# Recommendations Please!



## AfterHours

I would very much appreciate your assistance in finding better recorded performances than those I've listed on my "Greatest Classical Music Works - Best Recorded Performances" list over on besteveralbums.com.

To visit my list, go here: https://www.besteveralbums.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=458120#458120

This list is updated pretty frequently, so be wary of changes. I will notify of any Classical Works added to it and updated recordings right here on this thread (as well as on its besteveralbums.com thread). This will make it much easier to keep track of.

There are so many experienced, knowledgeable users on this site and I'd love to hear from you about any recordings of these works that might be better than those I've already provided. Feel free to post recommendations, or just discuss them, or anything related to any of them. Though I've been quite meticulous with my choices, I am always looking to improve them (wherever possible).

Note: in cases where you feel there is NOT a better choice than what I've provided, feel free to recommend a "best HIP performance" (where the selection I've made is with modern instruments), or a "best modern performance" (where the selection I've made is HIP). I will very likely be branching out to including at least one of each, so this would be most helpful.

Please note that this is not my entire list of "Greatest Classical Works". It is just those I've updated onto that list so far. There are _at least_ 100+ additional works that I've already heard, yet to be added, but which are deserving of being on such a "Greatest of All Time" list -- so again, this will be expanded pretty consistently as I revisit them and/or simply determine their ranking. And then of course, there will be brand new additions of works I've recently discovered.

Also, if you have any questions about my criteria or choices, feel free to ask.


----------



## Pugg

If I go to your website my P.C gets in a alarm mode, not safe and no security guaranteed.
Any info on that?


----------



## AfterHours

Pugg said:


> If I go to your website my P.C gets in a alarm mode, not safe and no security guaranteed.
> Any info on that?


Hmmm, interesting... I've never had a single problem or heard of that with besteveralbums.com. It's a large site, been around for several years, probably similar in size and users (at least) to this one, so I would doubt that it's a real issue.


----------



## realdealblues

Just glancing through your list there is a definitely a good deal we would disagree on and I would make different suggestions too, but one right off the bat is that Solti Schubert 9th...ugh! 

Solti takes the exposition repeat in the finale and no where else which makes absolutely no sense and throws the entire Symphony off balance in my opinion. Not to mention he took some nut job's idea in the late 70's that Schubert’s long accent marks were really decrescendos which is utter nonsense!

To hear how Schubert's 9th should go I would recommend two recordings, one with repeats and one without.

#1. Charles Munch/Boston Symphony Orchestra. (without repeats)
#2. Riccardo Muti/Vienna Philharmonic (with repeats)

Either of those recordings are infinitely better than the Solti one.


----------



## Kjetil Heggelund

I'm glad that the Artemis quartet gets mentioned with Schubert no. 14. I really like all their recordings. They aren't so bad in Schuberts quintet either.


----------



## realdealblues

I will go through the whole list on ones I feel I can make suggestions on if you want, but I will suggest a few that are empty right now instead:

Wagner: Tristan Und Isolde
Karl Bohm/Bayreuth Festival Orchestra

Sibelius: Symphony #2
George Szell/Concertgebouw Orchestra

Bruckner: Symphony #8
Lorin Maazel/Berlin Philharmonic or Herbert Von Karajan/Vienna Philharmonic

Shostakovich: Symphony #7 "Leningrad"
Leonard Bernstein/Chicago Symphony Orchestra

Hindemith: Mathis der Maler
William Steinberg/Boston Symphony Orchestra

Mozart: Symphony #39
Karl Bohm/Berlin Philharmonic

Tchaikovsky: Symphony #5
George Szell/Cleveland Orchestra

Bernstein: Symphony #2 "Age Of Anxiety"
Leonard Bernstein/New York Philharmonic (Piano: Philippe Entremont_)_

Schumann: Piano Concerto
Radu Lupu/Andre Previn/London Symphony

Holst: The Planets
Herbert Von Karajan/Vienna Philharmonic

Mussorgsky: Pictures At An Exhibition
Fritz Reiner/Chicago

Beethoven: Triple Concerto
Herbert Von Karajan/Berlin Philharmonic (Oistrakh/Rostrapovich/Richter)


----------



## Chatellerault

Piano Sonata No. 8 in C Minor "Pathetique" - Ludwig van Beethoven (1798) 
Piano Sonata No. 29 in B-flat Major "Hammerklavier" - Ludwig van Beethoven (1818) 

Best HIP Recording: Ronald Brautigam (he has recorded all the 32 but these ones are really stunning, from the first chord of the Pathétique)

Also I noticed a complete absence of Debussy, Ravel and other French warhorses such as Franck's violin sonata and Dutilleux’s Métaboles


----------



## chesapeake bay

You can try Mahler's 5th with Rudolph Barshai and the Junge Deutsche Philharmonie


----------



## realdealblues

Also ones I will agree on:

Dvorak: Symphony #9 “From The New World”
Leonard Bernstein/New York Philharmonic (Definitely my desert island recording of this work)

Brahms: Requiem
Otto Klemperer/Philharmonia Orchestra (Again, definitely my desert island recording)

Brahms: Symphony #3
Gunter Wand/NDR Symphony Orchestra (Great, but so are Walter, Levine, Klemperer, Abbado)

Ives: Symphony #4
Michael Tilson Thomas/Chicago Symphony (Again, tops for me)

Beethoven: Symphony #3 "Eroica"
Pierre Monteux/Concertgebow (This one is indeed fine, but equal or better are Szell, Munch, Wand, Dohnanyi)

Mahler: Symphony #5
Leonard Bernstein/Vienna Philharmonic (Wonderful, but so is Karajan/Berlin and Levine/Philadelphia)

Beethoven: Symphony #7
Manfred Honeck/Pittsburgh (A great new recording but Szell, Bernstein, Kleiber, Dorati, Wand are all equally amazing)

Schubert: Symphony #8 “Unfinished”
Eugen Jochum/Boston Symphony (Unfortunately forgotten by most...what a performance!)

Liszt: Faust Symphony
Leonard Bernstein/New York (Both this one and Bernstein/Boston are top of the heap for me)

Concertos and Solo works are harder for me because Soloists each have a different voice and can be far more personal...but I will agree that many listed are great recordings like:

Beethoven Sting Quartets by The Alban Berg Quartett are all excellent.

Beethoven: Piano Sonatas by the likes of Maurizio Pollini and Annie Fischer are excellent.

Mozart Concertos by the likes of: Alfred Brendel, Andras Schiff, Rudolf Buchbinder are all excellent.

Brahms: Piano Concerto #2
Sviatoslav Richter/Erich Leinsdorf is great for Richter's viewpoint but Fleisher, Serkin, Gilels, Katchen are all great and have a more classical viewpoint.

Tchaikovsky: Piano Concerto #1
Argerich/Abbado is great but there are other great ones as well.

Brahms: Piano Concerto #1
Rudolf Serkin/George Szell is a great one but again there are several others with equally valid viewpoints that are just as great in my book.


----------



## bigshot

I don't see any point in even thinking about a "best" performance when comparing different interpretations is often like comparing apples and oranges. With the history of recording as big and varied as it is, there are dozens of "bests" for most major works.


----------



## Klassik

I'll only list the ones where I have listened to several performances and have a strong favorite:


Symphony No. 8 in C Minor - Anton Bruckner (1892): Wand/Berlin/RCA 
Symphony No. 3 in C Minor "Organ" - Camille Saint-Saens (1886): Ormandy/Power Biggs/Philadelphia/Sony
The Planets - Gustav Holst (1916) - Dutoit/Montreal/Decca (Though Mehta/LA/Decca is very close here)

I do agree with bigshot above though that it's very hard to say what the "best" performance is since that is subjective. You can only poll favorites and say which is liked by the most.


----------



## merlinus

Arguing about which version of anything is "best" is an exercise in futility. FWIW, the only choice of the original poster that I agree with is Annie Fischer's Hammerklavier, but even there, I could easily choose someone else's interpretation.

à chacun son goût, de gustibus non est disputandum, and all that.


----------



## AfterHours

realdealblues said:


> Just glancing through your list there is a definitely a good deal we would disagree on and I would make different suggestions too, but one right off the bat is that Solti Schubert 9th...ugh!
> 
> Solti takes the exposition repeat in the finale and no where else which makes absolutely no sense and throws the entire Symphony off balance in my opinion. Not to mention he took some nut job's idea in the late 70's that Schubert's long accent marks were really decrescendos which is utter nonsense!
> 
> To hear how Schubert's 9th should go I would recommend two recordings, one with repeats and one without.
> 
> #1. Charles Munch/Boston Symphony Orchestra. (without repeats)
> #2. Riccardo Muti/Vienna Philharmonic (with repeats)
> 
> Either of those recordings are infinitely better than the Solti one.


I do disagree that it "throws the whole symphony off balance" and I think it's an outstanding performance in every way, but thank you for the recommendations. I've heard Munch's, which is fantastic, and I've considered for the position before. I am not sure if I've heard Muti's before... I'll revisit #1 and check out #2.


----------



## realdealblues

bigshot said:


> I don't see any point in even thinking about a "best" performance when comparing different interpretations is often like comparing apples and oranges. With the history of recording as big and varied as it is, there are dozens of "bests" for most major works.


Agreed...there are no "Best" recordings. There are personal favorites which I should add are the recommendations I made. So "Recommended Recordings" might be a better title for the original poster to use.

I sometimes have a dozen or two dozen favorite recordings of various works, others I only have one or two.


----------



## AfterHours

realdealblues said:


> I will go through the whole list on ones I feel I can make suggestions on if you want, but I will suggest a few that are empty right now instead:
> 
> Wagner: Tristan Und Isolde
> Karl Bohm/Bayreuth Festival Orchestra
> 
> Sibelius: Symphony #2
> George Szell/Concertgebouw Orchestra
> 
> Bruckner: Symphony #8
> Lorin Maazel/Berlin Philharmonic or Herbert Von Karajan/Vienna Philharmonic
> 
> Shostakovich: Symphony #7 "Leningrad"
> Leonard Bernstein/Chicago Symphony Orchestra
> 
> Hindemith: Mathis der Maler
> William Steinberg/Boston Symphony Orchestra
> 
> Mozart: Symphony #39
> Karl Bohm/Berlin Philharmonic
> 
> Tchaikovsky: Symphony #5
> George Szell/Cleveland Orchestra
> 
> Bernstein: Symphony #2 "Age Of Anxiety"
> Leonard Bernstein/New York Philharmonic (Piano: Philippe Entremont_)_
> 
> Schumann: Piano Concerto
> Radu Lupu/Andre Previn/London Symphony
> 
> Holst: The Planets
> Herbert Von Karajan/Vienna Philharmonic
> 
> Mussorgsky: Pictures At An Exhibition
> Fritz Reiner/Chicago
> 
> Beethoven: Triple Concerto
> Herbert Von Karajan/Berlin Philharmonic (Oistrakh/Rostrapovich/Richter)


Thank you, I probably already agree with you that Bohm/Bayreuth is the best Tristan. What a performance! Just one of the more difficult selections so I haven't updated it yet.

Of those you list, I haven't heard the following recordings:

Sibelius: Symphony #2
George Szell/Concertgebouw Orchestra

Tchaikovsky: Symphony #5
George Szell/Cleveland Orchestra

Schumann: Piano Concerto
Radu Lupu/Andre Previn/London Symphony

So I will check those out, and revisit the others as necessary. Lots of listening in my future -- as always


----------



## AfterHours

Chatellerault said:


> Piano Sonata No. 8 in C Minor "Pathetique" - Ludwig van Beethoven (1798)
> Piano Sonata No. 29 in B-flat Major "Hammerklavier" - Ludwig van Beethoven (1818)
> 
> Best HIP Recording: Ronald Brautigam (he has recorded all the 32 but these ones are really stunning, from the first chord of the Pathétique)
> 
> Also I noticed a complete absence of Debussy, Ravel and other French warhorses such as Franck's violin sonata and Dutilleux's Métaboles


Yes, there are several missing Classical Works that will be added in the future, perhaps those among them? I'll see...

Great recommendation on Brautigam's Beethoven Piano Sonatas! He really does do such an excellent job with an extremely difficult task. I'll revisit those two out in particular.


----------



## AfterHours

chesapeake bay said:


> You can try Mahler's 5th with Rudolph Barshai and the Junge Deutsche Philharmonie


Thank you, will do!


----------



## AfterHours

realdealblues said:


> Also ones I will agree on:
> 
> Dvorak: Symphony #9 "From The New World"
> Leonard Bernstein/New York Philharmonic (Definitely my desert island recording of this work)
> 
> Brahms: Requiem
> Otto Klemperer/Philharmonia Orchestra (Again, definitely my desert island recording)
> 
> Brahms: Symphony #3
> Gunter Wand/NDR Symphony Orchestra (Great, but so are Walter, Levine, Klemperer, Abbado)
> 
> Ives: Symphony #4
> Michael Tilson Thomas/Chicago Symphony (Again, tops for me)
> 
> Beethoven: Symphony #3 "Eroica"
> Pierre Monteux/Concertgebow (This one is indeed fine, but equal or better are Szell, Munch, Wand, Dohnanyi)
> 
> Mahler: Symphony #5
> Leonard Bernstein/Vienna Philharmonic (Wonderful, but so is Karajan/Berlin and Levine/Philadelphia)
> 
> Beethoven: Symphony #7
> Manfred Honeck/Pittsburgh (A great new recording but Szell, Bernstein, Kleiber, Dorati, Wand are all equally amazing)
> 
> Schubert: Symphony #8 "Unfinished"
> Eugen Jochum/Boston Symphony (Unfortunately forgotten by most...what a performance!)
> 
> Liszt: Faust Symphony
> Leonard Bernstein/New York (Both this one and Bernstein/Boston are top of the heap for me)
> 
> Concertos and Solo works are harder for me because Soloists each have a different voice and can be far more personal...but I will agree that many listed are great recordings like:
> 
> Beethoven Sting Quartets by The Alban Berg Quartett are all excellent.
> 
> Beethoven: Piano Sonatas by the likes of Maurizio Pollini and Annie Fischer are excellent.
> 
> Mozart Concertos by the likes of: Alfred Brendel, Andras Schiff, Rudolf Buchbinder are all excellent.
> 
> Brahms: Piano Concerto #2
> Sviatoslav Richter/Erich Leinsdorf is great for Richter's viewpoint but Fleisher, Serkin, Gilels, Katchen are all great and have a more classical viewpoint.
> 
> Tchaikovsky: Piano Concerto #1
> Argerich/Abbado is great but there are other great ones as well.
> 
> Brahms: Piano Concerto #1
> Rudolf Serkin/George Szell is a great one but again there are several others with equally valid viewpoints that are just as great in my book.


Thank you, I agree with your points, including the alternative selections you listed, most of which I've heard and are no doubt excellent.


----------



## AfterHours

bigshot said:


> I don't see any point in even thinking about a "best" performance when comparing different interpretations is often like comparing apples and oranges. With the history of recording as big and varied as it is, there are dozens of "bests" for most major works.


I do explain on the besteveralbums.com page the general parameters of what I'm looking for. These things are always subjective of course, though I don't agree that one can't find a performance that best matches one's criteria, and call it the "best" in his/her view. I also agree that there are usually several close candidates, and that getting it down to one is an absurd task -- speaking from experience!  There is a strong possibility that, in the future, I'll expand the selections to 3 recordings (or something like that) per Classical Work.


----------



## AfterHours

Klassik said:


> I'll only list the ones where I have listened to several performances and have a strong favorite:
> 
> 
> Symphony No. 8 in C Minor - Anton Bruckner (1892): Wand/Berlin/RCA
> Symphony No. 3 in C Minor "Organ" - Camille Saint-Saens (1886): Ormandy/Power Biggs/Philadelphia/Sony
> The Planets - Gustav Holst (1916) - Dutoit/Montreal/Decca (Though Mehta/LA/Decca is very close here)
> 
> I do agree with bigshot above though that it's very hard to say what the "best" performance is since that is subjective. You can only poll favorites and say which is liked by the most.


Thank you very much! I've heard Dutoit's Planets (which is exceptional), but I don't think I've heard the others. Will check them out accordingly.

Re: favorties/best performance and what-have-you ... It's all subjective (or should be)


----------



## Klassik

AfterHours said:


> Re: favorties/best performance and what-have-you ... It's all subjective (or should be)


Yeah, sometimes the smallest of factors can influence preferences. Even small differences in recording quality can have an impact. Fidelity is not that important to some, but it's all important to others. Most people live somewhere in the middle of the range.

As for HIP Schubert symphonies, I'm currently listening to the Bruggen box from Philips (I have the reissued version from Decca). I've listened to 5, 6, 8, and 9 so far and really like what I'm hearing. I can't really compare it to other HIP Schubert, but it might be worth a try.


----------



## AfterHours

Klassik said:


> Yeah, sometimes the smallest of factors can influence preferences. Even small differences in recording quality can have an impact. Fidelity is not that important to some, but it's all important to others. Most people live somewhere in the middle of the range.
> 
> As for HIP Schubert symphonies, I'm currently listening to the Bruggen box from Philips (I have the reissued version from Decca). I've listened to 5, 6, 8, and 9 so far and really like what I'm hearing. I can't really compare it to other HIP Schubert, but it might be worth a try.


Thank you, I'll look into those! I love Bruggen's Haydn Symphonies!


----------



## bigshot

AfterHours said:


> I do explain on the besteveralbums.com page the general parameters of what I'm looking for.


If you can nail down the criteria you want us to judge by, we could give you a recommendation then. Do you want fast or slow? Is precision in playing what you're looking for or expressiveness? Do you want a "traditional" approach or do you want something that expresses the originality of the performer? Is sound quality of primary importance, or would you accept a great performance with inferior sound?

Those are the sorts of things you need to define before we can recommend "bests". It isn't just a matter of "like" if you are careful to define the criteria for judging.


----------



## AfterHours

bigshot said:


> If you can nail down the criteria you want us to judge by, we could give you a recommendation then. Do you want fast or slow? Is precision in playing what you're looking for or expressiveness? Do you want a "traditional" approach or do you want something that expresses the originality of the performer? Is sound quality of primary importance, or would you accept a great performance with inferior sound?
> 
> Those are the sorts of things you need to define before we can recommend "bests". It isn't just a matter of "like" if you are careful to define the criteria for judging.


Outside of what I've stated on the BEA page, I feel this could just become too complicated -- overly specific in terms of requests. I would say that it should stay within the general parameters of the composer's known wishes.

I'm perfectly fine with you, or anyone, simply recommending those performances you prefer, including multiple recordings for a single Classical Work (though try and limit that a bit per recommendation, as it could get to a point where there is just no way I'm going to listen to them all anytime soon). You're also welcome to provide insight into why you recommend them, if you'd like.


----------



## TurnaboutVox

For Beethoven's last 5 string quartets the Alban Bergs are certainly contenders, but their rather cool, clinical aspirations to perfection are clearly not the only approach to take. My favourites here are the Quartetto Italiano, who seem to me to give more personal readings, and the Talich Quartet on Calliope, who really do concentrate less on absolute accuracy and more on communicating the essence of the music, as they feel it. Their accounts are absolutely heart-felt.

For Beethoven's duo sonatas for piano and violin, alongside Melnikov and Faust I'd suggest Gidon Kremer and Martha Argerich, who I'd suggest steal the top prize here, much though I do like Melnikov and Faust.


In Schubert's great quartets (No. 14 and 15) I'm not familiar with your choice (the Artemis Quartet) but an alternative is the Quartetto Italiano again. Their performances (recorded on Philips in the late 1960s) of both quartets are phenomenal in their grip and intensity. The recordings are good for their time, and still quite good by modern standards.

For Schubert's string quintet I own the Alban Berg / Heinrich Schiff recording but still swear by (and prefer) the Chilingirian Quartet with Jennifer Ward Clarke (EMI (CfP), 1981) whose performance, again, is remarkable for its pathos and sheer intensity, particularly in the first two movements. An almost forgotten master-recording.

In the piano quintet I like the vintage recording by the Beaux Arts Trio with Samuel Rhodes and Georg Hörtnagel.


For the Shostakovich string quartets 3 & 11 - the Borodin Quartet and the Fitzwilliam Quartet are both excellent and get very deep into this wonderful music. I've not liked anything very much I've heard the Emersons do, Webern excepted, but I haven't heard their Shostakovich, so perhaps I shouldn't comment.

For Bartok's 4th String Quartet you might try the Tokyo, Takacs or Keller Quartets, all of which are excellent.

One solo piano recommendation - if you haven't heard Wilhelm Kempff play Schubert's final piano sonata (D.960 in B flat) you really ought to! Heavenly lengths...

I've rambled enough.


----------



## AfterHours

bigshot said:


> If you can nail down the criteria you want us to judge by, we could give you a recommendation then. Do you want fast or slow? Is precision in playing what you're looking for or expressiveness? Do you want a "traditional" approach or do you want something that expresses the originality of the performer? Is sound quality of primary importance, or would you accept a great performance with inferior sound?
> 
> Those are the sorts of things you need to define before we can recommend "bests". It isn't just a matter of "like" if you are careful to define the criteria for judging.


It would of course vary from composer to composer quite greatly. If I think of a "catch-all" way to put it, I will update my answer, but what I look for in a Mozart performance is so different than in a Beethoven Symphonies performance, so it's difficult to say exactly and in an overall sense.

Generally, perhaps something like:
(1) Should stay within the general known parameters of the composer's wishes
(2) Should be performed with great conviction and, ideally, illuminate the various aspects of the work, even shedding light on it in a way that no one else has (without veering away from the score or the general intentions of the work) 
(3) Recording quality would ideally be excellent, lively and resonant. Ideally, all aspects of the work would be properly articulated. Performance is more important than sound quality, however, the sound quality should at least be good enough to give one the details and a full emotional sensation of the work.

That's a rough example, but really, just recommend me what you prefer. If it's a particularly unusual choice, you can always provide insight into why.

Also, I will be adding "performance and sound quality ratings" to each of my listed selections, which might help steer the recommendations some. Even though these are my top selections, not all of them will be equally rated in terms of performance/sound quality. So might be helpful with comparisons and knowing "if I think X is a 10, then maybe Z would be too" and the like.


----------



## Vaneyes

So many recs, so many lists, so little time.

And that doesn't include my own biases. Talk about for-ev-er. Send money, and I'll get started. 

http://rateyourmusic.com/list/Sator...u_must_hear_before_you_die__2007_us_edition_/

http://www.1000recordings.com/the-list/category/classical/

https://www.arkivmusic.com/classical/100.jsp

http://www.classical-music.com/article/50-greatest-recordings-all-time

https://www.gramophone.co.uk/featur...dings-of-all-time-chosen-by-leading-musicians

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/music/classical-music/best-classical-recordings/

http://www.bbc.com/culture/story/20140430-the-10-best-classical-recordings

http://soon.cocoplastic.com/page/Gramophone-TOP-100-Greatest-Classical-Recording.aspx

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/3670355/100-classical-albums-you-must-hear.html

http://marlene-d.blogspot.ca/2012/02/ten-best-sounding-classical-recordings.html

http://www.culturekiosque.com/klassik/best/ra1best.htm

http://www.laweekly.com/music/top-1...-dont-know-****-about-classical-music-2409814

http://www.high-endaudio.com/supreme.html

http://www.classicalcdguide.com/

http://www.npr.org/series/99866406/the-npr-classical-50


----------



## AfterHours

Vaneyes said:


> So many recs, so many lists, so little time.
> 
> And that doesn't include my own biases. Talk about for-ev-er. Send money, and I'll get started.
> 
> http://rateyourmusic.com/list/Sator...u_must_hear_before_you_die__2007_us_edition_/
> 
> http://www.1000recordings.com/the-list/category/classical/
> 
> https://www.arkivmusic.com/classical/100.jsp
> 
> http://www.classical-music.com/article/50-greatest-recordings-all-time
> 
> https://www.gramophone.co.uk/featur...dings-of-all-time-chosen-by-leading-musicians
> 
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/music/classical-music/best-classical-recordings/
> 
> http://www.bbc.com/culture/story/20140430-the-10-best-classical-recordings
> 
> http://soon.cocoplastic.com/page/Gramophone-TOP-100-Greatest-Classical-Recording.aspx
> 
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/3670355/100-classical-albums-you-must-hear.html
> 
> http://marlene-d.blogspot.ca/2012/02/ten-best-sounding-classical-recordings.html
> 
> http://www.culturekiosque.com/klassik/best/ra1best.htm
> 
> http://www.laweekly.com/music/top-1...-dont-know-****-about-classical-music-2409814
> 
> http://www.high-endaudio.com/supreme.html
> 
> http://www.classicalcdguide.com/
> 
> http://www.npr.org/series/99866406/the-npr-classical-50


Ummm ... err ... yeah, I'll get right on all of those -- this week! ;-)


----------



## AfterHours

TurnaboutVox said:


> For Beethoven's last 5 string quartets the Alban Bergs are certainly contenders, but their rather cool, clinical aspirations to perfection are clearly not the only approach to take. My favourites here are the Quartetto Italiano, who seem to me to give more personal readings, and the Talich Quartet on Calliope, who really do concentrate less on absolute accuracy and more on communicating the essence of the music, as they feel it. Their accounts are absolutely heart-felt.
> 
> For Beethoven's duo sonatas for piano and violin, alongside Melnikov and Faust I'd suggest Gidon Kremer and Martha Argerich, who I'd suggest steal the top prize here, much though I do like Melnikov and Faust.
> 
> In Schubert's great quartets (No. 14 and 15) I'm not familiar with your choice (the Artemis Quartet) but an alternative is the Quartetto Italiano again. Their performances (recorded on Philips in the late 1960s) of both quartets are phenomenal in their grip and intensity. The recordings are good for their time, and still quite good by modern standards.
> 
> For Schubert's string quintet I own the Alban Berg / Heinrich Schiff recording but still swear by (and prefer) the Chilingirian Quartet with Jennifer Ward Clarke (EMI (CfP), 1981) whose performance, again, is remarkable for its pathos and sheer intensity, particularly in the first two movements. An almost forgotten master-recording.
> 
> In the piano quintet I like the vintage recording by the Beaux Arts Trio with Samuel Rhodes and Georg Hörtnagel.
> 
> For the Shostakovich string quartets 3 & 11 - the Borodin Quartet and the Fitzwilliam Quartet are both excellent and get very deep into this wonderful music. I've not liked anything very much I've heard the Emersons do, Webern excepted, but I haven't heard their Shostakovich, so perhaps I shouldn't comment.
> 
> For Bartok's 4th String Quartet you might try the Tokyo, Takacs or Keller Quartets, all of which are excellent.
> 
> One solo piano recommendation - if you haven't heard Wilhelm Kempff play Schubert's final piano sonata (D.960 in B flat) you really ought to! Heavenly lengths...
> 
> I've rambled enough.


Thank you for all of these!

Re: Alban Berg/Beethoven Late SQ ... I've never found performance that capture the shattering profundity and inwardness as these, but I will look into those you mention

Re: Kreutzer ... Yes, Kremer/Argerich are extraordinary. I've been listening to Classical since about 14, and your recommendation was one of my earliest favorites, so thanks for the dose of nostalgia -- I don't think I've heard it since -- will revisit 

Re: Schubert Quintet/Alban Berg ... One of the recordings I wonder if it will ever be topped. Like with Beethoven, AB really reach the profound, inward depths of the work like no other, but I will check out your preference

Re: Piano Quintet ... I assume you are referring here to Schubert's "Trout"... Forellen is about as flawless as I can imagine, but I'd be overjoyed to find one equal or better

Re: Emerson/Shostakovich SQ ... They are second to none -- that I've heard. Ill give your recommendations a fair shot 

Re: Bartok 4th SQ ... Thank you, I'll hunt them down. I've heard various renditions but remain undecided...

Re: Fleisher's is quite heavenly, elongated (without losing its place) and extraordinarily moving -- and beautifully idiosyncratic in its subtle articulations/phrasings. I've listened to Kempff's but, like many recordings, it's been quite awhile, so it could use a revisit


----------



## Heck148

Wouldn't know where to begin...
#1. I see lots of HIP, original instrument stuff, I would never nominate any such as best of anything...
#2. same with HvK - he does not have the best of anything, IMO.

I do like the Alban Berg 4tet in the late Beethoven 4tets, however....really excellent...


----------



## AfterHours

Heck148 said:


> Wouldn't know where to begin...
> #1. I see lots of HIP, original instrument stuff, I would never nominate any such as best of anything...
> #2. same with HvK - he does not have the best of anything, IMO.
> 
> I do like the Alban Berg 4tet in the late Beethoven 4tets, however....really excellent...


Well, if you think of any recommendations, by all means...! 

... ...

On my OP it does state the following:

_Note: in cases where you feel there is NOT a better choice than what I've provided, feel free to recommend a "best HIP performance" (where the selection I've made is with modern instruments), or a "best modern performance" (where the selection I've made is HIP). I will very likely be branching out to including at least one of each, so this would be most helpful._

I do think HIP sounds better for Mozart in general, and Bach, and Haydn -- actually, much of what came before Beethoven -- where such composer's often favored/rewarded more translucent textures between layers of instruments in their works (for instance, how such a sound illuminates Mozart's incredible ability to interlock varying harmonic parts and express emotional duality). But, that said, it does have to be performed exceptionally well to stand out, which is quite rare and very few have mastered, or even come close (but performances have been improving, generally, since the surge in HIP recordings in the late 80s and 90s).

An extraordinary example is those Staier/Concerto Koln Mozart Piano Concertos, which are undoubtedly the best I've ever heard, whether modern or HIP.


----------



## Klassik

AfterHours said:


> I do think HIP sounds better for Mozart in general, and Bach, and Haydn...


I certainly agree with that, but obviously not everyone thinks the same. I guess that's fine as long as we have good recordings of both. Of course, not all HIP performances are the same. Some use modern instruments, some time-period instruments, and some a combination of both. Obviously some prefer their Baroque keyboard works on harpsichord (me), but many others prefer it on piano.


----------



## AfterHours

TO ALL:

Okay, on my "Best Recorded Performances" list (at besteveralbums.com: https://www.besteveralbums.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=458120#458120) I've now begun adding ratings of the selections on "Performance Quality" and "Sound Quality", including a brief explanation of the ratings scale in my message above the list. This may help in future recommendations. For instance: If you see that I give a certain performance a 9.5 or 10 you'll know that this is ideal or near-ideal to me for that particular work. Or if you see a work I rate 9.5 for "Performance Quality" but, say, a 7 for "Sound Quality", you'll know that if you recommend a similarly impressive performance, but with better sound quality, that there's a shot I could upgrade the selection if I agree with you.

Etc...


----------



## AfterHours

Chatellerault said:


> Piano Sonata No. 8 in C Minor "Pathetique" - Ludwig van Beethoven (1798)
> Piano Sonata No. 29 in B-flat Major "Hammerklavier" - Ludwig van Beethoven (1818)
> 
> Best HIP Recording: Ronald Brautigam (he has recorded all the 32 but these ones are really stunning, from the first chord of the Pathétique)
> 
> Also I noticed a complete absence of Debussy, Ravel and other French warhorses such as Franck's violin sonata and Dutilleux's Métaboles


I revisited these today and I liked his 8th much more than his 29th. Obviously both are very impressive considering they're on fortepiano, but it's hard to feel much for such an unforceful Hammerklavier (in its outer movements), even when the articulation is so well executed. Annie Fischer's completely puts such a version to rest, though I don't necessarily mean she could've done better on a fortepiano! To be considered for my list, even if its the very best HIP version (which I wouldn't be surprised if it is -- so far), the recording needs to rate at least a 9 in performance quality and a 7 in sound quality. I'd probably rate that Hammerklavier a 7 / 9.5. It's well executed but I didn't find it special in any significant way (aside from being accomplished on fortepiano). Now, the Pathetique, I found, deserves consideration. Not sure if it will quite make it (again, very very difficult on fortepiano!) but I'll be listening to it again.

All in all, I enjoyed them both. I enjoyed the effort even if the Hammerklavier falls well short of the more striking renditions (plus the 3rd movement was quite good).

Thank you for the recs so far. Looking forward to more in the future!


----------



## AfterHours

Added my selection for:

Tristan und Isolde - Richard Wagner (1859)

https://www.besteveralbums.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=458120#458120

Thank you realdealblues for the "nudge" to fill that one out. I also love Furtwangler's (Flagstaad's performance may never be surpassed) and the unique allure of Kleiber's (perhaps the best orchestration). Bohm's is probably the best of all worlds, and is of course better recorded and articulated than Furtwangler's 1952 rendition, so gets the nod (slightly) even if on any given day I might switch the two, and even at this moment, am not quite sure if I made the "best" choice.


----------



## bigshot

AfterHours said:


> (1) Should stay within the general known parameters of the composer's wishes
> (2) Should be performed with great conviction and, ideally, illuminate the various aspects of the work, even shedding light on it in a way that no one else has (without veering away from the score or the general intentions of the work)
> (3) Recording quality would ideally be excellent, lively and resonant.


1. Yes to Toscanini
2. Yes to Toscanini
3. Emphatic No to Toscanini

1. No to Stokowski
2. Yes to Stokowski (except for the parenthetical)
3. Yes to late period Stokowski, but not his prime years with the Philadelphia Orchestra.

It's a draw! Neither of the two greatest conductors of the 20th century meet your standards.

You left out the personal expression of the conductor and the qualities of the orchestra. I honestly think you are barking up the wrong tree.

When I first started out collecting classical music 40 years ago, my goal was to have one "perfect" recording of each major work. So I picked up the Penguin guide and started buying "rosettes". I did pretty well collecting "the regular suspects". I had a nice tidy collection of music reflecting the tastes of some elderly British gentlemen who wrote reviews at a magazine.

After a while I got bored and decided to throw my net wider into uncharted territory. It was a risk, so I scoured used bins for classical CDs for a few dollars apiece, including works that I already had the "rosette" version. One of the first CDs I took a chance on was Previn's Scheherezade. I already had the Mackerras Telarc "rotsette" version, so I wasn't hoping for much. Well, I was surprised to find that the Previn was MUCH better in every way... better balances and sound quality, more lively, more emotional... so I went out and bought a few more of the "also rans" in the Penguin Guide and found although the "rosettes" were always nice solid contenders, they were far from "perfect".

Flash forward a few decades and my collection has expanded to well over 12,000 discs with multiple versions of all the major works... Now they aren't CDs. They are files in an iTunes library in random rotation. Whenever a piece comes up in the shuffle, I try to guess the orchestra and conductor. I'm not just listening to the composer and work... I am hearing the personality of the conductor. That opens a whole new level of understanding that I didn't know existed.

The composer, the work and the conductor are all equal partners in a good performance. The composer and work are fixed in time and space. Beethoven is Beethoven and his fifth symphony is a bunch of marks on paper that don't change... but that third part- the conductor! That is the wild card. Before I was so fixated on composer and work, I considered any conductor who expressed himself as an individual as a black mark. But the truth is, a conductor who just plays the notes on the page the way the composer wanted it played isn't doing his job. He might as well be a machine.

My ears were opened. I had considered individual style in soloists and singers... it was fine for Birgit Nilsson to sound different than Kirsten Flagstad. But now it was fine for Bernstein or Stokowski to sound different than Szell or Toscanini. And the worst thing for a conductor to be was blandly "correct" like Abbado. The "perfect" recordings suddenly became depressingly "appropriate" and I was hearing facets in works that I had never heard before in "lesser" recordings. It was the best thing that ever happened to me, because it reinvigorated my interest in music.

The HIP movement has convinced people that there is a "proper" way to perform. Hogwash. The only way that is proper is the way that expresses the individuality of the performer and his particular point of view. The notes on the paper are just little chicken scratches representing abstract ideas until the performer brings them to life. No single performer can express every idea contained in those chicken scratches. Each performance represents one angle on a multifaceted jewel. The more performances you experience, the more you understand the layered complexity of the ideas in a work.

One version can't represent a classical work. Impossible. It can take dozens or hundreds... ideally the work can be brought to life in a new way every time it's performed. The second you label something "best", you can bet that it isn't the best at all.


----------



## AfterHours

bigshot said:


> 1. Yes to Toscanini
> 2. Yes to Toscanini
> 3. No to Toscanini
> 
> 1. No to Stokowski
> 2. Yes to Stokowski (except for the parenthetical)
> 3. Yes to late period Stokowski
> 
> It's a draw!
> 
> You left out the personal expression of the conductor and the qualities of the orchestra. I honestly think you are barking up the wrong tree.
> 
> When I first started out collecting classical music 40 years ago, my goal was to have one "perfect" recording of each major work. So I picked up the Penguin guide and started buying "rosettes". I did pretty well collecting "the regular suspects". I had a nice tidy collection of music reflecting the tastes of some elderly British gentlemen who wrote reviews at a magazine.
> 
> After a while I got bored and decided to throw my net wider into uncharted territory. It was a risk, so I scoured used bins for classical CDs for a few dollars apiece, including works that I already had the "rosette" version. One of the first CDs I took a chance on was Previn's Scheherezade. I already had the Mackerras Telarc "rotsette" version, so I wasn't hoping for much. Well, I was surprised to find that the Previn was MUCH better in every way... better balances and sound quality, more lively, more emotional... so I went out and bought a few more of the "also rans" in the Penguin Guide and found although the "rosettes" were always nice solid contenders, they were far from "perfect".
> 
> Flash forward a few decades and my collection has expanded to well over 12,000 discs with multiple versions of all the major works... Now they aren't CDs. They are files in an iTunes library in random rotation. Whenever a piece would come up in random shuffle, I would try to guess the orchestra and conductor. As I listen, I start listening not only to the composer and work... I start hearing the personality of the conductor and whole level of understanding that I didn't have before begins to form.
> 
> The composer, the work and the conductor are all equal partners in a good performance. The composer and work are fixed in time and space. Beethoven is Beethoven and his fifth symphony is a bunch of marks on paper that doesn't change... but that third part- the conductor! That is the wild card. Before I was so fixated on composer and work, I considered any conductor who expressed himself as an individual as a black mark. But the truth was that a conductor who just plays the notes on the page the way the composer wanted it played isn't doing his job.
> 
> My ears were opened. I had considered individual style in soloists and singers... it was fine for Birgit Nilsson to sound different than Kirsten Flagstad. But now it was fine for Bernstein or Stokowski to sound different than Szell or Toscanini. And the worst thing for a conductor to be was blandly "correct" like Abbado. The "perfect" recordings suddenly became "appropriate" and I was hearing facets in works that I had never heard before.
> 
> The HIP movement has convinced people that there is a proper way to perform. The only way that is proper is the way that expresses the individuality of the performer and his particular point of view. The notes on the paper are just little chicken scratches representing abstract ideas until the performer brings them to life. No single performer can express every idea contained in those chicken scratches. They can only represent one angle on a multifaceted jewel.
> 
> One version can't represent a classical work. Impossible. It can take dozens or hundreds... or the work can be brought to life in a new way every time it's performed. The second you label something "best", you can bet that it isn't the best at all.


Okay, your whole message seems to be based on not reading #2 (or misinterpreted it), but even had that happened -- I indicated that was a rough outline anyway and that I may provide more detail later. Either way, to each his own! If you don't think one can have a preferred recording or don't want to give out recommendations, don't worry about it! It's impossible anyway! ;-)

Sarcasm aside, I do absolutely agree with you that many worthy recordings usually exist per work. Personally, I will usually find that one or two in particular will stand out (just a hair maybe) over others as being the closest to my ideal interpretation/performance of a work. Hence, my choices.


----------



## bigshot

AfterHours said:


> I do absolutely agree with you that many worthy recordings usually exist per work. Personally, I will usually find that one or two in particular will stand out (just a hair maybe) over others as being the closest to my ideal interpretation/performance of a work. Hence, my choices.


I think you'll find that as you gain experience and hear more music, you'll find that your tastes expand and you'll discover a lot more performances that appeal to you beyond just the one or two that stand out when you are just getting familiar with the work. Knowledge brings levels of understanding that you might not see at first, and with experience, the definition of the word "ideal" will become more and more difficult to pin down.

My best advice to you is to not let your list of "bests" close your mind to completely different sorts of interpretations. If that happens, it can stunt your growth instead of broadening your horizons. Try listening to the same works performed by Stokowski and Toscanini and your mind will be blown at how perfect they both are, yet how different their approaches are. They are the perfect example of "ying and yang" in conducting.


----------



## AfterHours

bigshot said:


> I think you'll find that as you gain experience and hear more music, you'll find that your tastes expand and you'll discover a lot more performances that appeal to you beyond just the one or two that stand out when you are just getting familiar with the work. Knowledge brings levels of understanding that you might not see at first, and with experience, the definition of the word "ideal" will become more and more difficult to pin down.
> 
> My best advice to you is to not let your list of "bests" close your mind to completely different sorts of interpretations. If that happens, it can stunt your growth instead of broadening your horizons. Try listening to the same works performed by Stokowski and Toscanini and your mind will be blown at how perfect they both are, yet how different their approaches are. They are the perfect example of "ying and yang" in conducting.


Yes, I've been listening to Classical music for 20+ years and have extensive experience with Rock and Jazz too. I'm not sure why you've assumed otherwise, but in all cases listed, I've already heard several renditions -- most of the classic ones and often many less familiar choices. An exception would be those where there are few or only one (Gerhard's Concerto for Orchestra, Dolmen Music, The Ascension). I don't post my choice for the "best" before I've heard a number of interpretations.


----------



## AfterHours

bigshot said:


> Try listening to the same works performed by Stokowski and Toscanini and your mind will be blown at how perfect they both are, yet how different their approaches are. They are the perfect example of "ying and yang" in conducting.


I do agree that Toscanini and Stokowski are really great. Not my absolute favorites in any recordings off the top of my head, (except perhaps Verdi's Requiem for Toscanini, which is astonishing), and should be part of every listener's education (especially Beethoven, Brahms, Verdi's Requiem, and Debussy for Toscanini) and, for Stokowski, some of his Brahms Symphonies (especially #1) are near my top choices. It's been quite some time since I listened to many of his other recordings, but I don't remember having an issue with any of them -- a very consistent artist.


----------



## AfterHours

Klassik said:


> I certainly agree with that, but obviously not everyone thinks the same. I guess that's fine as long as we have good recordings of both. Of course, not all HIP performances are the same. Some use modern instruments, some time-period instruments, and some a combination of both. Obviously some prefer their Baroque keyboard works on harpsichord (me), but many others prefer it on piano.


Yes, it can be tough to know if HIP is really HIP, or just partially! I too prefer Bach's keyboard works on harpsichord. That's what they're written for, and I think it shows when comparing with piano. That said, I do like several interpretations with piano as well, just not as much as my favorite harpsichord versions.


----------



## AfterHours

TO ALL:

Thank you for all your recommendations so far!

I've now updated my besteveralbums page to include a fairly detailed explanation of my "Performance Quality" and "Sound Quality" criteria: https://www.besteveralbums.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=458120#458120


----------



## AfterHours

realdealblues said:


> Just glancing through your list there is a definitely a good deal we would disagree on and I would make different suggestions too, but one right off the bat is that Solti Schubert 9th...ugh!
> 
> Solti takes the exposition repeat in the finale and no where else which makes absolutely no sense and throws the entire Symphony off balance in my opinion. Not to mention he took some nut job's idea in the late 70's that Schubert's long accent marks were really decrescendos which is utter nonsense!
> 
> To hear how Schubert's 9th should go I would recommend two recordings, one with repeats and one without.
> 
> #1. Charles Munch/Boston Symphony Orchestra. (without repeats)
> #2. Riccardo Muti/Vienna Philharmonic (with repeats)
> 
> Either of those recordings are infinitely better than the Solti one.


I take back what I said about the Munch/BSO performance being among the best, in-line for my top position. I don't actually think so any longer. Upon revisiting it today, I do think it's great in its own exciting, searing, frantic way. But, Munch's doesn't take hold of each moment and phrase. He hurls them, a bit violently, and it all seems a little rushed and under-considered, limiting the emotional and thematic breadth of the work (which would work better if it were, say, Beethoven's 5th). While flawed, I do still think it's a worthwhile reading for its peculiar style towards the work, but far from capturing the full glory of it. Such a modus operandi as Munch's actually subverts what is most powerful about the symphony, as found in Solti's or Muti's or Wand's. Which is the "heavenly lengths". The wandering, contemplative, existential, tragic, exasperated, emotionally exhausted Schubert. Delving into never-ending, gradually morphing streams-of-consciousness, repeating escapes from his horrible reality, bidding farewell in cyclic entrances and exits, his environment/state of mind spiraling out of control as he confronts, then re-confronts, his predicament over and over again, frustrated at its inescapable consequence.

Fwiw, I'd rate the Munch/BSO rendition as follows: Performance Quality: 7.5 / Sound Quality: 7.5

I also revisited Wand's and checked out Muti's, and found Wand to be the best I've ever heard, though I definitely agree with you that Muti's is outstanding. I still like Solti's but it possibly falls short of both, despite being a wonder in its own way (perhaps the single most articulated version I know [Wand's would be next], Solti's is somewhat more "wandering" and like a "waking dream" than other renditions, which can take some getting used to I suppose).


----------



## Heck148

AfterHours said:


> I do think HIP sounds better for Mozart in general, and Bach, and Haydn -- actually, much of what came before Beethoven -- where such composer's often favored/rewarded more translucent textures between layers of instruments in their works...


HIP has made some very worthwhile contributions - smaller orchestras for classical.baroque compositions, a shorter bow stroke in the strings, without the heavy Romantic-style vibrato applied constantly, etc...
However, I just don't like the sound of original instruments very much. I really dislike the flat [timbre] tone of the strings, entirely _sans_ vibrato, the thin barn-yard chirping and clucking of the woodwinds, or the braying sound of the brasses. I like modern instruments - tome, they jut sound immeasurably better. 
Fine results have been achieved with modern instruments, using smaller ensembles, yet playing with passion, expression and gorgeous tone. for me, it seems the best of both worlds...


----------



## AfterHours

Heck148 said:


> HIP has made some very worthwhile contributions - smaller orchestras for classical.baroque compositions, a shorter bow stroke in the strings, without the heavy Romantic-style vibrato applied constantly, etc...
> However, I just don't like the sound of original instruments very much. I really dislike the flat [timbre] tone of the strings, entirely _sans_ vibrato, the thin barn-yard chirping and clucking of the woodwinds, or the braying sound of the brasses. I like modern instruments - tome, they jut sound immeasurably better.
> Fine results have been achieved with modern instruments, using smaller ensembles, yet playing with passion, expression and gorgeous tone. for me, it seems the best of both worlds...


I can understand that. To put it quite simply, I like both, it just depends on the performance and how well its instruments (period or modern) are applied to the music


----------



## Klassik

AfterHours said:


> I can understand that. To put it quite simply, I like both, it just depends on the performance and how well its instruments (period or modern) are applied to the music





Heck148 said:


> ...or the braying sound of the brasses. I like modern instruments - tome, they jut sound immeasurably better.


I have several of the Thomas Fey HIP recordings of Haydn symphonies. Fey is a bit of a mad scientist with these recordings. He uses modern instruments, but time period brass and percussion. The tempo he uses varies significantly at times so his recordings are a bit of an oddball thing. Even with that, I usually like the end results. I would not recommend them to someone wanting safe HIP or non-HIP performances of Haydn, but they are worth sampling for someone wanting something different from the normal stuff.

I will say that the time period brass can sound rather brash. Sometimes it works, but sometimes it doesn't. But, anyway, I think that goes to show how the best recording for one person may not be the best for someone else. Some probably love Fey's renditions of Haydn, but others would find them to be some sort of disgraceful experiment gone wrong.


----------



## AfterHours

Klassik said:


> I have several of the Thomas Fey HIP recordings of Haydn symphonies. Fey is a bit of a mad scientist with these recordings. He uses modern instruments, but time period brass and percussion. The tempo he uses varies significantly at times so his recordings are a bit of an oddball thing. Even with that, I usually like the end results. I would not recommend them to someone wanting safe HIP or non-HIP performances of Haydn, but they are worth sampling for someone wanting something different from the normal stuff.
> 
> I will say that the time period brass can sound rather brash. Sometimes it works, but sometimes it doesn't. But, anyway, I think that goes to show how the best recording for one person may not be the best for someone else. Some probably love Fey's renditions of Haydn, but others would find them to be some sort of disgraceful experiment gone wrong.


I'm intrigued! Thank you! Have you heard Bruggen's late Haydn Symphonies? (probably my favorite renditions of most of them) If so, how would you compare them?


----------



## AfterHours

Revised my selections for:

Symphony No. 9 in C Major "The Great" - Franz Schubert (1826) (previously was Solti/Vienna Phil)
Symphony No. 1 in C Minor - Johannes Brahms (1876) (previously was Karajan/Berlin Phil)

I've also added the "Performance" and "Sound" quality ratings for almost all the selections so far.

For my list, go here: https://www.besteveralbums.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=15098&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0

Thank you realdealblues for inspiring this particular revisit of Schubert's 9th


----------



## Klassik

AfterHours said:


> I'm intrigued! Thank you! Have you heard Bruggen's late Haydn Symphonies? (probably my favorite renditions of most of them) If so, how would you compare them?


I don't own any of the Bruggen Haydn CDs, but I think I heard a symphony or two on YouTube some time back. I would say that Fey's performances are more brash and fiery than Bruggen's for better or for worse. The fidelity of the Fey recordings are excellent though, probably better than the Bruggen ones. Perhaps someone who has compared the same performance back-to-back can give a more in-depth analysis, but I would check out the Fey recordings if you get a chance. Like I said earlier, I would not recommend them to someone who wants safe recordings of Haydn, but someone who wants a very personalized interpretation with a very hot tempo at times may find something to like in the Fey recordings.


----------



## AfterHours

Heck148 said:


> Wouldn't know where to begin...
> #2. same with HvK - he does not have the best of anything, IMO.


While I don't think he is nearly so unimpeachable as once advertised (and still considered by many) his Mahler 9th is on another level. If you know of a better one...

His Brahms 2nd may be too, and his Mahler 5th is certainly among the very best. Various Beethoven Symphony renditions between his 63 and 75 cycles, deserve very high recognition too, in my opinion, but have probably all been surpassed by now -- no shame in that though.

Oh yes, also Bruckner 7-9th, all superb, perhaps among the very best.


----------



## AfterHours

Klassik said:


> I don't own any of the Bruggen Haydn CDs, but I think I heard a symphony or two on YouTube some time back. I would say that Fey's performances are more brash and fiery than Bruggen's for better or for worse. The fidelity of the Fey recordings are excellent though, probably better than the Bruggen ones. Perhaps someone who has compared the same performance back-to-back can give a more in-depth analysis, but I would check out the Fey recordings if you get a chance. Like I said earlier, I would not recommend them to someone who wants safe recordings of Haydn, but someone who wants a very personalized interpretation with a very hot tempo at times may find something to like in the Fey recordings.


Thank you, sounds like they could be my cup of tea, I will definitely check them out


----------



## AfterHours

AfterHours said:


> Thank you, sounds like they could be my cup of tea, I will definitely check them out


So far, I checked out his 102nd, which was quite striking and exhilarating! In comparing to Bruggen's _incomparable_ version, I didn't find it on the same level (no shame in that though). Bruggen finds the time (somehow) to vividly articulate every nuance, every spontaneous instrumental voice, every emotion erupting or freewheeling out of the piece, no matter how busy it gets -- both in the forefront and the layers beneath. It is an astonishing performance. Not sure it can possibly be beat so maybe an unfair trial/comparison! I do enjoy Fey's though and I can tell he has plenty of riveting potential to maybe even top Bruggen in some of the others. I'll keep going with him, for sure. Excellent rec from a conductor I've never paid attention to before this


----------



## Klassik

AfterHours said:


> So far, I checked out his 102nd, which was quite striking and exhilarating! In comparing to Bruggen's _incomparable_ version, I didn't find it on the same level (no shame in that though). Bruggen finds the time (somehow) to vividly articulate every nuance, every spontaneous instrumental voice, every emotion erupting or freewheeling out of the piece, no matter how busy it gets -- both in the forefront and the layers beneath. It is an astonishing performance. Not sure it can possibly be beat so maybe an unfair trial/comparison! I do enjoy Fey's though and I can tell he has plenty of riveting potential to maybe even top Bruggen in some of the others. I'll keep going with him, for sure. Excellent rec from a conductor I've never paid attention to before this


I'm glad you liked it. I agree that Bruggen's performances allow for greater articulation of subtle nuances. Fey's tempo is so fast at times that the nuances aren't there or get lost. Fey's tempo is more "disciplined" in some symphonies though. Like I said, Fey is like a mad scientist with his performances. There are some signature aspects to his recordings, but sometimes you're not really sure how he'll interpret the works. That in itself makes the Fey recordings interesting if you're looking for an adventure, but a Haydn purist would likely throw a fit listening to Fey.


----------



## Bulldog

Heck148 said:


> HIP has made some very worthwhile contributions - smaller orchestras for classical.baroque compositions, a shorter bow stroke in the strings, without the heavy Romantic-style vibrato applied constantly, etc...
> However, I just don't like the sound of original instruments very much. I really dislike the flat [timbre] tone of the strings, entirely _sans_ vibrato, the thin barn-yard chirping and clucking of the woodwinds, or the braying sound of the brasses.


Tell us how you really feel. As for me, I love the sound of period strings without vibrato - perfect.


----------



## Heck148

AfterHours said:


> While I don't think he is nearly so unimpeachable as once advertised (and still considered by many) his Mahler 9th is on another level. If you know of a better one...
> 
> His Brahms 2nd may be too, and his Mahler 5th is certainly among the very best. Various Beethoven Symphony renditions between his 63 and 75 cycles, deserve very high recognition too, in my opinion, but have probably all been surpassed by now -- no shame in that though.
> 
> Oh yes, also Bruckner 7-9th, all superb, perhaps among the very best.


For me....it is virtually inconceivable that HvK could produce best of anything.
Giuliani, Walter, Boulez Solti all have vastly superior Mahler 9s....for Brahms 2 - Monteux/LSO, Reiner/NYPO, Bernstein, Toscanini all preferable by a long way....same with Mahler 5 - Solti (2),Abbado far beyond hvk...i just find vk's approach unattractive overall....monotonous (mono-tone-ous)....the same smoothed-over, rounded-off, glossy sound for everything....too stifled, smooth, excessively legato...it's just not for me....


----------



## Heck148

Bulldog said:


> Tell us how you really feel. As for me, I love the sound of period strings without vibrato - perfect.


Haha!! It makes me queasy..I'm glad that many HIP groups now use a bit of vibrato....IOW...they sound more like modern instruments!!


----------



## bigshot

I have a lot of recordings by Karajan that I love. Peer Gynt Suites, the filmed performances by Cluzot, the 60s Eroica, the Dvorak Slavonic Dances, Strauss, Bruckner, Wagner, and a fantastic La Boheme. I can't define any one single way of describing Karajan's recordings. The earlier EMI are nothing like the late period DGG, and Karajan with Berlin is different than Karajan with Vienna.


----------



## AfterHours

Heck148 said:


> For me....it is virtually inconceivable that HvK could produce best of anything.
> Giuliani, Walter, Boulez Solti all have vastly superior Mahler 9s....for Brahms 2 - Monteux/LSO, Reiner/NYPO, Bernstein, Toscanini all preferable by a long way....same with Mahler 5 - Solti (2),Abbado far beyond hvk...i just find vk's approach unattractive overall....monotonous (mono-tone-ous)....the same smoothed-over, rounded-off, glossy sound for everything....too stifled, smooth, excessively legato...it's just not for me....


While I agree with the negatives you point out (though not as strongly, I also recognize his pluses), I do not feel they're applicable in the works I mentioned (or in some cases, such characteristics are marginalized or more appropriate). His Live Mahler 9th most especially, does not apply, and is utterly incredible, among the most substantial recordings of the 20th century in my opinion. It's all subjective of course. I do agree that he was too one dimensional in many instances and I also agree with the exceptional alternatives you point out (unless it's Walter's _very_ overrated 1938 Mahler 9).


----------



## Heck148

Walter/ColSO Mahler 9...not 1938...I also think that HvK's style....ultra-controlled, eyes closed, greatly inhibited communication with orchestra produces overall negative results.....some like it...not me. sounds too stifled, too suppressed...


----------



## Klassik

A part of the reason why I'm not too big of a fan of Karajan recordings is that his later stuff on DG has pretty mediocre sound quality IMO. It's not just Karajan recordings that are like that, many/most of the DG recordings from the 1970s and 1980s sound pretty bad to me. I believe that they went with multi-miking which may have been a mistake. I've read that Karajan tried to control the audio engineering too even though he wasn't qualified to do so. 

I'm not sure if recent re-mastering efforts have fixed any of these DG shortcomings from that era. Karajan and Abbado rarely are my preference anyway so I'm not that eager to find out, but I do like Boulez as a conductor and some of his older DG stuff sounds really weak to me compared to his older works with Columbia and others. I don't think that's on Boulez, I think DG's poor engineering has a lot to do with that.


----------



## bigshot

Walter's Mahler 9th isn't overrated. It's a performance that symbolizes and expresses the end of an era. It's a performance that starts out uncomfortable, rightly so, and builds to incredible sadness.

The 70s was thirty years into Karajan's career. If you skip to the 70s, you are eliminating a lot of fantastic work. But if you judge performances by sound quality I can understand why you might not like Karajan's later work. And he didn't always conduct with his eyes closed sitting in a chair. Again, that is the later Karajan. There's a lot more to him than that. Look at Cluzot's film. That is Karajan at his prime.


----------



## AfterHours

Heck148 said:


> Walter/ColSO Mahler 9...not 1938...I also think that HvK's style....ultra-controlled, eyes closed, greatly inhibited communication with orchestra produces overall negative results.....some like it...not me. sounds too stifled, too suppressed...


Fair enough, for me it depends on the work. Karajan was often absolutely a bit too single minded about how he recorded and I do agree with you there. However, his "weaknesses" can be marginalized on certain recordings: Tight and controlled can be a plus if we're talking about mounting, tunnel-visioned intensity in, say, Beethoven's 5th or 7th (certainly not his 80's recordings though). Tonal beauty and legato can be essential to bringing out the stream-of-consciousness and lyricism of Brahms' 2nd Symphony. Etc.

But regardless, none of these apply whatsoever to Karajan's Live Mahler's 9th, which is beyond astonishing. I'm not repeating this to "force" you to agree, but maybe to urge you to re-listen to it with as little bias as possible. I revisited it last night and was overcome by its depth of emotion and power. I don't know how Karajan/the BPO did it, but aside from the incredible direction, conviction and spontaneity in the playing of the Berlin Philharmonic, the sheer emotion and intensity and lyricism they display is ... overwhelming. Perhaps most amazingly, the tonal/sonorous _character_ of the instruments sound like they are actually verging on death, "willing themselves to live", mustering their last efforts in each "collapsing/flailing" surge of momentum, reciting their last hymns in each lyrical passage -- not "death-stricken" in a "weakly played" way -- but playing as if their very lives do depend on it, evidenced in the actual, pained, last-ditch-effort and in the valedictory glory of their very _sound/sonorities/tonal qualities_, in the very essence of how they're captured. It is once-in-a-lifetime and inimitable. Perhaps my 9.5 rating of its "Performance Quality" is too low and needs to be upgraded to a 10 now.


----------



## AfterHours

Klassik said:


> A part of the reason why I'm not too big of a fan of Karajan recordings is that his later stuff on DG has pretty mediocre sound quality IMO. It's not just Karajan recordings that are like that, many/most of the DG recordings from the 1970s and 1980s sound pretty bad to me. I believe that they went with multi-miking which may have been a mistake. I've read that Karajan tried to control the audio engineering too even though he wasn't qualified to do so.
> 
> I'm not sure if recent re-mastering efforts have fixed any of these DG shortcomings from that era. Karajan and Abbado rarely are my preference anyway so I'm not that eager to find out, but I do like Boulez as a conductor and some of his older DG stuff sounds really weak to me compared to his older works with Columbia and others. I don't think that's on Boulez, I think DG's poor engineering has a lot to do with that.


I agree with this in various cases, especially his 80's Beethoven (yikes!), but only partially for his 70's renditions.


----------



## AfterHours

bigshot said:


> Walter's Mahler 9th isn't overrated. It's a performance that symbolizes and expresses the end of an era. It's a performance that starts out uncomfortable, rightly so, and builds to incredible sadness.
> 
> The 70s was thirty years into Karajan's career. If you skip to the 70s, you are eliminating a lot of fantastic work. But if you judge performances by sound quality I can understand why you might not like Karajan's later work. And he didn't always conduct with his eyes closed sitting in a chair. Again, that is the later Karajan. There's a lot more to him than that. Look at Cluzot's film. That is Karajan at his prime.


We'll have to agree to disagree if we're talking about Walter's famous 1938 rendition. That doesn't mean I don't have sympathy for its WW II history however. I just feel it's a mediocre performance and a really poor recording (of course, being 1938), especially relative to incredible renditions like Karajan and Bernstein and Giulini, etc.

I do agree with your point of view re: Karajan


----------



## chesapeake bay

AfterHours said:


> But regardless, none of these apply whatsoever to Karajan's Live Mahler's 9th, which is beyond astonishing. I'm not repeating this to "force" you to agree, but maybe to urge you to re-listen to it with as little bias as possible. I revisited it last night and was overcome by its depth of emotion and power. I don't know how Karajan/the BPO did it, but aside from the incredible direction, conviction and spontaneity in the playing of the Berlin Philharmonic, the sheer emotion and intensity and lyricism they display is ... overwhelming. Perhaps most amazingly, the tonal/sonorous _character_ of the instruments sound like they are actually verging on death, "willing themselves to live", mustering their last efforts in each "collapsing/flailing" surge of momentum, reciting their last hymns in each lyrical passage -- not "death-stricken" in a "weakly played" way -- but playing as if their very lives do depend on it, evidenced in the actual, pained, last-ditch-effort and in the valedictory glory of their very _sound/sonorities/tonal qualities_, in the very essence of how they're captured. It is once-in-a-lifetime and inimitable. Perhaps my 9.5 rating of its "Performance Quality" is too low and needs to be upgraded to a 10 now.


I'll have to listen to this one again


----------



## Heck148

AfterHours said:


> But regardless, none of these apply whatsoever to Karajan's Live Mahler's 9th, which is beyond astonishing. I'm not repeating this to "force" you to agree, but maybe to urge you to re-listen to it with as little bias as possible. I revisited it last night and was overcome by its depth of emotion and power. I don't know how Karajan/the BPO did it,


I've tried many times with HvK. and it always comes up short....he always seems to hold back, suppress, limit the orchestra, to produce that same monotone quality - as if the performance is about him, and not the composer.
I like the "drivers", those conductors who push the orchestra, really let the orchestra cut loose, play right "at the edge" - Toscanini, Reiner, Solti, Mravinsky, etc...HvK doesn't ever let it get that far, like the throttle never goes over 85%....no hard edges, no nastiness, no bite - everything to sound "nice", smooth, round, and beautiful. Well, sometimes the music needs to be hard-edged, with alot of bite...the tonal colors of the orchestral palette are truly extensive, and full of variety - the greatest conductors bring forth this full spectrum...


----------



## AfterHours

Heck148 said:


> I've tried many times with HvK. and it always comes up short....he always seems to hold back, suppress, limit the orchestra, to produce that same monotone quality - as if the performance is about him, and not the composer.
> I like the "drivers", those conductors who push the orchestra, really let the orchestra cut loose, play right "at the edge" - Toscanini, Reiner, Solti, Mravinsky, etc...HvK doesn't ever let it get that far, like the throttle never goes over 85%....no hard edges, no nastiness, no bite - everything to sound "nice", smooth, round, and beautiful. Well, sometimes the music needs to be hard-edged, with alot of bite...the tonal colors of the orchestral palette are truly extensive, and full of variety - the greatest conductors bring forth this full spectrum...


I'll leave it at what I said last. The performance speaks for itself.


----------



## AfterHours

chesapeake bay said:


> I'll have to listen to this one again


Right on, I doubt you'll be disappointed


----------



## AfterHours

TO ALL:

Added my selection for:

Symphony No. 102 in B flat major - Franz Joseph Haydn (1794)

Revised my selections for:

Symphony No. 3 in C Minor "Organ" - Camille Saint-Saens (1886) 
Violin Sonata No. 3 in D Minor - Johannes Brahms (1888) 
Violin Sonata No. 1 in G Major - Johannes Brahms (1879)

List is here: https://www.besteveralbums.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=15098&start=0


----------



## AfterHours

Klassik said:


> I'll only list the ones where I have listened to several performances and have a strong favorite:
> 
> 
> Symphony No. 8 in C Minor - Anton Bruckner (1892): Wand/Berlin/RCA
> Symphony No. 3 in C Minor "Organ" - Camille Saint-Saens (1886): Ormandy/Power Biggs/Philadelphia/Sony
> The Planets - Gustav Holst (1916) - Dutoit/Montreal/Decca (Though Mehta/LA/Decca is very close here)
> 
> I do agree with bigshot above though that it's very hard to say what the "best" performance is since that is subjective. You can only poll favorites and say which is liked by the most.


Your Saint-Saens Symphony 3 (Ormandy, I haven't revisited Biggs yet) was an excellent suggestion! I came very close to choosing it, and probably would have, if not for Barenboim/Chicago Symphony Orchestra. Also, Munch/BSO is a serious contender.


----------



## AfterHours

I've been revisiting/discovering various renditions of Brahms' Piano Quintet recently. My choice has long been Maurizio Pollini/Quartetto Italiano, which seemed a fairly clear stand out among many excellent possibilities, but lately I've also really taken to these two, perhaps just as much in their own ways:

Rubinstein/Guarneri Quartet: http://cdn-s3.allmusic.com/release-covers/500/0002/710/0002710253.jpg
Silke Avenhaus/Arcanto Quartet: https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/71-mDQ-uOLL._SY355_.jpg

Anyone have any thoughts on these? Or, perhaps your own preferences that differ?


----------



## Klassik

AfterHours said:


> Your Saint-Saens Symphony 3 (Ormandy, I haven't revisited Biggs yet) was an excellent suggestion! I came very close to choosing it, and probably would have, if not for Barenboim/Chicago Symphony Orchestra. Also, Munch/BSO is a serious contender.


E. Power Biggs was the organist on the Ormandy/Philadelphia Columbia-Sony recording of Saint-Saens symphony no. 3 that I like. Ormandy and the Philadelphia Orchestra also did another recording on the Telarc label with Michael Murray on the organ. I like that recording a lot too. Murray and Power Biggs, along with Virgil Fox, were all very, very good organists who did a lot of recordings in that time.


----------



## AfterHours

Klassik said:


> E. Power Biggs was the organist on the Ormandy/Philadelphia Columbia-Sony recording of Saint-Saens symphony no. 3 that I like. Ormandy and the Philadelphia Orchestra also did another recording on the Telarc label with Michael Murray on the organ. I like that recording a lot too. Murray and Power Biggs, along with Virgil Fox, were all very, very good organists who did a lot of recordings in that time.


Oh, that makes sense! I mis-typed anyway (cell phones!), but you beat me to it! (no "revisit" of course, I wasn't familiar before with "either" [even though it was really just "one"] as in my original reply to your post a few pages back).

Thank you for the Telarc rec!


----------



## chesapeake bay

AfterHours said:


> I've been revisiting/discovering various renditions of Brahms' Piano Quintet recently. My choice has long been Maurizio Pollini/Quartetto Italiano, which seemed a fairly clear stand out among many excellent possibilities, but lately I've also really taken to these two, perhaps just as much in their own ways:
> 
> Rubinstein/Guarneri Quartet: http://cdn-s3.allmusic.com/release-covers/500/0002/710/0002710253.jpg
> Silke Avenhaus/Arcanto Quartet: https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/71-mDQ-uOLL._SY355_.jpg
> 
> Anyone have any thoughts on these? Or, perhaps your own preferences that differ?


Serkin, Budapest String quartet


----------



## AfterHours

chesapeake bay said:


> Serkin, Budapest String quartet


Thank you, excellent choice!


----------



## bharbeke

Here are a few great performances to consider for your blank entries:

Mozart Symphony No. 39: Neville Marriner, ASMF
Schumann Piano Concerto: Alfred Brendel, Claudio Abbado, London Symphony Orchestra
Holst's The Planets: Andre Previn, Royal Philharmonic Orchestra
Beethoven Triple Concerto: Yo-Yo Ma, Itzhak Perlman, Daniel Barenboim

I grabbed a few recommendations from your list, so I thank you for that.


----------



## AfterHours

bharbeke said:


> Here are a few great performances to consider for your blank entries:
> 
> Mozart Symphony No. 39: Neville Marriner, ASMF
> Schumann Piano Concerto: Alfred Brendel, Claudio Abbado, London Symphony Orchestra
> Holst's The Planets: Andre Previn, Royal Philharmonic Orchestra
> Beethoven Triple Concerto: Yo-Yo Ma, Itzhak Perlman, Daniel Barenboim
> 
> I grabbed a few recommendations from your list, so I thank you for that.


Thank you very much! I hope you enjoy them. Feel free to provide feedback either way. Thank you for your recommendations. I don't think I've heard the Brendel Schumann Concerto, which surprises me. I've heard the rest, all of which are excellent, but I have not revisited any of them in a long while so should do so.


----------



## Pugg

bharbeke said:


> Here are a few great performances to consider for your blank entries:
> 
> Mozart Symphony No. 39: Neville Marriner, ASMF
> Schumann Piano Concerto: Alfred Brendel, Claudio Abbado, London Symphony Orchestra
> Holst's The Planets: Andre Previn, Royal Philharmonic Orchestra
> Beethoven Triple Concerto: Yo-Yo Ma, Itzhak Perlman, Daniel Barenboim
> 
> I grabbed a few recommendations from your list, so I thank you for that.


How can one not love this one, sparkling and most of all performed with love.


----------



## AfterHours

Revised my selections for:

Piano Quintet in F minor - Johannes Brahms (1864) [previously Pollini/Quartetto Italiano]
Piano Quintet No. 2 in A major - Antonin Dvorak (1887) [previously Pressler/Emerson]
Piano Sonata No. 2 in B-flat Minor "The Funeral March" - Frederich Chopin (1839) [previously Janina Fialkowska]

Ratings Upgrades:

Symphony No. 9 in D Major - Gustav Mahler (1910) / Herbert von Karajan - Berlin Philharmonic (1982) ... After revisiting this and various other substantial recordings, I upgraded the "Performance Quality" from 9.5 to a 10 because it now stands out as even more substantial and inimitable. There are others (Bernstein, Chailly, Giulini, Ancerl...) that approach, _maybe_ even equal, the virtuosity and intensity of playing of Karajan's live rendition. However, I don't know of any that also boast such nuanced, detailed sound qualities from the instruments that they take on the very character of their parts and become the entire voice and visionary synthesis of Mahler. In their tonal colors and sonority, the very timbric detail of their play, one can experience such an astonishingly detailed, "death-stricken" assimilation of the work that it is most overwhelming and moving.

Mass in B Minor - Johann Sebastian Bach (1749) / Philippe Herreweghe - Collegium Vocale Gent (2011) ... Upgraded "Performance Quality" from 9.5 to 10. If you're familiar with other renditions and you've listened to this, no explanation for such a rating should be necessary. Considering how substantial a work the Mass in B Minor is, and just how incredible Herreweghe's rendition is in every way, this could be the single most impressive recorded performance in classical music history.

List is here: https://www.besteveralbums.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=15098&start=0


----------



## realdealblues

AfterHours said:


> Mass in B Minor - Johann Sebastian Bach (1749) / Philippe Herreweghe - Collegium Vocale Gent (2011) ... Upgraded "Performance Quality" from 9.5 to 10. If you're familiar with other renditions and you've listened to this, no explanation for such a rating should be necessary. Considering how substantial a work the Mass in B Minor is, and just how incredible Herreweghe's rendition is in every way, this could be the single most impressive recorded performance in classical music history.


Different strokes as they say. I'd give Herreweghe's recording an 8. I'll stay with Eugen Jochum/Bavarian Radio Symphony Orchestra on EMI.


----------



## AfterHours

realdealblues said:


> Different strokes as they say. I'd give Herreweghe's recording an 8. I'll stay with Eugen Jochum/Bavarian Radio Symphony Orchestra on EMI.


Fair enough, can't go wrong with Jochum!


----------



## AfterHours

chesapeake bay said:


> Serkin, Budapest String quartet


Again, excellent recommendation, thank you. I revisited it and it is quite worthy of the very best, maybe just a hair below or equal to Pollini's. Rubinstein's won out, though it took a little getting used to at first, as it somehow moves a bit faster than others while also being less forceful/aggressive yet more harmonious, flowing, lyrical and poetic (extraordinarily so).


----------



## AfterHours

realdealblues said:


> Different strokes as they say. I'd give Herreweghe's recording an 8. I'll stay with Eugen Jochum/Bavarian Radio Symphony Orchestra on EMI.


I generally prefer my Bach a bit more idiomatic, but Jochum's (along with Klemperer's perhaps?) may be the best of the larger scale, somewhat more "Romantic-informed" versions. I understand if one is more inclined towards the more epic scales of these, especially being so convincingly performed.

The subtlety and detail in the voices and orchestration, the feeling, compassion, spirituality, and the transparent contrapuntal and interweaving unification of the them among each other, gets more lyrical, reverent, luminous, extraordinary and powerful each time I listen to Herreweghe's.

That said, there's at least 5 other renditions I'd probably rate 9.5 (Jochum's among them) and perhaps revisits would yield an upgrade or two. Perhaps more than any other work, there is so much competition of the highest level, so Herreweghe's, while my top choice, may or may not be in the clear, despite its 10 and despite my statement above.


----------



## Chatellerault

AfterHours said:


> I do think HIP sounds better for Mozart in general, and Bach, and Haydn -- actually, much of what came before Beethoven -- where such composer's often favored/rewarded more translucent textures between layers of instruments in their works (...)


Well, that's your opinion and I beg to differ because my ears tell me otherwise. When I listen to Beethoven's sonatas on the fortepiano it becomes clear how Beethoven was often pushing the instrument to its limits in terms of sound, dynamics, speed, cantabile, etc. While on a modern Steinway the sonatas don't use all the instrument's possibilities or, if the pianist uses them, it may sound inappropriate.

While on the Symphonies, these conductors you chose for nos. 5 and 7 (John Eliot Gardiner and Manfred Honeck) deliver quite HIP performances (on modern instruments for no. 7) and, while I appreciate their recordings, I'll never prefer them to Kleiber (WPO), Klemperer (Philharmonia) or Haitink (LSO).

Last year I've watched Honeck conduct Beethoven's 7th with the Concertgebouw Orchestra and the famous Allegretto seemed perfectly done but rushed, so rushed and rather cold...


----------



## Heck148

AfterHours said:


> I do think HIP sounds better for Mozart in general, and Bach, and Haydn -- actually, much of what came before Beethoven -- where such composer's often favored/rewarded more translucent textures between layers of instruments in their works.


I was listening to Bruno Walter/ColSO recording of Mozart #35 "Haffner" - the 2nd mvt <Andante> is most beautifully played. the phrasing is exquisite. Walter takes a laid back, even slow tempo, which could end up as very plodding and stodgy in the wrong hands. But under Walter, it is so lovingly, passionately shaped, the phrasing, and inflections are really superbly done....it does not plod at all, it is simply beautiful. BTW, Walter used a small string section
I miss this is many HIP recordings, which seem to often favor a rather dry, _sans vibrato, sans expressione_, metric, "tick-tocky" approach over a warmer, more tellingly phrased approach. I'll take Walter any day....Reiner, Szell and Solti tend towards a more expressive approach, maybe not as laid back as Walter, but most effective, nonetheless.


----------



## AfterHours

Chatellerault said:


> Well, that's your opinion and I beg to differ because my ears tell me otherwise. When I listen to Beethoven's sonatas on the fortepiano it becomes clear how Beethoven was often pushing the instrument to its limits in terms of sound, dynamics, speed, cantabile, etc. While on a modern Steinway the sonatas don't use all the instrument's possibilities or, if the pianist uses them, it may sound inappropriate.
> 
> While on the Symphonies, these conductors you chose for nos. 5 and 7 (John Eliot Gardiner and Manfred Honeck) deliver quite HIP performances (on modern instruments for no. 7) and, while I appreciate their recordings, I'll never prefer them to Kleiber (WPO), Klemperer (Philharmonia) or Haitink (LSO).
> 
> Last year I've watched Honeck conduct Beethoven's 7th with the Concertgebouw Orchestra and the famous Allegretto seemed perfectly done but rushed, so rushed and rather cold...


I've never heard a fortepiano rendition that even approaches those I've listed (except _maybe_ Brautigam's Pathetique, but even that one I doubt). Andreas Staier is maybe the only forte-pianist with a realistic shot, if he records them (see his stunning Diabelli Variations). All in all, I simply listen to the work and if it brings it out best, that's my choice (for an explanation of criteria go to the top of my page of listed recordings). I don't worry about it being HIP or not. The day that a forte-pianist actually brings out the emotion of, say, the Hammerklavier, to the same or better degree as Annie Fischer's, is the day I will post such a rendition as equaling/supplanting hers. I'm not sure if or how it would be done, but it's there to be done. Personally, I don't see how a realistic argument against Gardiner's incredible 5th (2016 BBC version) that I list, or Honeck's astonishing 7th can be made if we're just listening to them attentively (and if that's what you've done, then that's perfectly fine, to each their own on this point) -- not that one has to agree that they're the very best renditions, but how a realistic argument could be made against these as superb renditions of their respective symphonies. I also wonder why you feel Honeck's are HIP any more so than any other astute conductor using modern instruments? For the 5th, perhaps only Wand's is as articulate as Gardiner's while maintaining such intensity, tension and a sense of ascending scale. Very few conductors bring out the full flesh of the symphony on recordings while also maintaining its tension and focus to the full extent as Gardiner has. Honeck's, on the same disc as the 7th, probably well fits this description too. And that's about it. I feel Kleiber's 5th, though great, has been surpassed (and was somewhat overrated anyway if we're claiming it's the greatest recording in history as some magazines have). For the 7th, I like Blomstedt's a lot, Gardiner's Live at Carnegie Hall, Bernstein's (DG), Kleiber's too, etc. Generally, for Beethoven's Symphonies, I think modern instrument versions are superior, though there are exceptions, and I feel I've found the few HIP renditions that are worth of such a distinction (but it's all subjective...). For his other works, the Ghost Piano Trio with Staier is unbelievable, and certainly his aforementioned Diabelli Variations (the "Ghost" Piano Trio is clearly the most stunning rendition ever recorded imo, and the Diabelli may very well be too)! Overall though, Beethoven is best served on modern instruments and I probably agree more closely than not with your general sentiment for his works (discounting the piano sonatas). There are too many mediocre or even poor HIP renditions to count, so when one stands out, it is quite an accomplishment because it is very difficult with Beethoven and composers who followed.

RE: "Last year I've watched Honeck conduct Beethoven's 7th with the Concertgebouw Orchestra and the famous Allegretto seemed perfectly done but rushed, so rushed and rather cold..." Fortunately for us then, this is a different version!


----------



## AfterHours

Heck148 said:


> I was listening to Bruno Walter/ColSO recording of Mozart #35 "Haffner" - the 2nd mvt <Andante> is most beautifully played. the phrasing is exquisite. Walter takes a laid back, even slow tempo, which could end up as very plodding and stodgy in the wrong hands. But under Walter, it is so lovingly, passionately shaped, the phrasing, and inflections are really superbly done....it does not plod at all, it is simply beautiful. BTW, Walter used a small string section
> I miss this is many HIP recordings, which seem to often favor a rather dry, _sans vibrato, sans expressione_, metric, "tick-tocky" approach over a warmer, more tellingly phrased approach. I'll take Walter any day....Reiner, Szell and Solti tend towards a more expressive approach, maybe not as laid back as Walter, but most effective, nonetheless.


I agree that many HIP recordings fail to deliver or aren't the very best. When done right, though...

I also agree that Walter is superb with Mozart's Symphonies so I have no argument whatsoever


----------



## Vaneyes

Heck148 said:


> I was listening to Bruno Walter/ColSO recording of Mozart #35 "Haffner" - the 2nd mvt <Andante> is most beautifully played. the phrasing is exquisite. Walter takes a laid back, even slow tempo, which could end up as very plodding and stodgy in the wrong hands. But under Walter, it is so lovingly, passionately shaped, the phrasing, and inflections are really superbly done....it does not plod at all, it is simply beautiful. BTW, Walter used a small string section
> I miss this is many HIP recordings, which seem to often favor a rather dry, _sans vibrato, sans expressione_, metric, "tick-tocky" approach over a warmer, more tellingly phrased approach. I'll take Walter any day....Reiner, Szell and Solti tend towards a more expressive approach, maybe not as laid back as Walter, but most effective, nonetheless.


Comparing, Walter has a wide range of tempi from score to score. For examples, I find his Mahler 1 & 2 plodding. His Mahler 9 (Vienna) and Bruckner 9 invigorating. Maybe a centrist in Brahms. Something for everyone. All valid interpretations. He kept this change-up philosophy through his twilight years in California.

Reiner, Solti, Szell, all less evidenced with change-up, but more invigorating on average, I'd say. :tiphat:


----------



## AfterHours

I added my selection for:

Symphony No. 8 in C Minor - Anton Bruckner (1892)

[NOTE: Jochum (EMI), Karajan (DG), Wand (RCA), Maazel, are all still in play. I am quite satisfied with my choice, but it is VERY close between my selection and all of these, and another reminder to expand my list to include additional entries at some point in the future]

Adjusted Ratings:

Concerto for 2 Violins in D Minor - Johann Sebastian Bach (circa 1718-1720) / Petra Mullejans, Gottfried Von Der Goltz & Anne-Katharina Schreiber - Freiburger Barockorchester (2012)

Upon revisiting it, I don't see how there could be a better rendition of this work (I've certainly never found one!), so I upgraded my "Performance Quality" rating from 9.5 to a 10.

Additionally, I am busy looking for better recorded renditions of Beethoven's 3rd Symphony. I really like the Monteux version I list a lot (and it may indeed be unsurpassed), but I have a hunch there might be a superior one somewhere. I am very impressed with Harnoncourts/Chamber Orchestra of Europe rendition lately and may replace it with that. If you know of some others that are truly at the pinnacle of recordings for the 3rd, please let me know (a very crowded field so please be meticulous).

NOTE: So far for the 3rd, realdealblues has recommended Szell, Munch, Wand, Dohnanyi so far, all of which are excellent and deserve consideration, and which I plan on revisiting soon.

List is here: https://www.besteveralbums.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=458120#458120


----------



## Heck148

For Beethoven Sym #3 "Eroica':
Toscanini/NBC/"49
Reiner/CSO
Von Matacic/CzechPO


----------



## Vaneyes

AfterHours said:


> I added my selection for:
> 
> Symphony No. 8 in C Minor - Anton Bruckner (1892)
> 
> [NOTE: Jochum (EMI), Karajan (DG), Wand (RCA), Maazel, are all still in play. I am quite satisfied with my choice, but it is VERY close between my selection and all of these, and another reminder to expand my list to include additional entries at some point in the future]
> 
> Adjusted Ratings:
> 
> Concerto for 2 Violins in D Minor - Johann Sebastian Bach (circa 1718-1720) / Petra Mullejans, Gottfried Von Der Goltz & Anne-Katharina Schreiber - Freiburger Barockorchester (2012)
> 
> Upon revisiting it, I don't see how there could be a better rendition of this work (I've certainly never found one!), so I upgraded my "Performance Quality" rating from 9.5 to a 10.
> 
> Additionally, I am busy looking for better recorded renditions of Beethoven's 3rd Symphony. I really like the Monteux version I list a lot (and it may indeed be unsurpassed), but I have a hunch there might be a superior one somewhere. I am very impressed with Harnoncourts/Chamber Orchestra of Europe rendition lately and may replace it with that. If you know of some others that are truly at the pinnacle of recordings for the 3rd, please let me know (a very crowded field so please be meticulous).
> 
> NOTE: So far for the 3rd, realdealblues has recommended Szell, Munch, Wand, Dohnanyi so far, all of which are excellent and deserve consideration, and which I plan on revisiting soon.
> 
> List is here: https://www.besteveralbums.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=458120#458120


*Bruckner* 8 w. BPO/Jochum (DG 1964), and *LvB* 3 w. BPO/HvK (DG 1963). :tiphat:


----------



## AfterHours

Heck148 said:


> For Beethoven Sym #3 "Eroica':
> Toscanini/NBC/"49
> Reiner/CSO
> Von Matacic/CzechPO


Thank you I've never listened to this Reiner or the Von Matacic. I've heard the Toscanini before but will test it newly to see if the performance is incredible enough to overcome its loss of detail/presence from weak sound quality (unlikely to be my #1 due to this but maybe through new tech this has changed. It's a shame the likes of Toscanini, Furtwangler etc couldnt be captured better). Play testing the Reiner now and so far it's superb.


----------



## AfterHours

Vaneyes said:


> *Bruckner* 8 w. BPO/Jochum (DG 1964), and *LvB* 3 w. BPO/HvK (DG 1963). :tiphat:


Thank you! Your Jochum might actually be the 8th I'm referring to of his. I'll have to double check. Frankly, both could be among the very best -- I might just be listening to them at different times and confusing which is which. I do like the '63 Hvk/BPO Eroica quite a bit and will revisit it soon. Especially if I can find the SACD enhanced version on Spotify, Youtube or some other legal source.


----------



## AfterHours

I added my selection for:

Symphony of Psalms - Igor Stravinsky (1930)

I revised my selection for:

Piano Concerto No. 5 in E-flat Major "Emperor" - Ludwig van Beethoven (1811) [previously: Yevgeny Sudbin - Osmo Vanska - Minnesota Orchestra (2010)]

Adjusted Ratings:

Requiem Mass in D minor - Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart (1791) / Nikolaus Harnoncourt - Arnold Schoenberg Chor - Concentus Musicus Wien (2003) ... I upgraded the "Sound Quality" rating to a 10, and may have to do the same for "Performance Quality" but have not quite decided on that yet. Simply put, this is an _incredible_ performance of Mozart's Requiem. So much conviction and care has been put into every detail from the vocals to the orchestration, to the dramatic relationships between both. Despite the work's well-worn recording history, this rendition sounds particularly striking and fresh and vividly real, while remaining idiomatically Mozart.

Piano Sonata No. 29 in B-flat Major "Hammerklavier" - Ludwig van Beethoven (1818) / Annie Fischer (1977-1978) ... I downgraded the "Sound Quality" rating from 7.5 to 7

List is here: https://www.besteveralbums.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=15098&start=0


----------



## AfterHours

Vaneyes said:


> *LvB* 3 w. BPO/HvK (DG 1963). :tiphat:





Heck148 said:


> For Beethoven Sym #3 "Eroica':
> Toscanini/NBC/"49
> Reiner/CSO
> Von Matacic/CzechPO





realdealblues said:


> Also ones I will agree on:
> Beethoven: Symphony #3 "Eroica"
> Pierre Monteux/Concertgebow (This one is indeed fine, but equal or better are Szell, Munch, Wand, Dohnanyi)


Thank you to each of you, this was some great listening. So far, I am sticking with Monteux's as my very top choice but all of these were exceptional discoveries/revisits and well worth my time. My hats off to you all! :tiphat: I do still have Munch's to revisit, and I will get back to you if that changes things, but I've checked out all the rest so far. Also, I discovered a 2015 upgrade of Monteux's available on Spotify which helped remind me of its greatness a little more than the earlier incarnation I was using. I've now posted its Spotify recording on my list at besteveralbums.com, here: https://www.besteveralbums.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=15098&start=0


----------



## AfterHours

I added my selections for the following:

Violin Concerto No. 2 in C-sharp Minor - Dmitri Shostakovich (1967) 
Symphony No. 2 "The Age of Anxiety" - Leonard Bernstein (1949) 
Violin Concerto "To the Memory of an Angel" - Alban Berg (1935) 
Violin Concerto in D major - Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky (1878)

I also upgraded the ratings of the following _as Classical Works_ (not their chosen recordings):

Violin Concerto No. 2 in C-sharp Minor - Dmitri Shostakovich (1967) 8/10 to 8.5/10 
Symphony No. 2 "The Age of Anxiety" - Leonard Bernstein (1949) 8/10 to 8.5/10 
Violin Concerto "To the Memory of an Angel" - Alban Berg (1935) 8/10 to 8.5/10

List is here: https://www.besteveralbums.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=15098


----------



## AfterHours

Re: Mass in B Minor - Johann Sebastian Bach (1749) / Philippe Herreweghe - Collegium Vocale Gent (2011) https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/41e5GoQyQQL._SY355_.jpg

I think a major aspect that distinguishes this among a handful of incredible renditions is that no other version captures the experience as if it is truly separating from this world. As if its interweaving, translucent voices and instrumentation are presiding, ascending and spiraling in and around otherworldy spaces and events, through heavenly scenes, _above ground_. It is so beautifully humbled, caring, reverent and idiomatic in all of its emotional execution vocally and orchestral (no drama of the _Romanticized_ sort to be found whatsoever), but also in its overall conception, in its unveiling of its particularly massive, "widescreen" luminosity, expanding in continuous movement as if among an infinity of space, totally engrossed in and among the humble spiritual spectacle of it all, that sounds as if a continual series of real-life, vivid, spontaneous, truly _miraculous_ events (not theater) are developing right before you.

Even if another rendition were to supplant it, this one will always remain very special and distinguished.


----------



## Animal the Drummer

AfterHours said:


> Thank you I've never listened to this Reiner or the Von Matacic. I've heard the Toscanini before but will test it newly to see if the performance is incredible enough to overcome its loss of detail/presence from weak sound quality (unlikely to be my #1 due to this but maybe through new tech this has changed. It's a shame the likes of Toscanini, Furtwangler etc couldnt be captured better). Play testing the Reiner now and so far it's superb.


Matacic's recording is a fine one and the fact that he was a distant cousin of mine has no bearing on my recommendation.


----------



## Heck148

Animal the Drummer said:


> Matacic's recording is a fine one and the fact that he was a distant cousin of mine has no bearing on my recommendation.


von Matacic was a great conductor, unfortunately not too active or well-known in the US...


----------



## AfterHours

Animal the Drummer said:


> Matacic's recording is a fine one and the fact that he was a distant cousin of mine has no bearing on my recommendation.


Yeah, I'd only vaguely run across Matacic prior to this. Great rendition of the 3rd.


----------



## AfterHours

I added my selections for the following:

Faust Cantata - Alfred Schnittke (1983) 
Violin Concerto No. 2 - Bela Bartok (1938)

List is here: https://www.besteveralbums.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=15098&start=0


----------



## AfterHours

I added my selections for:

Symphony: Mathis der Maler - Paul Hindemith (1934) 
Piano Concerto in A Minor - Robert Schumann (1845) 
Oiseaux Exotiques - Olivier Messiaen (1956)

List is here: https://www.besteveralbums.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=458120#458120


----------



## AfterHours

I added my selections for the following:

Symphony No. 5 in B-flat - Sergei Prokofiev (1944) 
Symphony No. 2 in D Major - Jean Sibelius (1902) 
Symphony No. 10 in E Minor - Dmitri Shostakovich (circa 1951-1953) 
Trio for Violin, Horn and Piano - Gyorgy Ligeti (1982) 
Fantasia in F Minor for Piano, Four Hands - Franz Schubert (1828) 
Chromatic Fantasia and Fugue in D Minor - Johann Sebastian Bach (circa 1717-1723) 
Passacaglia and Fugue in C Minor (BWV 582) - Johann Sebastian Bach (circa 1706-1713)

List is here: https://www.besteveralbums.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=15098&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0


----------



## AfterHours

WOW


----------



## AfterHours

I added my selections for:

Concerto for Piano and String Orchestra - Alfred Schnittke (1979) 
Piano Concerto No. 3 in C minor - Ludwig Van Beethoven (circa 1800-1803)

Also, I am wondering if anyone knows of any particularly extraordinary Art of Fugue renditions (w/ Organ) that are highly recommendable next to Helmut Walcha's? Preferably in a somewhat less "conservative" style. I am not sure if Walcha's can be topped but I am wondering if there is maybe one that is equally recommendable but from a different point-of-view.

List is here: https://www.besteveralbums.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=15098&start=0


----------



## realdealblues

AfterHours said:


> Also, I am wondering if anyone knows of any particularly extraordinary Art of Fugue renditions (w/ Organ) that are highly recommendable next to Helmut Walcha's? Preferably in a somewhat less "conservative" style. I am not sure if Walcha's can be topped but I am wondering if there is maybe one that is equally recommendable but from a different point-of-view.


Try Marie-Claire Alain's 1993 recording on Erato or Joan Lippincott's recording on Gothic.


----------



## Klassik

AfterHours said:


> I added my selections for the following:
> 
> Symphony No. 5 in B-flat - Sergei Prokofiev (1944)


It may not be considered to be the best, but Leonard Slatkin's performance of this symphony with the St. Louis SO on the RCA label is (perhaps a bit surprisingly) very good. I say surprisingly because it's a very early digital recording and the St. Louis SO isn't the first name that comes to mind with great performances, but this one is good.


----------



## AfterHours

realdealblues said:


> Try Marie-Claire Alain's 1993 recording on Erato or Joan Lippincott's recording on Gothic.


Thank you, I've heard Lippincott's, which I liked quite a bit, but will revisit. I've never listened to Alain's, and will look for it.


----------



## AfterHours

Klassik said:


> It may not be considered to be the best, but Leonard Slatkin's performance of this symphony with the St. Louis SO on the RCA label is (perhaps a bit surprisingly) very good. I say surprisingly because it's a very early digital recording and the St. Louis SO isn't the first name that comes to mind with great performances, but this one is good.


Thank you, I'll give it a shot. Do you feel it's comparable to Karajan/BPO? https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/81AfkTrOsIL._SY355_.jpg


----------



## Klassik

AfterHours said:


> Thank you, I'll give it a shot. Do you feel it's comparable to Karajan/BPO? https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/81AfkTrOsIL._SY355_.jpg


Yes, I think it's in the same class. Neeme Jarvi's recording on Chandos would be another recording that should be considered in the top class.


----------



## Heck148

Klassik said:


> Yes, I think it's in the same class. Neeme Jarvi's recording on Chandos would be another recording that should be considered in the top class.


for Prokofieff Sym #5 - Levine/CSO/DG - superb...great playing, great sound

an historical favorite:
Reiner/CSO - live concert from 2/58....the sound is not the greatest, it's OK, but the performance is amazing, really exciting...can't imagine what it was like live, in the hall.

Jarvi's Chandos set with Royal Scottish is well-recorded, and generally well-played, but I find Jarvi to be a bit pedestrian in his interpretations. None of them are "bad", but other conductors seem to get much more out of the scores - Levine, Rozh'sky, Mravinsky, Kondrashin, Ormandy, etc...Jarvi, too often, sounds like he's just reading it thru...decent read-thru, but....


----------



## AfterHours

Klassik said:


> Yes, I think it's in the same class. Neeme Jarvi's recording on Chandos would be another recording that should be considered in the top class.


Thank you, I'll give that one a shot. Though I haven't heard his Prokofiev, I tend to be mixed on Jarvi in general, in that he is so often a touch (or more) too conservative, even though his articulation of parts is excellent, and the sound quality of his recordings (the ones I've heard) are among the best around. I have similar feelings towards the most acclaimed recordings of Szell in that he tends to be a bit too conservative -- though in his case, usually with serviceable, instead of great, sound quality (not for Prokofiev's 5th, but for example, his generally acclaimed Beethoven and Mozart Symphonies). I don't mean that I don't like Jarvi's renditions (or Szell's), just that they aren't usually among my utmost favorites.


----------



## AfterHours

Heck148 said:


> for Prokofieff Sym #5 - Levine/CSO/DG - superb...great playing, great sound
> 
> an historical favorite:
> Reiner/CSO - live concert from 2/58....the sound is not the greatest, it's OK, but the performance is amazing, really exciting...can't imagine what it was like live, in the hall.
> 
> Jarvi's Chandos set with Royal Scottish is well-recorded, and generally well-played, but I find Jarvi to be a bit pedestrian in his interpretations. None of them are "bad", but other conductors seem to get much more out of the scores - Levine, Rozh'sky, Mravinsky, Kondrashin, Ormandy, etc...Jarvi, too often, sounds like he's just reading it thru...decent read-thru, but....


Thank you, I've never heard Levine's Prokofiev 5th, or the Reiner/CSO live concert rendition. I won't ask how comparable you feel they are to Karajan's


----------



## AfterHours

Klassik said:


> Yes, I think it's in the same class. Neeme Jarvi's recording on Chandos would be another recording that should be considered in the top class.


As a note, my comment above doesn't mean I won't go into Jarvi's rendition of Prokofiev's 5th with an open mind. I am totally open to it blowing me away as much as Karajan's and would love for it to do so!


----------



## Heck148

AfterHours said:


> Thank you, I've never heard Levine's Prokofiev 5th, or the Reiner/CSO live concert rendition. I won't ask how comparable you feel they are to Karajan's


HvK is not in the same class. He just does not relate to the great 20th century Russians.


----------



## AfterHours

Heck148 said:


> HvK is not in the same class. He just does not relate to the great 20th century Russians.


Whoa, surprising coming from you


----------



## AfterHours

Heck148 said:


> HvK is not in the same class. He just does not relate to the great 20th century Russians.


Too bad Karajan didn't make some HIP recordings we could discuss! :lol:


----------



## Heck148

AfterHours said:


> Too bad Karajan didn't make some HIP recordings we could discuss! :lol:


LOL!! That is funny!!


----------



## AfterHours

I added my selections for:

Missa Solemnis - Ludwig van Beethoven (1823) 
Symphony No. 40 in G minor - Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart (1788) 
Symphony No. 39 in E-flat Major - Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart (1788) 
Symphony No. 38 - Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart (1788) 
Symphony No. 35 in D major "Haffner" - Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart (1788) 
Piano Trio No. 2 in C Major - Johannes Brahms (1882)

Don't take my ratings/overall rankings _as Classical Works_ for these Mozart Symphonies too strictly yet. I am still revisiting these and working their ratings/rankings out. So I've only loosely placed them so far. In all likelihood, my current ratings/rankings of them are too conservative and too low. Plus, they are likely to separate out in relation to each other a bit more. They're pretty close qualitatively but not quite _that_ close.

Also, I am strongly considering the following renditions for my top selection for Mozart's 41st Symphony but remain undecided between them (previously Pinnock's was my selection):

Rene Jacobs/Freiburger Barockorchester https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51y4ScLR1NL.jpg
Charles Mackerras/Scottish Chamber Orchestra https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/61LakbiBqtL._SY355_.jpg
Nikolaus Harnoncourt/Concentus Musicus Wien http://cdn-s3.allmusic.com/release-covers/500/0004/199/0004199960.jpg

And possibly, an older favorite (particularly for renditions without repeats):
Karl Bohm/Berlin Philharmonic http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51FI0lvbs3L._SS500_.jpg

Jacobs is the only version of the Jupiter Symphony that I've ever heard that (and in my opinion, most idiomatically) emphasizes enough clarity and transparency between its parts, enough flamboyance and spontaneity in its execution, and that allows each orchestral part/instrumental voice to speak for itself. Thus, bringing about the spontaneity, lyrical individuality, spatial relation, full inter-communication of parts, and the sense of operatic theater/opera buffa of its conception -- as opposed to a compressed, more single file of unified sound (more in line with, say, Beethoven's 7th Symphony, as most conductors do), which also tends to result in a more strictly structured and "Olympian" reading, but less "theatrical and spontaneous". Mackerras' (with SCO above) is probably the greatest example of this more structured, "unifed" and "Olympian" way with the work. The Harnoncourt rendition above might be the happiest medium between the two. Bohm/BPO takes a more legato-oriented, "stream-of-conscious", and possibly the most lyrical, approach, and of course without the repeats.

I am curious about hearing others that have tried Jacobs' approach, either prior to his -- perhaps controversial -- release, or since. Anyone have any recommendations?

List is here: https://www.besteveralbums.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=458120#458120


----------



## Vaneyes

AfterHours said:


> I added my selections for:
> 
> Missa Solemnis - Ludwig van Beethoven (1823)
> Symphony No. 40 in G minor - Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart (1788)
> Symphony No. 39 in E-flat Major - Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart (1788)
> Symphony No. 38 - Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart (1788)
> Symphony No. 35 in D major "Haffner" - Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart (1788)
> Piano Trio No. 2 in C Major - Johannes Brahms (1882)
> ....


You may pat yourself on the back for resisting the rare anti-HvKers.

Question. Wha' happens if you can't find a recommended tune on Spotify or YT?

Re LvB "Missa", Norrington (Hanssler) and Kuhn (col legno) should not be overlooked. Klemps' is a sad sack in comparison.

Cheers! :tiphat:


----------



## Klassik

AfterHours said:


> Symphony No. 40 in G minor - Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart (1788)
> Symphony No. 39 in E-flat Major - Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart (1788)


What do you think of the Bruggen 2010 recordings with the Orchestra of the 18th Century on the Glossa label of Mozart's last three symphonies? I quite liked those and prefer them to the Harnoncourt recordings.


----------



## AfterHours

Vaneyes said:


> You may pat yourself on the back for resisting the rare anti-HvKers.
> 
> Question. Wha' happens if you can't find a recommended tune on Spotify or YT?
> 
> Re LvB "Missa", Norrington (Hanssler) and Kuhn (col legno) should not be overlooked. Klemps' is a sad sack in comparison.
> 
> Cheers! :tiphat:


Re: Karajan ... Yes, as with all-out HIP dismissals (or in cases of all-out modern instrument dismissals), everyone is entitled to their opinion of course, but such generalities are hard for me to take seriously. In the case of Karajan, who may have his limitations, but his talent is unquestionable and his strengths are _particularly_ applicable in certain recordings. Plus, there are certain recordings where his "flaws" are non-existent altogether anyway -- he didn't only perform and record like he did with his weaker, one-dimensional, less articulated renditions, _in every single case_. I honestly can't fathom how anyone that adores Mahler's 9th could listen to Karajan's Live rendition and not be in total awe, gobsmacked, emotionally overwhelmed and exhausted by the end of it -- but everyone has a different set of ears I suppose (and in Heck's case, he stands by his convictions, which I have no problem with, just maybe a little befuddled by their extent!) ...

Re: Not on Spotify or Youtube? ... I either buy the CD or download it, or listen to it via Amazon Music, or some other legal way. If there's no other way, which is very very rare, I'll order it from my library's "international inter-library loan system" (an amazing tool we have here in Oregon where you can find pretty much ANY film or music you can think of, no matter how obscure -- not sure if this exists elsewhere)

Re: Missa ... Thank you I'll look into those two ... Re: Klemperer the "Sad Sack" ... I find it quite vibrant and alive and celebratory when called for, but even if so, it is a Missa _Solemnis_, after all :tiphat:


----------



## Vaneyes

Klassik said:


> What do you think of the Bruggen 2010 recordings with the Orchestra of the 18th Century on the Glossa label of Mozart's last three symphonies? I quite liked those and prefer them to the Harnoncourt recordings.


I like more meat on my Late Mozart. Also, I didn't think these Mozart Lite performances were helped by the sound recording--bright, reverberant.:tiphat:


----------



## Klassik

Vaneyes said:


> I like more meat on my Late Mozart. Also, I didn't think these Mozart Lite performances were helped by the sound recording--bright, reverberant.:tiphat:


I can understand. Bruggen's style of HIP isn't for everyone especially when it's for pieces that we've heard frequently and gotten used to being played in the modern style. Also, I typically don't like live recordings, but I thought it sounded okay here. It is a bit reverberant though as you say.


----------



## Vaneyes

AfterHours said:


> Re: Karajan ... Yes, as with all-out HIP dismissals (or in cases of all-out modern instrument dismissals), everyone is entitled to their opinion of course, but such generalities are hard for me to take seriously. In the case of Karajan, who may have his limitations, but his talent is unquestionable and his strengths are _particularly_ applicable in certain recordings. Plus, there are certain recordings where his "flaws" are non-existent altogether anyway -- he didn't only perform and record like he did with his weaker, one-dimensional, less articulated renditions, _in every single case_. I honestly can't fathom how anyone that adores Mahler's 9th could listen to Karajan's Live rendition and not be in total awe, gobsmacked, emotionally overwhelmed and exhausted by the end of it -- but everyone has a different set of ears I suppose (and Heck stands by his convictions, which I have no problem with, just maybe a little befuddled by their extent!) ...
> 
> Re: Not on Spotify or Youtube? ... I either buy the CD or download it, or listen to it via Amazon Music, or some other legal way. If there's no other way, which is very very rare, I'll order it from my library's "international inter-library loan system" (an amazing tool we have here in Oregon where you can find pretty much ANY film or music you can think of, no matter how obscure -- not sure if this exists elsewhere)
> 
> Re: Missa ... Thank you I'll look into those two ... Re: Klemperer the "Sad Sack" ... I find it quite vibrant and alive and celebratory when called for, but even if so, it is a Missa _Solemnis_, after all :tiphat:


I think HvK got Mahler 9 right, but little else from that composer. I prefer the earlier DG studio.

He's more successful with Bruckner, where I like his 7 - 9. VPO for 7 & 8. 1966 BPO for 9.

And 60's Brahms, 60's & 70's LvB, R. Strauss. Wow! :tiphat:


----------



## Vaneyes

Klassik said:


> I can understand. Bruggen's style of HIP isn't for everyone especially when it's for pieces that we've heard frequently and gotten used to being played in the modern style. Also, I typically don't like live recordings, but I thought it sounded okay here. It is a bit reverberant though as you say.


I have no grudge with HIP.
I like Bruggen Rameau, and that's about it. R.I.P.:angel:


----------



## AfterHours

Klassik said:


> What do you think of the Bruggen 2010 recordings with the Orchestra of the 18th Century on the Glossa label of Mozart's last three symphonies? I quite liked those and prefer them to the Harnoncourt recordings.


I haven't listened to them in a bit, but I do remember liking them. I don't recall liking them as much as Harnoncourt's (which are astonishing. In my opinion, there is no way there's a superior 35th by anyone, ever, and it also seems unlikely for the others I list. Harnoncourt hit these renditions out of the ballpark, really capturing the theatricality, the spontaneity, rhythmic diversity, the lyricism and emotional nuances of the works); or several others (Bohm, Colin Davis, Mackerras, Pinnock...) -- but I've only listened to Bruggen's late renditions once. It could be at least partially a recording/mic issue, and not so much a performance issue, from what I recall. As I've mentioned, his Late Haydn Symphonies are incredible, so theoretically it seems like he should jump into Mozart pretty smoothly.

As a note, off the top of my head, there are no cases I'm aware of where I'd give a 10 in Performance Quality to two separate recordings of the same Classical Work, so when I rate something a 10 it means I don't think it has any equal. Whereas I will often find a few 9.5s per work, and if that's also the highest rating, my choice selection will be separated from the pack by sound quality being the "tie-breaker". That doesn't mean I am not open to changing my mind on a "10" (if a superior rendition is discovered) or finding additional ones if they so exist.


----------



## AfterHours

Klassik said:


> What do you think of the Bruggen 2010 recordings with the Orchestra of the 18th Century on the Glossa label of Mozart's last three symphonies? I quite liked those and prefer them to the Harnoncourt recordings.


Also ... I will make sure to revisit them. It's always possible they are better than I remember! And Bruggen's takes are rarely less than intriguing.


----------



## Phil loves classical

Bruno Walter's version of Beethoven's Pastorale is the only version I would listen to, after hearing many. John Barbirolli's version of Sibelius #2 edges out Berstein's in my book. Hey I noticed the other day another critic likes Joanne Newsom's Have One On Me, and seemed to have similar views as yours on the Beatles and Tim Buckley, Pierro Scaruffi right?


----------



## AfterHours

Phil loves classical said:


> Bruno Walter's version of Beethoven's Pastorale is the only version I would listen to, after hearing many. John Barbirolli's version of Sibelius #2 edges out Berstein's in my book. Hey I noticed the other day another critic likes Joanne Newsom's Have One On Me, and seemed to have similar views as yours on the Beatles and Tim Buckley, Pierro Scaruffi right?


Thanks I really do like Walter's Pastoral and Barbirolli's Sibelius. Both were my very next choices and could be #1. Frankly, they only missed the selection due to the "Sound Quality" of the others -- "Performance Quality" was equal.

Re: Scaruffi ... Yes, _by far_ the most "accurate" Rock/Jazz critic for my tastes. We do have a very similar criteria (presumably, he is a bit unclear on his, even in the correspondence I've had with him).


----------



## Vaneyes

Phil loves classical said:


> *Bruno Walter's version of Beethoven's Pastorale is the only version I would listen to, after hearing many.* John Barbirolli's version of Sibelius #2 edges out Berstein's in my book. Hey I noticed the other day another critic likes Joanne Newsom's Have One On Me, and seemed to have similar views as yours on the Beatles and Tim Buckley, Pierro Scaruffi right?


That's certainly possible, it's a great one. As is LvB 4 accompanying on 'Sony Bruno Walter The Edition'.

I also greatly enjoy HvK ('76, DG 24-bit remastering), COE/Harnoncourt ('90, Teldec), VSOO/Scherchen ('58, Millennium Classics 20-bit remastering). :tiphat:


----------



## AfterHours

Vaneyes said:


> That's certainly possible, it's a great one. As is LvB 4 accompanying on 'Sony Bruno Walter The Edition'.
> 
> I also greatly enjoy HvK ('76, DG 24-bit remastering), COE/Harnoncourt ('90, Teldec), VSOO/Scherchen ('58, Millennium Classics 20-bit remastering). :tiphat:


Yes, great choices. I haven't heard the VSOO/Scherchen, but I really like the Harnoncourt you mention and, though Hvk's '76 version isn't among my very top selections, I do think it's an underrated rendition.


----------



## AfterHours

Re-posting this, in case it was missed...

I am strongly considering the following renditions for my top selection for Mozart's 41st Symphony but remain undecided between them (previously Pinnock's was my selection):

Rene Jacobs/Freiburger Barockorchester https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51y4ScLR1NL.jpg
Charles Mackerras/Scottish Chamber Orchestra https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/61LakbiBqtL._SY355_.jpg
Nikolaus Harnoncourt/Concentus Musicus Wien http://cdn-s3.allmusic.com/release-covers/500/0004/199/0004199960.jpg

And possibly, an older favorite (particularly for renditions without repeats):
Karl Bohm/Berlin Philharmonic http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51FI0lvbs3L._SS500_.jpg

Jacobs is the only version of the Jupiter Symphony that I've ever heard that (and in my opinion, most idiomatically) emphasizes enough clarity and transparency between its parts, enough flamboyance and spontaneity in its execution, and that allows each orchestral part/instrumental voice to speak for itself. Thus, bringing about the spontaneity, lyrical individuality, spatial relation, full inter-communication of parts, and the sense of operatic theater/opera buffa of its conception -- as opposed to a compressed, more single file of unified sound (more in line with, say, Beethoven's 7th Symphony, as most conductors do), which also tends to result in a more strictly structured and "Olympian" reading, but less "theatrical and spontaneous". Mackerras' (with SCO above) is probably the greatest example of this more structured, "unifed" and "Olympian" way with the work. The Harnoncourt rendition above might be the happiest medium between the two. Bohm/BPO takes a more legato-oriented, "stream-of-conscious", and possibly the most lyrical, approach, and of course without the repeats.

I am curious about hearing others that have tried Jacobs' approach, either prior to his -- perhaps controversial -- release, or since. Anyone have any recommendations?


----------



## realdealblues

AfterHours said:


> Re-posting this, in case it was missed...
> 
> I am strongly considering the following renditions for my top selection for Mozart's 41st Symphony but remain undecided between them (previously Pinnock's was my selection):
> 
> Rene Jacobs/Freiburger Barockorchester https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51y4ScLR1NL.jpg
> Charles Mackerras/Scottish Chamber Orchestra https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/61LakbiBqtL._SY355_.jpg
> Nikolaus Harnoncourt/Concentus Musicus Wien http://cdn-s3.allmusic.com/release-covers/500/0004/199/0004199960.jpg
> 
> And possibly, an older favorite (particularly for renditions without repeats):
> Karl Bohm/Berlin Philharmonic http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51FI0lvbs3L._SS500_.jpg
> 
> Jacobs is the only version of the Jupiter Symphony that I've ever heard that (and in my opinion, most idiomatically) emphasizes enough clarity and transparency between its parts, enough flamboyance and spontaneity in its execution, and that allows each orchestral part/instrumental voice to speak for itself. Thus, bringing about the spontaneity, lyrical individuality, spatial relation, full inter-communication of parts, and the sense of operatic theater/opera buffa of its conception -- as opposed to a compressed, more single file of unified sound (more in line with, say, Beethoven's 7th Symphony, as most conductors do), which also tends to result in a more strictly structured and "Olympian" reading, but less "theatrical and spontaneous". Mackerras' (with SCO above) is probably the greatest example of this more structured, "unifed" and "Olympian" way with the work. The Harnoncourt rendition above might be the happiest medium between the two. Bohm/BPO takes a more legato-oriented, "stream-of-conscious", and possibly the most lyrical, approach, and of course without the repeats.
> 
> I am curious about hearing others that have tried Jacobs' approach, either prior to his -- perhaps controversial -- release, or since. Anyone have any recommendations?


I have heard the Jacobs recording several times and it does nothing for me. When I think of Symphony 41 I think of George Szell and Fritz Reiner. Energetic, Precise, Clarity, Texture and Personality beyond many. Klemperer, Bohm, Walter and Marriner wouldn't be far behind for me either.


----------



## Heck148

realdealblues said:


> I have heard the Jacobs recording several times and it does nothing for me. When I think of Symphony 41 I think of George Szell and Fritz Reiner. Energetic, Precise, Clarity, Texture and Personality beyond many. Klemperer, Bohm, Walter and Marriner wouldn't be far behind for me either.


Agree wholeheartedly - esp Reiner, Szell and Walter...I also like Solti for Mozart and Haydn -uses the same approach - Muscular, energetic, clarity.


----------



## realdealblues

Heck148 said:


> Agree wholeheartedly - esp Reiner, Szell and Walter...I also like Solti for Mozart and Haydn -uses the same approach - Muscular, energetic, clarity.


Another one I really like for 40 & 41 is Wand/NDR Symphony Orchestra on RCA. Very similar readings for big band Mozart.


----------



## Klassik

AfterHours said:


> I am strongly considering the following renditions for my top selection for Mozart's 41st Symphony but remain undecided between them (previously Pinnock's was my selection):
> 
> Rene Jacobs/Freiburger Barockorchester https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51y4ScLR1NL.jpg
> Charles Mackerras/Scottish Chamber Orchestra https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/61LakbiBqtL._SY355_.jpg
> Nikolaus Harnoncourt/Concentus Musicus Wien http://cdn-s3.allmusic.com/release-covers/500/0004/199/0004199960.jpg


I'd pick Mackerras or Pinnock out of this group. You describe Mackerras' performance of 41 quite well I say. Mozart's music, especially these late symphonies, have such vitality on their own that a structured performance of it seems to me to be the best way to go. Obviously I can understand why someone would want a different approach though.


----------



## AfterHours

realdealblues said:


> I have heard the Jacobs recording several times and it does nothing for me. When I think of Symphony 41 I think of George Szell and Fritz Reiner. Energetic, Precise, Clarity, Texture and Personality beyond many. Klemperer, Bohm, Walter and Marriner wouldn't be far behind for me either.


Thank you, while we disagree on Jacobs' 41st, I do really like your recommendations. I am familiar with all of them (except Reiner's) -- Bohm's (or possibly Walter) being my favorite of those. I actually think Jacobs has captured the essence of Mozart in this particular rendition, and I am not sure if there is another like it, which is what I am looking for. Conversely, I don't feel Jacobs' interpretations of the 38th, 39th and 40th are nearly so successful.


----------



## AfterHours

realdealblues said:


> Another one I really like for 40 & 41 is Wand/NDR Symphony Orchestra on RCA. Very similar readings for big band Mozart.


Another excellent selection. I'll have to revisit Wand, as it's been awhile.


----------



## AfterHours

Heck148 said:


> Agree wholeheartedly - esp Reiner, Szell and Walter...I also like Solti for Mozart and Haydn -uses the same approach - Muscular, energetic, clarity.


All excellent selections (though, as mentioned to realdealblues, haven't heard the Reiner yet). I'm actually looking for other renditions that attempt the work in a similar fashion as Jacobs' take, to see if there are any others worthy of consideration from that point-of-view. They would likely be HIP (due to the textural transparency generally more inherent to such renditions), but not necessarily.


----------



## AfterHours

Klassik said:


> I'd pick Mackerras or Pinnock out of this group. You describe Mackerras' performance of 41 quite well I say. Mozart's music, especially these late symphonies, have such vitality on their own that a structured performance of it seems to me to be the best way to go. Obviously I can understand why someone would want a different approach though.


Thank you, I love both Mackerras' and Pinnock's interpretations. I do think Jacobs' approach is the most likely representation to how Mozart would've played it/heard it. Other renditions are fantastic in their own way, but to me, don't necessarily sound as much like Mozart -- they leave a bit of his personality behind in an attempt to over-emphasize an "Olympian" reading of the work (as mentioned before, making it sound closer to a Symphony composed somewhere between Beethoven's 3rd and 7th, than as idiomatically Mozart). Most conductors either just haven't read it as Jacob's has, or just might have too hard a time replicating such spontaneity, opera buffa/theatricality, and inter-communication of parts, while also keeping the symphony in emotional/conceptual and structural focus. Also, older recordings, pre today's tech, probably couldn't sound this way even if they wanted to, unless seen live. Their sound being too compressed upon recording.


----------



## Phil loves classical

AfterHours said:


> Thank you, I love both Mackerras' and Pinnock's interpretations. I do think Jacobs' approach is the most likely representation to how Mozart would've played it/heard it. Other renditions are fantastic in their own way, but to me, don't necessarily sound as much like Mozart -- they leave a bit of his personality behind in an attempt to over-emphasize an "Olympian" reading of the work (as mentioned before, making it sound closer to a Symphony composed somewhere between Beethoven's 3rd and 7th, than as idiomatically Mozart). Most conductors either just haven't read it as Jacob's has, or just might have too hard a time replicating such spontaneity, opera buffa/theatricality, and inter-communication of parts, while also keeping the symphony in emotional/conceptual and structural focus. Also, older recordings, pre today's tech, probably couldn't sound this way even if they wanted to, unless seen live. Their sound being too compressed upon recording.


I just listened to the Rene Jacobs version on Youtube, which I never did before. I found it a shock to my system, the way he accelerates and decelerates, the crescendos and dimenuendos. This is one of the few cases where I found more detail distracted me from the overall cohesion of the work. It was definitely a very unique interpretation. My favourite versions are Tate's and Menuhin's. I hated Bohm's, being way too heavy for me.


----------



## Heck148

AfterHours said:


> All excellent selections (though, as mentioned to realdealblues, haven't heard the Reiner yet). ......They would likely be HIP (due to the textural transparency generally more inherent to such renditions), but not necessarily.


Reiner, and Walter/ColSO are modern instrument versions, but they used reduced string sections, which adds lots of clarity. there's plenty of heft, when needed, but the texture is very clear.... I esp enjoy Reiner, because his Mozart is very buoyant, boisterous, lively. and he does take some zippy tempos, in the finales - #35 [whew!!], 36, 39, 41. Walter is generally more laid back, but he can move it along too, when he wants to...Szell is always clear and precise, with splendid playing and ensemble.


----------



## AfterHours

Phil loves classical said:


> I just listened to the Rene Jacobs version on Youtube, which I never did before. I found it a shock to my system, the way he accelerates and decelerates, the crescendos and dimenuendos. This is one of the few cases where I found more detail distracted me from the overall cohesion of the work. It was definitely a very unique interpretation. My favourite versions are Tate's and Menuhin's. I hated Bohm's, being way too heavy for me.


Re: Jacobs ... I think Mozart would love your "shock to the system" comment. It's very much a symphony of theatrical gesture, lyricism, exuberance and surprise. And sudden creative impulse and epiphany, flamboyance, insouciant emotional/conceptual twists and turns... My first listen of Jacobs too, was one of playing a little bit of "catch up" with it and making sense of it. On the second and later listens, it came together more and more for me, and became quite incredible.

I like Menuhin's but I can't say it's among my favorites. It is a pleasant, fine, pretty reading, but as with many others, he doesn't really cause the first movement to burst with theatrical life, taking it a bit too slow, conservative and "considered/careful" (losing the spontaneity and the flamboyance of the conversational back-and-forth between parts). It just doesn't sound much like Mozart to me, aside from being the same score.

I've never listened to Tate's before now, but so far I play tested his 2nd movement and found it to be outstanding. Very lyrical and beautiful. Hope the rest is just as good. I'll definitely be giving it a full listen.


----------



## AfterHours

Heck148 said:


> Reiner, and Walter/ColSO are modern instrument versions, but they used reduced string sections, which adds lots of clarity. there's plenty of heft, when needed, but the texture is very clear.... I esp enjoy Reiner, because his Mozart is very buoyant, boisterous, lively. and he does take some zippy tempos, in the finales - #35 [whew!!], 36, 39, 41. Walter is generally more laid back, but he can move it along too, when he wants to...Szell is always clear and precise, with splendid playing and ensemble.


Thank you, I'm listening to Reiner's right now and really like it. Definitely gets to the heart of the matter. He definitely knows Mozart, much more than I ever thought he would.


----------



## Vaneyes

AfterHours said:


> Thank you, I'm listening to Reiner's right now and really like it. Definitely gets to the heart of the matter. He definitely knows Mozart, much more than I ever thought he would.


My first exposure. Fritz & Co. sound like they're on speed.


----------



## Vaneyes

Phil loves classical said:


> I just listened to the Rene Jacobs version on Youtube, which I never did before. I found it a shock to my system, the way he accelerates and decelerates, the crescendos and dimenuendos. This is one of the few cases where I found more detail distracted me from the overall cohesion of the work. It was definitely a very unique interpretation. My favourite versions are Tate's and Menuhin's. I hated Bohm's, being way too heavy for me.


Yes, the Jacobs is hideous. Tate's good, even better with Haydn. If you haven't, try his Schubert "Great" w. Dresden (EMI).:tiphat:


----------



## AfterHours

Vaneyes said:


> My first exposure. Fritz & Co. sound like they're on speed.


Good! Check out the tempo marking


----------



## Vaneyes

Klassik said:


> I'd pick Mackerras or Pinnock out of this group. You describe Mackerras' performance of 41 quite well I say. Mozart's music, especially these late symphonies, have such vitality on their own that a structured performance of it seems to me to be the best way to go. Obviously I can understand why someone would want a different approach though.


Pinnock from those, I agree. Re Mackerras, I prefer his Mozart with Prague CO (Telarc). Harnoncourt with VPO on YT is good-- the best Mozart I've heard from him. Don't care for his Mozart with COE, ACO, or CMW.:tiphat:


----------



## AfterHours

Vaneyes said:


> Pinnock from those, I agree. Re Mackerras, I prefer his Mozart with Prague CO (Telarc). Harnoncourt with VPO on YT is good-- the best Mozart I've heard from him. Don't care for his Mozart with COE, ACO, or CMW.:tiphat:


I like Mackerras' Prague CO renditions too, and as mentioned, am a big fan of Pinnock's. It's hard for me to imagine a better set of 35, 39-41 than Harnoncourt/CMW, really. Each are the very best I've ever heard or close to it (his 35th, for sure, has no match).


----------



## AfterHours

Here's a pretty good write-up on Mozart's 41st, that includes some insights into Jacobs' rendition and some other recommended recordings (including Mackerras and Harnoncourt/COE)

https://www.theguardian.com/music/t...ymphony-guide-mozart-41st-jupiter-tom-service


----------



## Heck148

AfterHours said:


> Thank you, I'm listening to Reiner's right now and really like it. Definitely gets to the heart of the matter. He definitely knows Mozart, much more than I ever thought he would.


Reiner always makes musical sense. He, along with Pierre Monteux had that great talent, of always being in the right ballpark musically. somehow, they just knew how the music should go...doesn't mean theirs is the only way, but they are never far off the mark. I've never heard a performance by either that was totally "wrong" in concept or interpretation.


----------



## Heck148

AfterHours said:


> I like Mackerras' Prague CO renditions too, and as mentioned, am a big fan of Pinnock's. It's hard for me to imagine a better set of 35, 39-41 than Harnoncourt/CMW, really. Each are the very best I've ever heard or close to it (his 35th, for sure, has no match).


Mackerras' #34 and #31 with Prague CO are very good. Reiner's #31 is excellent, too - #34 is a fine symphony, maybe not quite at the level of the last 6, but fine work nonetheless.


----------



## AfterHours

Heck148 said:


> Mackerras' #34 and #31 with Prague CO are very good. Reiner's #31 is excellent, too - #34 is a fine symphony, maybe not quite at the level of the last 6, but fine work nonetheless.


Right on, thank you. I'll note that for when I revisit them.


----------



## AfterHours

Heck148 said:


> Reiner always makes musical sense. He, along with Pierre Monteux had that great talent, of always being in the right ballpark musically. somehow, they just knew how the music should go...doesn't mean theirs is the only way, but they are never far off the mark. I've never heard a performance by either that was totally "wrong" in concept or interpretation.


Yes, he really does seem to be among the most diverse and consistent conductors.


----------



## AfterHours

I revised my selections for the following:

Piano Trio No. 7 in B-flat Major "Archduke" - Ludwig van Beethoven (1811) [previously Kempf Trio] 
Piano Concerto No. 2 in B-flat Major - Johannes Brahms (1881) [previously Richter/Leinsdorf]

I added my selections for the following:

Quintet for Clarinet and Strings in A major - Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart (1789) 
Piano Concerto No. 3 in C major - Sergei Prokofiev (1921) 
Piano Concerto in G major - Maurice Ravel (1931) 
Piano Trio No. 3 in C minor - Johannes Brahms (1883) 
Piano Concerto No. 2 in F minor - Frederic Chopin (1829) 
Piano Trio No. 1 in B major - Johannes Brahms (1854)

I updated the ratings for the following _as Classical Works_:

Piano Concerto No. 2 in B-flat Major - Johannes Brahms (1881) *8/10 to 8.5/10*

List is here: https://www.besteveralbums.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=15098


----------



## AfterHours

Though I liked it a lot before, this Archduke wasn't among my favorites the first few times I heard it: https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/61Gfu6c3ofL.jpg

But over the last week I've become very enamored with it, to the point where I think it might be the best Archduke ever recorded (if such a thing can be said). As regards these, there are no peers (in my opinion) for Faust's violin playing here, and Queryas' cello work. Melnikov's sprinkling, "rain-drop" forte piano work took me a little getting used to after hearing so many modern piano renditions with their more "assertive" sound, but with repeated listens, only revealed itself to me as more poetic and lyrical than most, especially in its relay and coordination with Faust and Queyras.


----------



## Klassik

I wouldn't disagree with any of your Brahms' selections, but what do you think about Harnoncourt's Brahms performances on the Teldec/Warner label? They're certainly something different. While Harnoncourt's style does not always work well with Romantic era composers, I feel that it actually works somewhat well with Brahms' style. It's not for everyone though, that's for sure. The sound quality of these live performances are a little bit lacking IMO, but I've found that it works best to turn up the volume a couple clicks above where you'd normally listen to Romantic symphonies to get the best performance.


----------



## AfterHours

Klassik said:


> I wouldn't disagree with any of your Brahms' selections, but what do you think about Harnoncourt's Brahms performances on the Teldec/Warner label? They're certainly something different. While Harnoncourt's style does not always work well with Romantic era composers, I feel that it actually works somewhat well with Brahms' style. It's not for everyone though, that's for sure. The sound quality of these live performances are a little bit lacking IMO, but I've found that it works best to turn up the volume a couple clicks above where you'd normally listen to Romantic symphonies to get the best performance.


Are you referring to his Brahms Symphonies?


----------



## Klassik

AfterHours said:


> Are you referring to his Brahms Symphonies?


Yes, and PC 1 & 2 with Rudolf Buchbinder.


----------



## AfterHours

Klassik said:


> Yes, and PC 1 & 2 with Rudolf Buchbinder.


Right on, I haven't heard Harnoncourt's Brahms Symphonies yet, but I would have to revisit the PC's as I have only heard them once (but was quite impressed). They are probably among the better renditions, but again, I would need to revisit to be sure.


----------



## Pugg

Klassik said:


> Yes, and PC 1 & 2 with Rudolf Buchbinder.


Am I the only one who like the Ashkenazy/ Haitink the most?


----------



## AfterHours

Pugg said:


> Am I the only one who like the Ashkenazy/ Haitink the most?


I'm not sure, I don't think I've heard Ashkenazy/Haitink's renditions before. Why do you prefer them over Chailly/Freire, Szell/Fleisher, Gilels/Jochum or (for #1) Serkin/Szell or (for #2) Richter/Leinsdorf?


----------



## Pugg

AfterHours said:


> I'm not sure, I don't think I've heard Ashkenazy/Haitink's renditions before. Why do you prefer them over Chailly/Freire, Szell/Fleisher, Gilels/Jochum or (for #1) Serkin/Szell or (for #2) Richter/Leinsdorf?


The red one, I don't know, not a Chailly fan, the others are fine bit somehow the total sound, recording and playing makes them great for me.


----------



## AfterHours

Pugg said:


> The red one, I don't know, not a Chailly fan, the others are fine bit somehow the total sound, recording and playing makes them great for me.


Thank you for the recommendation, I'll check them out.


----------



## AfterHours

*I added my selections for the following:*

Piano Concerto No. 1 in E flat major - Franz Liszt (1849) 
Piano Concerto No. 3 in D minor - Sergei Rachmaninov (1909) *... As with Argerich's Tchaikovsky 1st w/ Abbado/BPO, this is surely one of the most astonishing performances in the entire history of Classical recordings. Chailly and orchestra are truly exceptional too, leaving a 10 as the only rating that seems valid. If you think it might have been surpassed, watch the video I provided a link to, to leave behind all doubt * 
Piano Concerto No. 2 in A major - Franz Liszt (1861)

*I revised my selection for the following:*

Piano Concerto No. 23 in A major - Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart (1786) [previously Buchbinder/Wiener Symphoniker]

List is here: https://www.besteveralbums.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=15098&start=0


----------



## Vaneyes

AfterHours said:


> *I added my selections for the following:*
> 
> Piano Concerto No. 1 in E flat major - Franz Liszt (1849)
> Piano Concerto No. 3 in D minor - Sergei Rachmaninov (1909) *... As with Argerich's Tchaikovsky 1st w/ Abbado/BPO, this is surely one of the most astonishing performances in the entire history of Classical recordings. Chailly and orchestra are truly exceptional too, leaving a 10 as the only rating that seems valid. If you think it might have been surpassed, watch the video I provided a link to, to leave behind all doubt *
> Piano Concerto No. 2 in A major - Franz Liszt (1861)
> 
> *I revised my selection for the following:*
> 
> Piano Concerto No. 23 in A major - Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart (1786) [previously Buchbinder/Wiener Symphoniker]
> 
> List is here: https://www.besteveralbums.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=15098&start=0


Excellent choice for WAM PC 23. WAM PC 22 needs attention, also. I suggest Shelley/London Mozart Players (Chandos, rec.1994). Cheers! :tiphat:


----------



## AfterHours

Vaneyes said:


> Excellent choice for WAM PC 23. WAM PC 22 needs attention, also. I suggest Shelley/London Mozart Players (Chandos, rec.1994). Cheers! :tiphat:


Thank you :tiphat::tiphat::tiphat: I did already choose Buchbinder/Weiner for WAM 22, however I should check to see if I've heard the Shelley rendition you mention, as maybe there's a little room for improvement? Would be tough to top Buchbinder's, though not impossible, like for instance, Argerich's Rach PC #3!


----------



## AfterHours

I added my selections for the following:

Piano Concerto No. 3 in E major - Bela Bartok (1945) 
Piano Concerto in F - George Gershwin (1925) 
Byzantine Concerto - Ljubica Maric (1959)

I updated the ratings _as Classical Works_ for the following:

Piano Concerto No. 5 in E-flat Major "Emperor" - Ludwig van Beethoven (1811) *8/10 to 8.5/10*
Piano Concerto No. 20 in D Minor - Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart (1785) *8/10 to 8.5/10*

(Yes, I've been revisiting a lot of Piano Concertos recently!)


----------



## AfterHours

I will likely be revising by choice for Beethoven's 5th Piano Concerto soon (currently Gilels/Ludwig) as it seems like two other favorites may be supplanting it (see the order below). I am curious if anyone has any equal or better recommendations than my top choices. In the following order (not necessarily permanent, still working it out & revisiting these. Gilels/Ludwig may still end up being my top choice):

*Fleisher/Szell* _(Fleisher sounds like he is phrasing, characterizing, creating his parts as he is going, thus adding extra character and a sense of the new to each; Szell articulates as well as ever, with emphasis on the inner structure and architecture of the work. The Fleisher/Szell tandem illuminates each part so it seems like we're privy to each element of Beethoven's method as it is being put together, and the whole work attains added dimension, color, distinction and character instead of "running together" as much as it can in many other performances.) _ 
*Arrau/Davis* _(The broad tone of Arrau gives the piano a monumental presence, and his virtuosity is relentlessly displayed to an almost frantic vigor and relay between he and Davis' orchestra, developing a lot of tension and tremendous grandeur)_
*Gilels/Ludwig* _(Gilels powerful command and dexterity sounds like he is "showering the piece with un-ending gifts/luxury from above", so fitting for this "Emperor" concerto. The middle movement is probably without peer: ghostly, subtle, poetically beautiful beyond any other. Gilels in total command throughout. Ludwig and orchestra are excellent, though not as distinguished as some other recordings)_
*Ashkenazy/Solti* _(Solti's orchestra sounds so exuberant and monumental, evoking a towering, regal sense and occasion, as if ascending to rule, as if we are climbing the stairs to immortality. Ashkenazy is relentless, oftentimes racing to build up the momentum, counter and relay to match. A very exhilarating performance)_
*Sudbin/Vanska* _(Beautiful and vibrant. Has a particularly sparkling magic and wonder to it. Perhaps the most graceful, elegant, sweeping recording)_
*Pollini/Bohm* _(Excellent all around. I'd have to revisit it to choose its distinguishing characteristics but I recall it being among the best)_


----------



## Vaneyes

AfterHours said:


> I will likely be revising by choice for Beethoven's 5th Piano Concerto soon (currently Gilels/Ludwig) as it seems like two other favorites may be supplanting it (see the order below). I am curious if anyone has any equal or better recommendations than my top choices. In the following order (not necessarily permanent, still working it out & revisiting these. Gilels/Ludwig may still end up being my top choice):
> 
> *Fleisher/Szell* _(Fleisher sounds like he is phrasing, characterizing, creating his parts as he is going, thus adding extra character and a sense of the new to each; Szell articulates as well as ever, with emphasis on the inner structure and architecture of the work. The Fleisher/Szell tandem illuminates each part so it seems like we're privy to each element of Beethoven's method as it is being put together, and the whole work attains added dimension, color, distinction and character instead of "running together" as much as it can in many other performances.) _
> *Arrau/Davis* _(The broad tone of Arrau gives the piano a monumental presence, and his virtuosity is relentlessly displayed to an almost frantic vigor and relay between he and Davis' orchestra, developing a lot of tension and tremendous grandeur)_
> *Gilels/Ludwig* _(Gilels powerful command and dexterity sounds like he is "showering the piece with un-ending gifts/luxury from above", so fitting for this "Emperor" concerto. The middle movement is probably without peer: ghostly, subtle, poetically beautiful beyond any other. Gilels in total command throughout. Ludwig and orchestra are excellent, though not as distinguished as some other recordings)_
> *Ashkenazy/Solti* _(Solti's orchestra sounds so exuberant and monumental, evoking a towering, regal sense and occasion, as if ascending to rule, as if we are climbing the stairs to immortality. Ashkenazy is relentless, oftentimes racing to build up the momentum, counter and relay to match. A very exhilarating performance)_
> *Sudbin/Vanska* _(Beautiful and vibrant. Has a particularly sparkling magic and wonder to it. Perhaps the most graceful, elegant, sweeping recording)_
> *Pollini/Bohm* _(Excellent all around. I'd have to revisit it to choose its distinguishing characteristics but I recall it being among the best)_


Re *LvB *PC 5, don't forget Gelber/PhilharmoniaO./Leitner (EMI, rec.1966). :tiphat:


----------



## Vaneyes

AfterHours said:


> I added my selections for the following:
> 
> Piano Concerto No. 3 in E major - Bela Bartok (1945)
> Piano Concerto in F - George Gershwin (1925)
> Byzantine Concerto - Ljubica Maric (1959)
> 
> I updated the ratings _as Classical Works_ for the following:
> 
> Piano Concerto No. 5 in E-flat Major "Emperor" - Ludwig van Beethoven (1811) *8/10 to 8.5/10*
> Piano Concerto No. 20 in D Minor - Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart (1785) *8/10 to 8.5/10*
> 
> (Yes, I've been revisiting a lot of Piano Concertos recently!)


Re *Bartok* PCs 1 - 3, a clean sweep for Anda/Fricsay (DG, rec.1959/60).

Re *WAM* PC 20, Brendel/Marriner (Philips, rec.1973). :tiphat:


----------



## AfterHours

Vaneyes said:


> Re *LvB *PC 5, don't forget Gelber/PhilharmoniaO./Leitner (EMI, rec.1966). :tiphat:


Thank you, have not heard that one. I'll give it a shot!


----------



## AfterHours

Vaneyes said:


> Re *Bartok* PCs 1 - 3, a clean sweep for Anda/Fricsay (DG, rec.1959/60).
> 
> Re *WAM* PC 20, Brendel/Marriner (Philips, rec.1973). :tiphat:


Thank you I'll check out those Bartok's!

For Mozart's 20th, I agree that Brendel/Marriner is among the greats. However, I feel the more recent Brendel/Mackerras is even better and is my highest recommendation and top choice recording. A truly stunning, incisive, idiosyncratic rendition. The orchestration is second to none (except maybe Gardiner/Bilson), and the soloist playing is quite personal and subtly varied throughout by Brendel. Others I'd say are close (along with your Marriner/Brendel recommendation) would be (not in order particularly) Gulda/Abbado, Anderszewski/SCO, Goode/Orpheus, Bilson/Gardiner, Curzon/Britten, Vegh/Schiff.


----------



## Bettina

AfterHours said:


> Thank you I'll check out those Bartok's!
> 
> For Mozart's 20th, I agree that Brendel/Marriner is among the greats. However, I feel the more recent Brendel/Mackerras is even better and is my highest recommendation and top choice recording. A truly stunning, incisive, idiosyncratic rendition. The orchestration is second to none (except maybe Gardiner/Bilson), and the soloist playing is quite personal and subtly varied throughout by Brendel. Others I'd say are close (along with your Marriner/Brendel recommendation) would be (not in order particularly) Gulda/Abbado, Anderszewski/SCO, Goode/Orpheus, Bilson/Gardiner, Curzon/Britten, Vegh/Schiff.


I agree with all these recommendations for Mozart's PC No. 20. I'd also add Argerich/Abbado.


----------



## AfterHours

Bettina said:


> I agree with all these recommendations for Mozart's PC No. 20. I'd also add Argerich/Abbado.


Thank you, I like that one too


----------



## AfterHours

I've been revisiting Andreas Staier's rather obscure, out-of-print fortepiano rendition of Schubert's 21st Piano Sonata. It is _really_ extraordinary and may end up supplanting even Fleisher's (I am undecided). Both the fortepiano's sound, its particular character, timbric layers and Staier's breathtaking care and technique really bring out Schubert's vision, so much so that his rendition sounds like it has "more notes" than other versions -- if that makes sense. Each note has a special depth granted to it, and the overall vision is so thoroughly articulated that it feels more "complete" and multi-faceted. Staier articulates each bar and phrase and nuance with such care and consideration. His control of his instrument, in the slight pregnant pauses, deep conviction and consideration before, then during the deft elicitation of each note, really accentuates the feeling of Schubert's hesitant embrace of life passing away from him, his revisit and repetition of scenes that change ever so slightly each time, his tentative walk towards death, his moving reappraisal of his life, thoughts and feelings, his hesitant valediction of self as time seems increasingly eternal but dimmed. Fleisher's (this one: http://store.hmv.com/HMVStore/media/product/62094/01-62094.jpg) is also incredible (with a 2nd movement that is so emotional and moving that it is without peer) and reaches similar depths in a way that feels a little more spacious and "eternal". So my thoughts above don't mean Staier's is better, just that it is a different, amazing view and sound of the work, and that I am particularly enamored with it right now and will go back and forth with them (perhaps some other top renditions too) in order to determine if it's now my top preference.

Regardless of how that turns out, _very highly_ recommended:


----------



## AfterHours

I've been consumed by Schubert's Winterreise recently, listening to little else over the last few days (don't worry I am perfectly okay :wave.

My "reference recording" has long been the incredible 1979 rendition by Fischer-Dieskau/Brendel. It is not available on CD (that I know of). _Not _the _1986 rendition_ between the two, but this one here on video/DVD: https://www.amazon.com/Schubert-Win...ords=fischer+dieskau+brendel+winterreise+1979

It has recently been taken down from Youtube, but there is still 24 minutes of it available to sample. Not the most HQ download, but still well worth sampling if you haven't already heard it: 




This performance captures Fischer-Dieskau still at his peak, but near/at the tail-end of it, before his abilities were fading (or at least those necessary for Winterreise). It has a certain experiential depth and weathered conviction to it that makes it even superior to his earlier recordings, even if those could be argued its technical equal (such as those with Moore, Demus...). It also captures a very inspired Brendel turning in one of, if not _the_ best, piano accompaniments to the piece. They are so in tune with each other.

Anyway, though this is one of those renditions of a work that seems virtually impossible to surpass, I've recently been spending quite a bit of time with revisiting the following, each of which seem to have a shot at convincing me otherwise:

*Trekel/Eisenlohr* https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51rGiW8-sAL._SS500.jpg ... Not as colorful/theatrical as some others, but it is so in its element (not far removed from Dieskau/Brendel) that it seems to capture the emotional essence and depth of every single song. 
*Goerne/Eschenbach* http://cps-static.rovicorp.com/3/JPG_500/MI0003/798/MI0003798129.jpg?partner=allrovi.com ... Technically, perhaps the most astonishing rendition ever recorded, and likely the most "internalized", otherworldy and haunting (as if from beyond the grave) ... 
*Gura/Berner* https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/817c1kek-6L._SY355_.jpg ... this one is new to me ... Perhaps the most flawless of all, with a totally commanding and seemingly spontaneous performance from Gura as well as Berner. I have yet to decide if it is quite as moving and deeply felt as Dieskau/Brendel, but it has very quickly become one of my top choices, which is a good sign...

Of course, other Dieskau renditions deserve strong consideration, such as those with Moore and Demus, though I'd have to revisit them newly to determine their exact place here.

Some others that may be on the level of those, but are superb and still have potential because I am not as familiar with them are:

*Schreier/Richter* https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/41a7zSsmY0L.jpg ... Of all the great versions I know, this is perhaps the most emotionally unhinged and "risky". Some listens, it could be my all time favorite. Maybe not as idiomatic as others, but Schreier's conviction is incredible, Richter is full of idiosyncratic, gentle nuance. The result is quite powerful, almost expressionist even. The only drawback is the audience and the weakly mic'd piano, but this just means closer, more focused listening is in order, which isn't such a bad thing when assimilating the Winterreise.
*Prégardien/Staier* https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/519RDNX6SiL.jpg ... Quite internalized and compelling. Seems completely flawless, like it could be among the very best, but I need to listen to it more. 
*Kauffman/Deutsch* https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/81+vK4YYI6L._SL1500_.jpg ... Maybe somewhat too "theatrical" for the content of this work, but technically stunning, emotionally resonant, and very well recorded. Deutsch is also excellent.

Have you heard the 1979 Dieskau/Brendel rendition I referenced above? If so, what do you think? Do you have another all time favorite other than what I've listed? In your opinion, how do these stack up to yours?


----------



## chesapeake bay

I have the Prégardien/Staier which I really like, but I hadn't listened to that 1979 rendition by Fischer-Dieskau/Brendel, it really is pretty exceptional. I'll have to listen to some of the other you list.


----------



## Pugg

> Do you have another all time favourite other than what I've listed? In your opinion, how do these stack up to yours?


Ian Bostridge has a very good recording, bit British but it comes with the DVD these days and that's worth having.
( Waner now)


----------



## AfterHours

chesapeake bay said:


> I have the Prégardien/Staier which I really like, but I hadn't listened to that 1979 rendition by Fischer-Dieskau/Brendel, it really is pretty exceptional. I'll have to listen to some of the other you list.


Looking forward to what you think. I'll ensure I revisit Pregadien/Staier a bit more to give it more complete consideration among these.


----------



## AfterHours

Pugg said:


> Ian Bostridge has a very good recording, bit British but it comes with the DVD these days and that's worth having.
> ( Waner now)


Thank you I will check to see if I've heard it before


----------



## AfterHours

I revised my selection for the following:

Symphony No. 9 in D Minor "Choral" - Ludwig van Beethoven (1824) [previously Norrington/SWR Radio-Sinfonieorchester Stuttgart]

Among several revisits of various 9ths, I've now decided that both Wand/NDR and Karajan/BPO (1963 rendition) are superior to the above Norrington/SWR. I'm siding with Karajan over Wand, though this is far from "official".

Also, I downgraded the rating for Norrington/SWR Radio-Sinfonieorchester Stuttgart from:

*Performance Quality: 9.5 / Sound Quality: 9.5* to *Performance Quality: 9 / Sound Quality: 9.5*

I upgraded the Karajan/BPO (1963) from:

*Performance Quality: 9 / Sound Quality: 7.5* to *Performance Quality: 9.5 or 10 / Sound Quality: 7.5* (though I must note that I have yet to hear the SACD version, so the sound quality is probably better on that release than the one I have)

I upgraded the Wand/NDR from:

*Performance Quality: 9 / Sound Quality: 8* to *Performance Quality: 9.5 / Sound Quality: 8*

Wand/NDR might end up being my top choice after all, as it is a _very_ persuasive, nearly flawless rendition. But, it doesn't sound quite as transcendent as Karajan's 1963 rendition, at least during these recent listens. Karajan's manages to sound spontaneous, with an immediacy and sense of shock and awe and sudden ferocity, beauty and visionary, transcendent epiphany in each movement that is very difficult to accomplish -- presumably due to how technically challenging the work is combined with how much it has to be rehearsed, leading to renditions that often sound a little too "contained" or "planned". What Karajan has accomplished here can only occur with everything going exactly right -- but also somehow happening without ever sounding pre-ordained or over-rehearsed (like his later versions, especially the 80's one, somewhat less so the 77 one). This gives it a grittiness and sense of superhuman effort against insurmountable odds, that is so rare to hear with the 9th, no matter how technically impressive (the "visionary" element, as if everyone involved has sudden cognizance of this music as it is happening, the sense that the conductor and orchestra and choir have completely lost themselves and are immersed in the overwhelming sensation of it, is almost always lost or much less evident in recordings. But not here.). Above all, it has a final movement that may be impossible to ever surpass (the vocalists are simply unbelievable).

My reservation on giving the Karajan/BPO 1963 rendition a stable 10 for Performance Quality is that I'd prefer someone figure out how to perform it this well with Beethoven's original tempo intact throughout. Karajan isn't far off that pace at all, so maybe this is nit-picking.

Or, maybe I'm just holding out hope for what Honeck/Pittsburgh can make of this work, assuming they get around to recording it ;-)

List is here: https://www.besteveralbums.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=15098


----------



## AfterHours

AfterHours said:


> Thank you I will check to see if I've heard it before


Re: Bostridge ... Update: I had not heard it before, but checked it out and thought it was a very good rendition. Thank you Pugg.


----------



## AfterHours

I added my selections for the following:

Symphony No. 4 in F Minor - Peter Ilyitch Tchaikovsky (1878) 
Symphony No. 5 in E Minor - Peter Ilyitch Tchaikovsky (1888) 
Concerto for Piano and Chamber Orchestra "Introitus" - Sofia Gubaidulina (1978)

NOTE: My ranking of Tchaikovsky's 4th and 5th Symphonies should not be taken too seriously at this time. For now, I've (somewhat lazily) ranked them right next to each other, but this is very unlikely to hold true once I work out their exact ratings and places on my list.

List is here: https://www.besteveralbums.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=458120#458120


----------



## AfterHours

Also ... Concerto for Piano and Chamber Orchestra "Introitus" - Sofia Gubaidulina (1978) ... is new to me. And it's among the best Piano Concertos of any era. Highly recommended.


----------



## AfterHours

I revised my selection for the following:

Symphony No. 5 - Gustav Mahler (1902) [previously Bernstein/Vienna Philharmonic]

I added my selections for the following:

Symphony No. 4 in D minor - Robert Schumann (1841; 1851) 
Symphony No. 8 in E flat major "Symphony Of A Thousand" - Gustav Mahler (1906) 
Symphony No. 2 in C minor "Resurrection" - Gustav Mahler (1894) 
Symphony No. 6 in A minor "Tragic" - Gustav Mahler (1904; 1906)

Don't take the ratings/rankings too seriously for these (not counting Mahler's 5th which has been the same rating for years and seems "correct"). I am still working these latest ones out. Mahler's are especially tough to rank decisively, due to the vast amount of content in each -- just so much to take into account.

List is here: https://www.besteveralbums.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=15098


----------



## AfterHours

I added my selections for the following:

Messiah - George Frideric Handel (1741) 
St. Matthew Passion - Johann Sebastian Bach (1727) 
Symphony No. 11 For Six Percussionists And Orchestra - Kalevi Aho (1998) 
Symphony No. 3 "Liturgique" - Arthur Honegger (1946) 
Symphony No. 7 in D minor - Antonin Dvorak (1885) 
Sinfonia - Luciano Berio (1969) 
Das Lied von der Erde - Gustav Mahler (1909) 
Symphony 8 - Eduard Tubin (1966) 
Symphony 7 - Roger Sessions (1967) 
Symphony 3 "Collages" - Roberto Gerhard (1960) 
Symphony 8 - Vagn Holmboe (1952) 
Symphony No. 5 in E flat major - Jean Sibelius (1919) 
Symphony 2 "Mysterious Mountain" - Alan Hovhaness (1955) 
Symphony No. 4 in G major - Gustav Mahler (1900)

Yes, I have been revisiting Mahler's great symphonies (and finally ranking them), plus several masterpieces of 20th century Classical.

Also, I've heard a less varied number of recordings for most of the above works than is usual, so would be very curious about any additional great recordings for any of them.

List is here: https://www.besteveralbums.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=15098&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0


----------



## chesapeake bay

Mahler symphony no 4 - Paul Kletzki and the Philharmonia Orchestra, won't hurt to listen to this version of DLvdE either 









DLvdE - Kurt Sanderling Berliner Sinfonie Orchester, Peter Scheier, Birgit Finnila


----------



## AfterHours

chesapeake bay said:


> Mahler symphony no 4 - Paul Kletzki and the Philharmonia Orchestra, won't hurt to listen to this version of DLvdE either
> 
> View attachment 95361
> 
> 
> DLvdE - Kurt Sanderling Berliner Sinfonie Orchester, Peter Scheier, Birgit Finnila
> 
> View attachment 95362


Thank you, I will be curious to see if either of those rank among my favorite renditions. Do you feel they're comparable to Klemperer or Haitink?


----------



## chesapeake bay

Kletzki's 4 is definitely among the best. It's good to hear Fischer-Diskau but this DLvdE is just "good" 

Sanderling's DLvdE is certainly comparable to Klemperer, Scheier's delivery is more biting than Wunderlich's. Ludwig and Finnila are pretty even for me. though I prefer Finnila I can't say her performance is better than Ludwig's.


----------



## AfterHours

chesapeake bay said:


> Kletzki's 4 is definitely among the best. It's good to hear Fischer-Diskau but this DLvdE is just "good"
> 
> Sanderling's DLvdE is certainly comparable to Klemperer, Scheier's delivery is more biting than Wunderlich's. Ludwig and Finnila are pretty even for me. though I prefer Finnila I can't say her performance is better than Ludwig's.


Thank you, your comments make me surprised that I haven't heard Sanderling's yet!


----------



## Pugg

AfterHours said:


> Re: Bostridge ... Update: I had not heard it before, but checked it out and thought it was a very good rendition. Thank you Pugg.
> 
> ]








This is the one I was referring to, the you tube is fine but this one is from his early days, and filmed on location.


----------



## AfterHours

Pugg said:


> This is the one I was referring to, the you tube is fine but this one is from his early days, and filmed on location.


Right on thank you


----------



## AfterHours

I added my selections for the following:

Cello Symphony - Benjamin Britten (1963) 
Symphony No. 2 in E minor - Sergei Rachmaninoff (1907) 
Requiem - Gabriel Faure (1890) 
Symphony No. 3 "A Pastoral Symphony" - Ralph Vaughan Williams (1922)

*Ratings Changes (for Recordings)*
Glagolitic Mass - Leos Janacek (1926) [Original Manuscript Version] / Sir Charles Mackerras - Danish National Radio Symphony Orchestra & Choir (1993) - Performance Quality: 9.5 / Sound Quality: *8.5 to 9.5*

*Ratings Changes (as Classical Works)*
Cello Symphony - Benjamin Britten (1963) *Not Rated to 8.1/10*
Symphony No. 2 in E minor - Sergei Rachmaninoff (1907) _*Not Rated to 8.0/10*_
Symphony No. 3 "A Pastoral Symphony" - Ralph Vaughan Williams (1922) *Not Rated to 7.8/10*
The Rite of Spring - Igor Stravinsky (1913) *8.3/10 to 8.7/10* ... Also, Bernstein's 1958 recording of the work is under strong consideration to replace Gergiev's, but it's very difficult to choose (Bernstein's was my previous selection before Gergiev's replaced it so they've always been close, but after these recent revisits, perhaps even closer than ever

Also I updated the format of the list to show the more specific ratings of the Classical Works (as opposed to rounding them off). I also increased the font size so it's easier to read.

List is here: https://www.besteveralbums.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=15098


----------



## AfterHours

*I added my selections for the following:*
Symphony No. 4 "The Poem of Ecstasy" - Alexander Scriabin (1908) 
Symphony No. 4 - Michael Tippett (1977) 
Symphony No. 6 "Fantaisies Symphoniques" - Bohuslav Martinu (1953)

*I revised my selection for the following:* 
Symphony in D Minor - Cesar Franck (1888) / Pierre Monteux - Chicago Symphony Orchestra (1961) [previously Charles Dutoit/Montreal Symphony Orchestra]

*Updated Ratings (as Classical Works) *
Symphony No. 40 in G minor - Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart (1788) *8.3/10 to 8.7/10* 
Sinfonia da Requiem - Benjamin Britten (1940) *8.4/10 to 8.6/10*
Symphony No. 39 in E-flat Major - Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart (1788) *8.2/10 to 8.4/10* 
Symphony No. 35 in D major "Haffner" - Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart (1788) *8.2/10 to 8.3/10*

If you're curious about my ratings and criteria go here: https://www.besteveralbums.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=15503

"Best Recordings" list is here: https://www.besteveralbums.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=15098&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0


----------



## AfterHours

Revised as follows...

*RECORDED PERFORMANCES - NEWLY ADDED:*
Piano Concerto No. 25 in C major - Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart (1786) / Rudolf Buchbinder - Wiener Symphoniker (2003?) 
Violin Concerto No. 3 in G major - Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart (1775) / Anne-Sophie Mutter - London Philharmonic Orchestra (2005) 
Violin Concerto No. 5 in A major "The Turkish" - Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart (1775) / Anne-Sophie Mutter - London Philharmonic Orchestra (2005) 
Violin Concerto No. 4 in D major - Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart (1775) / Anne-Sophie Mutter - London Philharmonic Orchestra (2005) 
Violin Concerto in G Minor - Max Bruch (1866) / Daniel Hope - Sakari Oramo - Royal Stockholm Philharmonic Orchestra (2010)

*RECORDED PERFORMANCES - REVISED:*
Symphony No. 4 in F Minor - Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky (1878) / Evgeny Mravinsky - Leningrad Philharmonic Orchestra (1961) [previously Daniele Gatti/Royal Philharmonic]
Piano Concerto 24 in C Minor - Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart (1786) / Alfred Brendel - Sir Charles Mackerras - Scottish Chamber Orchestra (1998) [previously Andras Schiff/Sandor Vegh]

*FAMILIAR CLASSICAL WORKS - RE-RATED:*
Symphony No. 6 in B Minor "Pathetique" - Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky (1893) *8.7/10 to 8.8/10*
Symphony No. 2 in D Major - Johannes Brahms (1877) *8.6/10 to 8.8/10*
Symphony No. 4 in F Minor - Pyotr Ilyitch Tchaikovsky (1878) *8.1/10 to 8.8/10*
Symphony No. 1 in C Minor - Johannes Brahms (1876) *8.6/10 to 8.8/10*
Symphony No. 39 in E-flat Major - Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart (1788) *8.4/10 to 8.6/10*
Symphony No. 38 in D major - Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart (1786) *8.2/10 to 8.6/10*
Symphony No. 5 in E Minor - Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky (1888) *8.1/10 to 8.4/10*
Violin Concerto in E Minor - Felix Mendelssohn (1844) *7.9/10 to 8.1/10*
Violin Concerto in D Major - Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky (1878) *7.8/10 to 8.0/10*
Violin Sonata No. 3 in D Minor - Johannes Brahms (1888) *7.8/10 to 7.9/10*
Piano Concerto No. 25 in C major - Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart (1786) _*Not Rated to 7.9/10*_
Violin Concerto No. 3 in G major - Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart (1775) *Not Rated to 7.8/10*
Violin Concerto No. 5 in A major "The Turkish" - Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart (1775) *Not Rated to 7.8/10*
Violin Concerto No. 4 in D major - Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart (1775) *Not Rated to 7.8/10*
Violin Concerto in G Minor - Max Bruch (1866) *Not Rated to 7.8/10*

*"Best Classical Recordings" list is here:* https://www.besteveralbums.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=458120#458120
*For my criteria & ratings definitions/scale, go here:* https://www.besteveralbums.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=15503


----------



## AfterHours

Revised as follows...

*RECORDED PERFORMANCES - NEWLY ADDED:*
Concerto in C minor for Piano, Trumpet, and String Orchestra - Dmitri Shostakovich (1933) / Boris Giltburg - Vasily Petrenko - Royal Liverpool Philharmonic Orchestra (2016)
Violin Concerto in E major - Johann Sebastian Bach (circa 1718) / Petra Mullejans, Gottfried Von Der Goltz & Anne-Katharina Schreiber - Freiburger Barockorchester (2012) 
Violin Concerto in A minor - Johann Sebastian Bach (circa 1717-1723) / Petra Mullejans, Gottfried Von Der Goltz & Anne-Katharina Schreiber - Freiburger Barockorchester (2012)

*RECORDED PERFORMANCES - REVISED:*
Violin Concerto in D Major - Johannes Brahms (1878) / David Oistrakh - Otto Klemperer - Orchestre National de la Radiodiffusion Française (1960) [previously Perlman/Giulini]
Piano Concerto in A Minor - Robert Schumann (1845) / Ivan Moravec - Vaclav Neumann - Czech Philharmonic Orchestra (1976) [previously Lupu/Previn]
Piano Concerto No. 1 in D minor - Johannes Brahms (1858) / Nelson Freire - Riccardo Chailly - Gewandhaus Orchestra Leipzig (2006) [previously Serkin/Szell]

*RECORDED PERFORMANCES - RE-RATED:*
Violin Concerto in D Major - Ludwig van Beethoven (1806) / Itzhak Perlman - Carlo Maria Giulini - Philharmonia Orchestra (1981) / *Performance Quality: 9.5 / Sound Quality: 8.5 to Performance Quality: 10 / Sound Quality: 8.5*
Piano Concerto 24 in C Minor - Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart (1786) / Alfred Brendel - Sir Charles Mackerras - Scottish Chamber Orchestra (1998) *Performance Quality: 9.5 / Sound Quality: 9 to Performance Quality: 10 / Sound Quality: 9*

*FAMILIAR CLASSICAL WORKS - RE-RATED:*
Violin Concerto in D Major - Ludwig van Beethoven (1806) *8.4/10 to 8.8/10*
Piano Concerto No. 1 in B-flat Minor - Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky (1875) *8.1/10 to 8.3/10*
Piano Concerto - Michael Nyman (1993) *8.1/10 to 8.2/10*
Piano Concerto No. 2 in C Minor - Sergei Rachmaninoff (1901) *8.1/10 to 8.2/10*
Violin Concerto in E Minor - Felix Mendelssohn (1844) *8.1/10 to 8.2/10*
Violin Concerto in D Major - Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky (1878) *8.0/10 to 8.2/10*
Harpsichord Concerto No. 1 in D Minor - Johann Sebastian Bach (1734) *8.0/10 to 8.1/10*
Concerto in C minor for Piano, Trumpet, and String Orchestra - Dmitri Shostakovich (1933) *Not Rated to 7.9/10*
Piano Concerto No. 2 in F Major - Dmitri Shostakovich (1957) *8.1/10 to 7.8/10*
Violin Concerto in E major - Johann Sebastian Bach (circa 1718) *Not Rated to 7.8/10*
Violin Concerto in A minor - Johann Sebastian Bach (circa 1717-1723) *Not Rated to 7.8/10*

*"Best Classical Recordings" list is here:* https://www.besteveralbums.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=458120#458120
*For my criteria & ratings definitions/scale, go here:* https://www.besteveralbums.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=15503


----------



## AfterHours

Anyone know when and where this stunning rendition by Claudio Arrau of Beethoven's Appassionata is? The more certain and precise the info is the better, though any leads can help  And also if it's available on a particular CD issue or only on live video?






Possibly the very best rendition I've ever heard of this work. Though I've long held that Annie Fischer's Appassionata is the pinnacle, I think I might be changing my mind...


----------



## AfterHours

Revised as follows...

*RECORDED PERFORMANCES - REVISED:*
Piano Sonata No. 23 in F Minor "Appassionata" - Ludwig van Beethoven (1805) / Claudio Arrau (19??) [previously Annie Fischer (1977-1978)]
Piano Sonata No. 30 in E Major - Ludwig van Beethoven (1820) / Claudio Arrau (19??) [previously Alfred Brendel (1962-64)]
Piano Sonata in B Minor - Franz Liszt (1853) / Claudio Arrau (1970) [previously Alexei Grynyuk (2013)]

*RECORDED PERFORMANCES - RE-RATED:*
Piano Sonata No. 21 in B-flat Major - Franz Schubert (1828) / Leon Fleisher (2004) / Performance Quality: *9.5 to 10* / Sound Quality: 9
Piano Sonata No. 20 in A Major - Franz Schubert (1828) / Maurizio Pollini (1983) / Performance Quality: *9.5 to 10* / Sound Quality: 8.5
Piano Sonata No. 20 in A Major - Franz Schubert (1828) / Maurizio Pollini (1983) / Performance Quality: *9.5 to 10* / Sound Quality: 8.5

*FAMILIAR CLASSICAL WORKS - RE-RATED:*
Violin Concerto in D Major - Johannes Brahms (1878) *9.0/10 to 9.1/10*
Piano Sonata No. 21 in B-flat Major - Franz Schubert (1828) *8.6/10 to 9.0/10*
Violin Concertos Nos. 1-4, Op. 8, "The Four Seasons" - Antonio Vivaldi (1723) *8.8/10 to 9.0/10*
Piano Sonata No. 23 in F Minor "Appassionata" - Ludwig van Beethoven (1805) *8.6/10 to 8.7/10; 8.7/10 to 8.8/10*
Piano Sonata No. 30 in E Major - Ludwig van Beethoven (1820) *8.4/10 to 8.8/10*
Piano Sonata No. 20 in A Major - Franz Schubert (1828) *8.4/10 to 8.8/10*
Piano Sonata No. 29 in B-flat Major "Hammerklavier" - Ludwig van Beethoven (1818) *8.4/10 to 8.8/10*
Piano Concerto No. 4 in G Major - Ludwig van Beethoven (1806) *8.0/10 to 8.2/10*
Piano Concerto in G major - Maurice Ravel (1931) *8.0/10 to 8.1/10*
Piano Concerto 24 in C Minor - Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart (1786) *7.9/10 to 8.0/10*
Piano Sonata No. 31 in A-flat Major - Ludwig van Beethoven (1821) *7.8/10 to 8.0/10*
Piano Concerto No. 25 in C major - Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart (1786) *7.9/10 to 8.0/10*
Piano Concerto in D major for the Left Hand - Maurice Ravel (1930) *Not Rated to 7.9/10*

*Full (in-progress) "Best Classical Recordings" list is here:* https://www.besteveralbums.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=458120#458120
*For my criteria & ratings definitions/scale, go here:* https://www.besteveralbums.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=15503


----------

