# Blind Comparison - Prokofiev Symphony #1 "Classical"



## MatthewWeflen (Jan 24, 2019)

Hey everybody, here is a set of renditions of Prokofiev Symphony #1, "Classical," for a blind comparison without knowing or being influenced by pre-existing opinions of conductors and orchestras. If anyone knows the performances and would like to guess, please PM me for the answers. Otherwise, try to confine discussion to the pieces themselves - what do you like, what do you dislike, and how would you rank them? I will post the "answers" in a few days. Here are the mp3 files on pCloud, which can be listened to online or downloaded.

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


----------



## MatthewWeflen (Jan 24, 2019)

I just attended a live performance of this piece this week at the Orchestra Hall in Chicago (it was the Montreal S.O. conducted by Kent Nagano). What a delightful piece of music! I find it interesting that it is called "Haydn-esque," when really I wish more Haydn pieces were as charming! I also wish Prokofiev's subsequent symphonies were in the vein.


----------



## Guest (Oct 18, 2019)

MatthewWeflen said:


> What a delightful piece of music!


I agree entirely!

A. Peculiar recording, with first violins somewhat hidden, and the opening too rushed. I didn't like it.
B. Initially sounded slow, but actually just slower than A. Much better recording. I like it, though the last movement seems a bit sluggish.
C. Definitely too slow. I didn't like this one at all.
D. Somewhat mute - but quite delicate. I think I might know this one as it's very similar to one of the three versions I already have. It's OK. Recording lacks the clarity of B but tempos seem right.
E. Overall, the fastest, but with three relatively slow movements, the last is a too-rapid gallop to get home in under 14 minutes.

So, for me, the preferred order is D, B, E, A, C - and not much between E, A and C.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

I'm not sure that I liked any of them _that _much.

A - Brisk and attractive - but lacked any nice touches that the work begs for. nothing special.
B - 1st movement _is _sluggish. 2nd is delightful. 3rd is a little exaggerated in its stylishness and again sluggishness is waiting in the wings.
C - Even more slow (occasionally almost perversely so) but there is more life and nuance to it. The 2nd movement is lovely. 3rd a bit dull. 4th a bit slow but again lots of life and attractive detail.
D - Good but a little ordinary/unimaginative … almost on autopilot at times. The 3rd movement is sluggish and heavy. 4th sounds like it is going through the motions. 
E - Again, a little ordinary. 4th movement rushed but fails to be exhilarating.

I am not sure I can put them in order of preference. Perhaps C - D - A/E/B? But there is not one there that I will be adding to my wishlist.

It is strange how I find some performances sluggish but the slowest of them all less so. I do know an even slow performance - Celibidache's with the Munich PO - and quite like it, again because the slow speed is used to fit in lots of attractive detail. To my ears sluggish and slow are not the same thing at all. But I do know that most members don't hear things that way.


----------



## MatthewWeflen (Jan 24, 2019)

Enthusiast said:


> I'm not sure that I liked any of them _that _much.
> 
> A - Brisk and attractive - but lacked any nice touches that the work begs for. nothing special.
> B - 1st movement _is _sluggish. 2nd is delightful. 3rd is a little exaggerated in its stylishness and again sluggishness is waiting in the wings.
> ...


We are in agreement, actually, as the slowest is my favorite. It just seems livelier and more humorous to me.


----------



## WildThing (Feb 21, 2017)

Ormandy with the Philadelphia Orchestra is my prefered version of this delectable symphony. Rozhdestvensky has a lot of panache as well. Unfortunately I didn't find any of these renditions of comparable quality to my favorites.

A: A nice peppy reading that has plenty of exuberence, which always works well in this symphony, but a little short on charm.
B: Attentive and attractive but lacking in energy and a little ponderous.
C: Almost positive that I'm familiar with this recording; if so I wasn't a big fan of this conductor's set of Prokofiev symphonies, but I actually thought this was one of his more interesting efforts. Definitely a kind of contrarian take on the work, much slower than usual, but still colorful and witty in places.
D: I have this recording, mostly because it's paired with this conductors' tremendous take on the 5th symphony. This one is a fine account but lacking the rhythmic vitality, verve, and overall sense of fun found in the best interpretations.
E: Weirdly proportioned and out of whack, with the first three movements kind of hefty and leisurely, and the final movement fast and hard driven.

I suppose I would rank them A -> D -> C -> B -> E


----------



## Merl (Jul 28, 2016)

One of my favourites isn't in here but of those I've listened to all the way thru here goes. This is a quick listen but I'll return tomorrow. 

B - nice reading. Strong, lots of forward momentum. Sounds almost English in style. I'll come back to this again. Liked it.
D - this is big-band Prokofiev from a top orchestra. Decent performance. Rock-solid, steady rhythms so it suggests one person to me. Liked it a lot.
E - strange reading but enjoyable in some ways. The orchestral barely keep pace with the hectic last movement. Very Russian in style but not particularly sound. Interesting. 

Will listen to A & C tomorrow. Not heard them at all but C is intriguing me. 16 minutes is broadddddd for the Classical.


----------



## Merl (Jul 28, 2016)

Right, I've listened to all of them and rank them as such..

1st D - I like this one a lot. Its straightforward and rhythmically spot on. Some delightful orchestral playing. Pretty sure I know it but, even if it isn't the one I think it is, its still my favourite here.
2nd A - Lively and well played. Not too quick but I like the lilt of this one. As someone previously stated, could do with a bit more charm but good reading.
3rd E - Contrary to others here I like the eccentricity of this performance and the swiftness at the end.
4th B - Strong, forceful reading but loses some forward momentum. OK.
5th C - I've listened to this twice and initially I didn't mind the broad tempi but on the 2nd play I found myself getting bored. No doubt its well-played but its not for me.


----------



## MatthewWeflen (Jan 24, 2019)

Highlight answers to read:

A Leonard Bernstein NYPO 1962
B Carlo Maria Giulini & Chicago Symphony Orchestra 1976
C Ozawa BPO 1993
D Karajan BPO 1982
E Gergiev LSO 2006


----------



## MatthewWeflen (Jan 24, 2019)

Here are the answers with no need for highlighting.


A Leonard Bernstein NYPO 1962
B Carlo Maria Giulini & Chicago Symphony Orchestra 1976
C Ozawa BPO 1993
D Karajan BPO 1982
E Gergiev LSO 2006

My personal order would be C,D,B,A,E

Which makes the total Preferences as follows:

D - Karajan 1,2,2,2,1 = 8 points, 1st place
A - Bernstein 2,1,3,4,4 = 14 points, 2nd place
C - Ozawa 5,3,1,5,1 = 15 points, 3rd place
B - Giulini 4,4,5,2,3 = 18 points, 4th place
E - Gergiev 3,5,4,3,5 = 20 points, 5th place


----------



## Merl (Jul 28, 2016)

MatthewWeflen said:


> Here are the answers with no need for highlighting.
> 
> A Leonard Bernstein NYPO 1962
> B Carlo Maria Giulini & Chicago Symphony Orchestra 1976
> ...


I got Karajan and Gergiev but Ozawa's very broad approach surprised me. Should have got A but I thought it was Solti. Thanks Matt for a nice comparison. It's a shame that more people didn't get involved but thanks to those that did.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

I enjoyed it, too, and thought the work was a good/interesting choice (so simple and yet so hard to bring off well).


----------



## lluissineu (Dec 27, 2016)

I had 3 of them: Giulini's (which was my favourite one), Bernstein and Ozawa + Celibidache and Marriner.

I'd have chosen B A D C E.

Like this comparison, it's amazing. Thanks MatthewWelfen.

Just in case you like rehearsals, here's Celi's reharsal of this work, with MPO


----------



## MatthewWeflen (Jan 24, 2019)

lluissineu said:


> I had 3 of them: Giulini's (which was my favourite one), Bernstein and Ozawa + Celibidache and Marriner.
> 
> I'd have chosen B A D C E.
> 
> Like this comparison, it's amazing. Thanks MatthewWelfen.


That would make the new totals as follows:

D - Karajan 1,2,2,2,1,3 = 11 points, 1st place
A - Bernstein 2,1,3,4,4,2 = 16 points, 2nd place
C - Ozawa 5,3,1,5,1,4 = 19 points, t-3rd place
B - Giulini 4,4,5,2,3,1 = 19 points, t-3rd place
E - Gergiev 3,5,4,3,5,5 = 25 points, 5th place


----------

