# Solti CSO Mahler 6



## njk345

So I've recently been listening to Mahler 6 a good deal and I've been browsing around iTunes comparing recordings, and the one I seem to have settled on is Solti's recording with the CSO. It's electrifying, quick-paced, extraordinarily passionate, and the recording quality is super rich - also the brass (cso probably has the best one) and percussion sections literally blow my socks off with their power in the last movement. That said, when I search around for articles listing what critics and listeners deem the greatest M6 recordings, Solti's name never seems to get mentioned (instead the consensus seems to learn more toward the likes of Thomas Sanderling, Abbado, Boulez, and Haitink). 

Is there any particular reason Solti's rendition might be overshadowed by some of these other names? (Or am I just not looking hard enough for positive reviews?) What do you all think of this recording?


----------



## Becca

I bought the Solti/CSO back when it first came out on vinyl bu, having said that, the best summation regarding the 6th comes from Tony Duggan's invaluable survey of the Mahler symphonies...

_Solti is too machine-tooled and then hyper-charged to allow for darker shades to emerge. Maazel, Järvi and Von Dohnanyi deliver the notes but are largely empty vessels, all wheels and cogs but little worthwhile movement. Chailly, as so often in Mahler, is beautifully finished on the outside, but is all style and less substance. Karajan is chromium plated as usual, and that's it._


----------



## SixFootScowl

Becca said:


> I bought the Solti/CSO back when it first came out on vinyl bu, having said that, the best summation regarding the 6th comes from Tony Duggan's invaluable survey of the Mahler symphonies...
> 
> _Solti is too machine-tooled and then hyper-charged to allow for darker shades to emerge. Maazel, Järvi and Von Dohnanyi deliver the notes but are largely empty vessels, all wheels and cogs but little worthwhile movement. Chailly, as so often in Mahler, is beautifully finished on the outside, but is all style and less substance. Karajan is chromium plated as usual, and that's it._


So none of the 6ths reviewed, are considered outstanding by Tony. We may have to look elsewhere for reviews. Or do a lot more listening. So far I have only and ever heard Mahler's 6th in the early Bernstein cycle of the 1960s. I like it, but perhaps there is a better one out there. But the research I have done so far suggests to me that Levine's Mahler 6th is the one to try.


----------



## Pugg

Florestan said:


> So none of the 6ths reviewed, are considered outstanding by Tony. We may have to look elsewhere for reviews. Or do a lot more listening. So far I have only and ever heard Mahler's 6th in the early Bernstein cycle of the 1960s. I like it, but perhaps there is a better one out there. But the research I have done so far suggests to me that Levine's Mahler 6th is the one to try.


It will always be a matter of taste, I remember one member always bullying Solti just he " suppose" to have said something about a singer.


----------



## Becca

Florestan said:


> So none of the 6ths reviewed, are considered outstanding by Tony. We may have to look elsewhere for reviews. Or do a lot more listening. So far I have only and ever heard Mahler's 6th in the early Bernstein cycle of the 1960s. I like it, but perhaps there is a better one out there. But the research I have done so far suggests to me that Levine's Mahler 6th is the one to try.


Quite a few are considered outstanding, that is just a quote about those that he dismissed. His favorite is Thomas Sanderling, also Michael Gielen and Jascha Horenstein. I have not gone back to his original review to refresh my memory on other recordings but I seem to remember that the Abbado/CSo is well regarded.


----------



## Johnnie Burgess

He also gave high marks to this one, Günther Herbig & Saarbrucken Radio Symphony Orchestra.









https://www.amazon.com/Mahler-Symph...&refinements=p_n_feature_browse-bin:625150011


----------



## Scarr

George Szell on Sony Essentials is a classic and the Abbado with the Lucerne is a fantastic account. I love the early Bernstein for its vitality and sense of discovery. Despite that I still prefer the Szell.


----------



## techniquest

Personally I have never got along with Solti conducting Mahler. Regarding the 6th, I still stand by the Levine /LSO recording on RCA from 1977.


----------



## Scarr

I've not heard the Levine, though I love his conducting of Verdi's Otello from that period.Very Toscanini like. I'll give it a spin. Thanks.


----------



## Triplets

Scarr said:


> I've not heard the Levine, though I love his conducting of Verdi's Otello from that period.Very Toscanini like. I'll give it a spin. Thanks.


The strings in the Andante are weak at the big climax, which knocks Levine to also ran status


----------



## Triplets

njk345 said:


> So I've recently been listening to Mahler 6 a good deal and I've been browsing around iTunes comparing recordings, and the one I seem to have settled on is Solti's recording with the CSO. It's electrifying, quick-paced, extraordinarily passionate, and the recording quality is super rich - also the brass (cso probably has the best one) and percussion sections literally blow my socks off with their power in the last movement. That said, when I search around for articles listing what critics and listeners deem the greatest M6 recordings, Solti's name never seems to get mentioned (instead the consensus seems to learn more toward the likes of Thomas Sanderling, Abbado, Boulez, and Haitink).
> 
> Is there any particular reason Solti's rendition might be overshadowed by some of these other names? (Or am I just not looking hard enough for positive reviews?) What do you all think of this recording?


The best part of the Solti is the snarling string entrances. It is short on subtlety, not necessarily a sin in this piece


----------



## Mahlerian

Triplets said:


> The best part of the Solti is the snarling string entrances. It is short on subtlety, not necessarily a sin in this piece


I disagree. A performance of Mahler's Sixth should bring out all of the inner connections of the work, all of its complexities, and that requires a nuanced interpretation sensitive to Mahler's ideas. Also, any performance of Mahler's music that doesn't bring out the counterpoint of the music should be viewed negatively. If you lose the dialogue between voices, you cannot possibly understand the piece.


----------



## Scarr

I think the Solti recording of Mahler 3 with the LPO on Decca is magnificent. I played the cassette a few years ago whilst driving through the Alps. It was the perfect setting. An exhilerating performance. He does drive the music but it makes for an exciting listen.


----------



## Merl

I'd be interested in what other people think of Tilson Thomas' Mahler 6. I've just been listening to it and it's really good (I think his whole Mahler cycle is very convincing). Your thoughts, Mahlerian?


----------



## Scarr

Superb sound, beautifully played but a little too clinical for me. I don't believe he's a natural Mahlerian.


----------



## Mahlerian

Merl said:


> I'd be interested in what other people think of Tilson Thomas' Mahler 6. I've just been listening to it and it's really good (I think his whole Mahler cycle is very convincing). Your thoughts, Mahlerian?


I heard it several years ago, but I don't remember much about it. I do remember enjoying his SFSO Seventh, and his LSO Seventh has been one of my choices for the work too.


----------



## njk345

Also has anyone heard the NY Phil Mahler 6 that was just recently released - recorded live back in february 2016 with Semyon Bychkov? I feel like it's rather lacking in drive/passion (especially in the first and last movements), although the offstage cowbells are used to unusually good effect and the percussion is authoratative throughout.


----------



## Pugg

njk345 said:


> Also has anyone heard the NY Phil Mahler 6 that was just recently released - recorded live back in february 2016 with Semyon Bychkov? I feel like it's rather lacking in drive/passion (especially in the first and last movements), although the offstage cowbells are used to unusually good effect and the percussion is authoratative throughout.


Not yet no, no Bychkov fan though.


----------



## DavidA

Becca said:


> I bought the Solti/CSO back when it first came out on vinyl bu, having said that, the best summation regarding the 6th comes from Tony Duggan's invaluable survey of the Mahler symphonies...
> 
> _Solti is too machine-tooled and then hyper-charged to allow for darker shades to emerge. Maazel, Järvi and Von Dohnanyi deliver the notes but are largely empty vessels, all wheels and cogs but little worthwhile movement. Chailly, as so often in Mahler, is beautifully finished on the outside, but is all style and less substance. Karajan is chromium plated as usual, and that's it._


Frankly Duggan here has done is provided us with meaningless phrases. I mean, 'deliver the notes but are largely empty vessels, all wheels and cogs but little worthwhile movement.' What on earth does it mean?
And as I have Karajan's version I can say that to say 'Karajan is chromium plated as usual, and that's it' is sheer rubbish.'
So I don't think woe should take too much notice of someone who merely trots out perceived stereotypes.


----------



## Becca

DavidA said:


> Frankly Duggan here has done is provided us with meaningless phrases. I mean, 'deliver the notes but are largely empty vessels, all wheels and cogs but little worthwhile movement.' What on earth does it mean?
> And as I have Karajan's version I can say that to say 'Karajan is chromium plated as usual, and that's it' is sheer rubbish.'
> So I don't think woe should take too much notice of someone who merely trots out perceived stereotypes.


Perhaps if you took the trouble to read the entire article and see his comments in context, you might not be quite so quick to be disparaging. Just because his opinion does not match yours does not make it rubbish as I know that you will find many knowledgeable Mahler scholars who would agree with him and consider your opinion to be sheer rubbish.


----------



## DavidA

Becca said:


> Perhaps if you took the trouble to read the entire article and see his comments in context, you might not be quite so quick to be disparaging. Just because his opinion does not match yours does not make it rubbish as I know that you will find many knowledgeable Mahler scholars who would agree with him and consider your opinion to be sheer rubbish.


To dismiss recordings from distinguished conductors (which have been praised elsewhere) with trite phrases is not the way criticism should be done. I did take the comments in context as there was no other context he discussed that recording under. So to dismiss Karajan's Mahler 6 (which has been much praised by other critics and was given four stars by the Penguin Guide) in the way he did without even saying why is somewhat cavalier. As the Gramophone put it: "Karajan's classic Sixth confirmed his belated arrival as a major Mahler interpreter. His understanding of Mahler's sound world - its links forward to Berg, Schoenberg and Webern as opposed to retrospective links with Wagner - is very acute." So it's not just my opinion that doesn't match Duggan's but other people's as well.


----------



## Scarr

Karajan's legacy is ripe for re-appraisal. Some can't get past his jet set lifestyle, his obsessions with production and his control of orchestra and record label. I think this often clouds the judgement of even the most respected 'critics'. I agree with DavidA that Duggan's criticisms are dismissive but also incendiary. ' Chromium plated does not really describe the performance or musicianship in the recording nor does it give any detailed comment on the journey the conductor takes. It more refers to the sound and is a little 'sneering' to be honest. Karajan has a sizeable legacy with many superb performances. I listened to a Sibelius 7 the other day and Karajan's performance was glorious.


----------



## DavidA

Scarr said:


> Karajan's legacy is ripe for re-appraisal. Some can't get past his jet set lifestyle, his obsessions with production and his control of orchestra and record label. I think this often clouds the judgement of even the most respected 'critics'. *I agree with DavidA that Duggan's criticisms are dismissive but also incendiary.* ' Chromium plated does not really describe the performance or musicianship in the recording nor does it give any detailed comment on the journey the conductor takes. It more refers to the sound and is a little 'snearing' to be honest. Karajan has a sizeable legacy with many superb performances. I listened to a Sibelius 7 the other day and Karajan's performance was glorious.


We see Duggan at it again in no 5: "Mentioning Rattle and the Berlin Philharmonic reminds me that I am sure I will again receive e-mails pointing out that I have not mentioned the DG recording of this work by Herbert Von Karajan. Well now I have mentioned it and so I will pass on...."
Same trite, sneering comments. This is very poor criticism, with the critic preening himself and saying: "Oh look what a clever goose I am!" I have no problem with him not liking the performance but let him give valid reasons for it. This sort of thing is just annoying.
And with Das Lied: "I also believe Barenboim and Von Karajan aren't sufficiently Mahlerian enough to allow their recordings to match the best." What on earth does he mean by that? If he says something he should explain himself!
Interestingly he doesn't even mention either of Karajan's ninths which both won Gramophone awards. Perhaps they were just too good for his trite put downs! :lol:


----------



## Merl

Whilst I think Duggan's surveys are essential reading (they are ripe for someone else to update them, though) and have recommended many great Mahler recordings to me, he was very dismissive of Karajan. If he didn't like Karajan's accounts, his lifestyle or the Karajan 'sound' then fine but making the sneering comments has always struck me as rather childish (and I'm no Karajan fanboy, btw). It would have been far better not to mention them at all rather than gloatingly referring to them and then ignoring them. HvK was not everyone's cup of tea but Karajan's recordings of the 9th are considered to be among the best by critics less dismissive of Karajan. Saying that, he is a critic and one voice in many. We should really all be looking at the bigger picture to source recommendations for recordings.


----------



## Mahlerian

DavidA said:


> And as I have Karajan's version I can say that to say 'Karajan is chromium plated as usual, and that's it' is sheer rubbish.'


Yes, Karajan's Sixth is far worse than even that implies. The conductor has no understanding of the music and treats it as absolutely perfunctory. His recording of the work should be deleted from DG's catalog and removed from cultural memory for Mahler's sake.


----------



## techniquest

Mahlerian said:


> Yes, Karajan's Sixth is far worse than even that implies. The conductor has no understanding of the music and treats it as absolutely perfunctory. His recording of the work should be deleted from DG's catalog and removed from cultural memory for Mahler's sake.


A severe appraisal, but true.


----------



## Merl

HvK's Mahler 6 is definitely different. I've got it and probably only listened to it a handful of times. It's hard to know what to make of it. It's certainly like no other version but I kinda like that in a weird way. I have Barbirolli, Bernstein, Neumann, Fischer, Bertini, Chailly and Tennstedt all doing the 6th (to name but a few) and they all have a different take on it. Two of my favourite versions of the 6th are Barbirolli's heavy gloom-fest and Fischer's light and warmer account - both at opposite ends of the 6th spectrum. Go figure! Karajan's 6th sounds nothing like either (or anything in-between). Incidentally, I don't think a true re-appraisal of HvK will happen until this generation has gone.


----------



## Mahlerian

Merl said:


> HvK's Mahler 6 is definitely different. I've got it and probably only listened to it a handful of times. It's hard to know what to make of it. It's certainly like no other version but I kinda like that in a weird way. I have Barbirolli, Bernstein, Neumann, Fischer, Bertini, Chailly and Tennstedt all doing the 6th (to name but a few) and they all have a different take on it. Two of my favourite versions of the 6th are Barbirolli's heavy gloom-fest and Fischer's light and warmer account - both at opposite ends of the 6th spectrum. Go figure! Karajan's 6th sounds nothing like either (or anything in-between). Incidentally, I don't think a true re-appraisal of HvK will happen until this generation has gone.


Karajan's Mahler infuriates me as a Mahler lover because he messes with the orchestral balances so it doesn't even sound like Mahler, because he blithely ignores Mahler's numerous performance directions, and because he emphasizes certain things over other details which are just as important or even more so. I love the Sixth. It's my favorite Mahler symphony and perhaps my favorite symphony in the whole repertoire, and when I hear Karajan's version it feels like a distortion of the work that is recognizable even under the heavy hand of a Bernstein or the laser-sharp focus of a Boulez (who tends to underplay climaxes, but with such a firm command of structure that the whole is overwhelming despite that).

And I'm not against Karajan in everything, either. I think he produced some fantastic recordings of Bruckner, Beethoven, and others.


----------



## Becca

There is a story about Hvk and Misha Rostropovich which I believe came from one of the BPO players who was present when they were recording Strauss' _Don Quixote_ later in HvK's career, when he was really becoming the 'Emperor of Legato'. There was one section which Rostropovich was playing in a rather gruff and coarse way. HvK asked him why he was making such ugly sounds. Rostropovich says that the music is illustrating an ugly situation. HvK responds that you must never make ugly sounds, only beautiful. That, for me, sums up my reactions to Karajan. I could care less about his life style of how he 'managed' his recording companies and I like quite a bit of his 50's and early 60's work, especially with the Philharmonia, but I find myself less tolerant of his much later work.


----------



## howlingfantods

Mahlerian said:


> Karajan's Mahler infuriates me as a Mahler lover because he messes with the orchestral balances so it doesn't even sound like Mahler, because he blithely ignores Mahler's numerous performance directions, and because he emphasizes certain things over other details which are just as important or even more so. I love the Sixth. It's my favorite Mahler symphony and perhaps my favorite symphony in the whole repertoire, and when I hear Karajan's version it feels like a distortion of the work that is recognizable even under the heavy hand of a Bernstein or the laser-sharp focus of a Boulez (who tends to underplay climaxes, but with such a firm command of structure that the whole is overwhelming despite that).
> 
> And I'm not against Karajan in everything, either. I think he produced some fantastic recordings of Bruckner, Beethoven, and others.


Yeah, co-sign. Karajan's Mahler can be wonderful for people who aren't particularly fans of Mahler, but for fans of Mahler, it's all wrong.

Citing Penguin and Gramophone, God's representatives for Karajan on Earth, as the objective norms against which to measure Duggan is absurd.


----------



## howlingfantods

Scarr said:


> Karajan's legacy is ripe for re-appraisal. Some can't get past his jet set lifestyle, his obsessions with production and his control of orchestra and record label. I think this often clouds the judgement of even the most respected 'critics'.


It's pretty ad hominem to accuse anyone who dislikes Karajan as primarily driven by extra-musical reasons. How about accepting the possibility that this musician who had a very extreme and personal musical style that he applied universally to the entirety of the classical tradition might not suit the tastes of everyone who listens to each and every one of his recordings?


----------



## Scarr

You could apply that statement to most conductors really.


----------



## Bulldog

Duggan's Mahler surveys on MusicWeb International have plenty of supporters. However, it's one man's opinions and others are free to possess alternative views. I see no reason to beat the guy up over his opinions. It's possible Duggan would respond to the disparaging remarks aimed at him, but that won't happen since he is deceased.


----------



## Triplets

Bulldog said:


> Duggan's Mahler surveys on MusicWeb International have plenty of supporters. However, it's one man's opinions and others are free to possess alternative views. I see no reason to beat the guy up over his opinions. It's possible Duggan would respond to the disparaging remarks aimed at him, but that won't happen since he is deceased.


Excuses, excuses


----------



## Scarr

It's possible that Karajan would respond to Duggan's disparaging remarks aimed at him as well...but guess what...


----------



## Bulldog

DavidA said:


> To dismiss recordings from distinguished conductors (which have been praised elsewhere) with trite phrases is not the way criticism should be done. I did take the comments in context as there was no other context he discussed that recording under. So to dismiss Karajan's Mahler 6 (which has been much praised by other critics and was given four stars by the Penguin Guide) in the way he did without even saying why is somewhat cavalier. As the Gramophone put it: "Karajan's classic Sixth confirmed his belated arrival as a major Mahler interpreter. His understanding of Mahler's sound world - its links forward to Berg, Schoenberg and Webern as opposed to retrospective links with Wagner - is very acute." So it's not just my opinion that doesn't match Duggan's but other people's as well.


I can't think of two review sources I have less respect for than Gramophone Mag. and the Penguin Guide; I generally find them less than useless. Concerning Mahler in particular, I pay a lot of attention to Mahlerian and Duggan. I don't always agree with them, but their arguments routinely make sense to me.


----------



## Becca

Bulldog said:


> Concerning Mahler in particular, I pay a lot of attention to Mahlerian and Duggan. I don't always agree with them, but their arguments routinely make sense to me.


And that is the real key ... not that we agree with them but that they 'make sense', that they provide enough detailed information about their reasoning in coming to their conclusions such that we can judge how the opinions would match our own.


----------



## Vaneyes

I'm generally a HvK supporter, but I can only side with his Mahler 9s.

Meanwhile, to the topic at hand...


----------



## Merl

I like David Hurwitz's reviews. I don't always agree with him but he doesn't hold grudges. He's not a Neumann fan, for example, but he always gives his recordings a fair review and has accorded some of them his maximum scores. Same with Karajan. I like that in a critic. He will also reassess previous judgements and say he was wrong at the time.


----------



## howlingfantods

Scarr said:


> You could apply that statement to most conductors really.


Yes, and oddly, you can criticize all other conductors' recordings without being accused of only being a hater because of that conductor's biography. Only Karajan partisans insist it must be because you don't like his lifestyle or his biography or his personality.


----------



## Merl

howlingfantods said:


> Yes, and oddly, you can criticize all other conductors' recordings without being accused of only being a hater because of that conductor's biography. Only Karajan partisans insist it must be because you don't like his lifestyle or his biography or his personality.


I bet 'Karajan' and 'partisans' are two words you don't often see together. I shall say this only onnnnce!


----------



## Guest

howlingfantods said:


> Yes, and oddly, you can criticize all other conductors' recordings without being accused of only being a hater because of that conductor's biography. Only Karajan partisans insist it must be because you don't like his lifestyle or his biography or his personality.


Böhm and Karajan are sitting together arguing who s the greatest conductor on earth. Bernstein says that God appeared to him and said, It s you! Böhm replies that that s not very likely because God appeared to him and told him, It s you! At which point Herbert von Karajan drily adds, I said nothing of the sort!

:tiphat::tiphat::tiphat:


----------



## KirbyH

If you absolutely must have the Chicago Symphony present for the work, seek out Claudio Abbado - it's a model of incendiary virtuosity while also really digging into the music. Abbado has long had the measure of this score and DG's late analog sound is a masterpiece. My personal world-beater, however, is James Levine with the London Symphony. There isn't a bar in it he doesn't bring to life and also manages to have a great deal of fun with it too - seek them out for an insanely wonderful musical experience.


----------



## bz3

I've never heard Karajan's Mahler 6 but based on the heated disagreement over it I have seen here, I think I should.


----------



## Pugg

bz3 said:


> I've never heard Karajan's Mahler 6 but based on the heated disagreement over it I have seen here, I think I should.


That's the spirit, do make up your own mind!


----------



## Scarr

There's no real heated debate and it's not really about Karajan's Mahler 6. I posted my preferences earlier and his performance was not one of them.I'm no Karajan partisan but I do believe he is one of the greats. Kleiber believed this. 
It's more a question of whether a critics views are coloured by their personal dislike of a conductor, whatever the reason. I think in Duggan' case, they clearly are. It makes for uninteresting criticism. Theatre critics like Kenneth Tynan were constantly doing this.


----------



## Fletcher

I like Karajan, particularly his interpretations of Bruckner and Strauss, but struggle with his Mahler recordings for the same reasons noted by others in this thread.

I regret that I'm not as familiar with the 6th Symphony as I am with Mahler's other symphonies _(gasp!)_ and have only heard Boulez's DG recording. I recently heard Solti's Mahler 2 with CSO on decca which is perhaps my favourite recording of the first movement. But not for the rest of the symphony, i'm afraid.


----------



## ArgumentativeOldGit

The 6th is my favourite Mahler symphony, I think. One of the most unforgettable experiences I ever had was some 16or17 years ago, hearing Pierre Boulez conduct the LSO in Mahler's 6th at the Edinburgh Festival. (His later VPO recording was, in comparison, a rather tame affair.)

It is a work that, more than other Mahler symphonies, appears to be in a traditional classical format - the first movement is in sonata form, and even features an exposition repeat! - but, as the symphony progresses, its musical material seems increasingly unsuited to the classical format, and, in the awe-inspiring final movement, the classicism seems to break down altogether. The entire arc of the symphony seems to me to convey a sense of breakdown, of our old certainties no longer holding. And in that colossal final movement, we are in uncharted ground. It just takes the breath away. (All this is just a personal view, by the way, and I am not insisting upon it.)

It's an extreme symphony, and successful interpretations do, I think, need to be extreme. And naturally, one can't respond to all approaches. I've never really understood Barbirolli's approach, for instance, although I know many revere it. Karajan's approach is also extreme, and I can understand not everyone going for it - although, speaking for myself, it affects me powerfully. My own preferences are two very different approaches - Chicago SO/Solti, and London PO/Tennstedt (ideally the live performance from Riyal Festival Hall, although I like the studio version too). It may be a cliché to say so, but Solti's performance is fierce: it stares unblinkingly at the unfolding cataclysm, and I find it terrifying: there's something almost inhuman about it. Tennstedt is slow-moving and weighty - there's a massive solidity about it - and, unlike Solti's, is full of fears and passions and joys (yes, joys) that are very distinctly human. At least, that's how it comes across to me.

But there are so many possible ways of interpreting this symphony, it's worth getting a few different interpretations, I think. It's a shame Klemperer never recorded it: indeed, he never even conducted it, claiming he never quite understood it!


----------



## Scarr

Nice post and a persuasive arguement for Soliti.


----------



## Scarr

Becca said:


> There is a story about Hvk and Misha Rostropovich which I believe came from one of the BPO players who was present when they were recording Strauss' _Don Quixote_ later in HvK's career, when he was really becoming the 'Emperor of Legato'. There was one section which Rostropovich was playing in a rather gruff and coarse way. HvK asked him why he was making such ugly sounds. Rostropovich says that the music is illustrating an ugly situation. HvK responds that you must never make ugly sounds, only beautiful. That, for me, sums up my reactions to Karajan. I could care less about his life style of how he 'managed' his recording companies and I like quite a bit of his 50's and early 60's work, especially with the Philharmonia, but I find myself less tolerant of his much later work.


Could it have been tongue in cheek?


----------



## Becca

Scarr said:


> Could it have been tongue in cheek?


Considering who told the story and where I heard it, my answer is almost certainly not.


----------



## Scarr

It wasn't James was it?


----------



## DavidA

Becca said:


> There is a story about Hvk and Misha Rostropovich which I believe came from one of the BPO players who was present when they were recording Strauss' _Don Quixote_ later in HvK's career, when he was really becoming the 'Emperor of Legato'. There was one section which Rostropovich was playing in a rather gruff and coarse way. HvK asked him why he was making such ugly sounds. Rostropovich says that the music is illustrating an ugly situation. HvK responds that you must never make ugly sounds, only beautiful. That, for me, sums up my reactions to Karajan. I could care less about his life style of how he 'managed' his recording companies and I like quite a bit of his 50's and early 60's work, especially with the Philharmonia, but I find myself less tolerant of his much later work.


The stories that have been put out about H von K are a bit like the stories about Beecham, many of which have now been recognised to have been dreamed up by people who supposed that's what he would say.


----------



## Scarr

When you get two strong personalities Karajan and Rostropovich together, there are bound to be differences of opinion as each tries to assert their own views. Rostropovich was no shrinking violet.Though Karajan often gave the impression of being aloof, his knowledge and understanding of the work and his ideas were often illuminating and informative as seen in a couple of recent documentaries. There were some good things going on with the Philharmonia but there were plenty of goodies in his later years. Bit like Bernstein really.


----------



## DavidA

The story Rostropovich told was when he was given a hairy ride through the Alps in Karajan's car which scared him silly. He turned to HvK and said, "Herbert, I don't mind dying but remember your bones will be buried in Austria and mine in Moscow. If we crash at this speed they'll never be able to tell whose were who!"


----------



## Becca

DavidA said:


> The stories that have been put out about H von K are a bit like the stories about Beecham, many of which have now been recognised to have been dreamed up by people who supposed that's what he would say.


That story comes directly from Simon Rattle and was in an interview for the Berlin Philharmonic's own website about the Karajan legacy. Needless to say, Rattle knew both of them and many of the musicians who played for HvK.


----------



## Scarr

Rattle didn't like Karajan.He said he was 'repulsed' by the sound Karajan created with the BPO. Axe to grind?


----------



## Scarr

I thought it might have been James Galway. Karajan didn't like his beard and he made the hairless players wear wigs for his films.


----------



## Mahlerian

Scarr said:


> Rattle didn't like Karajan. He said he was 'repulsed' by the sound Karajan created with the BPO. Axe to grind?


No, the fact that Rattle didn't like Karajan's BPO neither means that he has an axe to grind nor that the story is likely to be untrue.

Casting vague aspersions on someone's credibility is a poor substitute for argument.


----------



## Merl

If you watch the Rattle interviews regarding Karajan he doesn't bad-mouth him. He says he was initially "repulsed by the BPO's Karajan sound but he doesn't diss him. It just wasn't what he wanted. Ironically, I felt his latest Beethoven cycle had some very characteristic Karajan-esque BPO playing on it. It's a very good set, Tbf but you can almost hear the ghost of Uncle Herbert in parts. Rattle has always been very even-handed about Karajan. He's stated what he admired about him but what he didn't like and tried to change. I certainly never get the feeling he hated him.


----------



## Scarr

Though repulsed is a strange choice of words.


----------



## Scarr

It's not really about his performances. Like all conductors, he has a mixed bag but much of his Wagner, Beethoven, Bruckner and Sibelius is up there with the best. His conducting of opera was also outstanding and usually outshone the singing, as in Butterfly with Price or Otello with Del Monaco. It's the language others use whist trying to describe the impact of a very complex man. Yes, he did coach the orchestra to be as resplendent as he could manage but he already had a great understanding of how he would express the music. As I said earlier, there is a sneering quality to some commentary that betrays personal dislike of the man and his philosophy ahead of his music making abilities. Rattle had to put his mark on an orchestra that had been under Karajan's influence for so long to create a Rattle era. He had to separate himself from this influence. He did this by exploring new repertoire, encouraging education and exploiting the media potential of the orchestra( sounds familiar). But did he actually change the sound? Judging by his recordings, not really.


----------



## Scarr

I thought this quote was interesting:

'I don't think Karajan ever understood how much of his troubles were due to the people he allowed to surround him. Such petty issues often distorted one's view of Karajan the musician.'


----------



## ArgumentativeOldGit

I don't really see that the Rostropovich-Karajan story reflects badly on Karajan. It just reflects different approaches to music-making, that's all. Presumably the two musicians had respect for each other's approach - they wouldn't have worked together so frequently otherwise.


----------



## Scarr

That's true. I inferred this in an earlier post. I forgot to say the quote above was from Culshaw.


----------



## DavidA

Duggan's reviews always seem to me highly contentious on occasion. However, as Mahler interpretations are highly personal things, we must allow him that. In the 6th I have Karajan (not chromium plated at all - Duggan is using a tired old phrase), Kubelik and Tennstedt. All terrific performances in their various (and very different) ways. Do note that Szell omits the repeat in the first movement - hence gets his on to one CD!

Just to say I admire Barbirolli's Mahler but I do find his 6th far too slow in the first movement


----------



## DavidA

It is instructive to read the following two reviews on Kubelik's cycle. You wonder whether they were listening to the same recordings!
Just shows how subjective music criticism is!

http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2000/dec00/Mahler_Kubelik.htm


----------



## Merl

DavidA said:


> It is instructive to read the following two reviews on Kubelik's cycle. You wonder whether they were listening to the same recordings!
> Just shows how subjective music criticism is!
> 
> http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2000/dec00/Mahler_Kubelik.htm


My opinions on Kubelik's cycle are somewhere in between (but much further towards Duggan). As I've said before, I listen and make up my own mind. Duggan's surveys are great to read but someone needs to give them an overhaul. There are some excellent, more recent, Mahler recordings that should be enjoyed.


----------



## Heck148

Solti's Chicago Mahler 6 is my favorite recording of the work - a real spectacular - also crushing, and harsh in its resounding brutality.... great sounding, brilliantly played....


----------



## Barbebleu

DavidA said:


> It is instructive to read the following two reviews on Kubelik's cycle. You wonder whether they were listening to the same recordings!
> Just shows how subjective music criticism is!
> 
> http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2000/dec00/Mahler_Kubelik.htm


I'll side with Duggan on this.


----------



## Larkenfield

The problem I had with HvK’s Mahler 5th and 6th in his belated arrival as a major Mahler interpreter was that I was reminded more of an interpretation of Bruckner. I felt it was a complete distortion of Mahler’s intentions with obscenely loud climaxes and a host of other ills too painful to mention—so poor that I felt he had no business conducting Mahler at all with evidently no feeling or understanding for the composer who had been banned from performance by the Nazis while they were in power. He somewhat redeemed himself with his performance of the 9th.

After reading over this thread, I agree with much of the heavy criticism of his performance of the 6th. I never got through it after making repeated attempts. In fact, I was greatly angered and infuriated by what he had done and unceremoniously dumped it from my library. Mahler is not Bruckner and I felt at the time that he’d committed an unforgivable mistake of being so wrong, the mistake of performing a composer that he might have felt obligated to play but may not have even liked. Of course, if he didn’t try to record Mahler during the composer’s growing popularity, he might have been open to accusations of prejudice against a Jewish composer after the War. So I think he was between a rock and a hard place when it came to Mahler. 

And neither HvK or Solti earn any rewards in my book for not following Mahler’s final published score with the Andante before the Scherzo, so it doesn’t sound top-heavy with an unrelenting, pounding, percussive turbulence with the Scherzo as the 2nd movement... So here are two more conductors who must have felt that Mahler just did not know what he was doing in how he wanted the order of the movements in this great symphony to be performed, though he never performed it himself during his lifetime other than Andante-Scherzo. I like the Barbirolli, the Szell, and the Boulez, even if with the last two recordings the Andante needs to be moved into the second position as Mahler preferred. Barbirolli always played it that way live anyway.


----------



## Heck148

Larkenfield said:


> And neither HvK or Solti earn any rewards in my book for not following Mahler's final published score with the Andante before the Scherzo, so it doesn't sound top-heavy with an unrelenting, pounding, percussive turbulence with the Scherzo as the 2nd movement..


I don't want to resurrect the Scherzo-Andante argument again....but Solti uses the S-A order to great effect, for exactly the reason you cite: "unrelenting, pounding, percussive turbulence with the Scherzo as the 2nd movement.."
Solti's version is harsh and brutal - the subject is pummeled into dust, crushed, "No Break for You!!" Having the Scherzo follow the opening movement really puts this message across - it also sets up the relative peace and tranquility of the Andante most effectively, which is, of course, crushed in the Finale.....one may not like this interpretation or approach - but it was Solti's, and IMO, he sells it most convincingly...


----------



## 89Koechel

(Solti) - Well, YEAH, there're certain parts of Solti's endeavor, that ARE very-sharp, even brutal. I'm sure that everyone has his/her FAVORITE, from Walter (or even - try this - Oskar Fried), thru many others. I even like the recent PBS celebration of Leonard Bernstein, and the FINALE of the 2nd … with Gilbert Kaplan! … despite some obvious "elongations" (let's say) of tempo. If there were ONLY some sort of example of Jascha Horenstein, in this Symphony - oh, well, let's enjoy the best of the recordings/performances that we DO have.


----------



## Merl

Whilst I'm not a fan of Solti's Mahler (never liked his 1st, especially) I do like his 6th. It's a very personal interpretation but, as the OP suggests, it mostly works. I feel the same about Karajan's 6th too. They're kinda guilty pleasures even though I know and understand why many Mahlerians despise both approaches. At least they're not boring!


----------



## DavidA

Larkenfield said:


> The problem I had with HvK's Mahler 5th and 6th in his belated arrival as a major Mahler interpreter was that I was reminded more of an interpretation of Bruckner. I felt it was a complete distortion of Mahler's intentions with obscenely loud climaxes and a host of other ills too painful to mention-so poor that *I felt he had no business conducting Mahler at all with evidently no feeling or understanding for the composer who had been banned from performance by the Nazis *while they were in power. He somewhat redeemed himself with his performance of the 9th.
> 
> After reading over this thread, I agree with much of the heavy criticism of his performance of the 6th. I never got through it after making repeated attempts. In fact, I was greatly angered and infuriated by what he had done and unceremoniously dumped it from my library. Mahler is not Bruckner and I felt at the time that he'd committed an unforgivable mistake of being so wrong, the mistake of performing a composer that he might have felt obligated to play but may not have even liked. Of course, if he didn't try to record Mahler during the composer's growing popularity, *he might have been open to accusations of prejudice against a Jewish composer after the War.* So I think he was between a rock and a hard place when it came to Mahler.


There were reasons that Karajan did not record Mahler before he did, but certainly the old chestnut of anti-Jewishness or Nazism does not reflect his views. After all, he kept scores of Mendelssohn's symphonies stashed away during the war even though Felix was on the banned list. The simple reason was that he felt the orchestra (BPO) was not ready for Mahler. He tried Das Lied von der Erde in 1960 but found the orchestra was not ready. After Barbirolli had a go with them with Mahler he felt they had been prepared and went on to record some of the symphonies. Whatever you think of them let's scotch this anti-Jewish red herring. After all his record producer and the leader of his orchestra were both Jews.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

DavidA said:


> Duggan's reviews always seem to me highly contentious on occasion. However, as Mahler interpretations are highly personal things, we must allow him that. In the 6th I have Karajan (not chromium plated at all - Duggan is using a tired old phrase), Kubelik and Tennstedt. All terrific performances in their various (and very different) ways. Do note that Szell omits the repeat in the first movement - hence gets his on to one CD!
> 
> Just to say I admire Barbirolli's Mahler but I do find his 6th far too slow in the first movement


You seem to have a Karajan recording for every work imaginable. What do you see in him?


----------



## Merl

I know DavidA is a big Karajan fan but for me Karajan is like every conductor in that he's made some duds and some cracking recordings. For example I find his Schumann dull but his Beethoven excellent. I've just finished writing a small review for his Live Japan 77 Symphony cycle (to be posted with my next Beethoven cycles roundup, soon).


----------



## DavidA

Brahmsianhorn said:


> You seem to have a Karajan recording for every work imaginable. What do you see in him?


Why do you make these statements? The fact is I haven't! :lol:

Just I like exciting performances with superb orchestral playing. There is a frisson and energy in the Karajan performances which is quite astonishing. I know it's fashionable to diss him now - he was a victim of the 'tall poppy syndrome' among the less talented - but I have never followed fashion, especially in music. I like what I like.


----------



## DavidA

Merl said:


> I know DavidA is a big Karajan fan but for me Karajan is like every conductor in that he's made some duds and some cracking recordings. For example I find his Schumann dull but his Beethoven excellent. I've just finished writing a small review for his Live Japan 77 Symphony cycle (to be posted with my next Beethoven cycles roundup, soon).


Yes like every great conductor he had his ups and downs, his great performances and his off days. This is what always amuses me when some tin-eared critic complains he conducted everything the same. He didn't even on his studio recordings. And when it came to live performances he could be as different as could be according to his mood. But get him on the right day the results were amazing. At least that's what the musicians said who played with him.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

DavidA said:


> Why do you make these statements? The fact is I haven't! :lol:
> 
> Just I like exciting performances with superb orchestral playing. There is a frisson and energy in the Karajan performances which is quite astonishing. I know it's fashionable to diss him now - he was a victim of the 'tall poppy syndrome' among the less talented - but I have never followed fashion, especially in music. I like what I like.


I was just curious


----------



## Merl

DavidA said:


> Yes like every great conductor he had his ups and downs, his great performances and his off days. This is what always amuses me when some tin-eared critic complains he conducted everything the same. He didn't even on his studio recordings. And when it came to live performances he could be as different as could be according to his mood. But get him on the right day the results were amazing. At least that's what the musicians said who played with him.


I think the amazing thing about Karajan was his consistency but even more his control of the orchestra. Some may see that as an almost totalitarian control but it's not like that. Listen to all of Karajan's performances of Beethoven's 7th and you can hear it - the orchestra is in the palm of his hands and he maintains such an incredible line throughout the performances. It's flexible, never sounds rushed, sluggish or forced and is constantly moving forward. And yes, I agree that it's highly unfashionable to like him but so was vinyl and look how that's come back.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

There is a great Bruno Walter interview where he talks about how to conduct Tristan und Isolde, a conductor needs passion in his heart, and to conduct Beethoven’s Pastorale he needs a love of nature. Karajan is Mr. Reliable. You always know the sound will be beautiful, the tempos just about right, and the execution exemplary. But it comes across as a well-oiled machine. I don’t hear the personal identification with the specific work.

I received a wonderful compliment when performing Bach’s Ich habe genung a year ago. The concertmaster told me he was amazed at how I had a different color for each movement, and that it brought him to tears. It wasn’t something I consciously thought about. I just tried to personify what each movement spoke to. It is also what I look for in evaluating recordings. Many people I work with expect a basic sound applied to everything sung. Corporate efficiency. That’s not me.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

Sorry if I was a little rough on old HvK. I do like some of his recordings. The Peer Gynt suites are gorgeous. He also made a great recording of Honegger symphonies. And he was great at Richard Strauss. I think tone poems suited him better, pieces that emphasized sound over structure.


----------



## DavidA

Merl said:


> I think the amazing thing about Karajan was his consistency but even more his control of the orchestra. Some may see that as an almost totalitarian control but it's not like that. Listen to all of Karajan's performances of Beethoven's 7th and you can hear it - the orchestra is in the palm of his hands and he maintains such an incredible line throughout the performances. It's flexible, never sounds rushed, sluggish or forced and is constantly moving forward. And yes, I agree that it's highly unfashionable to like him but so was vinyl and look how that's come back.


Interesting that the players of the BPO said it was like playing chamber music because he left them too play things themselves without giving a clear beat and only intervened if things went wrong. The opposite of what tin-eared critics like to say.


----------



## DavidA

Brahmsianhorn said:


> *Sorry if I was a little rough on old HvK. *I do like some of his recordings. The Peer Gynt suites are gorgeous. He also made a great recording of Honegger symphonies. And he was great at Richard Strauss. I think tone poems suited him better, pieces that emphasized sound over structure.


I don't think the shade of HvK will mind you being 'a little rough on him' when millions have bought (and enjoyed) his recordings! :lol:


----------



## DavidA

Brahmsianhorn said:


> There is a great Bruno Walter interview where he talks about how to conduct Tristan und Isolde, a conductor needs passion in his heart, and to conduct Beethoven's Pastorale he needs a love of nature. Karajan is Mr. Reliable. You always know the sound will be beautiful, the tempos just about right, and the execution exemplary. But it comes across as a well-oiled machine. I don't hear the personal identification with the specific work.
> 
> I received a wonderful compliment when performing Bach's Ich habe genung a year ago. The concertmaster told me he was amazed at how I had a different color for each movement, and that it brought him to tears. It wasn't something I consciously thought about. I just tried to personify what each movement spoke to. It is also what I look for in evaluating recordings. Many people I work with expect a basic sound applied to everything sung. Corporate efficiency. That's not me.


I frankly can't see what you receiving compliments for singing Bach has got to do with Karajan conducting Beethoven's Pastoral! I'm just listening to his 1850s performance and it really is something! But let me remind you the thread is about Mahler!


----------



## Guest

Funny how the OP explicitly asks about Solti and gets a debate about HvK instead.

I've not heard the Solti, but when I was looking for an account (after seeing Gergiev at the Proms, on TV with the World Orchestra for Peace), I settled on the LSO/Janssons. Seems pretty good to me. I also like Abbado/Lucerne.

Solti plays the Andante/Scherzo the 'wrong' way round of course, which is why I've probably overlooked him, and listening to it now, the opening movement is a little too brisk for my taste. Mind you, if he keeps this up, it'll shorten the interminable 4th mvmt (Jansons clocks in at 30.41 where Solti is three minutes faster).

[add] Not impressed with the Solti, or, more particularly, the orchestra. Some naff playing, I thought, though I suppose the engineer could be at fault.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

MacLeod said:


> Funny how the OP explicitly asks about Solti and gets a debate about HvK instead.
> 
> I've not heard the Solti, but when I was looking for an account (after seeing Gergiev at the Proms, on TV with the World Orchestra for Peace), I settled on the LSO/Janssons. Seems pretty good to me. I also like Abbado/Lucerne.
> 
> Solti plays the Andante/Scherzo the 'wrong' way round of course, which is why I've probably overlooked him, and listening to it now, the opening movement is a little too brisk for my taste. Mind you, if he keeps this up, it'll shorten the interminable 4th mvmt (Jansons clocks in at 30.41 where Solti is three minutes faster).
> 
> [add] Not impressed with the Solti, or, more particularly, the orchestra. Some naff playing, I thought, though I suppose the engineer could be at fault.


Even funnier that it was OP who first injected Karajan into the discussion, not me.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

DavidA said:


> I frankly can't see what you receiving compliments for singing Bach has got to do with Karajan conducting Beethoven's Pastoral! I'm just listening to his 1850s performance and it really is something! But let me remind you the thread is about Mahler!


I was explicitly clear how it relates. Karajan applies the same chromium-plated sound to every work. It is beautiful, but what does it tell you about the specific emotions of the work?


----------



## Guest

Brahmsianhorn said:


> Even funnier that it was OP who first injected Karajan into the discussion, not me.


Can't see where the OP mentions Karajan, but I could be overlooking it.. ?


----------



## Merl

Brahmsianhorn said:


> I was explicitly clear how it relates. Karajan applies the same chromium-plated sound to every work. It is beautiful, but what does it tell you about the specific emotions of the work?


Oops double post . Please delete this one, mods.
.................................


----------



## Merl

Brahmsianhorn said:


> I was explicitly clear how it relates. Karajan applies the same chromium-plated sound to every work. It is beautiful, but what does it tell you about the specific emotions of the work?











.................................


----------



## Heck148

Brahmsianhorn said:


> I was explicitly clear how it relates. Karajan applies the same chromium-plated sound to every work. It is beautiful, but what does it tell you about the specific emotions of the work?


I agree totally, and I'm no "tin-eared critic"...I've been performing professionally in orchestras for 50+ years
HvK always applies the same sound to all music, IME - everything is full, lush, rounded off, smooth, no sharp edges, no hard accents; always legato articulations - tone, dynamics under tight control.the throttle never goes to the firewall [control room fortissimos??] to me, it sounds monotonous [_monotone_-ous].

His musicians may have thought they had considerable expressive freedom under vK, but actually, their scope of expression was quite limited regarding tone quality and dynamic range - esp compared to such free-swingers as Stokowski, Mitropoulos,, Bernstein, or even Toscanini or Reiner.


----------



## Heck148

MacLeod said:


> [add] Not impressed with the Solti, or, more particularly, the orchestra. Some naff playing, I thought, though I suppose the engineer could be at fault.


Hmm. I find the orchestral execution quite spectacular, and certainly consistent with Solti's violent, viciously brutal concept of the work...They are not trying to make it sound "nice", except in the Andante, which is quite lovely....of course, then the stunning Finale comes in, and the tragic outcome is pounded home with a vengeance...quite a sound spectacular...


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

MacLeod said:


> Can't see where the OP mentions Karajan, but I could be overlooking it.. ?


Top of the last page. So it was OP who injected Karajan into his own Solti thread, not me. I just wanted to know why OP is always going on and on about Karajan. Just curious what he sees in him so much.


----------



## Guest

Brahmsianhorn said:


> Top of the last page. So it was OP who injected Karajan into his own Solti thread, not me. I just wanted to know why OP is always going on and on about Karajan. Just curious what he sees in him so much.


No, still can't see it. The OP is this one, by njk345

Solti CSO Mahler 6


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

MacLeod said:


> No, still can't see it. The OP is this one, by njk345
> 
> Solti CSO Mahler 6


My bad on the OP. The poster to whom I responded has started several Mahler threads, so I mistakenly thought this was one of them. The poster to whom I responded is the one who brought up Karajan in this thread.


----------



## DavidA

Heck148 said:


> I agree totally, and I'm no "tin-eared critic"...I've been performing professionally in orchestras for 50+ years
> HvK always applies the same sound to all music, IME - everything is full, lush, rounded off, smooth, no sharp edges, no hard accents; always legato articulations - tone, dynamics under tight control.the throttle never goes to the firewall [control room fortissimos??] to me, it sounds monotonous [_monotone_-ous].
> 
> His musicians may have thought they had considerable expressive freedom under vK, but actually, their scope of expression was quite limited regarding tone quality and dynamic range - esp compared to such free-swingers as Stokowski, Mitropoulos,, Bernstein, or even Toscanini or Reiner.


Interesting and amusing to hear what you guys say. Here is a review of a Jarajan concert in 1960

'The pianissimo syncopations in the second violins and violas were finely controlled in tone and timing: the tense hush was a truly histrionic preparation for the pathetic "childhood" theme. Needless to say, the attack on the C minor allegro nearly knocked us out of our seats.'

But a limited dynamic range? :lol:

But just yo remnd you - this is about Solti's Mahler 6


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

DavidA said:


> Interesting and amusing to hear what you guys say. Here is a review of a Jarajan concert in 1960
> 
> 'The pianissimo syncopations in the second violins and violas were finely controlled in tone and timing: the tense hush was a truly histrionic preparation for the pathetic "childhood" theme. Needless to say, the attack on the C minor allegro nearly knocked us out of our seats.'
> 
> But a limited dynamic range? :lol:
> 
> But just yo remnd you - this is about Solti's Mahler 6


Then why did you bring up Tony Duggan's critique of Karajan?


----------



## Heck148

Couldn't care less what some critic says...in the 60s, I heard HvK concert, Bruckner 9...I was most certainly NOT knocked out of my seat..vK simply did not want that intensity of sound....wasn't "beautiful", wasn't round and smooth.....


----------



## DavidA

Heck148 said:


> Couldn't care less what some critic says...in the 60s, I heard HvK concert, Bruckner 9...I was most certainly NOT knocked out of my seat..vK simply did not want that intensity of sound....wasn't "beautiful", wasn't round and smooth.....


Funny, other people say the opposite!


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

DavidA said:


> Funny, other people say the opposite!


And yet you're always defending Karajan against criticism, which is what brought him into this conversation in the first place. It seems you are not only keenly aware of Karajan's critics but also the specific issues they routinely bring up.


----------



## DavidA

Brahmsianhorn said:


> And yet you're always defending Karajan against criticism, which is what brought him into this conversation in the first place.* It seems you are not only keenly aware of Karajan's critics but also the specific issues they routinely bring up*.


No As a historian I am interested in fact not the fashionable nonsense sometimes put about.


----------



## DavidA

Brahmsianhorn said:


> Then why did you bring up Tony Duggan's critique of Karajan?


I can't remember doing so. Enlighten me dear friend!


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

DavidA said:


> I can't remember doing so. Enlighten me dear friend!


"In the 6th I have Karajan (not chromium plated at all - Duggan is using a tired old phrase),"


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

DavidA said:


> No As a historian I am interested in fact not the fashionable nonsense sometimes put about.


I didn't say you agree with them. I just said you are aware of them, so you must obviously know Karajan is not as universally praised as you claim.


----------



## Heck148

DavidA said:


> Funny, other people say the opposite!


I know what I hear...I do enjoy some recordings of BPO from the HvK era.....Mehta, Salonen, conducting excerpts from Stra7ss operas, and excerpts from Prokofieff R & J....orchestra sounds terrific, far better, more flexible than it did under vK....


----------



## Heck148

DavidA said:


> No As a historian I am interested in fact not the fashionable nonsense sometimes put about.


legitimate, accurate criticism is not "fashionable nonsense"....HvK is also justly criticized for his conducting with his eyes closed - generally regarded as a technical flaw, shutting off, not using one of the primary channels of communication between a conductor and his musicians...impairs spontaneity, but that's how he wanted it...tightly controlled, everything just so....


----------



## Larkenfield

...............


----------



## DavidA

Heck148 said:


> legitimate, accurate criticism is not "fashionable nonsense"....HvK is also justly criticized for his conducting with his eyes closed - generally regarded as a technical flaw, shutting off, not using one of the primary channels of communication between a conductor and his musicians...impairs spontaneity, but that's how he wanted it...tightly controlled, everything just so....


Oh dear! The musicians who played under him said the opposite. He shut his eyes because he didn't want it tightly controlled. :lol:


----------



## DavidA

Brahmsianhorn said:


> I didn't say you agree with them. I just said you are aware of them, so you must obviously know Karajan is not as universally praised as you claim.


I didn't claim he was universally praised. But you can see from the amount of recordings that were sold and the concerts that were sold out that obviously some people appreciated him. :lol:


----------



## KenOC

Just to note: I've read that the two top-earning conductors in the world today are Leonard Bernstein and Herbert von Karajan. Yes, obviously somebody likes them.


----------



## DavidA

KenOC said:


> Just to note: I've read that the two top-earning conductors in the world today are Leonard Bernstein and Herbert von Karajan. Yes, obviously somebody likes them.


Unfortunately they have committed the sin of making classical music popular and accessible to the unwashed masses! Let's face it, anyone who sells that amount of classical records must be suspect!
I mean Bernstein was criticised for his highly extrovert podium manner - Karajan for conducting eyes shut. You really can't please everybody. :lol:


----------



## DavidA

Heck148 said:


> I know what I hear...I do enjoy some recordings of BPO from the HvK era.....Mehta, Salonen, conducting excerpts from Stra7ss operas, and excerpts from Prokofieff R & J....orchestra sounds terrific, far better, more flexible than it did under vK....


It might sound so to you, but it doesn't do other people who listen..


----------



## Heck148

DavidA said:


> .....He shut his eyes because he didn't want it tightly controlled. :lol:


that's not the effect he achieved....shutting off communication with his musicians does not encourage them to play more freely..


----------



## Heck148

DavidA said:


> It might sound so to you, but it doesn't do other people who listen..


These are excellent discs, recorded by CBS/Sony....they were not widely marketed, for sure...I found them in a cutout bin....real treasures, the orchestra sounds great, much better, more flexible, more expressive than it sounded under HvK.


----------



## DavidA

Heck148 said:


> that's not the effect he achieved....shutting off communication with his musicians does not encourage them to play more freely..


Yes but they hapoened to be the BPO - rather a cut above I fancy! but frankly I'm more interested in what I hear rather than some doctrinaire stuff. Don't forget the same critics said Furtwangler couldn't give a beat!


----------



## DavidA

Heck148 said:


> These are excellent discs, recorded by CBS/Sony....they were not widely marketed, for sure...I found them in a cutout bin....real treasures, the orchestra sounds great, much better, more flexible, more expressive than it sounded under HvK.


Sorry no idea what discs you are talking about.


----------



## Heck148

shutting off communication with his musicians does not encourage them to play more freely..



DavidA said:


> Yes but they hapoened to be the BPO -


??What has that to do with anything??



> ....frankly I'm more interested in what I hear rather than some doctrinaire stuff.


same here...I don't care much what critics say. I find listening to HvK performances pretty uninteresting for the reasons previously stated...for me, there are problems in both concept, and execution...all of which affect what I hear.


----------



## Heck148

DavidA said:


> Sorry no idea what discs you are talking about.


Mehta -Strauss - Symphonic Music from Operas rec ,90
Salonen = Prokofieff - Romeo & Juliet [excerpts] rec '86

both on Sony...
BPO sounds terrific, free....


----------



## DavidA

Heck148 said:


> shutting off communication with his musicians does not encourage them to play more freely..
> 
> ??What has that to do with anything??
> 
> same here...I don't care much what critics say. I find listening to HvK performances pretty uninteresting for the reasons previously stated...for me, there are problems in both concept, and execution...all of which affect what I hear.


Well no accounting for taste I suppose. But just to remind you this thread is about Solti / CSO Mahler 6 and not for anti-HvK diatribes


----------

