# Best recording of Le Sacre du Printemps?



## Tapkaara

Starvinky's Le Sacre is an oft-recorded work, but which of the myriad recordings is "the best," if there is such a thing?

What are your favorites?

For me, it's a tos up between Geriev/Kirov and Tlson-Thomas/San Francisco.

No, I have not heard every recording extant, but the two records I've already mentioned seem to sit well with me. They have savagenes, yet clarity, which is important for this work.

Smoothed out recordings of the Le Sacre (Boulez/Cleaveland come to mind) just doesn't work.How can you depict human sacrifice with classical gloss and sensibility?

Also, I feel many recordings are "dishonest" by muting/restraining the bass drum. Come on, have you ever heard this piece live? The bass drum should be shattering and rise above the orchestra, not get buried behind the strings. I do not know why some recordings (Janssons/Oslo, for example) do this.


----------



## World Violist

I have heard great things of MTT's recording with SFSO, as well as of Bernstein with NYPO. However, the only recordings that I've really heard of this work are the Boulez/Cleveland (which was very clean and very intense, just not "savage" enough as Tapkaara pointed out) and Mehta/NYPO (a very good reading in my opinion, though I believe it's out of print these days).


----------



## mikenike

Tapkaara said:


> Starvinky's Le Sacre is an oft-recorded work, but which of the myriad recordings is "the best," if there is such a thing?
> 
> What are your favorites?
> 
> For me, it's a tos up between Geriev/Kirov and Tlson-Thomas/San Francisco.
> 
> No, I have not heard every recording extant, but the two records I've already mentioned seem to sit well with me. They have savagenes, yet clarity, which is important for this work.
> 
> Smoothed out recordings of the Le Sacre (Boulez/Cleaveland come to mind) just doesn't work.How can you depict human sacrifice with classical gloss and sensibility?
> 
> Also, I feel many recordings are "dishonest" by muting/restraining the bass drum. Come on, have you ever heard this piece live? The bass drum should be shattering and rise above the orchestra, not get buried behind the strings. I do not know why some recordings (Janssons/Oslo, for example) do this.


If you like the bass drums to really be felt, you can't go wrong with Esa-Pekka Salonen's with the Los Angeles Philharmonic. That recording really hit the spot when it comes to the bass drums.

Of course, Le Sacre does not get as definitive as when the composer himself conducted it. The recording of Stravinsky with the Columbia Symphony Orchestra is a must for the Sacre listener.


----------



## Chi_townPhilly

mikenike said:


> Of course, Le Sacre does not get as definitive as when the composer himself conducted it. The recording of Stravinsky with the Columbia Symphony Orchestra is a must for the Sacre listener.


What he said.

At home, I have Solti/Concertgebouw, and my wife has Karajan/Berlin-- it's not like there's anything terribly wrong about these renditions... but I had Stravinsky/Columbia back in the days of vinyl (must've donated it somewhere along the way), and that was a memorable recording.


----------



## Tapkaara

I have the Salonen/LA Rite of Spring and yes, the base drum is very present in that recording. I just feel the rest of the orchestra is less present. I actuall saw Salonen perform this in LA a few weeks ago and, let me say, it was incredible. I went home to review the CD that was recorded in the same hall, with the same orchestra and the same conductor, and it was nowhere near the live performance. Of course, a recording will never recreate the sound of a live performance 100%, but I think the disc could have been better engineer to more accurately reproduce the sound in that hall.

So, while that performance on disc is very well done, I think the recorded sound is over-rated.

The performance I attended will be available at some point for purchase on iTunes. I will look forward to hearing it; hopefully the sound will be better than the DG disc.


----------



## Badinerie

I love the Antal Dorati Detriot Symphony Orchestra 1982 Decca recording. If you can find the vinyl ...wow! but its availble on CD in the Penguin classics range.


----------



## david johnson

boulez/ortf
ozawa/chicago

dj


----------



## tahnak

*Le Sacre Du Printemps - Best Recording*

1. Pierre Boulez - Cleveland - 1977
2. Zubin Mehta - New York Philharmonic - 1978


----------



## theclassicalguy

I'm a big fan of Colin Davis' recording. Though it's the only one I own, I studied many different ones before I bought it. Davis' is, in my opinion, one of the most vicious of them all. I can't say that I noticed the base drum being overly prominent, but it wasn't shoved in the background either. In general, the sound was clearer than most. You can really appreciate this in the procession of the sage, where you can hear all the seperate instruments creating their cacophony. I feel like the tam-tam (at least I think it's a tam-tam) tends to get lost in most recordings during this passage. Davis also gives the few quiet passages a delicacy that I appreciate.


----------



## Rondo

david johnson said:


> ozawa/chicago
> 
> dj


Ditto. I'd give anything to have that performance on DVD!


----------



## Moldyoldie

Badinerie said:


> I love the Antal Dorati Detriot Symphony Orchestra 1982 Decca recording. If you can find the vinyl ...wow! but its availble on CD in the Penguin classics range.


Ditto! I may be biased, but this has to be the "baddest" balls-out in-your-face recording I've heard thus far!  Batten down the hatches!  It can be had very cheap on the used market.

Two of the most "out there" recordings I've heard are of opposite ilks:








*Stravinsky: The Rite of Spring (Le Sacre du Printemps) (Orchestral and Pianola versions!)
Boston Philharmonic Orchestra
Benjamin Zander, cond.
Rex Lawson, pianola
IMP MASTERS*
Incredibly racy tempos based on Stravinsky's own pianola version, performed by the notorious semi-pro Boston Philharmonic. Unfortunately out-of-print, but one often gets lucky.









*Stravinsky: The Firebird Suite (Original 1910 vers.); The Rite of Spring (Le Sacre du Printemps); Petrushka (1911 version); Symphony in Three Movements
London Symphony Orchestra
Gennadi Rozhdestvensky, cond.
NIMBUS*
Ultra-expansive interpretations in ultra-spacious recordings exemplary of the Nimbus label. A good sound system helps, but turn up the volume and the room is filled with orchestral color and bliss!


----------



## Lisztfreak

Is Maazel/Cleveland any good?


----------



## World Violist

In another Sacre thread the subject was being brought up about the "restrained" approach (such as Boulez/Cleveland) vs. the "riot-inducing" approach (Gergiev's ilk). I cannot understand how the restrained approach to this work can possibly work; even though Stravinsky really was primarily a composer of logic and cool, collected intelligence, this piece was written before his foray into neo-classicism. When you take it as a group with Petrouchka and the Firebird, I think the all-stops-out style of performing the Sacre makes infinitely more sense. This isn't one of the symphonies.


----------



## Tapkaara

I agree, Violist. Stravinky said with Le Sacre that he wanted "to send them all to hell." I don't see how you can do just that by taking the neo-classical approach to a work that you so nicely pointed out was before his neoclassical period.

I repeat: this is music of PAGAN Russia where human sacrifice is the order of the day (or in this case, night). Hmmm...pagan...human sacrifice...yeah, we should present this with tact and good taste.

Le Sacre should explode with ancient fury; it should not sound like a Mozartian cream puff.

So, the louder, the more brutal, the better. Send me to hell, Igor!


----------



## theclassicalguy

Amen to that, Tapkaara!


----------



## bassClef

Another vote for Ozawa/Chicago - it hits the spot for me.

Though I have just ordered Levi/Atlanta which gets some good reviews.


----------



## tahnak

*Definitive Recrding of Le Sacre Du Printemps*

Pierre Boulez and the Chicago Symphony


----------



## marinermark

Today I viewed/listened to a DVD of Michael Tilson Thomas' San Francisco Symphony performance of "Rite of Spring." That is my all-time favorite composition, and I haven't seen it performed in about 50 years. I viewed a Netflix DVD recently, but this one is much better. MTT gives insightful comments on the composer and the music, with the orchestra illustrating his remarks, and excerpts from a ballet performance. Following that is the complete performance, also a suite from "Firebird." I listened with headphones for an overall oustanding experience. I recommend it highly. Go to "keepingscore.org" if you're interested. I think I'll order the Copland DVD next.


----------



## maestrowick

I have Boulez! Great recording


----------



## bassClef

I have to change my mind. My recent purchase trumps Ozawa/Chicago for sheer brute strength and particularly the clarity of the timpani/bass drum in the heavier passages - they leap out at you. Sheer excitement. Ozawa's is an exciting rendition but the drums are too muted. The new definitive Sacre for me is *Yoel Levi/Atlanta Symphony Orchestra*.


----------



## Herzeleide

The performance under Stravinsky himself is interesting, but that's about it (though it's good to listen to to hear how the man actually wanted it articulated).

My other copy is Abbado's with the LSO. It's very good. Though since this is one of my all-time favourite pieces, I certainly wouldn't mind in the future purchasing different interpretations.


----------



## JTech82

I own many and I mean many versions of "The Rite of Spring." I would say my favorite is Boulez, Ozawa, Bernstein, or Stravinsky himself. If you have a good conductor and a world-class orchestra, then there's very little that could go wrong.


----------



## bassClef

If by Stravinsky's own you mean the account in his Sony box set, I don't rate it at all. The final sacrificial dance in particular seems all over the place, the timing seems off (most notably in the bass drum/timpani), there even appear to be some mistakes made. Ozawa's and Levi's account is pin sharp in this closing section, Gergiev's is too ponderous.

I'll certainly be buying different interpretations too, though I have 9 already (6 on CD, 3 lossless downloads) - I haven't heard Boulez yet.


----------



## JTech82

jezbo said:


> If by Stravinsky's own you mean the account in his Sony box set, I don't rate it at all. The final sacrificial dance in particular seems all over the place, the timing seems off (most notably in the bass drum/timpani), there even appear to be some mistakes made.


Every orchestra makes mistakes. No orchestra is perfect. Nobody is perfect, so what exactly is your point?


----------



## bassClef

Sure, sheer perfection would probably sound too clinical. But I just find Stravinsky's own account of the Rite sloppy in parts - I don't know if that's down to his shortcomings as a conductor, the performers on the day, or the sound editing. I still cherish the box set as a whole, but for a completely satisfying Rite I have to go elsewhere. Each to his own.


----------



## bassClef

I got hold of the Boulez account - only listened once so far but it is indeed impressive.


----------



## Mirror Image

jezbo said:


> I got hold of the Boulez account - only listened once so far but it is indeed impressive.


Yes, Boulez is a fine Stravinsky conductor. You should hear his "Symphony of Psalms" it's truly great. He takes the tempo a little slower than usual, but you get to hear the incredible detail he puts into this piece. I would seek that performance out next. It's on Deutsche Grammophon with the Cleveland Orchestra I believe.


----------



## bassClef

I will - I only have Stravinsky's own account of this in his box set - but it's a wonderful piece.


----------



## bongos

Im listening to my first Rite of Spring ever thanks to your thread so I have now listened to Gergiev/Kirov , Boulez /Cleveland , Ozawa,/Chicago,Levi /Atlanta , Dorati/,Detroit ,and the man himself on this CD . the sound on the Dorati is just what i like, so clear and natural , very real instruments and a huge drum too .The Ozawa will definitely appeal to some , up front and immediate, , cold .Boulez is warmer with a little reverb , its ok,.The authenticity of Stravinsky conducting Stravinsky is irresistable , and the remastering is very good , clean , wide sound stage .the Gergiev is great .The Levi did nothing for me .Thats my response to them but each of these will have their devotees.


----------



## Tapkaara

Stravinsky's own recording is not a preferred one, I think. The orchestra sounds thin, tempi are moderate throughout and it just seems to lack any measure of real brute force. It's almost as if Stravinsky transported the work from his Russian period to his neo-classical period with this recording.


----------



## david johnson

Lisztfreak said:


> Is Maazel/Cleveland any good?


yes.

dj


----------



## david johnson

fricsay on dg with his berlin orchestra is also very good.

dj


----------



## bassClef

I just want to hear all possible interpretations of this piece! It's become like an obsession. Next on my list is Dorati.


----------



## bongos

I know about that obsession I am the same I must say it is a very enjoyable obsession.So many different interpretations .Dont be swayed by reviews and forum folks opinions , just use these to list what you will listen to yourself .For myself, because I am not a performance critic , I am interested in the emotional impact and sound ( acoustics , immediacy , sound stage , etc ) .For me the Dorati, with its very real natural orchestra sound, and the Ozawa did the job


----------



## bassClef

I used to rate the Ozawa top, then I heard the Levi and I realised the drums were somewhat light on the Ozawa, but overall I think the excitement of the Ozawa is higher, and the brass sounds tighter. The Boulez is great too, but perhaps lacks in raw muscle. I've come to realise that I'll have several favourites, not just one - better that way I think!


----------



## Mirror Image

jezbo said:


> I used to rate the Ozawa top, then I heard the Levi and I realised the drums were somewhat light on the Ozawa, but overall I think the excitement of the Ozawa is higher, and the brass sounds tighter. The Boulez is great too, but perhaps lacks in raw muscle. I've come to realise that I'll have several favourites, not just one - better that way I think!


Absolutely Jezbo! This is what I've been saying all along! Thank you for mentioning the word favorites and also for telling us why you prefer one recording to another and so forth.

People ask me why do you need so many versions of, and this is just an example, "Daphnis et Chloe"? I think this is the great thing about classical music, which I think hasn't been tapped into too much on this forum, it is hard to pick a favorite, because all performances offer new insights into a piece.

Jezbo was talking about above the Ozawa/BSO recording of "Rite of...," this version is fantastic in it's raw emotion and intensity while Boulez's take on this piece maybe a lot more laid-back and somewhat of a more cerebral approach. I like them both for different reasons. It doesn't make one better than the next. It comes down to your own tastes and what you prefer I think.

I own 7 versions of "Rite of Spring." I love them all!  They all offer something truly different. The music is all the same, but it is all played differently and the emotions are felt differently.


----------



## bassClef

Well put. With most pieces I'm content enough to own one interpretation - after all there are tens or even hundreds of thousands to discover! But with the special pieces that really strike a chord and you know initimately, I think it's natural to want to hear different takes on it, and to enjoy many of them for different reasons.


----------



## tahnak

*Le Sacre Du Printemps*



JTech82 said:


> I own many and I mean many versions of "The Rite of Spring." I would say my favorite is Boulez, Ozawa, Bernstein, or Stravinsky himself. If you have a good conductor and a world-class orchestra, then there's very little that could go wrong.


Indeed! Even after 33 years, the Rite of Spring has never received a peformance like Pierre Boulez with the Cleveland Orchestra.


----------



## Air

Tapkaara said:


> Smoothed out recordings of the Le Sacre (Boulez/Cleaveland come to mind) just doesn't work.How can you depict human sacrifice with classical gloss and sensibility?


Great , I just ordered the Boulez/Cleveland, for 4 dollars. 

BTW, listening to Salonen/LA Phil right now. A great, deep, rhythmic feeling.


----------



## bongos

The Firebird (slightly off subject) Ive just heard one of the finest engineered recording I have ever heard, and it was made in 1959 on 3 track half inch tape recorder. The venue was the Walthamstow Town Hall , London.I dont often use such superlatives but this recording is bloody stunning . .Its very acoustically fast and lucid with great microphoning , you dont miss much .I strongly recommend it .I will let someone more experienced comment on the performance but that also sounds great to me


----------



## bassClef

Woo-hoo! Finally going to hear Le Sacre live on 2nd June:

http://www.fok.cz/en/concerts/prague-spring-festival2.html

That is, unless my wife goes into labour - she's due on 29th May!


----------



## Mirror Image

jezbo said:


> Woo-hoo! Finally going to hear Le Sacre live on 2nd June:
> 
> http://www.fok.cz/en/concerts/prague-spring-festival2.html
> 
> That is, unless my wife goes into labour - she's due on 29th May!


I'm jealous!


----------



## Tapkaara

airad2 said:


> Great , I just ordered the Boulez/Cleveland, for 4 dollars.
> 
> BTW, listening to Salonen/LA Phil right now. A great, deep, rhythmic feeling.


I saw Salonen/LA do this at the Walt Disney Concert Hall earlier this year. As good as the DG recording is, seeing this ensemble do it live is at least 10 times better. (The acoustics in the hall are especially favorable for the percussion, which is so important for a GOOD reading of Le Sacre.)


----------



## JoeGreen

I've heard some of the other ones mentioned on here, but I just have a thing for this one...


----------



## bongos

i really enjoyed both of these ,The Monteux is Mono but about as savage as it comes I imagine


----------



## bongos

the Tilson Thomas in that cover seems to be discontinued and is now in this cover


----------



## bassClef

bongos said:


> The Firebird (slightly off subject) Ive just heard one of the finest engineered recording I have ever heard, and it was made in 1959 on 3 track half inch tape recorder. The venue was the Walthamstow Town Hall , London.I dont often use such superlatives but this recording is bloody stunning . .Its very acoustically fast and lucid with great microphoning , you dont miss much .I strongly recommend it .I will let someone more experienced comment on the performance but that also sounds great to me


Sounds great to me too - very dynamic. Best Firebird I've heard I think.


----------



## bongos

hi Jezbo , have you heard Le Sacre with Tilson Thomas /Boston or Monteux /Boston ? I compared Tilson Thomas Boston to his San Franciso .The sound quality is very sweet in the San Francisco recording which maybe impairs the rawness required for Stravinsky .I prefer the Boston .the detail is still there and has greater savagery closer to the Monteux


----------



## bassClef

bongos said:


> hi Jezbo , have you heard Le Sacre with Tilson Thomas /Boston or Monteux /Boston ? I compared Tilson Thomas Boston to his San Franciso .The sound quality is very sweet in the San Francisco recording which maybe impairs the rawness required for Stravinsky .I prefer the Boston .the detail is still there and has greater savagery closer to the Monteux


I'm pretty sure this was the first version I ever heard actually - my parents had it on LP when I was a kid - I remember the cover with the big eye. I'll have to get the CD!


----------



## bassClef

I just found another version of Le Sacre (with Firebird suite) on CD in a box in the attic - Yuri Simonov conducting the Royal Philharmonic - I'll give it a whirl later -but I must have resigned it to the attic for nearly a decade for some reason!








The cover is oddly designed to be what appears to be a close up of frilly tutus and holding hands - the designer must have been given the brief: "it's a ballet".


----------



## World Violist

bongos said:


> the Tilson Thomas in that cover seems to be discontinued and is now in this cover


It's not in print anymore according to the US Amazon site... but it isn't going to stop me from buying it someday... "someday" being the operative word...


----------



## Scott Good

Tapkaara said:


> Also, I feel many recordings are "dishonest" by muting/restraining the bass drum. Come on, have you ever heard this piece live? The bass drum should be shattering and rise above the orchestra, not get buried behind the strings. I do not know why some recordings (Janssons/Oslo, for example) do this.


I don't have time to read the whole thread...sorry.

But when I saw title, I had to quickly put in my personal fav, the Janssons/Oslo recording!!

And when I read this, I had to comment.

Bass Drums come in quite a variety of sizes shapes and timbres. Maybe they wanted to choose something a little more "folky" sounding, rather than the bass drum sound of huge deepness that is usually associated with orchestral bass drum.

At any rate, that section + many others is what I like so much about this recording. You can actually hear all the instruments, and for me, the sound produced is more raw and edgy. I had spent many years studying this piece with many different recordings. And when I heard this one, I was simply blown away. It has both detail and edge. At times it hardly sounds like a classical orchestra, as players use tone colours that would never suit Tchaikovsky for instance (a composer the orchestra also does incredibly well).

I am a huge fan of this band. They seem to bring out the uniqueness of each piece/composer.

At any rate, just my opinion.


----------



## Mirror Image

jezbo said:


> I just found another version of Le Sacre (with Firebird suite) on CD in a box in the attic - Yuri Simonov conducting the Royal Philharmonic - I'll give it a whirl later -but I must have resigned it to the attic for nearly a decade for some reason!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The cover is oddly designed to be what appears to be a close up of frilly tutus and holding hands - the designer must have been given the brief: "it's a ballet".


Yes and here is the new Simonov/RPO cover:










I own this recording and it's actually quite good, but not as good as Stravinsky's own reading, Bernstein, Abbado, Ozawa, and Haitink. I own a lot of versions of "The Rite..." so I'll have to look at the rest of the recordings I own.


----------



## bassClef

Here's my list of Sacre recordings, with my 5 star ratings. 

CDs:
1. Ozawa/Chicago *****
2. Levi/Atlanta *****
3. Bernstein/NY ****
4. Haitink/LPO ***
5. Rozhdestvensky/LSO ***½
6. Gergiev/Kirov **½
7. Simonov/RPO ***
8. Stravinsky/CSO ***½
9. Dorati/Detroit (on its way)

Lossless Downloads:
1. Boulez/Cleveland ****
2. Abbado/LSO ***
3. Dorati/Minneapolis ***
4. Maazel/Cleveland ***½
5. Markevich/Philharmonia **½
6. (unknown performer - possibly a duplicate of one of the above)


----------



## bdelykleon

I can't pick any particularly good interpretation, I was a long fan of Monteux, after all he conducted the première, and liked Abbado and Boulez's recordings. But I can easily choose the worst: Karajan/BPhO, oh God, that wasn't his repertoire, it sounds so weird so un-stravinskian, really terrible.


----------



## Mirror Image

jezbo said:


> 1. Ozawa/Chicago *****


The Ozawa is the best recording in my opinion. I think it captures the savage and barbaric nature of "The Rite..." probably better than any of the versions I've heard. It's an excellent choice and one that I always recommend to newcomers of this classic.

I also agree about the Yoel Levi/Atlanta Symphony Orch. performance. It's outstanding.


----------



## jhar26

Mirror Image said:


> The Ozawa is the best recording in my opinion.


This one?


----------



## Mirror Image

jhar26 said:


> This one?


Yes that's the one, but I've got the recording with the old green cover. I got it a lot cheaper too.


----------



## jhar26

Ok, thanks.


----------



## bassClef

jhar26 said:


> This one?


That's the one I have - outstanding.


----------



## Mirror Image

jezbo said:


> That's the one I have - outstanding.


Yes, the Ozawa is probably one of the best performances I've heard of "The Rite." Ozawa really does a great job of building tension in the piece and wasn't afraid to get down and dirty with it.


----------



## christmashtn

Don't Laugh: The NASTIEST and DIRTIEST "Rite of Spring" I've ever heard was/is a 1967 Polskie Nagrania recording with The Polish National Radio Orchestra, led bt their then music director Bohdan Wodiczko. In the 1980's it was available in the USA on the budget Stolat LP label (catalog # 0106). In the late 1990's Polskie Nagrania reissued this on CD in Poland (coupled with a 1947 Petrouchka with The Warsaw Philharmonic under Witild Rowicki - catalog # PNCD 260). A limited number of copies were imported into the USA, but I believe it has since gone totally out of print once more. THIS REALLY IS WORTH SEEKING OUT!!


----------



## bassClef

christmashtn said:


> Don't Laugh: The NASTIEST and DIRTIEST "Rite of Spring" I've ever heard was/is a 1967 Polskie Nagrania recording with The Polish National Radio Orchestra, led bt their then music director Bohdan Wodiczko. In the 1980's it was available in the USA on the budget Stolat LP label (catalog # 0106). In the late 1990's Polskie Nagrania reissued this on CD in Poland (coupled with a 1947 Petrouchka with The Warsaw Philharmonic under Witild Rowicki - catalog # PNCD 260). A limited number of copies were imported into the USA, but I believe it has since gone totally out of print once more. THIS REALLY IS WORTH SEEKING OUT!!


Oh thanks - have to add another one to my wish list!

I just got the Salonen/LAP version to add to my list, and first impressions are it's very good, certainly in terms of the sound quality. I'll give it a proper listen later.


----------



## bassClef

The Salonen is indeed exhilirating. What sets this apart is the sound quality, it puts some of the older recordings into the shade in this respect. I can't give it 5 stars though because I wasn't keen on the interpretation in a few areas.

Updated my list, in approx order of my liking:

1. Ozawa/Chicago (1968) *****
2. Levi/Atlanta (1991) *****

3. Esa-Pekka Salonen/LA Philharmonic (2006) ****½

4. Bernstein/NY (1958) ****
5. Boulez/Cleveland (1969) ****

6. Rozhdestvensky/LSO ***½
7. Stravinsky/CSO (1960) ***½
8. Maazel/Cleveland (1980) ***½
9. Dorati/Detroit (1982) ***½

10. Haitink/LPO (1973) ***
11. Abbado/LSO ***
12. Simonov/RPO ***
13. Dorati/Minneapolis ***

14. Gergiev/Kirov (1999) **½
15. Markevich/Philharmonia (1959) **½

16. Ashkenazy/Gavrilov (piano version)

Which versions am I missing? Tilson-Thomas/SFS next to look out for I think.


----------



## joen_cph

_"http://www.classicalnotes.net "_ by Peter Gutmann
constitutes a delightful reading-room as regards presenting a 
historical survey of recordings of many standard-repertoire works.

What is particularly nice is the writer´s knowledge and comments
on the works themselves _and_ earlier issues/performance traditions
- an insight and a _canon_ that is often absent from most reviews today.


----------



## SalieriIsInnocent

Bernsteins NY recording is my favorite. Maazel's is pretty close, but Bernstein adds a certain charm with his.


----------



## christmashtn

*Live montuex/boston sym. "rite" from 1957*

On ebay right now, you will find a most fascinating Live "Rite" with Pierre Montuex (its first conductor) and the Boston Symphony Orchestra, from a concert given in 1957. Montuex performed the "Rite" with them in the early 20's while their music director, and the audience, though not as rude as the one he faced in Paris at the works premire, was nontheless not very appreciative. In 1957, the audience gave him a most rousing redemption. Search for ebay item 190396917208 in the ebay search engine.


----------



## georgie

*Hi*

Hello everyone,

I have just registered, because I could not contain my opinion on who conducted the perfect Sacre, anymore ; ) be careful, some controversy is coming up...

I do not like to tell people, what to like and what not, so do not take any offence. But I do not quite see, what is so good about Ozawa's and - most of all - Stravinsky's 1960 recording, as a lot of the instruments are not even audible...

So, what I came to post here, anyways, were my 2 favorite Sacres, and if I am nit mistaken, they have not yet mentioned here, before:

1. Simon Rattle & City of Birmingham Symphony Orchestra (1987)
This one is loud, full and deadly ; )

2. ... Well, some say, the piece was out of his league, but I do not believe, they have heard this particular recording: Herbert von Karajan & Berliner Philharmoniker (1977!!!)
It must have been the 12th or 13th Sacre that I have heard so far, and it is just the strangest-sounding (in a good way!)... It really takes you into another world and leaves you lost in that strange place, once in a while!

So, what do you think about these?

Cheers,
G.


----------



## bassClef

I'll listen to your recommendations - I have those and more to add since my last list. But I think to rank them all like I tried to is impossible - sometimes one of them really hits the mark, other times another interpretation is the one to set my heart racing. I like to mix them up.

I share your reservations about Stravinsky's own recording - mediocre in my view.


----------



## Vaneyes

georgie said:


> Hello everyone,
> 
> I have just registered, because I could not contain my opinion on who conducted the perfect Sacre, anymore ; ) be careful, some controversy is coming up...
> 
> I do not like to tell people, what to like and what not, so do not take any offence. But I do not quite see, what is so good about Ozawa's and - most of all - Stravinsky's 1960 recording, as a lot of the instruments are not even audible...
> 
> So, what I came to post here, anyways, were my 2 favorite Sacres, and if I am nit mistaken, they have not yet mentioned here, before:
> 
> 1. Simon Rattle & City of Birmingham Symphony Orchestra (1987)
> This one is loud, full and deadly ; )
> 
> 2. ... Well, some say, the piece was out of his league, but I do not believe, they have heard this particular recording: Herbert von Karajan & Berliner Philharmoniker (1977!!!)
> It must have been the 12th or 13th Sacre that I have heard so far, and it is just the strangest-sounding (in a good way!)... It really takes you into another world and leaves you lost in that strange place, once in a while!
> 
> So, what do you think about these?
> 
> Cheers,
> G.


Welcome, and thank you for your candor.

IMO the 1964 (DG) is the Karajan "Rite" to listen to. That, the Cleveland/Boulez (Sony), and NYPO/Bernstein (Sony, rec 1957) remain my favorites.

I'll re-listen to the Rattle.


----------



## World Violist

Rattle's is a stunning account, definitely. A couple of summers ago I picked it up for a few dollars and it bowled me over. Raw stuff.

I wonder what the forum members think of Dudamel's recent recording. It's been out for a while, but I haven't seen any talk about it (I acknowledge that I'm part of the problem, having never heard the whole thing). I think the bass drums ought to be sufficient, having seen a Youtube clip in which the bass drum drowns out everything else (though the live recording seems to have favored the bass drum, you could tell he was pounding the hell outta that thing).


----------



## Vaneyes

World Violist said:


> Rattle's is a stunning account, definitely. A couple of summers ago I picked it up for a few dollars and it bowled me over. Raw stuff.
> 
> I wonder what the forum members think of Dudamel's recent recording. It's been out for a while, but I haven't seen any talk about it (I acknowledge that I'm part of the problem, having never heard the whole thing). I think the bass drums ought to be sufficient, having seen a Youtube clip in which the bass drum drowns out everything else (though the live recording seems to have favored the bass drum, you could tell he was pounding the hell outta that thing).


It sounds like the Salonen bass drum lives on. I thought it might have been exorcised with the coming of Dudamel.


----------



## TxllxT

bassClef said:


> The Salonen is indeed exhilirating. What sets this apart is the sound quality, it puts some of the older recordings into the shade in this respect. I can't give it 5 stars though because I wasn't keen on the interpretation in a few areas.
> 
> Updated my list, in approx order of my liking:
> 
> 1. Ozawa/Chicago (1968) *****
> 2. Levi/Atlanta (1991) *****
> 
> 3. Esa-Pekka Salonen/LA Philharmonic (2006) ****½
> 
> 4. Bernstein/NY (1958) ****
> 5. Boulez/Cleveland (1969) ****
> 
> 6. Rozhdestvensky/LSO ***½
> 7. Stravinsky/CSO (1960) ***½
> 8. Maazel/Cleveland (1980) ***½
> 9. Dorati/Detroit (1982) ***½
> 
> 10. Haitink/LPO (1973) ***
> 11. Abbado/LSO ***
> 12. Simonov/RPO ***
> 13. Dorati/Minneapolis ***
> 
> 14. Gergiev/Kirov (1999) **½
> 15. Markevich/Philharmonia (1959) **½
> 
> 16. Ashkenazy/Gavrilov (piano version)
> 
> Which versions am I missing? Tilson-Thomas/SFS next to look out for I think.


My favourite is missing:


----------



## bassClef

Ah that's one I don't have! 
Must have it!


----------



## bassClef

georgie said:


> 2. ... Well, some say, the piece was out of his league, but I do not believe, they have heard this particular recording: Herbert von Karajan & Berliner Philharmoniker (1977!!!)
> It must have been the 12th or 13th Sacre that I have heard so far, and it is just the strangest-sounding (in a good way!)... It really takes you into another world and leaves you lost in that strange place, once in a while!


Tried this one. It's a good account, powerful & clear, though in some places the pace is a little slow for my liking, it doesn't quite have the electricity I look for.


----------



## mleghorn

Ozawa/Chicago is my favorite, even though it's analog. The orchestra plays with superhuman precision. After that, I like Dutoit / Montreal (for nice balance, but not very dynamic) and Oue / Minnesota (colorful, and superb recording). I don't like the Salonen / LA because the orchestra sounds too muted, while the bass drum is overbearing (none of my audio systems can handle it without clipping). The Boulez / Cleveland (DG) is good, although instrument placement is a bit odd, with strings up front and brass very far away.


----------



## TxllxT

With Dutoit I had for the first time the experience that you're not waiting for the violins starting to jigsaw, but that you listen to the whole story, with ravishing focus on detail.


----------



## bassClef

I think Bernstein's NY 1958 recording is top of my list now, I keep coming back to it - it just crackles with energy and the sense of rhythm is irresistable.

Tilson Thomas with the Boston SO is another good recording.

I'll seek out the DuToit/Montreal definitely.


----------



## bassClef

This is Peter Gutmann's take on it:
_
"Nowadays The Rite presents a vexing performance problem - how to restore the original impact. The score was intended to assault audiences with startling freshness, yet listeners now take its innovations for granted and thanks to Fantasia remember the work more as a cartoon soundtrack for dancing dinosaurs than as the bold cornerstone of twentieth century music. In a stunning January 1958 record, Leonard Bernstein and the New York Philharmonic Orchestra restored The Rite to its rightful place in musical history.

Bernstein's solution to the problem of historical perspective was brilliant and yet, as so often with artistic triumphs, disarmingly simple. He was well aware that what shocked audiences in 1913 would seem pretty mild stuff two generations later. He couldn't expect audiences to turn back the clock, forget what they knew and participate in an aesthetic masquerade. Nor would he falsify the score by adding more "modern" elements. There was only one way to jolt contemporary listeners while preserving the integrity of Stravinsky's original conception: to generate a level of energy so intense as to restore the disparity between what the audience expected and what they had to feel. Bernstein's performance explodes with huge crackling sparks of rough, untamed excitement.

But all the frenzied podium gestures in the world would be unavailing without a corresponding contribution from the orchestra. The New York Philharmonic, in most critics' view, had become lazy and unkempt by the late 'fifties, sleepwalking through concerts without challenge. Recently appointed its permanent conductor, Bernstein's hyper baton turned their unruliness to superb advantage, inspiring them to overcome the boredom of professional routine and to convey an urgent sense of creating art afresh.

Fully reflecting its conductor's galvanic commitment, the Philharmonic's attacks are razor-sharp, its outbursts perfectly synchronized, its dynamics startlingly precise, and its virtuosity staggering, even in the most complex and difficult passages in which the score abounds. Most amazing of all, the players manage to suggest primordial snarls and shrieks that heighten the raw excitement of Stravinsky's conception.

The early stereo engineering provides startlingly vivid sound. A huge number of spot microphones must have been used, as we seem to crawl inside each of the instruments, and can actually feel the buzz of a vibrating reed, the grip of a rosined bow, the impact of a plucked string, the tense breath on a flute, the biting flatulence of the heavy brass. The very air reverberates with the sounds of primal nature, like an ancient forest pulsing with life. Above it all the percussion section is given extreme prominence, far louder than could be generated in any auditorium, with the tympani in particular tearing the sonic fabric with their harsh blows.

This is not the sort of realistic sound to which we have become accustomed nowadays, but Stravinsky's was hardly a natural conception. If the performance is a vibrant dream, its recording is a thrashing hallucination. The all-important rhythm, which pounds home the structure, and the exaggerated presence, The only CD of Bernstein's 1958 Rite which underlines the radical harmonies, grab our attention, pull us inside a terrifyingly intense world and batter us with their overwhelming power. This is classical engineering at its most creative level - using the resources of the studio to enhance the composer's and performers' intentions.

This awesome performance is still available in the 1992 Bernstein Royal Edition (Sony SMK 47629), on a single mid-priced CD that sets the aesthetic perspective by including Stravinsky's previous ballet Petroushka. Accept no substitutes Don't get the Bernstein Century version!(including the more recent Sony Bernstein Century edition) - all other CDs of Bernstein Rites are of his diffuse 1972 and 1983 remakes with the London Symphony and Israel Philharmonic Orchestras."_


----------



## Stasou

As far as Youtube is concerned, I rather like this one:


----------



## Vaneyes

The Muti "Rite" is another worthy nominee, and this reissue has the better ART remastering.










For those who haven't heard the 1958 Bernstein "Rite", the LP "skip, snap, crackle, pop" sound is available at YouTube.


----------



## bassClef

Vaneyes said:


> For those who haven't heard the 1958 Bernstein "Rite", the LP "skip, snap, crackle, pop" sound is available at YouTube.


I like the sound - it adds to the rawness.


----------



## Moscow-Mahler

Have anyone heard *Andrew Litton's recording with Bergen Orchestra? *
Is it good? I want to buy some modern recording of Le Sacre du Printemps and found that the majority of the reviewers are more kind to this recording that to Paavo Jarvi's. I have Litton's recording of Prokofiev' Cello Concerto on Hyperion and Tchaikovsky' Violin Concerto on BIS with the Bergens and find that the orchestra is in good form and their playing is vital.


----------



## joen_cph

Somehow the *Boulez/Cleveland *is usually the one I tend to return to, *Dutoit* and *Karajan* with some merits as well. *Bernstein* was a late-comer in my collection and I didn´t find it quite as exciting as expected. *Atherton* is really poor and never gets off the ground (he made a brilliant recording of "Agon" though). Got the *Svetlanov *a few days ago and as it has been written elsewhere on the web, the orchestral playing is fine and points to the dancing elements of the music, sometimes with a bit of unusual phrasing, but the sound picture is very uneven - passages with many instruments become too muddy and distant, the hammering monotony of the strings early in the work too disappointing. That said, I don´t know all the recordings by heart, and there might be some surprises to be discovered yet, for instance in *Ansermet*.

CD Stravinsky:"Le Sacre du Printemps", Ballet (1911-12)/Muti,PhiladO/emi-unesco 01 dcl 707262 
CD Stravinsky:"Le Sacre du Printemps", Ballet (1911-12)/Salonen,NewPO/cbs sbk89894
cd Stravinsky:"Le Sacre du Printemps", Ballet (1911-12)/Atherton,BBC Wales O/bbc mm135
LP Stravinsky:"Le Sacre du Printemps", Ballet (1911-12)/Stravinsky,ColSO/cbs 81 29244
LP Stravinsky:"Le Sacre du Printemps", Ballet (1911-12)/Bernstein,NYPO/ph stereo sabl 835 505 ay
LP Stravinsky:"Le Sacre du Printemps", Ballet (1911-12)/Ansermet,SuissRom/decca mono LL 303
LP Stravinsky:"Le Sacre du Printemps", Ballet (1911-12)/Markevich,PO/emi srg 1024
LP Stravinsky:"Le Sacre du Printemps", Ballet (1911-12)/Svetlanov,USSR SO/melc01303-04
LP Stravinsky:"Le Sacre du Printemps", Ballet (1911-12)/Boulez,ClevO/cbs 72807
LP Stravinsky:"Le Sacre du Printemps", Ballet (1911-12)/Karajan,BPO/dg 138 920
LP Stravinsky:"Le Sacre du Printemps", Ballet (1911-12)/Dutoit,MontrealSO/decca 85 414 202-1


----------



## Vaneyes

joen_cph said:


> Somehow the *Boulez/Cleveland *is usually the one I tend to return to, *Dutoit* and *Karajan* with some merits as well. *Bernstein* was a late-comer in my collection and I didn´t find it quite as exciting as expected. *Atherton* is really poor and never gets off the ground (he made a brilliant recording of "Agon" though). Got the *Svetlanov *a few days ago and as it has been written elsewhere on the web, the orchestral playing is fine and points to the dancing elements of the music, sometimes with a bit of unusual phrasing, but the sound picture is very uneven - passages with many instruments become too muddy and distant, the hammering monotony of the strings early in the work too disappointing. That said, I don´t know all the recordings by heart, and there might be some surprises to be discovered yet, for instance in *Ansermet*.
> 
> CD Stravinsky:"Le Sacre du Printemps", Ballet (1911-12)/Muti,PhiladO/emi-unesco 01 dcl 707262
> CD Stravinsky:"Le Sacre du Printemps", Ballet (1911-12)/Salonen,NewPO/cbs sbk89894
> cd Stravinsky:"Le Sacre du Printemps", Ballet (1911-12)/Atherton,BBC Wales O/bbc mm135
> LP Stravinsky:"Le Sacre du Printemps", Ballet (1911-12)/Stravinsky,ColSO/cbs 81 29244
> LP Stravinsky:"Le Sacre du Printemps", Ballet (1911-12)/Bernstein,NYPO/ph stereo sabl 835 505 ay
> LP Stravinsky:"Le Sacre du Printemps", Ballet (1911-12)/Ansermet,SuissRom/decca mono LL 303
> LP Stravinsky:"Le Sacre du Printemps", Ballet (1911-12)/Markevich,PO/emi srg 1024
> LP Stravinsky:"Le Sacre du Printemps", Ballet (1911-12)/Svetlanov,USSR SO/melc01303-04
> LP Stravinsky:"Le Sacre du Printemps", Ballet (1911-12)/Boulez,ClevO/cbs 72807
> LP Stravinsky:"Le Sacre du Printemps", Ballet (1911-12)/Karajan,BPO/dg 138 920
> LP Stravinsky:"Le Sacre du Printemps", Ballet (1911-12)/Dutoit,MontrealSO/decca 85 414 202-1


True about Bernstein's, maybe he was looking over his shoulder for Stravinsky. I do like the introspection, and I think that's the excitement on this occasion.

Markevitch (Testament) was the one I was disappointed with, culling it quickly. That used to be almost everyone's knee-jerk recommendation.

Can't say I'm fond of Dutoit's either. I think his Stravinsky peak is the complete Firebird.


----------



## Vaneyes

bassClef said:


> I like the sound - it adds to the rawness.


LP is the only version I own. I'll have to relisten one of these days, and hear if it's developed more rawness.


----------



## georgie

Hello again,

some time has passed, and I have had the chance to puchase a download (320 kbps, if you care ; )) of the *Dutoit recording* (the 30-second sound sample was quite intriguing) and it really sounds very good, lots of details audible, which is what I value most in recordings of any piece of music.

About *Karajan, the 1964 recording* is the first I have ever heard in my life, so in a way, it is my reference recording... About the *1977 recording*, which I prefer over the other, I must admit that the most energetic parts (_Jeux des cités rivales_ & _Danse de la terre_) seem very subdued. Which is a pity, because the rest of it (especially _Cercles mystérieux des adolescentes_ & most of all the _Danse sacrale_) show what they are made of!

The *1958 Bernstein recording*, by the way, I forgot to mention. I think it is marvellous! It is my number 3 and, somehow, I cannot even express, why it is only there. Perhaps, sometimes a bit too flat (I am not a native speaker of English, so I hope, I do not talk complete nonsense now ; )), and once in a while you can *clearly* hear somebody coughing, and (I think in _Cercles mystérieux des adolescentes_) somebody must have dropped their bow... or even baton?! ; )
I have recently purchased a copy of this 1958 recording - released on an Italian label (Urania - WS121100) - at a local record store, who had ordered it for me. It is available _here_ (at prestoclassical.co.uk) and comes on a double CD with Mussorgsky's _Tableaux d'une exposition/Pictures at an exhibition_, Rimsky-Korsakov's _Shéhérazade_ and Prokofiev's _Peter and the Wolf_...
However, if anyone finds the Royal Edition, instead... you better get this one ; ) I have heard the recording of Pétrouchka, that it was released with, and it is really lovely! (I bought this, too, as 320 kbps download, just yesterday).

For those, who also like to hear the musical details, my number 5 (Dutoit now being number 4, thank you to TxllxT : )) is *Daniel Barenboim's recording with the Orchestre de Paris*. It is probably anything, but you want the Sacre to be, because it has a kind of smooth flow, but yet it is captivating. (Besides, I think a smooth flow is perfectly fine, as long as the recording really showcases its qualities... what is the reason in collecting brutal Sacres competing against each other? ; )). The only thing I really HATE in this recording is during the _Danses des adolescentes_. If only I knew, what instrument this is... it sounds a bit like a triangle, perhaps? Either way, whereas in other recordings, the notes played altnernate, until it mutes, in Barenboim's recording, it stubbornly only plays one note... I hope you get what I mean ; )

And then to the 1987 *Simon Rattle/CBSO recording*: I think, I have read somewhere (I think it was in a series of books introducing today's musicians, issued by German newspaper "Die Zeit"... not really scientific, this kind of source), that he altered the score a bit! I mean, I do not want to start any rumours... but when in _Rondes pritnanières_, everything turns wild, especially this recording attempts to deafen you! With what I suspect to be a gong... I have not heard this in any other recording, except *Rattle's 2003 recording with Berliner Philharmoniker* (and very subdued).

What a long post... Either way, I want to reveal my charts ; )


1. Simon Rattle & City of Birmingham Symphony Orchestra (1987)
2. Herbert von Karajan & Berliner Philharmoniker (1977)
3. Leonard Bernstein & New York Philharmonic (1958)
4. Charles Dutoit & Orchestre Symphonique de Montréal (1990)
5. Daniel Barenboim & Orchestre de Paris (1987)
6. Simon Rattle & Berliner Philharmoniker (2003)
7. Herbert von Karajan & Berliner Philharmoniker (1964)
8. Eugène Goossens & London Symphony Orchestra (1959)
9. Pierre Boulez & Cleveland Orchestra (1969)
10. Pierre Boulez & Cleveland Orchestra (1992)
11. ... Igor Stravinsky & Columbia Symphony Orchestra (1960)

Oh, and I am really intrigued about Stokowski's 1930 recording. It must be so different... _Here_ it states that the _Danse sacrale_ must be superslow. I wonder if that gives it a new haunting, half-dead quality...

EDIT: And right now, I am waiting for the *Charles Mackerras & London Philharmonic Orchestra* recording from 1987 (good year for le Sacre!) to land in my mailbox... I read somewhere, its sound is precise (please, do not ask me, where : D) ... and in fact, this must have been the first Sacre I bought, because of its artwork. 
(If anybody cares about it at all, I think most of them are really shabby... The Simon Rattle/CBSO again scores highest here (though it depicts SOME choreography instead of the Hodson-restored Nijinsky one) and Eugene Goossens/LSO also looks nice)

Best regards from Vienna! (Karajan-land, now everything is clear, huh? ; ))
Georg


----------



## TxllxT

*Gergiev*










Where does Valery Gergiev (Philips 2001) come in?


----------



## Vaneyes

TxllxT said:


> Where does Valery Gergiev (Philips 2001) come in?


I'm a big fan of Gergiev's Firebird Suite with VPO at Salzburg--gripping from start to finish. This Rite with Kirov lacks in ferocity and detail. It sounds under-rehearsed, which has been a problem with this conductor's schedule.


----------



## sfdoddsy

I like an agressive Rite so I tend to play the Gergiev, the Maazel/Cleveland, the Salonen or Muti the most.

The best quality recording I have is the Oue version from Reference Recordings.


----------



## tahnak

*Best recording of Le Sacre Du Printemps*



georgie said:


> Hello again,
> 
> some time has passed, and I have had the chance to puchase a download (320 kbps, if you care ; )) of the *Dutoit recording* (the 30-second sound sample was quite intriguing) and it really sounds very good, lots of details audible, which is what I value most in recordings of any piece of music.
> 
> About *Karajan, the 1964 recording* is the first I have ever heard in my life, so in a way, it is my reference recording... About the *1977 recording*, which I prefer over the other, I must admit that the most energetic parts (_Jeux des cités rivales_ & _Danse de la terre_) seem very subdued. Which is a pity, because the rest of it (especially _Cercles mystérieux des adolescentes_ & most of all the _Danse sacrale_) show what they are made of!
> 
> The *1958 Bernstein recording*, by the way, I forgot to mention. I think it is marvellous! It is my number 3 and, somehow, I cannot even express, why it is only there. Perhaps, sometimes a bit too flat (I am not a native speaker of English, so I hope, I do not talk complete nonsense now ; )), and once in a while you can *clearly* hear somebody coughing, and (I think in _Cercles mystérieux des adolescentes_) somebody must have dropped their bow... or even baton?! ; )
> I have recently purchased a copy of this 1958 recording - released on an Italian label (Urania - WS121100) - at a local record store, who had ordered it for me. It is available _here_ (at prestoclassical.co.uk) and comes on a double CD with Mussorgsky's _Tableaux d'une exposition/Pictures at an exhibition_, Rimsky-Korsakov's _Shéhérazade_ and Prokofiev's _Peter and the Wolf_...
> However, if anyone finds the Royal Edition, instead... you better get this one ; ) I have heard the recording of Pétrouchka, that it was released with, and it is really lovely! (I bought this, too, as 320 kbps download, just yesterday).
> 
> For those, who also like to hear the musical details, my number 5 (Dutoit now being number 4, thank you to TxllxT : )) is *Daniel Barenboim's recording with the Orchestre de Paris*. It is probably anything, but you want the Sacre to be, because it has a kind of smooth flow, but yet it is captivating. (Besides, I think a smooth flow is perfectly fine, as long as the recording really showcases its qualities... what is the reason in collecting brutal Sacres competing against each other? ; )). The only thing I really HATE in this recording is during the _Danses des adolescentes_. If only I knew, what instrument this is... it sounds a bit like a triangle, perhaps? Either way, whereas in other recordings, the notes played altnernate, until it mutes, in Barenboim's recording, it stubbornly only plays one note... I hope you get what I mean ; )
> 
> And then to the 1987 *Simon Rattle/CBSO recording*: I think, I have read somewhere (I think it was in a series of books introducing today's musicians, issued by German newspaper "Die Zeit"... not really scientific, this kind of source), that he altered the score a bit! I mean, I do not want to start any rumours... but when in _Rondes pritnanières_, everything turns wild, especially this recording attempts to deafen you! With what I suspect to be a gong... I have not heard this in any other recording, except *Rattle's 2003 recording with Berliner Philharmoniker* (and very subdued).
> 
> What a long post... Either way, I want to reveal my charts ; )
> 
> 
> 1. Simon Rattle & City of Birmingham Symphony Orchestra (1987)
> 2. Herbert von Karajan & Berliner Philharmoniker (1977)
> 3. Leonard Bernstein & New York Philharmonic (1958)
> 4. Charles Dutoit & Orchestre Symphonique de Montréal (1990)
> 5. Daniel Barenboim & Orchestre de Paris (1987)
> 6. Simon Rattle & Berliner Philharmoniker (2003)
> 7. Herbert von Karajan & Berliner Philharmoniker (1964)
> 8. Eugène Goossens & London Symphony Orchestra (1959)
> 9. Pierre Boulez & Cleveland Orchestra (1969)
> 10. Pierre Boulez & Cleveland Orchestra (1992)
> 11. ... Igor Stravinsky & Columbia Symphony Orchestra (1960)
> 
> Oh, and I am really intrigued about Stokowski's 1930 recording. It must be so different... _Here_ it states that the _Danse sacrale_ must be superslow. I wonder if that gives it a new haunting, half-dead quality...
> 
> EDIT: And right now, I am waiting for the *Charles Mackerras & London Philharmonic Orchestra* recording from 1987 (good year for le Sacre!) to land in my mailbox... I read somewhere, its sound is precise (please, do not ask me, where : D) ... and in fact, this must have been the first Sacre I bought, because of its artwork.
> (If anybody cares about it at all, I think most of them are really shabby... The Simon Rattle/CBSO again scores highest here (though it depicts SOME choreography instead of the Hodson-restored Nijinsky one) and Eugene Goossens/LSO also looks nice)
> 
> Best regards from Vienna! (Karajan-land, now everything is clear, huh? ; ))
> Georg


After listening to more than ten recordings, I hail the CBS as one that has not been surpassed with Pierre Boulez and the Cleveland Orchestra . I think it is a 1969 recording. It is a masterpiece. The strings, the winds and the percussion make you feel that you are actually participating in that ritual ceremony dance.


----------



## rgolubev

Hi everyone, After reading the thread I noticed that Riccardo Chailly with Cleveland SO wasn't mentioned (2CD set of 2003). It does have a big drum and got good interpretation and sound quality review. I haven't listened to it but am getting it.


----------



## Guest

Moscow-Mahler said:


> Have anyone heard *Andrew Litton's recording with Bergen Orchestra? *
> Is it good? I want to buy some modern recording of Le Sacre du Printemps and found that the majority of the reviewers are more kind to this recording that to Paavo Jarvi's. I have Litton's recording of Prokofiev' Cello Concerto on Hyperion and Tchaikovsky' Violin Concerto on BIS with the Bergens and find that the orchestra is in good form and their playing is vital.


Late to the party on this, but I have this recording and enjoy it very much. Admittedly, my selection of Le Sacre du Printemps is not very deep, so I can't compare it that broadly, but it certainly is an enjoyable recording.


----------



## pescholl

Three of my current favorite Rites are:

Jarvi / Cincinnati Orchestra / Telarc (2004)
Solti / Chicago Symphony / XRCD (1974)
Goossens / London Symphony Orchestra / Everest (1960)

None of these have been mentioned in this thread. What are your opinions?

I do have the Ozawa / Chicago ordered.


----------



## itywltmt

For the record:

There are _at least _three "editions" of _Le Sacre_: the *original *version, the *1965 *version and the *version Stravinsky recorded in 1961 for the CBS "Total Stravinsky" project*, which is probably a work in Progress between the two (although Stravinsky was a constant tinkerer and so there could be many "performance" versions).

My favourite "original" edition recording: Dutoit and MOntreal Symphony
My favourite 1965 version: Boulez and the NY Philharmonic (probably the best Sacre, period).


----------



## bassClef

For all my fanaticism of the Rite I don't really know what the differences are between the versions, could anyone enlighten us as to the specific detail? I thought there were 3 versions too but I thought they were 1913 (original), 1921 and 1947 - I hadn't heard of a 1965 version. I have read that the 1921 version was the first orchestrated version actually published (before that, after the premiere, it was only the 4-hands piano version that was published in 1913). Does this mean that the original 1913 version as premiered in Paris is lost?

By the way, my current collection of rites numbers 30 or so, but I've still only scratched the surface - presto classical lists over 100 (http://www.prestoclassical.co.uk/w/53903/1). My little passion of collecting versions could last a lifetime, which is a nice thought! The new recording by Kreizberg looks interesting (well, new-ish, he died this year).


----------



## bassClef

itywltmt said:


> My favourite 1965 version: Boulez and the NY Philharmonic (probably the best Sacre, period).


Did Boulez do a Rite with the NYPO?


----------



## itywltmt

bassClef said:


> Did Boulez do a Rite with the NYPO?


That's what I wrote...


----------



## itywltmt

bassClef said:


> For all my fanaticism of the Rite I don't really know what the differences are between the versions, could anyone enlighten us as to the specific detail? I thought there were 3 versions too but I thought they were 1913 (original), 1921 and 1947 - I hadn't heard of a 1965 version. I have read that the 1921 version was the first orchestrated version actually published (before that, after the premiere, it was only the 4-hands piano version that was published in 1913). Does this mean that the original 1913 version as premiered in Paris is lost?
> 
> By the way, my current collection of rites numbers 30 or so, but I've still only scratched the surface - presto classical lists over 100 (http://www.prestoclassical.co.uk/w/53903/1). My little passion of collecting versions could last a lifetime, which is a nice thought! The new recording by Kreizberg looks interesting (well, new-ish, he died this year).


Generally speaking, Stravinsky's major works were published three times: once in its original form (ergo, 1921 = 1913), right after WWII (ca. 1945) and between 1961 and 1966.

The WWII versions were published in the US (where Stravinsky had moved at the onset of the war) so he could collect royalties...

The 1960's versions were published as Stravinsky did a major project for his 80th birthday, recording all his works for Columbia/CBS Records. so it turns out, for the _Sacre_, he recorded an "in progress" version, soewhere between the 1947 and 65 versions.

At least, that's what I understand.


----------



## bassClef

itywltmt said:


> That's what I wrote...


I know but I've not heard of this one, and can't find it. Petrouchka yes, but the Rite I can't find. Perhaps you could post a link.


----------



## bassClef

itywltmt said:


> Generally speaking, Stravinsky's major works were published three times: once in its original form (ergo, 1921 = 1913), right after WWII (ca. 1945) and between 1961 and 1966.
> 
> The WWII versions were published in the US (where Stravinsky had moved at the onset of the war) so he could collect royalties...
> 
> The 1960's versions were published as Stravinsky did a major project for his 80th birthday, recording all his works for Columbia/CBS Records. so it turns out, for the _Sacre_, he recorded an "in progress" version, soewhere between the 1947 and 65 versions.
> 
> At least, that's what I understand.


That makes sense. I'd like to know what the exact differences are though.


----------



## bassClef

rgolubev said:


> Hi everyone, After reading the thread I noticed that *Riccardo Chailly* with Cleveland SO wasn't mentioned (2CD set of 2003). It does have a big drum and got good interpretation and sound quality review. I haven't listened to it but am getting it.


I just got round to getting this. It's an excellent account, right up there with the best I think. I'll try to write more once I've heard it again - but it produced all the right responses from me (inane grinning, raising the hair on the back of my neck, involuntary twitches, punching the air, etc - this is why I generally listen to it when I'm alone).


----------



## itywltmt

bassClef said:


> I know but I've not heard of this one, and can't find it. Petrouchka yes, but the Rite I can't find. Perhaps you could post a link.


You got me! The recording I thought he had made with the NY Phil was really his recording with the Cleveland Orchestra. I own a vinyl copy , but there is a coupling reissue with Petrouchka (as you point out, with the NY Phill). I stand corrected! In my (flimsy) defense, this was recorded at the time he was associated with both orchestras...


----------



## itywltmt

bassClef said:


> That makes sense. I'd like to know what the exact differences are though.


I don èt have the scores, but my understanding and recollection is the orchestration is different (his US versions shoot for smaller forces). Donèt take this to the bank, but I also think the 1965 version is the one that provides finer grain in the sub-section names within the two main sections.

It must be noted that Stravinsky was constantly tinkering. An account of recording sessions with the CBC Symphony (during his Columbia records project, so he was well-past 80 years old then) says that all musicians had pencils on their music stands, and Stravinsky, mid-rehearsal, would utter the dreaded phrase "take your pencils" and have musicians make changes under his direction on the spot. This means that many of his ÈColumbiaÈ recordings of the 1960ès would not be exact renderings of the latest published editions...


----------



## starthrower

The only one I have is the Boulez/Cleveland on DG. I'm going to have to try the Ozawa, and maybe the earlier Boulez.

I also recommend the Dorati Firebird on MLP. I'm pretty sure it's out of print, so check your library.

I also like Kent Nagano's recording on Virgin.


----------



## itywltmt

starthrower said:


> The only one I have is the Boulez/Cleveland on DG. I'm going to have to try the Ozawa, and maybe the earlier Boulez.
> 
> I also recommend the Dorati Firebird on MLP. I'm pretty sure it's out of print, so check your library.
> 
> I also like Kent Nagano's recording on Virgin.


I think a Firebird worth listening to is the one Stravinsky recorded with the Columbia Symphony Orchestra. He likes the 1910 version, BTW...


----------



## bassClef

It's weird, the Gergiev's Rite gets so many good reviews, but I just can't bring myself to like it. It's not just the over-elongated pause before the final chord, I'm warming to that (slowly) - it's not something definite I can put my finger on - other than in some passages some of the instruments that should be at the forefront are barely audible, and this is on a good pair of headphones - it's just an indefinable something that leaves me cold.

My current top 3 (very little to choose between them) are:

*Bernstein/NYPO* (1958), *Levi/Atlanta* (1991), *Chailly/Cleveland* (1985)

Then a bit of a gap before my runners up:

Ozawa/Chicago, Solonen/LAP, Craft/Philharmonia

However I still have to properly review and rank these from my collection (over 30 in all), they might just sneak in there:

Rattle/CBSO, Dudamel/Venezuela, DuToit/Montreal, Karajan/Berliner, Oue/Minnesota

On my wish list for future purchases are these:

Litton/Bergen, Eitvos/Gothenburg, Kreizberg/Monte-Carlo, Goossens/LSO, Fischer/BBCNOW, Inbal/Philharmonia, Rozhdestvensky/LSO, Jansons/Oslo, Stokowski/Philadelphia, Davis/Concertgebouw


----------



## jamesvr

I, too, love the 1958 Bernstein; just wow.


----------



## starthrower

itywltmt said:


> I think a Firebird worth listening to is the one Stravinsky recorded with the Columbia Symphony Orchestra. He likes the 1910 version, BTW...


I'll be listening to this eventually. I recently ordered the Sony box set!


----------



## bassClef

bassClef said:


> It's weird, the Gergiev's Rite gets so many good reviews, but I just can't bring myself to like it. It's not just the over-elongated pause before the final chord, I'm warming to that (slowly) - it's not something definite I can put my finger on - other than in some passages some of the instruments that should be at the forefront are barely audible, and this is on a good pair of headphones - it's just an indefinable something that leaves me cold.
> 
> My current top 3 (very little to choose between them) are:
> 
> *Bernstein/NYPO* (1958), *Levi/Atlanta* (1991), *Chailly/Cleveland* (1985)
> 
> Then a bit of a gap before my runners up:
> 
> Ozawa/Chicago, Solonen/LAP, Craft/Philharmonia
> 
> However I still have to properly review and rank these from my collection (over 30 in all), they might just sneak in there:
> 
> Rattle/CBSO, Dudamel/Venezuela, DuToit/Montreal, Karajan/Berliner, Oue/Minnesota
> 
> On my wish list for future purchases are these:
> 
> Litton/Bergen, Eitvos/Gothenburg, Kreizberg/Monte-Carlo, Goossens/LSO, Fischer/BBCNOW, Inbal/Philharmonia, Rozhdestvensky/LSO, Jansons/Oslo, Stokowski/Philadelphia, Davis/Concertgebouw


I now have the Thierry Fischer recording with the BBC National Orchestra of Wales. It's a very good account and deserves to displace Craft/Philharmonia in my trio of runners up, in my opinion. It doesn't quite have the immediate wow factor of the top 3 on the first listen, but the sound quality is amazing considering it is a "live" performance. I'll be listening to this one alot.


----------



## mleghorn

I like Ozawa/CSO and the digital DG Boulez/Cleveland Orchestra. They're very different from each other. The Ozawa is quite exciting, savage, and brutal, and the orchestra plays with super-human precision. The trumpets in the Boulez must get honorable mention. I don't like the Solonen LAP recording. It sounds way out of balance, with the all of the orchestra sounding muffled, except for the bass drum.


----------



## bassClef

True enough, you need a very forgiving hifi setup with the Salonen. Mine can't quite handle it through the speakers, it's almost unlistenable at the type of volume that the Rite needs. Yet through my headphones I can still make out the orchestral detail, and it does have a very real presence - the headphones are quite light yet precise with heavy bass so that certainly helps.

In contrast, the Ozawa is perhaps a bit _too_ light on the bass drum and timpani, and that's the only thing that lets it down slightly - other than that it's an exceptional and very tight performance.


----------



## Vaneyes

Has anyone listened to this Urania Widescreen Collection 2CD (WS121-100, ASIN: B004B8HMI0), which supposedly contains the NYPO/Bernstein '58 "Rite"? Wondering about the remastering. It was re-issued the latter part of 2010 or early 2011, and is still available at Amazon (DE, FR, UK), Crotchet, MDT, and Presto Classical.


----------



## georgie

Long time no see : )

Well, I have that very CD (Bernstein/NYP - "The Russian Composers") and I think it is a very good collection. The sound quality is probably as good as it can get... A bit rough, but that must be because of the age of the recording.
And it sure is that SUPPOSEDLY hardest recording of Le Sacre du Printemps...

HOWEVER!
Recently I have discovered a recording which, shamefully, seems to be completely out of print! I just happened to get a second hand copy the other day and it... well, it is a kind of special recording, because it is the first one to make me feel uncomfortable at times, because it is REALLY scary! A dry, precise, brutal recording.

I am talking about my new favorite:
*James Levine & The MET Orchestra (DG, 1992)*
This one was originally released along a recording of Mussorgsky's "Pictures at an Exhibition".
In fact, this happens to be my THIRD CD that has first Mussorgsky's Pictures and then Stravinsky's Sacre on it (the other two being Karajan/BP (DG, 1966/64) and Bernstein/NYP (1959/58)...).

If you can find it anywhere, get it! I don't think it can get any more threatening.
This recording of Le Sacre du Printemps has also been released as part of a box set of memorable Levine recordings.

The next recording I am waiting for to arrive in my mailbox, which I have enthusiastically discovered on Spotify, is
*Vladimir Ashkenazy & Deutsches Symphonie-Orchester Berlin (Decca, 1994)*

Any other opinions on these recordings? : )

Cheers from Vienna,

Georg


----------



## joen_cph

Concerning *Goosens *on Everest, praised by some reviewers, I got it recently but found it a huge disappointment - rather lifeless, tempi dragged out, even poorly integrated playing. Got rid of it.

*Maazel*´s on decca with VPO from 1972, bought a couple of weeks ago, is surprisingly good with some original traits.

Due to cheap LP sales here especially, I´ve got these now:

CD - Muti,PhiladO/emi-unesco 01 dcl 707262 
CD - Salonen,NewPO/cbs sbk89894
cd - Atherton,BBC Wales O/bbc mm135
LP - Stravinsky,ColSO/cbs 81 29244
LP - Bernstein,NYPO/ph stereo sabl 835 505 ay
LP - Dorati,MinneapSO/ph st 894 023zky
LP - Dorati,DetroitSO/decca82 sxdl 7548
LP - Solti,Chicagoso/decca 74 special ed. Club parnas 64 667
LP - Ansermet,SuissRom/decca mono LL 303
LP - Markevitch,PO/emi srg 1024
LP - Svetlanov,USSR SO/melc01303-04
LP - Maazel,WPO/decca london 75 cs 6954
LP - Boulez,ClevO/cbs 72807
LP - Karajan,BPO/dg 138 920
LP - Dutoit,MontrealSO/decca 85 414 202-1

(CD - Goosens /everest (sold))

LP - Stravinsky/Raphling:"Le Sacre du Printemps", arr.f.piano/Atamian/rca 80 arc1-3636


----------



## Discobole

Among all versions I know, I guess I think the best is Boulez with the Orchestre national de l'ORTF in 1963. The sound quality is wonderful, the orchestra is (for once) magnificent and with a savagery that evokes only Leningrad under Mravinsky.


----------



## joen_cph

Interesting, didn´t know that Boulez recording; his early CBS/Sony is indeed good too ...


----------



## Discobole

joen_cph said:


> Interesting, didn´t know that Boulez recording; his early CBS/Sony is indeed good too ...


Not as good as this one. The sound quality on the CBS version is really fuzzy, the orchestra is not that remarkable, I know it has a status of reference but, really, even if I find it very good, I've never considered it as one of the best.


----------



## bigshot

Dorati. Either version.


----------



## moody

I think the Everest/Goossens is very good. The Dorati Minneapolis was always a favourite of mine, Stravinsky disliked it intensely.
Everyone should have the Monteaux/Boston 1951 recording, after all he conducted the premiere.


----------



## bassClef

Vaneyes said:


> Has anyone listened to this Urania Widescreen Collection 2CD (WS121-100, ASIN: B004B8HMI0), which supposedly contains the NYPO/Bernstein '58 "Rite"? Wondering about the remastering. It was re-issued the latter part of 2010 or early 2011, and is still available at Amazon (DE, FR, UK), Crotchet, MDT, and Presto Classical.


Could you post an Amazon (UK) link? I can't find this. I don't think the original 58 rite needs any remastering, but it would be interesting to hear it.


----------



## bassClef

georgie said:


> *James Levine & The MET Orchestra (DG, 1992)*
> *Vladimir Ashkenazy & Deutsches Symphonie-Orchester Berlin (Decca, 1994)*
> Any other opinions on these recordings? : )
> Georg


I'll see if I can get hold of these.


----------



## moody

I thought I would come back to this again. Goossens gave the British premier of The Rite with an approving Stravinsky in the audience,1921. He also conducted for Dhiaghilev's Ballets Russes so I think he could be considered an authority on the subject.
I find it hard to believe that the LSO had the failings you describe, did you follow with a score? the same combination made a recording of Antill's "Corroboree" which is wild and highly expert.
I think one of the problems is that some ballet suites are recorded at a speed that no one could dance to. I have noticed tha t when watching a ballet it often seems much slower than records of the suite from the particular ballet. This is a problem with the Dorati Minneapolis Mercury effort, but I still like it!


----------



## joen_cph

I really must say that I stand by my words concerning *Goosens/Sacre*. I found it lifeless and static - in the bad, dull way - if compared to the others I have. Some praise the Everest sound, but I didn´t find it particularly good either.

*Atherton* is poor too, I got rid of that one as well, due to a similar non-fluent tempo and general dullness IMO. I clearly remember that I heard details of poorly integrated orchestral playing at Goosens, not massive, but obvious, but I can´t say exactly where now. The CD also had Petrouchka.

Opinions vary on this, it is possible to find positive reviews of Goosens on the web, but in this case no argument can make me change my opinion, having heard that recording ;-).

I second your opinion on *Dorati* as being among the best and most interesting - the Minneapolis is unusually fast and refreshing, the late Decca digital is still fresh and more majestic.

His late digital *Petrouchka* is magnificent too, re-heard it the other day.


----------



## georgie

bassClef said:


> Could you post an Amazon (UK) link? I can't find this. I don't think the original 58 rite needs any remastering, but it would be interesting to hear it.


You can get it at prestoclassical: http://www.prestoclassical.co.uk/r/Urania/WS121100

Cheers


----------



## joen_cph

Any comments on the old *Leinsdorf *or *Horenstein* LP issues ? They are available here for very little, but there isn´t much information on the web.
I own a lot of versions so I am looking for rather extraordinary performances only, preferably temperamental - not a decent play-through.

EDIT: Well it seems the Horenstein gets a bad review, making it uninteresting:
http://www.classicstoday.com/review/review-4613/
(Quote: _"...Indeed, the Sacrificial Dance might as well have been retitled "the Sacrificed Rehearsal_" ... )


----------



## joen_cph

Well, I just heard the* first Boulez *recording, with the ORTF orchestra, issued on Nonesuch LP and digitally later too. It´s a very impressive and passioned performance, I´d probably place it in a Top-5. Soundwise it is good with a lot of details that doesn´t always come through, especially as regards the wind section. You can hear right from the start in the bassoon that the players are going to be very committed. The strings are a bit thinner and steely (the famous "da-da-da-da" a few minutes into the work could sound more impressive), but overall it is an interesting and very primitivist issue underlining the rawness of the piece and worth hearing.


----------



## regnaDkciN

My progression in versions of the _Sacre_ has been, in chronological order:

1) Stokowski/_Fantasia_ soundtrack (Hey, what do you want? I was six years old!)
2) Tilson Thomas/BSO
3) Dutoit/Montreal
3) Maazel/Cleveland
4) Levi/Atlanta

I'd put the Levi at the top of the list, but could go with any of the last three. (The Tilson Thomas, which I owned on LP, I haven't heard in many years.) However, in my opinion, the best _Sacre_ you can hear is whichever one you can experience live, assuming your area has a competent orchestra and conductor. A number of years ago, I heard Gerard Schwarz and the Seattle Symphony perform it at the old Opera House, after which I came to realize that, probably more than with most pieces, there's simply no way any recording, no matter how good or how high-end an audio system used to play it, can ever hold a candle to hearing it played live.


----------



## tahnak

My best reading of Le Sacre Du Printemps has been by Pierre Boulez with the Cleveland Orchestra followed by Zubin Mehta and the New York Philharmonic. The third is this reading by Michael Tilson Thomas and the San Francisco Symphony


----------



## christmashtn

HEADS UP: What Urania Is Very Heavily Into These Days Is 24 Bit Re-Mastering FROM MONO LP's!! I Would Nearly Bet My Life On It That These CD's Are Vinyl Ripped From Old Columbia ML Mono Series Pressings!!


----------



## christmashtn

Urania Is Very Much Into 24 Bit Re-Mastering Of Mono LP Pressings. I Would Strongly Suspect That These Are ALL Sourced From Old Columbia ML Mono Series Vinyl Pressings!


----------



## eorrific

I like this one very very much. Don't know whether it's available commercially or not.


----------



## Morgante

This:


----------



## Wandering

This was always one of my favorite pieces growing up. Once I'd found this recording of Petrouchka and Le Sacre I stopped wanting any other recordings of either work. Boulez in almost all cases is sort of the definition of percision. Also a huge fan of his older DG recording of Ebony Concerto.


----------



## bassClef

Clovis said:


> View attachment 8186
> 
> 
> This was always one of my favorite pieces growing up. Once I'd found this recording of Petrouchka and Le Sacre I stopped wanting any other recordings of either work. Boulez in almost all cases is sort of the definition of percision. Also a huge fan of his older DG recording of Ebony Concerto.


You should still try some other versions of the Rite if you can - while this account is good, it's perhaps a bit too cold and clinical in it's execution - while that may be to your taste, I prefer it to be raw and wild.


----------



## Wandering

bassClef said:


> You should still try some other versions of the Rite if you can - while this account is good, it's perhaps a bit too cold and clinical in it's execution - while that may be to your taste, I prefer it to be raw and wild.


You're absolutely right, it is obviously a romantically inclined work, but maybe the way Boulez goes about it is in retrospect to later Stravinsky somehow?

I'm sure you probably already know this, but there is a Sony Stravinsky boxset of historical recordings that is unbelievably affordable, I've been considering it for a good while now.


----------



## bassClef

Clovis said:


> You're absolutely right, it is obviously a romantically inclined work, but maybe the way Boulez goes about it is in retrospect to later Stravinsky somehow?
> 
> I'm sure you probably already know this, but there is a Sony Stravinsky boxset of historical recordings that is unbelievably affordable, I've been considering it for a good while now.


Yeah I got that a while back at the ridiculous price of £22 for 22 CDs - I don't know how anyone couldn't be tempted by that!


----------



## joen_cph

A recent find, among my absolute favourites:

-* Ormandy,Philadelphia Orchestra (1955)*

perhaps the most temperamental I´ve ever heard.


----------



## Vaneyes

Clovis said:


> View attachment 8186
> 
> 
> This was always one of my favorite pieces growing up. Once I'd found this recording of Petrouchka and Le Sacre I stopped wanting any other recordings of either work. Boulez in almost all cases is sort of the definition of percision. Also a huge fan of his older DG recording of Ebony Concerto.


Have you tried the Sony?

View attachment 8211


----------



## Wandering

Vaneyes said:


> Have you tried the Sony?
> 
> View attachment 8211


No, I have not. The versions I'd heard before the Boulez/DG are the Ozawa/Chicago/RCA and also a Bernstein recording paired with Pictures/Mussorgsky on discount DG 'Musikfest' cd. I also had a cassette tape with Charles Munch conducting the work, all I remember is how incredibly slow it was, whether it was simply a warped tape or the conductor used abnormally slow tempi, I don't know.


----------



## techniquest

I used to have a vinyl recording of the Rite by the Minneapolis Orchestra with Dorati on Fontana Special. I remember it having no tam-tam 









I now have this recording by the little known combo of the Plovdiv Philharmonic under Dobrin Petkov and I have to say it's really rather good!


----------



## Mephistopheles

I haven't looked through all the pages on this thread, but, of the ones I saw, the recording I currently own hasn't been mentioned:










Riccardo Muti with the Philadelphia Orchestra. I've been listening to many of the selections here (Bernstein/Tilson-Thomas/Dutoit/Salonen/Gergiev/Davis), and I think it succeeds in being more brutal than any of these, but you'll have to tell me if you think otherwise. At the moment, the contender I'm considering is Ozawa.


----------



## Wandering

oopsy...

the cassette tape was actually Pierre Monteux, not Charles Munch.


----------



## Vaneyes

Mephistopheles said:


> I haven't looked through all the pages on this thread, but, of the ones I saw, the recording I currently own hasn't been mentioned:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Riccardo Muti with the Philadelphia Orchestra. I've been listening to many of the selections here (Bernstein/Tilson-Thomas/Dutoit/Salonen/Gergiev/Davis), and I think it succeeds in being more brutal than any of these, but you'll have to tell me if you think otherwise. At the moment, the contender I'm considering is Ozawa.


I share your Muti "Le Sacre" enthusiasm, I mentioned it in Post #81. Excellent remastering. Not to be missed.


----------



## moody

Clovis said:


> oopsy...
> 
> the cassette tape was actually Pierre Monteux, not Charles Munch.


Monteaux gave the first performance of the Rite as he did Petrushka and therefore worked closely with Stravinsky.
The thing to remember is that this is a ballet and certainly in the case of my favourite version--Dorati--nobody would be able to keep up with it.
Tecniquest, please note that those Fontana Specials crushed the magnificent Mercury recordings. When they were reissued on CD they emerged in their former glory.
The Stravinsky conducted recordings are available,how do they compare for speed---no doubt he had some idea of how he wanted things to go ?


----------



## powerbooks

Well, let's get over it with this one:









http://tower.jp/item/tracks/3158578

Happy now?


----------



## Vaneyes

powerbooks said:


> Well, let's get over it with this one:
> 
> View attachment 8587
> 
> 
> http://tower.jp/item/tracks/3158578
> 
> Happy now?


20 CDs, containing way too many "Rites". 

http://www.deccaclassics.com/cat/si...P_ID=STRIG&flow_per_page=50&presentation=flow


----------



## powerbooks

Vaneyes said:


> 20 CDs, containing way too many "Rites".
> 
> http://www.deccaclassics.com/cat/si...P_ID=STRIG&flow_per_page=50&presentation=flow


Yeah, 38 "rites", but still do not cover nearly half of those mentioned here, because these are only from Universal!


----------



## Wood

I have three versions. None are very common it would appear:

1) Rene Liebowitz, London Festival Orchestra (Mono LP)
2) Ricardo Muti, Philadelphia Orchestra (LP)
3) Kent Nagano, London Philharmonic Orchestra


The first is a treasure; there can be no more atmospheric opening to a piece of music than the opening bassoon solo just rising above the crackles and pops. I have never reacted to a piece of music like I did to this on my first playing of it several decades ago.

Muti was a considerable disappointment. It cost me deep in the purse, but it had none of the atmospheric qualities of the former. Indeed, this album put me off from buying multiple copies of the same piece for many years. It has proven to be one of my worst ever purchases of music.

It is fine to have Nagano's modern digital version. Such was the power of the drums in the final section, it sounded like the London Blitz was happening over again.

I heard a Youth Orchestra attempt this work some years ago on the radio, but it fell apart toward the end.

My best version by some margin is that of Liebowitz.


----------



## ptr

Boulez on SONY/CBS is my over all favourite, also like Salonens DG version with Philahrmonia (musch more than his recent LAPO version), but still have to say that Igor Markevich both 50's (Mono/Stereo on HMV/Testament) versions with the Philharmonia still makes me rather elated in a amazing way!

/ptr


----------



## kygeezer

Bernstein NYPO on Columbia vinyl!


----------



## userfume

I very much like the muti however the bassoon is very out of tune at the very beginning


----------



## tahnak

I have not heard the gergiev reading with Kirov. I respect valery Gergiev. He has a keen insight. Michael Tilson Thomas is another great interpreter. It is interesting that you have singled out these two performances. This is my list of important Le Sacre performances. First, I will mention that chronologically, the important recordings have been Stravinsky with the New York Philharmonic (1932), Pierre Monteux with Paris Conservatoire (1938) and Bernstein with New York Philharmonic (1958). Now, for my recommendations : 1. Zubin Mehta and Concertgebouw Amsterdam (2009).(His performances with Los Angeles and New York are also great in 1969 and 1978. 2. Seiji Ozawa and Boston 3. Michael Tilson Thomas and San Francisco 4. Pierre Boulez (Cleveland - you have got is wrong in your assessment of Boulez ; it is not gloss or sophisticated; it is raw emotion and pagan in its outburst and it is one of the sharpest Sacre that has ever been recorded.) 5. Gergiev/Kirov.


----------



## Vaneyes

userfume said:


> I very much like the muti however the bassoon is very out of tune at the very beginning


Sounds fine to me. For those interested, a link for some opening comparisons. :tiphat:

http://www.orchestralbassoon.com/stravinsky-rite-part-1/single-gallery/12329135


----------



## flamencosketches

Reviving this thread for a new generation.

So I have heard a handful of recordings and I can't possibly decide which one I like best. There are so many different ways to interpret this amazing work. Overall, I might have to give it to Pierre Boulez/Cleveland, but that may be because it's the first one I heard. But there is just so much clarity, and such a defined line. However, I just got the Levi/Atlanta Symphony and it is a serious contender. I also like the Robert Craft/LSO on Naxos, which has grown on me. It is crystal clear like the Boulez, but more percussion heavy, and he zips through a lot of it. I like it for its contrast. The Stravinsky Conducts recording with Columbia SO is pretty damn good too. Sometimes when I listen to it, I wonder why I bother with any other ones, but I like the interpretive choices that other conductors bring to the table. (Now, for the Symphonies? It's Stravinsky/Columbia all the way)

What say you, TC?


----------



## jegreenwood

Check out this thread.

Favorite Rite Of Spring

By the way, there are two Boulez/Cleveland recordings - oe on Sony and one on DG. I bought the DG one many years ago; I just got the Sony, which seems to earn wider praise, this month.


----------



## Larkenfield

flamencosketches said:


> Reviving this thread for a new generation.
> 
> So I have heard a handful of recordings and I can't possibly decide which one I like best. There are so many different ways to interpret this amazing work. Overall, I might have to give it to Pierre Boulez/Cleveland, but that may be because it's the first one I heard. But there is just so much clarity, and such a defined line. However, I just got the Levi/Atlanta Symphony and it is a serious contender. I also like the Robert Craft/LSO on Naxos, which has grown on me. It is crystal clear like the Boulez, but more percussion heavy, and he zips through a lot of it. I like it for its contrast. The Stravinsky Conducts recording with Columbia SO is pretty damn good too. Sometimes when I listen to it, I wonder why I bother with any other ones, but I like the interpretive choices that other conductors bring to the table. (Now, for the Symphonies? It's Stravinsky/Columbia all the way)
> 
> What say you, TC?


Stravinsky playing Stravinsky has an outstanding performance of the Rite, whether others consider it definitive or not. I don't care about that. It's the composer conducting or approving. Such an outstanding woodwind section and the orchestra is full of vibrant colors. The Firebird is also terrific.


----------



## flamencosketches

I agree that it’s an excellent recording. Very different from others’. 

@jeg, I have the Sony, I believe. I burned it a long time ago and don’t recall.


----------



## Josquin13

My six favorite Le Sacres, in order of preference:

1. Igor Markevitch--Philharmonia Orchestra, 1959:





https://www.amazon.com/Stravinsky-S...stravinsky+sacd&qid=1561137547&s=music&sr=1-2

2. Ernest Bour--I'm always surprised when Bour's Stravinsky doesn't get mentioned, I can only suppose that people haven't heard it. IMO, Bour was great in this music (though ultimately I prefer Markevitch's 1959 Le Sacre).









3. Igor Stravinsky--Columbia S.O.: 



4. Riccardo Chailly 1, Cleveland S.O.:




















5. Pierre Boulez 1963: 



6. Antal Dorati--Detroit S.O.: 




Otherwise, there was a live radio broadcast that I heard in the 1980s, with Charles Dutoit conducting the Philadelphia Orchestra that was memorable & better than Dutoit's Montreal recording, IMO--at least as I recall, since I've only heard the performance the one time on the radio. But it did make a strong impression on me. Unfortunately, I don't think it's ever been commercially released. (Charles Dutoit--Montreal S.O.: 



)

Other excellent Le Sacres: Leonard Bernstein NYP, Claudio Abbado LSO. I've not heard Ozawa Chicago.

The most recent Stravinsky conductor that I've heard & liked is Jaap van Zweden: 




Oliver Knussen was excellent in Stravinsky too, but he didn't record La Sacre.

By the way, people often mistakenly think that it was Stravinsky's music that caused the riot at the world premiere. However, according to Pierre Monteux (if memory serves), the audience was actually reacting more to Nijinsky's choreography, which they found highly offensive.


----------



## JB Henson

Ozawa: Chicago Symphony Orchestra. Fast brutal tempos. Great sound.


----------



## CrunchyFr0g

flamencosketches said:


> The Stravinsky Conducts recording with Columbia SO is pretty damn good too. Sometimes when I listen to it, I wonder why I bother with any other ones


Me too. Stravinsky with the Columbia Symphony is still my favourite. I don't usually prefer older recordings but this one wears its age very well.


----------



## Pepe

My first Rite was Osawa/Boston. I am sure that the performance itself had a lot to do with the Rite becoming something of an obsession for me. Haven't listened to this version for some years as a lot of my CDs got lost during a move. But I am on a quest to familiarize myself with as many of the top level recordings as possible, so I have ordered a new CD with Osawa's Rite.

Frankly, most of the other Rites I tried could not get close to Osawa's. That includes Stravinsky's first and last recordings, and Boulez' version from the early 90's. So I more or less gave up finding something more impressive...

until I recently (and by chance) found a Youtube video with Leonard Bernstein's 1958 Rite (the Sacrificial Dance). 




I understood instantly that I would need to delve deeper into this, so I have over the last few weeks ordered and listened to quite a few different Rites, with more to come. Here are some thoughts on the ones I have listened to:

Bernstein - New York Philharmonic - 1958
I can understand why this gets universal praise, it's really a great interpretation. I plan to spend a lot more time with this.

Dorati - Detroit - 1981
This is also very good, I think.

Gergiev - Kirov - 1991
This certainly has its great moments, but I am not convinced that it is "the best Rite in 40 years" as has been claimed. The balance of the instruments is very unusual in some sections, some parts that you expect to be prominent are buried in the background.

Litton - Bergen - 2008
This was actually the biggest surprise - I was really blown away by both the sound quality, the precision and the aggressive edge of this version. The percussion playing is simply unreal and thanks to the super high audio quality and excellent mixing you really get a "Cinescope" feeling when listening. This could easily become my new reference version of the Rite. Surprised this doesn't get mentioned more often, but I guess that it has a lot to do with the fact that it's not an American or Continental European orchestra, and that the CD was released by the independent BIS label and not one of the major labels. I cannot recommend this CD strongly enough if you are a Rite fan.

Others that I am waiting for:
Boulez/Cleveland, Craft/Naxos, Janssons/Oslo, Gatti

It is a real challenge to interpret and record the Rite in a way that transmits both the raw energy of the powerful sections, as well as the otherwordly and mysterious sonorities of the quieter parts. Augurs of Spring should have the same power and impact as a wall of Marshall amplifiers, whereas the introduction to part 2 should sound like ... I don't know, fairy dust sparkled over ice crystals or something. It calls for a much larger variety of sound textures than many assume.


----------



## adriesba

What does anyone think of the Solti recording?


----------



## Allegro Con Brio

Have not heard Solti as he is not a conductor I normally go for. But I can imagine that if you want to hear stellar, big-boned playing; he's the one to go for! My two current favorites are Bernstein/NY and Gergiev. Both immaculately recorded (which is very important in this work) with earth-shattering intensity and imagination on the part of both the conductor and the orchestra. Boulez is very micromanaged and underpowered but is very interesting if you want something different. I need to hear Stravinsky's own stereo version.


----------



## adriesba

Allegro Con Brio said:


> Have not heard Solti as he is not a conductor I normally go for. But I can imagine that if you want to hear stellar, big-boned playing; he's the one to go for! My current favorites in order. My two current favorites are Bernstein/NY and Gergiev. Both immaculately recorded (which is very important in this work) with earth-shattering intensity and imagination on the part of both the conductor and the orchestra. Boulez is very micromanaged and underpowered but is very interesting if you want something different. I need to hear Stravinsky's own stereo version.


A lot of people seem to like the Bernstein recording. I'll have to check it out. _Le Sacre du Printemps_ is a work I've come to like just recently. Choosing a recording is somewhat intimidating since it seems like everyone and their brother conducted it at least once.


----------



## jegreenwood

adriesba said:


> What does anyone think of the Solti recording?


Had it on LP when it came out. Now find I have it again in the Decca Analog box. As I've listened to the entire box, I must have heard it, but only once.

What I remember from the LP (and this may have been the first _Sacre _I ever bought) is that the sound was spectacular.


----------



## Allegro Con Brio

adriesba said:


> A lot of people seem to like the Bernstein recording. I'll have to check it out. _Le Sacre du Printemps_ is a work I've come to like just recently. Choosing a recording is somewhat intimidating since it seems like everyone and their brother conducted it at least once.


The Bernstein interpretation is amazing, but the sound quality is even better. Listening to it through a good hi-fi system is awesome. The bass drum feels like the thundering steps of King Kong. The Gergiev is more controversial since he takes some liberties, but it's a super daring performance that never fails to thrill.


----------



## Bigbang

userfume said:


> I very much like the muti however the bassoon is very out of tune at the very beginning


Why would recording engineers/and or who is in charge allow a recording *if* a instrument is out of tune? I cannot understand that so I wonder how you can determine what is approximate for the range? I hear this alot but I usually do not sense anything except different level of performance based on individual/instruments. Of course, period instruments do qualify in some cases as it is part of history and part of the practice to bring out what it was like in the past.


----------



## Heck148

adriesba said:


> What does anyone think of the Solti recording?


Solti/CSO Rite = great, one of the very best...some stunning playing, real sonic wallop..
The Boulez/Cleveland ('69-70) recording is terrific, not underplayed at all...it's Szell's band at their best...


----------



## Heck148

adriesba said:


> A lot of people seem to like the Bernstein recording. I'll have to check it out. _Le Sacre du Printemps_ is a work I've come to like just recently. Choosing a recording is somewhat intimidating since it seems like everyone and their brother conducted it at least once.


Bernstein/NYPO '58 is a great recording, the NY wildmen of the 50s in full cry...Lenny is really into the barbaric rhythms and shattering sonorities...Solti takes this approach, too - which definitely works for me.


----------



## Heck148

userfume said:


> I very much like the muti however the bassoon is very out of tune at the very beginning


What orchestra??


----------



## adriesba

I just realized that Solti made two _Le Sacre du Printemps_ recordings, the 1974 one with the Chicago Symphony Orchestra and a later one (1992, I think) with the Royal Concertgebouw Orchestra. How do they compare?


----------



## Heck148

adriesba said:


> I just realized that Solti made two _Le Sacre du Printemps_ recordings, the 1974 one with the Chicago Symphony Orchestra and a later one (1992, I think) with the Royal Concertgebouw Orchestra. How do they compare?


Chicago one is much better, no contest...RCO is ok, but not comparable to his CSO effort.


----------



## jegreenwood

Heck148 said:


> Solti/CSO Rite = great, one of the very best...some stunning playing, real sonic wallop..
> The Boulez/Cleveland ('69-70) recording is terrific, not underplayed at all...it's Szell's band at their best...


Now I definitely have to listen again. I also have the Boulez that you refer to.

And it occurs to me that my first _Sacre_ was Stravinsky/Columbia Symphony. Solti/CSO was second.


----------



## adriesba

I just listened to a few different _Le Sacre du Printemps_ on Google Play over the past few days: Abbado, Dorati, 1974 Solti, and 2001 Gergiev.

The 2001 Gergiev recording was quite impressive. It had great sound, vibrant percussion, and a vigorous morbidity. It was too slow for my taste in one brief section (can't recall which at the moment), but overall it was quite satisfying.

The Dorati was overall lively. It was slightly lacking in the first half, but somehow the overall energy of the piece and power of the percussion came through better in the second half.

The Abbado recording seemed slightly more moderate to me, but was still quite enjoyable.

The 1974 Solti had a lot to offer. It had the barbaric qualities and plenty of energy.

One of the recordings had some weird noises in it that I don't think were supposed to be there. I think it was the Solti recording, but I can't remember. The Solti recording had some awkward pauses when the music should have been continuous, but I think that was just a faulty file of Google Play since I've had that problem with other recordings on Google Play when the actual CD has no problems.

Overall, I think my favorites were the Solti recording and the Gergiev recording.


----------



## adriesba

I listened to the 1958 Bernstein recording. The sound quality wasn't the best, mostly in the beginning, but, for 1958, the sound quality was superb. 

I can see why many people like it. It was quite an exciting performance.


----------



## jegreenwood

jegreenwood said:


> Now I definitely have to listen again. I also have the Boulez that you refer to.
> 
> And it occurs to me that my first _Sacre_ was Stravinsky/Columbia Symphony. Solti/CSO was second.


Last night I played the Solti. Sonic wallop is right. Exciting performance.


----------



## Oldhoosierdude

Royal Philharmonic Orchestra & Yuri Simionov. - A strong performance.

The Boulez recording previously mentioned is my only other. I have heard the Ozawa and Craft and would pick them up if I ever saw them floating around.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

I have plenty of favorites - 1929 Stokowski, both Dorati’s, Bernstein, Boulez, Markevitch, Stravinsky - but the one I keep coming back to is the 1951 Monteux/BSO. Everything is paced just right.


----------



## adriesba

Just listened to the Ozawa recording today. It's another good one with good sound. Boy, I'm going to have a hard time picking a favorite! :lol:


----------



## flamencosketches

I think Boulez/Cleveland/Sony will likely remain my favorite, though there are others I like too, Levi/Atlanta, Stravinsky/Columbia. I should hear the Ozawa/Chicago and Bernstein/NY. 

Hey, that's funny, all American orchestras. Do American bands own this piece? Of course, it was premièred in France. Are there any great recordings with French conductors and/or orchestras? I know Pierre Monteux premièred the work, has he left behind a great recording of it...? Do Germans stand a chance with this music? I'm kind of laughing to myself trying to picture the Berlin Philharmonic taking on the Rite, but I'm sure they could bring it home under the right conductor.


----------



## adriesba

flamencosketches said:


> I think Boulez/Cleveland/Sony will likely remain my favorite, though there are others I like too, Levi/Atlanta, Stravinsky/Columbia. I should hear the Ozawa/Chicago and Bernstein/NY.
> 
> Hey, that's funny, all American orchestras. Do American bands own this piece? Of course, it was premièred in France. Are there any great recordings with French conductors and/or orchestras? I know Pierre Monteux premièred the work, has he left behind a great recording of it...? Do Germans stand a chance with this music? I'm kind of laughing to myself trying to picture the Berlin Philharmonic taking on the Rite, but I'm sure they could bring it home under the right conductor.


There do seem to be a lot of American orchestras in people's recommendations. This discography page might be a good start to try to find French orchestras:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Rite_of_Spring_discography

I'm looking at potentially the 1991 Barenboim recording.


----------



## adriesba

I really should try the Boulez recording. It's been recommended many times on this thread.


----------



## david johnson

Boulez/ORTF orchestra from France. Super from late 60s or early 70s.


----------



## flamencosketches

Apparently, this one is supposed to be really good:










Peter Eötvös conducting the Junge Deutsche Philharmonie. Anyone heard it? I love the weird cover artwork.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

flamencosketches said:


> I think Boulez/Cleveland/Sony will likely remain my favorite, though there are others I like too, Levi/Atlanta, Stravinsky/Columbia. I should hear the Ozawa/Chicago and Bernstein/NY.
> 
> Hey, that's funny, all American orchestras. Do American bands own this piece? Of course, it was premièred in France. Are there any great recordings with French conductors and/or orchestras? I know Pierre Monteux premièred the work, has he left behind a great recording of it...? Do Germans stand a chance with this music? I'm kind of laughing to myself trying to picture the Berlin Philharmonic taking on the Rite, but I'm sure they could bring it home under the right conductor.


Check out Monteux's 1951 Boston recording on RCA. My favorite!


----------



## Heck148

Brahmsianhorn said:


> Check out Monteux's 1951 Boston recording on RCA. My favorite!


Monteux's conducting is superb...not so impressed with the orchestra execution..not really competitive with some other versions...same with his BSO "Petrushka"...


----------



## flamencosketches

Brahmsianhorn said:


> Check out Monteux's 1951 Boston recording on RCA. My favorite!


Hah, another American orchestra. I'll add it to the list to check out though!


----------



## CnC Bartok

My three favourite recordings are:

Stravinsky's own with the Columbia SO
Markevitch (1960 I think)
Kent Nagano (Virgin)


----------



## HenryPenfold

Currentzis
Boiulez (Sony)
Gergiev


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

Heck148 said:


> Monteux's conducting is superb...not so impressed with the orchestra execution..not really competitive with some other versions...same with his BSO "Petrushka"...


Sometimes you lose a little bit of orchestral execution with conducting that is more spontaneous. For me that is more exciting than pinpoint execution where the pacing sounds telegraphed, more thought out in advance as opposed to in the moment.


----------



## Heck148

Brahmsianhorn said:


> Sometimes you lose a little bit of orchestral execution with conducting that is more spontaneous. For me that is more exciting than pinpoint execution where the pacing sounds telegraphed, more thought out in advance as opposed to in the moment.


Monteux was very precise, and exact in his conducting...and I don't mean stodgy or pedestrian at all...like Reiner, he knew exactly what he wanted to do, and gave very clear signals to the orchestra...I find these conductors to be both pre-thought/conceived, and spontaneous...they had the concept, and the technique down completely....


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

Heck148 said:


> Monteux was very precise, and exact in his conducting...and I don't mean stodgy or pedestrian at all...like Reiner, he knew exactly what he wanted to do, and gave very clear signals to the orchestra...I find these conductors to be both pre-thought/conceived, and spontaneous...they had the concept, and the technique down completely....


Monteux's Sacre is very spontaneous and free-wheeling. That is why it is my favorite alongside Stokowski 1929, another conductor with a gift for spontaneity.


----------



## Heck148

Brahmsianhorn said:


> Monteux's Sacre is very spontaneous and free-wheeling. That is why it is my favorite alongside Stokowski 1929, another conductor with a gift for spontaneity.


Yes, Monteux's conducting is superb...I just have issues with some of the orchestra playing...the wind/brass sections were not in great shape...
Stoki's '29 version is terrific...some legendary musicians in that one...


----------



## adriesba

Just listened to the Deutsche Grammophon Boulez recording. Again, like the Dorati recording, it seemed slightly underwhelming towards the beginning, but it got good afterwards. I was slightly disappointed that some of the percussion instruments seemed to be overshadowed at times. Overall a good recording though.


----------



## Pepe

*Rite of Spring recordings*

I have recently done a fairly detailed comparison between a number of Rite of Spring recordings, and here's my personal top 3 at the moment:

*1. Osawa - Chicago - 1968*
The quiet parts (Introduction to part 1 & 2, Mystic Circles) are better presented in other recordings, but Osawa is my reference recording for most of the heavier sections (Ritual of the Rival Tribes/Procession of the Sage, Glorification of the Chosen ONe)

*2. Levi - Atlanta - 1991*
The best interpretation of Spring Rounds I've heard, otherwise excellent as well.

*3. Litton - Bergen - 2008*
Very impressed by the overall sound quality and especially the percussion section.

Some comments on the other recordings I have listened to:

*Gergiev - Kirov - 1999*
This recording didn't do much for me. It sounds like a bootleg recorded by a member of the audience, the instrument balance is weird and there is a lot of distracting noise in the quieter sections. Whoever called this "the best Rite in 40 years" probably received kickback from the CD sales.

*Jansons - Oslo - 1993*
Good recording and performance, but the choice of tempi is unusual in a few places. (He's one of the few conductors that chooses to play Augurs of Spring at the tempo specified in the score, even Stravinsky himself had it played faster on recordings!)

*Gatti - ONDF - 2013*
Disappointing, already in the first bars of Augurs of Spring there are rhythmic imprecisions (if there ever was a piece that demanded rhythmic precision, this is it). Not inspired to listen more than once.

*Bernstein - NY Phil. - 1958*
This recording needs neither criticism nor praise from me, it is rightly revered. The heavier parts are generally played with a similar intensity to Osawa's recording, and Bernstein is not afraid to put his own stamp on the recording.

There were a few others I auditioned as well, but they either lacked personality (Craft on Naxos was particularly dull) or the personality on display did not feel "Rite" (Dorati - Detroit - 1981 is not uniteresting at all, but it's not my kind of Rite). Looking forward to get Boulez - Cleveland - 1963 and Rattle - Berlin - 2012.

Finally, it should be noted that (for me, at least) the Rite of Spring really requires top recording quality to be fully enjoyed, as it's a piece that covers a very large spectrum of frequency, timbres and decibels (the curse of audiophilia)! As much as I enjoy Osawa's rendition, the quiet parts really have too much hiss.


----------



## adriesba

I just listened to the Currentzis recording. It seemed promising in the first half (except the very beginning wind section. That was disappointing), but the second half was very bland. The "Sacrificial Dance" had no sense of urgency, chaos, or brutality at all. Overall, I found it very poor.


----------



## adriesba

Pepe said:


> Finally, it should be noted that (for me, at least) the Rite of Spring really requires top recording quality to be fully enjoyed, as it's a piece that covers a very large spectrum of frequency, timbres and decibels (the curse of audiophilia)! As much as I enjoy Osawa's rendition, the quiet parts really have too much hiss.


I agree. _Le Sacre du Printemps _is very colorful. Older recordings or recordings or recordings with less than perfect sound quality can be enjoyed, but full appreciation requires good sound. Personally, I am finding the Ozawa recording to fulfill most of my preferences though. I've been disappointed by the number of recordings in which the percussion is overshadowed. It bothers me if I can't hear the tamtam and güiro at the end of the first half or the cymbals at the end of the second half. I like the Solti recording, but too many percussion instruments are basically inaudible. They can be heard well on the Ozawa recording, but not quite as much as I would like. More modern recordings allow these instruments to be heard well, but the performance quality is often lacking.


----------



## perdido34

I want to mention a trio of excellent (IMO) versions that have been overlooked in this thread so far:
---Chailly/Cleveland
---van Zweden on Exton (can't recall the orchestra)
---Dudamel


----------



## adriesba

perdido34 said:


> I want to mention a trio of excellent (IMO) versions that have been overlooked in this thread so far:
> ---Chailly/Cleveland
> ---van Zweden on Exton (can't recall the orchestra)
> ---Dudamel


The Chailly recording is on Decca. Maybe it has good sound quality. Thanks. 

I wonder why these haven't been talked about though.


----------



## adriesba

Pepe, which release of the Ozawa recording do you have? I've found three, but I don't know if they are all the same master.

View attachment 132430


View attachment 132432


View attachment 132431


----------



## Pepe

The High Performance, which as I understand is a new digital transfer from the master tapes. I used to own the RCA Silver Seal version originally, but I've lost it and can't compare the two back to back. In any case, Osawa's Rite is required listening for anyone who's into this work.


----------



## adriesba

I just listened to the Chailly recording (he has two; I listened to the one with the Cleveland Orchestra released in 1987). It was generally good throughout. The percussion were very clear with a strong bass drum! From the "Martial Dance" to the end was some of the best I have listened to so far. Thank you for the recommendations, perdido34.


----------



## adriesba

It looks like Bernstein made about 4 or so other audio recordings of _Le Sacre du Printemps_ . How are they?


----------



## Simplicissimus

Pepe said:


> The High Performance, which as I understand is a new digital transfer from the master tapes. I used to own the RCA Silver Seal version originally, but I've lost it and can't compare the two back to back. In any case, Osawa's Rite is required listening for anyone who's into this work.


I'm glad to hear endoresements of Ozawa's Le Sacre du Printemps. Just wanted to mention another CD version, which is the one I have. It is the third CD in the 6-CD Ozawa/Chicago Symphony Orchestra (complete RCA recordings) box set by Sony. The album cover is shown below. The CDs in this set have nice original LP album cover reproductions, including the back of the covers which are fully legible thanks to very high quality printing. The original LP was released in 1968 as LSC-3026.

This recording of Le Sacre du Printemps was made on July 1, 1968 in Orchestra Hall (Chicago). That is after the remodeling of Orchestra Hall in 1966, which was said by many critics to have worsened the acoustics substantially. Therefore, some people might hold that the sound quality of this recording is not particularly good. As for the remastering, the only information I have is that it was done by Kazuie Sugimoto of the JVC Mastering Center. On my good but not high end system, I find the sound quality very good, I'd say in the top 25% of all the recordings I own. I sort of wish that the recording had been made in the pre-renovation Orchestra Hall or in the Medinah Temple, like most of the other recordings in this set.


----------



## Heck148

Ozawa's CSO "Rite" is quite good....not as good as Solti's, which is better overall...but the orchestra knew the work well, having played it shortly before with Martinon...one of the CSO musicians who played for both told me that Martinon was really excellent, led the orchestra well (I have a live concert recording of it) and there were parts where Ozawa simply did not feel the rhythm...he basically followed the orchestra thru those parts....interestingly enough, a BostonSO musician said pretty much the same thing....that there were parts of the score that Ozawa simply didn't "get"...that the orchestra just played thru, Ozawa followed them...


----------



## Pepe

In general, I think conductors get too much credit! The musicians, as well as the recording and mixing engineers, should be credited in equally large letters as the conductor. Interesting background info, Heck148, I have always felt that "Osawa's Rite" sounded surprisingly aggressive for a young and relatively inexperienced conductor. Makes sense to me what you say, that it was in fact a well rehearsed orchestra in the driving seat.



Heck148 said:


> Ozawa's CSO "Rite" is quite good....not as good as Solti's, which is better overall...but the orchestra knew the work well, having played it shortly before with Martinon...one of the CSO musicians who played for both told me that Martinon was really excellent, led the orchestra well (I have a live concert recording of it) and there were parts where Ozawa simply did not feel the rhythm...he basically followed the orchestra thru those parts....interestingly enough, a BostonSO musician said pretty much the same thing....that there were parts of the score that Ozawa simply didn't "get"...that the orchestra just played thru, Ozawa followed them...


----------



## adriesba

Heck148 said:


> Ozawa's CSO "Rite" is quite good....not as good as Solti's, which is better overall...but the orchestra knew the work well, having played it shortly before with Martinon...one of the CSO musicians who played for both told me that Martinon was really excellent, led the orchestra well (I have a live concert recording of it) and there were parts where Ozawa simply did not feel the rhythm...he basically followed the orchestra thru those parts....interestingly enough, a BostonSO musician said pretty much the same thing....that there were parts of the score that Ozawa simply didn't "get"...that the orchestra just played thru, Ozawa followed them...


I find this rather humorous. Not sure if it makes me hold Ozawa in lower regard now.


----------



## perdido34

adriesba said:


> It looks like Bernstein made about 4 or so other audio recordings of _Le Sacre du Printemps_ . How are they?


I find the live performance he did with London Symphony (in a YouTube video) better than the best of his studio recordings (NY Phil).


----------



## adriesba

perdido34 said:


> I find the live performance he did with London Symphony (in a YouTube video) better than the best of his studio recordings (NY Phil).


I watched that video. It was quite a good performance.


----------



## Malx

I have the box below which covers all my needs - as to which is the best, that's a question I'd struggle to answer as there are many I enjoy as I'm listening to them. Can I sit on the fence on this occasion.


----------



## pacret

I was listening Karel Ancerl today. He seems really good, but I am no expert.


----------



## pacret

About this Ancerl album, I wish to add that the sound is outstanding and every instrument remains clearly audible even at the paroxysm of the played music.

And an other thing, is the quality of the orchestra : great attention to every detail and real virtuosity, paired with an impressive rythm.


----------



## flamencosketches

I'm back on team Boulez/Cleveland/Columbia. What a recording...!


----------



## Oldhoosierdude

https://www.prestomusic.com/classical/products/8024206--stravinsky-le-sacre-du-printemps

Possibly already mentioned but 20 cd's of 38 recordings of Rite. Quite expensive but free if you have access to Hoopla through your local public library (USA). I give the Presto link because it lists everything.


----------



## The3Bs

For a long time I only owned and listened to:

Kent Nagano ‎, The London Philharmonic Orchestra (on a Virgin double CD)

More recently I like very much also:

Teodor Currentzis, MusicAeterna


----------



## Oldhoosierdude

I haven't plugged the two I own. Boulez, which has been mentioned.

And Simonov with the RPO.








This recording is available all over the place on a number of labels. Some bargain basement prices such as the Bach Guild Stravinsky box. It is a clear and concise recording. Good all the way around i believe.


----------



## sstucky

Boulez/Cleveland (1969). I know Stravinsky is supposed to have hated it, but its perfection is mind blowing.


----------



## jegreenwood

sstucky said:


> Boulez/Cleveland (1969). I know Stravinsky is supposed to have hated it, but its perfection is mind blowing.


I have the Sony and DG Boulez "Rites." I need to listen to them back to back.


----------



## Heck148

sstucky said:


> Boulez/Cleveland (1969). I know Stravinsky is supposed to have hated it, but its perfection is mind blowing.


The Boulez/Cleveland is a great effort...Szell's Orchestra in great form...my only reservation is purely subjective - the opening bassoon solo (George Goslee) is played almost "sans espressione", sterile, with little inflection or expression...this, I believe, was Boulez' instruction - he wanted the solo to be rather "primordial", an awakening, straight, 
without inflection...I don't agree with this, I hear it as more of an invocation, a call to celebrate, that indeed welcomes expressiveness... but that's just my opinion... Boulez knew what he wanted, and he certainly makes a convincing case for it.


----------



## Vasks

I grew up on the composer's Columbia recording. With score in hand I always had a bit of a problem following the Sacrificial Dance. A few years ago I bought the Boulez/Cleveland and voila! No problem following the score!


----------



## Atomas

I was big Boulez fan since i found Sir Eugene Goossens with LSO 1960. Now it's my favorite


----------



## Oldhoosierdude

Atomas said:


> I was big Boulez fan since i found Sir Eugene Goossens with LSO 1960. Now it's my favorite


I was wondering about that one. I have Goossens Scheherezade and like it.


----------



## Atomas

what is the year of Scheherezade recording?


----------



## Oldhoosierdude

Atomas said:


> what is the year of Scheherezade recording?


 Recording Location and Date:
Walthamstow Assembly Hall, London (November
1958)

The US Amazon link, not sure if you can get this where you are. https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B075X3BFP3/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_search_asin_title?ie=UTF8&psc=1


----------



## adriesba

Of Karajan's two studio recordings which one is the first and which the second? I mean by the album cover. I'm confused about which one is which.


----------



## Kiki

adriesba said:


> Of Karajan's two studio recordings which one is the first and which the second? I mean by the album cover. I'm confused about which one is which.


The first on DG was recorded in 1963-64.









The second on DG was recorded in 1975-77.









DG's re-issues over the years often used different covers. I believe the one re-issued with the Prokofiev 5 from the "The Originals" series is the 1975-77, i.e. the second one. Sorry can't help you with other re-issues.

Apart from the two DGs, there are in fact two more recordings on CDs -

On Testament, live recording made in 1972.









On Palexa, live recording made in 1978.


----------



## adriesba

Thank you, Kiki. :tiphat:
It was those two specific editions you listed that I was confused about.


----------



## Kiki

^^ Think the re-issue coupled with the Prokofiev 5th should be 1975-77 instead, since it's (P) 1977. Corrected now. Sorry about that. The 2 original covers that I posted are correct though.


----------



## adriesba

Vasks said:


> I grew up on the composer's Columbia recording. With score in hand I always had a bit of a problem following the Sacrificial Dance. A few years ago I bought the Boulez/Cleveland and voila! No problem following the score!


There is a recording with David Zinman that includes a track with him discussing different versions of the piece. Apparently Stravinsky edited the score to make it easier for him to conduct. I think it was because of some strange time signatures for the "Sacrificial Dance". I don't know music theory though, so I probably can't explain this adequately.


----------



## adriesba

Of Monteux's recordings which is the most essential?


----------



## adriesba

Anyone heard this, or know another release with this recording?

View attachment 134728


There's only one on Amazon (and on the whole internet it looks). It's super expensive!


----------



## adriesba

I think the discussion may have transferred to another thread, but I'll ask here.

I've seen several people mention Stravinsky's own opinions on various recordings. Where can I find what he said?


----------

