# Stravinsky: Le Sacre du printemps (The Rite of Spring)



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

Stravinsky's _Rite of Spring_ is currently on the fifth tier of the Talk Classical community's favorite and most highly recommended works, making it the most highly ranked work by anyone who wasn't German, and the most highly ranked ballet on the list.

Wikipedia has a fantastic article about it, including a little analysis that amounts to a decent listening guide.

This site has often discussed the merits of various recordings, and Trout has added the recommendations up:



> Condensed Listing:
> 1.	Boulez (cond.), Cleveland Orchestra	(1969)
> 2.	Stravinsky (cond.), Columbia Symphony Orchestra	(1960)
> 3.	Doráti (cond.), Detroit Symphony Orchestra	(1981)
> ...


For this thread, the main questions of this thread are: *Do you like this work? Do you love it? Why? What do you like about it? Do you have any reservations about it? What would you want someone new to this work to know about it?*


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

science said:


> Stravinsky's _Rite of Spring_ is currently on the fifth tier of the Talk Classical community's favorite and most highly recommended works, making it the most highly ranked work by anyone who wasn't German, and the most highly ranked ballet on the list.
> 
> Wikipedia has a fantastic article about it, including a little analysis that amounts to a decent listening guide.
> 
> ...


For me, a work of extraordinary genius. Though revolutionary (and seemingly, somewhat atonal at moments), *it retains melody*. The first version I heard was Michael Tilson Thomas's (Boston SO). I think Rattle (LSO) is good too:


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Yes terrific work. I have the Stravinsky which is absolutely dynamic. Also Karajan 2 where he had considered criticism of the composer to his first reading.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

A very great work but also one of those pieces that didn't go anywhere. Nothing could follow it except music that was totally different. There was recently a long thread on recommended recordings so I won't bother adding anything on that - there are many great ones and there are many more that are good but not as great as the great ones.


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

Enthusiast said:


> A very great work but also one of those pieces that didn't go anywhere. Nothing could follow it except music that was totally different. There was recently a long thread on recommended recordings so I won't bother adding anything on that - there are many great ones and there are many more that are good but not as great as the great ones.


actually, "Le Sacre" was very influential, and it spawned quite a number of imitative works from some major composers - 
OTTOMH:
Prokofieff - Scythian Suite
Bartok- Miraculous Mandarin

I know there are quite a few more, others may chime in....
another not so well-known:
Surinach - Rites and Dances from Ancient Iberia [for Wind Ensemble]


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

Enthusiast said:


> A very great work but also one of those pieces that didn't go anywhere. Nothing could follow it except music that was totally different.


Not sure what you mean here.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Heck148 said:


> actually, "Le Sacre" was very influential, and it spawned quite a number of imitative works from some major composers -
> OTTOMH:
> Prokofieff - Scythian Suite
> Bartok- Miraculous Mandarin
> ...


That was partly my point: the Scythian Suite suffered from sounding like a cynical attempt to cash in on the Rite and to this day gets less attention than other comparable Prokofiev works. And Mandarin might have suffered in the same way as far as its reputation goes - I don't know if it did or not - but aside from being noisy it has no relationship to the Rite. The noise is used for a very different purpose and the work is pure Bartok and is not in any way about primitive ritual.

I suppose, though, you could say that the Rite did much to liberate rhythm as a valid musical subject and thereby to set the scene for much that followed it. That is true and that is its true bequest. But there are no obvious pieces to recommend to someone who loved the Rite.

Of course, other composers have since attempted to use primitive ritual as a subject but the successful ones don't borrow anything much from the Rite: Earth Dances (Birtwistle); Ritual Dances (from Tippett's Midsummer Marriage). Stravinsky did of course, go on to be inspired by and to use primitive Siberian music in many of his pieces.


----------



## NLAdriaan (Feb 6, 2019)

Fantastic music, you hear the rough Russian forces of nature in it. 

I got to know the piece with Dorati/Detroita and have also Rattle/CBSO. Rattle was a teacher at the Rotterdam Conservatory long time ago and he conducted the Sacre by head(!). I have heard various live concerts, of which Gergiev in Rotterdam was memorable (huge climaxes, great Russian atmosphere as you might expect and last year I heard Gatti as (still) chief of the Concertgebouw. He conducted the Sacre at slow tempo, not as a ballet (undanceable tempi), but more as a symphonic piece and it was very convincing as well. Funny that this music created such a row in Paris at the premiere. Clearly the second Viennese school still had to start off

Listening to this piece in its traditional  form is like 30 minute roller coaster. But as Gatti directed the Sacre with the Concertgebouw orchestra last year, it was also very convincing. 

Has anyone seen a ballet performance with live music of the Sacre? I didn't.


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

Enthusiast said:


> I suppose, though, you could say that the Rite did much to liberate rhythm as a valid musical subject and thereby to set the scene for much that followed it. That is true and that is its true bequest.


yes, the entire liberation of rhythm, the use of violence, extensive percussion, mixed meters, clashing dissonance and generally barbaric tone of much of the music was most influential - indeed the Scythian Suite and Miraculous Mandarin are direct descendants of Le Sacre - it's hard to imagine them coming into existence without Le Sacre preceding them...



> But there are no obvious pieces to recommend to someone who loved the Rite.


not so...as shown..



> Of course, other composers have since attempted to use primitive ritual as a subject


yes, for sure, using the inspiration of Stravinsky..



> Stravinsky did of course, go on to be inspired by and to use primitive Siberian music in many of his pieces.


Interestingly enough, the famous opening bassoon solo in "Le Sacre" is based on a folk tune a _dudka_ tune = primitive Russian folk instrument] - Mussorgsky used this tune on occasion - in fact - listen to the final section of "Night on Bald Mountain" - the clarinet solo is the same tune, but Stravinsky offset the bar line to slightly alter the rhythm


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Heck148 said:


> yes, the entire liberation of rhythm, the use of violence, extensive percussion, mixed meters, clashing dissonance and generally barbaric tone of much of the music was most influential - indeed the Scythian Suite and Miraculous Mandarin are direct descendants of Le Sacre - it's hard to imagine them coming into existence without Le Sacre preceding them...
> 
> not so...as shown..
> 
> ...


I am not sure we are disagreeing as such. You are probably exaggerating the influence of the Rite as the trends were already there. And I certainly do not think that the Tippett and Birtwistle examples I gave can be traced with any directness to Stravinsky. Not beyond the very general sense that Stravinsky was a giant and influenced much that followed.


----------



## Harmonie (Mar 24, 2007)

When playing it in orchestra years back I was always mesmerized by the first two movements of Part 2. I still go back and listen regularly. Such gorgeous instrumentation, melodies, and harmonies.


----------



## Larkenfield (Jun 5, 2017)

Enthusiast said:


> A very great work but also one of those pieces that didn't go anywhere. Nothing could follow it except music that was totally different. There was recently a long thread on recommended recordings so I won't bother adding anything on that - there are many great ones and there are many more that are good but not as great as the great ones.


It was influential, highly, with its primordial violence that can be heard another 20th century composers, but Stravinsky either couldn't follow it or didn't want to with anything ever on a similar dynamic or colorful scale-his Russian period was over. The world waited another 40 years for him to do something as vibrant and waited in disappointment. Everything thereafter, as good as it was, seemed anti-climactic. But to follow it up with neoclassicism? What a letdown, but he did it partly because there was a strong reaction against the avant-garde during the time of World War One and composers and artists became more conservative, including even someone like Picasso. This epoc of art and music history is described in the great documentary _Paris: The Luminous Years_, originally shown on PBS.

References:


> The music historian Donald Jay Grout has written: "The Sacre is undoubtedly the most famous composition of the early 20th century ... it had the effect of an explosion that so scattered the elements of musical language that they could never again be put together as before".The academic and critic Jan Smaczny, echoing Bernstein, calls it one of the 20th century's most influential compositions, providing "endless stimulation for performers and listeners". According to Kelly the 1913 premiere might be considered "the most important single moment in the history of 20th century music", and its repercussions continue to reverberate in the 21st century. Ross has described The Rite as a prophetic work, presaging the "second avant-garde" era in classical composition-music of the body rather than of the mind, in which "[m]elodies would follow the patterns of speech; rhythms would match the energy of dance ... sonorities would have the hardness of life as it is really lived".
> 
> Among 20th-century composers most influenced by The Rite is Stravinsky's near contemporary, Edgard Varèse, who had attended the 1913 premiere. Varèse, according to Ross, was particularly drawn to the "cruel harmonies and stimulating rhythms" of The Rite, which he employed to full effect in his concert work Amériques (1921), scored for a massive orchestra with added sound effects including a lion's roar and a wailing siren. Aaron Copland, to whom Stravinsky was a particular inspiration in the former's student days, considered The Rite a masterpiece that had created "the decade of the displaced accent and the polytonal chord". Copland adopted Stravinsky's technique of composing in small sections which he then shuffled and rearranged, rather than working through from beginning to end. Ross cites the music of Copland's ballet Billy the Kid as coming directly from the "Spring Rounds" section of The Rite. For Olivier Messiaen The Rite was of special significance; he constantly analysed and expounded on the work, which gave him an enduring model for rhythmic drive and assembly of materials. [unquote]


----------



## Red Terror (Dec 10, 2018)

I don't see how anyone could be let down by Stravinsky's output after the Rite. His oeuvre is exceptional even when pitted against that of the all-time great composers.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

I remember The Rite as one of the earliest works of the modern period that I listened to. I actually remember the first time I heard it, which was in school when a teacher put it on and encouraged us to do free dancing to it (a la Isadora Duncan). I got it on tape and imagined scenarios to go along with the music (having not much of a clue about the actual scenario).

Unlike other works of the period which I got to know early on - e.g. Bartok's Concerto for Orchestra, Prokofiev's Classical Symphony and Shostakovich's Symphony No. 10 or Stravinsky's own Petrushka - The Rite, oddly enough, hasn't retained my continuing interest. I had a few recordings over the years: Liensdorf, Dorati, Craft and Iwaki. My collection now only includes things which I want to listen to with some regularity, and along with some other key works I culled The Rite a few years ago.

I would however jump at the chance to hear it live, even see it done as a ballet. I remember watching a ballet production of it on television many years ago done by an Australian Aboriginal dance group, Bangarra. The choreographer said he identified with it fully, despite having only recently got to know it. I usually don’t like ballet but this was riveting.

The Rite was of course a groundbreaking work. Esa Pekka Salonen said it was one of the big gamechangers in the orchestral repertoire, along with Beethoven's Eroica and Berlioz's Symphonie Fantastique. Its also one of the most important works of the 1910's decade, along with Prokofiev's Classical Symphony and Schoenberg's Pierrot Lunaire. 

Perhaps no other piece of music is so closely identified with modernism in popular culture. Disney's Fantasia is one (I don't remember seeing the whole thing) and I like how it is used as a frame for the plot of the 2009 movie Coco Chanel and Igor Stravinsky. It opens with the failed premiere of the piece as a ballet and concludes with its successful performance as an orchestral work not much long after.


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

Love it, even more because it was my gateway into 20th century music. I have two versions: Detroit Symphony Orchestra/Dorati on Decca, and London Symphony Orchestra/Abbado on DG. No preference between these two.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Larkenfield said:


> It was influential, highly, with its primordial violence that can be heard another 20th century composers, but Stravinsky either couldn't follow it or didn't want to with anything ever on a similar dynamic or colorful scale-his Russian period was over. The world waited another 40 years for him to do something as vibrant and waited in disappointment. Everything thereafter, as good as it was, seemed anti-climactic. But to follow it up with neoclassicism? What a letdown, but he did it partly because there was a strong reaction against the avant-garde during the time of World War One and composers and artists became more conservative, including even someone like Picasso. This epoc of art and music history is described in the great documentary _Paris: The Luminous Years_, originally shown on PBS.


Heck 148 made the same points so it seems I expressed myself badly. Of course, the Rite was one of the key works that introduced us to the modernist interest in rhythm and loud discordant sounds. My point was merely and simply that the idea of using a primitive ritual for a musical work went nowhere very interesting. I was not attempting an evaluation of its importance to subsequent developments. I do agree very strongly with Red Terror that, although Stravinsky went on to compose very different music, his subsequent output was at least as great (and as "important") as the Rite. It is sad that even today many people remember him for that and know little of his other music.


----------



## Bourdon (Jan 4, 2019)

I have only four recordings,Ansermet,Karajan ( his first) Solti and Boulez.
The Karajan was my first recording many years ago and I still like it.


----------



## david johnson (Jun 25, 2007)

I will add to the list of good recordings: Boulez/ORTF/Nonesuch records LP.


----------



## Bill Cooke (May 20, 2017)

My first experience with the "Rite" was in Disney's FANTASIA. That movie got me hooked on classical music, and I remember how excited I was to learn that the "Rite" was actually quite a bit longer than what Stokowski edited together for the animated film.

Down through the years I've collected quite a few recordings of this masterwork, but here are my favorites:

Boulez/Cleveland - my musician uncle introduced me to this recording, claiming it was the most perfect version. 
Bernstein/NYP (1958) - stunning, hair-raising performance!
Stravinsky/CSO - the final movement has never sounded more "right" to me than in this version.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn (Feb 17, 2017)

This is one of the few situations where I find one recording so definitive I feel no need to get any others, and that is the composer's own version on Sony.

Though let's not forget the old Stokowski account available on Pearl, which probably introduced a great number of us to this great work via _Fantasia_.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

^^ Stravinsky's is very good. But when you have recordings like those by Markevitch, Dorati and Monteux (all historical but pretty good sound is available for them) and of such overall excellence as Gergiev's ... then it is hard to talk about anything being definitive. I generally like Stravinsky's own recordings of his music a lot but he was not such a technically skilled conductor so if there are other options where the conductor totally "gets" the music - not always the case with Stravinsky - it can be worth shopping around.


----------



## christomacin (Oct 21, 2017)

The Symphony in Three Movements (1945) has a similar fire and drive to the Rite of Spring, especially the two outer movements.


----------



## DeepR (Apr 13, 2012)

I've grown to like it. Certainly deserving of its reputation as an important and influential piece. To me personally however, this could never be among my top favorites. Not for what it is, but for what it expresses and where it takes me as a listener. It's great, sophisticated music, but raw, primitive, for the body, earthly. A fantastic visceral experience. But when I have to choose between great music like this and great music that transports me to a higher sphere of beauty and mystery, into the beyond, I will always choose the latter.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

The Rite is very innovative, especially rhythmically. Harmonically, the use of tritones and other modern devices make it very modern indeed. The orchestration is great, as well.

But these formal musical qualities are not what initially drew me to the work, at least not consciously. I got the eeriest feeling when I heard the movement "The Sacrifice." It really creeped me out. It was as if Stravinsky had somehow tapped directly in to the subconscious. I also vaguely remembered the use of dinosaurs and volcanoes erupting as it was used in _Fantasia_. In other words, artistically this work had hit me on a very visceral, primal level. This was probably the first time I had been affected by classical music in this way.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

christomacin said:


> The Symphony in Three Movements (1945) has a similar fire and drive to the Rite of Spring, especially the two outer movements.


Yes you can hear that although the work is essentially a neoclassical one. Some performances bring out its Rite-like nature but Stravinsky's own doesn't.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn (Feb 17, 2017)

Bill Cooke said:


> Stravinsky/CSO - the final movement has never sounded more "right" to me than in this version.


I agree with this. Most versions sound almost as if they end too soon, but this one sounds just right. I listened to all three of Stravinsky's versions tonight - 1929, 1940, 1960 - and I still feel the last one was the one where he really nailed it. Contrary to what you might expect there is more energy throughout this version, particularly as compared to 1940, strangely enough, which was recorded live in his prime with the cream of NY musicians. The 1929 version has a palpable sense of discovery and excitement, though the end falters as apparently the musicians were not comfortable enough with the music.

However, even this 1960 account may ultimately take a backseat for me to the first Stokowski, recorded 1929-30 with the Philadelphia Orchestra. As with so many of his recordings from this period, Stokowski brings panache and abandon to the score. This is a version to savor.

After hearing Stravinsky's versions and the Stokowski, Boulez struck me as rather more pedestrian. I can't say I have been enthralled by much of his work, and this was no exception.

I plan to do some more listening, eyeing both Dorati's, Bernstein I, Muti, and Markevitch. I even think I will give Karajan a spin. I recall briefly owning his second recording decades ago but selling it away after I got the composer's own.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn (Feb 17, 2017)

Enthusiast said:


> ^^ Stravinsky's is very good. But when you have recordings like those by Markevitch, Dorati and Monteux (all historical but pretty good sound is available for them) and of such overall excellence as Gergiev's ... then it is hard to talk about anything being definitive. I generally like Stravinsky's own recordings of his music a lot but he was not such a technically skilled conductor so if there are other options where the conductor totally "gets" the music - not always the case with Stravinsky - it can be worth shopping around.


So in the past week I have gone from owning three Sacres to owning eleven, and it's all your fault! 

I did go on a listening binge, and you are right that there is much more to say than Stravinsky's and Stokowski's, although those remain my reference points.

I gave Boulez '69 another listen, and I got totally sold on it. The care and attention to detail really do work, and the end is thrilling. Sometimes it is good to give a recording a second chance!

I was also bowled over by both Dorati's, especially the 1959 MSO on Mercury with its bold audacity. Another reference point. 1981 Detroit is less in your face but still essential and providing great sound.

Unfortunately I could not find Markevitch on Itunes or YouTube, so I have the Testament CD with both mono and stereo Philharmonia versions on order.

I also was enthralled with the 1951 Monteux. Excellent sound quality and obvious authority with the score. Another keeper.

The biggest surprise was 1977 Karajan. I was simply bowled over by this one. I have always credited Karajan for his recordings of modern repertoire. You could argue that he languors too much during Part 1 especially, but the result is so intriguing. It just works. And then Part 2 just knocked me out of my seat. Along with Dorati '59, no version IMO has such a visceral impact as this. Damn me for selling this off 2 1/2 decades ago and now having to pay a pretty penny to reacquire it!

I actually am much less impressed with the 1964 Karajan, the version which infamously drew the composer's ire. Much like comparing his 1963 and 1977 Beethoven 9ths, I find the earlier versions more tame and manicured, whereas in 1977 he really lets loose and makes a powerful impact.

I liked the 1958 Bernstein enough to purchase it, if nothing for both its historical significance and "Royal Edition" coupling with an excellent Petrushka. But I have to admit it does not strike me as the be-all, end-all of Rites the way it is portrayed in some quarters. I actually do not hear volcanic abandon with Bernstein. What I hear is that everything has been meticulously planned and thought out, so that there is obvious care but not the thrill factor I get with Dorati. I can see how this was considered a demonstration recording in its day, however. The NYPO plays lights out.

Muti is also excellent and a top choice for digital after Dorati. Tilson Thomas '71, Fricsay and Ormandy are also all excellent alternative choices. Rattle I found to be above average but nothing spectacular. Gergiev was a disappointment. I felt he was trying too hard to make something special with the phrasing to where the power was lost for me. Dutoit is underpowered but as often creates an evocative sound world. I can see where people look at Ozawa/Boston as a demonstration recording, but the interpretation is just too careful for my taste. Abbado was simply not up to snuff. I can't even recommend it as a supplement.

So my essential Rites of Spring are:

Leopold Stokowski (1929-30) (RCA, Golden Classics)
Igor Stravinsky (1960) (Sony)
Pierre Boulez (1969) (Sony)
Antal Dorati (1959) (Mercury)
Igor Markevitch (1951, 1959) (EMI, Testament) * pending my receipt in the mail to hopefully affirm the acclaim!
Pierre Monteux (1951) (RCA)
Herbert von Karajan (1977) (DG)
Antal Dorati (1981) (Decca)
Leonard Bernstein (1958) (Sony)

Additional listening:

Igor Stravinsky (1929) (Pearl)
Igor Stravinsky (1940) (Sony, Naxos)
Riccardo Muti (EMI)
Michael Tilson Thomas (1971) (DG, Pentatone)
Ferenc Fricsay (DG)
Eugene Ormandy (Sony)
Pierre Monteux (1958) (Guild, Music & Arts)
Ernst Ansermet (1950) (Decca, Classica D'Oro)
Herbert von Karajan (1964) (DG)
Simon Rattle (EMI)
Pierre Monteux (1956) (Decca)
Valery Gergiev (Decca)
Pierre Monteux (1929) (Pearl)
Charles Dutoit (Decca)
Seiji Ozawa (1968) (RCA)


----------



## SONNET CLV (May 31, 2014)

The _Rite of Spring_!

Sure. I've been playing it non-stop ever since this latest snow storm blew in. If the piece really is that great, maybe it can have some effect upon nature and hurry spring along.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn (Feb 17, 2017)

One more to add to the list of additional recommendations: Mehta's 1970 LAPO on Decca. Part 1 is fairly conventional, but Part 2 is exciting as hell, one of the best I have heard.


----------



## eugeneonagain (May 14, 2017)

I like this work, but I don't particularly like Stravinsky in general apart from Petrouchka, Concerto for Piano and Wind Instruments and some piano music like Les Cinq Doigts from when I was a little piano learner. I'm always coming across little gems from his pen though. like the 3 pieces for clarinet solo.

Back to the topic... I've been lucky enough to see The Rite of Spring played live a few times and it's always impressive. The orchestration is amazing.


----------



## Vronsky (Jan 5, 2015)

Brahmsianhorn said:


> So my essential Rites of Spring are:
> 
> Leopold Stokowski (1929-30) (RCA, Golden Classics)
> Igor Stravinsky (1960) (Sony)
> ...


I've heard:

Bernstein/New York Philharmonic (Sony)
Abbado/London Symphony Orchestra (DG)
Francois-Xavier Roth/Les Siecles (Actes Sud)
Fedoseyev/Bolshoi Symphony Orchestra
Pierre Boulez/The Cleveland Orchestra (both Sony & DG)
Eugene Ormandy/Philadelphia Orchestra (Sony)
Daniele Gatti/Orchestre National de France (Sony)
Stravinsky/Columbia Symphony Orchestra (Sony)
Yoel Levi /Atlanta Symphony Orchestra (Telarc)
Lorin Maazel/The Cleveland Orchestra (Telarc)
Rattle/City of Birmingham Symphony Orchestra (EMI)
Riccardo Chailly/Lucerne Festival Orchestra (Decca)

So far, I would choose Ormandy & Philadelphia Orchestra as my favourite Le Sacre du printemps.


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

Brahmsianhorn said:


> One more to add to the list of additional recommendations: Mehta's 1970 LAPO on Decca. Part 1 is fairly conventional, but Part 2 is exciting as hell, one of the best I have heard.


I think I already mentioned that one - sound spectacular with Decca's spot-miking on full display...fine reading and performance....Mehta's NYPO one ['77] is good also.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn (Feb 17, 2017)

Heck148 said:


> I think I already mentioned that one - sound spectacular with Decca's spot-miking on full display...fine reading and performance....Mehta's NYPO one ['77] is good also.


Seems like just about every major US orchestra got their kicks in with this work!


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

Brahmsianhorn said:


> Seems like just about every major US orchestra got their kicks in with this work!


It's now an orchestra standard, every conductor and orchestra has to test it out....wasn't always that way, of course...at one time "Le Sacre" was a real "boogie-man" for orchestras....the famous bassoon opening solo was regarded as quite difficult and rather fearsome....bassoons were not routinely equipped with a high "D" key, so the range was demanding...now it is almost commonplace....
Stoki's great '29 recording featured J. Walter Guetter on the solo, and he plays it beautifully....Guetter, a marvelous artist, died way too young of cancer, age 42...

his successor, Sol Schoenbach recounts his first experiences with "Le Sacre" - it was during the recording for Disney's "Fantasia" in 1939...Schoenbach said he'd always been somewhat scared of the solo, so exposed, high, a bit intricate....however, at the recording session, something kept going wrong...either with timing, execution, whatever....Schoenbach said he had to play the opening solo that day 37 times!!...before they got a take they wanted...:tiphat:
He said he never worried about it after that!!


----------



## Reichstag aus LICHT (Oct 25, 2010)

Heck148 said:


> actually, "Le Sacre" was very influential, and it spawned quite a number of imitative works from some major composers -
> OTTOMH:
> Prokofieff - Scythian Suite
> Bartok- Miraculous Mandarin
> ...


Les Noces, perhaps?


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

Heck148 said:


> It's now an orchestra standard, every conductor and orchestra has to test it out....wasn't always that way, of course...at one time "Le Sacre" was a real "boogie-man" for orchestras....the famous bassoon opening solo was regarded as quite difficult and rather fearsome....bassoons were not routinely equipped with a high "D" key, so the range was demanding...now it is almost commonplace....


And as bassoonists got more and more comfortable with it, Stravinsky said if he had known people would be playing it perfectly, he would transpose it up a half-step every year so they didn't get so complacent. But that solo still is a problem; it takes nerves of steel to start it and there are plenty of examples in live recordings where the poor player messes up.


----------



## flamencosketches (Jan 4, 2019)

definitely one of the greatest orchestral works of all time... not something I listen to every day though. I really like Boulez/Cleveland though I have heard people trash it for not being "savage" enough... whatever that means. I also like Stravinsky/Columbia and Levi/Atlanta (my adopted home town orchestra  they do a great job on it).


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

Reichstag aus LICHT said:


> Les Noces, perhaps?


perhaps, I was also thinking of Shostakovich - Lady Macbeth/Msenzk....which has some pretty barbaric passages in it - whippings, murders, rape scene, etc....


----------



## Brahmsianhorn (Feb 17, 2017)

flamencosketches said:


> I really like Boulez/Cleveland though I have heard people trash it for not being "savage" enough... whatever that means.


I listened to it twice over the past two weeks. The first time I was disappointed, not wowed enough. The second time I was engrossed. I realize now that the power of this recording comes from the attention and logic applied to every line. In the context Boulez sets the savagery absolutely comes through even more forcefully.


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

Brahmsianhorn said:


> The second time I was engrossed. I realize now that the power of this recording comes from the attention and logic applied to every line. In the context Boulez sets the savagery absolutely comes through even more forcefully.


Boulez/CO is really excellent - extremely well-played - this was Szell's Clevelanders at their best ...the savagery comes thru very well, I think....my only complaint [purely subjective] is the opening bassoon solo - very straight, almost sterile,but Boulez wanted it this way [one of the Cleveland WW principals told me this] - like some sort of primordial seed just beginning to sprout....I like it a bit more expressive, more like a priest or shaman calling his followers to the ritual....Geo Goslee, the principal bassoon, was a wonderful player...I'm sure he could play it any way, shape of form required.


----------



## fluteman (Dec 7, 2015)

science said:


> Stravinsky's _Rite of Spring_ is currently on the fifth tier of the Talk Classical community's favorite and most highly recommended works, making it the most highly ranked work by anyone who wasn't German, and the most highly ranked ballet on the list.
> 
> Wikipedia has a fantastic article about it, including a little analysis that amounts to a decent listening guide.
> 
> ...


The Rite is certainly one of my top ten favorite works of all time. I like Trout's list of recommended recordings, especially no. 1, Boulez and the Cleveland Orchestra from 1969. The Rite had a profound and far-reaching impact on 20th century music. I see it as key part of the transition from the harmony-centered music of the 19th century into a period where rhythm and timbre played more important roles.


----------



## ushkinamakushke (Feb 23, 2019)

Truly astonishing to me that Stravinsky produced a work so revolutionary and influential at such an early stage of his career. Is there another symphonic work after it that has been (and continues to be) recorded and performed so often? To the list of recordings I would also add Ancerl's 1963 recording on Supraphon, not as superior to the aforementioned recordings necessarily, but rather unique in terms of time and place (i.e. Eastern European). Thanks to other posters for remarks and recommendations!


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

DeepR said:


> I've grown to like it. Certainly deserving of its reputation as an important and influential piece. To me personally however, this could never be among my top favorites. Not for what it is, but for what it expresses and where it takes me as a listener. It's great, sophisticated music, but raw, primitive, for the body, earthly. A fantastic visceral experience. But when I have to choose between great music like this and great music that transports me to a higher sphere of beauty and mystery, into the beyond, I will always choose the latter.


I feel similarly. It's one of the most striking and groundbreaking works in the history of music, and can pack a punch when well-played. That said, I've never found that it had much to say to me, as it affords neither the intellectual delights of form nor the richness or subtlety of feeling embodied by my favorite music.


----------



## skim1124 (Mar 6, 2019)

Inspired by this thread, I listened to Rite all the way through for the first time. And I must say, I didn't like it much, didn't get it enough to appreciate it much. I could hear that he was creating different moods and that it seemed very different in sound and form from the kinds of works that I'm familiar with (Beethoven, Mozart, Bach, etc), but at first hearing, it didn't strike me as the type of music I can easily like.

What are some things I should know that'd help me appreciate it more, even if I never end up loving it?


----------



## Mark Emanuele (Nov 18, 2018)

My favorite performance is on YouTube Michael Tilson Thomas conducting the San Francisco Symphony at their BBC Proms Debut. Part 1: 



Part 2:


----------



## Mark Emanuele (Nov 18, 2018)

skim1124 said:


> Inspired by this thread, I listened to Rite all the way through for the first time. And I must say, I didn't like it much, didn't get it enough to appreciate it much. I could hear that he was creating different moods and that it seemed very different in sound and form from the kinds of works that I'm familiar with (Beethoven, Mozart, Bach, etc), but at first hearing, it didn't strike me as the type of music I can easily like.
> 
> What are some things I should know that'd help me appreciate it more, even if I never end up loving it?


I said the same thing back in college (1975 - 1979). Now it is one of my favorite works. The more I understood Jazz, The more I liked it, and Stravinsky. Also, I watched a Balet perform it and that gave me a new perspective on the work. Actually, I will be conducting a recording of this work along with Petrouchka next year.


----------



## Tchaikov6 (Mar 30, 2016)

skim1124 said:


> Inspired by this thread, I listened to Rite all the way through for the first time. And I must say, I didn't like it much, didn't get it enough to appreciate it much. I could hear that he was creating different moods and that it seemed very different in sound and form from the kinds of works that I'm familiar with (Beethoven, Mozart, Bach, etc), but at first hearing, it didn't strike me as the type of music I can easily like.
> 
> What are some things I should know that'd help me appreciate it more, even if I never end up loving it?


Well, this was my gateway drug into modern music, and it's one of my favorite pieces now. For me, it is the constant energy and motion of the music that always brings it back to being one of my favorites. And I actually think that this is one of Stravinsky's most accessible pieces, because later he got into some very, very, weird stuff. Anything before Rite of Spring I think would definitely get you into Stravinsky more, because he was still using traditional tonal harmonies... but, this piece isn't everyone's cup of tea, so I wouldn't sweat it if you end up never liking/appreciating it.


----------



## skim1124 (Mar 6, 2019)

Tchaikov6 said:


> Well, this was my gateway drug into modern music, and it's one of my favorite pieces now. For me, it is the constant energy and motion of the music that always brings it back to being one of my favorites. And I actually think that this is one of Stravinsky's most accessible pieces, because later he got into some very, very, weird stuff. Anything before Rite of Spring I think would definitely get you into Stravinsky more, because he was still using traditional tonal harmonies... but, this piece isn't everyone's cup of tea, so I wouldn't sweat it if you end up never liking/appreciating it.


I like the idea of listening to some pre-Rite stuff first as preparation. Thanks!


----------



## skim1124 (Mar 6, 2019)

Mark Emanuele said:


> I said the same thing back in college (1975 - 1979). Now it is one of my favorite works. The more I understood Jazz, The more I liked it, and Stravinsky. Also, I watched a Balet perform it and that gave me a new perspective on the work. Actually, I will be conducting a recording of this work along with Petrouchka next year.


Interesting, since I do listen to jazz quite a bit (old stuff, bebop, hard bop). But perhaps I'm not familiar enough with the right type of jazz?


----------



## Brahmsianhorn (Feb 17, 2017)

Listened yesterday to my “essential 9,” and I have to say I now rank them thusly:

Dorati (1981) (Decca)
Stokowski (1929-30) (RCA)
Boulez (1969) (Sony)
Markevitch (1959) (Testament)
Stravinsky (1960) (Sony)
Dorati (1959) (Mercury)
Karajan (1977) (DG)
Monteux (1951) (RCA)
Bernstein (1958) (Sony)

I was bowled over by Dorati/Detroit. This is now my go-to version. As an interpretation it is superior to the earlier Mercury version, more patient and thus exuding even more power.

Bernstein/NYPO sounds great and the orchestra plays lights out. For some reason I am just not as impressed with the interpretation.


----------



## perdido34 (Mar 11, 2015)

Heck148 said:


> Boulez/CO is really excellent - extremely well-played - this was Szell's Clevelanders at their best ...the savagery comes thru very well, I think....my only complaint [purely subjective] is the opening bassoon solo - very straight, almost sterile,but Boulez wanted it this way [one of the Cleveland WW principals told me this] - like some sort of primordial seed just beginning to sprout....I like it a bit more expressive, more like a priest or shaman calling his followers to the ritual....Geo Goslee, the principal bassoon, was a wonderful player...I'm sure he could play it any way, shape of form required.


Which Boulez/Cleveland are you talking about? Since you mention Goslee, I assume you're talking about the first one on Columbia/Sony; I think Goslee had retired before the second Sacre on DG was recorded.


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

perdido34 said:


> Which Boulez/Cleveland are you talking about? Since you mention Goslee, I assume you're talking about the first one on Columbia/Sony; I think Goslee had retired before the second Sacre on DG was recorded.


Boulez/Cleveland '69 or '70 -Columbia/Sony


----------

