# What Scheherazade should i get?



## Itullian

I don't have any recordings of this.
What should I get?
Thanks


----------



## jimsumner

Going to be difficult to come up with a consensus on this. One of the most popular pieces of classical music ever, which means darn near any conductor of consequence has had a shot or three at it.

Many of the classic performances have been around a lot. I'm partial to the late 1950s Reiner/Chicago Symphony Orchestra. RCA was making pretty good recordings at that time, so it still sounds good. Lots of people swear by the Beecham, around the same time.

More recently, Russian composers seem to have pulled off some more-than-competitive versions, e.g. Gergiev, Kondrashin, Temirikanov. 

Like I said, tons of options. Someone could come along in a few minutes and give a half-dozen equally valid options.


----------



## david johnson

Reiner/CSO. Branch out from there if desired. Beecham and Mackerras have super versions.


----------



## flamencosketches

david johnson said:


> Reiner/CSO. Branch out from there if desired. Beecham and Mackerras have super versions.


This. The one I have also includes Stravinsky's Song of the Nightingale. Both recordings are definitive IMO.


----------



## Triplets

The Reiner is hard to beat. Unbelievable playing and perfect tempos. I have managed to collect a few others without trying to do to purchases of large box sets. Ormandy/Philadelphia is also very virtuosic. Stokowski recorded it numerous times, and I recently heard a version from 1928 (also with Philly) on the radio recently. It sounds a lot more energetic than the stereo version that I have from a large Stokie collection that was made in the seventies.
The only recording besides Reiner that I deliberately bought featured a Turkish Orchestra and featured some Middle Eastern instruments noodling around between movements. It received great reviews probably due to the novelty, but the main work itself was rather tame.


----------



## Larkenfield

Get 'em all! It's pure storytelling magic.


----------



## joen_cph

I'd be sure to have a Celi version too, such as the SDR-one on the Originals label, or the DG or EMI versions. I don't remember which one that is the best of them.


----------



## SixFootScowl

I only have one and it is on the 10-CD set: Fricsay Perfectionist.


----------



## D Smith

I think there was another thread about Scheherazade recently. I must have over a dozen recordings of this and most have their strengths. Not to be boring but I’d also have to recommend Reiner tops for both the performance and recording. I also love Temirkanov’s 90’s recording with the NY Phil with Glenn Dicterow on the violin. Svetlanov /LSO is also great. Steven Staryk’s solo work on Beecham’s RPO recording is wonderful, as is the whole recording, lush and full. Ansermet, Previn, Karajan, Gilbert/NY Phil (2017), Ormandy and Mackerras are all good recordings. Plenty to choose from!


----------



## philoctetes

Stokowski and Fricsay work fo rme. For some reason Reiner never did, but I like him better in Strauss. I avoid Beecham cause I just don't like him. There must be a dozen good ones I haven't heard, it's not a piece that I've ever shopped for. Surprised I've never heard it live given its popularity.


----------



## Merl

Gergiev, Reiner, Ashkenazy, Beecham but I'm particularly fond of Ansermet's account with the Suisse Romande, Schwarz on Naxos and, especially, Dorati's performance with the Minneapolis SO. Love the sound on all of these. but there's summat about Dorati's slightly odd reading that appeals to me. I posted this elsewhere so sorry for repeating myself.


----------



## DavidA

Beecham is probably the best performance on disc but the sound its not modern


----------



## DavidA

philoctetes said:


> Stokowski and Fricsay work fo rme. For some reason Reiner never did, but I like him better in Strauss. *I avoid Beecham cause I just don't like him.* There must be a dozen good ones I haven't heard, it's not a piece that I've ever shopped for. Surprised I've never heard it live given its popularity.


Pretty awful man but fine conductor


----------



## bigshot

I have quite a few of this and by far the best one is Previn. Hard to find on CD though.


----------



## CnC Bartok

Beecham, or Kondrashin, or Fricsay, or Dutoit, are my personal recommendations, probably in that order!

I don't have any issues with Beecham as a person, but I was never on the receiving end of his famed acerbic humour.....


----------



## Heck148

Reiner/CSO for me - terrific solo work, which is absolutely critical for this work....like "Bolero" - "Scheherazade" lives or dies by the soloists....FWIW - the final mvt of Reiner's recording as made on a single take, IIRC....once thru - in the can....doesn't happen too often.

Ormandy/Phila have a fine one from early 60s, I believe....again, stellar solo work....
I've always liked Stokowski's way with this work, also - his original Philadelphia one from 10/27 is a real classic, with some legendary soloists.


----------



## chill782002

Agree with Heck148, Stokowski's 1927 recording with the Philadelphia Orchestra is great. I also like Fried's 1928 recording with the Berliner Philharmoniker.

For more modern stereo versions, Reiner's 1960 recording with the Chicago Symphony Orchestra has always been extremely popular as others have mentioned. Kondrashin's 1979 recording with the Amsterdam Concertgebouworkest is highly recommended too.


----------



## wkasimer

bigshot said:


> I have quite a few of this and by far the best one is Previn. Hard to find on CD though.


There are a number of copies on eBay.

How does this compare with Previn's later recording with the VPO?


----------



## Oldhoosierdude

There are really a number of great recordings available, I will mention some that have not been listed. Depends on how much you want to spend and what format you want it in. There's a great one on a cheap $.99 box set Big Russian Box available on amazon, below is the youtube listing, it is a little discussed 1957 recording that still sounds good. Or go the CD route and your choices are huge, almost every known conductor has handled this one.

You might sample Goossen's fine rendition, this youtube link is a little poppy and cracky as it seems to have transferred from an LP. The download I have has been remastered from tape and has no excess sounds.


----------



## bigshot

wkasimer said:


> How does this compare with Previn's later recording with the VPO?


Not sure. One of the standouts of the London one is the violinist though. I like the dynamics in it too. Some get too quiet, but the Previn is a perfect listenable balance.


----------



## Josquin13

Four of my favorite, preferred conductors of Rimsky-Korsakov's beguiling Scheherazade worked for the Ballet Russes & its impresario, Sergei Diaghilev: who commissioned a ballet adaptation of the 1888 symphonic suite, & premiered it in 1910 in Paris--they are (1) French conductor Pierre Monteux, (2) Russian conductor Igor Markevitch, (3) Swiss conductor Ernest Ansermet, and (4) English conductor, Sir Thomas Beecham.

Markevitch's 1962 recording of Scheherazade is remarkable, but IMO was unfairly superseded in the Philips catalogue by Kiril Kondrashin's later 1979 Concertgebouw recording. My guess is that that was partly due to the greater commercial appeal of hearing Scheherazade, with its brilliant orchestral colors, in better Philips sound (i.e., late analogue versus early stereo), rather than the conducting itself, as Markevitch's imaginative understanding of the score & idiom is a lot more interesting to me than Kondrashin's. Plus, I prefer the playing of LSO violinist Erich Gruenberg to the Concertgebouw's Hermann Krebbers--who, for me, doesn't have a big enough sound or projection in this music, as his tone is too slight & delicate. Don't misunderstand me, I like Krebbers' playing (both here & elsewhere), but I don't think his style is as bold and romantically lush as the score requires--after all, the violinist is competing with the orchestra, as in a violin concerto. (You might also compare Krebbers playing to that of violinist Anshel Brusilow in Eugene Ormandy's 1962 Philadelphia recording, as Brusilow is ideal for me in this music, & the same is true for Ormandy's 1953 recording--see links below). So, in my opinion, Markevitch is the Russian conductor of choice in this very Russian music. Indeed, if I were pressed to pick just one recording to take with me to my desert island, I'd be tempted to take Markevitch's. But you can compare the two for yourselves:

--Igor Markevitch, London Symphony Orchestra, Philips, 1962: once issued on Philips excellent Festivo LP series: 



--Kirill Kondrashin, Concertgebouw Orchestra, Philips, 1979: 




To my knowledge, there have been only two CD releases of Markevitch's Philips recording, both issued in Japan:

https://www.amazon.co.jp/R-コルサコフ-交響...V9YTYCCA35T&psc=1&refRID=R5M1N8Q6BV9YTYCCA35T
https://www.amazon.co.jp/リムスキー-コルサコ...msky-korsakov&qid=1559204569&s=gateway&sr=8-6

Pierre Monteux's 1957 Decca recording with the London Symphony Orchestra (& violinist Hugh Maguire) is another one of my top picks. As I prefer Monteux to Beecham, whose reading is a 'classic', but for some reason I never seem to reach for it anymore. There's also a San Francisco S.O. recording from Monteux made in 1942 on RCA Victor that is arguably more dynamic, but it doesn't have nearly as good sound quality (nor is the orchestra as fine as the LSO).

--Monteux, London Symphony Orchstra, Decca, 1957 (judging by the fullness of sound on the RCA Victor LP recording linked below, the CD remasters haven't done justice to the original LP recording: so, if you're interested, you had better sample the CD first; although I've not heard the recent Praga "Genuine Stereo Lab" remaster--see below):














https://www.amazon.com/Rimsky-Korsa...+monteux+rimsky&qid=1559242240&s=music&sr=1-4
https://www.amazon.com/Korsakov-Rim...+monteux+rimsky&qid=1559177954&s=music&sr=1-6
ETC.

Monteux, San Francisco, RCA Victor, 1941: 




https://www.amazon.com/Scheherazade...+monteux+rimsky&qid=1559177954&s=music&sr=1-2

--Here too is a link to Sir Thomas Beecham's 1957 EMI recording, with the Royal Philharmonic Orchestra. Interestingly, Beecham worked with the Ballets Russes for their 1913 London season, conducting his own orchestra, the Beecham Symphony Orchestra, and sharing conducting duties with Monteux: 




Throughout his career, Ernest Ansermet was closely associated with Russian (& French) music, and made four recordings of Scheherazade, in total: two Decca recordings with the Orchestre de la Suisse Romande, from 1957 and 1960, along with an earlier Decca recording from 1950 with the Orchestre la Société des Concerts du Conservatoire, and one from 1955, with the Orchestre de la Société des Concerts du Conservatoire Paris (a different orchestra). I've only heard Ansermet's 1960 Swiss recording myself. We shouldn't forget that not only did Ansermet meet both Debussy & Ravel, and discuss their music with them, but he also maintained a lifelong friendship with Igor Stravinsky, who he first met when Stravinsky was exiled in Switzerland during WW1. Of course, Stravinsky himself knew a thing or two about achieving a huge variety of orchestral colors, having been a student of Rimsky-Korsakov's. So the two likely discussed Stravinsky's teacher, and possibly Scheherazade. IMO, Ansermet's conducting of the score is first rate, however, the one negative is that the orchestra he founded, the Orchestre de la Suisse Romande doesn't quite match up to the standards set by the best orchestras on record. (The other much bigger negative for me is that Ansermet was a huge anti-semite, who collaborated with the Nazis, and not surprisingly was later boycotted in the new state of Israel.)

--Ansermet, L'Orchestre de la Suisse Romande, Decca, 1960, released 1961: 




Esoteric hybrid SACD (the 1960 Decca recording in excellently refurbished sound): 




Which brings me to the orchestra that I think must be heard in Scheherazade, above all, and that is the Philadelphia Orchestra! To my ears, they are ideal in this music. To date, the Philadelphians have made 4 recordings of Scheherazade, starting as early as 1927 with Leopold Stokowski and the last with Riccardo Muti in 1989. While the earliest recordings by Stokowski & later Ormandy are preferable, conducting-wise, Muti's version is very good, too, and comes in exceptional digital sound, which is a major plus in this music. I should also point out that I'm not always a huge fan of Ormandy's conducting (especially his later recordings), but must admit that Ormandy was exceptional in the Russian repertory, and his two early recordings of Scheherazade are very fine--especially the 1953 recording, which I'd consider another 'classic':

--Stokowski, Philadelphia Orchestra: Victor--1927, reissued by Biddulph, 1993: not on YT.
--Stokowski, Philadelphia Orchestra: Victor--1934, reissued by Cala, 1997: 



--Ormandy: Philadelphia Orchestra, Columbia Masterworks, 1953: 



--Ormandy, Philadelphia, Columbia/Odyssy/CBS/Sony, 1962, with violinist Anshel Brusilow: 



--Muti, Philadelphia Orchestra, EMI digital, 1989: 




As others have mentioned, Stokowski had a long association with this music. In addition to his Philadelphia recordings, there is a 1964 Decca LSO recording that is considered a 'classic'--reissued by Cala in 2003; a 1951 London Philharmonic EMI recording, reissued by Testament, 2003, and finally, a Royal Philharmonic Orchestra, RCA Red Seal LP, from 1975.

--Stokowski, London Symphony Orchestra, Decca, 1964 (& remastered by Cala): 









However, personally, Stokowski's conducting is so driven & unrelaxed that I can become exhausted listening to him. At times, I feel he overdoes things, and is too big a showman--at least, for my tastes (though I like his Debussy a lot).

Other notable conductors of Scheherazade:

--Leonard Bernstein, New York Philharmonic, 1960s: https://www.youtube.com/watch?
--Fritz Reiner, Chicago Symphony Orchestra, RCA Victor Red Seal, 1960: 



--Constantin Silvestri, Bournemouth S.O.: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Y-lK2WWGdgv=gvRv3LJMfMY&list=PLeFIyXVO5hEsu7BhY0BANAM6WXz5bEr2c
--Andre Cluytens, Paris Conservatoire Orchestra, 1952: 



--Yevgeny Svetlanov, USSR State Symphony Orchestra, Melodiya, 1967: 




As for digital era recordings, with the possible exception of Muti's already mentioned Philadelphia recording, I've found that none of them are preferable to my top picks above. However, I have enjoyed the following four digital recordings, and yes, it's very nice to have this wonderful music in good sound:

1. Yuri Termirkanov, New York Philharmonic, with violinist Glenn Dictorow, 1991, RCA:









2. Sergiu Celibidache, Stuggart RSO, 1982, DG: I prefer Celi's more exciting DG reading to his later Munich recording on EMI (but of course both readings have their eccentricities...):

DG: 



EMI: 




3. Valery Gergiev, Kirov Orchestra, Philips, 2002, hybrid SACD: 




4. Charles Dutoit, Orchestre Symphonique de Montreal, Decca, 1983: 




Hope that helps.


----------



## Larkenfield

Ansermet's famous Scheherazade:


----------



## Larkenfield

Big, epic, and majestic ...






… posted simply because I enjoyed it. Melodiya Records review: "Svetlanov's 1969 Scheherazade is clearly an historical object now, with getting on for forty years service. But in its brazen, sometimes indulgent and dramatic way it still has claims to be taken as seriously as other august Scheherazades," plus its share of sheer passion, drama and suspense. There is not just one way to do this imaginative and colorful work, no matter how fine the performance, and sometimes a new version can give it a fresh look.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

I posted this on another thread, but this is my exhaustive survey on a 5-star scale. Short story is that Kondrashin is the safest bet for your one and only Scheherazade.

Stokowski (1927) (Biddulph) (*****) - Stokowski at his best, combining passion, beauty, and an improvisatory interpretation that manages to sound just right. Although there is the inevitable constant hiss, the sound quality is surprisingly good for the period, with the lush Philadelphia sound vividly caught. This recording truly captures the essence of the work. There is an alternate take of the first movement which is even more committed than the original.

Stokowski (1934) (Cala) (*****) - The same collaboration as before with similarly magical results. Choice between this and the earlier Philadelphia recording will come down to taste. Interpretively, Stokowski is a bit more risk-taking at times in this later recording. I prefer the slightly more natural feel of the earlier version. The later recording does boast more clear sound, though the earlier recording has greater body and fullness accentuating the beauty of the Philadelphia strings.

Stokowski (1951) (Testament) (*****) - Stokowski's later versions find him slightly more wayward compared to the earlier Philadelphia accounts but still exhibiting his inimitable sensuousness. The 1951 Philharmonia account is simply ravishing with plenty of beauty, power, and gusto in abundance. The sound is somewhat muddy even for the time period, but it represents obvious improvement over the earlier accounts in presence, fullness and clarity.

Kondrashin (1979) (Philips) (*****) - This is my top choice in modern sound, supplying a perfect blend of color, excitement, and beauty. Given the excellent sound quality, it makes an ideal first introduction to the piece as Kondrashin's interpretation is one where everything sounds right. Herman Krebbers' lovely, authoritative account of the violin solo is a major bonus. The final movement is among the most powerful ever recorded.

Gergiev (2001) (Philips) (*****) - If you want unbridled passion, look no further. Gergiev's interpretation is seductive, impassioned and powerful in the best Russian tradition. This really knocks your socks off! Some find the interpretation too subjective, but for me Gergiev is one of the few to really capture the essence of the work in the same way as Stokowski's old Philadelphia accounts.

Beecham (1958) (EMI) (*****) - That Beecham touch and sensitivity works its wonders. Few if any have ever captured the ethereal dreaminess of the work like Beecham. Perhaps there is a certain lack of thrust and power compared to some others, but taken on its own merits the recording is essential listening. No consideration need be made for the 1958 sound, which is excellent and full-bodied.

Stokowski (1964) (Decca, Cala) (*****) - Stokowski is not quite as inspired as in 1951 and even a bit more mannered. However, with the vastly improved sound quality you get an invaluably vivid taste of Stokowski's way with the work. This stands among the handful of greatest stereo recordings in its thrust and passion. Essential for lovers of this work. If you value modern sound, this is the Stokowski version to get.

Van Beinum (1957) (Decca) (*****) - If you want a great vintage recording without the mannerisms of a Stokowski, look no further than Van Beinum. The performance is robust, exciting, romantic, and the Concertgebouw in their heyday perform gloriously. The sound quality lacks fullness and clarity in comparison to contemporary recordings from Beecham and Reiner, but this is more than made up for in the lush sounds emanating from the orchestra.

Previn (1968) (RCA) (*****) - Though his spacious, measured approach may not appeal to all tastes, Previn's earlier account blends poetic sensuousness with robust, overwhelming climaxes in an interpretation that is unerring in its inspired concentration and spontaneity. The London Symphony performs gloriously, and the sound quality is clear and full.

Goossens (1958) (Everest) (*****) - Another one of the more underrated Scheherazade recordings, this is one that truly captures the magical, evocative nature of the work with plenty of excitement and sensuousness in abundance. Goossens allows the music to unfold naturally, and many may prefer this approach to that of more celebrated readings. The Everest sound is a model of its kind in its brilliance and clarity.

Dobrowen (1953) (Archipel, Opus Kura) (*****) - Another great pre-stereo account in sound that is quite acceptable for the period. This is a red-blooded, passionate performance with plenty of beauty and nuance. The Philharmonia play as if their lives depend on it.

Golovanov (1950) (Russian Classic Collection) (****1/2) - You will not find a more brazenly intense version of the work than this. Indeed, some may find it too high octane and the interpretation a bit too heavy-handed. The virtuosic playing is incredible, with the beautiful violin solo by none other than a young David Oistrakh. This is one of those versions that falls into the category of those that pack an emotional wallop but are not meant for everyday listening. The 1950 sound is quite acceptable for the time.

Stokowski (1974) (RCA) (****1/2) - Stokowski returned to the recording studio a fifth time nearly half a century after his first effort. Again, the results are revelatory if not quite as inspired as in previous efforts. In terms of sound quality, none of his previous recordings match the clarity of this one, though the 1964 recording has plenty of body and is even more committed and thrilling.

Haitink (1972) (Philips) (****1/2) - A solid, central recommendation in excellent, full sound. The London Philharmonic plays gloriously, and the interpretation from Haitink is alert and dedicated if not quite as individual as some others.

Ormandy (1973) (RCA) (****1/2) - Ormandy's last recording in Philadelphia presents their best collaboration. The interpretation is rock solid and the playing is stupendous - lush, grand, tense, and with thrilling climaxes. Only a slight lack of forward impetus at times prevents this from rating higher.

Dorati (1958) (Mercury) (****1/2) - From the opening bars is it apparent that Dorati understands the sensuous nature of the work. This is one of the most exciting, rapturous of versions, recorded in excellent vintage Mercury sound. Things are taken somewhat on the quick side, and there is a relative lack of tonal opulence in the strings.

Reiner (1960) (RCA) (****1/2) - Arguably the most celebrated modern recording, particularly among audiophiles. However, on my list it falls short of that acclaim. No doubt the playing and sound quality are spectacular. However, despite its brilliance I get the feeling that this could be a performance of any orchestral work. Everything is done with great efficiency, but I fail to hear the sensuous spirit of Scheherazade come through as it does with those listed above.

Mackerras (1990) (Telarc) (****1/2) - This recording marries ethereal beauty with powerful attack in sound that is a marvel of clarity. The brass playing in particular is the most impressive of any Scheherazade recording I know. My only quibble with this interpretation is that in its clarity and perfection it misses some of the sensuous passion of others. As impressive an account as it is, I wouldn't want it to be my only version.

Matacic (1958) (EMI, Testament) (****) - Another great recording from the 1950s that captures the evocative magic of Scheherazade. The Philharmonia play beautifully, and the sound is good for the period. The interpretation may strike some as relatively pedestrian, but the music speaks in such a way as to make this a worthy choice.

Stokowski (1962) (Guild) (****) – Any Stokowski recording of this work is going to be worth a listen, and this live recording certainly displays his flair and mastery of the score, if a bit more mannered and contorted as his later versions tended to be. However, even though the Philadelphia Orchestra is on top form the recording quality and performance itself are not competitive with his other versions.

Ansermet (1948) (Dutton) (****) – The extra flexibility and panache of Ansermet’s earliest recording as compared to his later ones is pure gain. Despite its age the sound quality is very full and atmospheric though obviously more limited than the 1960 Decca recording.

Gaubert (1928-29) (Serie Contrepoint, Columbia 78) (****) - A virtuosic reading in surprisingly clear sound. Though the reading is on the fast side, the musicality is undeniable, exhibiting a romanticism and panache you don't find too often these days.

Silvestri (1967) (EMI, Royal Classics) (****) - Silvestri paces everything just right, with plenty of excitement in abundance even though the Bournemouth Symphony cannot match others in virtuosity. The sound is clear though has a certain cavernous quality.

Ormandy (1953) (Sony) (****) - Though Ormandy still shows traces of deliberateness, this account shows him and the Philadelphia Orchestra in much better form than in their later efforts. Things progress quite naturally and with plenty of excitement, virtuosity, and poetry in abundance. The sound is very decent mono. Unfortunately this has never made it onto CD.

Muti (1983) (EMI) (****) - Muti goes for broke in the first movement in an interpretation which may strike some as even too thrustful though certainly lush and impressive, enhanced by excellent, clear sound. The rest of the performance settles down a bit with plenty of sensuousness if missing the last ounce of inspiration.

Karajan (1967) (DG) (****) - This scores as an above-average effort due to the typical Karajan/Berlin lushness which highlights the ethereal beauty of the work. There is a certain lack of bite and excitement - perhaps even a bit of German heaviness at times - but those prioritizing beautiful sound will not be disappointed. Michel Schwalbe's violin solo is among the most beautiful in the catalogue.

Ansermet (1960) (Decca) (****) - A very beautiful vintage performance, though quite a bit on the careful side. Adherents of this performance see it as all the more evocative for its want of thrust and momentum. For me this is what I would classify more as a straight-forward, no-nonsense reading.

Gould (1955) (RCA LP) (***1/2) - Gould serves up a sort of "Stokowski-light" interpretation. The results are not always entirely convincing, but it is a lush, free-wheeling reading with plenty of exciting moments. The sound is decent 1950's quality. This has not been released on CD.

Chailly (1994) (Decca) (***1/2) - Some lush, passionate playing from the Concertgebouw and excellent sound make this a solid version, though Chailly is not without a few distracting interpretive choices.

Temirkanov (1993) (RCA) (***1/2) - Though not quite as distinctive or nuanced as others, this is a solid performance in excellent sound. The interpretation is sensitive if not quite evoking the magic of, say, a Beecham. This issue will appeal to those wanting an idiomatic reading without too much interpretive fuss.

Monteux (1942) (RCA, Archipel) (***1/2) - Robust, exciting performance, though played at times terribly fast. Nevertheless it packs a dramatic punch. The 1942 sound is acceptable for the period though obviously no match for Monteux's later account.

Ashkenazy (1987) (Decca) (***1/2) - This is a lush, romantic reading in opulent sound. Ashkenazy's interpretation is sensitive even if at times there is a certain want of excitement. Overall this makes for a solid modern, digital choice.

Jansons (1988) (EMI) (***1/2) - There is plenty of sensuous poetry in this performance that avoids any excess of dramatic impact. Though this will not appeal to all tastes, there is a singularness of purpose that makes it worthy of consideration, particularly given the clear, beautiful sound quality.

Previn (1981) (Philips) (***1/2) - While no match for Previn's earlier effort, this Vienna Philharmonic traversal nevertheless stands as a solid performance in excellent sound. Everything is judged and paced well if lacking a certain amount of impetus and inspiration.

Fricsay (1956) (DG, Beulah) (***1/2) - A very sensitive, beautiful interpretation, though a little on the cool side. The first movement in particular lacks in momentum. The Berlin Philharmonic in its heyday displays plenty of color and body, though the mono recording lacks presence and body.

Rostropovich (1974) (EMI/Warner) (***1/2) – Much of this interpretation is somewhat on the slow side, even plodding at times, yet the final movement is quite thrilling. Rostropovich maintains a keen sense of phrasing throughout with lush playing from the Orchestre de Paris.

Ansermet (1954) (Decca, EMI) (***1/2) – This is taken at a much quicker pace than Ansermet’s later recording, which at times serves only to accentuate the straight-forward nature of the reading. Though it lacks the later recording’s more ethereal beauty and is rather dryly recorded, this one has a bit more drama, flow, and dash.

Monteux (1957) (Decca, RCA) (***1/2) - Monteux's phrasing is sensitive and admirable though missing the passion of his earlier version. The sound is adequate though not up to the standards of the best from the period.

Bernstein (1959) (Sony) (***1/2) - Although the New York Philharmonic plays brilliantly at times, the interpretation is too deliberate and self-conscious. You miss the free-flowing nature of the best readings. The last two movements fare better. The sound quality is bright and detailed, but there is a constant hiss present.

Kletzki (1960) (Classics for Pleasure) (***1/2) - Lovingly molded interpretation, beautifully played by the Philharmonia, though this is not a performance that will knock your socks off. The sound is adequate but no match for contemporaries like Reiner and Beecham.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

Leinsdorf (1960) (EMI, Urania) (***) – The biggest selling point for this recording is the luscious Capitol sound, offering excellent clarity and accentuating the exquisite playing of the soloist. Otherwise the performance is not particularly distinctive, though there are moments of beauty and excitement.

Bakels (2003) (BIS) (***) - Competent if unspectacular performance. Strong points in its favor include a lovely violin solo, clear, opulent sound, and an exciting final movement.

Ormandy (1962) (Sony) (***) - The first thing that jumps out at you is the ravishing violin solo from Anshel Brusilow. This is a very sensitive reading, and the Philadephia Orchestra is second to none in brilliance and execution. However, Ormandy is often quite restrained and even metronomical, and this is not a performance for those looking for passion and thrust. The sound quality is very good for the period.

Scherchen (1958) (Westminster) (***) - Scherchen is never boring, and this recording is full of passion and moments of electricity. However, there are plenty of interpretive choices that feel forced and disrupt the natural continuity of the work. In addition, the sound is substandard and the playing often scrappy.

Dutoit (1990) (Decca) (***) - This is an under-powered performance to be sure. However, it carries appeal for those who prefer a more gentle interpretation and value beauty of sound.

Jarvi (1987) (Chandos) (***) - Another fairly careful reading that emphasizes the ethereal beauty of the work and downplays the more dramatic aspects. The approach is enhanced by the excellent sound quality.

Boughton (1988) (Nimbus) (***) – Delicacy is the hallmark of this performance, with contained lushness and beautifully sensitive phrasing, if a bit on the precious side, in a clear recording.

Skripka (2014) (EMG) (***) – These Moscow forces supply a strong, conventional interpretation that qualifies as a solid if not spectacular version.

Wordsworth (1993) (RPO) (***) - Truly a middle-of-the-road recording. The sound quality is decent, the interpretation is conventional, and the performance strikes the right chords without being particularly distinguished.

Masur (1999) (***) – Well-played, sensitive, if somewhat pedestrian and unremarkable rendition, featuring excellent sound and the New York Philharmonic on top form.

Mauceri (1987) (MCA, LSO) (***) - A relatively clean, competent performance in good, clear sound. There are some good climaxes and fine sensitivity, though at other times the interpretation is sluggish.

Serebrier (1999) (Reference Recordings) (***) - This is taken at a deliberately brisk pace. Certainly there are moments where the approach produces thrilling climaxes and attacks. However, we know from others that this work needs more room to breathe for the full effect to come through.

Litton (1988) (EMI) (**1/2) - Though the outer movements supply moments of excitement at the climaxes, this rendition is otherwise lacking in inspiration and any hint at the sensuousness nature of the work.

Fedoseyev (2005) (Melodiya) (**1/2) - A deliberately cool, detached approach that is saved only by an exciting account of the finale. Some see the reserved approach as refreshing. For me it goes too far in its attempt to eschew sentiment.

Schwarz (2011) (Naxos) (**1/2) - Though there are moments of lush phrasing, much of this performance is comparatively pedestrian. The sound is excellent, and this comes at budget price.

Mehta (1989) (Sony) (**1/2) - Despite some sensitive playing from the Israel Philharmonic, particularly the violin soloist, this is by and large an under-powered, underwhelming rendition.

Svetlanov (1969) (Melodiya) (**1/2) - Very cool, clean interpretation. For me, it is too uninvolved emotionally to warrant praise, but certainly there are some who will favor this approach.

Ozawa (1978) (DG) (**1/2) - A very tame, gentle approach. Though the phrasing is certainly sensitive at times, the interpretation is mostly faceless. The biggest selling point here is the sweet, sensuous playing of the violin soloist, Joseph Silverstein.

Dutoit (2010) (Onyx) (**) – Despite good presence and execution from the orchestra, as well as commendable sensitivity, this interpretation from Dutoit is less inspired than his earlier, already underpowered approach. 

Frémaux (1988) (Collins) (**) – Fairly bland, faceless reading aside from a few moments of virtuosic brilliance in the outer movements.

Immerseel (2005) (Harmonia Mundi) (**) - Not only is this a "period instrument" performance with minimal vibrato, but the interpretation is cool and four-square, an apparent attempt to "authentically" present the score without any hint of a performer subjecting his will. I suppose some may like this, even as a novelty, but for me it robs the music of its natural essence.

Spano (2001) (Telarc) (**) - Though lauded in some quarters, this is little more than a well-recorded run-through. The orchestra plays well, but the interpretation is quite mechanical and robotic.

Chung (1993) (DG) (**) - Generally competent performance in excellent sound, but mostly devoid of any passion, excitement, or flair.

Barenboim (1993) (Warner) (**) – Well-played account from the Chicago Symphony but lacks passion and inspiration.

Maazel (1986) (DG) (**) – Largely dull, by-the-numbers, uninspired recording. Though uncontroversial and somewhat sensitive in spots, everyone involved seems to just be going through the motions.

Svetlanov (1979) (EMI) (**) - Though there are some moments of poetry, this interpretation is so contorted towards the slow and plodding that the effect of the work is lost.

Celibidache (1984) (EMI) (**) - Eccentrically slow. Certainly there are some lovely moments, but overall the performance simply does not hold together.

Perlea (1957) (Vox, Tuxedo) (**) - Though there are a few moments of decipherable musicianship, this is generally a sluggish, uninspired performance given a mostly perfunctory interpretation. The sound is adequate, though fairly confined and cavernous.

Yuasa (1995) (EMI) (*1/2) - A fairly comatose reading. Only the final movement has any moments of life, but overall this comes across like a first rehearsal.


----------



## Larkenfield

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


----------



## Becca

Brahmsianhorn said:


> I posted this on another thread, but this is my exhaustive survey on a 5-star scale. Short story is that Kondrashin is the safest bet for your one and only Scheherazade.


I would probably have reached Scheherazade saturation by the time I had listened to no more than a quarter of these and would never want to hear it again!! That having been said, a couple of comments...

Stokowski/Decca - that was a 'Phase 4' recording which was a bit OTT in terms of stereo layout/separation. There is a collection of rehearsal excerpts available (on Spotify??) made during this recording - quite fascinating.

Reiner - Yea verily. I know that at least one person will vehemently disagree but that is my reaction to quite a bit of Reiner's work, i.e. technically brilliant but...

Of the half dozen that I am familiar with, I go with Gergiev.


----------



## DavidA

I'd say beecham. he brings the tired old lady to life better than anyone.


----------



## Larkenfield

Beecham's recording with the Royal Philharmonic:




Only 80 more to go before Scheherazade drops 
dead of old age. hehe


----------



## Heck148

Scheherazade is a work that lives or dies by the soloists....start with the Concertmeister/mistress, clarinet, bassoon, flute, oboe, etc....some major solo work here....
I love the old Stoki/PhilaOrch recording, some great, legendary musicians at work [Mischakoff (??), Kincaid, Tabuteau, Bonade, Guetter, Horner, etc]

for more modern versions:
Reiner/CSO - great solo work all-around; CM Sidney Harth makes a splendid story-teller....btw, the final mvt was recorded on a single take...straight thru, no need for retake.
Ormandy/Phila - great solo work. this is the repertoire at which Ormandy excelled, and his orchestra delivers beautifully.


----------



## Josquin13

If anyone's interested, the Markevitch LSO Philips "Festivo" recording that was my top choice among Scheherazade recordings by Russian conductors (in my earlier post) has been reissued (outside of Japan). The Australian Eloquence label released the recording on July 19, 2019, and it comes coupled with a fine performance of Rimsky-Korsakov's Capriccio espagnol: https://www.prestomusic.com/classic...kov-scheherazade-capriccio-espagnol#tracklist.


----------



## Guest

Ansermet/OSR/Decca


----------



## staxomega

Brahmsianhorn said:


> list


Impressive survey, one you didn't mention Pavel Kogan with the Moscow State Symphony Orchestra. This is a boldly Russian performance.


----------



## DavidA

Brahmsianhorn said:


> I posted this on another thread, but this is my exhaustive survey on a 5-star scale.
> 
> .


Just couldn't imagine anyone listening to this number of Scheherazades without dropping dead! But well done! You get a VC for persistence anyone! Of the ones I have I would agree Kondrashin would suit anyone.
Beecham has more magic than anyone
Stokowski is worth hearing in the Phase 4 recording
Karajan is pretty good but this was made with the DG accountants in mind, not because it was a particular Karajan speciality. But you won't go wrong with it as the BPO playing is special.


----------



## Geoff48

*Pro*

Scheherezade was one of the first records I bought after buying a bsr autochanger to replace the old 78 turntable in my parents RGD radiogram. As a treat I was allowed to purchase four records from a special offer in the paper. I can't remember the orchestra, only that it didn't exist at least under the name shown on the label. With nothing to compare it to I was very impressed with the music.Latera when funds permitted I acquired a Saga Recording by Nathan Rachlin and realised how much better the music could sound with a decent orchestra. And somehow I also acquired Kempe with Loveday, a little serious and Germanic, and Pierre Monteux with Hugh Maguire which is still my benchmark recording. I prefer it to his earlier San Francisco mono version although I may be in the minority.
After time passed and money became less of a problem I seemed to collect many versions on CD often as part of large boxes. Somehow this was one work which seemed difficult to conduct badly. And most of them gave and still give me great pleasure. Of course there has to be an exception, Celibidache. With him the music dawdles, there are beautiful moments but somehow he destroys any tension in what is a dramatic symphonic suite.
So to conclude, my favourite is still Monteux now on CD but I am listening to Silvestri with the Bournemouth Symphony Orchestra, a partnership I often heard live, and still very good even if the Studio 2 spectacular recording has dated somewhat. 
And I guess this is one advantage of the large bargain boxes, the opportunity to revisit recordings of the past, not always the most obvious ones, and remember how good they seemed and still are. And so cheaply particularly if bought from Amazon Marketplace.


----------



## Allegro Con Brio

My absolute favorite is Gergiev. He and his players go for broke and the results are outrageously fun. He’s very free over rhythms, rubato, phrasing, etc. but I think Scheherazade at its heart is a flashy orchestral showpiece that is meant to delight and beguile and I think formal seriousness is out of place here, which is why I really don’t like the famous Reiner - dry and analytical doesn’t cut it for me here. Other great ones include Kondrashin (intense as hell) and Beecham (underpowered but glittery, elfin, and exotic in the best Beecham way).


----------



## Animal the Drummer

I have "first recording loyalty" to von Matacic's performance, plus he was a distant relative (my grandfather's cousin). Fortunately it is mostly a good performance, after a slightly bloodless opening. I also like Beecham though the sound is rather elderly.


----------



## Brahmsian Colors

I still get the greatest enjoyment from Beecham/Royal Philharmonic on EMI and Stokowski/London Symphony on London Phase 4.


----------



## questor

i heard a cd copy version of scheherazade with some great harp playing but it didnt say which orchestra/conductor was doing it.
after searching for several available i couldnt find it. but was the 1 that i liked most. others were great but dont have any harp so are not what i liked most.
perhaps some1 could bring the link? 
i believe that 1 of the reasons angels are depicted playing a harp is because it is the instrument that makes us feel closest to heaven. 
remember that movie with clifton webb in which he is an angel and in 1 of the scenes he is playing st luis blues with a harp?


----------



## questor

am talking about this movie: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/For_Heaven's_Sake_(1950_film)


----------



## amfortas

I'm not nearly as familiar with the various versions as others here, but for what it's worth, the Reiner made me sit up and take notice. I can understand why it's highly touted.


----------



## questor

found it: 



i hope it shows it right.


----------



## questor

anyway, it is harp at its best, and serves as an example of what can we expect when harp is used to implement any music, like in the example of the version am looking for.


----------



## questor

end of the quest
after searching for the recording of scheherazade that i heard before, and finding a lot of recordings, it had to be the last 1 that is the 1 i like best.
it is this: 



.
all are good, but this has more play with the harp, which to me brings more the feeling that the work is intended for.
again, this is my feeling and what i like best, but it is up to each 1.


----------

