# Back Again In Need of Direction



## nortonowner (May 18, 2020)

Ok , it's been awhile since i posted here but i have a more detailed question now. I had posted in past about which recordings to get being new to classical, how to navigate the maze of versions and such. ere is my current question. Lets use Mussorgsky - Pictures at an Exhibition as an example. I like this piece. However, i have found dozens (and im sure there are many more) of this by various artists, on various labels in various variety. How would one go about finding the best sounding (sound quality) or talented version (talent of musicians). In other words if you were going to an island for 10 years and loved this piece, which recording of it would you take and why? i dont want to have to buy 15 different recordings to figure out which one sounds best. Its so confusing.


----------



## Bruckner Anton (Mar 10, 2016)

My general recommedation for any major composition for beginners would be: 
Pick one of the top-seller widely acclaimed recordings on big labels (such as DG, Philips, Decca and EMI) which is recorded later than 1970 (1960s' sound cound be great for a lot of recordings on Decca and EMI etc., but it could also be pretty bad otherwise) in studio in stereo sound.
BTW, my first collections are Chopin etudes by Magaloff, Beethoven's piano sonata #21,23,26 by Gilels, Brahms piano concertos by Gilels Jochum BPO.


----------



## Animal the Drummer (Nov 14, 2015)

That's excellent general advice. As far as "Pictures" or indeed any Russian music goes, I would supplement it with the recommendation that you look for the description "conducted by Evgeny Svetlanov" - the recording quality may or may not be top notch but the intensity Svetlanov brings to everything he does will cover any shortfall.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Are we talking the piano piece? There are many (as noted in the OP). Pogorelich is very good. Or, in terrible sound, the famous live Richter from Sophia.

For orchestral, Gergiev (Vienna) is excellent but the issue is complicated by there being a number of different orchestrations that are each rewarding in very different ways.


----------



## Chilham (Jun 18, 2020)

Somewhere out there, is a music critic or website whose taste you share. You just have to find them.

My, "Go-to", place recommends these:

For Piano:










Steven Osborne

For the Ravel orchestration:










Jos Van Immerseel

Anima Eterna Brugge

For the Stokowski orchestration










José Serebrier

Bournemouth Symphony Orchestra


----------



## HenryPenfold (Apr 29, 2018)

nortonowner said:


> Ok , it's been awhile since i posted here but i have a more detailed question now. I had posted in past about which recordings to get being new to classical, how to navigate the maze of versions and such. ere is my current question. Lets use Mussorgsky - Pictures at an Exhibition as an example. I like this piece. However, i have found dozens (and im sure there are many more) of this by various artists, on various labels in various variety. How would one go about finding the best sounding (sound quality) or talented version (talent of musicians). In other words if you were going to an island for 10 years and loved this piece, which recording of it would you take and why? i dont want to have to buy 15 different recordings to figure out which one sounds best. Its so confusing.


Use a streaming service and listen to as many as possible and then decide which one(s) you like best.


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

It is confusing and it what makes classical collecting so much fun! You get to hear so many different recordings; then compare what you hear to the so-called experts (there aren't any, btw). There are some works that just demand the highest quality sound possible and Pictures is one of them - at least in any of the orchestral versions. When I want something where sound reproduction is paramount I start with labels known for that: Telarc, Bis, Exton, Pentatone, Reference Recordings and early RCA. Telarc has two Pictures that still hold up sonically and musically: Lorin Maazel in Cleveland and Paavo Jarvi in Cincinnati. RCA released many of Reiner's recordings in SACD and they sound fabulous even 60 years later - that Chicago Pictures is still a knockout.

I don't believe in the concept of a "best" version of anything; a great piece of music can be interpreted many different ways and still be thoroughly enjoyable. My life-long quest has been to get the best sound possible at home that's affordable. Having gone through LP, cassettes and then CDs and SACDs, now Blu Ray it's been a great time. While a lot of people collect what they are told are the greatest performances I went the other way: I collect the best sounding recordings. Happily, the two are not mutually exclusive.


----------



## Saxman (Jun 11, 2019)

I agree with mbhaub. The idea of a 'best version' doesn't really exist. At best, the question is: which one is best for you?

In reality, of the main repertoire, there are dozens of good recordings. Most people (even picky people) would be happy with any of them. Since there are many ways to listen these days, I'd use one of them to establish a general liking for a recording (including sound quality, quality of orchestra, tempo, etc.). SO listen to a streaming service, or clips, or youtube, or whatever. The point is to see if you like what you hear, without even thinking about what anyone else thinks. It's your ears, not theirs.

How to go about it depends on you. You could pick a site (like musicweb, or the SACD review site, which focuses on sound quality) and then listen to their rec's to make sure you like them. Or, you could read comments on Amazon and the like. Or, come to sites like these. Or...well, you get the point.

Just don't worry about finding 'the best'. It's a waste of time and it doesn't exist.


----------



## Merl (Jul 28, 2016)

At least we're in the days when you can listen before buying. No more getting stuck with expensive turkeys. I'm with HP. Stream, YouTube... Find a version that resonates with you. Don't read any reviews before you do. Read the reviews after you've enjoyed and settled on ones you like.


----------



## NoCoPilot (Nov 9, 2020)

Your original question presupposes that there *is* a "best version." That's not necessarily true.

Some recordings have more fire than others, some are better recordings, some are played with more precision. Which version you enjoy may differ from week to week.

Once you're familiar with a piece you can start searching for your favorite recording(s) of it. Until then, any decent recording will do. As others have pointed out, go with a well known orchestra, conductor and/or label and you probably won't be disappointed.

Or, if you are, it won't be until much later.


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

Merl said:


> . Find a version that resonates with you. Don't read any reviews before you do. Read the reviews after you've enjoyed and settled on ones you like.


Yes, this is a good approach...find ones that you like....then read reviews, and you will begin to see which reviewers have tastes similar to your own...many years ago, I used to read reviews by Mortimer Frank and Royal Brown....they tended to like what I like, not always, but quite often....chances are, if they liked it, I might as well...if they panned it, I might well do the same...
Thing is, you decide what you like, then be on the lookout for new possibilities...


----------



## wkasimer (Jun 5, 2017)

For Pictures at an Exhibition, you might want to consider a disc that contains both the solo piano version and the Ravel orchestration. There's a Mercury disc with Byron Janis and Antal Dorati, and there are probably others.


----------



## Andrew Kenneth (Feb 17, 2018)

best sound quality contender =>

This SACD disc won a Grammy Award for "Best Surround Sound Album".


----------



## Andrew Kenneth (Feb 17, 2018)

Excellent sounding piano version (SACD) =>


----------



## arpeggio (Oct 4, 2012)

Along with You Tube, two streaming services I have used are the Naxos Music Library and Apple I Tunes.

Based on my experiences CD's have better sound quality than streaming so one can review them to decide what recordings you like.

Amazon Prime has some classical steaming.

(Note: The Naxos Music Library can be expensive. I am a member of the Association of Concert Bands. Membership includes free access to the Naxos Music Library. It is cheaper to join them than to pay directly for the Naxos Music Library.)


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

wkasimer said:


> For Pictures at an Exhibition, you might want to consider a disc that contains both the solo piano version and the Ravel orchestration. There's a Mercury disc with Byron Janis and Antal Dorati, and there are probably others.


And you know, I prefer the original piano version.


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

Then you need the real original version. The published versions were taken from Rimsky-Korsakov's first edition...and he made some errors and "corrections". Noriko Ogawa made a recording for Bis from the original hand-written manuscript. Very much worth hearing. Great playing, great sound.


----------



## ORigel (May 7, 2020)

I like Peter Breiner's orchestration. It's availiable on Youtube.


----------



## ORigel (May 7, 2020)

consuono said:


> And you know, I prefer the original piano version.


I prefer the Ravel orchestration of Catacombs...otherwise I prefer solo piano the tiniest bit.


----------



## Triplets (Sep 4, 2014)

nortonowner said:


> Ok , it's been awhile since i posted here but i have a more detailed question now. I had posted in past about which recordings to get being new to classical, how to navigate the maze of versions and such. ere is my current question. Lets use Mussorgsky - Pictures at an Exhibition as an example. I like this piece. However, i have found dozens (and im sure there are many more) of this by various artists, on various labels in various variety. How would one go about finding the best sounding (sound quality) or talented version (talent of musicians). In other words if you were going to an island for 10 years and loved this piece, which recording of it would you take and why? i dont want to have to buy 15 different recordings to figure out which one sounds best. Its so confusing.


Safest bet is to do exactly what I say and ignore everyone else, because I am the acknowledged expert on everything.

But seriously...you do seem to place a premium on sound reproduction, and I do as well. I understand your bewilderment at the multiplicity of choices for something like Pictures at an Exhibition. Nor I have heard most of them; once I settled on 2 favorites I didn't feel the need to explore.

Streaming services make this easier as you can explore quickly and without incurring expense. And I do suggest that you identify a few posters here that seem to make suggestions that work for you.

My 3 Pictures recommendations are Fritz Reiner and the Chicago SO, Lorin Maazel and Cleveland, and Eugene Ormandy and Philadelphia. Don't be afraid that they are 50 to 70 years old, they still sound great


----------



## nortonowner (May 18, 2020)

Thanks all, i guess i forgot to mention which version between solo and orchestra. Ive yet to hear it on piano only or single instrument. Ive heard several full orchestra versions, most of which were not mentioned in the previous posts so now im curious about those.


----------



## larold (Jul 20, 2017)

I's say if all you care about is sound buy the version produced the most recently; it almost certainly will sound the best.

If you are interested in the greatest art, that's a more difficult challenge. It isn't likely the best-sounding version is also going to be the best version artistically.

Any easy way to sample some is to use YouTube where millions of recordings are available in whole or part for free. Newer and newest recordings may not be available but you can no doubt find sound bytes on the web, perhaps even a one-off freebie. You can also subscribe to one of those $10 a month services that lets you listen to anything once.


----------



## NoCoPilot (Nov 9, 2020)

Triplets said:


> Safest bet is to do exactly what I say and ignore everyone else, because I am the acknowledged expert on everything.


Great. This'll come in handy when I do my taxes.


----------



## Pat Fairlea (Dec 9, 2015)

consuono said:


> And you know, I prefer the original piano version.


Yes, me too, much as I love Ravel's music. Piers Lane and Giacomo Scinardo are both excellent in the original version. If you read music, try following the score as well. It amazes me what effects Mussorgsky gets with seemingly few notes.


----------



## arpeggio (Oct 4, 2012)

*Ashkenazy's [I]Pictures[/I].*

The above members have made some excellent suggestions.

I have the following recordings in my library:

Maazel with Cleveland on Telarc
Abado with the London Symphony on Deutsche Grammophone

I have a recording that you might want to look into as well as the Ravel version.

As has already been mentioned, Rimsky-Korsakov prepared an edition of the original piano version (He edited many of Mussorgsky's works. At that time many considered the original Mussorgsky to be crude.)

There is a recording of Vladimir Ashkenazy performing the original piano version on the London 414 386-2. Also on the recording is Ashkenazy's orchestrations of _Pictures_.

A link to a YouTube of the recording:


----------

