Discussion:
SCHEHEREZADE????
(too old to reply)
Richard Loeb
2006-06-15 02:12:54 UTC
Permalink
Any recommendations for the best combination of conductor and recorded
sound - I recall an Ansermet LP from the late fifties that sounded marvelous
but I don't know if it has been properly transferred to CD??? Thanks in
advance Richard
Jenn
2006-06-15 02:17:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Richard Loeb
Any recommendations for the best combination of conductor and recorded
sound - I recall an Ansermet LP from the late fifties that sounded marvelous
but I don't know if it has been properly transferred to CD??? Thanks in
advance Richard
Of course there is the famous Reiner/CSO on RCA. I also like Gergiev on
Philips.
Kalman Rubinson
2006-06-15 14:57:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jenn
Post by Richard Loeb
Any recommendations for the best combination of conductor and recorded
sound - I recall an Ansermet LP from the late fifties that sounded marvelous
but I don't know if it has been properly transferred to CD??? Thanks in
advance Richard
Of course there is the famous Reiner/CSO on RCA. I also like Gergiev on
Philips.
Yes, the Reiner/CSO and especially with its remastering on Living
Stereo SACD that delivers the original 3 channels. Outstanding.

The Gergiev, otoh, is one of the most constrained and hard-sounding
releases in an already far from noteworthy series. Performance?
Dunno since I find the sound so offensive.

Kal
tomdeacon
2006-06-15 15:50:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kalman Rubinson
The Gergiev, otoh, is one of the most constrained and hard-sounding
releases in an already far from noteworthy series. Performance?
Dunno since I find the sound so offensive.
Not half as offensive as either his admirers or his colleagues at
Philips.

TD
Richard Loeb
2006-06-15 02:23:43 UTC
Permalink
OOOPs sorry for the misspelling -

Richard
Post by Richard Loeb
Any recommendations for the best combination of conductor and recorded
sound - I recall an Ansermet LP from the late fifties that sounded
marvelous but I don't know if it has been properly transferred to CD???
Thanks in advance Richard
b***@phillynews.com
2006-06-15 03:01:23 UTC
Permalink
Stokowski's LSO recording is my favorite. It's such a sensual
performance. I also find the sound on Cala very good. It's also out as
part of the Stoki Decca boxed set, but I haven't heard that, so I can't
make a sound comparison.
Barry
Jeremy
2006-06-15 13:12:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by b***@phillynews.com
Stokowski's LSO recording is my favorite. It's such a sensual
performance. I also find the sound on Cala very good. It's also out as
part of the Stoki Decca boxed set, but I haven't heard that, so I can't
make a sound comparison.
Barry
You're right about the performance. It was my first exposure to the work,
which I just happened to hear as I was scanning up and down the radio dial
in New York in the mid 60s. WQXR had their 8:PM "Symphony Hall" program,
and that was the featured work that evening. I still remember the feeling
of being smitten by Stoki's conducting.

I've bought several other versions, but they all seemed thinned-out and
lacked the conviction of the Phase 4 recording, so I finally went out and
bought the "real thing." I was in my early teens, didn't have much cash and
didn't know much about music. I certainly had no preferences when it came
to conductors or performances yet. I think the Stokowski performances of
Scherazade and "Pictures At An Exhibition" were my first ones where I began
expressing a preference for particular versions.

I never did feel completely at home with the London Phase 4 LP. It was LOUD
and it had a wide dynamic range, that was painful to listen to, because the
volume seemed either too high or too low. Later on I bough a DBX Model 119
expander/compressor and I was able to compress the dynamic range when I
played the LP. I believe that this was the only LP I ever owned where I
compressed, rather than expanded, the dynamic range.

I just recently bought the CD on Cala, after having given up on ever finding
the performance on CD (someone in this NG mentioned that performance and I
ordered it that same day). I must say I am very disappointed in the
technical performance.

The only good thing is that the clicks, pops and crackle that have developed
in the LP version over the decades are gone. (We had a cheap GE "console
stereo" with a ceramic cartridge when I first bought the LP, and it wasn't
long before distortion set in.)

Now the frustrating factors:

1: The CD was LOUD, again with a wide dynamic range. If I set the volume so
I could hear the quiet parts, I'd get BLASTED at the loud passages. I found
myself sitting with remote control in hand, constantly adjusting the sound
volume. I still have my DBX unit, and I'll just have to compress the
playback, just as I did with the LP. Bummer.

2: There is a lot of clipping in the loud passages. I notice it more on the
CD than I did on the LP, and this is the most disturbing part of all. Why
did those Phase 4 engineers have to record at volume levels that drove the
meters beyond maximum? That clipping is God-awful!

So I have this love-hate thing with this performance. The syrupy violin
playing of Erich Gruenberg is seductive, but the recording is brash, the
audio seems brittle, the clipping is unforgivable. The CD claims to have
been remastered at 24 bit / 96 kHz, but this is by far the worst-sounding of
any high-definition CD that I own (compare to the RCS high-definition
remasters of Ormandy and the Philadelphia Orchestra, where the sound is
clean and "open," and the noise is gone without adversely affecting the high
frequencies of the performance). The Cala CD lists the SPARS information as
"AAD." I don't understand how a 24/96 remastering could be AAD and not ADD.
Typo?

I've been rediscovering the Stokowski version on RCA Victrola 7743-2-RV,
with the RPO and also with Gruenberg's violin playing. This was produced by
Richard Mohr, and I seem to associate his name with "Living Stereo" LP
pressings. If anyone knows any details about this particular recording I'd
appreciate finding out more.

I try not to be too critical of technical issues, especially on older
recordings that had to work with whatever the state of the art was at the
time of the recording, but this particular CD really bothers me, because the
performance was magnificent, and the engineering just ruined it. I'd gladly
take the LSO performance along with the RCA Victrola CD sound, if it were
possible.

My recommendation is to get the CD, because the performance is a must-have,
but try to set aside the deficiencies associated with loud volume and
clipping if you can.
tomdeacon
2006-06-15 13:21:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jeremy
The Cala CD lists the SPARS information as
"AAD." I don't understand how a 24/96 remastering could be AAD and not ADD.
Typo?
This is an easy one.

Decca MAY have gone back to the original multi-track mastertapes and
remixed this recording for their release, although actually, given the
costs of doing that, I would doubt it. If they did do that, their
version would merit the ADD designation.

Cala clearly have NOT done that. They have simply mastered their CD
directly from the production mastertape authorized by Stokowski. This
should resemble most closely the original LP mastering.
But it would only receive an AAD designation, as there is no digital
mixing involved.

Frankly, I STILL prefer the LP of this recording. If I were you, I
would hunt for a UK version of this recording on ebay and sit back and
glory in the sound the way you used to hear it.

TD
Jeremy
2006-06-15 18:44:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by tomdeacon
Post by Jeremy
The Cala CD lists the SPARS information as
"AAD." I don't understand how a 24/96 remastering could be AAD and not ADD.
Typo?
This is an easy one.
Decca MAY have gone back to the original multi-track mastertapes and
remixed this recording for their release, although actually, given the
costs of doing that, I would doubt it. If they did do that, their
version would merit the ADD designation.
Cala clearly have NOT done that. They have simply mastered their CD
directly from the production mastertape authorized by Stokowski. This
should resemble most closely the original LP mastering.
But it would only receive an AAD designation, as there is no digital
mixing involved.
Frankly, I STILL prefer the LP of this recording. If I were you, I
would hunt for a UK version of this recording on ebay and sit back and
glory in the sound the way you used to hear it.
TD
I must not understand SPARS codes. I thought that the second letter was to
denote whether the remastering was don on analogue tape or using digital
techniques.

As for the UK version, I need to check my LP, I do have some Phase 4s on the
London label that indicate that they were made in England. I never realized
that some were pressed in the USA.

The Cala remastering should have removed that distortion. After having
looked for a CD reissue of this performance for so long, it was a real
letdown to hear those overblown sounds.
Steven de Mena
2006-06-15 19:41:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jeremy
Post by tomdeacon
Post by Jeremy
The Cala CD lists the SPARS information as
"AAD." I don't understand how a 24/96 remastering could be AAD and not ADD.
Typo?
This is an easy one.
Decca MAY have gone back to the original multi-track mastertapes and
remixed this recording for their release, although actually, given the
costs of doing that, I would doubt it. If they did do that, their
version would merit the ADD designation.
Cala clearly have NOT done that. They have simply mastered their CD
directly from the production mastertape authorized by Stokowski. This
should resemble most closely the original LP mastering.
But it would only receive an AAD designation, as there is no digital
mixing involved.
Frankly, I STILL prefer the LP of this recording. If I were you, I
would hunt for a UK version of this recording on ebay and sit back and
glory in the sound the way you used to hear it.
TD
I must not understand SPARS codes. I thought that the second letter was
to denote whether the remastering was don on analogue tape or using
digital techniques.
As for the UK version, I need to check my LP, I do have some Phase 4s on
the London label that indicate that they were made in England. I never
realized that some were pressed in the USA.
The Cala remastering should have removed that distortion.
There is some distortion on the Cala CD. But not detrimental to one's
overall enjoyment of a fantastic performance. I have the Decca Sokowski box
too, but have not played the Scheherazade yet to ascertain if it sounds any
better/worse/same than the Cala.

I think record companies have been a little fuzzy on the middle SPARS code
designator, I would not pay much attention to it.

Steve
D***@aol.com
2006-06-15 20:49:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jeremy
The Cala remastering should have removed that distortion. After having
looked for a CD reissue of this performance for so long, it was a real
letdown to hear those overblown sounds.
If a tape is distorted because of too-high recording levels, the
distortion is there for good and cannot be removed. It can only be
possibly masked by artificial means, and that can alter, perhaps
damage, the character of the entire sound. The people at Cala probably
wanted to be as faithful as they were able to the original.
Unfortunately, that kind of blowzy sound was part of the Phase 4 thing.
Especially when the series began, and if I'm correct Stoki's
Scheherazade inaugurated it.

Don Tait
tomdeacon
2006-06-15 21:59:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by D***@aol.com
Post by Jeremy
The Cala remastering should have removed that distortion. After having
looked for a CD reissue of this performance for so long, it was a real
letdown to hear those overblown sounds.
If a tape is distorted because of too-high recording levels, the
distortion is there for good and cannot be removed. It can only be
possibly masked by artificial means, and that can alter, perhaps
damage, the character of the entire sound. The people at Cala probably
wanted to be as faithful as they were able to the original.
Unfortunately, that kind of blowzy sound was part of the Phase 4 thing.
Especially when the series began, and if I'm correct Stoki's
Scheherazade inaugurated it.
Right on ALL counts, Don.

TD
makropulos
2006-06-15 22:17:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by D***@aol.com
Unfortunately, that kind of blowzy sound was part of the Phase 4 thing.
Especially when the series began, and if I'm correct Stoki's
Scheherazade inaugurated it.
It was Stoki's first Phase 4 recording, but I'm not so sure that it was
the first Phase 4 release. The Scheherazade came out on SPC 21015, but
SPC 21001 was of Tchaikovsky's 1812 and Nutcracker conducted by Robert
Sharples with the London Festival Orchestra (recorded in 1963). I think
that was actually the very first release in the series.
D***@aol.com
2006-06-15 23:38:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by tomdeacon
Post by D***@aol.com
Post by Jeremy
The Cala remastering should have removed that distortion. After having
looked for a CD reissue of this performance for so long, it was a real
letdown to hear those overblown sounds.
If a tape is distorted because of too-high recording levels, the
distortion is there for good and cannot be removed. It can only be
possibly masked by artificial means, and that can alter, perhaps
damage, the character of the entire sound. The people at Cala probably
wanted to be as faithful as they were able to the original.
Unfortunately, that kind of blowzy sound was part of the Phase 4 thing.
Especially when the series began, and if I'm correct Stoki's
Scheherazade inaugurated it.
Right on ALL counts, Don.
Thank you, Tom.
Post by tomdeacon
TD
tomdeacon
2006-06-15 21:54:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jeremy
I must not understand SPARS codes. I thought that the second letter was to
denote whether the remastering was don on analogue tape or using digital
techniques.
Probably. Some people in the industry don't understand it either.
Post by Jeremy
As for the UK version, I need to check my LP, I do have some Phase 4s on the
London label that indicate that they were made in England. I never realized
that some were pressed in the USA.
The point is not whether or not the LP was "pressed" in the UK. It
would seem that the UK pressings on the local Decca label were
different from the UK pressings on the London label.
Post by Jeremy
The Cala remastering should have removed that distortion. After having
looked for a CD reissue of this performance for so long, it was a real
letdown to hear those overblown sounds.
Probably the result of pushing the medium to the maximum.

Distortion is really impossible to remove once it is on the tape.

TD
Jeremy
2006-06-16 00:21:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by tomdeacon
Distortion is really impossible to remove once it is on the tape.
I need to dig out my LP and give it a listen, but I do not recall hearing
that clipping on the LP. I suspect that Cala could have mastered this a bit
less loudly. I wish I had any of the other CD releases to compare this
with. I believe it was once out on a Weekend Classics or Jubilee release
from London, but by the time I had found out about it, the CD had been
withdrawn from their catalog.

I wouldn't ordinarily be so critical, but I really love this performance,
and I find it difficult to believe that the Cala reissue represents the best
sonic treatment of this classic.
Brendan R. Wehrung
2006-06-16 03:55:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jeremy
Post by tomdeacon
Post by Jeremy
The Cala CD lists the SPARS information as
"AAD." I don't understand how a 24/96 remastering could be AAD and not ADD.
Typo?
This is an easy one.
Decca MAY have gone back to the original multi-track mastertapes and
remixed this recording for their release, although actually, given the
costs of doing that, I would doubt it. If they did do that, their
version would merit the ADD designation.
Cala clearly have NOT done that. They have simply mastered their CD
directly from the production mastertape authorized by Stokowski. This
should resemble most closely the original LP mastering.
But it would only receive an AAD designation, as there is no digital
mixing involved.
Frankly, I STILL prefer the LP of this recording. If I were you, I
would hunt for a UK version of this recording on ebay and sit back and
glory in the sound the way you used to hear it.
TD
I must not understand SPARS codes. I thought that the second letter was to
denote whether the remastering was don on analogue tape or using digital
techniques.
As for the UK version, I need to check my LP, I do have some Phase 4s on the
London label that indicate that they were made in England. I never realized
that some were pressed in the USA.
The Cala remastering should have removed that distortion. After having
looked for a CD reissue of this performance for so long, it was a real
letdown to hear those overblown sounds.
Somebody here explained the equipment in the Phase 4 recording chain (a
compander, as I recall) and that the artifacts it produced could not be
removed. Cala did a reasonable job with what they had.

Brendan
tomdeacon
2006-06-16 10:36:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Brendan R. Wehrung
Somebody here explained the equipment in the Phase 4 recording chain (a
compander, as I recall) and that the artifacts it produced could not be
removed. Cala did a reasonable job with what they had.
It is not "artifacts" but distortion per se which is impossible to
remove from a recording once it is present.

TD
Jeremy
2006-06-16 14:54:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by tomdeacon
It is not "artifacts" but distortion per se which is impossible to
remove from a recording once it is present.
What went on in the minds of Decca's engineers, to record at such high
levels? Phase 4 was supposed to be audiophile quality. They must have
thought that the louder the music the better it would sound. (I read
somewhere that loudspeaker salesmen in audio stores always jacked up the
volume on the speaker lines they were pushing, because that mad the speaker
sound brighter to the customer)
tomdeacon
2006-06-16 15:12:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jeremy
Post by tomdeacon
It is not "artifacts" but distortion per se which is impossible to
remove from a recording once it is present.
What went on in the minds of Decca's engineers, to record at such high
levels? Phase 4 was supposed to be audiophile quality.
Ever heard of "pushing the envelope"?

That was Stokie all the way.

I recall Toscanini instructed the recording engineers for Roman
Festivals to "blow all the tubes in your equipment", so anxious was he
to capture the sonic splendour of Respighi's score.

It took Decca to manage to do that, finally, with Maazel. Toscanini's
version now seems just nasty and loud. And they did it without blowing
tubes (or transistors) in the process.

TD
Jeremy
2006-06-16 20:26:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by tomdeacon
Ever heard of "pushing the envelope"?
That was Stokie all the way.
I know that he was always pressing for higher fidelity, but overloading the
tape did not make for better audio. You'd think that he could have
understood that. I can't figure out why Decca/London, given all their
investment in Phase 4, would have made such an obvious error in
judgment--unless they just figured that the public would perceive louder as
better.

I read years ago that Columbia Records always cut their vocal artists on the
loud side, because they sounded better to the buyers. Listening to old Andy
Williams cuts, I can hear a fair amount of compression, along with the
addition of reverb to make the voice sound richer, and an overall high
volume level.

Perhaps Phase 4 and clipping were Decca's equivalent of RCA's use of
distortion in their DynaGroove LPs . . .
k***@yahoo.co.uk
2006-06-15 19:41:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jeremy
Post by b***@phillynews.com
Stokowski's LSO recording is my favorite. It's such a sensual
performance. I also find the sound on Cala very good. It's also out as
part of the Stoki Decca boxed set, but I haven't heard that, so I can't
make a sound comparison.
Barry
You're right about the performance. It was my first exposure to the work,
which I just happened to hear as I was scanning up and down the radio dial
in New York in the mid 60s. WQXR had their 8:PM "Symphony Hall" program,
and that was the featured work that evening. I still remember the feeling
of being smitten by Stoki's conducting.
I've bought several other versions, but they all seemed thinned-out and
lacked the conviction of the Phase 4 recording, so I finally went out and
bought the "real thing." I was in my early teens, didn't have much cash and
didn't know much about music. I certainly had no preferences when it came
to conductors or performances yet. I think the Stokowski performances of
Scherazade and "Pictures At An Exhibition" were my first ones where I began
expressing a preference for particular versions.
I never did feel completely at home with the London Phase 4 LP. It was LOUD
and it had a wide dynamic range, that was painful to listen to, because the
volume seemed either too high or too low. Later on I bough a DBX Model 119
expander/compressor and I was able to compress the dynamic range when I
played the LP. I believe that this was the only LP I ever owned where I
compressed, rather than expanded, the dynamic range.
I just recently bought the CD on Cala, after having given up on ever finding
the performance on CD (someone in this NG mentioned that performance and I
ordered it that same day). I must say I am very disappointed in the
technical performance.
The only good thing is that the clicks, pops and crackle that have developed
in the LP version over the decades are gone. (We had a cheap GE "console
stereo" with a ceramic cartridge when I first bought the LP, and it wasn't
long before distortion set in.)
1: The CD was LOUD, again with a wide dynamic range. If I set the volume so
I could hear the quiet parts, I'd get BLASTED at the loud passages. I found
myself sitting with remote control in hand, constantly adjusting the sound
volume. I still have my DBX unit, and I'll just have to compress the
playback, just as I did with the LP. Bummer.
2: There is a lot of clipping in the loud passages. I notice it more on the
CD than I did on the LP, and this is the most disturbing part of all. Why
did those Phase 4 engineers have to record at volume levels that drove the
meters beyond maximum? That clipping is God-awful!
So I have this love-hate thing with this performance. The syrupy violin
playing of Erich Gruenberg is seductive, but the recording is brash, the
audio seems brittle, the clipping is unforgivable. The CD claims to have
been remastered at 24 bit / 96 kHz, but this is by far the worst-sounding of
any high-definition CD that I own (compare to the RCS high-definition
remasters of Ormandy and the Philadelphia Orchestra, where the sound is
clean and "open," and the noise is gone without adversely affecting the high
frequencies of the performance). The Cala CD lists the SPARS information as
"AAD." I don't understand how a 24/96 remastering could be AAD and not ADD.
Typo?
I've been rediscovering the Stokowski version on RCA Victrola 7743-2-RV,
with the RPO and also with Gruenberg's violin playing. This was produced by
Richard Mohr, and I seem to associate his name with "Living Stereo" LP
pressings. If anyone knows any details about this particular recording I'd
appreciate finding out more.
I try not to be too critical of technical issues, especially on older
recordings that had to work with whatever the state of the art was at the
time of the recording, but this particular CD really bothers me, because the
performance was magnificent, and the engineering just ruined it. I'd gladly
take the LSO performance along with the RCA Victrola CD sound, if it were
possible.
My recommendation is to get the CD, because the performance is a must-have,
but try to set aside the deficiencies associated with loud volume and
clipping if you can.
It's always amusing to read diametrically opposed opinions of a
recording. Of the Cala reissue of Stokowski's 'Phase 4' Scheherazade,
Jonathan Woolf on MusicWeb-International wrote that "it has been
re-mastered to ever more spectacular effect ... one remains amazed by
the sound of the Phase 4 recording in all its flamboyance and glamour."
Paul Shoemaker wrote a second review for the same website: "This Cala
transfer has been done utilising 96kHz, 24-bit technology ... at once
the improvement in power and clarity of sound in the new version was
manifest and unmistakeable." Don Vroon in American Record Guide wrote:
"This is Stokowski's greatest recording of Scheherazade and as
Stokowski's greatest you know it has to be one of the world's greatest
... The 1964 sound is stunning and Cala has made it even better with a
new 24-bit remastering." .

But to be fair, there were adverse opinions on the CD release just as
there were over the original LP. In The Gramophone, Ivan March wrote:
"Stokowski's is altogether a superb account ... the snag is the
recording, close-miked and vivid but over-modulated with coarse
fortissimi which often approach distortion." ... Maybe it all depends
on the equipment and speakers as to the kind of results one gets .. and
maybe CD digital remastering of older recordings can make better that
which sounded good in the first place, but make worse that which was
bad to start with.

Why not listen to the audio snippets from Stokowski's Phase 4 CD on
Cala's website and see what they sound like over your computer
speakers! ... www.calarecords.com
Jeremy
2006-06-16 01:54:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by k***@yahoo.co.uk
It's always amusing to read diametrically opposed opinions of a
recording. Of the Cala reissue of Stokowski's 'Phase 4' Scheherazade,
Jonathan Woolf on MusicWeb-International wrote that "it has been
re-mastered to ever more spectacular effect ... one remains amazed by
the sound of the Phase 4 recording in all its flamboyance and glamour."
Believe me when I say this--I am hardly an audio critic. I have a plain
vanilla Sony 100 watt receiver, about 12 years old, I still listen on my
original Advent speakers, I use an ordinary Sony CD Deck and a 30 year-old
Technics Turntable with a Stanton 681 EEE cartridge (new stylus every two
years, though). I have always been amazed at the improved sound from CD
remasterings--especially the absence of those pops and crackles, which I
happened to find so annoying. I am, thankfully, not bitten by the
audiophile bug and I have bought gear that I felt was at a certain threshold
of sound quality and I have stuck with it. (I also have an AR XB Turntable,
and I have never understood how it got its cult status. It is cheaply made,
and my Technics SL-5300 runs circles around it).

I hardly ever am critical of recordings. But I am really upset over this
one.I cannot understand how any objective reviewer can write that is it is
"spectacular." It is LOUD and the loud passages go into clipping and that
damned "buzzing" annoys the hell out of me. Given my tendency to be so
forgiving of audio flaws (except for pops and crackle on LPs) my dislike for
the Cala remastering is a big departure from my normal, laid-back self.

I have an LP transfer to CD that I made several years ago, and I think I may
just remaster the LP myself on Diamond Cut Millennium editing software. The
de-clicked LP sound will probably be more pleasing than this "spectacular"
CD reissue.
Jeremy
2006-06-16 02:07:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jeremy
I hardly ever am critical of recordings. But I am really upset over this
one.I cannot understand how any objective reviewer can write that is it is
"spectacular." It is LOUD and the loud passages go into clipping and that
damned "buzzing" annoys the hell out of me.
I just auditioned the Cala reissue once more--this time running the signal
through my DBX compressor set at 1.4:1 (40% compressed). That's about as
far as one can go before that pumping sound sets in.

Much better sound. The clipping was still there, but was more
tolerable--perhaps because it was not associated with very loud passages
this time around.

The compression did serve to bring out some of the background tape hiss, but
my ears found that more tolerable than those loud crescendos.

I also played a bit of the LP transfer that I made some years ago. More
clipping on that than was on the remaster. I might have thought that the
clipping was groove distortion resulting from cutting too loud. Anyway, the
CD seemed better, once I compressed the audio.

So I'll stop bitching about the CD and will now get back to enjoying the
performance itself. To the best of my knowledge, this is the only recording
that I ever compressed. I typically used the DBX box to expand LPs and
tapes to make up for their already-compressed audio. Perhaps I should offer
a bootleg compressed version of the CD . . . ????
Norman M. Schwartz
2006-06-16 02:33:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jeremy
any high-definition CD that I own (compare to the RCS high-definition
remasters of Ormandy and the Philadelphia Orchestra, where the sound is
clean and "open," and the noise is gone without adversely affecting the high
frequencies of the performance).
What and where can be found the "RCS high-definition remaster of Ormandy and
the Philadelphia Orchestra"? (Label and/or catalog number would do just
fine.) Both the performance and sound of the Sony Essential Classics release
is a "natural" to my ears. All that I desire to hear can be found in this
release and something or other always seems to "stick out like a sore thumb"
in all the other recordings I've recently heard.
Steven de Mena
2006-06-16 02:40:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Norman M. Schwartz
Post by Jeremy
any high-definition CD that I own (compare to the RCS high-definition
remasters of Ormandy and the Philadelphia Orchestra, where the sound is
clean and "open," and the noise is gone without adversely affecting the high
frequencies of the performance).
What and where can be found the "RCS high-definition remaster of Ormandy and
the Philadelphia Orchestra"? (Label and/or catalog number would do just
fine.) Both the performance and sound of the Sony Essential Classics release
is a "natural" to my ears. All that I desire to hear can be found in this
release and something or other always seems to "stick out like a sore thumb"
in all the other recordings I've recently heard.
"RCS" is probably "RCA" and "high definition remasters" their "High
Performance" CD series.

Steve
Norman M. Schwartz
2006-06-16 14:05:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Steven de Mena
Post by Norman M. Schwartz
Post by Jeremy
any high-definition CD that I own (compare to the RCS high-definition
remasters of Ormandy and the Philadelphia Orchestra, where the sound is
clean and "open," and the noise is gone without adversely affecting the high
frequencies of the performance).
What and where can be found the "RCS high-definition remaster of Ormandy and
the Philadelphia Orchestra"? (Label and/or catalog number would do just
fine.) Both the performance and sound of the Sony Essential Classics release
is a "natural" to my ears. All that I desire to hear can be found in this
release and something or other always seems to "stick out like a sore thumb"
in all the other recordings I've recently heard.
"RCS" is probably "RCA" and "high definition remasters" their "High
Performance" CD series.
No HP RCA/BMG Ormandy in this work, only Sony/Columbia/CBS.
Post by Steven de Mena
Steve
Jeremy
2006-06-16 14:51:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Steven de Mena
"RCS" is probably "RCA" and "high definition remasters" their "High
Performance" CD series.
Yes. Typo. I have a recording called "The Fabulous Philadelphians" and the
audio is very pleasing.
Joe Vitale
2006-06-15 21:06:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jeremy
I just recently bought the CD on Cala, after having given up on ever
finding the performance on CD (someone in this NG mentioned that
performance and I ordered it that same day). I must say I am very
disappointed in the technical performance.
My recommendation is to get the CD, because the performance is a
must-have, but try to set aside the deficiencies associated with loud
volume and clipping if you can.
If it makes you feel any better, I have the Japanese issue of this
performance and all the distortion is there as well.
Matthew B. Tepper
2006-06-15 03:28:27 UTC
Permalink
Skip Martin. ;--)
--
Matthew B. Tepper: WWW, science fiction, classical music, ducks!
My personal home page -- http://home.earthlink.net/~oy/index.html
My main music page --- http://home.earthlink.net/~oy/berlioz.html
To write to me, do for my address what Androcles did for the lion
I ask you to judge me by the enemies I have made. ~ FDR (attrib.)
Clarinetowner
2006-06-15 08:34:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Matthew B. Tepper
Skip Martin. ;--)
Yeah, that one's fun! Even though I had to mix down the big band parts
a little and burn another copy of it, because otherwise they were just
too "shocking". Frank Rosolino imitating that bassoon cadenza is
something else.

As for the legit versions, I like Reiner.

HCD
Curtis Croulet
2006-06-15 03:39:10 UTC
Permalink
Reiner.
--
Curtis Croulet
Temecula, California
33°27'59"N, 117°05'53"W
Paul Goldstein
2006-06-15 03:28:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Richard Loeb
Any recommendations for the best combination of conductor and recorded
sound - I recall an Ansermet LP from the late fifties that sounded marvelous
but I don't know if it has been properly transferred to CD??? Thanks in
advance Richard
The Ansermet sounds great on CD, and is a good choice. Likewise the Dorati on
Mercury. In more modern sound, Kondrashin's is a great performance. If you
like RCA Living Stereo sound, there's the great Reiner recording.
Royke
2006-06-15 04:00:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul Goldstein
Post by Richard Loeb
Any recommendations for the best combination of conductor and recorded
sound - I recall an Ansermet LP from the late fifties that sounded marvelous
but I don't know if it has been properly transferred to CD??? Thanks in
advance Richard
The Ansermet sounds great on CD, and is a good choice. Likewise the Dorati on
Mercury. In more modern sound, Kondrashin's is a great performance. If you
like RCA Living Stereo sound, there's the great Reiner recording.
Kondrashin seconded. Herman Krebbers playing great. Krebbers later admitted
that he did not fully agree with how Kondrahsin wanted him to play. But I
love it ...
Vaneyes
2006-06-15 03:55:15 UTC
Permalink
Reiner, RCA LS SACD/Hybrid.

Regards
Matthew Silverstein
2006-06-15 03:55:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Richard Loeb
Any recommendations for the best combination of conductor and recorded
sound - I recall an Ansermet LP from the late fifties that sounded marvelous
but I don't know if it has been properly transferred to CD??? Thanks in
advance Richard
I'm very fond of this piece, and while I have a number of favorites, I'd
take Reiner/CSO on RCA if I could have only one. The recorded sound
(especially in its latest SACD release is fantastic), and the playing of
the CSO is astonishing. A gorgeous disc.

Matty
j***@aol.com
2006-06-15 04:37:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by Matthew Silverstein
Post by Richard Loeb
Any recommendations for the best combination of conductor and recorded
sound - I recall an Ansermet LP from the late fifties that sounded marvelous
but I don't know if it has been properly transferred to CD??? Thanks in
advance Richard
I'm very fond of this piece, and while I have a number of favorites, I'd
take Reiner/CSO on RCA if I could have only one. The recorded sound
(especially in its latest SACD release is fantastic), and the playing of
the CSO is astonishing. A gorgeous disc.
Matty
I haven't heard the latest release, but if it's good, that good news.

For a very recent recording, in excellent sound, one might try
Spano/Atlanta on Telarc.

--Jeff
Richard Schultz
2006-06-15 09:46:46 UTC
Permalink
In article <***@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com>, ***@aol.com wrote:

: For a very recent recording, in excellent sound, one might try
: Spano/Atlanta on Telarc.

No doubt I should be embarrassed to admit this, but I like the old
Previn/LSO recording. The sound is fine, but may not be spectacular
enough for the OP.

-----
Richard Schultz ***@mail.biu.ac.il
Department of Chemistry, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel
Opinions expressed are mine alone, and not those of Bar-Ilan University
-----
"You go on playing Bach your way, and I'll go on playing him *his* way."
-- Wanda Landowska
Thomas Wood
2006-06-15 13:05:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Richard Schultz
: For a very recent recording, in excellent sound, one might try
: Spano/Atlanta on Telarc.
No doubt I should be embarrassed to admit this, but I like the old
Previn/LSO recording. The sound is fine, but may not be spectacular
enough for the OP.
Previn's recording was actually my introduction to the work, but I find him
a little slack in the climaxes. I prefer Stokowski and Reiner.

Tom Wood
rkhalona
2006-06-15 18:48:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Richard Schultz
: For a very recent recording, in excellent sound, one might try
: Spano/Atlanta on Telarc.
No doubt I should be embarrassed to admit this, but I like the old
Previn/LSO recording. The sound is fine, but may not be spectacular
enough for the OP.
Don't be embarrassed at all. That's among my favorites as well, with
one of the most exciting last movements, but overall
I don't think it matches Kondrashin/COA or Reiner/CSO. Previn's second
recording with the VPO for
Philips was a HUGE disappointment. You probably cannot get a more
unidiomatic orchestra for this music (unless you consider British
Petroleum :-)

RK
Richard Schultz
2006-06-15 19:04:46 UTC
Permalink
In article <***@c74g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>, rkhalona <***@hotmail.com> wrote:
: Richard Schultz wrote:

:> No doubt I should be embarrassed to admit this, but I like the old
:> Previn/LSO recording.

: Don't be embarrassed at all. That's among my favorites as well, with
: one of the most exciting last movements, but overall
: I don't think it matches Kondrashin/COA or Reiner/CSO. Previn's second
: recording with the VPO for Philips was a HUGE disappointment.

I believe that Simon Roberts may have been on to something when he opined
that at some point, Previn turned into a Pod Person. Not long ago, I was
in a CD shoppe and heard a particularly passionate performance (alliterative,
too) of the second movement of the Sibelius violin concerto. Boy was I
surprised to discover that I was listening to Mutter/Previn. I guess love
really is a many-splendored thing.

-----
Richard Schultz ***@mail.biu.ac.il
Department of Chemistry, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel
Opinions expressed are mine alone, and not those of Bar-Ilan University
-----
"That's *genius*!"
"Really? I thought it was Rachmaninov."
Simon Roberts
2006-06-15 15:21:09 UTC
Permalink
In article <***@40tude.net>, Matthew Silverstein
says...
Post by Matthew Silverstein
Post by Richard Loeb
Any recommendations for the best combination of conductor and recorded
sound - I recall an Ansermet LP from the late fifties that sounded marvelous
but I don't know if it has been properly transferred to CD??? Thanks in
advance Richard
I'm very fond of this piece, and while I have a number of favorites, I'd
take Reiner/CSO on RCA if I could have only one. The recorded sound
(especially in its latest SACD release is fantastic), and the playing of
the CSO is astonishing.
Well, if that won't make Michael Schaffer come running back from wherever he is,
nothing will....

Simon
j***@aol.com
2006-06-15 15:49:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Simon Roberts
says...
Post by Matthew Silverstein
Post by Richard Loeb
Any recommendations for the best combination of conductor and recorded
sound - I recall an Ansermet LP from the late fifties that sounded marvelous
but I don't know if it has been properly transferred to CD??? Thanks in
advance Richard
I'm very fond of this piece, and while I have a number of favorites, I'd
take Reiner/CSO on RCA if I could have only one. The recorded sound
(especially in its latest SACD release is fantastic), and the playing of
the CSO is astonishing.
Well, if that won't make Michael Schaffer come running back from wherever he is,
nothing will....
...and here I was, waiting for someone to recommend the snoozefest by
Maazel/British Petroleum.

--Jeff
tomdeacon
2006-06-15 15:52:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by j***@aol.com
British Petroleum.
Is that an attempt at humour, a serious critical evaluation of the
Berlin Philharmonic, or simply an indication of your lack of taste?

TD
j***@aol.com
2006-06-15 15:56:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by tomdeacon
Post by j***@aol.com
British Petroleum.
Is that an attempt at humour, a serious critical evaluation of the
Berlin Philharmonic, or simply an indication of your lack of taste?
TD
Is that sarcasm, a quip, or a serious lack of a sense of humor on your
part?

--Jeff
tomdeacon
2006-06-15 16:12:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by j***@aol.com
Post by tomdeacon
Post by j***@aol.com
British Petroleum.
Is that an attempt at humour, a serious critical evaluation of the
Berlin Philharmonic, or simply an indication of your lack of taste?
TD
Is that sarcasm, a quip, or a serious lack of a sense of humor on your
part?
I have NO sense of humour.

Moreover, that is not only not funny, it isn't even pertinent. It's
just mindless.

Why don't you leave such things to Koren, who does it much better,
actually.

TD
j***@aol.com
2006-06-15 16:21:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by tomdeacon
Post by j***@aol.com
Post by tomdeacon
Post by j***@aol.com
British Petroleum.
Is that an attempt at humour, a serious critical evaluation of the
Berlin Philharmonic, or simply an indication of your lack of taste?
TD
Is that sarcasm, a quip, or a serious lack of a sense of humor on your
part?
I have NO sense of humour.
Moreover, that is not only not funny, it isn't even pertinent. It's
just mindless.
But you have NO sense of humor, or humour, for that matter, so you
wouldn't know, would you?

--Jeff
Derek Hollman
2006-06-15 07:02:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Richard Loeb
Any recommendations for the best combination of conductor and recorded
sound - I recall an Ansermet LP from the late fifties that sounded marvelous
but I don't know if it has been properly transferred to CD??? Thanks in
advance Richard
I enjoy Bernstein/NYPO. There is a motif about 3 minutes into the
first movement (and again at 6 minutes, 9 minutes), that Bernstein hits
just right for me (sorry for my lack of vocabulary). This motif, too,
comes back at the end of the piece I feel Reiner/CSO rushes right
through this, not enjoying it at all. However, the playing of the CSO
is superb, especially the brass as you might have heard already. The
Ansermet did make it to CD on a Decca Double.

Best,
Derek
Wal
2006-06-15 08:04:54 UTC
Permalink
Stokowski/LSO - mine's on Decca but apparently the Cala reissue is far
better sonically. A second choice would be HvK/BPO with the inimitable
Michel Schwalbe as a very up front and alluring story teller.
MELMOTH
2006-06-15 09:06:16 UTC
Permalink
Ce cher mammifère du nom de Richard Loeb nous susurrait, le jeudi
15/06/2006, dans nos oreilles grandes ouvertes mais un peu sales quand
même, et dans le message
Any recommendations for the best combination of conductor and recorded sound
- I recall an Ansermet LP from the late fifties that sounded marvelous but I
don't know if it has been properly transferred to CD??? Thanks in advance
Richard
1) Kondrashin
2) Kondrashin
3) Kondrashin

And...first of all...Kondrashin...
--
Car avec beaucoup de science, il y a beaucoup de chagrin; et celui qui
accroît sa science, accroît sa douleur.
[Ecclésiaste, 1]
Melmoth - souffrant
tomdeacon
2006-06-15 09:58:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Richard Loeb
Any recommendations for the best combination of conductor and recorded
sound - I recall an Ansermet LP from the late fifties that sounded marvelous
but I don't know if it has been properly transferred to CD??? Thanks in
advance
A little history.

Three versions dominated the analogue era: Beecham, Ansermet, and
Reiner.

When Stokowski came along most were swept away by Stokie's technicolour
version. Me included.

In the waning days of LP along came Kondrashin. This was a splendid
recording with a great orchestra. It received little attention at the
time from the press. When it first appeared on CD again it sort of died
an early death. Then I reissued it on Solo and the critics began to sit
up and take notice, specially in France, hence the extreme reaction
from that French near-idiot who spouts received ideas faster than the
mint does nickels.

Where do things stand today?

Well, Stokie is still terrific, of course, specially in analogue sound.
(Sorry, but my original Phase Four still sounds better than either of
the CDs). And nobody before or since has come close to approaching
Stokie's special handling of orchestral colour in this music.

Beecham sounds very dated these days. And after Stokie, well, lacking
in balls!

Ansermet: a bit like the Beecham. It was bested a long time ago.
Retirement is the best solution.

Reiner: the only one OTHER than Stokie and Kondrashin to consider as an
option today. I have the SACD/Hybrid version but have not heard the
SACD layers yet. Probably sounds just great. The performance is good,
but again it doesn't have quite the sweep of Stokie. Perhaps its a good
middle ground, though, and the ultimate recommendation still, even
after almost forty years.

Kondrashin? Wonderful reading. Krebbers is good, but he is no Steve
Staryk, I have to say. But you don't buy a Scheherezade for the
violinist anyway.

Frankly, I cannot do with only one version of this music. I need
Kondrashin AND Stokowski AND Reiner AND Beecham.

Gergiev? One of the most over-processed sonic disasters Philips ever
produced. A disgrace to the label.

TD
Nick Sun
2006-06-15 12:53:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by tomdeacon
Reiner: the only one OTHER than Stokie and Kondrashin to consider as an
option today. I have the SACD/Hybrid version but have not heard the
SACD layers yet. Probably sounds just great. The performance is good,
but again it doesn't have quite the sweep of Stokie. Perhaps its a good
middle ground, though, and the ultimate recommendation still, even
after almost forty years.
The sound of Reiner's one (even on SACD layer) sucks by modern
standard, overly artificial, to me, so is the performance. It's mainly
for old time audiophile's sentimental nostalgia purpose, who might have
already lost their sensitivity to subtleties. :-)
tomdeacon
2006-06-15 13:08:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Nick Sun
Post by tomdeacon
Reiner: the only one OTHER than Stokie and Kondrashin to consider as an
option today. I have the SACD/Hybrid version but have not heard the
SACD layers yet. Probably sounds just great. The performance is good,
but again it doesn't have quite the sweep of Stokie. Perhaps its a good
middle ground, though, and the ultimate recommendation still, even
after almost forty years.
The sound of Reiner's one (even on SACD layer) sucks by modern
standard, overly artificial, to me, so is the performance. It's mainly
for old time audiophile's sentimental nostalgia purpose, who might have
already lost their sensitivity to subtleties.
In order to substantiate such a statement, you would have to mention a
single "subtlety" which Reiner's performance fails to reveal.

By the way: this IS a test.

TD
Norman M. Schwartz
2006-06-15 14:08:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Nick Sun
The sound of Reiner's one (even on SACD layer) sucks by modern
standard, overly artificial, to me, so is the performance. It's mainly
for old time audiophile's sentimental nostalgia purpose, who might have
already lost their sensitivity to subtleties. :-)
What is that you might be looking forward to listening to "for old time
audiophile's sentimental nostalgia purpose" (assuming of course that you
have the good fortune of reaching such an age)?
j***@yale.edu
2006-06-15 13:05:59 UTC
Permalink
Pittsburgh Symphony Orchestra, William Steinberg on mono LP Capitol P-8305.
Subtle, sensuous, stunning performance never issued on CD. This is one not
to miss if you encounter it.

Jon Butler
tomdeacon
2006-06-15 13:15:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by j***@yale.edu
Pittsburgh Symphony Orchestra, William Steinberg on mono LP Capitol P-8305.
Subtle, sensuous, stunning performance never issued on CD. This is one not
to miss if you encounter it.
Possibly.

But more than likely you have imprinted on this.

Scheherezade, perhaps more than any other piece except Respighi's Roman
trilogy, simply screams for stereophonic sound.

Frankly, I think you should try to get this version out of your head
and move on to one of the more modern versions which can truly reflect
the brilliance of Rimsky's orchestration.

Or, and I don't know if this is possible, try to see if Steinberg ever
made a stereo version of this music. I think Leinsdorf did the stereo
version for Capitol Records, but I am not sure. Wasn't that one of the
Full Dimension Stereo reissues on EMI?

In the meantime the closest version to Steinberg from the recommendable
ones would probably be Reiner's.

TD
Paul Goldstein
2006-06-15 15:12:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by j***@yale.edu
Pittsburgh Symphony Orchestra, William Steinberg on mono LP Capitol P-8305.
Subtle, sensuous, stunning performance never issued on CD. This is one not
to miss if you encounter it.
Interesting . . . I didn't know about this. Capitol also issued a very fleet
performance by Leinsdorf which sounds great in its CD reincarnation. The OP
might try that one too. Capitol's early stereo FDS sound is comparable to
Mercury's in some ways.
Stan Punzel
2006-06-15 20:52:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by tomdeacon
Post by Richard Loeb
Any recommendations for the best combination of conductor and recorded
sound - I recall an Ansermet LP from the late fifties that sounded marvelous
but I don't know if it has been properly transferred to CD??? Thanks in
advance
A little history.
Three versions dominated the analogue era: Beecham, Ansermet, and
Reiner.
When Stokowski came along most were swept away by Stokie's technicolour
version. Me included.
In the waning days of LP along came Kondrashin. This was a splendid
recording with a great orchestra. It received little attention at the
time from the press. When it first appeared on CD again it sort of died
an early death. Then I reissued it on Solo and the critics began to sit
up and take notice, specially in France, hence the extreme reaction
from that French near-idiot who spouts received ideas faster than the
mint does nickels.
Where do things stand today?
Well, Stokie is still terrific, of course, specially in analogue sound.
(Sorry, but my original Phase Four still sounds better than either of
the CDs). And nobody before or since has come close to approaching
Stokie's special handling of orchestral colour in this music.
Beecham sounds very dated these days. And after Stokie, well, lacking
in balls!
Ansermet: a bit like the Beecham. It was bested a long time ago.
Retirement is the best solution.
Reiner: the only one OTHER than Stokie and Kondrashin to consider as an
option today. I have the SACD/Hybrid version but have not heard the
SACD layers yet. Probably sounds just great. The performance is good,
but again it doesn't have quite the sweep of Stokie. Perhaps its a good
middle ground, though, and the ultimate recommendation still, even
after almost forty years.
Kondrashin? Wonderful reading. Krebbers is good, but he is no Steve
Staryk, I have to say. But you don't buy a Scheherezade for the
violinist anyway.
Frankly, I cannot do with only one version of this music. I need
Kondrashin AND Stokowski AND Reiner AND Beecham.
Gergiev? One of the most over-processed sonic disasters Philips ever
produced. A disgrace to the label.
TD
One that has not been mentioned is Temirkanov/NYP. Great sound and
conducting that rivals Reiner/Stoky, etc. And for sheer curiosity, I
like the Celibidache on DG.

Stan Punzel
rkhalona
2006-06-15 21:31:39 UTC
Permalink
...And for sheer curiosity, I
like the Celibidache on DG.
Have you heard his EMI recording with the Munich Phil?
One of a kind for sure.

RK
Matthew B. Tepper
2006-06-16 01:44:50 UTC
Permalink
"rkhalona" <***@hotmail.com> appears to have caused the following
letters to be typed in news:1150407099.375042.83420
Post by rkhalona
...And for sheer curiosity, I like the Celibidache on DG.
Have you heard his EMI recording with the Munich Phil?
One of a kind for sure.
How many CDs does it take?
--
Matthew B. Tepper: WWW, science fiction, classical music, ducks!
My personal home page -- http://home.earthlink.net/~oy/index.html
My main music page --- http://home.earthlink.net/~oy/berlioz.html
To write to me, do for my address what Androcles did for the lion
I ask you to judge me by the enemies I have made. ~ FDR (attrib.)
George Murnu
2006-06-16 02:52:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by rkhalona
...And for sheer curiosity, I
like the Celibidache on DG.
Have you heard his EMI recording with the Munich Phil?
One of a kind for sure.
RK
I also prefer his Munich Philharmonic recording as well - and let me put a
word for another Romanian, Silvestri. The Bournemouth Symphony may not be
the CSO but this is one of the most fierce finales that I heard.

I am neuter for Reiner; great orchestra for sure but leaves me cold
otherwise.

Regards,

George
j***@aol.com
2006-06-16 04:02:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by rkhalona
...And for sheer curiosity, I
like the Celibidache on DG.
Have you heard his EMI recording with the Munich Phil?
One of a kind for sure.
RK
It is very different from his 1961 Rome radio peformance on Hunt
Classics, that's for sure. It's barely over 50 minutes.

--Jeff
George Murnu
2006-06-17 01:20:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by j***@aol.com
Post by rkhalona
...And for sheer curiosity, I
like the Celibidache on DG.
Have you heard his EMI recording with the Munich Phil?
One of a kind for sure.
RK
It is very different from his 1961 Rome radio peformance on Hunt
Classics, that's for sure. It's barely over 50 minutes.
So much for all Celi's performances beeing the same as some opinionated
member of this group says. But hey, who am I to disagree with somebody who
"knows the tradition from inside"?

Regards,

George
Post by j***@aol.com
--Jeff
MELMOTH
2006-06-16 09:02:17 UTC
Permalink
Ce cher mammifère du nom de tomdeacon nous susurrait, le jeudi
15/06/2006, dans nos oreilles grandes ouvertes mais un peu sales quand
même, et dans le message
Post by tomdeacon
Reiner: the only one OTHER than Stokie and Kondrashin
Thanks for NOT missing MONTEUX (RCA and Decca)...
--
Car avec beaucoup de science, il y a beaucoup de chagrin; et celui qui
accroît sa science, accroît sa douleur.
[Ecclésiaste, 1]
Melmoth - souffrant
Dan Fowler
2006-06-15 12:02:21 UTC
Permalink
I've enjoyed many versions mentioned in this thread, especially Kondrashin.
One of my current "favorites" is Mackerras with the LSO, coupled with a
rousing Capriccio Espagnol. Great sound and great performance. I also like
the version with Tjeknavorian and the Armenian Philharmonic Orchestra.

Dan
Post by Richard Loeb
Any recommendations for the best combination of conductor and recorded
sound - I recall an Ansermet LP from the late fifties that sounded
marvelous but I don't know if it has been properly transferred to CD???
Thanks in advance Richard
Stephen Worth
2006-06-15 13:35:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Richard Loeb
Any recommendations for the best combination of conductor and recorded
sound - I recall an Ansermet LP from the late fifties that sounded marvelous
but I don't know if it has been properly transferred to CD??? Thanks in
advance Richard
Previn is the best, followed by Beecham.

See ya
Steve
--
Rare 78 rpm recordings on CD! http://www.vintageip.com/records/
Building a museum and archive of animation! http://www.animationarchive.org/
The Quest for the BEST HOTDOG in Los Angeles! http://www.hotdogspot.com/
Rediscovering great stuff from the past! http://www.vintagetips.com/
Bill McCutcheon
2006-06-15 15:31:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Richard Loeb
Any recommendations for the best combination of conductor and recorded
sound - I recall an Ansermet LP from the late fifties that sounded
marvelous but I don't know if it has been properly transferred to CD???
Thanks in advance Richard
Mackerras/LSO on Telarc.
-- Bill McC.
rkhalona
2006-06-15 18:39:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Richard Loeb
Any recommendations for the best combination of conductor and recorded
sound - I recall an Ansermet LP from the late fifties that sounded marvelous
but I don't know if it has been properly transferred to CD??? Thanks in
advance Richard
For best combination of performance/sound, Kondrashin's Concertgebouw
recording on Philips is hard to beat. Reiner would be a close second.

RK
a***@aol.com
2006-06-15 22:21:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by rkhalona
Post by Richard Loeb
Any recommendations for the best combination of conductor and recorded
sound - I recall an Ansermet LP from the late fifties that sounded marvelous
but I don't know if it has been properly transferred to CD??? Thanks in
advance Richard
For best combination of performance/sound, Kondrashin's Concertgebouw
recording on Philips is hard to beat. Reiner would be a close second.
RK
Whatever one thinks of Mr Stokowski's performance of this wonderful
piece the most illuminating moments occur (for me) in that Cala
recording which includes 21 minutes of Stokowski in rehearsal.

That's a GREAT rehearser at work. Straight down to it. The Orchestra
laughing - serious when need be.

THAT'S the secret of this business. People who can convey what they
want with skill and humour (humor).

If fans of Mr Stokowski want to know how he achieved the "magic" that
some like that is how it is done.

I do not know if Mr Stucka knows this recording but, if he does, I
think he would appreciate the rehearsal sequence, as any performing
musician would.

Sadly, I never had the opportunity to rehearse or play for him. But on
the basis of that 21 minutes I would liked to have done.

Very similar to Mr Krombholc, by the way.

And very similar to Adrian Boult: tension and laughter at the same
time.

As in: "You talk like market women (pause). I only shout at you because
I can"

As in Krombholc Ma Vlast Movement II: "Flutes...you are not up in a
mountain. You are down to earth. Let's get back up the mountain,
please. This is tiny stuff. You are far too loud."

As in Krombholc Ma Vlast I: Timps: I want a big fat sound from you but
warm at the same time. That's your problem but that's what I want.
Good luck."

Can musicians relate to such people? Yes, they certainly can. And
that is the secret of it, I think.

If anyone is interested in the "process" of either rehearsing or
recording I would suggest they listen to the Stokowski rehearsal on
Cala.

Kind regards,
Alan M. Watkins
a***@aol.com
2006-06-15 22:43:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by a***@aol.com
Post by rkhalona
Post by Richard Loeb
Any recommendations for the best combination of conductor and recorded
sound - I recall an Ansermet LP from the late fifties that sounded marvelous
but I don't know if it has been properly transferred to CD??? Thanks in
advance Richard
For best combination of performance/sound, Kondrashin's Concertgebouw
recording on Philips is hard to beat. Reiner would be a close second.
RK
Whatever one thinks of Mr Stokowski's performance of this wonderful
piece the most illuminating moments occur (for me) in that Cala
recording which includes 21 minutes of Stokowski in rehearsal.
That's a GREAT rehearser at work. Straight down to it. The Orchestra
laughing - serious when need be.
THAT'S the secret of this business. People who can convey what they
want with skill and humour (humor).
If fans of Mr Stokowski want to know how he achieved the "magic" that
some like that is how it is done.
I do not know if Mr Stucka knows this recording but, if he does, I
think he would appreciate the rehearsal sequence, as any performing
musician would.
Sadly, I never had the opportunity to rehearse or play for him. But on
the basis of that 21 minutes I would liked to have done.
Very similar to Mr Krombholc, by the way.
And very similar to Adrian Boult: tension and laughter at the same
time.
As in: "You talk like market women (pause). I only shout at you because
I can"
As in Krombholc Ma Vlast Movement II: "Flutes...you are not up in a
mountain. You are down to earth. Let's get back up the mountain,
please. This is tiny stuff. You are far too loud."
As in Krombholc Ma Vlast I: Timps: I want a big fat sound from you but
warm at the same time. That's your problem but that's what I want.
Good luck."
Can musicians relate to such people? Yes, they certainly can. And
that is the secret of it, I think.
If anyone is interested in the "process" of either rehearsing or
recording I would suggest they listen to the Stokowski rehearsal on
Cala.
Kind regards,
Alan M. Watkins
PS: My favourite quote is still from Rozhdestvensky in a rehearsal of
Prokofiev Scythian Suite.

"Ladies and Gentlemen, that was so bad it was very nearly what the
composer would have meant if he had thought about it longer but
fortunately he didn't............."

Kind regards,
Alan M. Watkins
Matthew B. Tepper
2006-06-16 01:44:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by a***@aol.com
Whatever one thinks of Mr Stokowski's performance of this wonderful
piece the most illuminating moments occur (for me) in that Cala
recording which includes 21 minutes of Stokowski in rehearsal.
That's a GREAT rehearser at work. Straight down to it. The Orchestra
laughing - serious when need be.
THAT'S the secret of this business. People who can convey what they
want with skill and humour (humor).
If fans of Mr Stokowski want to know how he achieved the "magic" that
some like that is how it is done.
I do not know if Mr Stucka knows this recording but, if he does, I
think he would appreciate the rehearsal sequence, as any performing
musician would.
Sadly, I never had the opportunity to rehearse or play for him. But on
the basis of that 21 minutes I would liked to have done.
You didn't play in that "Enigma" Variations with the Czech Philharmonic?
I'd love to know the story of why he recorded the works that he did (some
of his Bach transcriptions, too, I believe) with that ensemble.
--
Matthew B. Tepper: WWW, science fiction, classical music, ducks!
My personal home page -- http://home.earthlink.net/~oy/index.html
My main music page --- http://home.earthlink.net/~oy/berlioz.html
To write to me, do for my address what Androcles did for the lion
I ask you to judge me by the enemies I have made. ~ FDR (attrib.)
Ralph
2006-06-15 20:31:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by Richard Loeb
Any recommendations for the best combination of conductor and recorded
sound - I recall an Ansermet LP from the late fifties that sounded marvelous
but I don't know if it has been properly transferred to CD??? Thanks in
advance Richard
I can't say that I have compared many versions, but I have been quite
satisfied with my Beecham on EMI.

Ralph
makropulos
2006-06-15 20:56:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Richard Loeb
Any recommendations for the best combination of conductor and recorded
sound - I recall an Ansermet LP from the late fifties that sounded marvelous
but I don't know if it has been properly transferred to CD??? Thanks in
advance Richard
Stokowski/LSO is magical (Decca/Cala). Despite the irritation of the
occasional moments of distortion, the sound is pretty exciting - and
to my ears the Cala transfer is much better than Decca's own in the
Stokowski Original Masters box (and the Cala also includes some
rehearsal tracks which are fun).

Kondrashin is less overtly colourful, but his is a beautiful and
wonderfully paced performance in very good sound.

Another current favourite (though in less good sound) is the superb
live Svetlanov/LSO performance on BBC Legends on 21 February 1978
(whereas the studio recording made at about the same time was hugely
disappointing).
tomdeacon
2006-06-15 21:58:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ralph
I can't say that I have compared many versions, but I have been quite
satisfied with my Beecham on EMI.
That is the problem in a nutshell.

Try Stokowski and you'll think Beecham sounds like a refugee from
Ladies in Lavender.

TD
frankwm
2006-06-15 22:37:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by tomdeacon
That is the problem in a nutshell.
Try Stokowski and you'll think Beecham sounds like a refugee from
Ladies in Lavender.

Too many Lady Trombonists in the RPO..although the original 1958 ASD
sounds lovely.

LSO/Stokowski..always LSO/Stokowski...

How about the 1951 Philharmonia Stokowski for a change..
http://www.classical.net/music/recs/reviews/t/tst01139a.html

Have this as a NOS 1956 HMV - ALP1339 (short-lived in the catalogue)
..now it's on Seedy.
Terry Simmons
2006-06-16 06:03:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Richard Loeb
Any recommendations for the best combination of conductor and recorded
sound - I recall an Ansermet LP from the late fifties that sounded marvelous
but I don't know if it has been properly transferred to CD??? Thanks in
advance Richard
Ansermet's was a wonderful performance, superbly recorded. I thought it was
later than the 1950s, but it wouldn't be the first time I'd got that sort of
thing wrong! I'd have placed it in the mid-1960s. I'm pretty sure it's available
now on a double CD set. You could do a search at one of the big record stores
like Tower.

Other recordings I like are those conducted by Beecham (EMI), Haitink (Philips),
Muti (EMI), Neeme Jarvi (Chandos) and Maazel (DGG). This is a work that almost
nobody makes a mess of (possible exception Stokowski), so you should try to get
a recording in splendid sound.
--
Cheers!

Terry
Eric Nagamine
2006-06-16 08:14:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Richard Loeb
Any recommendations for the best combination of conductor and recorded
sound - I recall an Ansermet LP from the late fifties that sounded marvelous
but I don't know if it has been properly transferred to CD??? Thanks in
advance Richard
Reiner/CSO on RCA/BMG.
Kondrashin/Concertgebouw on Philips.
Ormandy/Philadelphia on Sony.
--
-----------
Aloha and Mahalo,

Eric Nagamine
http://home.hawaii.rr.com/mahlerb/broadcaststartpage.html
Russ and/or Martha Oppenheim
2006-06-23 23:35:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Eric Nagamine
Reiner/CSO on RCA/BMG.
Kondrashin/Concertgebouw on Philips.
Ormandy/Philadelphia on Sony.
Agree on Ormandy; want to get Kondrashin.

Treason & blasphemy thought it may be, the Reiner is the only recording by
him that I bought and subsequently dumped. More exaggeration and fiddling
with tempos than I would have expected of the usually straightforward Fritz.

Russ (not Martha)

Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...