# Blind Comparison - Rite of Spring



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

Yet another in the blind comparison series. Here are links to 5 performances of Stravinsky's Rite of Spring. The object is to compare and contrast them without being biased by knowing the identity of the performers. Of course some will want to guess who they are ... which is fine  If you do recognize a particular performance, please don't spoil it for others by posting the names, just PM me. Also PM me if you want to know about the selections. I will probably put the answers up by the end of this coming weekend

Enjoy...

A - part 1 - https://my.pcloud.com/publink/show?code=XZvFjA7ZpXhVwPYoKck32vNilSU3dQ3eWa7X
part 2 - https://my.pcloud.com/publink/show?code=XZHpjA7ZI3rYyTosTdQGOaXJUIhNVJA3hlDk

B - part 1 - https://my.pcloud.com/publink/show?code=XZbpjA7ZMszNbqchMs7AGxMrRxSJFu8JlPvk
part 2 - https://my.pcloud.com/publink/show?code=XZupjA7ZBHeUJCnhsYJu92QNl6KCAkGIiezk

C - part 1 - https://my.pcloud.com/publink/show?code=XZnpjA7ZenUhy027JbuT2tNLnRmmjftrryPV
part 2 - https://my.pcloud.com/publink/show?code=XZCpjA7ZW96GX2bbnv4eBJxBpuphcXI4XUhV

D - part 1 - https://my.pcloud.com/publink/show?code=XZEpjA7Z8HOu8HvIQ6RYbdvOOpi2eJpzUgTV
part 2 - https://my.pcloud.com/publink/show?code=XZapjA7Z0sKoPMN3TsXUcCTg34hw5BuKj7aV

E - part 1 - https://my.pcloud.com/publink/show?code=XZ7HjA7ZPn8lkBSbeSbS3cJuM9V7UHaPlj3y
part 2 - https://my.pcloud.com/publink/show?code=XZ0HjA7ZHpFc3m1HHby0c101kNUImfkoy8I7


----------



## pianoville (Jul 19, 2018)

Thank you for this! I was waiting for this particular work.


----------



## Merl (Jul 28, 2016)

I'll have a listen tomorrow, Becca. Thanks. It's not a favourite work of mine but I'm up for giving it a go.


----------



## hustlefan (Apr 29, 2016)

I enjoyed all of these performances very much. If I had to rank them, it would be B then A, E, D, and C.

By the way, the parts for A are switched - what is labelled part 1 is really part 2 and vice versa. Part 1 for E includes part 2.

A: languorous opening - good sound and orchestral playing - slow, danceable tempo - clear and relaxed - can hear everything; all lines are audible - lyrical when appropriate - fast portions are very fast - orchestra plays extremely well - opening of part 2 doesn't dawdle - fast portion has speed and intensity - later slow portion again doesn't dawdle - sacrificial dance has clarity and intensity (rank=2)

B: slow expressive bassoon solo - audience coughs indicate a live performance - good sound with woodwinds forward - urgent and polished orchestral playing - expressive, tangy woodwind playing - slow portions are phrased nicely - dance of the earth has clarity with excellent sound - great stillness before final portion of part 1 - tremendous acceleration and crescendo at end of part 1 - nice sense of desolate, barren earth at beginning of part 2 - continues deliberately - fast portion speeds up considerably - woodwinds continue to be forward and distinctive - brass blend well with rest of orchestra instead of protruding - sacrificial dance steady and rhythmically accurate - pauses and quiet moments given full due (rank=1)

C: polished bassoon solo - excellent, slightly recessed sound with subsidiary parts audible - tension maintained throughout slow portions - forward momentum at all times with effortless orchestral playing - urgent climax with sudden ending to part 1 - opening of part 2 isn't as slow as some - gathers speed and tension nicely and gradually - the eleven drum poundings are very fast - suddenly extremely tense as well - later slow portion is slower than most - tension is always maintained - sacrificial dance is steady and furious with good clarity (rank=5)

D: bassoon solo has distinctive, expressive vibrato - other winds have a sensuous sound - nice rhythmic bounce to faster portion - sound is recessed and very resonant - orchestra plays very well and is sensuous and evocative in lyrical sections - sound has good bass and excellent dynamic range - dance of the earth has tremendous urgency and dynamic range - opening of part 2 is on the fast side - continues on the fast side - recorded at a high level so crescendos have huge impact - sacrificial dance maintains tension throughout - final portion is a mass of sound (rank=4)

E: bassoon solo is highly inflected - live performance - orchestra is loud and well recorded - brass are prominent whenever they have something to say - dance of the earth has good clarity - all percussion parts can be heard - opening of part 2 is close-up but muted trumpets are nicely distant - the eleven drum poundings are not too fast - orchestra is so close-up that unusual detail can sometimes be heard - sacrificial dance is not too fast and accumulates tension to the end nicely (rank=3)


----------



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

I was aware of the issue with part 1 of E and I'm not going to do anything about it now!

As to A ... oops, that's what comes of having 'prepared' these about 4 or 5 weeks ago and just uploaded them today without checking, so...

A - part 1 - https://my.pcloud.com/publink/show?code=XZHpjA7ZI3rYyTosTdQGOaXJUIhNVJA3hlDk
part 2 - https://my.pcloud.com/publink/show?code=XZvFjA7ZpXhVwPYoKck32vNilSU3dQ3eWa7X


----------



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

hustlefan said:


> I enjoyed all of these performances very much. If I had to rank them, it would be B then A, E, D, and C.
> 
> By the way, the parts for A are switched - what is labelled part 1 is really part 2 and vice versa. Part 1 for E includes part 2.
> 
> ...


From the looks of your comments, it seems that there isn't much between #1 & #5


----------



## hustlefan (Apr 29, 2016)

Becca said:


> From the looks of your comments, it seems that there isn't much between #1 & #5


Yes, that's right - they are all very good. The only reason I put B as #1 is because it's the most different from the others with its slower tempos. In the comments I tried to be more descriptive than judgmental so that people can judge from the description which one they like. I put C as #5 because it seems the fastest and almost too easily played. The other three are neck and neck to me with D slightly worse because of the too-resonant sound. I really like these blind comparisons because it forces me to listen without preconceptions of who the performers are.


----------



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

hustlefan said:


> I really like these blind comparisons because it forces me to listen without preconceptions of who the performers are.


Exactly, and some TCers have been quite surprised to discover that their preconceived notions didn't quite match what they heard! Which, I will admit, has also occasionally happened to me.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

I've listened to three and a half of them so far and am finding myself having fairly polarised reactions - two I like very much and two not so much.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Actually that was easier than I thought it would be. I must have heard some of these before (I have heard a lot of Rites in my time) but didn’t recognise any .... although I do have a suspicion about A (disappointing if I am correct as it was a version I thought I had more respect for). This is a work that many noted conductors have come unstuck on while others, perhaps less highly reputed, have excelled in. 

A – Rather dull? The Dance of the Adolescent Girls sounds too pretty. Goes to the impressionist in Stravinsky. Almost a coherent vision – just not the way for me – but then some parts sound a little trite (which is not right!). (Rank 3)
B –Live. Exciting. Good attention to detail and much characterful phrasing … all without sacrificing flow or coherence. But gets a bit faster than it needs to at the end of Part 1 – possibly reducing power – but justifies this by becoming exciting. And so it goes on … but does it run out of steam a little? (Rank 2)
C – Overdoes the mystery in the opening (exaggerated mystery is not mysterious). Fussy and episodic. Often boring moments and cumulatively boring as well. Definitely one I don’t need to hear again! (Rank 5)
D – Has the shortest timing of those on offer (but they are all on the longer side). Despite this it starts off sounding rather laboured and when it gets moving the effect is not exciting (let alone visceral!) but just a little ordinary (not a word you want to apply to a performance of the Rite). A tendency to squareness and rather prosaic. (Rank 4)
E – Live. I like the way it builds (and then delivers) its big moments and it is all full of life (and “meaning”). I found this a coherent and powerful account, riveting from first to last. (Rank 1).

I'd love to get the answers by PM please, Becca.


----------



## Merl (Jul 28, 2016)

Becca said:


> Exactly, and some TCers have been quite surprised to discover that their preconceived notions didn't quite match what they heard! Which, I will admit, has also occasionally happened to me.


I find it equally interesting that some won't get involved for those very reasons. Only had chance to listen to one up to now but I'll get a few more listened to over the weekend.


----------



## Kiki (Aug 15, 2018)

A
Beautiful and glorious. A precise and delicate kill rather than overwhelming brute force. 

B
Brutally honest primitivism. And I like the fat-free, sugar-free sonority.

C
A straight forward, uncompromising assault, but there's also something magical in the air.

D
Intense, charismatic, savaging, yet so elegantly executed.

E
Gloriously played and I suppose overall there is little to fault, but somehow there are little things here and there that got to me, e.g. that slightly odd tempo when the chosen one enters, that long pause before the final bang… 

I like A to D equally, though they are all very different. As for E, I’m afraid, it’s not my cup of tea.

My ranking: A/B/C/D > E

I’m pretty sure I have A, C and D; and am reasonably sure I know who B is. As for E, I actually don’t know, but the way I am reacting to it, it could be that conductor...

Thanks, Becca, for setting up this round of blind comparison! This round has been as enjoyable as ever. Also, as ever, it’s eye-opening to see how someone else feels the exact opposite way about the same recording. Always found that a fascinating and revealing read!


----------



## Kiki (Aug 15, 2018)

Merl said:


> I find it equally interesting that some won't get involved for those very reasons. Only had chance to listen to one up to now but I'll get a few more listened to over the weekend.


Listening with an open mind is a rewarding experience that enriches our understanding of the piece. I can understand guessing correctly the identity is satisfying, but guessing it wrong is also revealing. Anyway I think surprise is fun!


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

I guess the difficult bit of blind comparing - and, actually, any fairly quick attempt to evaluate a set of performances - is concerned with the way we (or me anyway) concentrate. I find myself tending to evaluate the detail at the expense of the ... performance. Of course, I try to avoid this and feel fairly content this time that I came up with a view that would reflect how I would hear these performances over time. 

Thanks, Becca, for the opportunity. I enjoyed it.


----------



## Merl (Jul 28, 2016)

Enthusiast said:


> Actually that was easier than I thought it would be. I must have heard some of these before (I have heard a lot of Rites in my time) but didn't recognise any .... although I do have a suspicion about A (disappointing if I am correct as it was a version I thought I had more respect for). This is a work that many noted conductors have come unstuck on while others, perhaps less highly reputed, have excelled in.
> 
> A - Rather dull? The Dance of the Adolescent Girls sounds too pretty. Goes to the impressionist in Stravinsky. Almost a coherent vision - just not the way for me - but then some parts sound a little trite (which is not right!). (Rank 3)
> B -Live. Exciting. Good attention to detail and much characterful phrasing … all without sacrificing flow or coherence. But gets a bit faster than it needs to at the end of Part 1 - possibly reducing power - but justifies this by becoming exciting. And so it goes on … but does it run out of steam a little? (Rank 2)
> ...


Having listened to all of these last night and this morning, heres what i think and its not too dissimilar to Enthusiast's views (with a few caveats). Please bear in mind that this is a piece i have few recordings of....

A) Didn't do it for me. Felt as though it never really got going. Well-played but dull. Rank 5th
B) A live coughfest. Big, bold and quite exciting but the recording and audience ruined it for me. Rank 3rd (joint)
Ç) Like Enthusiast I wasn't keen on this one either. Felt the conductor was trying too hard and ultimately it came across as rather contrived. Some nice moments but overall......meh Rank 4th
D) Again one that has moments and I do like the powerful crescendos.Starts tepidly but improves. Still an account i dont find that great, so it ranks alongside coughalong B. Rank 3rd (joint)
E) Definitely my favourite of the 5. Lively, powerful, really well played (and conducted). I like how the miking is close up on this one and theres lots of tension. Rank 1st

As i said, im not a Stravinsky enthusiast but it was good hearing Rite again, as i havent played it in a long time. No idea of artists involved, btw, and couldnt even hazard a guess. Looking forward to finding out.


----------



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

Is there anyone else who wants to hazard opinions before I post the performers?


----------



## philoctetes (Jun 15, 2017)

Becca said:


> Is there anyone else who wants to hazard opinions before I post the performers?


I'm having a listen now.....


----------



## philoctetes (Jun 15, 2017)

20 minutes later... listened to at least 1' of each track, did not bother to download and only heard the softer intros... first time playing this game...

A sounds older, and I thought of Fricsay or, less likely Monteux
B is live with good details and a bit fast and I'm guessing it's a lesser-known orchestra on a good night
C this one also sounds older with a flat, radio-like sound and I didn't listen much...
D raspy winds, weird rubato, maybe Karajan who I threw in the trash 35 years ago, or a French orchestra
E maybe Bernstein who I haven't heard, nice bassoon...

I heard an excellent performance of this by Nagano and Toronto a few years ago... and it did not sound like the Nagano we knew in Berkeley at all.. 

and now we find my ears are made of plastic...


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Are we done? I would like the answers! 

Was this one less popular than earlier blind comparison pieces? Is that because the piece is a bit longer? Or is it that some of the usual participants don't greatly like the work?


----------



## Kiki (Aug 15, 2018)

Thought the Rite would be super popular.... does anyone else want to join in?

I'm refraining from making further comments on my preconception until the identities are revealed...


----------



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

There was one more person who intended to listen but hasn't yet - flamencosketches - so I will give it until tonight.


----------



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

Here you go...

1 - Pierre Boulez / Cleveland Orchestra / studio recording
2 - François-Xavier Roth / Les Siècles / live - Proms
3 - Antal Dorati / Detroit Symphony / studio
4 - Igor Markevitch / Philharmonia / studio - Testament
5 - Simon Rattle / London Symphony / live - 2017

Thanks to everyone for taking part. Now time for the debriefing ... 

P.S. The Roth claims to be using the original 1913 score and original instruments.


----------



## Guest (Jun 4, 2019)

Merl said:


> I find it equally interesting that some won't get involved for those very reasons. Only had chance to listen to one up to now but I'll get a few more listened to over the weekend.


Well, I tried to get involved, but didn't have enought time to do justice to the whole thing. Reduced to comparing the first five minutes of each, and then going back and forth, I noticed different things each time, liking this bassoon, but not that brass, liking this oboe, but not those strings...

I've not heard any of the five versions before. I only have BPO/Karajan and Chung/ROF. It's too late to claim that I preferred 3 and 5 now I know which is which...but I preferred 3 and 5!


----------



## Merl (Jul 28, 2016)

And Rattle comes out on top again (for some of us). Lol


----------



## Kiki (Aug 15, 2018)

C first. I have this recording. Its characteristics are instantly recognisable. In fact Dorati/Detroit was my first Rite. I'll admit it did have casted a lasting impression on me. I have always liked it, and very few recordings have come close to it, for me that is. Talk about the imprinting effect. And the recording was considered superb in its days; and those deep, swirling grooves on the LP are quite magnificent to look at! Now you can tell I must be biased... That aside, I think this recording have got, over the years, a lot of positive reviews, so I'm a bit surprised that some of you here don't really like it that much. Now I feel intrigued to listen to it again bearing in mind some of your words, to see if I will discover anything that I didn't notice (or perhaps refused to notice) in the past. 

I also have D, and it's also quite easy to recognise. Testament re-issued this 1959 Markevitch coupled with his 1951 rendition. The booklet talked about the hastily put together 1959 session losing some of its novelty when compared to the 1951 recording; but honestly I prefer the 1959, which I have always found it exciting and idiomatic, and more urgent-sounding than the 1951. However, it is again interesting that some of you heard more negative things in it than I did.

A is the interesting one. I also have this recording, but I didn't recognise it. My first reaction was how beautiful it sounded. Some of you have also used words like "lyrical" and "pretty" so we were hearing similar things. But once I cheated and found out this was Boulez, I was shocked. "Beautiful", "lyrical" or "pretty" are not words that I would in general use to describe Boulez. This was revelatory for me. On the other hand, I do feel that Boulez's Le Sacre is more precision than excitement. That was still apparent before I found out it was him.

B had me scratching my head a little bit. It sounded like Roth's live 2013 recording released by Musicale Actes Sud, which I have; but it has got a lot of background noise, and I have to admit this 2015 Proms performance is a livelier performance than his 2013 live recording! With hindsight, it was Roth's Proms broadcast that sent me to buy his commercial release, and I did feel a little bit less satisfied listening to his commercial release than what I could remember from the Proms broadcast. Well, at least I guessed the conductor correctly... About the 1913 reconstructed score, I am no musicologist and I've no idea if his score is the same as the one used by Mr. Zinman in his dual-1913/1967-version release. Unfortunately I bought the Roth from Highresaudio.com and there was no digital booklet, so I can't find out any background about Roth's reconstructed 1913 score. 

And E, ha ha, well it's excellent, but like I said, there were little things here and there that bugged me. Therefore if it's not Rattle who else could it be, right? Even though I guessed the conductor correctly there's no way I could have guessed the ensemble. Sir Simon must have made like a hundred recordings of Le Sacre over the years :lol: ... I have Rattle's Berlin (EMI), CBSO (EMI) and NYOGB (ASV). From my recollection, Berlin (EMI), recorded in 2012, is probably not as good as this LSO 2017 live account. I remember I started getting agitated very early on in the Berlin (EMI), but this LSO 2017 live account sounded pretty excellent to me until the chosen one entered in Part 2, where it was still excellent, but I started noticing those "little things" and therefore I really cannot love it... However, the collector in me is getting more and more tempted to get his live 2015 LSO blu-ray though! :lol:


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Really interesting! A few surprises here. I have all but one of the recordings but deliberately didn't try to identify which ones had been posted as my test wouldn't have been blind if I had.

To start with the ones I didn't like, I suspected A was Boulez but was surprised at the occasional triteness. C surpised me a little as I hadn't realised that I actually hated it! D was a *big surprise *as I have enjoyed it many times (while preferring the '51 Markevitch). I will listen to both the Markevitch recordings again in the near future and try to match my earlier perceptions with what I felt on this occasion. I'll also check out Dorati as I think I remember quite liking at least his earlier ('54) Minneapolis recording.

Of the ones I liked I was not surprised by B although I would like to think I would have noticed the "original instruments" sound if I'd played it on my proper sound system! E is a *very big surprise *to me as I found it doing what I so often miss in Rattle, paying attention to the broader shaping (building the moments). That is a very important quality in a conductor for me and far more important than the odd strange phrase. It seems that at some point after I stopped listening to Rattle he arrived as a mature and great conductor. I must investigate his more recent work further!


----------



## Duncan (Feb 8, 2019)

Enthusiast said:


> Are we done? I would like the answers!
> 
> Was this one less popular than earlier blind comparison pieces? Is that because the piece is a bit longer? Or is it that some of the usual participants don't greatly like the work?


I would have loved to participate as I'm quite fond of the composition and the thread concept and the OP but for God's sake don't mention that to her lest I never hear the end of it, eh? - Thanks! but have been dealing with family health issues which take precedence.

I would still like to enter the "Identify the recordings" part of the competition though and without further ado...

1 - Pierre Boulez and the Cleveland Orchestra - (Full disclosure - at first I was convinced this was Gergiev with the Kirov Orchestra...)

2 - François-Xavier Roth et Les Siècles - (Full disclosure- at first I was convinced that this was Chailly with the Lucerne Festival Orchestra)

3 - Antal Dorati and the Detroit Symphony - this was childishly simple - almost insultingly so - and also a pure 100% guess on my part as I don't have the vaguest idea...

4 - Igor Markevitch and the Philharmonia - (Full disclosure - at first I was convinced that this was Stravinsky/Columbia SO and I still think that Markevich is actually conducting the RIAS Symphony Orchestra and not the Philharmonia but I'm not about to start an argument with someone who loves to argue merely for the sake of arguing and will embark upon a feud that will end about 9 or 10 years from now but I'm not naming names here -it's Becca

5 - Simon Rattle and London Symphony - (Full disclosure - at first I was convinced that this was André Rieu and His Orchestra because I just know that at some point someone probably Merl is going to use one of his recordings in these blind listening tests just to make the rest of you look like fools (Full disclosure - I probably won't be fooled as I've been expecting it for quite a long time now)…

Well there it is... I've put my reputation on the line once again... It's going to be a clean sweep - either I've got each of them correct or each of them incorrect... Once Becca releases the answers we'll know for certain but I'm fairly certain that a "Congratulations" will soon be making an appearance.


----------



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

Congratulations MJ, you have outdone yourself


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Mollie John said:


> I would have loved to participate as I'm quite fond of the composition and the thread concept and the OP but for God's sake don't mention that to her lest I never hear the end of it, eh? - Thanks! but have been dealing with family health issues which take precedence.


Sorry to hear about your family health issues, Molly.

You have an astonishing ability to identify recordings! I doubt any member could match your ability in this. I gather - perhaps wrongly - that you can do this quite quickly (quicker than listening to the five selections and "evaluating" them, it seems). Do you have a particular method for doing this? What do you listen out for?


----------



## Duncan (Feb 8, 2019)

Enthusiast said:


> Sorry to hear about your family health issues, Molly.
> 
> You have an astonishing ability to identify recordings! I doubt any member could match your ability in this. I gather - perhaps wrongly - that you can do this quite quickly (quicker than listening to the five selections and "evaluating" them, it seems). Do you have a particular method for doing this? What do you listen out for?


I actually listened to the recordings - I just didn't have time to "evaluate" them with a written review.

- No tricks - No secrets - I have a phonographic memory... Pretty funny, eh? - Get it? - "phonographic memory" LOL - 

Thank you for your kind wishes - they are greatly appreciated.

Best always,

MJ


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Mollie John said:


> I have a phonographic memory... Pretty funny, eh? - Get it? - "phonographic memory" LOL -


What a wonderful gift! It must encompass 1000s of recordings.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn (Feb 17, 2017)

I'm with Kiki, have always loved Dorati/Detroit


----------



## Duncan (Feb 8, 2019)

Enthusiast said:


> What a wonderful gift! It must encompass 1000s of recordings.


That's just the box sets... :lol:


----------



## Merl (Jul 28, 2016)

I can't remember my name most days, never mind remember thousands of recordings.


----------



## hustlefan (Apr 29, 2016)

The Boulez/Cleveland recording - earlier Sony or later DG? From the timings it looks like the later DG.

After buying the Roth commercial recording used from Amazon, I discovered that the live recording is on YouTube at 




The live Rattle/London Symphony is also on YouTube at


----------



## Malx (Jun 18, 2017)

Enthusiast said:


> It seems that at some point after I stopped listening to Rattle he arrived as a mature and great conductor. I must investigate his more recent work further!


May I be so bold and suggest It may be that you listen to most of Rattle's recordings thinking they will not be good - and that is why these blind listenings are so interesting.

For instance his recent Das Rheingold is one of my favourite recordings of the piece - but it rarely gets a look in.


----------



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

About a year ago I did a 'blind' Ring, but only 1 of each of the 4 operas. I used the Rattle/BRSO Rheingold and it got excellent reviews.


----------



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

hustlefan said:


> The Boulez/Cleveland recording - earlier Sony or later DG? From the timings it looks like the later DG.


Correct ... the DG recording.

And yes, both the Roth & Rattle came from YouTube. Interestingly the Rattle performance was from one of his first LSO concerts after becoming MD ... he did all 3 of the major ballets in one concert!!


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Malx said:


> May I be so bold and suggest It may be that you listen to most of Rattle's recordings thinking they will not be good - and that is why these blind listenings are so interesting.
> 
> For instance his recent Das Rheingold is one of my favourite recordings of the piece - but it rarely gets a look in.


It might have been but I can't think of a Rattle recording I have heard in years except for more obscure repertoire. He hasn't been a conductor who I want to hear when there is a choice. But maybe it is time to change my mind on that.


----------



## Merl (Jul 28, 2016)

Rattle has done extremely well in Becca's blind comparisons, highlighting that we do really need to listen again to some of Rattle's output, especially in more recent years. Tbh, I've rarely had a beef with his performances and rate quite a few. Like every other conductor, there are great recordings and duds in his history. Maybe it's time for others to re-evaluate too.


----------



## Guest (Jun 5, 2019)

How much is it Rattle (or Dorati, or Boulez) and how much the orchestra? To what extent does the conductor say to the bassoonist, "You must play like this, not like that" for every bar?


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

^ When you see rehearsals on TV (or recorded on disc) that is one of the things conductors do. But the more important thing (for me anyway) is the shaping of the whole and the "larger units".


----------



## Kiki (Aug 15, 2018)

Oh, is this thread turning into another Rattle discussion? :lol: ..... 

Rattle is excellent, top of the pile; but he’s not perfect, just like everybody else.

(Before finding out E was Rattle, I did say it was excellent but there were also “little things” that I didn’t like, Now I feel like I’ve won something. :lol


----------



## NLAdriaan (Feb 6, 2019)

Thanks for this comparison, although I just found it when it was too late. 

As to Roth, he is sure worthwile a listen, interesting conductor. He recently recorded Mahler 1 HIP style. He also is the founder of the Siecles orchestra. 

As to Rattle, I always cherished his Stravinsky EMI CBSO recordings. The same goes for Dorati/Detroit, but it might well be that they recorded these works when I started to build my CD collection and I sure wanted digital recordings, especially of Stravinsky.


----------



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

This is getting off-topic but given the above posts, worth saying. I have been going to concerts for a long time now and have had an opportunity to see many well-known conductors in action, many of them also on video - Abbado, Barbirolli, Boulez, Davis (both), Haitink, Giulini, Mackerras, Mehta, Muti, Salonen, Rattle, Solti and probably a few others that don't come to mind. And then there have been many concert videos and recordings of concerts. I would agree with a previous comment that there have been terrific, average and duds from all of them ... that's the nature of the beast. Rattle is certainly no different. I have been attending and watching his concerts going back to the 1980s in Los Angeles during the Giulini years. I remember winners and losers, and admittedly some of the losers have been for the typical Rattle complaints, but I really do not understand the amount of flak that he gets on this forum. Some of the above list have IMO been 'guilty' of many of the same issues and no less frequently, but they rarely get lambasted in the same way.

As to my various blind comparisons, I have not gone into them with any intent to promote Rattle, far from it. My primary goal is always to find an interesting mix of studio and live performances. What is fascinating is the responses to many of the conductors. I was most struck with this when I did one of the Ring some time ago. Because I wanted live performances and not well-known studio/commercial recordings, I ended up with two Rattle performances, Rheingold and Gotterdammerung. While they both received some very indifferent reviews, they mostly got very glowing ones.


----------



## Merl (Jul 28, 2016)

Unfortunately, Becca, there are still a number of people who won't listen to certain conductors, often because of blind prejudice. The same people are the sort of narrow-minded fanboys who think that every performance of composer A is excellent, even if it's rubbish, or won't listen to conductor B because "if I like A then I can't like B". There are sheep everywhere, not just in fields.


----------



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

Merl said:


> Unfortunately, Becca, there are still a number of people who won't listen to certain conductors, often because of blind prejudice. The same people are the sort of narrow-minded fanboys who think that every performance of composer A is excellent, even if it's rubbish, or won't listen to conductor B because "if I like A then I can't like B". There are sheep everywhere, not just in fields.


In all honesty I must admit that I do have 2 or 3 of my own strong negative biases. While they are all based on direct experiences, they are probably still unfair.


----------



## Malx (Jun 18, 2017)

Becca said:


> In all honesty I must admit that I do have 2 or 3 of my own strong negative biases. While they are all based on direct experiences, they are probably still unfair.


I fear we all have preferences as a result of which we may have a tendency to dislike what can be perceived as a contary view to those preferences which leads to negative biases - there are very few who can take a wholly unbiased view.

Another conductor who gets singled out reasonably frequently by some (at times including myself) is Karajan - but the truth is he has made some awful recordings, some average and some blindingly good recordings.

How does this make sense - I am currently enjoying Karajan's recording of the Ring Cycle perhaps because of one of the reasons I dislike some of his other recordings - his tendency to smooth out the sound!

Listen with an open mind plus open ears and have the courage to like what you hear not what you are told is best.


----------



## Duncan (Feb 8, 2019)

Malx said:


> I fear we all have preferences as a result of which we may have a tendency to dislike what can be perceived as a contary view to those preferences which leads to negative biases - there are very few who can take a wholly unbiased view.
> 
> Another conductor who gets singled out reasonably frequently by some (at times including myself) is Karajan - but the truth is he has made some awful recordings, some average and some blindingly good recordings.
> 
> ...


Well said, my friend, well said and allow me to extend my compliments - :tiphat:


----------



## Guest (Jun 6, 2019)

Has there been a gender-based blind test yet?


----------



## Merl (Jul 28, 2016)

MacLeod said:


> Has there been a gender-based blind test yet?


Not that I know of (correct me if I'm wrong).


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Merl said:


> Unfortunately, Becca, there are still a number of people who won't listen to certain conductors, often because of blind prejudice. The same people are the sort of narrow-minded fanboys who think that every performance of composer A is excellent, even if it's rubbish, or won't listen to conductor B because "if I like A then I can't like B". There are sheep everywhere, not just in fields.


That's a bit strong, I think. If you have found that you don't much like the work of a given performer why would you spend time listening to more of their work? In the main repertoire there are usually so many choices to keep you busy. Often it is not so black and white and it is just a matter of not liking a performer's work as much as that of other performers. So there are a few conductors that I generally avoid (some in only some composers and others more widely). Of course, I keep in mind that things could change - the performer might develop or my taste might - and do actively watch out for that happening. I don't think there is anything narrow-minded about my approach and do not come to feel unimpressed with a conductor's work lightly. Often it is a disappointment not to like the work of someone who many feel differently about. Perhaps a good example for me is Mackerras. I have many of his records and even quite like them but I have noticed over time that I enjoy the music they contain better when it is played by others. So these days I am cautious of buying or listening to more of his work.

With Rattle there were many recordings of his made when he was in Birmingham and during his early days in Berlin that I didn't enjoy greatly. It wasn't about dud performances. Many others did enjoy those recordings so I put it down to him not being my cup of tea. I have felt that there may come a time when he matures and starts producing work that I really like.


----------



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

A few years ago Simon Rattle quoted a friend of his as saying "You know Simon, all the great conductors, they didn't really become great until their 60s ... and you are no different!"


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

^ Yes, that seems to be the rule (almost). It seems not to be true of instrumentalists, though, which is interesting.


----------



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

Probably because physical dexterity is an important factor for instrumentalists. For conductors it is (almost) all mental.


----------



## Guest (Jun 6, 2019)

Enthusiast said:


> With Rattle there were many recordings of his made when he was in Birmingham and during his early days in Berlin that I didn't enjoy greatly. It wasn't about dud performances. Many others did enjoy those recordings so *I put it down to him not being my cup of tea*. I have felt that there may come a time when he matures and starts producing work that I really like.


If he's not your cup of tea, no amount of "maturing" on his part will make any difference.


----------



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

Conductors styles do change, just witness the difference between the Karajan of the Philharmonia period and the later Berlin Philharmonic (1975+). I like much of the former but not much of the latter so it is easy for me to see how someone would not care for a conductor's earlier performances but could like later ones.


----------



## Merl (Jul 28, 2016)

Enthusiast said:


> That's a bit strong, I think. If you have found that you don't much like the work of a given performer why would you spend time listening to more of their work? In the main repertoire there are usually so many choices to keep you busy. Often it is not so black and white and it is just a matter of not liking a performer's work as much as that of other performers. So there are a few conductors that I generally avoid (some in only some composers and others more widely). Of course, I keep in mind that things could change - the performer might develop or my taste might - and do actively watch out for that happening. I don't think there is anything narrow-minded about my approach and do not come to feel unimpressed with a conductor's work lightly. Often it is a disappointment not to like the work of someone who many feel differently about. Perhaps a good example for me is Mackerras. I have many of his records and even quite like them but I have noticed over time that I enjoy the music they contain better when it is played by others. So these days I am cautious of buying or listening to more of his work.
> 
> With Rattle there were many recordings of his made when he was in Birmingham and during his early days in Berlin that I didn't enjoy greatly. It wasn't about dud performances. Many others did enjoy those recordings so I put it down to him not being my cup of tea. I have felt that there may come a time when he matures and starts producing work that I really like.


I wasn't having a go at you, Enthusiast (far from it). I was just stating that just because a piece is performed by Abbado (for example) it would not stop me listening to it if I was not a fan of many of his recordings. Every account I listen to starts on a level playiing field. I dont care who it's by and just listen. What I was saying is that some people don't listen without prejudice and that annoys me so maybe that did come across a bit strong. However, why narrow the field by being biased? Some people are missing out on some great recordings. And like you said, opinions do change over time and so do conductors. Who knows what I'll think of some of the recordings I rate highly in 10 years time? I can change my mind about recordings in a matter of months, sometimes.


----------



## Kjetil Heggelund (Jan 4, 2016)

I liked to read this  I have been too obsessed with Gergiev's 100th anniversary of the piece on youtube and busy elsewhere to take the time. It's really something to see it with the dancers!


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Merl said:


> I wasn't having a go at you, Enthusiast (far from it). I was just stating that just because a piece is performed by Abbado (for example) it would not stop me listening to it if I was not a fan of many of his recordings. Every account I listen to starts on a level playiing field. I dont care who it's by and just listen. What I was saying is that some people don't listen without prejudice and that annoys me so maybe that did come across a bit strong. However, why narrow the field by being biased? Some people are missing out on some great recordings. And like you said, opinions do change over time and so do conductors. Who knows what I'll think of some of the recordings I rate highly in 10 years time? I can change my mind about recordings in a matter of months, sometimes.


No - I didn't think you were (but thanks for taking the trouble to say so). I just thought there can be quite a few reasons why we tend to avoid some performers in works where there are too many versions to keep up. But your approach is positively scientific and we all benefit from the "sifting" you do for us.


----------



## Merl (Jul 28, 2016)

Enthusiast said:


> No - I didn't think you were (but thanks for taking the trouble to say so). I just thought there can be quite a few reasons why we tend to avoid some performers in works where there are too many versions to keep up. But your approach is positively scientific and we all benefit from the "sifting" you do for us.


Lol @ sifting. I'm fortunate to be part of such a knowledgeable community. I've learned so much in the time I've been here and had my attention drawn to recordings I knew nothing about. It's a pleasure trying to give something back to the community that has educated me. Not everyone agrees with my comments and reviews, and I wouldn't expect them to, but the open-minded posters on here always have something interesting to say (even if they think I'm wrong). You are one such person, Enthusiast (I feel a communal hug coming on). That's why I like it here.


----------

