Discussion:
Munch/Boston NOT on CD yet
(too old to reply)
Mark Obert-Thorn
2007-05-25 15:00:42 UTC
Permalink
In light of the 40 CD series that Japanese RCA brought out (41 if you
count the bonus disc), I was wondering if anyone knew which Munch/BSO
commercial recordings have NOT yet been issued on CD. Of course, the
Japanese discs omitted some that are available here (Brahms PC 2 with
Rubinstein, Mozart Clarinet Cto with Goodman, etc.). And there are
some Munch/BSO commercial recordings which have come out on other
labels (the Blackwood 1st on Cedille, the Beethoven Gradulations
Minuet on Tahra, the Bruch VC 1 with Menuhin on Naxos, and the
forthcoming Tchaikovsky VC with Milstein, also on Naxos).

As far as I'm aware, the following Munch/BSO RCA items have not yet
been issued on CD:

Early mono versions of Schubert 2nd, Schumann 1st and Brahms 4th.

Stereo recordings: Haeiff Sym. # 2, Chopin PC # 1 with Graffman,
Tchaikovsky Francesca and the 1956 version of Romeo.

Are there any others that I'm not thinking of?

By the way, when I was researching in the RCA Archives many years ago,
I came across listings for two interesting unpublished Munch/Boston
recordings: the Schumann PC and the first movement only of the
Rachmaninoff PC # 3, both with Van Cliburn. Apparently, Cliburn
wanted to record the Schumann with Reiner, which caused not only this
version not to be issued, but Byron Janis' with Reiner, as well. (The
Janis version eventually did come out on LP in the early '80s, but the
Cliburn remains unissued. And Janis then went onto record the
complete Rachmaninoff 3rd with Munch.)

Mark Obert-Thorn
Bill Anderson
2007-05-25 15:06:02 UTC
Permalink
Hi Mark -
Post by Mark Obert-Thorn
Early mono versions of Schubert 2nd, Schumann 1st and Brahms 4th.
Not a true 'commercial issue', but the mono Brahms 4th is available
from Haydn House

-Bill
Russ and/or Martha Oppenheim
2007-05-25 15:34:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill Anderson
Hi Mark -
Post by Mark Obert-Thorn
Early mono versions of Schubert 2nd, Schumann 1st and Brahms 4th.
Stereo recordings: Haeiff Sym. # 2, Chopin PC # 1 with Graffman,
Tchaikovsky Francesca and the 1956 version of Romeo.
Not a true 'commercial issue', but the mono Brahms 4th is available
from Haydn House
-Bill
Chopin PF Concerto w/Graffman also available from Haydn House, and the
Tchaikovsky works.

Tchaikovsky works also restored by yours truly (cassette), and the Haieff
symphony.

Russ (not Martha)
Haydn House
2007-05-26 01:57:50 UTC
Permalink
Thank you , Russ! Our in-house transfer, wide-eyed-fanatique engineer,
Wilfrid Biscaye-Pryckre, also thanks you.
Pierre Paquin at www. HaydnHouse.com
P.S.
He's working on the Dorati Beeethoven Eroica and 8th sym with the Royal
Philharmonic. This should be out shortly
along with ever more E. Power Biggs.
Post by Russ and/or Martha Oppenheim
Post by Bill Anderson
Hi Mark -
Post by Mark Obert-Thorn
Early mono versions of Schubert 2nd, Schumann 1st and Brahms 4th.
Stereo recordings: Haeiff Sym. # 2, Chopin PC # 1 with Graffman,
Tchaikovsky Francesca and the 1956 version of Romeo.
Not a true 'commercial issue', but the mono Brahms 4th is available
from Haydn House
-Bill
Chopin PF Concerto w/Graffman also available from Haydn House, and the
Tchaikovsky works.
Tchaikovsky works also restored by yours truly (cassette), and the Haieff
symphony.
Russ (not Martha)
John Wilson
2007-05-26 14:08:42 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 25 May 2007 10:34:08 -0500, "Russ and/or Martha Oppenheim"
Post by Russ and/or Martha Oppenheim
Post by Bill Anderson
Hi Mark -
Post by Mark Obert-Thorn
Early mono versions of Schubert 2nd, Schumann 1st and Brahms 4th.
Stereo recordings: Haeiff Sym. # 2, Chopin PC # 1 with Graffman,
Tchaikovsky Francesca and the 1956 version of Romeo.
Not a true 'commercial issue', but the mono Brahms 4th is available
from Haydn House
-Bill
Chopin PF Concerto w/Graffman also available from Haydn House, and the
Tchaikovsky works.
I transferred the 1956 Romeo and Juliet and Francesca in my Idlewild
Reissues project. (IDLR-128) I will happily post them in anyone is
interested.

John
D***@aol.com
2007-05-25 20:37:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill Anderson
Hi Mark -
Post by Mark Obert-Thorn
Early mono versions of Schubert 2nd, Schumann 1st and Brahms 4th.
Not a true 'commercial issue', but the mono Brahms 4th is available
from Haydn House
I don't know that transfer, but can say that this earlier version is
very much worth knowing. As was so often true of Munch, the
performance differs from the stereo remake in a number of ways,
especially the third movement. It's wildly fast, so fast that it fit
on one side of the 45 rpm edition. I'm not claiming that it's good or
bad; just that it's astonishing and unlike the remake.

Don Tait
Walter Traprock
2007-05-25 15:25:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark Obert-Thorn
As far as I'm aware, the following Munch/BSO RCA items have not yet
Early mono versions of Schubert 2nd, Schumann 1st and Brahms 4th.
Erg. I should not have passed by the mono Schumann 1st at the library
sale for 50 cents because I thought I had the mono schumann 1st on
order from Japan.
D***@aol.com
2007-05-25 20:43:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Walter Traprock
Post by Mark Obert-Thorn
As far as I'm aware, the following Munch/BSO RCA items have not yet
Early mono versions of Schubert 2nd, Schumann 1st and Brahms 4th.
Erg. I should not have passed by the mono Schumann 1st at the library
sale for 50 cents because I thought I had the mono schumann 1st on
order from Japan.
I know that someone might have posted this information in the past,
but is the mono Schumann 1st available in Japan? If you can get it
that way it might be preferable to the LP (and 45s) because every
edition of those I've come across is a half-tone sharp. They play in
B, not B-Flat. Preferable, that is, if a CD had the correct pitch.

Of course, the higher pitch makes the LP (and 45s) even more
exciting -- if one doesn't notice the discrepancy.

Don Tait
td
2007-05-25 23:33:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by D***@aol.com
Post by Walter Traprock
Post by Mark Obert-Thorn
As far as I'm aware, the following Munch/BSO RCA items have not yet
Early mono versions of Schubert 2nd, Schumann 1st and Brahms 4th.
Erg. I should not have passed by the mono Schumann 1st at the library
sale for 50 cents because I thought I had the mono schumann 1st on
order from Japan.
I know that someone might have posted this information in the past,
but is the mono Schumann 1st available in Japan? If you can get it
that way it might be preferable to the LP (and 45s) because every
edition of those I've come across is a half-tone sharp. They play in
B, not B-Flat. Preferable, that is, if a CD had the correct pitch.
Of course, the higher pitch makes the LP (and 45s) even more
exciting -- if one doesn't notice the discrepancy.
Am I wrong in saying that the BSO tunes sharp? So much so that
Toscanini was uncomfortable conducting this ensemble?

It that is so, perhaps it isn't actually a half-tone, Don, but
something less?

TD
r***@usa.net
2007-05-26 03:25:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by td
Post by D***@aol.com
Post by Walter Traprock
Post by Mark Obert-Thorn
As far as I'm aware, the following Munch/BSO RCA items have not yet
Early mono versions of Schubert 2nd, Schumann 1st and Brahms 4th.
Erg. I should not have passed by the mono Schumann 1st at the library
sale for 50 cents because I thought I had the mono schumann 1st on
order from Japan.
I know that someone might have posted this information in the past,
but is the mono Schumann 1st available in Japan? If you can get it
that way it might be preferable to the LP (and 45s) because every
edition of those I've come across is a half-tone sharp. They play in
B, not B-Flat. Preferable, that is, if a CD had the correct pitch.
Of course, the higher pitch makes the LP (and 45s) even more
exciting -- if one doesn't notice the discrepancy.
Am I wrong in saying that the BSO tunes sharp? So much so that
Toscanini was uncomfortable conducting this ensemble?
It that is so, perhaps it isn't actually a half-tone, Don, but
something less?
TD
Don is correct -- all issues are a half-tone sharp. In the mid-50's
Irving Kolodin brought this to readers' attention in one of his LP
review books. The BSO did indeed tune high, but certainly nothing like
a half-step.

I believe I am correct in stating that Toscanini never conducted the
Boston Symphony. He admired the orchestra, but not Koussevitzky.

Ron Whitaker
Haydn House
2007-05-26 04:21:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by r***@usa.net
Don is correct -- all issues are a half-tone sharp. In the mid-50's
Irving Kolodin brought this to readers' attention in one of his LP
review books. The BSO did indeed tune high, but certainly nothing like
a half-step.
I believe I am correct in stating that Toscanini never conducted the
Boston Symphony. He admired the orchestra, but not Koussevitzky.
Ron Whitaker
Peut être Toscanini était un jalou. Il portait toujours "une crotte" sur le
coeur.
After all, the NBC SYM had a raw but precise, meat-grinding, vibrato-filled
effect about it, uninviting, dead, antiseptic, downright unpleasant, and,
according to consensus, Toscanini LIKED it. Had Toscanini been a bit more
friendly as opposed to being a constant pain in the ass, Koussy might have
invited AT to conduct the BSO in Symphony Hall, Boston.
Did AT and the NBCSO ever play in Boston, even for the famous 1950 AT coast
to coast tour? No! I wonder why.
As for correct pitch, all our releases of earlier Munch have been corected
by our team of musically, well-informed engineers.

P.Paquin

HaydnHouse.com
D***@aol.com
2007-05-26 17:22:43 UTC
Permalink
Haydn House
2007-05-26 17:28:54 UTC
Permalink
edit<
Peut tre Toscanini tait un jalou. Il portait toujours "une crotte" sur le
coeur.
After all, the NBC SYM had a raw but precise, meat-grinding,
vibrato-filled
effect about it, uninviting, dead, antiseptic, downright unpleasant, and,
according to consensus, Toscanini LIKED it. Had Toscanini been a bit more
friendly as opposed to being a constant pain in the ass, Koussy might have
invited AT to conduct the BSO in Symphony Hall, Boston.
Did AT and the NBCSO ever play in Boston, even for the famous 1950 AT
coast
to coast tour? No! I wonder why[....]
As was pointed out in a later post, your assumption about the 1950
tour is wrong. Toscanini and the NBC SO did indeed perform in Boston.

As for blaming the bad feeling between Toscanini and Koussevitzky
entirely upon the former, you are also incorrect. William Primrose,
who knew and worked with them both, wrote the following about
Koussevitzky on page 96 of his memoir "Walk on the North Side":

"On one occasion I was supping with him at his home in Tanglewood
when an inept person asked him what he thought of Toscanini. The
answer was revealing, showing how much these conductors love each
other. Koussevitzky leaned back in his chair with a sort of puzzled
look on his face and his quizzical, inimitable smile and repeated
several times, using the Russian word for yes, 'Da, Toscanini, da, da.
Toscanini a great (pause) OPERA conductor.' That was a droll remark,
with the caesura perfectly timed."

It would seem that Toscanini's hostility toward Koussevitzky was
based upon what he considered Koussevitzky's faulty musicianship,
which he found impossible to forgive in any musician.

Don Tait

Glad to be corrected with more facts.

Paquin
Paul Goldstein
2007-05-26 17:38:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Haydn House
edit<
Peut =EAtre Toscanini =E9tait un jalou. Il portait toujours "une crotte" =
sur le
coeur.
After all, the NBC SYM had a raw but precise, meat-grinding, vibrato-fill=
ed
effect about it, =A0uninviting, dead, antiseptic, downright unpleasant, a=
nd,
according to consensus, Toscanini LIKED it. =A0 Had Toscanini been a bit =
more
friendly as opposed to being a constant pain in the ass, =A0Koussy might =
have
invited AT to conduct the BSO in Symphony Hall, Boston.
Did AT and the NBCSO ever play in Boston, =A0even for the famous 1950 AT =
coast
to coast tour? =A0 =A0No! =A0I wonder why[....]
As was pointed out in a later post, your assumption about the 1950
tour is wrong. Toscanini and the NBC SO did indeed perform in Boston.
As for blaming the bad feeling between Toscanini and Koussevitzky
entirely upon the former, you are also incorrect. William Primrose,
who knew and worked with them both, wrote the following about
"On one occasion I was supping with him at his home in Tanglewood
when an inept person asked him what he thought of Toscanini. The
answer was revealing, showing how much these conductors love each
other. Koussevitzky leaned back in his chair with a sort of puzzled
look on his face and his quizzical, inimitable smile and repeated
several times, using the Russian word for yes, 'Da, Toscanini, da, da.
Toscanini a great (pause) OPERA conductor.' That was a droll remark,
with the caesura perfectly timed."
It would seem that Toscanini's hostility toward Koussevitzky was
based upon what he considered Koussevitzky's faulty musicianship,
which he found impossible to forgive in any musician.
Fortunately, such feuds are ancient history now, and we can enjoy the
considerable merits of both Maestri.
D***@aol.com
2007-05-26 17:46:33 UTC
Permalink
On May 26, 12:38?pm, Paul Goldstein <***@newsguy.com> wrote:

(edit)
Post by Paul Goldstein
Fortunately, such feuds are ancient history now, and we can enjoy the
considerable merits of both Maestri.
How true.

Don Tait
td
2007-05-26 12:19:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by r***@usa.net
Post by td
Post by D***@aol.com
Post by Walter Traprock
Post by Mark Obert-Thorn
As far as I'm aware, the following Munch/BSO RCA items have not yet
Early mono versions of Schubert 2nd, Schumann 1st and Brahms 4th.
Erg. I should not have passed by the mono Schumann 1st at the library
sale for 50 cents because I thought I had the mono schumann 1st on
order from Japan.
I know that someone might have posted this information in the past,
but is the mono Schumann 1st available in Japan? If you can get it
that way it might be preferable to the LP (and 45s) because every
edition of those I've come across is a half-tone sharp. They play in
B, not B-Flat. Preferable, that is, if a CD had the correct pitch.
Of course, the higher pitch makes the LP (and 45s) even more
exciting -- if one doesn't notice the discrepancy.
Am I wrong in saying that the BSO tunes sharp? So much so that
Toscanini was uncomfortable conducting this ensemble?
It that is so, perhaps it isn't actually a half-tone, Don, but
something less?
TD
Don is correct -- all issues are a half-tone sharp. In the mid-50's
Irving Kolodin brought this to readers' attention in one of his LP
review books. The BSO did indeed tune high, but certainly nothing like
a half-step.
I believe I am correct in stating that Toscanini never conducted the
Boston Symphony. He admired the orchestra, but not Koussevitzky.
I think you'll find that the sticking point was their sharp tuning.

TD
John Wilson
2007-05-26 13:56:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by r***@usa.net
Post by td
Am I wrong in saying that the BSO tunes sharp? So much so that
Toscanini was uncomfortable conducting this ensemble?
It that is so, perhaps it isn't actually a half-tone, Don, but
something less?
TD
Don is correct -- all issues are a half-tone sharp. In the mid-50's
Irving Kolodin brought this to readers' attention in one of his LP
review books. The BSO did indeed tune high, but certainly nothing like
a half-step.
I believe I am correct in stating that Toscanini never conducted the
Boston Symphony. He admired the orchestra, but not Koussevitzky.
Yes, absolutely correct. Toscanini never conducted the BSO before or
after Koussevitzky. However he and the NBC SO performed in Boston
Symphony Hall.

John
D***@aol.com
2007-05-26 17:06:18 UTC
Permalink
Eric Grunin
2007-05-26 03:26:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by td
Post by D***@aol.com
Post by Walter Traprock
Post by Mark Obert-Thorn
As far as I'm aware, the following Munch/BSO RCA items have not yet
Early mono versions of Schubert 2nd, Schumann 1st and Brahms 4th.
Erg. I should not have passed by the mono Schumann 1st at the library
sale for 50 cents because I thought I had the mono schumann 1st on
order from Japan.
I know that someone might have posted this information in the past,
but is the mono Schumann 1st available in Japan? If you can get it
that way it might be preferable to the LP (and 45s) because every
edition of those I've come across is a half-tone sharp. They play in
B, not B-Flat. Preferable, that is, if a CD had the correct pitch.
Of course, the higher pitch makes the LP (and 45s) even more
exciting -- if one doesn't notice the discrepancy.
Am I wrong in saying that the BSO tunes sharp? So much so that
Toscanini was uncomfortable conducting this ensemble?
It that is so, perhaps it isn't actually a half-tone, Don, but
something less?
TD- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
As of the 70s, the BSO had been A444 for some decades. Don't know if
they still are.

Regards,
Eric Grunin
www.grunin.com/eroica
Russ and/or Martha Oppenheim
2007-05-26 03:34:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by td
Post by D***@aol.com
Post by Mark Obert-Thorn
As far as I'm aware, the following Munch/BSO RCA items have not yet
I know that someone might have posted this information in the past,
but is the mono Schumann 1st available in Japan? If you can get it
that way it might be preferable to the LP (and 45s) because every
edition of those I've come across is a half-tone sharp. They play in
B, not B-Flat. Preferable, that is, if a CD had the correct pitch.
Of course, the higher pitch makes the LP (and 45s) even more
exciting -- if one doesn't notice the discrepancy.
Am I wrong in saying that the BSO tunes sharp? So much so that
Toscanini was uncomfortable conducting this ensemble?
It that is so, perhaps it isn't actually a half-tone, Don, but
something less?
They tuned to A = 442 - 445Hz or thereabouts, I believe.

If a recording is wrongly pitched, why not just re-pitch it using most any
editing software (which would also yield the correct tempo).

Russ (not Martha)
D***@aol.com
2007-05-26 17:35:08 UTC
Permalink
j***@gmail.com
2007-05-25 16:22:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark Obert-Thorn
As far as I'm aware, the following Munch/BSO RCA items have not yet
Early mono versions of Schubert 2nd, Schumann 1st and Brahms 4th.
Stereo recordings: Haeiff Sym. # 2, Chopin PC # 1 with Graffman,
Tchaikovsky Francesca and the 1956 version of Romeo.
Are there any others that I'm not thinking of?
Mark Obert-Thorn
more info on the Haieff Symphonies on ROCD:

HAIEFF: Symphony No. 2. Symphony No. 3. STRAVINSKY: Jeu de cartes
Boston Symphony Orch/Charles Munch, cond.
ROCD

Of extraordinary interest to collectors is a private issue of
performances by Charles Munch and the Boston Symphony. Featured are
two symphonies by Siberian-born Alexei Haieff (1914-1994) who made his
career in the United States before settling in Rome in the '70's.
Haieff, influenced by Boulanger and Stravinsky, worked with two major
choreographers of the past century, won two Guggenheim Fellowships,
was awarded by the American Academy of Arts and Letters, had his music
performed by major conductors, and was a conductor himself (he led the
first broadcast of Stravinsky's Ebony Concerto). Yet today his music
is virtually forgotten (nothing by him is listed on the ArkivMusic
site). Critics of his time considered him to be a very skilled
composer and a very good craftsman. Munch conducted music of Haieff
carrying on Serge Koussevitzky's tradition of championing American
works, and made this recording of Symphony No. 2 for RCA (issued on
LSC 2352, coupled with Easley Blackwood's Symphony #1), out of print
for many years. Symphony No. 3 is heard in a broadcast of the premiere
performance. There's a good reason why Haieff's orchestral music isn't
heard today-it doesn't have much to say, in spite of the craft
displayed in its composition. Surely these vivid performances by Munch
and the Bostonians do what can be done for this music, which often
shows traces of Stravinsky, whose Jeu de cartes fills out this CD (a
dazzling performance!), from the RCA stereodisk where it was
incongruously coupled with Poulenc's Organ Concerto (LSC 2567)-also
deleted. This is a private CD issue; for information contact:
***@satx.rr.com

http://www.classicalcdreview.com/alfano.html
r***@usa.net
2007-05-26 03:59:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark Obert-Thorn
In light of the 40 CD series that Japanese RCA brought out (41 if you
count the bonus disc), I was wondering if anyone knew which Munch/BSO
commercial recordings have NOT yet been issued on CD. Of course, the
Japanese discs omitted some that are available here (Brahms PC 2 with
Rubinstein, Mozart Clarinet Cto with Goodman, etc.). And there are
some Munch/BSO commercial recordings which have come out on other
labels (the Blackwood 1st on Cedille, the Beethoven Gradulations
Minuet on Tahra, the Bruch VC 1 with Menuhin on Naxos, and the
forthcoming Tchaikovsky VC with Milstein, also on Naxos).
As far as I'm aware, the following Munch/BSO RCA items have not yet
Early mono versions of Schubert 2nd, Schumann 1st and Brahms 4th.
Stereo recordings: Haeiff Sym. # 2, Chopin PC # 1 with Graffman,
Tchaikovsky Francesca and the 1956 version of Romeo.
Are there any others that I'm not thinking of?
By the way, when I was researching in the RCA Archives many years ago,
I came across listings for two interesting unpublished Munch/Boston
recordings: the Schumann PC and the first movement only of the
Rachmaninoff PC # 3, both with Van Cliburn. Apparently, Cliburn
wanted to record the Schumann with Reiner, which caused not only this
version not to be issued, but Byron Janis' with Reiner, as well. (The
Janis version eventually did come out on LP in the early '80s, but the
Cliburn remains unissued. And Janis then went onto record the
complete Rachmaninoff 3rd with Munch.)
Mark Obert-Thorn
The Mendelssohn Violin Concerto with Jaime Laredo. The only issue I am
aware of is on LP: Victrola VIC/VICS 1033, recorded on Dec. 24, 1960.

Ron Whitaker
J***@msn.com
2007-05-26 11:54:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by r***@usa.net
Post by Mark Obert-Thorn
In light of the 40 CD series that Japanese RCA brought out (41 if you
count the bonus disc), I was wondering if anyone knew which Munch/BSO
commercial recordings have NOT yet been issued on CD. Of course, the
Japanese discs omitted some that are available here (Brahms PC 2 with
Rubinstein, Mozart Clarinet Cto with Goodman, etc.). And there are
some Munch/BSO commercial recordings which have come out on other
labels (the Blackwood 1st on Cedille, the Beethoven Gradulations
Minuet on Tahra, the Bruch VC 1 with Menuhin on Naxos, and the
forthcoming Tchaikovsky VC with Milstein, also on Naxos).
As far as I'm aware, the following Munch/BSO RCA items have not yet
Early mono versions of Schubert 2nd, Schumann 1st and Brahms 4th.
Stereo recordings: Haeiff Sym. # 2, Chopin PC # 1 with Graffman,
Tchaikovsky Francesca and the 1956 version of Romeo.
Are there any others that I'm not thinking of?
By the way, when I was researching in the RCA Archives many years ago,
I came across listings for two interesting unpublished Munch/Boston
recordings: the Schumann PC and the first movement only of the
Rachmaninoff PC # 3, both with Van Cliburn. Apparently, Cliburn
wanted to record the Schumann with Reiner, which caused not only this
version not to be issued, but Byron Janis' with Reiner, as well. (The
Janis version eventually did come out on LP in the early '80s, but the
Cliburn remains unissued. And Janis then went onto record the
complete Rachmaninoff 3rd with Munch.)
Mark Obert-Thorn
The Mendelssohn Violin Concerto with Jaime Laredo. The only issue I am
aware of is on LP: Victrola VIC/VICS 1033, recorded on Dec. 24, 1960.
Ron Whitaker- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
I know this sounds sacriligeous (being a non-techno-convert; and with
all the budding engineers out there), but if the master recordings of
Boston are tuned sharp (and I've heard and felt it over the years);
and that's the way they were played live; then don't fix it! Keep
your hands off! Let the hooples at home dabble with the pitch to
their hearts content. So many recordings are spoiled by the
intervention of "sound engineers" who have no musical aesthetic or
respect for the original material (however poorly or excellently
captured). If we all have such inborn musical engineering
sensibilities - leave it to the people at home to mess around with.
I'm still recovering from some great Markevitch performances (on cd
unfortunately) that were ruined by re-engineering idiots. Hauser
td
2007-05-26 12:22:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by J***@msn.com
Post by r***@usa.net
Post by Mark Obert-Thorn
In light of the 40 CD series that Japanese RCA brought out (41 if you
count the bonus disc), I was wondering if anyone knew which Munch/BSO
commercial recordings have NOT yet been issued on CD. Of course, the
Japanese discs omitted some that are available here (Brahms PC 2 with
Rubinstein, Mozart Clarinet Cto with Goodman, etc.). And there are
some Munch/BSO commercial recordings which have come out on other
labels (the Blackwood 1st on Cedille, the Beethoven Gradulations
Minuet on Tahra, the Bruch VC 1 with Menuhin on Naxos, and the
forthcoming Tchaikovsky VC with Milstein, also on Naxos).
As far as I'm aware, the following Munch/BSO RCA items have not yet
Early mono versions of Schubert 2nd, Schumann 1st and Brahms 4th.
Stereo recordings: Haeiff Sym. # 2, Chopin PC # 1 with Graffman,
Tchaikovsky Francesca and the 1956 version of Romeo.
Are there any others that I'm not thinking of?
By the way, when I was researching in the RCA Archives many years ago,
I came across listings for two interesting unpublished Munch/Boston
recordings: the Schumann PC and the first movement only of the
Rachmaninoff PC # 3, both with Van Cliburn. Apparently, Cliburn
wanted to record the Schumann with Reiner, which caused not only this
version not to be issued, but Byron Janis' with Reiner, as well. (The
Janis version eventually did come out on LP in the early '80s, but the
Cliburn remains unissued. And Janis then went onto record the
complete Rachmaninoff 3rd with Munch.)
Mark Obert-Thorn
The Mendelssohn Violin Concerto with Jaime Laredo. The only issue I am
aware of is on LP: Victrola VIC/VICS 1033, recorded on Dec. 24, 1960.
Ron Whitaker- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
I know this sounds sacriligeous (being a non-techno-convert; and with
all the budding engineers out there), but if the master recordings of
Boston are tuned sharp (and I've heard and felt it over the years);
and that's the way they were played live; then don't fix it! Keep
your hands off! Let the hooples at home dabble with the pitch to
their hearts content. So many recordings are spoiled by the
intervention of "sound engineers" who have no musical aesthetic or
respect for the original material (however poorly or excellently
captured). If we all have such inborn musical engineering
sensibilities - leave it to the people at home to mess around with.
I'm still recovering from some great Markevitch performances (on cd
unfortunately) that were ruined by re-engineering idiots.
Hear! Hear!

TD
Bob Harper
2007-05-26 13:19:52 UTC
Permalink
(snip)
Post by td
Post by J***@msn.com
I know this sounds sacriligeous (being a non-techno-convert; and with
all the budding engineers out there), but if the master recordings of
Boston are tuned sharp (and I've heard and felt it over the years);
and that's the way they were played live; then don't fix it! Keep
your hands off! Let the hooples at home dabble with the pitch to
their hearts content. So many recordings are spoiled by the
intervention of "sound engineers" who have no musical aesthetic or
respect for the original material (however poorly or excellently
captured). If we all have such inborn musical engineering
sensibilities - leave it to the people at home to mess around with.
I'm still recovering from some great Markevitch performances (on cd
unfortunately) that were ruined by re-engineering idiots.
Hear! Hear!
TD
The Mravinsky Shostakovich 8 from 1983 issued on Phillips was, according
to reviews, a half-tone sharp.
Two questions:
1. Did the orchestra play it this way, or was this simply a mastering
mistake?
2. If the latter, is the issue on Regis: RRC1250 correctly pitched?

Bob Harper
M***@gmail.com
2007-05-26 13:36:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bob Harper
The Mravinsky Shostakovich 8 from 1983 issued on Phillips was, according
to reviews, a half-tone sharp.
1. Did the orchestra play it this way, or was this simply a mastering
mistake?
2. If the latter, is the issue on Regis: RRC1250 correctly pitched?
The first movement pitch of the Regis matches most any other DSCH 8 in
my collection (escept my Mra 8 from '47 on JVC Japan, which is flat).

As for the other movements, the Regis pitch matches both my Previn/LSO
and Mravinsky/Leningrad on BBC.
Bob Harper
2007-05-26 13:52:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by M***@gmail.com
Post by Bob Harper
The Mravinsky Shostakovich 8 from 1983 issued on Phillips was, according
to reviews, a half-tone sharp.
1. Did the orchestra play it this way, or was this simply a mastering
mistake?
2. If the latter, is the issue on Regis: RRC1250 correctly pitched?
The first movement pitch of the Regis matches most any other DSCH 8 in
my collection (escept my Mra 8 from '47 on JVC Japan, which is flat).
As for the other movements, the Regis pitch matches both my Previn/LSO
and Mravinsky/Leningrad on BBC.
Thanks. I'll be ordering it, then.

Bob Harper
Sol L. Siegel
2007-05-26 16:44:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by M***@gmail.com
Post by Bob Harper
The Mravinsky Shostakovich 8 from 1983 issued on Phillips was, according
to reviews, a half-tone sharp.
1. Did the orchestra play it this way, or was this simply a mastering
mistake?
2. If the latter, is the issue on Regis: RRC1250 correctly pitched?
The first movement pitch of the Regis matches most any other DSCH 8 in
my collection (escept my Mra 8 from '47 on JVC Japan, which is flat).
As for the other movements, the Regis pitch matches both my Previn/LSO
and Mravinsky/Leningrad on BBC.
I have the '82 (that's when it was recorded) Mravinsky on Russian
Disc, properly pitched; the total timing is 61'36", and every movement
takes almost precisely 3 percent longer than on Philips. (Whether
Russian Disc actually transferred the tape at proper pitch or slowed
down a sharp copy is something I couldn't tell you.) If the Regis
matches this timing, then it should be okay.

FWIW, the Kenzo Amoh Mravinsky discography confirms that Russian Disc
and Philips are the same performance.

http://www32.ocn.ne.jp/~yemravinsky/discography.htm#Shostakovich

- Sol L. Siegel, Philadelphia, PA
"It may take a village to raise a child - but it only takes one idiot
to burn down the village."
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
Bob Harper
2007-05-26 18:27:18 UTC
Permalink
Sol L. Siegel wrote:
(snip)
Post by Sol L. Siegel
I have the '82 (that's when it was recorded) Mravinsky on Russian
Disc, properly pitched; the total timing is 61'36", and every movement
takes almost precisely 3 percent longer than on Philips. (Whether
Russian Disc actually transferred the tape at proper pitch or slowed
down a sharp copy is something I couldn't tell you.) If the Regis
matches this timing, then it should be okay.
FWIW, the Kenzo Amoh Mravinsky discography confirms that Russian Disc
and Philips are the same performance.
http://www32.ocn.ne.jp/~yemravinsky/discography.htm#Shostakovich
- Sol L. Siegel, Philadelphia, PA
"It may take a village to raise a child - but it only takes one idiot
to burn down the village."
Thanks. I wrote to Presto Classical, who have it on Regis; Ben wrote
back immediately (thanks!), and indeed the timings are 3% longer for
each movement. My order's on its way.

Bob Harper
Haydn House
2007-05-26 17:18:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by J***@msn.com
Post by r***@usa.net
Post by Mark Obert-Thorn
In light of the 40 CD series that Japanese RCA brought out (41 if you
count the bonus disc), I was wondering if anyone knew which Munch/BSO
commercial recordings have NOT yet been issued on CD. Of course, the
Japanese discs omitted some that are available here (Brahms PC 2 with
Rubinstein, Mozart Clarinet Cto with Goodman, etc.). And there are
some Munch/BSO commercial recordings which have come out on other
labels (the Blackwood 1st on Cedille, the Beethoven Gradulations
Minuet on Tahra, the Bruch VC 1 with Menuhin on Naxos, and the
forthcoming Tchaikovsky VC with Milstein, also on Naxos).
As far as I'm aware, the following Munch/BSO RCA items have not yet
Early mono versions of Schubert 2nd, Schumann 1st and Brahms 4th.
Stereo recordings: Haeiff Sym. # 2, Chopin PC # 1 with Graffman,
Tchaikovsky Francesca and the 1956 version of Romeo.
Are there any others that I'm not thinking of?
By the way, when I was researching in the RCA Archives many years ago,
I came across listings for two interesting unpublished Munch/Boston
recordings: the Schumann PC and the first movement only of the
Rachmaninoff PC # 3, both with Van Cliburn. Apparently, Cliburn
wanted to record the Schumann with Reiner, which caused not only this
version not to be issued, but Byron Janis' with Reiner, as well. (The
Janis version eventually did come out on LP in the early '80s, but the
Cliburn remains unissued. And Janis then went onto record the
complete Rachmaninoff 3rd with Munch.)
Mark Obert-Thorn
The Mendelssohn Violin Concerto with Jaime Laredo. The only issue I am
aware of is on LP: Victrola VIC/VICS 1033, recorded on Dec. 24, 1960.
Ron Whitaker- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
I know this sounds sacriligeous (being a non-techno-convert; and with
all the budding engineers out there), but if the master recordings of
Boston are tuned sharp (and I've heard and felt it over the years);
and that's the way they were played live; then don't fix it! Keep
your hands off! Let the hooples at home dabble with the pitch to
their hearts content. So many recordings are spoiled by the
intervention of "sound engineers" who have no musical aesthetic or
respect for the original material (however poorly or excellently
captured). If we all have such inborn musical engineering
sensibilities - leave it to the people at home to mess around with.
I'm still recovering from some great Markevitch performances (on cd
unfortunately) that were ruined by re-engineering idiots. Hauser
Hauser,

The master session parts were not tuned 1/2 step higher......most likely.
The variable could have been subsequent tape playback machines not
running at the correct speed when working master tape was fed into the
LP record cutter. (Please think of other similar varaialbles) Could be the
record cutter speed was off due "to a
good enough for govt work" mindset? Who knows....
Please remember that our "labor of love" attitude with our transfer work is
NOT an industry wide phenomenon. It never has been.
To understand fully how careless RCA Victor has been in the past, get a copy
of the
Chicago Symphony / Rodzinski Mendelssohn Scotch (sic) Symphony. You will
be shocked
at the level of carelessness in engineering while listening to this
recording.

Paquin
D***@aol.com
2007-05-26 18:07:30 UTC
Permalink
Haydn House
2007-05-26 20:52:22 UTC
Permalink
It was my copy of the LM 1053. An incredible pitch change 1/3 way thru the
first movement. I can't recall if the
the rest of movements were ok. I strongly suspect it was the working master
tape to make the LP back in the early 50's.

<***@aol.com> wrote in message news:***@u30g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
On May 26, 12:18?pm, "Haydn House" <***@comcast.net> wrote:

(edit)
Post by Haydn House
To understand fully how careless RCA Victor has been in the past, get a copy
of the
Chicago Symphony / Rodzinski Mendelssohn Scotch (sic) Symphony. You will
be shocked
at the level of carelessness in engineering while listening to this
recording.
Paquin
I'm curious. What do you have in mind? I'd love to know. I only have
the LP, LM-1053, but haven't played it in years. The 78s are fairly
scarce, I've found. (It was also in the CSO's 1991 12-CD Centennial
set. Frankly, I don't remember whether that came from RCA or a tape I
might have made of the LP.)

Don Tait

It was my copy of the LM 1053 - an early pressing. An incredible pitch
change 1/3 way thru the first movement. I can't recall if the
the rest of movements were ok. I strongly suspect it was the working master
tape to make the LP back in the early 50's.
Thomas Liebert
2007-05-26 20:59:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by D***@aol.com
(edit)
Post by Haydn House
To understand fully how careless RCA Victor has been in the past, get a copy
of the
Chicago Symphony / Rodzinski �Mendelssohn Scotch (sic) Symphony. � You will
be shocked
at the level of carelessness in engineering while listening to this
recording.
Paquin
I'm curious. What do you have in mind? I'd love to know. I only have
the LP, LM-1053, but haven't played it in years. The 78s are fairly
scarce, I've found. (It was also in the CSO's 1991 12-CD Centennial
set. Frankly, I don't remember whether that came from RCA or a tape I
might have made of the LP.)
Don Tait
Don,

The booklet for the Centennial set says, "The LP matrix of the
Mendelssohn was used except for the first movement, which was taken from
the LP because the master tape has developed a severe tape stretch, with
resultant pitch waver."
D***@aol.com
2007-05-27 17:21:54 UTC
Permalink
td
2007-05-26 20:56:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Haydn House
Post by J***@msn.com
Post by r***@usa.net
Post by Mark Obert-Thorn
In light of the 40 CD series that Japanese RCA brought out (41 if you
count the bonus disc), I was wondering if anyone knew which Munch/BSO
commercial recordings have NOT yet been issued on CD. Of course, the
Japanese discs omitted some that are available here (Brahms PC 2 with
Rubinstein, Mozart Clarinet Cto with Goodman, etc.). And there are
some Munch/BSO commercial recordings which have come out on other
labels (the Blackwood 1st on Cedille, the Beethoven Gradulations
Minuet on Tahra, the Bruch VC 1 with Menuhin on Naxos, and the
forthcoming Tchaikovsky VC with Milstein, also on Naxos).
As far as I'm aware, the following Munch/BSO RCA items have not yet
Early mono versions of Schubert 2nd, Schumann 1st and Brahms 4th.
Stereo recordings: Haeiff Sym. # 2, Chopin PC # 1 with Graffman,
Tchaikovsky Francesca and the 1956 version of Romeo.
Are there any others that I'm not thinking of?
By the way, when I was researching in the RCA Archives many years ago,
I came across listings for two interesting unpublished Munch/Boston
recordings: the Schumann PC and the first movement only of the
Rachmaninoff PC # 3, both with Van Cliburn. Apparently, Cliburn
wanted to record the Schumann with Reiner, which caused not only this
version not to be issued, but Byron Janis' with Reiner, as well. (The
Janis version eventually did come out on LP in the early '80s, but the
Cliburn remains unissued. And Janis then went onto record the
complete Rachmaninoff 3rd with Munch.)
Mark Obert-Thorn
The Mendelssohn Violin Concerto with Jaime Laredo. The only issue I am
aware of is on LP: Victrola VIC/VICS 1033, recorded on Dec. 24, 1960.
Ron Whitaker- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
I know this sounds sacriligeous (being a non-techno-convert; and with
all the budding engineers out there), but if the master recordings of
Boston are tuned sharp (and I've heard and felt it over the years);
and that's the way they were played live; then don't fix it! Keep
your hands off! Let the hooples at home dabble with the pitch to
their hearts content. So many recordings are spoiled by the
intervention of "sound engineers" who have no musical aesthetic or
respect for the original material (however poorly or excellently
captured). If we all have such inborn musical engineering
sensibilities - leave it to the people at home to mess around with.
I'm still recovering from some great Markevitch performances (on cd
unfortunately) that were ruined by re-engineering idiots. Hauser
Hauser,
The master session parts were not tuned 1/2 step higher......most likely.
The variable could have been subsequent tape playback machines not
running at the correct speed when working master tape was fed into the
LP record cutter. (Please think of other similar varaialbles) Could be the
record cutter speed was off due "to a
good enough for govt work" mindset? Who knows....
Please remember that our "labor of love" attitude with our transfer work is
NOT an industry wide phenomenon. It never has been.
To understand fully how careless RCA Victor has been in the past, get a copy
of the
Chicago Symphony / Rodzinski Mendelssohn Scotch (sic) Symphony. You will
be shocked
at the level of carelessness in engineering while listening to this
recording.
Don't know the record mentioned.

But the sweeping generalization is simply bullshit.

TD
Haydn House
2007-05-28 00:21:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by td
Post by Haydn House
Post by J***@msn.com
Post by r***@usa.net
Post by Mark Obert-Thorn
In light of the 40 CD series that Japanese RCA brought out (41 if you
count the bonus disc), I was wondering if anyone knew which Munch/BSO
commercial recordings have NOT yet been issued on CD. Of course, the
Japanese discs omitted some that are available here (Brahms PC 2 with
Rubinstein, Mozart Clarinet Cto with Goodman, etc.). And there are
some Munch/BSO commercial recordings which have come out on other
labels (the Blackwood 1st on Cedille, the Beethoven Gradulations
Minuet on Tahra, the Bruch VC 1 with Menuhin on Naxos, and the
forthcoming Tchaikovsky VC with Milstein, also on Naxos).
As far as I'm aware, the following Munch/BSO RCA items have not yet
Early mono versions of Schubert 2nd, Schumann 1st and Brahms 4th.
Stereo recordings: Haeiff Sym. # 2, Chopin PC # 1 with Graffman,
Tchaikovsky Francesca and the 1956 version of Romeo.
Are there any others that I'm not thinking of?
By the way, when I was researching in the RCA Archives many years ago,
I came across listings for two interesting unpublished Munch/Boston
recordings: the Schumann PC and the first movement only of the
Rachmaninoff PC # 3, both with Van Cliburn. Apparently, Cliburn
wanted to record the Schumann with Reiner, which caused not only this
version not to be issued, but Byron Janis' with Reiner, as well.
(The
Janis version eventually did come out on LP in the early '80s, but the
Cliburn remains unissued. And Janis then went onto record the
complete Rachmaninoff 3rd with Munch.)
Mark Obert-Thorn
The Mendelssohn Violin Concerto with Jaime Laredo. The only issue I am
aware of is on LP: Victrola VIC/VICS 1033, recorded on Dec. 24, 1960.
Ron Whitaker- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
I know this sounds sacriligeous (being a non-techno-convert; and with
all the budding engineers out there), but if the master recordings of
Boston are tuned sharp (and I've heard and felt it over the years);
and that's the way they were played live; then don't fix it! Keep
your hands off! Let the hooples at home dabble with the pitch to
their hearts content. So many recordings are spoiled by the
intervention of "sound engineers" who have no musical aesthetic or
respect for the original material (however poorly or excellently
captured). If we all have such inborn musical engineering
sensibilities - leave it to the people at home to mess around with.
I'm still recovering from some great Markevitch performances (on cd
unfortunately) that were ruined by re-engineering idiots. Hauser
Hauser,
The master session parts were not tuned 1/2 step higher......most likely.
The variable could have been subsequent tape playback machines not
running at the correct speed when working master tape was fed into the
LP record cutter. (Please think of other similar varaialbles) Could be the
record cutter speed was off due "to a
good enough for govt work" mindset? Who knows....
Please remember that our "labor of love" attitude with our transfer work is
NOT an industry wide phenomenon. It never has been.
To understand fully how careless RCA Victor has been in the past, get a copy
of the
Chicago Symphony / Rodzinski Mendelssohn Scotch (sic) Symphony. You will
be shocked
at the level of carelessness in engineering while listening to this
recording.
Don't know the record mentioned.
But the sweeping generalization is simply bullshit.
TD
????? Explain yourself, please.

PAP
td
2007-05-28 00:48:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Haydn House
Post by td
Post by Haydn House
Post by J***@msn.com
Post by r***@usa.net
Post by Mark Obert-Thorn
In light of the 40 CD series that Japanese RCA brought out (41 if you
count the bonus disc), I was wondering if anyone knew which Munch/BSO
commercial recordings have NOT yet been issued on CD. Of course, the
Japanese discs omitted some that are available here (Brahms PC 2 with
Rubinstein, Mozart Clarinet Cto with Goodman, etc.). And there are
some Munch/BSO commercial recordings which have come out on other
labels (the Blackwood 1st on Cedille, the Beethoven Gradulations
Minuet on Tahra, the Bruch VC 1 with Menuhin on Naxos, and the
forthcoming Tchaikovsky VC with Milstein, also on Naxos).
As far as I'm aware, the following Munch/BSO RCA items have not yet
Early mono versions of Schubert 2nd, Schumann 1st and Brahms 4th.
Stereo recordings: Haeiff Sym. # 2, Chopin PC # 1 with Graffman,
Tchaikovsky Francesca and the 1956 version of Romeo.
Are there any others that I'm not thinking of?
By the way, when I was researching in the RCA Archives many years ago,
I came across listings for two interesting unpublished Munch/Boston
recordings: the Schumann PC and the first movement only of the
Rachmaninoff PC # 3, both with Van Cliburn. Apparently, Cliburn
wanted to record the Schumann with Reiner, which caused not only this
version not to be issued, but Byron Janis' with Reiner, as well.
(The
Janis version eventually did come out on LP in the early '80s, but the
Cliburn remains unissued. And Janis then went onto record the
complete Rachmaninoff 3rd with Munch.)
Mark Obert-Thorn
The Mendelssohn Violin Concerto with Jaime Laredo. The only issue I am
aware of is on LP: Victrola VIC/VICS 1033, recorded on Dec. 24, 1960.
Ron Whitaker- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
I know this sounds sacriligeous (being a non-techno-convert; and with
all the budding engineers out there), but if the master recordings of
Boston are tuned sharp (and I've heard and felt it over the years);
and that's the way they were played live; then don't fix it! Keep
your hands off! Let the hooples at home dabble with the pitch to
their hearts content. So many recordings are spoiled by the
intervention of "sound engineers" who have no musical aesthetic or
respect for the original material (however poorly or excellently
captured). If we all have such inborn musical engineering
sensibilities - leave it to the people at home to mess around with.
I'm still recovering from some great Markevitch performances (on cd
unfortunately) that were ruined by re-engineering idiots. Hauser
Hauser,
The master session parts were not tuned 1/2 step higher......most likely.
The variable could have been subsequent tape playback machines not
running at the correct speed when working master tape was fed into the
LP record cutter. (Please think of other similar varaialbles) Could be the
record cutter speed was off due "to a
good enough for govt work" mindset? Who knows....
Please remember that our "labor of love" attitude with our transfer work is
NOT an industry wide phenomenon. It never has been.
To understand fully how careless RCA Victor has been in the past, get a copy
of the
Chicago Symphony / Rodzinski Mendelssohn Scotch (sic) Symphony. You will
be shocked
at the level of carelessness in engineering while listening to this
recording.
Don't know the record mentioned.
But the sweeping generalization is simply bullshit.
TD
????? Explain yourself, please.
I think I made myself perfectly clear.

TD
Haydn House
2007-05-28 00:57:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by td
Post by Haydn House
Post by td
Post by Haydn House
Post by J***@msn.com
Post by r***@usa.net
Post by Mark Obert-Thorn
In light of the 40 CD series that Japanese RCA brought out (41 if you
count the bonus disc), I was wondering if anyone knew which Munch/BSO
commercial recordings have NOT yet been issued on CD. Of course, the
Japanese discs omitted some that are available here (Brahms PC 2 with
Rubinstein, Mozart Clarinet Cto with Goodman, etc.). And there are
some Munch/BSO commercial recordings which have come out on other
labels (the Blackwood 1st on Cedille, the Beethoven Gradulations
Minuet on Tahra, the Bruch VC 1 with Menuhin on Naxos, and the
forthcoming Tchaikovsky VC with Milstein, also on Naxos).
As far as I'm aware, the following Munch/BSO RCA items have not yet
Early mono versions of Schubert 2nd, Schumann 1st and Brahms 4th.
Stereo recordings: Haeiff Sym. # 2, Chopin PC # 1 with Graffman,
Tchaikovsky Francesca and the 1956 version of Romeo.
Are there any others that I'm not thinking of?
By the way, when I was researching in the RCA Archives many years ago,
I came across listings for two interesting unpublished Munch/Boston
recordings: the Schumann PC and the first movement only of the
Rachmaninoff PC # 3, both with Van Cliburn. Apparently, Cliburn
wanted to record the Schumann with Reiner, which caused not only this
version not to be issued, but Byron Janis' with Reiner, as well.
(The
Janis version eventually did come out on LP in the early '80s,
but
the
Cliburn remains unissued. And Janis then went onto record the
complete Rachmaninoff 3rd with Munch.)
Mark Obert-Thorn
The Mendelssohn Violin Concerto with Jaime Laredo. The only issue I am
aware of is on LP: Victrola VIC/VICS 1033, recorded on Dec. 24, 1960.
Ron Whitaker- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
I know this sounds sacriligeous (being a non-techno-convert; and with
all the budding engineers out there), but if the master recordings of
Boston are tuned sharp (and I've heard and felt it over the years);
and that's the way they were played live; then don't fix it! Keep
your hands off! Let the hooples at home dabble with the pitch to
their hearts content. So many recordings are spoiled by the
intervention of "sound engineers" who have no musical aesthetic or
respect for the original material (however poorly or excellently
captured). If we all have such inborn musical engineering
sensibilities - leave it to the people at home to mess around with.
I'm still recovering from some great Markevitch performances (on cd
unfortunately) that were ruined by re-engineering idiots. Hauser
Hauser,
The master session parts were not tuned 1/2 step higher......most likely.
The variable could have been subsequent tape playback machines not
running at the correct speed when working master tape was fed into the
LP record cutter. (Please think of other similar varaialbles) Could
be
the
record cutter speed was off due "to a
good enough for govt work" mindset? Who knows....
Please remember that our "labor of love" attitude with our transfer
work
is
NOT an industry wide phenomenon. It never has been.
To understand fully how careless RCA Victor has been in the past, get
a
copy
of the
Chicago Symphony / Rodzinski Mendelssohn Scotch (sic) Symphony. You will
be shocked
at the level of carelessness in engineering while listening to this
recording.
Don't know the record mentioned.
But the sweeping generalization is simply bullshit.
TD
????? Explain yourself, please.
I think I made myself perfectly clear.
TD
Not at all, except for the fact that you've made yourself perfectly clear
as not being well informed on THIS topic.
Other topics? Why......yes!

PAP
td
2007-05-28 13:09:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Haydn House
Post by td
Post by Haydn House
Post by td
Post by Haydn House
Post by J***@msn.com
Post by r***@usa.net
Post by Mark Obert-Thorn
In light of the 40 CD series that Japanese RCA brought out (41 if you
count the bonus disc), I was wondering if anyone knew which Munch/BSO
commercial recordings have NOT yet been issued on CD. Of course, the
Japanese discs omitted some that are available here (Brahms PC 2 with
Rubinstein, Mozart Clarinet Cto with Goodman, etc.). And there are
some Munch/BSO commercial recordings which have come out on other
labels (the Blackwood 1st on Cedille, the Beethoven Gradulations
Minuet on Tahra, the Bruch VC 1 with Menuhin on Naxos, and the
forthcoming Tchaikovsky VC with Milstein, also on Naxos).
As far as I'm aware, the following Munch/BSO RCA items have not yet
Early mono versions of Schubert 2nd, Schumann 1st and Brahms 4th.
Stereo recordings: Haeiff Sym. # 2, Chopin PC # 1 with Graffman,
Tchaikovsky Francesca and the 1956 version of Romeo.
Are there any others that I'm not thinking of?
By the way, when I was researching in the RCA Archives many years
ago,
I came across listings for two interesting unpublished Munch/Boston
recordings: the Schumann PC and the first movement only of the
Rachmaninoff PC # 3, both with Van Cliburn. Apparently, Cliburn
wanted to record the Schumann with Reiner, which caused not only this
version not to be issued, but Byron Janis' with Reiner, as well.
(The
Janis version eventually did come out on LP in the early '80s,
but
the
Cliburn remains unissued. And Janis then went onto record the
complete Rachmaninoff 3rd with Munch.)
Mark Obert-Thorn
The Mendelssohn Violin Concerto with Jaime Laredo. The only issue I am
aware of is on LP: Victrola VIC/VICS 1033, recorded on Dec. 24, 1960.
Ron Whitaker- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
I know this sounds sacriligeous (being a non-techno-convert; and with
all the budding engineers out there), but if the master recordings of
Boston are tuned sharp (and I've heard and felt it over the years);
and that's the way they were played live; then don't fix it! Keep
your hands off! Let the hooples at home dabble with the pitch to
their hearts content. So many recordings are spoiled by the
intervention of "sound engineers" who have no musical aesthetic or
respect for the original material (however poorly or excellently
captured). If we all have such inborn musical engineering
sensibilities - leave it to the people at home to mess around with.
I'm still recovering from some great Markevitch performances (on cd
unfortunately) that were ruined by re-engineering idiots. Hauser
Hauser,
The master session parts were not tuned 1/2 step higher......most likely.
The variable could have been subsequent tape playback machines not
running at the correct speed when working master tape was fed into the
LP record cutter. (Please think of other similar varaialbles) Could
be
the
record cutter speed was off due "to a
good enough for govt work" mindset? Who knows....
Please remember that our "labor of love" attitude with our transfer
work
is
NOT an industry wide phenomenon. It never has been.
To understand fully how careless RCA Victor has been in the past, get
a
copy
of the
Chicago Symphony / Rodzinski Mendelssohn Scotch (sic) Symphony. You will
be shocked
at the level of carelessness in engineering while listening to this
recording.
Don't know the record mentioned.
But the sweeping generalization is simply bullshit.
TD
????? Explain yourself, please.
I think I made myself perfectly clear.
TD
Not at all, except for the fact that you've made yourself perfectly clear
as not being well informed on THIS topic.
This topic being?

The Rodzinski recording?

OR

The sweeping generalization as follows: "To understand fully how
careless RCA Victor HAS BEEN IN THE PAST(sic!), get a copy of the
Chicago Symphony / Rodzinski Mendelssohn Scotch Symphony. You will be
shocked at the level of carelessness in engineering."

What I am shocked at is not the recording in question, which I do not
know and am indifferent to, but rather your appalling lack of logic.
Since when do we draw general conclusions from one, or even two, or
even three examples?

RCA Victor has a long and distinguished reputation for sonic
excellence. THEY introduced most posters here to a great deal of the
music we know and love and in fabulous sound.

Sit in your corner, do what you like, but don't try to get your
reputation by pooping on RCA Victor. That dog won't fly!!!

TD
Haydn House
2007-05-29 00:41:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by td
Post by Haydn House
Post by td
Post by Haydn House
Post by td
Post by Haydn House
Post by J***@msn.com
Post by r***@usa.net
Post by Mark Obert-Thorn
In light of the 40 CD series that Japanese RCA brought out (41
if
you
count the bonus disc), I was wondering if anyone knew which
Munch/BSO
commercial recordings have NOT yet been issued on CD. Of
course,
the
Japanese discs omitted some that are available here (Brahms PC
2
with
Rubinstein, Mozart Clarinet Cto with Goodman, etc.). And
there
are
some Munch/BSO commercial recordings which have come out on other
labels (the Blackwood 1st on Cedille, the Beethoven Gradulations
Minuet on Tahra, the Bruch VC 1 with Menuhin on Naxos, and the
forthcoming Tchaikovsky VC with Milstein, also on Naxos).
As far as I'm aware, the following Munch/BSO RCA items have
not
yet
Early mono versions of Schubert 2nd, Schumann 1st and Brahms 4th.
Stereo recordings: Haeiff Sym. # 2, Chopin PC # 1 with Graffman,
Tchaikovsky Francesca and the 1956 version of Romeo.
Are there any others that I'm not thinking of?
By the way, when I was researching in the RCA Archives many years
ago,
I came across listings for two interesting unpublished Munch/Boston
recordings: the Schumann PC and the first movement only of the
Rachmaninoff PC # 3, both with Van Cliburn. Apparently, Cliburn
wanted to record the Schumann with Reiner, which caused not
only
this
version not to be issued, but Byron Janis' with Reiner, as well.
(The
Janis version eventually did come out on LP in the early '80s,
but
the
Cliburn remains unissued. And Janis then went onto record the
complete Rachmaninoff 3rd with Munch.)
Mark Obert-Thorn
The Mendelssohn Violin Concerto with Jaime Laredo. The only
issue I
am
aware of is on LP: Victrola VIC/VICS 1033, recorded on Dec. 24, 1960.
Ron Whitaker- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
I know this sounds sacriligeous (being a non-techno-convert; and with
all the budding engineers out there), but if the master
recordings
of
Boston are tuned sharp (and I've heard and felt it over the years);
and that's the way they were played live; then don't fix it!
Keep
your hands off! Let the hooples at home dabble with the pitch to
their hearts content. So many recordings are spoiled by the
intervention of "sound engineers" who have no musical aesthetic or
respect for the original material (however poorly or excellently
captured). If we all have such inborn musical engineering
sensibilities - leave it to the people at home to mess around with.
I'm still recovering from some great Markevitch performances (on cd
unfortunately) that were ruined by re-engineering idiots. Hauser
Hauser,
The master session parts were not tuned 1/2 step higher......most likely.
The variable could have been subsequent tape playback machines not
running at the correct speed when working master tape was fed into the
LP record cutter. (Please think of other similar varaialbles) Could
be
the
record cutter speed was off due "to a
good enough for govt work" mindset? Who knows....
Please remember that our "labor of love" attitude with our transfer
work
is
NOT an industry wide phenomenon. It never has been.
To understand fully how careless RCA Victor has been in the past, get
a
copy
of the
Chicago Symphony / Rodzinski Mendelssohn Scotch (sic) Symphony.
You
will
be shocked
at the level of carelessness in engineering while listening to this
recording.
Don't know the record mentioned.
But the sweeping generalization is simply bullshit.
TD
????? Explain yourself, please.
I think I made myself perfectly clear.
TD
Not at all, except for the fact that you've made yourself perfectly clear
as not being well informed on THIS topic.
This topic being?
The Rodzinski recording?
TD

You suffer from mental compression as RCA did sonically during this late 40s
early 50s era.
But you can't told and cannot do what I ask: LISTEN! Hence you shall
continue to be MY student.
I've alway been amazed at this refusal. With my help, I could move you from
few obviously flawed particulars
in order that you might grab hold of the truth of all. "Much learning can
be gained in an atmosphere of conflict."

PAP
td
2007-05-29 10:56:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Haydn House
Post by td
Post by Haydn House
Post by td
Post by Haydn House
Post by td
Post by Haydn House
Post by J***@msn.com
Post by r***@usa.net
Post by Mark Obert-Thorn
In light of the 40 CD series that Japanese RCA brought out (41
if
you
count the bonus disc), I was wondering if anyone knew which
Munch/BSO
commercial recordings have NOT yet been issued on CD. Of
course,
the
Japanese discs omitted some that are available here (Brahms PC
2
with
Rubinstein, Mozart Clarinet Cto with Goodman, etc.). And
there
are
some Munch/BSO commercial recordings which have come out on
other
labels (the Blackwood 1st on Cedille, the Beethoven
Gradulations
Minuet on Tahra, the Bruch VC 1 with Menuhin on Naxos, and the
forthcoming Tchaikovsky VC with Milstein, also on Naxos).
As far as I'm aware, the following Munch/BSO RCA items have
not
yet
Early mono versions of Schubert 2nd, Schumann 1st and Brahms
4th.
Stereo recordings: Haeiff Sym. # 2, Chopin PC # 1 with
Graffman,
Tchaikovsky Francesca and the 1956 version of Romeo.
Are there any others that I'm not thinking of?
By the way, when I was researching in the RCA Archives many
years
ago,
I came across listings for two interesting unpublished
Munch/Boston
recordings: the Schumann PC and the first movement only of the
Rachmaninoff PC # 3, both with Van Cliburn. Apparently,
Cliburn
wanted to record the Schumann with Reiner, which caused not
only
this
version not to be issued, but Byron Janis' with Reiner, as
well.
(The
Janis version eventually did come out on LP in the early '80s,
but
the
Cliburn remains unissued. And Janis then went onto record the
complete Rachmaninoff 3rd with Munch.)
Mark Obert-Thorn
The Mendelssohn Violin Concerto with Jaime Laredo. The only
issue I
am
aware of is on LP: Victrola VIC/VICS 1033, recorded on Dec. 24,
1960.
Ron Whitaker- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
I know this sounds sacriligeous (being a non-techno-convert; and with
all the budding engineers out there), but if the master
recordings
of
Boston are tuned sharp (and I've heard and felt it over the years);
and that's the way they were played live; then don't fix it!
Keep
your hands off! Let the hooples at home dabble with the pitch to
their hearts content. So many recordings are spoiled by the
intervention of "sound engineers" who have no musical aesthetic or
respect for the original material (however poorly or excellently
captured). If we all have such inborn musical engineering
sensibilities - leave it to the people at home to mess around with.
I'm still recovering from some great Markevitch performances (on cd
unfortunately) that were ruined by re-engineering idiots. Hauser
Hauser,
The master session parts were not tuned 1/2 step higher......most likely.
The variable could have been subsequent tape playback machines not
running at the correct speed when working master tape was fed into the
LP record cutter. (Please think of other similar varaialbles) Could
be
the
record cutter speed was off due "to a
good enough for govt work" mindset? Who knows....
Please remember that our "labor of love" attitude with our transfer
work
is
NOT an industry wide phenomenon. It never has been.
To understand fully how careless RCA Victor has been in the past, get
a
copy
of the
Chicago Symphony / Rodzinski Mendelssohn Scotch (sic) Symphony.
You
will
be shocked
at the level of carelessness in engineering while listening to this
recording.
Don't know the record mentioned.
But the sweeping generalization is simply bullshit.
TD
????? Explain yourself, please.
I think I made myself perfectly clear.
TD
Not at all, except for the fact that you've made yourself perfectly clear
as not being well informed on THIS topic.
This topic being?
The Rodzinski recording?
TD
You suffer from mental compression as RCA did sonically during this late 40s
early 50s era.
But you can't told and cannot do what I ask: LISTEN! Hence you shall
continue to be MY student.
I wouldn't be your student if you were Jesus, Mohammed, and Buddha all
roled into one.

Just try a logical statement for a change and get off your French soap-
box. This is America.

TD
Haydn House
2007-05-29 18:52:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by td
Post by Haydn House
You suffer from mental compression as RCA did sonically during this late 40s
early 50s era.
But you can't told and cannot do what I ask: LISTEN! Hence you shall
continue to be MY student.
PAP
I wouldn't be your student if you were Jesus, Mohammed, and Buddha all
roled into one.
Just try a logical statement for a change and get off your French soap-
box. This is America.
TD
Quid petis fili mi?
I don'd want you as a student either unless you acquire a bit of docility.
Since you REFUSE to do what I ask you will continue to be my student by
default.
And I have so much to teach you.


PAP
magister
td
2007-05-29 21:40:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Haydn House
Post by td
Post by Haydn House
You suffer from mental compression as RCA did sonically during this late 40s
early 50s era.
But you can't told and cannot do what I ask: LISTEN! Hence you shall
continue to be MY student.
PAP
I wouldn't be your student if you were Jesus, Mohammed, and Buddha all
roled into one.
Just try a logical statement for a change and get off your French soap-
box. This is America.
TD
Quid petis fili mi?
I don'd want you as a student either unless you acquire a bit of docility.
I have no interest in being docile with known pirates.

They are unconscionable scum.

Sorry if that isn't "docile" enough for you.

TD
J***@msn.com
2007-05-26 21:27:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Haydn House
Post by J***@msn.com
Post by r***@usa.net
Post by Mark Obert-Thorn
In light of the 40 CD series that Japanese RCA brought out (41 if you
count the bonus disc), I was wondering if anyone knew which Munch/BSO
commercial recordings have NOT yet been issued on CD. Of course, the
Japanese discs omitted some that are available here (Brahms PC 2 with
Rubinstein, Mozart Clarinet Cto with Goodman, etc.). And there are
some Munch/BSO commercial recordings which have come out on other
labels (the Blackwood 1st on Cedille, the Beethoven Gradulations
Minuet on Tahra, the Bruch VC 1 with Menuhin on Naxos, and the
forthcoming Tchaikovsky VC with Milstein, also on Naxos).
As far as I'm aware, the following Munch/BSO RCA items have not yet
Early mono versions of Schubert 2nd, Schumann 1st and Brahms 4th.
Stereo recordings: Haeiff Sym. # 2, Chopin PC # 1 with Graffman,
Tchaikovsky Francesca and the 1956 version of Romeo.
Are there any others that I'm not thinking of?
By the way, when I was researching in the RCA Archives many years ago,
I came across listings for two interesting unpublished Munch/Boston
recordings: the Schumann PC and the first movement only of the
Rachmaninoff PC # 3, both with Van Cliburn. Apparently, Cliburn
wanted to record the Schumann with Reiner, which caused not only this
version not to be issued, but Byron Janis' with Reiner, as well. (The
Janis version eventually did come out on LP in the early '80s, but the
Cliburn remains unissued. And Janis then went onto record the
complete Rachmaninoff 3rd with Munch.)
Mark Obert-Thorn
The Mendelssohn Violin Concerto with Jaime Laredo. The only issue I am
aware of is on LP: Victrola VIC/VICS 1033, recorded on Dec. 24, 1960.
Ron Whitaker- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
I know this sounds sacriligeous (being a non-techno-convert; and with
all the budding engineers out there), but if the master recordings of
Boston are tuned sharp (and I've heard and felt it over the years);
and that's the way they were played live; then don't fix it! Keep
your hands off! Let the hooples at home dabble with the pitch to
their hearts content. So many recordings are spoiled by the
intervention of "sound engineers" who have no musical aesthetic or
respect for the original material (however poorly or excellently
captured). If we all have such inborn musical engineering
sensibilities - leave it to the people at home to mess around with.
I'm still recovering from some great Markevitch performances (on cd
unfortunately) that were ruined by re-engineering idiots. Hauser
Hauser,
The master session parts were not tuned 1/2 step higher......most likely.
The variable could have been subsequent tape playback machines not
running at the correct speed when working master tape was fed into the
LP record cutter. (Please think of other similar varaialbles) Could be the
record cutter speed was off due "to a
good enough for govt work" mindset? Who knows....
Please remember that our "labor of love" attitude with our transfer work is
NOT an industry wide phenomenon. It never has been.
To understand fully how careless RCA Victor has been in the past, get a copy
of the
Chicago Symphony / Rodzinski Mendelssohn Scotch (sic) Symphony. You will
be shocked
at the level of carelessness in engineering while listening to this
recording.
Paquin
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Maybe I'm missing something here; RonW mentions Kolodin's reportage
(certainly ½ step high is audible - and I don't here that on old Munch
recordings); Gruin says they tune to 444 which is in line with what I
hear. Needless to say after collecting 15,000 records there are many
duds (Audio Fidelity forgets to turn the gain on and we get 10 seconds
of hardly audible music). In transferring and checking pitch on my
open reel broadcasts I am able to check the pitch of the transfers I
made (and I have the ears to do it). I have the Rodzinski disk in
question and can check it. However, my point is NOT dud disks but the
actual recording. If the orchestra plays 444 then record it in 444;
don't fotz with the pitch (nor many other variables - one frequent fun
item many "professional" engineers like to do it mess with the mid-
range and diminish the highs; or suggest to conductors what balances
or tempi to choose; or even better let's record in the balcony and
keep excessive reverb of an empty hall). We've got a few of 'em on
this list. I was not criticizing Haydn House, unless you mess with
Munch's original tuning intentions. I'll stick with the lps then!
Thanks. Hauser
ansermetniac
2007-05-26 21:37:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by J***@msn.com
ne frequent fun
item many "professional" engineers like to do it mess with the mid-
range and diminish the highs
Diminish the highs? Not on this planet!

Abbedd
D***@aol.com
2007-05-27 18:36:30 UTC
Permalink
Curtis Croulet
2007-05-27 19:31:44 UTC
Permalink
And the point, again, is that if all of Munch's BSO Victors from
this period except LM-1190 preserve an orchestra tuned to
approximately A=444/445, and LM-1190 preserves one tuned to A=466 (as
Ron wrote), it would seem logical to assume that something went wrong
with the processing of the Schumann. Also, if someone (Haydn House?)
has reissued this recording, I have heard none of them and have no
opinion about their pitch.
Funny thing. After I discovered the Schumann Spring Symphony, I played this
LP a lot at the record library at San Diego State University. I think it
was the only recording they had. I haven't heard it since about 1963, and
it has come down in my memory as my favorite version, no doubt due to early
imprinting. I never knew anything was awry.
--
Curtis Croulet
Temecula, California
33°27'59"N, 117°05'53"W
J***@msn.com
2007-05-28 02:19:33 UTC
Permalink
{About Munch/BSO Schumann 1st Symphony, the mono version, LM-1190,
ca. 1951--}
(repeats of earlier messages snipped)
Post by J***@msn.com
Maybe I'm missing something here; RonW mentions Kolodin's reportage
(certainly ? step high is audible - and I don't here that on old Munch
recordings);
Only one old Munch/BSO recording is at issue here -- the Schumann
1st on RCA Victor LM-1190. No other Munch/BSO recording is involved.
Post by J***@msn.com
Gruin says they tune to 444 which is in line with what I
hear[...] ?In transferring and checking pitch on my
open reel broadcasts I am able to check the pitch of the transfers I
made (and I have the ears to do it). ?
So the issue is LM-1190. It is one-half step sharp. It is what must
be auditioned to know about this. Based upon what you wrote about your
sense of pitch I am sure that you would notice the pitch problem
instantly. I don't mean to challenge you about whether you own and
have played it. As Ron W. said in a subsequent post, the orchestra
would have had to be tuned to A=466 to raise the pitch that much. The
issue here, I think, is faulty processing of the session tapes.
Post by J***@msn.com
?However, my point is NOT dud disks but the
actual recording. ?If the orchestra plays 444 then record it in 444;
don't fotz with the pitch[....]
But the possibility of "dud disks" IS the point. If LM-1190 plays
one-half step sharp and other Munch/BSO recordings do not, including
contemporaneous ones, it would seem logical to assume that something
went awry with the processing of the tapes for LM-1190.
Post by J***@msn.com
?I was not criticizing Haydn House, unless you mess with
Munch's original tuning intentions. ?I'll stick with the lps then!
Thanks. ?Hauser
And the point, again, is that if all of Munch's BSO Victors from
this period except LM-1190 preserve an orchestra tuned to
approximately A=444/445, and LM-1190 preserves one tuned to A=466 (as
Ron wrote), it would seem logical to assume that something went wrong
with the processing of the Schumann. Also, if someone (Haydn House?)
has reissued this recording, I have heard none of them and have no
opinion about their pitch.
Don Tait
But my comments were NOT about the first Schumann First with Munch (a
recording which I've never heard) - but the later recordings that were
mentioned under discussion where the orchestra tuned (according to
others) at 444/445 and whether or not engineers would try to correct a
pitch that was played live at 444/445 after the fact! Hauser
D***@aol.com
2007-05-28 22:16:45 UTC
Permalink
J***@msn.com
2007-05-29 01:27:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by J***@msn.com
? {About Munch/BSO Schumann 1st Symphony, the mono version, LM-1190,
ca. 1951--}
? (repeats of earlier messages snipped)
Post by J***@msn.com
Maybe I'm missing something here; RonW mentions Kolodin's reportage
(certainly ? step high is audible - and I don't here that on old Munch
recordings);
? Only one old Munch/BSO recording is at issue here -- the Schumann
1st on RCA Victor LM-1190. No other Munch/BSO recording is involved.
?> Gruin says they tune to 444 which is in line with what I
Post by J***@msn.com
hear[...] ?In transferring and checking pitch on my
open reel broadcasts I am able to check the pitch of the transfers I
made (and I have the ears to do it). ?
? So the issue is LM-1190. It is one-half step sharp. It is what must
be auditioned to know about this. Based upon what you wrote about your
sense of pitch I am sure that you would notice the pitch problem
instantly. I don't mean to challenge you about whether you own and
have played it. As Ron W. said in a subsequent post, the orchestra
would have had to be tuned to A=466 to raise the pitch that much. The
issue here, I think, is faulty processing of the session tapes.
Post by J***@msn.com
?However, my point is NOT dud disks but the
actual recording. ?If the orchestra plays 444 then record it in 444;
don't fotz with the pitch[....]
? But the possibility of "dud disks" IS the point. If LM-1190 plays
one-half step sharp and other Munch/BSO recordings do not, including
contemporaneous ones, it would seem logical to assume that something
went awry with the processing of the tapes for LM-1190.
Post by J***@msn.com
?I was not criticizing Haydn House, unless you mess with
Munch's original tuning intentions. ?I'll stick with the lps then!
Thanks. ?Hauser
? And the point, again, is that if all of Munch's BSO Victors from
this period except LM-1190 preserve an orchestra tuned to
approximately A=444/445, and LM-1190 preserves one tuned to A=466 (as
Ron wrote), it would seem logical to assume that something went wrong
with the processing of the Schumann. Also, if someone (Haydn House?)
has reissued this recording, I have heard none of them and have no
opinion about their pitch.
? Don Tait
But my comments were NOT about the first Schumann First with Munch (a
recording which I've never heard) - but the later recordings that were
mentioned under discussion where the orchestra tuned (according to
others) at 444/445 and whether or not engineers would try to correct a
pitch that was played live at 444/445 after the fact! Hauser- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
But the entire topic, total, complete, was the mono Munch/BSO
Schumann 1st on RCA Victor LM-1190. And the fact that that record is
one-half step sharp while no other Munch/BSO records from the period
(1950-53) are, nor are any others from the rest of the Munch era. Or
indeed Koussevitzky from 1928 until 1950 on records, during which the
Boston Symphony also tuned to a 444/5 A. No one has suggested that RCA
Victor engineers decided to "correct" this single recording's pitch.
It seems to have been a technical blunder of some sort.
Sorry. There seems to be some kind of misunderstanding. I don't like
disputes and don't intend to enter into them with others on rmcr, and
I hope you will not take offense. But this record and this record
alone is the reason I initially brought this subject up and I think it
is the correct subject for discussion.
Don Tait- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
J***@msn.com
2007-05-29 01:31:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by J***@msn.com
? {About Munch/BSO Schumann 1st Symphony, the mono version, LM-1190,
ca. 1951--}
? (repeats of earlier messages snipped)
Post by J***@msn.com
Maybe I'm missing something here; RonW mentions Kolodin's reportage
(certainly ? step high is audible - and I don't here that on old Munch
recordings);
? Only one old Munch/BSO recording is at issue here -- the Schumann
1st on RCA Victor LM-1190. No other Munch/BSO recording is involved.
?> Gruin says they tune to 444 which is in line with what I
Post by J***@msn.com
hear[...] ?In transferring and checking pitch on my
open reel broadcasts I am able to check the pitch of the transfers I
made (and I have the ears to do it). ?
? So the issue is LM-1190. It is one-half step sharp. It is what must
be auditioned to know about this. Based upon what you wrote about your
sense of pitch I am sure that you would notice the pitch problem
instantly. I don't mean to challenge you about whether you own and
have played it. As Ron W. said in a subsequent post, the orchestra
would have had to be tuned to A=466 to raise the pitch that much. The
issue here, I think, is faulty processing of the session tapes.
Post by J***@msn.com
?However, my point is NOT dud disks but the
actual recording. ?If the orchestra plays 444 then record it in 444;
don't fotz with the pitch[....]
? But the possibility of "dud disks" IS the point. If LM-1190 plays
one-half step sharp and other Munch/BSO recordings do not, including
contemporaneous ones, it would seem logical to assume that something
went awry with the processing of the tapes for LM-1190.
Post by J***@msn.com
?I was not criticizing Haydn House, unless you mess with
Munch's original tuning intentions. ?I'll stick with the lps then!
Thanks. ?Hauser
? And the point, again, is that if all of Munch's BSO Victors from
this period except LM-1190 preserve an orchestra tuned to
approximately A=444/445, and LM-1190 preserves one tuned to A=466 (as
Ron wrote), it would seem logical to assume that something went wrong
with the processing of the Schumann. Also, if someone (Haydn House?)
has reissued this recording, I have heard none of them and have no
opinion about their pitch.
? Don Tait
But my comments were NOT about the first Schumann First with Munch (a
recording which I've never heard) - but the later recordings that were
mentioned under discussion where the orchestra tuned (according to
others) at 444/445 and whether or not engineers would try to correct a
pitch that was played live at 444/445 after the fact! Hauser- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
But the entire topic, total, complete, was the mono Munch/BSO
Schumann 1st on RCA Victor LM-1190. And the fact that that record is
one-half step sharp while no other Munch/BSO records from the period
(1950-53) are, nor are any others from the rest of the Munch era. Or
indeed Koussevitzky from 1928 until 1950 on records, during which the
Boston Symphony also tuned to a 444/5 A. No one has suggested that RCA
Victor engineers decided to "correct" this single recording's pitch.
It seems to have been a technical blunder of some sort.
Sorry. There seems to be some kind of misunderstanding. I don't like
disputes and don't intend to enter into them with others on rmcr, and
I hope you will not take offense. But this record and this record
alone is the reason I initially brought this subject up and I think it
is the correct subject for discussion.
Don Tait- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Problems, problems, problems. Mr. Tait, whatever, the case the way
this thread appears on Google (at least to me) is the question whether
engineers tamper with performances that are recorded. Again, the way
the thread began on Google (and since the appearance has changed as of
late - about a month ago when it went out - and slightly before that
when the format was radically changed), it was NOT just focused on the
early Munch Schumann 1st (which I have never heard), my references
were about later Munch recordings with the slightly sharper tunings.
Sorry about any misunderstanding. Hauser
r***@usa.net
2007-05-27 01:40:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by J***@msn.com
Post by r***@usa.net
Post by Mark Obert-Thorn
In light of the 40 CD series that Japanese RCA brought out (41 if you
count the bonus disc), I was wondering if anyone knew which Munch/BSO
commercial recordings have NOT yet been issued on CD. Of course, the
Japanese discs omitted some that are available here (Brahms PC 2 with
Rubinstein, Mozart Clarinet Cto with Goodman, etc.). And there are
some Munch/BSO commercial recordings which have come out on other
labels (the Blackwood 1st on Cedille, the Beethoven Gradulations
Minuet on Tahra, the Bruch VC 1 with Menuhin on Naxos, and the
forthcoming Tchaikovsky VC with Milstein, also on Naxos).
As far as I'm aware, the following Munch/BSO RCA items have not yet
Early mono versions of Schubert 2nd, Schumann 1st and Brahms 4th.
Stereo recordings: Haeiff Sym. # 2, Chopin PC # 1 with Graffman,
Tchaikovsky Francesca and the 1956 version of Romeo.
Are there any others that I'm not thinking of?
By the way, when I was researching in the RCA Archives many years ago,
I came across listings for two interesting unpublished Munch/Boston
recordings: the Schumann PC and the first movement only of the
Rachmaninoff PC # 3, both with Van Cliburn. Apparently, Cliburn
wanted to record the Schumann with Reiner, which caused not only this
version not to be issued, but Byron Janis' with Reiner, as well. (The
Janis version eventually did come out on LP in the early '80s, but the
Cliburn remains unissued. And Janis then went onto record the
complete Rachmaninoff 3rd with Munch.)
Mark Obert-Thorn
The Mendelssohn Violin Concerto with Jaime Laredo. The only issue I am
aware of is on LP: Victrola VIC/VICS 1033, recorded on Dec. 24, 1960.
Ron Whitaker- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
I know this sounds sacriligeous (being a non-techno-convert; and with
all the budding engineers out there), but if the master recordings of
Boston are tuned sharp (and I've heard and felt it over the years);
and that's the way they were played live; then don't fix it! Keep
your hands off! Let the hooples at home dabble with the pitch to
their hearts content. So many recordings are spoiled by the
intervention of "sound engineers" who have no musical aesthetic or
respect for the original material (however poorly or excellently
captured). If we all have such inborn musical engineering
sensibilities - leave it to the people at home to mess around with.
I'm still recovering from some great Markevitch performances (on cd
unfortunately) that were ruined by re-engineering idiots. Hauser
While I agree entirely with your premise, the early Munch/Boston
Schumann 1 falls outside this argument. 99.9% of the master recordings
of the Boston Symphony were not "tuned sharp" by outside hands -- it's
the pitch at which they played, which is admittedly higher than most
orchestras. The Schumann, however, is pitched a half-step high, unlike
any other Boston recording from that, or any, era. What you are saying
means that for this recording the Boston Symphony tuned to A=466, an
almost ridiculous idea. Do you have any idea how the wind and brass
instruments could have ever gotten their instruments up to that pitch?

Who knows what happened? Electrical problems in Symphony Hall that day
or something else along the production line?

In any case, this recording as originally issued cannot be correct.

Ron Whitaker
d***@aol.com
2007-05-27 19:36:44 UTC
Permalink
Have they ever found the lost tapes of the Troyens with Munch with
Callas as Dido and Thill as Aeneas?

-david gable
D***@aol.com
2007-05-27 20:19:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by d***@aol.com
Have they ever found the lost tapes of the Troyens with Munch with
Callas as Dido and Thill as Aeneas?
-david gable
As someone said or wrote, surely you jest. As this dreamer
says,...dream on, me. You too? What an idea.

Don Tait
td
2007-05-29 11:16:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by J***@msn.com
Post by J***@msn.com
? {About Munch/BSO Schumann 1st Symphony, the mono version, LM-1190,
ca. 1951--}
? (repeats of earlier messages snipped)
Post by J***@msn.com
Maybe I'm missing something here; RonW mentions Kolodin's reportage
(certainly ? step high is audible - and I don't here that on old Munch
recordings);
? Only one old Munch/BSO recording is at issue here -- the Schumann
1st on RCA Victor LM-1190. No other Munch/BSO recording is involved.
?> Gruin says they tune to 444 which is in line with what I
Post by J***@msn.com
hear[...] ?In transferring and checking pitch on my
open reel broadcasts I am able to check the pitch of the transfers I
made (and I have the ears to do it). ?
? So the issue is LM-1190. It is one-half step sharp. It is what must
be auditioned to know about this. Based upon what you wrote about your
sense of pitch I am sure that you would notice the pitch problem
instantly. I don't mean to challenge you about whether you own and
have played it. As Ron W. said in a subsequent post, the orchestra
would have had to be tuned to A=466 to raise the pitch that much. The
issue here, I think, is faulty processing of the session tapes.
Post by J***@msn.com
?However, my point is NOT dud disks but the
actual recording. ?If the orchestra plays 444 then record it in 444;
don't fotz with the pitch[....]
? But the possibility of "dud disks" IS the point. If LM-1190 plays
one-half step sharp and other Munch/BSO recordings do not, including
contemporaneous ones, it would seem logical to assume that something
went awry with the processing of the tapes for LM-1190.
Post by J***@msn.com
?I was not criticizing Haydn House, unless you mess with
Munch's original tuning intentions. ?I'll stick with the lps then!
Thanks. ?Hauser
? And the point, again, is that if all of Munch's BSO Victors from
this period except LM-1190 preserve an orchestra tuned to
approximately A=444/445, and LM-1190 preserves one tuned to A=466 (as
Ron wrote), it would seem logical to assume that something went wrong
with the processing of the Schumann. Also, if someone (Haydn House?)
has reissued this recording, I have heard none of them and have no
opinion about their pitch.
? Don Tait
But my comments were NOT about the first Schumann First with Munch (a
recording which I've never heard) - but the later recordings that were
mentioned under discussion where the orchestra tuned (according to
others) at 444/445 and whether or not engineers would try to correct a
pitch that was played live at 444/445 after the fact! Hauser- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
But the entire topic, total, complete, was the mono Munch/BSO
Schumann 1st on RCA Victor LM-1190. And the fact that that record is
one-half step sharp while no other Munch/BSO records from the period
(1950-53) are, nor are any others from the rest of the Munch era. Or
indeed Koussevitzky from 1928 until 1950 on records, during which the
Boston Symphony also tuned to a 444/5 A. No one has suggested that RCA
Victor engineers decided to "correct" this single recording's pitch.
It seems to have been a technical blunder of some sort.
Sorry. There seems to be some kind of misunderstanding. I don't like
disputes and don't intend to enter into them with others on rmcr, and
I hope you will not take offense. But this record and this record
alone is the reason I initially brought this subject up and I think it
is the correct subject for discussion.
Don Tait- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Problems, problems, problems. Mr. Tait, whatever, the case the way
this thread appears on Google (at least to me) is the question whether
engineers tamper with performances that are recorded. Again, the way
the thread began on Google (and since the appearance has changed as of
late - about a month ago when it went out - and slightly before that
when the format was radically changed), it was NOT just focused on the
early Munch Schumann 1st (which I have never heard), my references
were about later Munch recordings with the slightly sharper tunings.
Sorry about any misunderstanding.
John, it is well to remember the recording industry of 1950 was not
the all-knowing, digital nirvanna of the year 2007, with its arrogant
Paquins and Rosses and such like droning on about their own current
supremacies.

Indeed, much was still experimental in "high fidelity".

Living Presence was still to be discovered: single mike mono(for
orchestral music), two track, binaural, three-track, multi-track all
lay ahead of us.

Indeed, in 1950 many were still listening to 78 RPM recordings, some
of which were recorded at 76 RPM, and still others at 80 RPM or more.
I remember the steel needles and the wow and flutter of our first home
player(actually a very noisy changer). I also remember full well the
complete inability of all players of the day - except perhaps
professional broadcast tables - to make adjustments in speed. One has
to wonder if the Scully cutters of the day had flawless speed
regulation?

Few people had anything resembling high fidelity, even fewer still
knew precisely what speed their turntables (a word invented later, of
course, the term then being record-player) were revolving at. Or
cared, actually. We were simply happy to be able to hear the music.
And they weren't all listening on Fisher or McIntosh amplifiers. I
remember our plug into a Rogers table radio. ARGH!!!

So, if Munch's Spring Symphony was a bit off pitch in the LP produced
at that time, no big deal, really. One has to wonder how many people
were likely to be able to purchase such a record or even to play it.
And perhaps the equipment to alter the recorded product was not
available at the time? Who can tell? The voltage may have changed
during the recording session, resulting in the pitch change?

I don't hold this against RCA Victor or its engineers. They were on
the frontier of the new high fidelity recording industry. Who would
dream of complaining that Lewis and Clark took a wrong turn on their
journey west? Didn't they know the way through the Rockies? How stupid
they were!

What still interests me is the "half-step" statement. I think it's
actually false, since the BSO tunes(tuned) notoriously sharp. The half-
step comparison will be then to THEIR tuning basis, or half-step above
A=440? A=460 is not a full half-step higher than A=450, for example.

So far the posts on this subject have been largely unclear on this
subject. Mostly they have been shock and outrage that such a mistake
could have occurred. Maybe the posters are simply too young? It's
possible. But they are also highly intolerant of mistakes, which is
simply juvenile.

TD
e***@gmail.com
2007-05-29 15:28:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by td
What still interests me is the "half-step" statement. I think it's
actually false, since the BSO tunes(tuned) notoriously sharp. The half-
step comparison will be then to THEIR tuning basis, or half-step above
A=440? A=460 is not a full half-step higher than A=450, for example.
- Show quoted text -
This thread has gotten a bit silly. Just to summarize:

1) Rounding to the nearest integer: when A=440, B-flat=477. When
A=444, B-flat=481. In either case, 466 is closer to B-flat than A, so
the statement that the LP under discussion was issued a "half-step
sharp" is sufficiently accurate for those of us who care about such
things.

2) Nobody here has offered a case where the original issuer of a
performance has intentionally altered a non-A440 performance to A440.
(Modern reissues of pre-LP material are not so lucky.)

Regards,
Eric Grunin
www.grunin.com/eroica
J***@msn.com
2007-05-29 15:42:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by e***@gmail.com
Post by td
What still interests me is the "half-step" statement. I think it's
actually false, since the BSO tunes(tuned) notoriously sharp. The half-
step comparison will be then to THEIR tuning basis, or half-step above
A=440? A=460 is not a full half-step higher than A=450, for example.
- Show quoted text -
1) Rounding to the nearest integer: when A=440, B-flat=477. When
A=444, B-flat=481. In either case, 466 is closer to B-flat than A, so
the statement that the LP under discussion was issued a "half-step
sharp" is sufficiently accurate for those of us who care about such
things.
2) Nobody here has offered a case where the original issuer of a
performance has intentionally altered a non-A440 performance to A440.
(Modern reissues of pre-LP material are not so lucky.)
Regards,
Eric Gruninwww.grunin.com/eroica
thank you; agreed. Hauser
td
2007-05-29 21:38:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by e***@gmail.com
Post by td
What still interests me is the "half-step" statement. I think it's
actually false, since the BSO tunes(tuned) notoriously sharp. The half-
step comparison will be then to THEIR tuning basis, or half-step above
A=440? A=460 is not a full half-step higher than A=450, for example.
- Show quoted text -
1) Rounding to the nearest integer: when A=440, B-flat=477. When
A=444, B-flat=481. In either case, 466 is closer to B-flat than A, so
the statement that the LP under discussion was issued a "half-step
sharp" is sufficiently accurate for those of us who care about such
things.
I agree. It has gotten silly.

But my impression is that those who talk about "half-steps" are
actually speaking of a half-step above A=440, not A=444, or 445, for
example, let alone A=450, which is also not unknown.

What is the frequency of Bflat if A=440.

That might help to clear up this knotty point, at least for me.

TD
Russ and/or Martha Oppenheim
2007-05-29 22:09:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by td
Post by e***@gmail.com
Post by td
What still interests me is the "half-step" statement. I think it's
actually false, since the BSO tunes(tuned) notoriously sharp. The half-
step comparison will be then to THEIR tuning basis, or half-step above
A=440? A=460 is not a full half-step higher than A=450, for example.
- Show quoted text -
1) Rounding to the nearest integer: when A=440, B-flat=477. When
A=444, B-flat=481. In either case, 466 is closer to B-flat than A, so
the statement that the LP under discussion was issued a "half-step
sharp" is sufficiently accurate for those of us who care about such
things.
I agree. It has gotten silly.
But my impression is that those who talk about "half-steps" are
actually speaking of a half-step above A=440, not A=444, or 445, for
example, let alone A=450, which is also not unknown.
What is the frequency of Bflat if A=440.
That might help to clear up this knotty point, at least for me.
TD
If A=440, B flat would be 466.16376.

In the tempered scale, the ratio of a half-step is the 12th root of 2,
namely

1.0594631.

Russ (not Martha
Kevin P. Mostyn
2007-05-30 02:07:27 UTC
Permalink
Actually, some types of tempering shift the tone ratios slightly away from
the twelfth root of two. I believe the purpose is to make chords "sound"
better.
--
Kevin Mostyn

------------------------------------------------------------
My real e-mail address is my first name at my last name dot com.
"Russ and/or Martha Oppenheim" <***@satx.rr.com> wrote in message news:465ca490$0$12428$***@roadrunner.com...

<big snip>
Post by Russ and/or Martha Oppenheim
Post by td
What is the frequency of Bflat if A=440.
That might help to clear up this knotty point, at least for me.
TD
If A=440, B flat would be 466.16376.
In the tempered scale, the ratio of a half-step is the 12th root of 2,
namely
1.0594631.
Russ (not Martha
TareeDawg
2007-05-30 11:38:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kevin P. Mostyn
Actually, some types of tempering shift the tone ratios slightly away from
the twelfth root of two. I believe the purpose is to make chords "sound"
better.
Indeed, it is to make the octaves sound more consonant with each other.
The real reason is partly due to the "stiffness" of the strings, and if
one divides the 440Hz string into two, each smaller octave will always
sound slightly sharp (a tad above the frequency of the higher octave at
880Hz). Hence, when the tuner comes to the 880Hz string, he has to
slightly sharpen this, to be consonant, or "nice on the ear", with the
effects of the 440Hz string. Therefore in practice, a good piano tuner
will always slightly "sharp" each octave as he goes upwards, and
"flatten" as he tunes downwards from middle A, or C, or whatever middle
note he chooses as his best starting point. It will depend on the piano
of course, and the state of tuning repair it is in.

A full tune normally requires about 3 tunings. One tuning is always
considered a 'partial' tuning.

In essence, of course, it ends up being a case of "what sounds good",
mainly to the pianist, or sometimes a conductor.

In any case, the "12th root of two" method merely yields "equal"
temperament, and we have come a long way from escaping the strictures
and agonies of this mathematical form of tuning.

Ray (Dawg) Hall, Taree

Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...