# Conductors and their interpretation



## Wicked_one (Aug 18, 2010)

I’ve noticed that when it comes to symphonies or large orchestral works, you guys put ahead the conductor. I’m not a great knower of conductors, I know some of them, but I certainly don’t know how they approach music or what quality to they give to the music itself.

So there’s Bernstein, Karajan, Celibidache, Eschenbach to name a few. Surely, there is a great deal of good conductors out there, some you love, some you don’t and some of them are just there. Ok.
What characteristics does the music take under a certain conductor? For example, Celibidache will have slow tempi (I dunno, just saying) in Bruckner’s symphonies. Does this apply to all the symphonies (not Bruckner’s only) he has ever recorded? Does the way the music is “served” has a “hint-hint” quality to it that indicates that this is Bernstein, or Abbado? The Mahler symphonies will differ from Bernstein, to Eschenbach, to Abbado, to Dudamel, but what makes it special to one conductor?

Hm, hope I’ve been clear enough


----------



## Vesteralen (Jul 14, 2011)

I sort of classify conductors four ways:

"Blurred edges" (from extreme - Ormandy, to not-so-extreme - Abbado)
Literal (from dynamic - Szell, to not-so-dynamic - Haitink, Davis)
Dramatic (from ultra - Bernstein, to quirky - Ozawa)
Unclassifiable- but usually ponderous (Klemperer, Bruno Walter)

just my own shorthand


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

Vesteralen said:


> I sort of classify conductors four ways:
> 
> "Blurred edges" (from extreme - Ormandy, to not-so-extreme - Abbado)
> Literal (from dynamic - Szell, to not-so-dynamic - Haitink, Davis)
> ...


Bruno Walter ponderous---never!


----------



## Vesteralen (Jul 14, 2011)

Well, not the early Bruno, of course.

I'm thinking of his later years with his own Columbia orchestra. I think his blood congealed a little bit as he got older. Some lovely stuff, still, and beautifully recorded. But, in my hot-blooded younger days I agreed with a reviewer who referred to his tempos as "elephantine".


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

Vesteralen said:


> Well, not the early Bruno, of course.
> 
> I'm thinking of his later years with his own Columbia orchestra. I think his blood congealed a little bit as he got older. Some lovely stuff, still, and beautifully recorded. But, in my hot-blooded younger days I agreed with a reviewer who referred to his tempos as "elephantine".


There is some truth in it but his "Pastoral " is still the best ever.
One can always listen to his earlier NY recordings.


----------



## realdealblues (Mar 3, 2010)

To answer your question about Tempo...generally yes. Celibidache is slow with Bruckner, and yes he is generally slower with all his recordings. Many conductors slow with age as well. If you listen to Bernstein's Tchaikovsky 6 from the 60's and then his Tchaikovsky 6 on DG in the 80's you will find too totally different takes on the same work. But sometimes it's not true, Bohm's Beethoven and Mozart is considered generally on the slower side, but his Wagner Ring Cycle is faster than most.

As far as hearing the difference between conductors. Yeah, sometimes I can. I usually know Bernstein when I hear him and I usually know Szell or Karajan when I hear them.

I agree with Vesteralen that there are different classes of Conductors.

Some just try to conduct what's on the page. Some try to convey more emotion or drama. Some try to bring out Lyrical qualities, etc.

I have different conductors I like for different composers in general, but many were very good across the board. Abbado is big name conductor but I have found very little I enjoy from him. I find him very bland, for lack of a better word, but other people love him. I love Bernstein because of his high drama and emotion, while others don't want excitement and want a cooler approach to a certain composer. Just all depends on what you like.

That's why I try to have a few different recordings of each work so that I have a variety.


----------



## Vaneyes (May 11, 2010)

Generally with conductors, once mortality sets in they get more detailed and slower. Lingering over odd spots that help ruin the spontaneity, intensity of the piece. 'Tis always a sad transformation.


----------



## Vesteralen (Jul 14, 2011)

Vaneyes said:


> Generally with conductors, once mortality sets in they get more detailed and slower. Lingering over odd spots that help ruin the spontaneity, intensity of the piece. 'Tis always a sad transformation.


Giulini is a great example of that. A very dramatic and exciting conductor as a younger man, but plodding and almost comatose in his old age. Although some people swear by a few of his beautifully recorded later albums, I find all the vitality of the music is gone.


----------



## bigshot (Nov 22, 2011)

Most conductors present the music in an "appropriate way", with established tempos and phrasing. Those conductors are usually thought of as "safe". But a few conductors are daring enough to put their own stamp on how the music is presented. Generally, these are the truly great conductors, because if what they were doing didn't work, they'd be run out of town on a rail. I tend to prefer the ones that take a chance.


----------

