann. The third movement. And that weird thing that's going on with the bass line. I'm not even sure what instrument that is, but it seems totally anachronistic.

The great thing about Berlioz is that he broke all the rules before there were many rules, at least in his earliest works. My sense is that he became much more conventional over time, perhaps out of necessity.


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

BPS said:


> @Science - You've probably heard Harold in Italy by now, but if you haven't, please check out Colin Davis's LSO Live recording with Tabea Zimmermann. The third movement. And that weird thing that's going on with the bass line. I'm not even sure what instrument that is, but it seems totally anachronistic.
> 
> The great thing about Berlioz is that he broke all the rules before there were many rules, at least in his earliest works. My sense is that he became much more conventional over time, perhaps out of necessity.


What I've got is Munch, but I'll listen for it.


----------



## apricissimus (May 15, 2013)

science said:


> But now I want to get to know some music really, really well. Today I listened to Bernstein's Eroica symphony three times, and I bought that one largely because I felt I'd listened to Karajan '63, Gardiner, and Zinman more than enough times.


This is a good point that I didn't think of at first in the other thread: Listening to a familiar piece in a new recording can give it some freshness (and this is separate from considerations of which one's _better_). That alone might be reason enough to acquire different recordings of the same work.


----------



## ptr (Jan 22, 2013)

apricissimus said:


> This is a good point that I didn't think of at first in the other thread: Listening to a familiar piece in a new recording can give it some freshness (and this is separate from considerations of which one's _better_). That alone might be reason enough to acquire different recordings of the same work.


This resonates well with me, Mahler's Fourth is work that I have been fascinated with for most of my adult life! I do not believe that there is a definitive interpretation of any work, for me every new encounter with a new recording brings a new clue, a step closer to understanding what Gustav wanted to be heard. And if I honestly deal with my conscience, I could probably recycle at least half of the 87 Fours I have on the basis that they do not ad anything vital, but I don't because a man should have at lest one important collection in his life! 

/ptr


----------



## Guest (May 21, 2013)

It seems silly to purposely have half a dozen versions of Shostakovich's St Qt #8 when you do not have the others, sometimes you can't help doubling up but, expand the collection content first.


----------

