# Sibelius VC,Hahn/Vengerov and oistrakh/56/Ehrling



## paulbest (Apr 18, 2019)

Oistrakh/Rozh/67, Oistrakh/Ormandy/59, Oistrakh /Ehrling/56
I always had the Rozh and Ormandy,,,just today heard the 56/Ehrling/Stockholm SO.
I prefer , by a lot, his 1956 Ehrling recording.

Then we move to Vengerov, who some feel dominates this concerto. I thought so as well*can it get any better than THIS*…..,,,until I heard the Oistrakh/Ehrling
Then we have Hillary Hahn performing the Sibelius non stop world over past 5 yrs and has another 5 more yrs booked solid, tickets at $100++ a pop.

I prefer Oistrakh/Ehrling and would not consider a second choice in this work.

Its all there, just as Sibelius wrote it. 
Oistrakh disappears, what you hear is only the music, with Ehrling doing his wizardry. . Both have a firm grasp of the score, making this record the only one you need. .


----------



## MarkW (Feb 16, 2015)

By an accident of when I happened to have series tickets, I was in Symphony Hall in my teens when a similarly aged Itzhak Perleman made his BSO debut playing the Sibelius Concerto --a work previously unknown to me. I will never forget it.


----------



## Guest (Jun 13, 2019)

i have 3 versions of this excellent work, all with female violinists:

- Lisa Batiashvili (violin), Staatkapelle Berlin/Daniel Barenboim
- Viktoria Mullova (violin), Academy of St Martin-in-the-Fields/Seiji Ozawa
- Ida Haendel (violin), Czech Philharmonic Orchestra/Karel Ančerl

On a quick re-listen, I'd say that the best of these is Lisa Batiashvili. When it came out in 2006 it received a very favourable reception It is partnered with the Tchaikovsky VC. The sound quality is excellent. I have no intention of acquiring any more versions of the Sibelius, or Tchaikovsky, as I can't imagine anything that can top this CD.


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

I heard a great live performance of it by Vengerov, with the NY Phil. If I were looking for a recording I would definitely consider him.


----------



## Rangstrom (Sep 24, 2010)

Heifetz by golly.


----------



## paulbest (Apr 18, 2019)

many fine suggestions, some which I have heard and agree with. 
What I love about the Oistrakh/Ehrling is the flow, , Oistrakh and Ehrling spends no extra time on the lush slow passages. They go with it, the music moves along at a pace I prefer over any others.


----------



## philoctetes (Jun 15, 2017)

Kuusisto with Segerstam, Dylana Jensen with Ormandy, and Oistrakh for the "polar bear polonaisse"


----------



## paulbest (Apr 18, 2019)

I had, may still have somewhere in my collection the Kuusisto with Segerstam's powerful orchestral conducting, as his usual. Incredible balance between soloist and orchestra. The tonal sounds of Kuusisto's violin , velvety and rich voicing. Must be heard. 


Hahn takes it just a few seconds over 33,,and Vengerov just over 32...Its not by much, but Oisterakh takes it just at 30 minutes,,,,he does not dally at the slower sections. It is for this I prefer Oistrakh's 56.


----------



## paulbest (Apr 18, 2019)

while researching the timings on the Kuusisto/Segerstam,,I came across a comment in a amazon review of the cd...someone mentioned a certain violinist by the name of,,,let me spell this correctly....

Spivakovsky 
The reviewer gives glowing comments about Spivakovsky's performance,,so here it is, broken in 4 YT uplodas, 
I find this performance, fluid as Oistrakh's, and perhaps equaln to Oistrakh's, or superior,,I have no time to compoare the 2,,,will leave that task for the more seasoned on the TC board.
But amazing it is , indeed.

btw Kuusisto takes it at 33:33/

I know this Spivokvsky is at 30 or just under,,,you can tell by the fact he lingers not, which gives this performance a sweeping, windward feeling..., , yet never rushed.

I had no idea this treasure laid buried all these years.
The conducting/orchestra is 1st rate/stunning.


----------



## paulbest (Apr 18, 2019)

Spivakovsky/Hannikainen/London SO

Timing 29:41. 
I knew it. Instinctively felt the concerto comes off best at just a few secs under 30 minutes.

As I say, there are countless fine, excellent recordings,,,all the above mentioned and many others, No denying these recordings of their virtuosic and electrifying renditions. 
With my long experience of the work, I find the concerto is best at just under 30 minutes, Heiftz has one record at under 28,,now that's too fast,, if not skipping some notes.

https://www.amazon.com/Sibelius-Sym...s+spivakovsky&qid=1560560886&s=gateway&sr=8-1


----------



## Brahmsian Colors (Sep 16, 2016)

I'm no longer the big fan of Heifetz I used to be, but his interpretation of the Sibelius Concerto with Hendl and the Chicago Symphony still sits near the top in my affections.


----------



## paulbest (Apr 18, 2019)

There are quite a few loyal faithful Heifetz (misspelled previously) , who have now given their ears for another violinist, Hillary Hahn has given them a new experience in their beloved romantic concertos. 
They thought, *it can not get any better*,,yet it did to their shocking surprise.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

An amusing story about the 1917 New York debut of the 16-year-old Vilnius-born violinist Jascha Heifetz:
-------------------------------------------------
Most of the great violinists living in the city seem to have been at the concert. The pianist Leopold Godowsky, who was a family friend of the Heifetzes, shared a box with the violinist Mischa Elman, who was 10 years older than Heifetz and had studied with the same teacher, Leopold Auer.

The longer the concert went on, the more uncomfortable Elman became. In order to hide his discomfiture he turned to Godowsky and said, “It’s hot in here, isn’t it?” Godowsky retorted, “No Mischa. Not for pianists.”
-------------------------------------------------
Five years earlier, Fritz Kreisler had accompanied the 11 year-old Heifetz at a private concert. He remarked, “We may as well break our fiddles across our knees.”


----------



## Brahmsian Colors (Sep 16, 2016)

paulbest said:


> There are quite a few loyal faithful Heifetz (misspelled previously) , who have now given their ears for another violinist, Hillary Hahn has given them a new experience in their beloved romantic concertos.
> They thought, *it can not get any better*,,yet it did to their shocking surprise.


Thanks for the info, Paul. I haven't heard the Hahn, but will give it a listen tomorrow on You Tube.


----------



## paulbest (Apr 18, 2019)

Haydn67 said:


> Thanks for the info, Paul. I haven't heard the Hahn, but will give it a listen tomorrow on You Tube.


In all honesty, her Sibelius,,is not her finest example of her playing. Its the Bruch, and Mendelssohn. It is in these 2 which astounds the Heifetz and Oistrakh fan clubs.

You can observe these reactions from the faces of the crawds which pack her concerts, via YT uploads.

In the Mendelssohn , there on the front row is a gentleman, with a smile of great pleasure, focued in on every note she plays,,,I can tell he was/remains a Heifetz devotee, and now a believer in Hahn's gorgeous tonal and silvery playing techniques.

Asa long time collector/fan of Oistrakh,,I too was amazed at her Mendelssohn and Bruch...The finest?

In these 2 concertos, I am not, in fact, do not believe there is a such thinga s *definitive*. But what Hahn offers in both,,is something,,,*legends are made of*.

Think about it, all her concerts are packed houses ,,FOUR shows in Chicago, this past May, all offered the Sibelius,,,Was the final shown packed? I doubt it, still, which solist do you know on tour which can fill seats ina major city for FOUR shows?

The love her world over, but it is the Koreans and Asians which are moved to tears by her playing.

Do I prefer her Bruch and Mendelssohn , over Oistrakh's many recordings...??? I've not heard all the Oistrakh as yet. 
In these 2 concertos, it is not a point to compare the 2 master violinists recordings. I mean a 10/10 in both, is beyond compare.

Now in the Bruch Scottish fantasy, Hahn so far has no offerings, and it is here where Oistrakh takes her,,,by light years...
In that masterpiece, I have doubts she could match Oistrakh in the details, and poetic demands.
I just have my doubts,,so says my intuitions. Don't quote me on that , its only a *hunch*, * a best guess*. But Hahn has not given us a public recording of the Scottish Fantasy, ,,,so we may never know.

btw, I did see a YT upload of her in a concerto , post delivery of her baby , recently,,,,,,No comments. …..


----------



## Mifek (Jul 28, 2018)

paulbest said:


> Oistrakh/Rozh/67, Oistrakh/Ormandy/59, Oistrakh /Ehrling/56


I have Oistrakh/Fougstedt/54. 
As much as I like Oistrakh, it is *Ginette Neveu* who owes this concerto in my opinion. 
Together, I have 14 different recordings of Sibelius VC. Apart from Neveu, I listen to Shaham/Sinopoli and Kavakos/Vänskä most often.

Honestly speaking, this is such a beautiful piece of music that I can enjoy it irrespective of who performs the concerto. This is especially true for live performances. Last time it was Sergey Khachatryan who almost made me break into tears with his beautiful interpretation. I absolutely agree with Leif Segerstam who said:
_"Sibelius's music - born of sincere thought and feeling - lends itself to such different atmospheres and approaches. The concerto can withstand very different interpretations because, thanks to its harmonic language, its musical message, it never comes across as false - even if you think it might have been played either too fast or too slow. I have heard so many bad accompaniments, and so many young people from other countries and with other styles misunderstand the piece, but somehow it doesn't suffer as long as the interpreter has a sparkling intensity."_


----------



## Mifek (Jul 28, 2018)

As for Hilary Hahn, I rarely listen to her recording of Sibelius (which I owe), but this is mostly because I hate skipping any tracks on CD, and her Sibelius follows the Schoenberg's violin concerto, a piece that I don't like much enough to listen to it that often. However, I love to listen to (and to watch) her live performance on YT (see below). Take a look at the beginning of the 3rd movement - it is obvious that she loves this piece as much as I do.


----------



## Brahmsian Colors (Sep 16, 2016)

Well, I listened to the Hahn. Next, I re-listened to the Heifetz/Hendl, which I had not heard in quite some time....and then I listened to the Oistrakh/Ehrling, which I had never heard before. One of these three performances impressed me as being more intimate, more supple, more striking and more substantial than the others---and that was the one given by Oistrakh and Ehrling. Hahn's performance is lovely. That by Heifetz no longer does for me what it did before. I still regard it as a dynamic trip, but to me neither it nor Hahn's rendition really stands at the level of accomplishment achieved by Oistrakh. For now, I have no desire to listen to anyone else's version of the Sibelius VC.


----------



## Josquin13 (Nov 7, 2017)

Here's an overview of the best recordings I've heard over the decades:

I. Mono & analog stereo era:

--I'm in complete agreement with you on the Oistrakh/Ehrling 1956 recording. It was one of the first classical LPs I ever owned, and I've never heard the opening played quite so mysteriously. If pressed to pick just one, I'd choose it as my favorite. However, I think that the recording is best heard on LP, where the violin playing sounds warmer to my ears (see the YT link below to a recording made directly from the vinyl), although the EMI Testament remaster is a good one: https://www.amazon.com/Beethoven-Vi...elius+ehrlin g&qid=1560572058&s=music&sr=1-1). But yes, Oistrakh/Ormandy and Oistrakh/Rozhdestvensky are wonderful too, and are better orchestrally speaking, especially in Philadelphia (although the various CD remasters can be tricky to navigate, as Oistrakh's violin tone can become grating on some of the earlier remasters). I've not heard Oistrakh's 'historical' recording with conductor Nils-Erik Fougstedt and the Finnish R.S.O., on Ondine.

Oistrakh/Ehrling:





--I also like the 1952 recording that violinist Camilla Wicks made with Ehrling, too. In certain phrases, she finds meanings in the score that other violinists don't bring out, interpretatively:

Wicks/Ehrling:




Here's an alternative remaster of Wicks/Erhling: 




--Ida Haendel should be mentioned, too. Haendel is the only violinist that Sibelius ever said he liked in the concerto, after hearing her play it on a radio broadcast (I guess that rules out Heifetz!... as well as Neveu & Wicks?). There are several Haendel recordings of the concerto, with conductors Ancerl (1957), Berglund (1975), and Decker (1981). Here are links to the Ancerl & Berglund recordings:

Haendel/Berglund (I like her Berglund recording best):





Haendel/Ancerl: 




--As others have mentioned, there's also a legendary 1945 recording from violinist Ginette Neveu, with the Philharmonia Orchestra, conducted by Walter Susskind:

Ginette Neveu/Susskind: 




--Compared to Oistrakh, Wicks, & others, I find Jascha Heifetz's playing rather cold (although I've liked the recording that his student, Miriam Fried made on the Finlandia label--see below).

--Salvatore Accardo's late analog Philips recording, with Sir Colin Davis & the LSO is excellent, too: 




II. Digital era recordings:

Among digital era recordings, I've most liked the following 10 recordings (yes, I'm a Sibelius nut!), which I've listed roughly in order of preference (but not in preference to Oistrakh, Wicks, Haendel, etc., mentioned above):

1. Miriam Fried/Kamu--This is a big, bold, passionate reading, where the violinist takes lots of imaginative risks, while Kamu & the Helsinki Philharmonic Orchestra offer good support. I find their 2nd movement particularly gripping and successfully done: [Edit: I thought that this was a digital recording, but now I'm not entirely sure, as the YT listing says it was recorded in 1977...?]






2. Arve Tellefsen/Berglund--Tellefsen can be more relaxed than Fried, and his playing is generally more nuanced & subtle, but this is one of the great performances of the digital era, in my opinion, and arguably better than Fried/Kamu, as the interplay between the soloist and orchestra is preferable--thanks to Berglund's vast experience in Sibelius, and his knowing, careful attention to getting the orchestral details & balances just right (which is better here than on most other versions):









https://www.amazon.com/Sibelius-Con...+violin+vale n&qid=1560623859&s=music&sr=1-1

3. Hilary Hahn/Salonen: 




4. Pekka Kuusisto/Segerstam--Kuusisto won the 1995 Sibelius Violin Competition as a teenager (interestingly, 1995 was also the year that Lisa Batiashvili played in the competition): 



. Now that Kuusisto is in his prime, as a violinist, it'll be interesting to see if he records the Sibelius again, and whether or not his interpretation will have changed or deepened, compared to his more youthful performance here, with Segerstam.

5. Cho-Liang Lin/Salonen: I find this to be is an exciting, heartfelt and unabashedly romantic reading; however, Hahn's reading, also with Salonen, is both heartfelt & romantic, and yet even more mysterious, subtle, and smoother, which I slightly prefer (even though she didn't take my advice and record the concerto with Berglund): 




6. Leonidas Kavakos/Vänska--Kavakos was another winner of the Sibelius competition, in 1985, who, by permission of the heirs of Sibelius, recorded the world premiere of the composer's original version of the Violin Concerto, as a coupling to the better known final 1905 version: https://www.amazon.com/Violin-Conce...avakos+sibelius&qid=1560623647&s=music&sr=1-1. The recording won a 1991 Gramophone award. However, I should point out that the BIS engineers decided not to spot mike the violinist, and to instead go with the natural acoustics of the concert hall, and that may be a problem for some listeners, as the violin playing isn't always out in front of the orchestra. Plus, the dynamics for Vanska's BIS Sibelius recordings can be on the extreme side, which not everyone has enjoyed, as you have to turn the volume up in order to hear the quietest parts, and then, when the more dramatic passages come, the sound will suddenly blare out from your speakers, awaking the dog & possibly your neighbors, before you get up & turn the volume back down. At least, that's been my experience with Vänska's BIS cycle--though admittedly, it may be a stereo system dependent issue.)

7. Vilde Frang/Søndergård: 




8. Dylana Jenson/Ormandy: 




9. Silvia Marcovici/N. Jarvi: https://www.amazon.com/Sibelius-Con...covici+sibelius&qid=1560626375&s=music&sr=1-1

10. Joseph Swensen/Saraste: This recording isn't on YT, and is OOP, as well. It was part of Jukka-Pekka Saraste's excellent 1st Sibelius Symphony cycle for RCA, with the Finnish R.S.O..

In addition, I should mention that I like Maxim Vengerov and Lisa Batiashvili, as violinists (especially Batiashvili), but the problem I have with their Sibelius recordings is that they are let down by Daniel Barenboim's drab, imprecise conducting (just compare to him to Berglund), especially Batiashvili on DG. He's not an understanding Sibelian, IMO, but at least he had the sense to stay out of her way. The violin playing is fantastic, however, and among the best I've heard in this concerto during the digital era. So, it's a shame that she didn't have a better conductor, as the concerto is unfortunately about more than just her remarkable violin playing. As for Batiashvili's earlier 2007 recording, for some reason, I was more taken by her playing of the coupling--Magnus Lindberg's Violin Concerto no. 1, which is phenomenal--than I was with her Sibelius; which is surprising, since I've liked Sakari Oramo's Sibelius cycle on Erato (& nearly everything else I've heard from him). I suppose it may have had something to do with the balances on the (live?) sound recording, which aren't ideal. But regardless, she's a wonderful violinist!!

Batiashvili/Oramo:












https://www.amazon.com/Sibelius-Lin...+sibelius+oramo&qid=1560571272&s=music&sr=1-1

Batiashvili/Barenboim: 





Venegerov/Barenboim: 




In addition, I wish that a Sibelius VC recording by violinist Elina Vähälä would be released. She's played the concerto live many times, but no recording yet: 




Janine Jansen also plays the concerto exceptionally well, but I'd like to see her record it again with one of the Finnish conductors--perhaps Saraste: 




My 15 cents.


----------



## senza sordino (Oct 20, 2013)

I own five different recordings: Heifetz with Chicago and Hendl, Hahn with Salonen, Oistrakh with Ormandy and Philadelphia, Accardo with LSO and Davis, and Hadelich with Liverpool and Lintu.

The Heifetz rockets along at well under 30 minutes. Hahn is good but I think the orchestra is particularly good in this one. Oistrakh is really good. Accardo is good but safe. Hadelich is a bit annoying as I can hear him breathing at every phrase. I'm not sure I have a favourite. Sometimes I find Heifetz is just too fast. Sibelius spent a lot of time deciding on each note and Heifetz just races throughout.

I'd like to hear the Vengerov and James Ehnes performances. I don't listen to it very often, it's a bit too familiar to me. I have heard the concerto a couple of times live, I can't remember who played. I wonder if I could manage to learn a few parts of it? (You wouldn't want to hear me play it though, it's an especially tough piece)


----------



## Brahmsian Colors (Sep 16, 2016)

Josquin13 said:


> I'm in complete agreement with you on the Oistrakh/Ehrling 1956 recording. It was one of the first classical LPs I ever owned, and I've never heard the opening played quite so mysteriously. If pressed to pick just one, I'd choose it as my favorite. However, I think that the recording is best heard on LP, where the violin playing sounds warmer to my ears...


Virtually all my listening is done on LPs, however, excellent condition copies in that format are rare, and prices for them are well beyond what I'm willing to pay.

Otherwise, I've noted several references to the mono Neveu recording, which I used to own. I feel she does not project enough tension and intensity in her performance. Conductor Susskind's accompaniment also strikes me as somewhat stiff.


----------



## wkasimer (Jun 5, 2017)

Any thoughts about this one, with Julian Sitkovetsky?:


----------



## Pat Fairlea (Dec 9, 2015)

Josquin13 wrote "--Ida Haendel should be mentioned, too. Haendel is the only violinist that Sibelius ever said he liked in the concerto, after hearing her play it on a radio broadcast (I guess that rules out Heifetz!... as well as Neveu & Wicks?). There are several Haendel recordings of the concerto, with conductors Ancerl (1957), Berglund (1975), and Decker (1981)."

Long ago, I heard Haendel play the Sibelius VC live (can't recall the orchestra, I'm afraid), and was rather underwhelmed by the performance. She must have been having an off-day, as her reading of the piece was rather 'mechanical', lacking a feel for its ebb and flow. Or maybe I was just having an off-day as a listener. Anyway, it's good to hear so many recommendations.


----------



## paulbest (Apr 18, 2019)

Pat Fairlea said:


> Josquin13 wrote "--Ida Haendel should be mentioned, too. Haendel is the only violinist that Sibelius ever said he liked in the concerto, after hearing her play it on a radio broadcast (I guess that rules out Heifetz!... as well as Neveu & Wicks?). There are several Haendel recordings of the concerto, with conductors Ancerl (1957), Berglund (1975), and Decker (1981)."
> 
> Long ago, I heard Haendel play the Sibelius VC live (can't recall the orchestra, I'm afraid), and was rather underwhelmed by the performance. She must have been having an off-day, as her reading of the piece was rather 'mechanical', lacking a feel for its ebb and flow. Or maybe I was just having an off-day as a listener. Anyway, it's good to hear so many recommendations.


Ida is like 89 years old in that live performance, if it is the same YT upload we are in reference about,,,,the very fact Ida recorded the Pettersson 2nd concerto, that accomplishment alone, something 
neither 
Oistrakh,
Heifetz
Perlman
Hillary Hahn
Vengerov
and ,,,well simple fact is
There are only 
2 recordings
make that 3

That alone makes Ida a Legend.
Her earlier Sibelius is good, not exceptional, but not bad either.

How many violints can play the Pettersson on her level?
Hillary Hahn? 
Doubt that, not after her recent delivery of her child
She's is over the hill now.


----------



## wkasimer (Jun 5, 2017)

paulbest said:


> How many violints can play the Pettersson on her level?
> Hillary Hahn?
> Doubt that, not after her recent delivery of her child
> She's is over the hill now.


This statement is absurd. Plenty of performers bear children and go on to continue great careers. Hahn is 39 - which is not, by any stretch of the imagination, "over the hill".


----------



## Josquin13 (Nov 7, 2017)

wkasimer said:


> Any thoughts about this one, with Julian Sitkovetsky?:


It's excellent. Yes, that recording should have been on my list. Sitkovetsky certainly doesn't hold back!, he keeps you on the edge of your seat. I found it exciting. Thanks for the introduction. (Prior to hearing your link, I had only heard Sitkovetsky's son & grandson play the violin.) Generally speaking, I think the older violinists tended to have a bolder projection, and more meaty violin tones, which helps significantly in a work of this size & virtuosity. It also adds more personality and a greater characterization to the music. Sometimes I feel that Vilde Frang, for instance, had trouble projecting enough size into the concerto. But it's hard to say for sure, since I've never heard her live, and it's possible that she wasn't miked closely enough. While, conversely, the older violinists may have just been placed more closely to the single mike (on mono recordings), considering that the orchestral details on the older recordings are often quite recessed, and you don't hear the full score, in comparison, and sometimes not even close to it.

EDIT: In response, yes, I think you have to take into account Haendel's advanced age on her much later recordings and concert appearances. But she was only 47 when she recorded the Sibelius with Berglund in 1975, and much younger when she recorded it with Ancerl and when Sibelius heard her on the radio, and also when she recorded the Pettersson VC2 with Blomstedt.

Hilary Hahn, over the hill? because she's had a baby. Come on. That's nonsense. It may even make her a better violinist, & add greater depth to her interpretations. Before, she traveled around the world with her pet mouse...


----------



## paulbest (Apr 18, 2019)

;;;;;;;
I just thought this performance was abit too sluggish, and not her usual self. thats all i'm saying


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

paulbest said:


> There are quite a few loyal faithful Heifetz (misspelled previously) , who have now given their ears for another violinist, Hillary Hahn has given them a new experience in their beloved romantic concertos.
> They thought, *it can not get any better*,,yet it did to their shocking surprise.


No Heiftetz fanboys here preferring Hahn. You will have to go somewhere else to promoted Hahn because nobody here ever even bothers to talk about her.

Give me Heifetz, Oistrakh, Szeryng ....

Hahn - forget it.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

The concerto has been well-served by recordings. It is a work I love and is by no means a typical virtuoso Romantic concerto. Off the top of my head (by memory ... and I guess subject to constant revision) ....

*Favourites *
Accardo with Davis is interesting and unique: slower and more lyrical than any other I have heard and as far from making the work a virtuoso showpiece as it is possible to be.

Batiashvili's first recording (with Oramo) was very good but her second recording (with Barenboim) is even better.

Oistrakh with Ehrling is excellent.

Khachatryan with Krivine is very good if not as amazing as his Shostakovich.

Kuusisto with Segerstam is also very good.

*Among the good:*
Hahn's with Salonen is not a bad account at all and earns a mention but it is probably not one of the very best.

I like Kavakos with Vanska a lot - very musical - but (as has been said) the decision not to spotlight the soloist will deter many. The coupling with an earlier version of the concerto makes his disc a must have for me.

I like Rachlin with Maazel but I think you have to get it with Maazel's second (and disappointing) symphony set.

Vengerov with Barenboim is OK but is it a little episodic?


----------



## paulbest (Apr 18, 2019)

have you seen Vengerov's live account on YT,,not sure the date of your Barenboim mention,,,nor the conductor in his live Performance,,,IOW the Barenboim, which year? 
The live YT upload, which yr?
In the live YT, he *ripds the thing*.

Some are saying , he masters the work. 

Your episodic...and my ripping apart may have some connections here.
I mean yeah, he RIPS IT,,,but is this the best way to approach it?


I cked out Hahn's live, May2, M Franck/France radi,,,she takes it with masterly talents, who can deny it. 
She has incredible skills on the violin,,,,,,but again, its nota concerto I will visit. I've heard it every day back in the mid 1980's, I am sick of hearing it.
I prefer Henze, Schoenbern, Berg, concertos I can listen to everyday. In the now moment. 


All the ones mentioned here in this thread, have some interest, all are at least 8,9,10 out of 10.
Its not a difficult concerto to get right. has lots and lots of lovely passages. 
Yet to my ears its dated, and so predictable. 
I've advanced in my preferences,, I prefer unpredictable, thickly scored works..
But does not rule out predictable works either, Take Szymanowski, predictable, yet fascinating material.
Why?
Someone here mentioned his connections with Polish folk, highlands music., 

BINGO, that's it, I love folk music shinning through Szymanowski's works. 
I know I am the one who opened this topic, but honestly folks, as of about 10 or 15 yrs ago, I gave up the Sibelius violin concerto. It just seems so predictable and the once beloved beauty, has now all faded.
But you are young, so enjoy it, as I once did.


----------



## Malx (Jun 18, 2017)

> Vengerov with Barenboim is OK but is it a little episodic?


Too much Vengerov & Barenboim and not enough Sibelius perhaps.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Mm - slightly indulgent.


----------



## Malx (Jun 18, 2017)

I found Vengerov treated the piece more as a virtuoso showpiece which I don't believe it is - it is one concerto where soloist, orchestra and conductor need to share a common view of the work. Sadly I don't hear that on their disc.


----------



## paulbest (Apr 18, 2019)

Malx said:


> Too much Vengerov & Barenboim and not enough Sibelius perhaps.


Yep, excellent review,,,,now will Vengerov read your comment and make some needful adjustments?
No, He knows, in order to keep at least some spot light on his concerts, he will have to beat Hillary at least in the Sibelius. , willy-nilly.

Hillary has been performing the Sibeolius, past 5 yrs and has another 5 yrs contracts to fulfill, tahts 10 years of Sibelius,,,,
I'm sure Vengerov is playing the Sibelius there in his main base fan club, London,,,but how often does the Londoners want to hear the Sibelius AND with Vengerov?
I mean 1/2 crowd ain't gonna pay the lights. 
Full house is what promoters want, Vengerov/Sibelius,,,my guess is 2 X's a year in London, tops,,whereas Hillary has packed houses, 4 concerts/Sibelius in Chicago last month, EVERY SEAT SOLD.


----------



## paulbest (Apr 18, 2019)

Enthusiast said:


> Mm - slightly indulgent.


Indulgent, but definitely powerful. It is the only way he can compete with Hillary


----------



## paulbest (Apr 18, 2019)

Malx said:


> I found Vengerov treated the piece more as a virtuoso showpiece which I don't believe it is - it is one concerto where soloist, orchestra and conductor need to share a common view of the work. Sadly I don't hear that on their disc.


What about Fritz Kreisler?

Legendary showman.

I don't care for either Hahn's nor Vengerov, The classic recording, is Oistrakh/Ehrling. 
Its balanced in every way. It is definitive.


----------



## wkasimer (Jun 5, 2017)

paulbest said:


> What about Fritz Kreisler?
> 
> Legendary showman.


Huh? Kreisler was a great violinist, who played with great imagination and personality. But he was anything but a "showman".



> The classic recording, is Oistrakh/Ehrling.
> Its balanced in every way. It is definitive.


There is no such thing as a definitive recording. Of anything.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Malx said:


> I found Vengerov treated the piece more as a virtuoso showpiece which I don't believe it is - it is one concerto where soloist, orchestra and conductor need to share a common view of the work. Sadly I don't hear that on their disc.


You could be right, Malx. It is a while since I heard the work, let alone that recording. But I do agree that the violin concerto does not respond well to being treated merely as a virtuoso showpiece. It needs a conductor who gets Sibelius but Barenboim does well with a similar approach for Batiashvili so the fault may be Vengerov's.


----------



## Larkenfield (Jun 5, 2017)

The Oistrakh /Ehrling/56 is indeed a fine recording. Love his sound and expression.


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

paulbest said:


> Yep, excellent review,,,,now will Vengerov read your comment and make some needful adjustments?
> No, He knows, in order to keep at least some spot light on his concerts, he will have to beat Hillary at least in the Sibelius. , willy-nilly.


Listen to Vengerov and Hahn back to back. In the live performances posted above the only advantage Hahn had was a better balance with the orchestra, which was not a soloist issue in this case. And addressing a later comment: No, Vengerov's performance is not episodic. Precisely what is most refined about his playing is his sense of line on the grand scale.


----------



## paulbest (Apr 18, 2019)

EdwardBast said:


> Listen to Vengerov and Hahn back to back. In the live performances posted above the only advantage Hahn had was a better balance with the orchestra, which was not a soloist issue in this case. And addressing a later comment: No, Vengerov's performance is not episodic. Precisely what is most refined about his playing is his sense of line on the grand scale.


You guys have a finer sense of musicality/details, /balance twix soloist/orch. 
There is no doubt Vengerov has *smashed* the concerto, that is taking it to the ultimate extreme.
Like Kogan did with the Shostakovich VC1. 
He hammered it.

This intensity, does it constitute a correct interpretation?
Who can say. 
Sibelius loved Ida Haendel's performance when she was young. I am going to leave it up to you gusy to figure out, Hahn's technical bravura, Vengerov's *hammering* hard,,,Oistrakh's magic with Ehrling,

If I went with 2 records, It would be Oistrakh
Ehrling
and Hillary Hahn. (I'm a big fan of Hahn)

The one thing we all learned here in this thread, is

wkasimer's

astute insight, that there is no such thing as a *definitive * Sibelius VC.

Wish to thank
Josquin13
for giving us a DEFINITIVE run down of all the best available recordings. Great job Josquin13. 
You have quite a collection and a dedication which we have all benifited from.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

EdwardBast said:


> Listen to Vengerov and Hahn back to back. In the live performances posted above the only advantage Hahn had was a better balance with the orchestra, which was not a soloist issue in this case. And addressing a later comment: No, Vengerov's performance is not episodic. Precisely what is most refined about his playing is his sense of line on the grand scale.


I _find _it episodic, you don't. It's one of the weaker performances I have heard, I think. But if you like it that's fine and it is fairly normal for different listeners to hear things differently. I do often like Vengerov's recordings but not always. I don't like his Walton/Britten record either, for example: I find it brutal and crude.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

paulbest said:


> You guys have a finer sense of musicality/details, /balance twix soloist/orch.
> There is no doubt Vengerov has *smashed* the concerto, that is taking it to the ultimate extreme.
> Like Kogan did with the Shostakovich VC1.
> He hammered it.
> ...


Nobody seems to much like Hahn but you.


----------



## Guest (Jun 18, 2019)

Having now heard the versions by Oistrakh/Philadelphia and Hahn/Swedish RSO, I agree that both are good. I would probably concur that Oistrakh is the better of the two, if not the best overall. 

I still like the version by Batiashvili/Barenboim that I mentioned earlier. I cannot see anything sloppy about Bareboim's conducting, as mentioned previously in the thread. It seems fine to me, and the orchestral accompaniment doesn't get in her way. Everything's nicely in step, and the sound quality is good.

Quite frankly, though, I'd be happy with any one of these above if my choice was restricted to one only, plus a couple of other alternatives if push came to shove.

Regards Hilary Hahn, I've noticed that she rather appears to be more popular in North America than in UK/Europe, from some of comments I've noticed on here. I wonder if this is partly because she's from the USA. In the UK, among modern-day violinists such as Frank Zimmermann, Rachel Podger and (the Russian) Alina Ibragimova tend to be among the most highly rated.


----------



## wkasimer (Jun 5, 2017)

stomanek said:


> Nobody seems to much like Hahn but you.


Plenty of people like Hahn, even if they don't worship her.


----------



## paulbest (Apr 18, 2019)

Look, I was a committed Oistrakh fan for decades, 
I gave Hahn a listen, with bias,,,then later with a open mind.
Who can deny her skills/tones?
The Heifetz fans are is shock and awe.
Oistrakh always was a superior violinist over Heifetz's spectacular talents. 
Oistrakh was superior , if only slightly, to the legendary Kogan, in the Shostakovich VC1, But there are other records of Kogan that surpass Oistrakh. ….Heifetz did not surpasss Oistrakh.
….
Yet when I heard Hahn in the Sibelius, there was a undeniable sweetness in her instrument , the tones, timbers, then add in her incredible mastery of anything she plays. 

Hahn is a formidable violinist. 

But again its not a matter of who offers the finest performance.
It is nearly impossible to make a compare.

As I say, there are so many excellent performances on record...everyone will have their favs.
Hahn ranks high, not just because she is popular, well loved. It is her incredible skills and sensitivity to the work. 
But again, ,,,hate to go around in circles here and appear to be in contraditions,,,yet it is Oistrakh that has such technique, power, understanding of the score,,,which all violinists stand in deep respect. 


But does David offer everything , which deletes Hahn's, Vengerov's? 
No, All 3 and many others have valid and exceptional renditions. 

It is a matter of which record do you want to hear that particular day. 


I may reach for Hahn's one day,,another Oistrakh's. 
In this sense, it has been astutely observed by a member here on TC, there is no definitive Sibelius VC1 on record.


----------



## paulbest (Apr 18, 2019)

wkasimer said:


> Plenty of people like Hahn, even if they don't worship her.


I was busy writing my post, and I see you and I are in agreement.

Hahn is popular wherever she goes. The crowds love her, ESPECIALLY in all of asia. 
the Koreans, do worship her, this is a observable fact.


----------



## Guest (Jun 18, 2019)

I just don't hear these alleged vast differences in quality between any of the top name violinists that have been mentioned. They're all pretty similar in quality, but maybe have slightly different approaches. I think it's unconvincing to make out that any one is vastly superior to another. It's fair enough to express a preference for one performer over another, but to crack on that this is somehow definitive goes too far.

If we were comparing the likes of Vengerov with some 13 year old violin "prodigy" with the Radio Orchestra of some place that hardly anyone's heard of, recorded on some very cheap label, I might agree, but otherwise it's all kidology when we're comparing one recognised top performer with another.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

^ But it isn't comparing one violinist with another so much as comparing one performance with another. That is a different matter. I guess if there seems nothing much to choose between with a handful of performances they must each have a similar number of different strong points or all be identical (which would be bland in the extreme) and this makes the space for personal preferences to enter into the question.


----------



## Guest (Jun 18, 2019)

^ I was mainly responding to the post above mine where the focus was purely on the violinist, not the "performance".

But even when the overall "performance" is taken into account (e.g. in a concerto) one cannot say that one particular violinist always comes out as the best.

....

You slightly modified your post 2 minutes after I replied, but yes I agree with you.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Sibelius? Heifetz with Beecham or Hendl. The rest might be good but are also-rans compared to him


----------



## paulbest (Apr 18, 2019)

Enthusiast said:


> ^ But it isn't comparing one violinist with another so much as comparing one performance with another. That is a different matter. I guess if there seems nothing much to choose between with a handful of performances they must each have a similar number of different strong points or all be identical (which would be bland in the extreme) and this makes the space for personal preferences to enter into the question.


Hard to argue your points raised.
Take Oistrakh's 3 records. 
Each is only slightly different, In fact if you play the Ormandy and Rozh,,,side by side A/B , cd vs LP, they play exactly, to the second for nearly the entire concerto. Not sure the dates on the 2, but it is simply amazing feat Oistrakh has such a extraordinary memory. 
His earlier Ehrling may be very close as well, not cked. But it for Ehrling that I love the performance.

As I say I am a historic buff and prefer the *earlier the better*.

So I guess your point can not be argued against. 
All have their merits and all are excellent.

Its in the tiny details , which we call, ~~~The Nuances~~~ which draw some to this record, others to that one.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

paulbest said:


> Look, I was a committed Oistrakh fan for decades,
> I gave Hahn a listen, with bias,,,then later with a open mind.
> Who can deny her skills/tones?
> *The Heifetz fans are is shock and awe.*
> ...


No they are not LOL

Im a Heifetz fan - have listened to her playing Mozart in front of the pope - and wrote her off. Not special.

There are some excellent present day violinists that I like - but she is not one of them.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

Partita said:


> *I just don't hear these alleged vast differences in quality between any of the top name violinists that have been mentioned.* They're all pretty similar in quality, but maybe have slightly different approaches. I think it's unconvincing to make out that any one is vastly superior to another. It's fair enough to express a preference for one performer over another, but to crack on that this is somehow definitive goes too far.
> 
> If we were comparing the likes of Vengerov with some 13 year old violin "prodigy" with the Radio Orchestra of some place that hardly anyone's heard of, recorded on some very cheap label, I might agree, but otherwise it's all kidology when we're comparing one recognised top performer with another.


I probably feel this way about piano. Top name pianists I always find acceptable - never find myself quibbling about this or that.

Violinists all sound different to me - its the nature of the instrument. Somebody once said to me why this is so. On the piano - all the notes are there - you only need to press the key and you will get a beautiful in tune note.

With the violin - the musician has to make the notes. So many factors are in play. Every violin is different - every Steinway concert grand sounds the same - more or less. So naturally violinists will sound different and quality does vary.

I find very few violinists can play flawless music - there is almost always something that is not right - slightly scrapy sound in fast passages for example - that is very common - even at the top. And its one reason we admire heiftetz and oistrakh and some others - because they can get through the fast passages with style and finesse. I heard Sarah Chang playing Paganini 1 - embarrassing to listen to. She, like many others - cant handle the virtuoso passages.

I could go on - but I've made my point.


----------



## fluteman (Dec 7, 2015)

Pat Fairlea said:


> Josquin13 wrote "--Ida Haendel should be mentioned, too. Haendel is the only violinist that Sibelius ever said he liked in the concerto, after hearing her play it on a radio broadcast (I guess that rules out Heifetz!... as well as Neveu & Wicks?). There are several Haendel recordings of the concerto, with conductors Ancerl (1957), Berglund (1975), and Decker (1981)."
> 
> Long ago, I heard Haendel play the Sibelius VC live (can't recall the orchestra, I'm afraid), and was rather underwhelmed by the performance. She must have been having an off-day, as her reading of the piece was rather 'mechanical', lacking a feel for its ebb and flow. Or maybe I was just having an off-day as a listener. Anyway, it's good to hear so many recommendations.


Actually, Sibelius is said to have liked the Camilla Wicks recording, so much so he came to a concert to hear her perform it in person.

Edit: And as for this thread generally, I find it remarkable how in nearly every discussion of various versions of one of the standard repertoire violin concertos from Mozart and Beethoven to Hindemith and Shostakovich in every classical music-related forum, so many find the best version to be one by David Oistrakh. As the decades pass, his achievement on record stands out more and more, and by all accounts, he was equally extraordinary in live concert performance.


----------



## Guest (Jun 19, 2019)

stomanek said:


> I probably feel this way about piano. Top name pianists I always find acceptable - never find myself quibbling about this or that.
> 
> Violinists all sound different to me - its the nature of the instrument. Somebody once said to me why this is so. On the piano - all the notes are there - you only need to press the key and you will get a beautiful in tune note.
> 
> ...


I accept that the top violinists can and often do sound different to each, but this doesn't bother me provided it's a recognised good performance of the work in question.

This was discussed a few posts above, To clarify, I wouldn't accept that one particular violinist, whoever that may be, is always the best regardless of work. That seems like a very wild assertion to make. For one particular work, it might violinist X and for another it might be violinist Y, who seem to give the best performance to a particular listener. For example, if it's Elgar's violin concerto I like Thomas Zehetmair or Hugh Bean. If it's Mendelssohn's Violin Concerto I especially like James Ehnes or Nicola Benedetti. There is not much for which I like Heifetz, as I find his speeds are generally too fast. I don't necessarily expect anyone else to agree with any of my choices.

I feel the same way about pianists as I do about violinists. Pianists can and do sound different when playing the same work and using the same brand of piano. Speeds and emphasis, pedal use etc all make a difference. This is obviously the case. In fact the same applies to the whole caboodle: cellists, cymbal players, oboists, organists, anyone.

I suppose it could be said that some top violinists and pianists are more likely than others to be considered the "best" among a range of works according to one person's perceptions because they happen to like that artist's style, but it seems impossible to generalise a personal preference to apply to all other listeners.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

Partita said:


> I accept that the top violinists can and often do sound different to each, but this doesn't bother me provided it's a recognised good performance of the work in question.
> 
> This was discussed a few posts above, *To clarify, I wouldn't accept that one particular violinist, whoever that may be, is always the best regardless of work. * That seems like a very wild assertion to make. For one particular work, it might violinist X and for another it might be violinist Y, who seem to give the best performance to a particular listener. For example, if it's Elgar's violin concerto I like Thomas Zehetmair or Hugh Bean. If it's Mendelssohn's Violin Concerto I especially like James Ehnes or Nicola Benedetti. There is not much for which I like Heifetz, as I find his speeds are generally too fast. I don't necessarily expect anyone else to agree with any of my choices.
> 
> ...


Nobody claimed that.


----------



## wkasimer (Jun 5, 2017)

Partita said:


> I wouldn't accept that one particular violinist, whoever that may be, is always the best regardless of work. That seems like a very wild assertion to make.


It's not merely wild, it's asinine. Just as there is no such thing as a "definitive" recording, there is no "best" recording - of anything.


----------



## Guest (Jun 19, 2019)

wkasimer said:


> It's not merely wild, it's asinine. Just as there is no such thing as a "definitive" recording, there is no "best" recording - of anything.


Agreed, but as far as I'm concerned they're basically the same thing, if you look up synonyms. Also agree that there is no objective "best" or "definitive" version of anything. It only makes sense for an individual or group of individuals who think there is such a version upon which they are agreed.


----------



## Guest (Jun 19, 2019)

stomanek said:


> Nobody claimed that.


Quite right to correct me. It was badly expressed. What I should have said, on reflection, was that the opinions of people don't constitute proof of "best", as there an't be any "best" since there is no objective way of measuring it. The whole discussion is really just a chat about who one likes among violinists for one particular work, which was an arbitrary choice of work. At the same rate, if applied to all violin concertos and other violin works, we'll be here for ever almost.


----------



## paulbest (Apr 18, 2019)

stomanek said:


> No they are not LOL
> 
> Im a Heifetz fan - have listened to her playing Mozart in front of the pope - and wrote her off. Not special.
> 
> There are some excellent present day violinists that I like - but she is not one of them.


Yeah the Pope concert was her Mozart VC,,I think the 3rd VC. 
Mozart's VC's arfe 
duds.
Boring
dull
I never listen to them
She is a great violinist
But is she Oistakh, Kogan?
No
Heifetz I found excellent, but always preferred Oistrakh.


----------



## paulbest (Apr 18, 2019)

stomanek said:


> I probably feel this way about piano. Top name pianists I always find acceptable - never find myself quibbling about this or that.
> 
> Violinists all sound different to me - its the nature of the instrument. Somebody once said to me why this is so. On the piano - all the notes are there - you only need to press the key and you will get a beautiful in tune note.
> 
> ...


No. I find the piano much more challenging in reviewing performances.

The nuamces, details on the piano are much greater in piano vs the violin.

Take the Sibelius VC, seems there are quite a few excellent performances
Now lets go to Ravel's PC. 
If you listen closely, you can tell which is getting atn the music more than others.
Zimerman spent the most time at figuring out the best numaces, and he had the skills at that time in his career, he wins the top prize.

I know today he could not play that PC no where even near what he did back in his younger years.

Whereas Hahn might be able to play the Sibelius VC, today, tomorrow and in 20 yrs from now, in top form. 
The piano is much more difficult to maintain a certain standard of performance. 
Take Uchida in Mozart,,,can she play the PC's on the same level toady as she did 15 yrs ago,when the Philips was released?
Maybe yes, but I doubt it.


----------



## paulbest (Apr 18, 2019)

Partita said:


> I accept that the top violinists can and often do sound different to each, but this doesn't bother me provided it's a recognised good performance of the work in question.
> 
> This was discussed a few posts above, To clarify, I wouldn't accept that one particular violinist, whoever that may be, is always the best regardless of work. That seems like a very wild assertion to make. For one particular work, it might violinist X and for another it might be violinist Y, who seem to give the best performance to a particular listener. For example, if it's Elgar's violin concerto I like Thomas Zehetmair or Hugh Bean. If it's Mendelssohn's Violin Concerto I especially like James Ehnes or Nicola Benedetti. There is not much for which I like Heifetz, as I find his speeds are generally too fast. I don't necessarily expect anyone else to agree with any of my choices.
> 
> ...


Excellent understanding in how each artist approaches each work.
Take the Brahms violin concerto.
If you listen carefully to Oistrakh's multi record history.
In each and every one, you can tell, Oistrakh felt a deep love of the score. I mean he was in love with the concerto, there is passion and commitment in every note.
Pretty much Oistrakh owns that concerto.

On Heifetz, I always felt his records were good, but not on the level of Oistrakh and others. So I never bought any of the Heifetz records.

If you go to Russia and bring up great violinists. 
When Kogan comes up in the conversation, you will have the impression, there was only 1 truly great violinist.
Now when the conversation changes to Oistrakh, well now look what happens, seems Kogan has not existed. 
Both are wizards and there never will be any agreement which was the superior.


----------



## fluteman (Dec 7, 2015)

paulbest said:


> Excellent understanding in how each artist approaches each work.
> Take the Brahms violin concerto.
> If you listen carefully to Oistrakh's multi record history.
> In each and every one, you can tell, Oistrakh felt a deep love of the score. I mean he was in love with the concerto, there is passion and commitment in every note.
> ...


I was lucky enough to hear Kogan in recital. Nathan Milstein too, but not Oistrakh, who died all too soon. My father went to one of Oistrakh's Boston concerts in his debut American tour, which extended from late November 1955 to early January 1956.

There was a bit of controversy regarding that tour back in the USSR, since although Oistrakh gave the world premiere performance of the Shostakovich 1st violin concerto with Evgeny Mravinsky and the Leningrad Philharmonic before he left, there wasn't time for him to record it until he returned. So the recording he made of it during his US tour with Dmitri Mitropoulos and the NY Philharmonic is actually the world premiere recording, an honor that the Soviet authorities did not want bestowed on an American orchestra.


----------



## Guest (Jun 20, 2019)

Since Hilary Hahn has been mentioned quite a lot in this thread, I thought I'd listen to her well-regarded first CD of J S Bach's BWV 1001-3, i.e Violin Sonatas No 1 and 2 and Partita No 1. 

I already had several other versions of these works and had drawn the line with those, basically because I was happy enough with those and I'm not that fantastically appreciative of this kind of music. But these days, with Spotify and similar, it's so easy to listen to a wide range of versions.

I must say that I found the Hahn version incredibly good. It is very easy to listen to and a treat. I can now appreciate better the general enthusiasm for her violin playing.


----------



## paulbest (Apr 18, 2019)

When Hahn's Bach broke pressing,,,there was a lot of commotion about her performance. 

Tower records on Decatur had the CD playing and as much as I not a fan of his music, I could not deny the crafmanship of the performance.

Still not enough to bring me to listen to Bach. 
The Bach collectors were not looking at all their ~~Legenday X,Y, and Z's~~~ performers records,,and saying,,,,hummm, a 16 yr old girl,,,out playing my definitive legenday Bach violinists....but how,,,is ,,this even,,con,,,ceiv,,,,abl;;;;e....

,,,now their ```legendary``` Bach collections are,,,now collecting,,,,dust.


----------



## haydnguy (Oct 13, 2008)

Everyone has their likes and dislikes. I don't think there is anyone trying to convince anyone of anything. God forbid Hillary's health doesn't deteriorate she's going to be around for a long time.


----------



## paulbest (Apr 18, 2019)

haydnguy said:


> Everyone has their likes and dislikes. I don't think there is anyone trying to convince anyone of anything. God forbid Hillary's health doesn't deteriorate she's going to be around for a long time.


Yes she is, but as you know *the health crisis* is for real.
I've seen it, I've experienced it.

Aside from that, what about the recent upload, from Paris, Mikko Franck leads the French National radio SO, in the Sibelius.

??
I guess some of you may have missed what im 
~~might have ~~ heard.

Now I know there are such things as the

~~f~~passages

But is there sucha lowering of the notes to a

f

nuanced note?

Here let me see where it is, I know this part well, if I recall, one can hear Oistrakh's low notes in these 2 passages. 
Yet with Hahn the ~~f~~is not at all auditable and Franck is looking on with a approving smile...

Found it
@ starting at 33:49

and one other place, maybe a bit later as well, same issue
can you actually hear these notes lowered,, ~~as per noted in the score??~~

as I say, I am quite aware the notes are significantly lowered at this critical passage. 
Now is it matter of incorrect micing?
But that's odd, as the entire concerto all notes are played/heard with clarity.
Or is it a matter 
~~of my poor hearing~~ in the super high notes.
As I did fail a hearing exam given at my refinery job/scaffolding at Valero,, to the chuckles of coworkers,.

Test results, *highest frequencies, not recognized***

But as I say, I hear this section on Oistrakh's recordings,.

Help me out here. 
Is Hahn playing correctly,
OR

is she taking a new found freedom. in reducing these notes to inaudible subtlety, faint is one thing, non-audible another....

f

When it should be taken as 
~~f~~

Hear for yourself. 
My opinion was made, after 2nd review.
I just could not believe the lowering to 
inaudible

or is it
UN-audible (that is even if one has perfect hearing, still can't listen rfor sounds which are below the human hearing potential).

I see this as what is known among CM lingo ~~Idiosyncrasy~~. which ,,,is hard to define, yet does exist.

33:49 onwards


----------

