Discussion:
Mendelssohn - MSND - Previn
(too old to reply)
Randy Lane
2011-02-18 20:19:04 UTC
Permalink
During his tenure with the LSO, when he made so many great recordings
for EMI, Andre Previn made a groundbreaking recording of the complete
music Mendelssohn wrote for A Midsummer Night's Dream. I've never
heard the music in better form. The recording has been a mainstay of
my collection ever since the first release.

There was a remake for Decca with the Vienna Philharmonic. I've never
heard it. Has anyone compared the two?
I've generally been disappointed with Previn's Universal recordings,
especially stuff he recorded earlier for EMI, like the Shosty 8. So
I'm a little suspicious this will likewise not be up the level of
excellence of the EMI recording. But I've been wrong before, so I
don't just to pass it up.
herman
2011-02-18 20:44:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Randy Lane
During his tenure with the LSO, when he made so many great recordings
for EMI,
I think many of those LSO / Previn recordings were pretty lousy. Bad,
underrehearsed ensemble and no clear conductorial grasp of the entire
narrative.

I would have a hard time thinking of anything Previn did back then
that hasn't been superseded.
Matthew B. Tepper
2011-02-18 20:47:16 UTC
Permalink
herman <***@yahoo.com> appears to have caused the following letters to be
typed in news:d29192ba-70ed-470a-b15b-61bef6937852
Post by herman
Post by Randy Lane
During his tenure with the LSO, when he made so many great recordings
for EMI,
I think many of those LSO / Previn recordings were pretty lousy. Bad,
underrehearsed ensemble and no clear conductorial grasp of the entire
narrative.
I would have a hard time thinking of anything Previn did back then
that hasn't been superseded.
Walton Symphony #1 for RCA?
--
Matthew B. Tepper: WWW, science fiction, classical music, ducks!
Read about "Proty" here: http://home.earthlink.net/~oy/proty.html
To write to me, do for my address what Androcles did for the lion
Opinions expressed here are not necessarily those of my employers
Jáns
2011-02-18 22:19:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Matthew B. Tepper
typed in news:d29192ba-70ed-470a-b15b-61bef6937852
Post by herman
Post by Randy Lane
During his tenure with the LSO, when he made so many great recordings
for EMI,
I think many of those LSO / Previn recordings were pretty lousy. Bad,
underrehearsed ensemble and no clear conductorial grasp of the entire
narrative.
I would have a hard time thinking of anything Previn did back then
that hasn't been superseded.
Walton Symphony #1 for RCA?
Shostakovich 5th (RCA) and 8th (EMI)? Both with LSO.

And Vaughan Williams.
Jáns
2011-02-18 21:53:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by herman
Post by Randy Lane
During his tenure with the LSO, when he made so many great recordings
for EMI,
I think many of those LSO / Previn recordings were pretty lousy. Bad,
underrehearsed ensemble and no clear conductorial grasp of the entire
narrative.
I would have a hard time thinking of anything Previn did back then
that hasn't been superseded.
Perhaps you should think harder.

I forget his [Previn's] exact words, but he was bowled over by the
LSO, and amazed that they needed so little rehearsal time no matter
what the repertoire. I think it was the LSO's sight-reading skills
that impressed him most, not just the virtuosity of the playing.
jrsnfld
2011-02-18 22:04:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jáns
Post by herman
Post by Randy Lane
During his tenure with the LSO, when he made so many great recordings
for EMI,
I think many of those LSO / Previn recordings were pretty lousy. Bad,
underrehearsed ensemble and no clear conductorial grasp of the entire
narrative.
I would have a hard time thinking of anything Previn did back then
that hasn't been superseded.
Perhaps you should think harder.
I forget his [Previn's] exact words, but he was bowled over by the
LSO, and amazed that they needed so little rehearsal time no matter
what the repertoire. I think it was the LSO's sight-reading skills
that impressed him most, not just the virtuosity of the playing.
Do sight-reading skills translate into great recordings?

--Jeff
Jáns
2011-02-18 22:13:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by jrsnfld
Post by Jáns
Post by herman
Post by Randy Lane
During his tenure with the LSO, when he made so many great recordings
for EMI,
I think many of those LSO / Previn recordings were pretty lousy. Bad,
underrehearsed ensemble and no clear conductorial grasp of the entire
narrative.
I would have a hard time thinking of anything Previn did back then
that hasn't been superseded.
Perhaps you should think harder.
I forget his [Previn's] exact words, but he was bowled over by the
LSO, and amazed that they needed so little rehearsal time no matter
what the repertoire. I think it was the LSO's sight-reading skills
that impressed him most, not just the virtuosity of the playing.
Do sight-reading skills translate into great recordings?
--Jeff- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Not always, but they worked for Previn (and others, of course). But
good sight reading and versatility (a sort of LSO trademark) does mean
less rehearsal time, yes? Great recordings are matter of opinion, as
they always are and always have been.
jrsnfld
2011-02-18 22:27:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jáns
Post by jrsnfld
Post by Jáns
Post by herman
Post by Randy Lane
During his tenure with the LSO, when he made so many great recordings
for EMI,
I think many of those LSO / Previn recordings were pretty lousy. Bad,
underrehearsed ensemble and no clear conductorial grasp of the entire
narrative.
I would have a hard time thinking of anything Previn did back then
that hasn't been superseded.
Perhaps you should think harder.
I forget his [Previn's] exact words, but he was bowled over by the
LSO, and amazed that they needed so little rehearsal time no matter
what the repertoire. I think it was the LSO's sight-reading skills
that impressed him most, not just the virtuosity of the playing.
Do sight-reading skills translate into great recordings?
--Jeff- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Not always, but they worked for Previn (and others, of course). But
good sight reading and versatility (a sort of LSO trademark) does mean
less rehearsal time, yes? Great recordings are matter of opinion, as
they always are and always have been.
Did Previn take advantage of this versatility by using less rehearsal
time? If so, that could explain why some of us feel his recordings
with the LSO sound a bit rough or (more likely) undercharacterized.

I've had some good experiences with their recordings. The Walton 1 is
still a favorite, though it no longer stands alone. Their Nutcracker
was my first complete recording of the work, and I enjoyed it for many
years until others replaced it. Their Rachmaninoff 2 was an early
favorite (and one of the few complete versions at the time) but not so
much now. The Debussy Images with Previn was one of my first CDs, but
it's fair to say that others superseded it. I recently bought their
Rimsky Scheherazade and liked it very much, but as nicely played and
conducted as it is, there are others that are more spectacular, or
refined, or what have you.

Of course, if anything, the LSO sounded less rehearsed under other
conductors in that era. For instance, Kertesz's Dvorak series, which
is exciting and fun but doesn't compare well when placed beside the
better refinement of Rowicki's recordings with the same orchestra.

It seems to me that Herman is exaggerating, but not by as much as some
would believe.

--Jeff
Jáns
2011-02-18 22:42:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by jrsnfld
Post by Jáns
Post by jrsnfld
Post by Jáns
Post by herman
Post by Randy Lane
During his tenure with the LSO, when he made so many great recordings
for EMI,
I think many of those LSO / Previn recordings were pretty lousy. Bad,
underrehearsed ensemble and no clear conductorial grasp of the entire
narrative.
I would have a hard time thinking of anything Previn did back then
that hasn't been superseded.
Perhaps you should think harder.
I forget his [Previn's] exact words, but he was bowled over by the
LSO, and amazed that they needed so little rehearsal time no matter
what the repertoire. I think it was the LSO's sight-reading skills
that impressed him most, not just the virtuosity of the playing.
Do sight-reading skills translate into great recordings?
--Jeff- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Not always, but they worked for Previn (and others, of course). But
good sight reading and versatility (a sort of LSO trademark) does mean
less rehearsal time, yes? Great recordings are matter of opinion, as
they always are and always have been.
Did Previn take advantage of this versatility by using less rehearsal
time? If so, that could explain why some of us feel his recordings
with the LSO sound a bit rough or (more likely) undercharacterized.
I've had some good experiences with their recordings. The Walton 1 is
still a favorite, though it no longer stands alone. Their Nutcracker
was my first complete recording of the work, and I enjoyed it for many
years until others replaced it. Their Rachmaninoff 2 was an early
favorite (and one of the few complete versions at the time) but not so
much now. The Debussy Images with Previn was one of my first CDs, but
it's fair to say that others superseded it. I recently bought their
Rimsky Scheherazade and liked it very much, but as nicely played and
conducted as it is, there are others that are more spectacular, or
refined, or what have you.
Of course, if anything, the LSO sounded less rehearsed under other
conductors in that era. For instance, Kertesz's Dvorak series, which
is exciting and fun but doesn't compare well when placed beside the
better refinement of Rowicki's recordings with the same orchestra.
It seems to me that Herman is exaggerating, but not by as much as some
would believe.
--Jeff- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
I really don't know if Previn took advantage, but it must have been a
bonus for him - and anyone else fortunate enough to conduct the LSO. I
suppose I should be more patriotic and shout - 'Hungarian orchestras
are the best in the world!' - but I don't do that sort of thing.
Credit where it's due, etc.

Some of Rowicki's Dvorák was really excellent, but I prefer the
Kertész set. I haven't heard Previn's Debussy.
jrsnfld
2011-02-18 23:18:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jáns
Post by jrsnfld
Post by Jáns
Post by jrsnfld
Post by Jáns
Post by herman
Post by Randy Lane
During his tenure with the LSO, when he made so many great recordings
for EMI,
I think many of those LSO / Previn recordings were pretty lousy. Bad,
underrehearsed ensemble and no clear conductorial grasp of the entire
narrative.
I would have a hard time thinking of anything Previn did back then
that hasn't been superseded.
Perhaps you should think harder.
I forget his [Previn's] exact words, but he was bowled over by the
LSO, and amazed that they needed so little rehearsal time no matter
what the repertoire. I think it was the LSO's sight-reading skills
that impressed him most, not just the virtuosity of the playing.
Do sight-reading skills translate into great recordings?
--Jeff- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Not always, but they worked for Previn (and others, of course). But
good sight reading and versatility (a sort of LSO trademark) does mean
less rehearsal time, yes? Great recordings are matter of opinion, as
they always are and always have been.
Did Previn take advantage of this versatility by using less rehearsal
time? If so, that could explain why some of us feel his recordings
with the LSO sound a bit rough or (more likely) undercharacterized.
I've had some good experiences with their recordings. The Walton 1 is
still a favorite, though it no longer stands alone. Their Nutcracker
was my first complete recording of the work, and I enjoyed it for many
years until others replaced it. Their Rachmaninoff 2 was an early
favorite (and one of the few complete versions at the time) but not so
much now. The Debussy Images with Previn was one of my first CDs, but
it's fair to say that others superseded it. I recently bought their
Rimsky Scheherazade and liked it very much, but as nicely played and
conducted as it is, there are others that are more spectacular, or
refined, or what have you.
Of course, if anything, the LSO sounded less rehearsed under other
conductors in that era. For instance, Kertesz's Dvorak series, which
is exciting and fun but doesn't compare well when placed beside the
better refinement of Rowicki's recordings with the same orchestra.
It seems to me that Herman is exaggerating, but not by as much as some
would believe.
--Jeff- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
I really don't know if Previn took advantage, but it must have been a
bonus for him - and anyone else fortunate enough to conduct the LSO.
There's no doubt that sight-reading skills are a bonus, and no doubt
that the LSO remains famed for their quickness and flexibilty. The
same has been said about other orchestras of course, but Previn's
comments should carry even more weight because of his familiarity at
that time with the notoriously quick sight readers in Hollywood.

My main reason for replying to you was to point out that sight reading
skill is a basic for all great orchestras, but the production of great
recordings is not correlated to great sight reading or more efficient
rehearsals. Great recordings are made by proficiency shaped by
insightful, well communicated interpretations. After a certain basic
competency, nobody cares how well orchestras sight read for Stokowski,
Fricsay, Mravinsky, Rosbaud, Kleiber, Furtwangler, Giulini, Toscanini,
etc.; they care about the end product. Sometimes it's the result of
years of collaboration and sometimes the result of spontaneous accord,
but it's the collective personality that emerges that really counts,
something you rarely get when you sight read.
Post by Jáns
I
suppose I should be more patriotic and shout - 'Hungarian orchestras
are the best in the world!'  - but I don't do that sort of thing.
Well, you should, because they are! :-) Seriously, too few people seem
to realize how wonderful the various Hungarian orchestras are. Last
week I was listening to a fairly recent broadcast with D'Agostino and
the Magyar RSO and amazed to find myself totally hooked by their
Schubert 8, a piece I swore I would skip because, well, I (most of us,
actually) have too many great recordings of it already. This one
turned out to be a must-have!

And all those pianists, violinists, cellists...they "grow on trees" in
Hungary.

Nonetheless, one needn't be British to admire the flexibility and
facility of British orchestras.

--Jeff
Jáns
2011-02-19 00:18:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by jrsnfld
Post by Jáns
I really don't know if Previn took advantage, but it must have been a
bonus for him - and anyone else fortunate enough to conduct the LSO.
[slight snip]
Post by jrsnfld
My main reason for replying to you was to point out that sight reading
skill is a basic for all great orchestras, but the production of great
recordings is not correlated to great sight reading or more efficient
rehearsals. Great recordings are made by proficiency shaped by
insightful, well communicated interpretations. After a certain basic
competency, nobody cares how well orchestras sight read for Stokowski,
Fricsay, Mravinsky, Rosbaud, Kleiber, Furtwangler, Giulini, Toscanini,
etc.; they care about the end product. Sometimes it's the result of
years of collaboration and sometimes the result of spontaneous accord,
but it's the collective personality that emerges that really counts,
something you rarely get when you sight read.
I think that was the point I was trying to make. Previn didn't need
years years of collaberation. As one critic (I forget who) said - "It
was love at first sight" - meaning, I suppose, both Previn and the
LSO. Previn knew what he wanted from them and the LSO obliged.

I understand what you mean about Fricsay (surprise!) and Mravinsky, et
al. Some conductors have a natural way of getting what they want and
know how to communicate without any hysterics. I heard a broadcast of
a Toscanini rehearsal, and I was shocked that he needed to scream and
shout so much. I wonder how many of today's orchestras would tolerate
that sort of behaviour?
Post by jrsnfld
Post by Jáns
suppose I should be more patriotic and shout - 'Hungarian orchestras
are the best in the world!'  - but I don't do that sort of thing.
Well, you should, because they are! :-) Seriously, too few people seem
to realize how wonderful the various Hungarian orchestras are. Last
week I was listening to a fairly recent broadcast with D'Agostino and
the Magyar RSO and amazed to find myself totally hooked by their
Schubert 8, a piece I swore I would skip because, well, I (most of us,
actually) have too many great recordings of it already. This one
turned out to be a must-have!
Thanks; but our orchestras are no better or worse than anywhere else
in Europe.
Post by jrsnfld
And all those pianists, violinists, cellists...they "grow on trees" in
Hungary.
Hungarian musicians do indeed grow on trees. I have to pick up the
fallen ones every autumn;)
Post by jrsnfld
Nonetheless, one needn't be British to admire the flexibility and
facility of British orchestras.
And not just the LSO.
jrsnfld
2011-02-19 00:44:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jáns
Post by jrsnfld
Post by Jáns
I really don't know if Previn took advantage, but it must have been a
bonus for him - and anyone else fortunate enough to conduct the LSO.
[slight snip]
Post by jrsnfld
My main reason for replying to you was to point out that sight reading
skill is a basic for all great orchestras, but the production of great
recordings is not correlated to great sight reading or more efficient
rehearsals. Great recordings are made by proficiency shaped by
insightful, well communicated interpretations. After a certain basic
competency, nobody cares how well orchestras sight read for Stokowski,
Fricsay, Mravinsky, Rosbaud, Kleiber, Furtwangler, Giulini, Toscanini,
etc.; they care about the end product. Sometimes it's the result of
years of collaboration and sometimes the result of spontaneous accord,
but it's the collective personality that emerges that really counts,
something you rarely get when you sight read.
I think that was the point I was trying to make. Previn didn't need
years years of collaberation. As one critic (I forget who) said - "It
was love at first sight" - meaning, I suppose, both Previn and the
LSO. Previn knew what he wanted from them and the LSO obliged.
Yes, but that's different than emphasizing their flexibility and sight
reading, which is what you said initially. Love at first sight is a
good way to say they were in sync from the beginning, and that's a
nice thought that might have something to do with flexibility. (In
this case it may have something to do with a flexible orchestra
pleasing a conductor who asks for little beyond technical skill. The
art of a flexible orchestra is to make all conductors feel loved.)

Now, whether or not one thinks the results were special just because
they were in sync is another matter...
Post by Jáns
I understand what you mean about Fricsay (surprise!) and Mravinsky, et
al. Some conductors have a natural way of getting what they want and
know how to communicate without any hysterics. I heard a broadcast of
a Toscanini rehearsal, and I was shocked that he needed to scream and
shout so much. I wonder how many of today's orchestras would tolerate
that sort of behaviour?
No one would tolerate that anymore. Those were different times.
Post by Jáns
Post by jrsnfld
And all those pianists, violinists, cellists...they "grow on trees" in
Nonetheless, one needn't be British to admire the flexibility and
facility of British orchestras.
And not just the LSO.
Understood.

--Jeff
Jáns
2011-02-19 09:16:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by jrsnfld
Yes, but that's different than emphasizing their flexibility and sight
reading, which is what you said initially. Love at first sight is a
good way to say they were in sync from the beginning, and that's a
nice thought that might have something to do with flexibility. (In
this case it may have something to do with a flexible orchestra
pleasing a conductor who asks for little beyond technical skill. The
art of a flexible orchestra is to make all conductors feel loved.)
Now, whether or not one thinks the results were special just because
they were in sync is another matter...
Perhaps 'instant rapport' might have been a better and more accurate
phrase, I'm not sure. The results satisified me - Shostakovich sym.
5, for example, (I have yet to hear better, although Ancerl comes very
close) and the Vaughan Williams symphonies (all for RCA), and I
haven't heard a more satisfying and intense 'London Symphony'. Rather
more than just technical skill, I think.
Post by jrsnfld
Post by Jáns
I understand what you mean about Fricsay (surprise!) and Mravinsky, et
al. Some conductors have a natural way of getting what they want and
know how to communicate without any hysterics. I heard a broadcast of
a Toscanini rehearsal, and I was shocked that he needed to scream and
shout so much. I wonder how many of today's orchestras would tolerate
that sort of behaviour?
No one would tolerate that anymore. Those were different times.
Indeed. The days of the martinet (or "Martinique", as my grandfather
used to say) are well and truly over.
jrsnfld
2011-02-19 19:17:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jáns
Post by jrsnfld
Yes, but that's different than emphasizing their flexibility and sight
reading, which is what you said initially. Love at first sight is a
good way to say they were in sync from the beginning, and that's a
nice thought that might have something to do with flexibility. (In
this case it may have something to do with a flexible orchestra
pleasing a conductor who asks for little beyond technical skill. The
art of a flexible orchestra is to make all conductors feel loved.)
Now, whether or not one thinks the results were special just because
they were in sync is another matter...
Perhaps 'instant rapport' might have been a better and more accurate
phrase, I'm not sure.  The results satisified me - Shostakovich sym.
5, for example, (I have yet to hear better, although Ancerl comes very
close)
I really ought to hear that Shostakovich some day. I have his other
Shostakovich 5 and it is fine but not conducted with the same
penetrating clarity as, say, Kondrashin or Mravinsky, or the boldly
confident character of either Bernstein version. But it seems like
Previn knows what he's doing anyway.

--Jeff
Gerard
2011-02-19 19:49:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by jrsnfld
I really ought to hear that Shostakovich some day. I have his other
Shostakovich 5 and it is fine but not conducted with the same
penetrating clarity as, say, Kondrashin or Mravinsky, or the boldly
confident character of either Bernstein version. But it seems like
Previn knows what he's doing anyway.
That "other Shostakovich 5" is the one on EMI, with the Chicago SO?
That's a very good example of one of Previn's remakes that is absolutely "less
than the original" (while that original is in the top league).
M forever
2011-02-19 19:54:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by jrsnfld
Post by Jáns
Post by jrsnfld
Post by Jáns
Post by jrsnfld
Post by Jáns
Post by herman
Post by Randy Lane
During his tenure with the LSO, when he made so many great recordings
for EMI,
I think many of those LSO / Previn recordings were pretty lousy. Bad,
underrehearsed ensemble and no clear conductorial grasp of the entire
narrative.
I would have a hard time thinking of anything Previn did back then
that hasn't been superseded.
Perhaps you should think harder.
I forget his [Previn's] exact words, but he was bowled over by the
LSO, and amazed that they needed so little rehearsal time no matter
what the repertoire. I think it was the LSO's sight-reading skills
that impressed him most, not just the virtuosity of the playing.
Do sight-reading skills translate into great recordings?
--Jeff- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Not always, but they worked for Previn (and others, of course). But
good sight reading and versatility (a sort of LSO trademark) does mean
less rehearsal time, yes? Great recordings are matter of opinion, as
they always are and always have been.
Did Previn take advantage of this versatility by using less rehearsal
time? If so, that could explain why some of us feel his recordings
with the LSO sound a bit rough or (more likely) undercharacterized.
I've had some good experiences with their recordings. The Walton 1 is
still a favorite, though it no longer stands alone. Their Nutcracker
was my first complete recording of the work, and I enjoyed it for many
years until others replaced it. Their Rachmaninoff 2 was an early
favorite (and one of the few complete versions at the time) but not so
much now. The Debussy Images with Previn was one of my first CDs, but
it's fair to say that others superseded it. I recently bought their
Rimsky Scheherazade and liked it very much, but as nicely played and
conducted as it is, there are others that are more spectacular, or
refined, or what have you.
Of course, if anything, the LSO sounded less rehearsed under other
conductors in that era. For instance, Kertesz's Dvorak series, which
is exciting and fun but doesn't compare well when placed beside the
better refinement of Rowicki's recordings with the same orchestra.
It seems to me that Herman is exaggerating, but not by as much as some
would believe.
--Jeff- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
I really don't know if Previn took advantage, but it must have been a
bonus for him - and anyone else fortunate enough to conduct the LSO.
There's no doubt that sight-reading skills are a bonus, and no doubt
that the LSO remains famed for their quickness and flexibilty. The
same has been said about other orchestras of course, but Previn's
comments should carry even more weight because of his familiarity at
that time with the notoriously quick sight readers in Hollywood.
My main reason for replying to you was to point out that sight reading
skill is a basic for all great orchestras, but the production of great
recordings is not correlated to great sight reading or more efficient
rehearsals. Great recordings are made by proficiency shaped by
insightful, well communicated interpretations. After a certain basic
competency, nobody cares how well orchestras sight read for Stokowski,
Fricsay, Mravinsky, Rosbaud, Kleiber, Furtwangler, Giulini, Toscanini,
etc.; they care about the end product. Sometimes it's the result of
years of collaboration and sometimes the result of spontaneous accord,
but it's the collective personality that emerges that really counts,
something you rarely get when you sight read.
Post by Jáns
I
suppose I should be more patriotic and shout - 'Hungarian orchestras
are the best in the world!'  - but I don't do that sort of thing.
Well, you should, because they are! :-) Seriously, too few people seem
to realize how wonderful the various Hungarian orchestras are. Last
week I was listening to a fairly recent broadcast with D'Agostino and
the Magyar RSO and amazed to find myself totally hooked by their
Schubert 8, a piece I swore I would skip because, well, I (most of us,
actually) have too many great recordings of it already. This one
turned out to be a must-have!
And all those pianists, violinists, cellists...they "grow on trees" in
Hungary.
Trumpet players, too, apparently. Both of the current principals of
the BP are Hungarian, and I know a number of other very good trumpet
players from Hungary, too. They must have a trumpet player factory
there somewhere.
Post by jrsnfld
Nonetheless, one needn't be British to admire the flexibility and
facility of British orchestras.
--Jeff
Jáns
2011-02-19 22:35:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by M forever
Post by jrsnfld
And all those pianists, violinists, cellists...they "grow on trees" in
Hungary.
Trumpet players, too, apparently. Both of the current principals of
the BP are Hungarian, and I know a number of other very good trumpet
players from Hungary, too. They must have a trumpet player factory
there somewhere.
We have many musician factories! How many Hungarians have been
principal counductors/music directors of American orchestras? Quite a
long list, I think. I wish I could say the same about Hungarian
composers, but perhaps I take my own country's music for granted.
OTOH, I was away from Hungary for almost 43 years, so perhaps that's
why I like English music so much.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Some OT. I'm sorry that we have had so many disagreements, and I
really don't hate you, despite everything I've written in this group.
I know you don't have Nazi sympathies and it was silly of me to
suggest so. I hate to repeat myself: but after being forced to witness
what the SS did to my sister in 1944, memories like that are
impossible to erase. I know you were born afer WW2 and it is stupid to
blame you or any of your generation for anything like that.

And if I may put in a good word for Gerard; he isn't a "little idiot"
at all. I don't know him personally, but he's a nice guy with a fine
sense of humour and a good knowledge of recorded music. I respect him
for those qualities.
Gerard
2011-02-20 09:35:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jáns
And if I may put in a good word for Gerard; he isn't a "little idiot"
at all. I don't know him personally, but he's a nice guy with a fine
sense of humour and a good knowledge of recorded music. I respect him
for those qualities.
Thanks!
Jáns
2011-02-20 10:00:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gerard
Post by Jáns
And if I may put in a good word for Gerard; he isn't a "little idiot"
at all. I don't know him personally, but he's a nice guy with a fine
sense of humour and a good knowledge of recorded music. I respect him
for those qualities.
Thanks!
You don't need to thank me, but thanks anyway. My words are sincerely
meant. I have you thank for some recommendations, even though you
might not realise it. (It was before I started posting here). Thanks
to you, I have more Tchaikovsky 'Manfred' symphonies - including
Chailly/Concertgebouw. Perhaps not the very best version, but still
very good indeed.

As for M: Life is too short to make enemies. I know you don't get on
with him very well, and neither did I for a while. My fighting days
are over and I don't want to fight any more. Pax vobiscum :-)
Gerard
2011-02-20 10:42:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jáns
Post by Gerard
Post by Jáns
And if I may put in a good word for Gerard; he isn't a "little
idiot" at all. I don't know him personally, but he's a nice guy
with a fine sense of humour and a good knowledge of recorded
music. I respect him for those qualities.
Thanks!
You don't need to thank me, but thanks anyway. My words are sincerely
meant. I have you thank for some recommendations, even though you
might not realise it. (It was before I started posting here). Thanks
to you, I have more Tchaikovsky 'Manfred' symphonies - including
Chailly/Concertgebouw. Perhaps not the very best version, but still
very good indeed.
I almost would like to bet you still don't have Pletnev's.
BTW Previn has recorded the Manfred too (I have it on LP). Has that been issued
on CD ?
Jáns
2011-02-20 11:00:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gerard
Post by Jáns
Post by Gerard
Post by Jáns
And if I may put in a good word for Gerard; he isn't a "little
idiot" at all. I don't know him personally, but he's a nice guy
with a fine sense of humour and a good knowledge of recorded
music. I respect him for those qualities.
Thanks!
You don't need to thank me, but thanks anyway. My words are sincerely
meant. I have you thank for some recommendations, even though you
might not realise it. (It was before I started posting here). Thanks
to you, I have more Tchaikovsky 'Manfred' symphonies - including
Chailly/Concertgebouw. Perhaps not the very best version, but still
very good indeed.
I almost would like to bet you still don't have Pletnev's.
BTW Previn has recorded the Manfred too (I have it on LP). Has that been issued
on CD ?
- Show quoted text -
You have won your bet! The only Pletnev recording I have is a 2 CD set
of Scarlatti sonatas, and very fine it is.

I really don't know if Previn's 'Manfred' is available on CD. I didn't
know he had recorded it. But if it's anything like his 'Swan Lake',
then perhaps I don't want it. I have 6 Manfreds and that's enough for
me.
Gerard
2011-02-20 12:04:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jáns
You have won your bet! The only Pletnev recording I have is a 2 CD set
of Scarlatti sonatas, and very fine it is.
I really don't know if Previn's 'Manfred' is available on CD. I didn't
know he had recorded it. But if it's anything like his 'Swan Lake',
then perhaps I don't want it. I have 6 Manfreds and that's enough for
me.
That's nice for a start ;-)
Have you heard Jurowski's recording?
(a review at http://www.classicstoday.com/review.asp?ReviewNum=11963 )
Jáns
2011-02-20 12:20:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gerard
Post by Jáns
You have won your bet! The only Pletnev recording I have is a 2 CD set
of Scarlatti sonatas, and very fine it is.
I really don't know if Previn's 'Manfred' is available on CD. I didn't
know he had recorded it. But if it's anything like his 'Swan Lake',
then perhaps I don't want it. I have 6 Manfreds and that's enough for
me.
That's nice for a start ;-)
For a start and an end, I think. I love the Manfred Symphony, but
there is other music to listen to and I don't want to listen to any
piece too often in case I tire of it.
Post by Gerard
Have you heard Jurowski's recording?
(a review athttp://www.classicstoday.com/review.asp?ReviewNum=11963)
No, I haven't heard it, but I have read some very good reviews. Maybe
one day, but not yet.
Jáns
2011-02-20 12:34:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jáns
Post by Gerard
Post by Jáns
You have won your bet! The only Pletnev recording I have is a 2 CD set
of Scarlatti sonatas, and very fine it is.
I really don't know if Previn's 'Manfred' is available on CD. I didn't
know he had recorded it. But if it's anything like his 'Swan Lake',
then perhaps I don't want it. I have 6 Manfreds and that's enough for
me.
That's nice for a start ;-)
For a start and an end, I think. I love the Manfred Symphony, but
there is other music to listen to and I don't want to listen to any
piece too often in case I tire of it.
Post by Gerard
Have you heard Jurowski's recording?
(a review athttp://www.classicstoday.com/review.asp?ReviewNum=11963)
No, I haven't heard it, but I have read some very good reviews. Maybe
one day, but not yet.
BTW - to get back on topic- what do you think of Ashkenazy's MSND? The
tempi are generally a bit faster than Previn's (my favourite recording
of the complete music), but, imo.it's very good. Previn uses a youth
choir. I find this much more effective and 'fairy-like'. ( Sorry, I
can't think of a better term to describe it).
Gerard
2011-02-20 12:45:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jáns
Post by Jáns
Post by Gerard
Post by Jáns
You have won your bet! The only Pletnev recording I have is a 2
CD set of Scarlatti sonatas, and very fine it is.
I really don't know if Previn's 'Manfred' is available on CD. I
didn't know he had recorded it. But if it's anything like his
'Swan Lake', then perhaps I don't want it. I have 6 Manfreds
and that's enough for me.
That's nice for a start ;-)
For a start and an end, I think. I love the Manfred Symphony, but
there is other music to listen to and I don't want to listen to any
piece too often in case I tire of it.
Post by Gerard
Have you heard Jurowski's recording?
(a review
athttp://www.classicstoday.com/review.asp?ReviewNum=11963)
No, I haven't heard it, but I have read some very good reviews.
Maybe one day, but not yet.
BTW - to get back on topic- what do you think of Ashkenazy's MSND?
I've never seen or heard it.
Post by Jáns
The
tempi are generally a bit faster than Previn's (my favourite recording
of the complete music), but, imo.it's very good. Previn uses a youth
choir. I find this much more effective and 'fairy-like'. ( Sorry, I
can't think of a better term to describe it).
I've always liked Previn's recording, and never found another recording I liked
more.
Maybe some are "better", but then they tend to be more-than-complete (spoken
word included), which I don't like to hear. Previn's selection is so right!
Jáns
2011-02-20 13:23:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gerard
Post by Jáns
Post by Jáns
Post by Gerard
Post by Jáns
You have won your bet! The only Pletnev recording I have is a 2
CD set of Scarlatti sonatas, and very fine it is.
I really don't know if Previn's 'Manfred' is available on CD. I
didn't know he had recorded it. But if it's anything like his
'Swan Lake', then perhaps I don't want it. I have 6 Manfreds
and that's enough for me.
That's nice for a start ;-)
For a start and an end, I think. I love the Manfred Symphony, but
there is other music to listen to and I don't want to listen to any
piece too often in case I tire of it.
Post by Gerard
Have you heard Jurowski's recording?
(a review
athttp://www.classicstoday.com/review.asp?ReviewNum=11963)
No, I haven't heard it, but I have read some very good reviews.
Maybe one day, but not yet.
BTW - to get back on topic- what do you think of Ashkenazy's MSND?
I've never seen or heard it.
Post by Jáns
The
tempi are generally a bit faster than Previn's (my favourite recording
of the complete music), but, imo.it's very good. Previn uses a youth
choir. I find this much more effective and 'fairy-like'. ( Sorry, I
can't think of a better term to describe it).
I've always liked Previn's recording, and never found another recording I liked
more.
Maybe some are "better", but then they tend to be more-than-complete (spoken
word included), which I don't like to hear. Previn's selection is so right!
- Show quoted text -
Likewise, I prefer Previn's recording - quite magical - as it should
be.

By "more than complete", do you mean Ozawa's recording with spoken
dialogue? I know the play well enough and I don't need dialogue to
help me with the music. The music speaks for itself.
Gerard
2011-02-20 13:48:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jáns
Post by Gerard
Post by Jáns
Post by Jáns
Post by Gerard
Post by Jáns
You have won your bet! The only Pletnev recording I have is
a 2 CD set of Scarlatti sonatas, and very fine it is.
I really don't know if Previn's 'Manfred' is available on
CD. I didn't know he had recorded it. But if it's anything
like his 'Swan Lake', then perhaps I don't want it. I have
6 Manfreds and that's enough for me.
That's nice for a start ;-)
For a start and an end, I think. I love the Manfred Symphony,
but there is other music to listen to and I don't want to
listen to any piece too often in case I tire of it.
Post by Gerard
Have you heard Jurowski's recording?
(a review
athttp://www.classicstoday.com/review.asp?ReviewNum=11963)
No, I haven't heard it, but I have read some very good reviews.
Maybe one day, but not yet.
BTW - to get back on topic- what do you think of Ashkenazy's MSND?
I've never seen or heard it.
Post by Jáns
The
tempi are generally a bit faster than Previn's (my favourite
recording of the complete music), but, imo.it's very good. Previn
uses a youth choir. I find this much more effective and
'fairy-like'. ( Sorry, I can't think of a better term to describe
it).
I've always liked Previn's recording, and never found another
recording I liked more.
Maybe some are "better", but then they tend to be
more-than-complete (spoken word included), which I don't like to
hear. Previn's selection is so right!
- Show quoted text -
Likewise, I prefer Previn's recording - quite magical - as it should
be.
By "more than complete", do you mean Ozawa's recording with spoken
dialogue? I know the play well enough and I don't need dialogue to
help me with the music. The music speaks for itself.
I don't know Ozawa's recording as well. But I have a Teldec recording by Masur
with some spoken dialogue (IIRC Abbado also has made such a recording), and I
never listen to it because of that reason. When I want to hear it, I want to
hear the music.
For the same reason I don't like to listen to complete Peer Gynt recordings.
Once or twice hearing it complete is interesting, but not a third time.
Kip Williams
2011-02-20 14:47:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jáns
By "more than complete", do you mean Ozawa's recording with spoken
dialogue? I know the play well enough and I don't need dialogue to
help me with the music. The music speaks for itself.
If it was anybody but Shakespeare, I'd agree instantly. As it is, I'd
have to think about it. There's music and there's music.


Kip W
Jáns
2011-02-20 15:57:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kip Williams
Post by Jáns
By "more than complete", do you mean Ozawa's recording with spoken
dialogue? I know the play well enough and I don't need dialogue to
help me with the music. The music speaks for itself.
If it was anybody but Shakespeare, I'd agree instantly. As it is, I'd
have to think about it. There's music and there's music.
Kip W
I'm not a Shakespeare expert, but even my pathetic English is good
enough to get me through MSND. Even if the listener only has a vague
idea of what's going on, that's enough to let the music speak. Only my
opinion.
Matthew B. Tepper
2011-02-20 18:08:01 UTC
Permalink
Jáns <***@gmail.com> appears to have caused the following letters to
be typed in news:5d0e122e-a46a-4763-9316-d25b761ba5e2
Post by Jáns
By "more than complete", do you mean Ozawa's recording with spoken
dialogue? I know the play well enough and I don't need dialogue to
help me with the music. The music speaks for itself.
I learned the music from Leinsdorf/BSO, which I see got issued in 1992 as an
RCA Silver Seal, and is now available as an ArkivCD. Tempting.
--
Matthew B. Tepper: WWW, science fiction, classical music, ducks!
Read about "Proty" here: http://home.earthlink.net/~oy/proty.html
To write to me, do for my address what Androcles did for the lion
Opinions expressed here are not necessarily those of my employers
ivanmaxim
2011-02-20 18:32:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gerard
Post by Jáns
Post by Jáns
Post by Gerard
Post by Jáns
You have won your bet! The only Pletnev recording I have is a 2
CD set of Scarlatti sonatas, and very fine it is.
I really don't know if Previn's 'Manfred' is available on CD. I
didn't know he had recorded it. But if it's anything like his
'Swan Lake', then perhaps I don't want it. I have 6 Manfreds
and that's enough for me.
That's nice for a start ;-)
For a start and an end, I think. I love the Manfred Symphony, but
there is other music to listen to and I don't want to listen to any
piece too often in case I tire of it.
Post by Gerard
Have you heard Jurowski's recording?
(a review
athttp://www.classicstoday.com/review.asp?ReviewNum=11963)
No, I haven't heard it, but I have read some very good reviews.
Maybe one day, but not yet.
BTW - to get back on topic- what do you think of Ashkenazy's MSND?
I've never seen or heard it.
Post by Jáns
The
tempi are generally a bit faster than Previn's (my favourite recording
of the complete music), but, imo.it's very good. Previn uses a youth
choir. I find this much more effective and 'fairy-like'. ( Sorry, I
can't think of a better term to describe it).
I've always liked Previn's recording, and never found another recording I liked
more.
Maybe some are "better", but then they tend to be more-than-complete (spoken
word included), which I don't like to hear. Previn's selection is so right!- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Do you like Maags??? Wagner fan
Gerard
2011-02-20 19:01:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by ivanmaxim
Post by Gerard
Post by Jáns
Post by Jáns
Post by Gerard
Post by Jáns
You have won your bet! The only Pletnev recording I have is
a 2 CD set of Scarlatti sonatas, and very fine it is.
I really don't know if Previn's 'Manfred' is available on
CD. I didn't know he had recorded it. But if it's anything
like his 'Swan Lake', then perhaps I don't want it. I have
6 Manfreds and that's enough for me.
That's nice for a start ;-)
For a start and an end, I think. I love the Manfred Symphony,
but there is other music to listen to and I don't want to
listen to any piece too often in case I tire of it.
Post by Gerard
Have you heard Jurowski's recording?
(a review
athttp://www.classicstoday.com/review.asp?ReviewNum=11963)
No, I haven't heard it, but I have read some very good reviews.
Maybe one day, but not yet.
BTW - to get back on topic- what do you think of Ashkenazy's MSND?
I've never seen or heard it.
Post by Jáns
The
tempi are generally a bit faster than Previn's (my favourite
recording of the complete music), but, imo.it's very good. Previn
uses a youth choir. I find this much more effective and
'fairy-like'. ( Sorry, I can't think of a better term to describe
it).
I've always liked Previn's recording, and never found another recording I liked
more.
Maybe some are "better", but then they tend to be
more-than-complete (spoken
word included), which I don't like to hear. Previn's selection is
so right!- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Do you like Maags??? Wagner fan
I don't remember having heard it.
But I can imagine liking it .. ;)
Did he record the complete incidental music?
ivanmaxim
2011-02-20 20:28:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gerard
Post by Gerard
Post by Jáns
Post by Jáns
Post by Gerard
Post by Jáns
You have won your bet! The only Pletnev recording I have is
a 2 CD set of Scarlatti sonatas, and very fine it is.
I really don't know if Previn's 'Manfred' is available on
CD. I didn't know he had recorded it. But if it's anything
like his 'Swan Lake', then perhaps I don't want it. I have
6 Manfreds and that's enough for me.
That's nice for a start ;-)
For a start and an end, I think. I love the Manfred Symphony,
but there is other music to listen to and I don't want to
listen to any piece too often in case I tire of it.
Post by Gerard
Have you heard Jurowski's recording?
(a review
athttp://www.classicstoday.com/review.asp?ReviewNum=11963)
No, I haven't heard it, but I have read some very good reviews.
Maybe one day, but not yet.
BTW - to get back on topic- what do you think of Ashkenazy's MSND?
I've never seen or heard it.
Post by Jáns
The
tempi are generally a bit faster than Previn's (my favourite
recording of the complete music), but, imo.it's very good. Previn
uses a youth choir. I find this much more effective and
'fairy-like'. ( Sorry, I can't think of a better term to describe
it).
I've always liked Previn's recording, and never found another recording I liked
more.
Maybe some are "better", but then they tend to be
more-than-complete (spoken
word included), which I don't like to hear. Previn's selection is
so right!- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Do you like Maags???  Wagner fan
I don't remember having heard it.
But I can imagine liking it .. ;)
Did he record the complete incidental music?- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Here it is - I really like it

http://www.amazon.com/Mendelssohn-Midsummer-Nights-Symphony-Orchestra/dp/B00004TEUX/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=music&qid=1298233594&sr=8-1-spell

best Wagner fan
Gerard
2011-02-20 21:06:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by ivanmaxim
Post by Gerard
Post by Gerard
Post by Jáns
On Feb 20, 12:04 pm, "Gerard"
Post by Gerard
Post by Jáns
You have won your bet! The only Pletnev recording I
have is a 2 CD set of Scarlatti sonatas, and very fine
it is.
I really don't know if Previn's 'Manfred' is available
on CD. I didn't know he had recorded it. But if it's
anything like his 'Swan Lake', then perhaps I don't
want it. I have 6 Manfreds and that's enough for me.
That's nice for a start ;-)
For a start and an end, I think. I love the Manfred
Symphony, but there is other music to listen to and I don't
want to listen to any piece too often in case I tire of it.
Post by Gerard
Have you heard Jurowski's recording?
(a review
athttp://www.classicstoday.com/review.asp?ReviewNum=11963)
No, I haven't heard it, but I have read some very good
reviews. Maybe one day, but not yet.
BTW - to get back on topic- what do you think of Ashkenazy's MSND?
I've never seen or heard it.
Post by Jáns
The
tempi are generally a bit faster than Previn's (my favourite
recording of the complete music), but, imo.it's very good.
Previn uses a youth choir. I find this much more effective and
'fairy-like'. ( Sorry, I can't think of a better term to
describe it).
I've always liked Previn's recording, and never found another recording I liked
more.
Maybe some are "better", but then they tend to be
more-than-complete (spoken
word included), which I don't like to hear. Previn's selection
is so right!- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Do you like Maags??? Wagner fan
I don't remember having heard it.
But I can imagine liking it .. ;)
Did he record the complete incidental music?- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Here it is - I really like it
http://www.amazon.com/Mendelssohn-Midsummer-Nights-Symphony-Orchestra/dp/B00004TEUX/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=music&qid=1298233594&sr=8-1-spell
Post by ivanmaxim
best Wagner fan
Thanks.
Hm, that looks like a recording I should have, while I don't.
Maybe because I have another recording of the 3rd symphony with Maag.
Bob Harper
2011-02-20 20:30:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gerard
Post by ivanmaxim
Do you like Maags??? Wagner fan
I don't remember having heard it.
But I can imagine liking it .. ;)
Did he record the complete incidental music?
No, just a selection (8 numbers, including the Overture, Scherzo,
Nocturne, and Wedding March). It's marvellous.

Bob Harper
Kip Williams
2011-02-20 14:46:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jáns
For a start and an end, I think. I love the Manfred Symphony, but
there is other music to listen to and I don't want to listen to any
piece too often in case I tire of it.
How do you know that you don't tire of pieces based on how long you've
been listening to them and not how often?


Kip W
Jáns
2011-02-20 15:52:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kip Williams
Post by Jáns
For a start and an end, I think. I love the Manfred Symphony, but
there is other music to listen to and I don't want to listen to any
piece too often in case I tire of it.
How do you know that you don't tire of pieces based on how long you've
been listening to them and not how often?
Kip W
(?) I'm not sure if that's a serious question! I *never* listen to the
same piece very often. One possible exception - RVW's Sea Symphony;
but even then, I don't listen to it every day/week/month, etc.

A teenage kid lives quite close to me. He buys whatever rock single
happens to be all the rage; then plays it over 30 times or more until
it drives me nuts. That's too often. In another week or so, he will
tire of it and I'll never hear it again - thank God! So far, no
classical piece has had that effect on me - with the possible
exception of the Blue goddamn Danube - sorry, 'Duna' - which, BTW,
doesn't look very blue today.
Kip Williams
2011-02-20 19:11:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jáns
Post by Kip Williams
Post by Jáns
For a start and an end, I think. I love the Manfred Symphony, but
there is other music to listen to and I don't want to listen to any
piece too often in case I tire of it.
How do you know that you don't tire of pieces based on how long you've
been listening to them and not how often?
(?) I'm not sure if that's a serious question! I *never* listen to the
same piece very often. One possible exception - RVW's Sea Symphony;
but even then, I don't listen to it every day/week/month, etc.
So you don't actually know whether you tire of a piece based on how many
times you've heard it, or whether you tire of it based on how long ago
you first heard it. That wouldn't apply to music you didn't like the
first time you heard it, I'd guess.

Serious? Less serious than nuclear war, undoubtedly, and more serious
than lolcats.


Kip W
Jáns
2011-02-20 21:50:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kip Williams
Post by Jáns
Post by Kip Williams
Post by Jáns
For a start and an end, I think. I love the Manfred Symphony, but
there is other music to listen to and I don't want to listen to any
piece too often in case I tire of it.
How do you know that you don't tire of pieces based on how long you've
been listening to them and not how often?
(?) I'm not sure if that's a serious question! I *never* listen to the
same piece very often. One possible exception - RVW's Sea Symphony;
but even then, I don't listen to it every day/week/month, etc.
So you don't actually know whether you tire of a piece based on how many
times you've heard it, or whether you tire of it based on how long ago
you first heard it. That wouldn't apply to music you didn't like the
first time you heard it, I'd guess.
Serious? Less serious than nuclear war, undoubtedly, and more serious
than lolcats.
Kip W
Kip - I'm so sorry, but I'm not really "with it" today. I don't like
to spread misery, but my depression is taking hold again. I'm sure
I'll be alright soon. Just a lot of bad memories (one in particular)
and stuff like that. Posting at rmcr helps sometimes, but I'm feeling
much worse than usual. And I don't mind admitting that I've been
crying. Sorry, but there you have it. I'll pull through because I have
no choice.

My best wishes to you,

JF
Ray Hall
2011-02-20 22:50:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jáns
Post by Kip Williams
Post by Jáns
Post by Kip Williams
Post by Jáns
For a start and an end, I think. I love the Manfred Symphony, but
there is other music to listen to and I don't want to listen to any
piece too often in case I tire of it.
How do you know that you don't tire of pieces based on how long you've
been listening to them and not how often?
(?) I'm not sure if that's a serious question! I *never* listen to the
same piece very often. One possible exception - RVW's Sea Symphony;
but even then, I don't listen to it every day/week/month, etc.
So you don't actually know whether you tire of a piece based on how many
times you've heard it, or whether you tire of it based on how long ago
you first heard it. That wouldn't apply to music you didn't like the
first time you heard it, I'd guess.
Serious? Less serious than nuclear war, undoubtedly, and more serious
than lolcats.
Kip W
Kip - I'm so sorry, but I'm not really "with it" today. I don't like
to spread misery, but my depression is taking hold again. I'm sure
I'll be alright soon. Just a lot of bad memories (one in particular)
and stuff like that. Posting at rmcr helps sometimes, but I'm feeling
much worse than usual. And I don't mind admitting that I've been
crying. Sorry, but there you have it. I'll pull through because I have
no choice.
Check in to a doctor. Get well soon.

Ray Hall, Taree
Kip Williams
2011-02-20 22:58:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jáns
Kip - I'm so sorry, but I'm not really "with it" today. I don't like
to spread misery, but my depression is taking hold again. I'm sure
I'll be alright soon. Just a lot of bad memories (one in particular)
and stuff like that. Posting at rmcr helps sometimes, but I'm feeling
much worse than usual. And I don't mind admitting that I've been
crying. Sorry, but there you have it. I'll pull through because I have
no choice.
My best wishes to you,
And mine to you. I hope I haven't made it worse.


Kip W
Jáns
2011-02-20 23:16:31 UTC
Permalink
Many, many thanks to Ray and to you. And no, Kip, you haven't made
anything worse. I'll be alright if I can get some decent sleep for a
couple of nights.

Ray; there is nothing that any doctor can do for me - apart from
giving me my sister back - but that's impossible. It's something I've
never been able live with, but I thank you for your kindness.

Ray Hall
2011-02-20 22:37:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kip Williams
Post by Jáns
Post by Kip Williams
Post by Jáns
For a start and an end, I think. I love the Manfred Symphony, but
there is other music to listen to and I don't want to listen to any
piece too often in case I tire of it.
How do you know that you don't tire of pieces based on how long you've
been listening to them and not how often?
(?) I'm not sure if that's a serious question! I *never* listen to the
same piece very often. One possible exception - RVW's Sea Symphony;
but even then, I don't listen to it every day/week/month, etc.
So you don't actually know whether you tire of a piece based on how many
times you've heard it, or whether you tire of it based on how long ago
you first heard it. That wouldn't apply to music you didn't like the
first time you heard it, I'd guess.
Serious? Less serious than nuclear war, undoubtedly, and more serious
than lolcats.
Kip W
I agree with Jáns on this point. It is quite clear when a piece starts
to become too familiar, as some pieces have through too much exposure
early on in my listening.

This is the reason I avoid any over-exposure by selecting a varied diet
of listening. There is simply too much good music written over time,
between genres, styles, that is available. Any repeated listening is
only given to more complex music in an effort to assimilate and
appreciate its meaning.

Ray Hall, Taree
Kip Williams
2011-02-20 23:02:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ray Hall
I agree with Jáns on this point. It is quite clear when a piece starts
to become too familiar, as some pieces have through too much exposure
early on in my listening.
This is the reason I avoid any over-exposure by selecting a varied diet
of listening. There is simply too much good music written over time,
between genres, styles, that is available. Any repeated listening is
only given to more complex music in an effort to assimilate and
appreciate its meaning.
It's like with anything else — food, for instance. There is often
"limerance," which is the fifty-cent word for love at first sight. Then
there's some binging. Then it may become a standard item for you, or you
may cool off of it.

With music, there's an additional pre-limerance stage sometimes where
the whole piece hasn't yet come together in my mind.

It's still not clear to me if that has to do with how many times I've
listened to the piece or not, though. And it doesn't much matter, I suppose.


Kip W
Ray Hall
2011-02-18 22:19:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jáns
Post by herman
Post by Randy Lane
During his tenure with the LSO, when he made so many great recordings
for EMI,
I think many of those LSO / Previn recordings were pretty lousy. Bad,
underrehearsed ensemble and no clear conductorial grasp of the entire
narrative.
I would have a hard time thinking of anything Previn did back then
that hasn't been superseded.
Perhaps you should think harder.
I forget his [Previn's] exact words, but he was bowled over by the
LSO, and amazed that they needed so little rehearsal time no matter
what the repertoire. I think it was the LSO's sight-reading skills
that impressed him most, not just the virtuosity of the playing.
Exactly. Besides which, most of his work for RCA, not so much EMI, will
never be equalled by the present batch of under-45 baton wavers, let
alone many of the older ones. And the LSO was only part the reason.

Ray Hall, Taree
herman
2011-02-19 08:54:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jáns
Post by herman
Post by Randy Lane
During his tenure with the LSO, when he made so many great recordings
for EMI,
I think many of those LSO / Previn recordings were pretty lousy. Bad,
underrehearsed ensemble and no clear conductorial grasp of the entire
narrative.
I would have a hard time thinking of anything Previn did back then
that hasn't been superseded.
Perhaps you should think harder.
I forget his [Previn's] exact words, but he was bowled over by the
LSO, and amazed that they needed so little rehearsal time no matter
what the repertoire. I think it was the LSO's sight-reading skills
that impressed him most, not just the virtuosity of the playing.
Perhaps it's you who should think harder. Praising an orchestra for
their sightreading skills is a completely vapid compliment. All
orchestras of that rank can do that. It's fundamental. Besaically it's
saying 'wow, I can't believe the LSO is an orchestra!' The way you put
it actually reinforces my point. Here is a conductor who has multiple
obligations in geographically disparate places (in that respect Previn
was actually ahead of his time), not completely sure whether he wants
to be a conductor, a Great Pianist of Century (kidding!), a 2d rate
composer, or one of those guys who pontificate about the arts on tv.

So, an orchestra that doesn't get restive if the conductor talks for a
couple of minutes before the recording and then proceeds to make the
recording without getting bogged down in details, is a perfect fit for
the man Previn was in the seventies. Wow, I didn't realize we could
make records this fast!

Why do I feel that way? I used to have a number of Previn LPs in the
seventies, and I hadn't listened to those for decades when EMI started
reissuing those recordings as budget priced cds. So I bought a couple
of those, and I couldn't believe how messy the playing was. I hadn't
noticed this when I was younger, and didn't have comparison
recordings - and just more discerning ears.

It's quite possible there are a few good recordings among these, of
course.
Jáns
2011-02-19 09:30:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by herman
Post by Jáns
Post by herman
Post by Randy Lane
During his tenure with the LSO, when he made so many great recordings
for EMI,
I think many of those LSO / Previn recordings were pretty lousy. Bad,
underrehearsed ensemble and no clear conductorial grasp of the entire
narrative.
I would have a hard time thinking of anything Previn did back then
that hasn't been superseded.
Perhaps you should think harder.
I forget his [Previn's] exact words, but he was bowled over by the
LSO, and amazed that they needed so little rehearsal time no matter
what the repertoire. I think it was the LSO's sight-reading skills
that impressed him most, not just the virtuosity of the playing.
Perhaps it's you who should think harder. Praising an orchestra for
their sightreading skills is a completely vapid compliment. All
orchestras of that rank can do that. It's fundamental. Besaically it's
saying 'wow, I can't believe the LSO is an orchestra!' The way you put
it actually reinforces my point. Here is a conductor who has multiple
obligations in geographically disparate places (in that respect Previn
was actually ahead of his time), not completely sure whether he wants
to be a conductor, a Great Pianist of Century (kidding!), a 2d rate
composer, or one of those guys who pontificate about the arts on tv.
So, an orchestra that doesn't get restive if the conductor talks for a
couple of minutes before the recording and then proceeds to make the
recording without getting bogged down in details, is a perfect fit for
the man Previn was in the seventies. Wow, I didn't realize we could
make records this fast!
Why do I feel that way? I used to have a number of Previn LPs in the
seventies, and I hadn't listened to those for decades when EMI started
reissuing those recordings as budget priced cds. So I bought a couple
of those, and I couldn't believe how messy the playing was. I hadn't
noticed this when I was younger, and didn't have comparison
recordings  -  and just more discerning ears.
It's quite possible there are a few good recordings among these, of
course.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
I think Jeff has already clarified matters with regard to LSO/Previn.
I didn't hear every recording they made for EMI, so perhaps I do need
to think harder. But the LSO remains very near the top of my list of
really great orchestras.
Jáns
2011-02-19 09:43:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jáns
Post by herman
Post by Jáns
Post by herman
Post by Randy Lane
During his tenure with the LSO, when he made so many great recordings
for EMI,
I think many of those LSO / Previn recordings were pretty lousy. Bad,
underrehearsed ensemble and no clear conductorial grasp of the entire
narrative.
I would have a hard time thinking of anything Previn did back then
that hasn't been superseded.
Perhaps you should think harder.
I forget his [Previn's] exact words, but he was bowled over by the
LSO, and amazed that they needed so little rehearsal time no matter
what the repertoire. I think it was the LSO's sight-reading skills
that impressed him most, not just the virtuosity of the playing.
Perhaps it's you who should think harder. Praising an orchestra for
their sightreading skills is a completely vapid compliment. All
orchestras of that rank can do that. It's fundamental. Besaically it's
saying 'wow, I can't believe the LSO is an orchestra!' The way you put
it actually reinforces my point. Here is a conductor who has multiple
obligations in geographically disparate places (in that respect Previn
was actually ahead of his time), not completely sure whether he wants
to be a conductor, a Great Pianist of Century (kidding!), a 2d rate
composer, or one of those guys who pontificate about the arts on tv.
So, an orchestra that doesn't get restive if the conductor talks for a
couple of minutes before the recording and then proceeds to make the
recording without getting bogged down in details, is a perfect fit for
the man Previn was in the seventies. Wow, I didn't realize we could
make records this fast!
Why do I feel that way? I used to have a number of Previn LPs in the
seventies, and I hadn't listened to those for decades when EMI started
reissuing those recordings as budget priced cds. So I bought a couple
of those, and I couldn't believe how messy the playing was. I hadn't
noticed this when I was younger, and didn't have comparison
recordings  -  and just more discerning ears.
It's quite possible there are a few good recordings among these, of
course.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
I think Jeff has already clarified matters with regard to LSO/Previn.
I didn't hear every recording they made for EMI, so perhaps I do need
to think harder. But the LSO remains very near the top of my list of
really great orchestras.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
And I apologise for my half-hearted response. Maybe when I feel a
little more awake.......
Gerard
2011-02-19 09:42:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by herman
Post by Jáns
Post by herman
Post by Randy Lane
During his tenure with the LSO, when he made so many great
recordings for EMI,
I think many of those LSO / Previn recordings were pretty lousy.
Bad, underrehearsed ensemble and no clear conductorial grasp of
the entire narrative.
I would have a hard time thinking of anything Previn did back then
that hasn't been superseded.
Perhaps you should think harder.
I forget his [Previn's] exact words, but he was bowled over by the
LSO, and amazed that they needed so little rehearsal time no matter
what the repertoire. I think it was the LSO's sight-reading skills
that impressed him most, not just the virtuosity of the playing.
Perhaps it's you who should think harder. Praising an orchestra for
their sightreading skills is a completely vapid compliment. All
orchestras of that rank can do that. It's fundamental. Besaically it's
saying 'wow, I can't believe the LSO is an orchestra!' The way you put
it actually reinforces my point. Here is a conductor who has multiple
obligations in geographically disparate places (in that respect Previn
was actually ahead of his time), not completely sure whether he wants
to be a conductor, a Great Pianist of Century (kidding!), a 2d rate
composer, or one of those guys who pontificate about the arts on tv.
So, an orchestra that doesn't get restive if the conductor talks for a
couple of minutes before the recording and then proceeds to make the
recording without getting bogged down in details, is a perfect fit for
the man Previn was in the seventies. Wow, I didn't realize we could
make records this fast!
Why do I feel that way? I used to have a number of Previn LPs in the
seventies, and I hadn't listened to those for decades when EMI started
reissuing those recordings as budget priced cds. So I bought a couple
of those, and I couldn't believe how messy the playing was.
Quite recently I compared a few parts of Previn's Romeo and Juliet (Prokofiev)
with a few other recordings.
I had never noticed how marvelous the playing was.
Jáns
2011-02-19 09:46:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gerard
Post by herman
Post by Jáns
Post by herman
Post by Randy Lane
During his tenure with the LSO, when he made so many great
recordings for EMI,
I think many of those LSO / Previn recordings were pretty lousy.
Bad, underrehearsed ensemble and no clear conductorial grasp of
the entire narrative.
I would have a hard time thinking of anything Previn did back then
that hasn't been superseded.
Perhaps you should think harder.
I forget his [Previn's] exact words, but he was bowled over by the
LSO, and amazed that they needed so little rehearsal time no matter
what the repertoire. I think it was the LSO's sight-reading skills
that impressed him most, not just the virtuosity of the playing.
Perhaps it's you who should think harder. Praising an orchestra for
their sightreading skills is a completely vapid compliment. All
orchestras of that rank can do that. It's fundamental. Besaically it's
saying 'wow, I can't believe the LSO is an orchestra!' The way you put
it actually reinforces my point. Here is a conductor who has multiple
obligations in geographically disparate places (in that respect Previn
was actually ahead of his time), not completely sure whether he wants
to be a conductor, a Great Pianist of Century (kidding!), a 2d rate
composer, or one of those guys who pontificate about the arts on tv.
So, an orchestra that doesn't get restive if the conductor talks for a
couple of minutes before the recording and then proceeds to make the
recording without getting bogged down in details, is a perfect fit for
the man Previn was in the seventies. Wow, I didn't realize we could
make records this fast!
Why do I feel that way? I used to have a number of Previn LPs in the
seventies, and I hadn't listened to those for decades when EMI started
reissuing those recordings as budget priced cds. So I bought a couple
of those, and I couldn't believe how messy the playing was.
Quite recently I compared a few parts of Previn's Romeo and Juliet (Prokofiev)
with a few other recordings.
I had never noticed how marvelous the playing was.
- Show quoted text -
It still keeps *me* happy!
Ed Romans
2011-02-19 12:28:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by herman
Post by herman
I think many of those LSO / Previn recordings were pretty lousy. Bad,
underrehearsed ensemble and no clear conductorial grasp of the entire
narrative.
Which recordings are you referring to? As others have mention, most of
Previn's LSO recordings are of early 20th century music like
Rachmaninov, Prokofiev, Orff, RVW and Shostakovich rather than say
Beethoven, Brahms, Mozart. Could you give some actual examples of
where you hear underrehearsed ensemble? Why would they be
underrehearsed compared to other orchestras anyway? The clips I've
seen from that era show Previn to be a fairly demanding technician in
rehearsal.

And whilst you're at it could you explain what "conductorial grasp"
and "narrative" you feel is missing in his conducting of these 20th
century works? This seems a very strange complaint to level at the
conducting of this type of music.
Post by herman
Here is a conductor who has multiple
obligations in geographically disparate places (in that respect Previn
was actually ahead of his time), not completely sure whether he wants
to be a conductor, a Great Pianist of Century (kidding!), a 2d rate
composer, or one of those guys who pontificate about the arts on tv.
This doesn't make much sense to me. Although he may composed more from
the 1990s, Previn gave up his film music career in the 1960s and
concentrated on conducting and performing during the LSO era. As far
as I know Previn lived in the UK at the time and for the first half of
the 1970s he was only in charge of the LSO. A lot of his piano playing
and TV shows were part of his LSO activities not separate.

So perhaps you could give some specific examples of what you mean?

Ed
Jáns
2011-02-19 12:59:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ed Romans
Post by herman
Post by herman
I think many of those LSO / Previn recordings were pretty lousy. Bad,
underrehearsed ensemble and no clear conductorial grasp of the entire
narrative.
Which recordings are you referring to? As others have mention, most of
Previn's LSO recordings are of early 20th century music like
Rachmaninov, Prokofiev, Orff, RVW and Shostakovich rather than say
Beethoven, Brahms, Mozart. Could you give some actual examples of
where you hear underrehearsed ensemble? Why would they be
underrehearsed compared to other orchestras anyway? The clips I've
seen from that era show Previn to be a fairly demanding technician in
rehearsal.
And whilst you're at it could you explain what "conductorial grasp"
and "narrative" you feel is missing in his conducting of these 20th
century works? This seems a very strange complaint to level at the
conducting of this type of music.
Post by herman
Here is a conductor who has multiple
obligations in geographically disparate places (in that respect Previn
was actually ahead of his time), not completely sure whether he wants
to be a conductor, a Great Pianist of Century (kidding!), a 2d rate
composer, or one of those guys who pontificate about the arts on tv.
This doesn't make much sense to me. Although he may composed more from
the 1990s, Previn gave up his film music career in the 1960s and
concentrated on conducting and performing during the LSO era. As far
as I know Previn lived in the UK at the time and for the first half of
the 1970s he was only in charge of the LSO. A lot of his piano playing
and TV shows were part of his LSO activities not separate.
So perhaps you could give some specific examples of what you mean?
Ed
You have made my point far better than ever I could. BTW, I also saw
Previn's TV broadcasts: Both informative and witty, and extremely
enjoyable. In particular, I loved his demo of how to open Strauss's
'Don Juan'. Bring down baton while the audience is still applauding in
case of a ragged opening. If you have a score, you'll see that it's
not always easy to pull off, (more difficult than it sounds), and I've
heard more than one world class orchestra make a mess of it in
concert.

And after searching through my CDs - everything is a mess right now,
because I shall be leaving Hungary (again) quite soon - I find some
Previn/EMI recordings that I really enjoy. Romeo & Juliet; Cinderella;
Carmina Burana, and so on. I recall Previn's version of The Planets,
and that was my only real disappointment. But I think it's unfair to
expect any conductor to "deliver the goods" every time.
herman
2011-02-19 15:37:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jáns
. In particular, I loved his demo of how to open Strauss's
'Don Juan'. Bring down baton while the audience is still applauding in
case of a ragged opening. If you have a score, you'll see that it's
not always easy to pull off,
Again, this is a very strange way of saying Previn is a great
conductor.
Jáns
2011-02-19 17:39:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by herman
Post by Jáns
. In particular, I loved his demo of how to open Strauss's
'Don Juan'. Bring down baton while the audience is still applauding in
case of a ragged opening. If you have a score, you'll see that it's
not always easy to pull off,
Again, this is a very strange way of saying Previn is a great
conductor.
Okay, I get the message: you don't admire Previn, but I agree with you
about the Tchaikovsky ballets. Well played, but that's about all. Swan
Lake really disappointed me. (Lanchberry and Dutoit are much better,
IMO) I haven't heard the others. And I agree that I don't always make
my point very well, for which I apologise.
Matthew B. Tepper
2011-02-19 18:10:18 UTC
Permalink
herman <***@yahoo.com> appears to have caused the following letters to be
typed in news:b6ebb578-5670-459d-ac09-
In particular, I loved his demo of how to open Strauss's 'Don Juan'. Bring
down baton while the audience is still applauding in case of a ragged
opening. If you have a score, you'll see that it's not always easy to pull
off,
Again, this is a very strange way of saying Previn is a great conductor.
Great conductor, probably not. Great performer, possibly so.
--
Matthew B. Tepper: WWW, science fiction, classical music, ducks!
Read about "Proty" here: http://home.earthlink.net/~oy/proty.html
To write to me, do for my address what Androcles did for the lion
Opinions expressed here are not necessarily those of my employers
O
2011-02-19 22:10:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Matthew B. Tepper
typed in news:b6ebb578-5670-459d-ac09-
In particular, I loved his demo of how to open Strauss's 'Don Juan'. Bring
down baton while the audience is still applauding in case of a ragged
opening. If you have a score, you'll see that it's not always easy to pull
off,
Again, this is a very strange way of saying Previn is a great conductor.
Great conductor, probably not. Great performer, possibly so.
Well, we already know he's a great pianist of the century. I have a
recording that says so.

-Owen
Matthew B. Tepper
2011-02-19 18:10:17 UTC
Permalink
Jáns <***@gmail.com> appears to have caused the following letters to
be typed in news:2de16915-a3eb-4db4-a249-7d9d1f500900
In particular, I loved [Previn's] demo of how to open Strauss's 'Don
Juan'. Bring down baton while the audience is still applauding in case of
a ragged opening.
Isn't that a Muti practice too?
--
Matthew B. Tepper: WWW, science fiction, classical music, ducks!
Read about "Proty" here: http://home.earthlink.net/~oy/proty.html
To write to me, do for my address what Androcles did for the lion
Opinions expressed here are not necessarily those of my employers
Jáns
2011-02-19 18:29:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Matthew B. Tepper
be typed in news:2de16915-a3eb-4db4-a249-7d9d1f500900
In particular, I loved [Previn's] demo of how to open Strauss's 'Don
Juan'. Bring down baton while the audience is still applauding in case of
a ragged opening.
Isn't that a Muti practice too?
I really don't know. I've seen Muti conduct, but not Don Juan. Perhaps
Muti was allowed more rehearsal time, but I don't know that either.
There is quite a lot I don't know;)
CharlesSmith
2011-02-19 21:45:26 UTC
Permalink
And after searching through my CDs  - everything is a mess right now,
because I shall be leaving Hungary (again) quite soon - I find some
Previn/EMI recordings that I really enjoy. Romeo & Juliet; Cinderella;
Carmina Burana, and so on. I recall Previn's version of The Planets,
and that was my only real disappointment. But I think it's unfair to
expect any conductor to "deliver the goods" every time.
I would add Turangalila to the Previn/LSO top-notch list.

Charles
Jáns
2011-02-19 22:59:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by CharlesSmith
And after searching through my CDs  - everything is a mess right now,
because I shall be leaving Hungary (again) quite soon - I find some
Previn/EMI recordings that I really enjoy. Romeo & Juliet; Cinderella;
Carmina Burana, and so on. I recall Previn's version of The Planets,
and that was my only real disappointment. But I think it's unfair to
expect any conductor to "deliver the goods" every time.
I would add Turangalila to the Previn/LSO top-notch list.
Charles
I can't comment on that, but that's only because I detest anything by
Messian!
herman
2011-02-19 15:31:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ed Romans
Post by herman
I think many of those LSO / Previn recordings were pretty lousy. Bad,
underrehearsed ensemble and no clear conductorial grasp of the entire
narrative.
Which recordings are you referring to?
The Tchaikovsky ballets are a mess in my view.
herman
2011-02-19 15:35:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by herman
Post by Ed Romans
Post by herman
I think many of those LSO / Previn recordings were pretty lousy. Bad,
underrehearsed ensemble and no clear conductorial grasp of the entire
narrative.
Which recordings are you referring to?
The Tchaikovsky ballets are a mess in my view.
The Prokofiev ballets aren't competitive either.

Previn's Ravel L'Enfant used to be regarded as the top recommendation.
It's very hard to figure out why, by now. (Not sure if it's LSO: same
goes for the RVW 5.)
Gerard
2011-02-19 15:53:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by herman
Post by herman
Post by Ed Romans
Post by herman
I think many of those LSO / Previn recordings were pretty
lousy. Bad, underrehearsed ensemble and no clear
conductorial grasp of the entire narrative.
Which recordings are you referring to?
The Tchaikovsky ballets are a mess in my view.
The Prokofiev ballets aren't competitive either.
Yes, they are absolutely.
(There is no "better").
herman
2011-02-19 17:13:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gerard
Post by herman
The Prokofiev ballets aren't competitive either.
Yes, they are absolutely.
(There is no "better").
Well, be my guest / no skin off my back.
Jáns
2011-02-19 17:44:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by herman
Post by Gerard
Post by herman
The Prokofiev ballets aren't competitive either.
Yes, they are absolutely.
(There is no "better").
Well, be my guest / no skin off my back.
Maazel seems slighly better in R & J, but that's only my opinion.

(I thought the saying was "no skin off my nose", but it's no skin off
my my back:-)
Gerard
2011-02-19 18:09:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jáns
Post by herman
Post by Gerard
Post by herman
The Prokofiev ballets aren't competitive either.
Yes, they are absolutely.
(There is no "better").
Well, be my guest / no skin off my back.
Maazel seems slighly better in R & J,
That's only seeming.
Post by Jáns
but that's only my opinion.
Eh, yes, it's only that too ;-)
Post by Jáns
(I thought the saying was "no skin off my nose", but it's no skin off
my my back:-)
Which saying are you referring to?
Jáns
2011-02-19 18:33:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gerard
Post by Jáns
Post by herman
Post by Gerard
Post by herman
The Prokofiev ballets aren't competitive either.
Yes, they are absolutely.
(There is no "better").
Well, be my guest / no skin off my back.
Maazel seems slighly better in R & J,
That's only seeming.
Post by Jáns
but that's only my opinion.
Eh, yes, it's only that too ;-)
Post by Jáns
(I thought the saying was "no skin off my nose", but it's no skin off
my my back:-)
Which saying are you referring to?
The one which says "no skin off my nose" :-) In other words: It
doesn't bother me; or, I don't really care.
Gerard
2011-02-19 18:56:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jáns
Post by Gerard
Post by Jáns
Post by herman
Post by Gerard
Post by herman
The Prokofiev ballets aren't competitive either.
Yes, they are absolutely.
(There is no "better").
Well, be my guest / no skin off my back.
Maazel seems slighly better in R & J,
That's only seeming.
Post by Jáns
but that's only my opinion.
Eh, yes, it's only that too ;-)
Post by Jáns
(I thought the saying was "no skin off my nose", but it's no skin
off my my back:-)
Which saying are you referring to?
The one which says "no skin off my nose" :-) In other words: It
doesn't bother me; or, I don't really care.
Aaaaaah. It's always the same old song: those English speaking guys don't care
;-(
Matthew B. Tepper
2011-02-19 18:10:18 UTC
Permalink
herman <***@yahoo.com> appears to have caused the following letters to
be typed in news:7e545981-91aa-4dec-85b0-
Post by herman
Post by herman
Post by Ed Romans
Post by herman
I think many of those LSO / Previn recordings were pretty lousy.
Bad, underrehearsed ensemble and no clear conductorial grasp of
the entire narrative.
Which recordings are you referring to?
The Tchaikovsky ballets are a mess in my view.
The Prokofiev ballets aren't competitive either.
The "Romeo," at least, used to be considered competitive with the Maazel,
which was issued (and widely reviewed) almost simultaneously.
Post by herman
Previn's Ravel L'Enfant used to be regarded as the top recommendation.
It's very hard to figure out why, by now. (Not sure if it's LSO: same
goes for the RVW 5.)
I've got Maazel in both Ravel operas (and some other French works) on DGG
Originals, and I imagine those will hold me. I hate to admit it, but the
Chuck Jones artwork on Previn's separate issues rather puts me off.
--
Matthew B. Tepper: WWW, science fiction, classical music, ducks!
Read about "Proty" here: http://home.earthlink.net/~oy/proty.html
To write to me, do for my address what Androcles did for the lion
Opinions expressed here are not necessarily those of my employers
herman
2011-02-19 18:43:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Matthew B. Tepper
be typed in news:7e545981-91aa-4dec-85b0-
Post by herman
Post by herman
Post by Ed Romans
Post by herman
I think many of those LSO / Previn recordings were pretty lousy.
Bad, underrehearsed ensemble and no clear conductorial grasp of
the entire narrative.
Which recordings are you referring to?
The Tchaikovsky ballets are a mess in my view.
The Prokofiev ballets aren't competitive either.
The "Romeo," at least, used to be considered competitive with the Maazel,
which was issued (and widely reviewed) almost simultaneously.
Post by herman
Previn's Ravel L'Enfant used to be regarded as the top recommendation.
It's very hard to figure out why, by now. (Not sure if it's LSO: same
goes for the RVW 5.)
I've got Maazel in both Ravel operas (and some other French works) on DGG
Originals, and I imagine those will hold me.  I hate to admit it, but the
Chuck Jones artwork on Previn's separate issues rather puts me off.
Oh, stop the press, I hate to say it but I was wrong. The Maazel used
to be the top recommendation, not the Previn, as I said.

I do have both, and I never listen to either.

I guess it is not a good work to listen to on one's stereo anyway.
Gerard
2011-02-19 19:00:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by herman
letters to be typed in news:7e545981-91aa-4dec-85b0-
Post by herman
Post by herman
Post by Ed Romans
Post by herman
I think many of those LSO / Previn recordings were
pretty lousy. Bad, underrehearsed ensemble and no clear
conductorial grasp of the entire narrative.
Which recordings are you referring to?
The Tchaikovsky ballets are a mess in my view.
The Prokofiev ballets aren't competitive either.
The "Romeo," at least, used to be considered competitive with the
Maazel, which was issued (and widely reviewed) almost
simultaneously.
Post by herman
Previn's Ravel L'Enfant used to be regarded as the top
recommendation. It's very hard to figure out why, by now. (Not
sure if it's LSO: same goes for the RVW 5.)
I've got Maazel in both Ravel operas (and some other French works)
on DGG Originals, and I imagine those will hold me. I hate to admit
it, but the Chuck Jones artwork on Previn's separate issues rather
puts me off.
Oh, stop the press, I hate to say it but I was wrong. The Maazel used
to be the top recommendation, not the Previn, as I said.
Where did you say so?
I didn't see it.
BTW "The Maazel used to be the top recommendation" is not true.
Post by herman
I do have both, and I never listen to either.
I guess it is not a good work to listen to on one's stereo anyway.
Then why would someone bother with your top recommendation anyway?
herman
2011-02-19 19:15:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gerard
Then why would someone bother with your top recommendation anyway?
I never recommend anything. People have different tastes and
preferences.
Gerard
2011-02-19 19:52:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by herman
Post by Gerard
Then why would someone bother with your top recommendation anyway?
I never recommend anything. People have different tastes and
preferences.
Also differences in being clear.
Matthew B. Tepper
2011-02-19 19:35:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by herman
to be typed in news:7e545981-91aa-4dec-85b0-
Post by herman
Post by herman
Post by Ed Romans
Post by herman
I think many of those LSO / Previn recordings were pretty
lousy. Bad, underrehearsed ensemble and no clear
conductorial grasp of the entire narrative.
Which recordings are you referring to?
The Tchaikovsky ballets are a mess in my view.
The Prokofiev ballets aren't competitive either.
The "Romeo," at least, used to be considered competitive with the
Maazel, which was issued (and widely reviewed) almost simultaneously.
Post by herman
Previn's Ravel L'Enfant used to be regarded as the top
recommendation. It's very hard to figure out why, by now. (Not sure
if it's LSO: same goes for the RVW 5.)
I've got Maazel in both Ravel operas (and some other French works) on
DGG Originals, and I imagine those will hold me.  I hate to admit it,
but the Chuck Jones artwork on Previn's separate issues rather puts me
off.
Oh, stop the press, I hate to say it but I was wrong. The Maazel used
to be the top recommendation, not the Previn, as I said.
I do have both, and I never listen to either.
I guess it is not a good work to listen to on one's stereo anyway.
Why? Because if one has been naughty, the stereo will walk away?
--
Matthew B. Tepper: WWW, science fiction, classical music, ducks!
Read about "Proty" here: http://home.earthlink.net/~oy/proty.html
To write to me, do for my address what Androcles did for the lion
Opinions expressed here are not necessarily those of my employers
jrsnfld
2011-02-19 18:44:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Matthew B. Tepper
be typed in news:7e545981-91aa-4dec-85b0-
Post by herman
Post by herman
Post by Ed Romans
Post by herman
I think many of those LSO / Previn recordings were pretty lousy.
Bad, underrehearsed ensemble and no clear conductorial grasp of
the entire narrative.
Which recordings are you referring to?
The Tchaikovsky ballets are a mess in my view.
The Prokofiev ballets aren't competitive either.
The "Romeo," at least, used to be considered competitive with the Maazel,
which was issued (and widely reviewed) almost simultaneously.
Post by herman
Previn's Ravel L'Enfant used to be regarded as the top recommendation.
It's very hard to figure out why, by now. (Not sure if it's LSO: same
goes for the RVW 5.)
I've got Maazel in both Ravel operas (and some other French works) on DGG
Originals, and I imagine those will hold me.  I hate to admit it, but the
Chuck Jones artwork on Previn's separate issues rather puts me off.
For some reason, Maazel really shines in Ravel's L'Enfant. There's the
famous DG recording, plus the NYPO broadcast from a few years ago is
one of my favorite Maazel moments. For L'Heure, there are other
options, including the Maderna-led performance. I never bothered to
investigate Previn's recording of either--does anyone recommend them?

--Jeff-
jrsnfld
2011-02-19 18:39:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by herman
Post by herman
Post by Ed Romans
Post by herman
I think many of those LSO / Previn recordings were pretty lousy. Bad,
underrehearsed ensemble and no clear conductorial grasp of the entire
narrative.
Which recordings are you referring to?
The Tchaikovsky ballets are a mess in my view.
The Prokofiev ballets aren't competitive either.
Previn's Ravel L'Enfant used to be regarded as the top recommendation.
It's very hard to figure out why, by now. (Not sure if it's LSO: same
goes for the RVW 5.)
That's easy to explain. When his L'Enfant came out, it was the only
one on CD (or the only one easy to find that was "DDD"). Not so
anymore. I haven't heard it though, so I have no opinion on it.

I haven't compared his Vaughan Williams closely to others. I enjoyed
it when I first encountered it, but I was only aware of one other
alternative at the time (Boult's late EMI cycle), and I liked that
equally well. Now, if I want to hear the LSO, I might go for their
later cycle with Hickox--the bits of it I've heard have been very
good.

--Jeff
Jáns
2011-02-20 16:41:47 UTC
Permalink
On Feb 19, 8:54 am, herman <***@yahoo.com> wrote:

Praising an orchestra for
Post by herman
their sightreading skills is a completely vapid compliment. All
orchestras of that rank can do that. It's fundamental. Besaically it's
saying 'wow, I can't believe the LSO is an orchestra!' The way you put
it .....[snip]
It wasn't really the way *I* put it. I was quoting (or paraphrasing) a
music journalist's words after an interview with Previn, so they were
his [Previn's] words, not mine.
Gerard
2011-02-18 20:52:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Randy Lane
During his tenure with the LSO, when he made so many great recordings
for EMI, Andre Previn made a groundbreaking recording of the complete
music Mendelssohn wrote for A Midsummer Night's Dream. I've never
heard the music in better form. The recording has been a mainstay of
my collection ever since the first release.
Agreed.
I was happy to see it on CD (much) later.
Post by Randy Lane
There was a remake for Decca with the Vienna Philharmonic. I've never
heard it. Has anyone compared the two?
I've never seen it.
Are you sure it wasn't on DG?
Randy Lane
2011-02-18 21:10:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gerard
Post by Randy Lane
During his tenure with the LSO, when he made so many great recordings
for EMI, Andre Previn made a groundbreaking recording of the complete
music Mendelssohn wrote for A Midsummer Night's Dream. I've never
heard the music in better form. The recording has been a mainstay of
my collection ever since the first release.
Agreed.
I was happy to see it on CD (much) later.
Post by Randy Lane
There was a remake for Decca with the Vienna Philharmonic. I've never
heard it. Has anyone compared the two?
I've never seen it.
Are you sure it wasn't on DG?
Available currently as a Japanese Decca

http://www.hmv.co.jp/en/product/detail/3636079
jrsnfld
2011-02-18 21:17:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gerard
Post by Randy Lane
During his tenure with the LSO, when he made so many great recordings
for EMI, Andre Previn made a groundbreaking recording of the complete
music Mendelssohn wrote for A Midsummer Night's Dream. I've never
heard the music in better form. The recording has been a mainstay of
my collection ever since the first release.
Agreed.
I was happy to see it on CD (much) later.
Post by Randy Lane
There was a remake for Decca with the Vienna Philharmonic. I've never
heard it. Has anyone compared the two?
I've never seen it.
Are you sure it wasn't on DG?
That's funny. I thought the remake was made for Philips.

I don't see why anyone would hesitate to buy it. Previn changed over
the years, so there's no point in expecting it to be the same as his
LSO recording, but the point of buying this disc is to have the Vienna
Philharmonic in this great music. What other complete recording have
they made? Previn is a sideshow in this case, and no matter how bad he
might be, I doubt he can ruin the orchestra. He's not the type to get
in the way.

--Jeff
Gerard
2011-02-18 22:51:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by jrsnfld
Post by Gerard
Post by Randy Lane
During his tenure with the LSO, when he made so many great
recordings for EMI, Andre Previn made a groundbreaking recording
of the complete music Mendelssohn wrote for A Midsummer Night's
Dream. I've never heard the music in better form. The recording
has been a mainstay of my collection ever since the first release.
Agreed.
I was happy to see it on CD (much) later.
Post by Randy Lane
There was a remake for Decca with the Vienna Philharmonic. I've
never heard it. Has anyone compared the two?
I've never seen it.
Are you sure it wasn't on DG?
That's funny. I thought the remake was made for Philips.
If that's right (and it seems more likely to me), than it explains why it has
been issued on Decca now.
Post by jrsnfld
I don't see why anyone would hesitate to buy it. Previn changed over
the years, so there's no point in expecting it to be the same as his
LSO recording, but the point of buying this disc is to have the Vienna
Philharmonic in this great music.
That's only a point if the performance is very fine.
Previn did different remakes, and the second time it was not 'better' in most
cases, imo.
jrsnfld
2011-02-19 18:57:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gerard
Post by jrsnfld
Post by Gerard
Post by Randy Lane
During his tenure with the LSO, when he made so many great
recordings for EMI, Andre Previn made a groundbreaking recording
of the complete music Mendelssohn wrote for A Midsummer Night's
Dream. I've never heard the music in better form. The recording
has been a mainstay of my collection ever since the first release.
Agreed.
I was happy to see it on CD (much) later.
Post by Randy Lane
There was a remake for Decca with the Vienna Philharmonic. I've
never heard it. Has anyone compared the two?
I've never seen it.
Are you sure it wasn't on DG?
That's funny. I thought the remake was made for Philips.
If that's right (and it seems more likely to me), than it explains why it has
been issued on Decca now.
Exactly.
Post by Gerard
Post by jrsnfld
I don't see why anyone would hesitate to buy it. Previn changed over
the years, so there's no point in expecting it to be the same as his
LSO recording, but the point of buying this disc is to have the Vienna
Philharmonic in this great music.
That's only a point if the performance is very fine.
Previn did different remakes, and the second time it was not 'better' in most
cases, imo.
Well, we look at this from different perspectives. My only reason to
buy that disc was to hear the orchestra do its thing, and since I
probably will only listen once anyway, I'm not really worried about
how the performance compares to others in terms of excitement or
insight. For the same reason I bought Previn's Strauss in Vienna--to
hear the orchestra but without any expectation that the
interpretations would be as compelling as my favorites.

Previn in "remake" mode is, as you say, less compelling than Previn's
LSO days. However, I consider his name to be a guarantee of quality
playing. I can't think of a single post-LSO era recording of his that
wasn't decent in this regard, and, despite complaints here, his LSO
recordings also seem (to me) to be well enough played. The problem
with Previn almost always lies elsewhere.

--Jeff
Gerard
2011-02-19 19:08:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by jrsnfld
Post by Gerard
That's only a point if the performance is very fine.
Previn did different remakes, and the second time it was not
'better' in most cases, imo.
Well, we look at this from different perspectives. My only reason to
buy that disc was to hear the orchestra do its thing, and since I
probably will only listen once anyway, I'm not really worried about
how the performance compares to others in terms of excitement or
insight. For the same reason I bought Previn's Strauss in Vienna--to
hear the orchestra but without any expectation that the
interpretations would be as compelling as my favorites.
Well, we're talking about a divergence of interests then ;-)
Post by jrsnfld
Previn in "remake" mode is, as you say, less compelling than Previn's
LSO days. However, I consider his name to be a guarantee of quality
playing. I can't think of a single post-LSO era recording of his that
wasn't decent in this regard, and, despite complaints here, his LSO
recordings also seem (to me) to be well enough played. The problem
with Previn almost always lies elsewhere.
Where lies it?
M forever
2011-02-19 20:42:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by jrsnfld
Post by Gerard
Post by Randy Lane
During his tenure with the LSO, when he made so many great recordings
for EMI, Andre Previn made a groundbreaking recording of the complete
music Mendelssohn wrote for A Midsummer Night's Dream. I've never
heard the music in better form. The recording has been a mainstay of
my collection ever since the first release.
Agreed.
I was happy to see it on CD (much) later.
Post by Randy Lane
There was a remake for Decca with the Vienna Philharmonic. I've never
heard it. Has anyone compared the two?
I've never seen it.
Are you sure it wasn't on DG?
That's funny. I thought the remake was made for Philips.
You are correct. I never had the CD, but a friend bought it back then
and I listened to it at his place and for some reason, I still
remember the cover. It was definitely Philips, and it had some kind of
semi-translucent ghost donkey or something like that on the front. How
is it? I don't remember. I heard it over 20 years ago. But I see that
they have it at the library and I haven't listened to that music in a
long time, so I will check it out and check it out.


DG recorded their own versions with Ozawa/BSO and Levine/CSO back in
those days of the early digital era remake-everything-frenzy.
Post by jrsnfld
I don't see why anyone would hesitate to buy it. Previn changed over
the years, so there's no point in expecting it to be the same as his
LSO recording, but the point of buying this disc is to have the Vienna
Philharmonic in this great music. What other complete recording have
they made?
None that I know of.
Post by jrsnfld
Previn is a sideshow in this case, and no matter how bad he
might be, I doubt he can ruin the orchestra. He's not the type to get
in the way.
--Jeff
Abbeddrose Bierce
2011-02-19 21:09:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by jrsnfld
Previn is a sideshow in this case, and no matter how bad he
Post by jrsnfld
might be, I doubt he can ruin the orchestra. He's not the type to get
in the way.
Orchestral Music is a Cionductor's Medium. The orchestral players just
pawns

Abbedd
Gerard
2011-02-19 21:41:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Abbeddrose Bierce
Post by jrsnfld
Previn is a sideshow in this case, and no matter how bad he
Post by jrsnfld
might be, I doubt he can ruin the orchestra. He's not the type to
get in the way.
Orchestral Music is a Cionductor's Medium. The orchestral players just
pawns
Abbedd
Like peerless Paolo pawns.
Abbeddrose Bierce
2011-02-19 21:58:40 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 19 Feb 2011 22:41:43 +0100, "Gerard"
Post by Gerard
Post by Abbeddrose Bierce
Post by jrsnfld
Previn is a sideshow in this case, and no matter how bad he
Post by jrsnfld
might be, I doubt he can ruin the orchestra. He's not the type to
get in the way.
Orchestral Music is a Cionductor's Medium. The orchestral players just
pawns
Abbedd
Like peerless Paolo pawns.
Correct PP is playing as if Ansermet was sitting in his chair

Abbedd
Gerard
2011-02-19 22:14:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Abbeddrose Bierce
On Sat, 19 Feb 2011 22:41:43 +0100, "Gerard"
Post by Gerard
On Sat, 19 Feb 2011 12:42:05 -0800 (PST), M forever
Post by jrsnfld
Previn is a sideshow in this case, and no matter how bad he
Post by jrsnfld
might be, I doubt he can ruin the orchestra. He's not the
type to get in the way.
Orchestral Music is a Cionductor's Medium. The orchestral players
just pawns
Abbedd
Like peerless Paolo pawns.
Correct PP is playing as if Ansermet was sitting in his chair
Abbedd
So Ansermet can be missed easily.
Abbeddrose Bierce
2011-02-19 23:26:06 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 19 Feb 2011 23:14:32 +0100, "Gerard"
Post by Gerard
Post by Abbeddrose Bierce
On Sat, 19 Feb 2011 22:41:43 +0100, "Gerard"
Post by Gerard
On Sat, 19 Feb 2011 12:42:05 -0800 (PST), M forever
Post by jrsnfld
Previn is a sideshow in this case, and no matter how bad he
Post by jrsnfld
might be, I doubt he can ruin the orchestra. He's not the
type to get in the way.
Orchestral Music is a Cionductor's Medium. The orchestral players
just pawns
Abbedd
Like peerless Paolo pawns.
Correct PP is playing as if Ansermet was sitting in his chair
Abbedd
So Ansermet can be missed easily.
Can we have an answer from someone who is not a total retard

Mr. Garrison
herman
2011-02-20 02:55:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Abbeddrose Bierce
Orchestral Music is a Cionductor's Medium. The orchestral players just
pawns
Abbedd
silly nonsense
Abbeddrose Bierce
2011-02-20 04:33:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by herman
Post by Abbeddrose Bierce
Orchestral Music is a Cionductor's Medium. The orchestral players just
pawns
Abbedd
silly nonsense
Tell that to Toscanini or Ansermet

Are you saying the players play what they want-all 100 of them . All
different
You must listen to some bad conductors

Clueless

Abbedd
M forever
2011-02-20 05:28:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Abbeddrose Bierce
Post by herman
Post by Abbeddrose Bierce
Orchestral Music is a Cionductor's Medium. The orchestral players just
pawns
Abbedd
silly nonsense
Tell that to Toscanini or Ansermet
Are you saying the players play what they want-all 100 of them . All
different
You must listen to some bad conductors
Clueless
Since you never played in a real orchestra nor have any idea about how
professional music making really goes, you won't be able to understand
the idea of concerted teamwork inspired and guided by a conductor
towards a coherent and complex interpretation which combines the
conductor's concept with what the musicians have to offer, rather than
just the mechanically executed ideas of one guy who forces his will on
everybody. I can see how that is too complex for you to grasp though.
It's way over your head.
herman
2011-02-20 09:34:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Abbeddrose Bierce
Post by herman
Post by Abbeddrose Bierce
Orchestral Music is a Cionductor's Medium. The orchestral players just
pawns
Abbedd
silly nonsense
Tell that to Toscanini or Ansermet
They're dead.
Post by Abbeddrose Bierce
Are you saying the players play what they want-all 100 of them . All
different
No, that's not what I'm saying. However the conductor-as-tyrant idea
is just your wet dream, part of your massive psychological problems
which you air routinely on RMCR.
Post by Abbeddrose Bierce
You must listen to some bad conductors
I'll leave that to you, Clueless Abbedd
M forever
2011-02-20 06:02:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by herman
Post by Abbeddrose Bierce
Orchestral Music is a Cionductor's Medium. The orchestral players just
pawns
Abbedd
silly nonsense
Indeed it is. Obviously, a good conductor needs to have very specific
ideas about how he wants the music to go, the technical means to
realize his ideas and personality to convince the musicians to follow
him in his concept, but a really good conductor takes what the
musicians have to offer him into account and creates a coherent
interpretation by guiding the musicians' contributions rather than
imposing his will on everything they do. That is why the
interpretations of such "tyrant" conductors as Toscanini, Reiner or
Szell are often just driven and one-dimensional. There is enormous
potential in the dozens of highly trained and experienced musicians of
any professional orchestra. Conductors who just terrorize them into
playing everything exactly the way they want instead of guiding them
by creating a framework into which the musicians can insert their
contributions aren't even particularly good conductors. Or just very
one-sided ones.

That is why I have to disagree with you about your blanket dismissal
of Previn and his LSO recordings. Actually Previn shows himself to be
a very good "partner" rather than "dictator" conductor in these
recordings. I assume that the reported good relationship he had with
the LSO was because he had a lot of experience in the film music
industry which necessitates fast, precise, and reliable achievement of
results and that fit the mode of working of the London orchestras who
operated on a showstring budget and had very limited time and money
for rehearsals (and still do, of course). And the results he got were
generally rather respectable even if maybe not quite as extraordinary
as some of the hype suggested.

I realize that railing against anything you perceive to be
"mainstream" is your thing, and Previn in his LSO period was as
"mainstream" as one can get in the classical music world, he was hip
and fit well into the 60s and 70s London scene, had a Beatles hairdo,
married lots of glamorous ladies, appeared on popular TV shows talking
smartly about music in a fake British accent. And he made recordings
which sold very well and often received quite good reviews. So you
must shoot that down, I can see that.
But a lot of these recordings do show solid craftsmanship. They may
not be the most polished and some of the playing may actually be a
little roughly hewn, but they aren't as "messy" as you exaggerated at
all, and that direct, unpolished and unvain style of playing and
conducting actually has some rather attractive sides. His LSO
Rachmaninoff recordings, for instance, benefit from this approach and
make a lot of the musical detail stand out in relief where other,
smoother and more blended interpretations miss a lot of detail and
structure. And he is rather good at sustaining the longer "narrative"
as well in these recordings.
Generally, his later work seems to have been much blander, mostly
routine and rather faceless, but there is a lot of pretty good stuff
there from his LSO period.
The Nutcracker, for instance, is a little rough-edged and at times
maybe a little heavy-handed, but it isn't "messy" at all. Not all of
the string playing is of the highest quality and one can hear some
less than perfect ensemble in some places. But nothing any worse than
the typical level of orchestral playing at the time. One can find
little mistakes in basically any recording. Not my favorite version
either but definitely not a big "mess".
CharlesSmith
2011-02-20 09:14:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by M forever
That is why I have to disagree with you about your blanket dismissal
of Previn and his LSO recordings. Actually Previn shows himself to be
a very good "partner" rather than "dictator" conductor in these
recordings. I assume that the reported good relationship he had with
the LSO was because he had a lot of experience in the film music
industry which necessitates fast, precise, and reliable achievement of
results and that fit the mode of working of the London orchestras who
operated on a showstring budget and had very limited time and money
for rehearsals (and still do, of course).
And the results he got were
generally rather respectable even if maybe not quite as extraordinary
as some of the hype suggested.
I suspect the orchestra believed the hype - probably thought they
didn't need any more rehearsal
Post by M forever
I realize that railing against anything you perceive to be
"mainstream" is your thing, and Previn in his LSO period was as
"mainstream" as one can get in the classical music world, he was hip
and fit well into the 60s and 70s London scene, had a Beatles hairdo,
married lots of glamorous ladies, appeared on popular TV shows talking
smartly about music in a fake British accent. And he made recordings
which sold very well and often received quite good reviews. So you
must shoot that down, I can see that.
Mainstream from what perspective? As a TV celebrity perhaps? He was
viewed as decidely risky by the musical establishment - a Hollywood
man (not a compliment), and not the sort of person who could be
trusted with core repertoire Beethoven or Brahms. And he more or less
abandoned that repertoire.
Post by M forever
But a lot of these recordings do show solid craftsmanship. They may
not be the most polished and some of the playing may actually be a
little roughly hewn, but they aren't as "messy" as you exaggerated at
all, and that direct, unpolished and unvain style of playing and
conducting actually has some rather attractive sides. His LSO
Rachmaninoff recordings, for instance, benefit from this approach and
make a lot of the musical detail stand out in relief where other,
smoother and more blended interpretations miss a lot of detail and
structure. And he is rather good at sustaining the longer "narrative"
as well in these recordings.
I only saw them live once, in 1971 playing Rachmaninov 2nd symphony (I
can't remember what else). I sat behind the orchestra. They were a
predominantly young orchestra, relishing the music and oozing
confidence. Previn was encouraging this 'enjoy yourselves' atmosphere,
and details and solos were given lots of space (and winks). I loved it
at the time, but would probably object if I heard it again now. I
suspect he didn't shape the overall structure too well.

Charles
herman
2011-02-20 09:26:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by M forever
I realize that railing against anything you perceive to be
"mainstream" is your thing, and Previn in his LSO period was as
"mainstream" as one can get in the classical music world, he was hip
and fit well into the 60s and 70s London scene, had a Beatles hairdo,
married lots of glamorous ladies, appeared on popular TV shows talking
smartly about music in a fake British accent. And he made recordings
which sold very well and often received quite good reviews. So you
must shoot that down, I can see that.
'Railing' is too strong a word. My point was (and is) that one can do
better than Previn. At the same time Karajan was making a zilion
recordings for DG and Marriner for Philips (though not, of course, in
modern rep). And of course Bernstein for CBS. However in those same
decades Giulini, Haitink, Colin Davis and Kubelik were making
recordings that were much better. And many other conductors. The only
thing Previn did better was quantity, which is a good marketing idea.

To me Previn just is not a conductor (or pianist or anything) we need
to go back to thirty, forty years later. Most of what he did was
useful at the time. He did record the entire ballets instead of
exceprt suites (but so did Dorati, and much much better), he did
record 20th century classics such as RVW and some DSCH. But everything
he did was done better by other conductors at the time, and by now
there's a mer à boire of recordings that supersede his RVW, DSCH and
everything. Not everything that's older is better, although that idea
gets a lot of mileage with some RMCR posters.
Gerard
2011-02-20 09:47:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by herman
record 20th century classics such as RVW and some DSCH. But everything
he did was done better by other conductors at the time, and by now
there's a mer à boire of recordings that supersede his RVW, DSCH and
everything.
This is simply not true.
Post by herman
Not everything that's older is better, although that idea
gets a lot of mileage with some RMCR posters.
While some posters seem to have that idea, this ("everything that's older is
better") was not stated here at all. It was about Previn's recordings and their
merits, not about being older recordings.
Bob Harper
2011-02-20 18:03:37 UTC
Permalink
On 2/20/11 1:26 AM, herman wrote:
(snip)
Post by herman
To me Previn just is not a conductor (or pianist or anything) we need
to go back to thirty, forty years later. .... But everything
he did was done better by other conductors at the time, and by now
there's a mer à boire of recordings that supersede his RVW, DSCH and
everything.
I am no indiscriminate fan of Previn, but has his RCA Walton 1 been
bettered? I think not.

Bob Harper
Matthew B. Tepper
2011-02-20 18:08:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bob Harper
(snip)
To me Previn just is not a conductor (or pianist or anything) we need to
go back to thirty, forty years later. .... But everything he did was
done better by other conductors at the time, and by now there's a mer à
boire of recordings that supersede his RVW, DSCH and everything.
I am no indiscriminate fan of Previn, but has his RCA Walton 1 been
bettered? I think not.
Since I already mentioned this one earlier, I obviously agree with you.
--
Matthew B. Tepper: WWW, science fiction, classical music, ducks!
Read about "Proty" here: http://home.earthlink.net/~oy/proty.html
To write to me, do for my address what Androcles did for the lion
Opinions expressed here are not necessarily those of my employers
CharlesSmith
2011-02-20 18:57:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bob Harper
(snip)
Post by herman
To me Previn just is not a conductor (or pianist or anything) we need
to go back to thirty, forty years later. ....  But everything
he did was done better by other conductors at the time, and by now
there's a mer boire of recordings that supersede his RVW, DSCH and
everything.
I am no indiscriminate fan of Previn, but has his RCA Walton 1 been
bettered? I think not.
Bob Harper
It's certainly a spectacular recording. The immediacy of the sound -
the sense of being there on the rostrum - is very exciting. But after
a couple of listenings I begin to wonder whether I really want those
trombones playing straight into my face. I'm not keen on this sort of
close recording for other music, so why is it so great for this work?
Also the muscular drive, emphasised by the recording, gets rather
wearing, a one-dimensional view of the symphony. There's mystery and
tenderness, even in the first movement, that doesn't appear to be of
any interest to Previn. My final gripe might be a flaw in the edition
I have, the BMG 2-CD 'Collected Works'. Just before the orgasmic
climax in the finale someone turns down the volume as though they're
frightened the noise might upset the neighbours. Not my idea of a
convincing climax.

My preference is for Ashkenazy and the RPO, who find much more
variety, and with a more normal soundscape.

Charles
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...