Discussion:
Celibidache Edition - First Impressions
(too old to reply)
George Murnu
2004-11-25 04:49:34 UTC
Permalink
Well, I have listened to a few of those CDs; a lot is still to go but here
are my impressions:

Bach Mass in B Minor - Already discussed, magnificent.

Tchaikovsky 4 / Nutcracker. While Celi's readings of Tchaikovsky's 5th and
6th symphonies where IMO some of the greatest performances of the previous
EMI releases, this is not quite in the same league. It may be because Celi
did not perform the 4th as much as the other two symphonies and it even
shows that the performance is not as well tought as the other two. There
are still plenty of magic Celi moments but perhaps this is first recommended
to Celi fans. As far as the Nutcracker excerpts, I prefer Celi's earlier
readings though I am yet to hear a more exciting Trepak.

Milhaud / Roussel. So far, with the Bach CD, the best of the edition. A
little more buoyancy (sp?) could have been used in Roussel but anyway Celi
puts anyone else to shame.

Prokofiev 1 and 5. Another case in which I prefer Celi's earlier readings -
especially in the Classical - though the Munich Philharmonic is clearly the
much better band in the fifth.

The bonus CD. The Oberon overture could be faster although Celi fans will
clearly enjoy the performance. The Parsifal excerpts are perhaps not as
good as Celi's best Wagner though there's much to enjoy. The Tristan
excertps are out of this world, among the greatest interpretations of
anything aywhere. Yes, the tempo is a little bit slow but who cares, Celi
is simply maginificent here.

As I listen to more I will post more impressions. Meanwhile other opinions
are welcome.

Regards,

George
Marc Bridle
2004-11-25 17:51:11 UTC
Permalink
I agree about the Bach B minor - outstanding (and outrageously fast in
places), in a very different league from the Verdi Requiem on these
discs which I must try and listen to again without dozing off (though
the Mozart is tremendous). I agree about the Tchaikovsky 4 as well -
and second your view of the earlier Fifth and Sixth symphonies.

I definitely prefer the LSO Prokofiev 5 - a really blazing
performance, and don't really care for this newer performance of the
Classical either. It's almost unfair to comment on the bonus disc
because you only get it in the complete boxed set, but the Tristan is
fabulous. I heard this originally on Meteor (coupled with La Mer from
1991) and was blown away by it. It is really neither slow nor fast for
a Tristan Prelude, in my view, but given this conductors later
predilection for slow tempi it is surprisingly swift. Celi does not
really keep to Wagner's markings (especially at the climax where he
speeds up) but it is a really spellbinding performance, and
beautifully played. Similarly, the Barber Adagio is not what one might
expect - it is straight forward, but deeply moving.

For me, the highlight (or perhaps discovery would be a better word) of
this set is the disc of Rossini and other Italian overtures. They
really have something very special about them; they fizz, they have
humour and they have a real Italianate warmth of sound to them.

Marc Bridle
Post by George Murnu
Well, I have listened to a few of those CDs; a lot is still to go but here
Bach Mass in B Minor - Already discussed, magnificent.
Tchaikovsky 4 / Nutcracker. While Celi's readings of Tchaikovsky's 5th and
6th symphonies where IMO some of the greatest performances of the previous
EMI releases, this is not quite in the same league. It may be because Celi
did not perform the 4th as much as the other two symphonies and it even
shows that the performance is not as well tought as the other two. There
are still plenty of magic Celi moments but perhaps this is first recommended
to Celi fans. As far as the Nutcracker excerpts, I prefer Celi's earlier
readings though I am yet to hear a more exciting Trepak.
Milhaud / Roussel. So far, with the Bach CD, the best of the edition. A
little more buoyancy (sp?) could have been used in Roussel but anyway Celi
puts anyone else to shame.
Prokofiev 1 and 5. Another case in which I prefer Celi's earlier readings -
especially in the Classical - though the Munich Philharmonic is clearly the
much better band in the fifth.
The bonus CD. The Oberon overture could be faster although Celi fans will
clearly enjoy the performance. The Parsifal excerpts are perhaps not as
good as Celi's best Wagner though there's much to enjoy. The Tristan
excertps are out of this world, among the greatest interpretations of
anything aywhere. Yes, the tempo is a little bit slow but who cares, Celi
is simply maginificent here.
As I listen to more I will post more impressions. Meanwhile other opinions
are welcome.
Regards,
George
Matthew B. Tepper
2004-11-26 06:44:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Marc Bridle
I agree about the Bach B minor - outstanding (and outrageously fast in
places), in a very different league from the Verdi Requiem on these
discs which I must try and listen to again without dozing off (though
the Mozart is tremendous). I agree about the Tchaikovsky 4 as well -
and second your view of the earlier Fifth and Sixth symphonies.
Fast? FAST???? A Celibidache performance?

THUD (sound of Matthew fainting onto the floor)
--
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
Take THAT, Daniel Lin, Mark Sadek, James Lin & Christopher Chung!
George Murnu
2004-11-26 07:08:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Matthew B. Tepper
Fast? FAST???? A Celibidache performance?
THUD (sound of Matthew fainting onto the floor)
Come on Ducky, you played this joke to death. Should I give specific
examples of fast Celi performances from all his phases of his career?

Regards,

George
Post by Matthew B. Tepper
--
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
Take THAT, Daniel Lin, Mark Sadek, James Lin & Christopher Chung!
Matthew B. Tepper
2004-11-26 07:28:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by George Murnu
Post by Matthew B. Tepper
Fast? FAST???? A Celibidache performance?
THUD (sound of Matthew fainting onto the floor)
Come on Ducky, you played this joke to death. Should I give specific
examples of fast Celi performances from all his phases of his career?
Yes, please. Particularly from the later years of his career, which I
associate with generally slow tempi, including those at the three concerts
I attended.
--
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
Take THAT, Daniel Lin, Mark Sadek, James Lin & Christopher Chung!
George Murnu
2004-11-26 17:34:05 UTC
Permalink
Besides the Bach Mass in B Minor - except for Kyrie - there's the Mozart 40
with standard tempi and among the weakest performances of the first EMI set.
The Bruckner 6 for EMI, except for the slow moment has pretty much standard
tempi. Likewise the Schumann piano concerto wih Barenboim - a weak
performance IMO.

I will come back with exaples from Celi's earlier phase - got to go now...

Regards,

George
Post by Matthew B. Tepper
Post by George Murnu
Post by Matthew B. Tepper
Fast? FAST???? A Celibidache performance?
THUD (sound of Matthew fainting onto the floor)
Come on Ducky, you played this joke to death. Should I give specific
examples of fast Celi performances from all his phases of his career?
Yes, please. Particularly from the later years of his career, which I
associate with generally slow tempi, including those at the three concerts
I attended.
--
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
Take THAT, Daniel Lin, Mark Sadek, James Lin & Christopher Chung!
George Murnu
2004-11-27 20:52:32 UTC
Permalink
Besides these examples, I will say that the performance of Haydn's Symphony
Nr. 102 - pirate with the Stuttgart Radio Orchestra from the 70s - has the
fastest finale that I ever heard with the caveat that I don't listen to HIP.
In general Celibidache from the Stuttgart era and earlier is unpredictable:
could be very fast or very slow or both during the same concert - or even
piece. If you want a sample of early "normal" Celi try the Great Conductors
set that Mr. Watkins is discussing elsewhere. It would be unfair to judge
Celi only from his late phase of the career in the same way that it would
give us an incomplete picture of Klemperer to judge him only from his
Philharmonia years (and similar comments can be made about Bernstein,
Giulini, and in our days Rozhdestvensky and even Levine is going towards
slow tempi at an earlier age than Celi).

Regards,

George
Post by George Murnu
Besides the Bach Mass in B Minor - except for Kyrie - there's the Mozart 40
with standard tempi and among the weakest performances of the first EMI set.
The Bruckner 6 for EMI, except for the slow moment has pretty much standard
tempi. Likewise the Schumann piano concerto wih Barenboim - a weak
performance IMO.
I will come back with exaples from Celi's earlier phase - got to go now...
Regards,
George
Post by Matthew B. Tepper
Post by George Murnu
Post by Matthew B. Tepper
Fast? FAST???? A Celibidache performance?
THUD (sound of Matthew fainting onto the floor)
Come on Ducky, you played this joke to death. Should I give specific
examples of fast Celi performances from all his phases of his career?
Yes, please. Particularly from the later years of his career, which I
associate with generally slow tempi, including those at the three concerts
I attended.
--
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
Take THAT, Daniel Lin, Mark Sadek, James Lin & Christopher Chung!
Raymond Hall
2004-11-28 01:18:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by George Murnu
Besides these examples, I will say that the performance of Haydn's Symphony
Nr. 102 - pirate with the Stuttgart Radio Orchestra from the 70s - has the
fastest finale that I ever heard with the caveat that I don't listen to HIP.
In general Celibidache from the Stuttgart era and earlier is
could be very fast or very slow or both during the same concert - or even
piece. If you want a sample of early "normal" Celi try the Great Conductors
set that Mr. Watkins is discussing elsewhere. It would be unfair to judge
Celi only from his late phase of the career in the same way that it would
give us an incomplete picture of Klemperer to judge him only from his
Philharmonia years (and similar comments can be made about Bernstein,
Giulini, and in our days Rozhdestvensky and even Levine is going towards
slow tempi at an earlier age than Celi).
Lenny became generally slower too. In fact I haven't yet heard his
"supposedly" ridiculously slow Tchaik Pathetique. In fact, I don't really
think I want to either.

Ray H
Taree
Dan Koren
2004-11-28 02:40:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Raymond Hall
Lenny became generally slower too. In fact I
haven't yet heard his "supposedly" ridiculously
slow Tchaik Pathetique. In fact, I don't really
think I want to either.
Why? Do you expect all music
performances to be ostrich
paced?



dk
Raymond Hall
2004-11-28 03:12:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dan Koren
Post by Raymond Hall
Lenny became generally slower too. In fact I
haven't yet heard his "supposedly" ridiculously
slow Tchaik Pathetique. In fact, I don't really
think I want to either.
Why? Do you expect all music
performances to be ostrich
paced?
I haven't heard the performance yet, remember. Lenny in his prime generally
took middle of the road tempi. Also remember that I love Celi's Bruckner.

As for Ostrichiiiiii, some are fast and some are slow. But all moose are
slow and ponderous.

Ray H
Taree
JRsnfld
2004-11-28 08:37:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Raymond Hall
Post by George Murnu
Besides these examples, I will say that the performance of Haydn's Symphony
Nr. 102 - pirate with the Stuttgart Radio Orchestra from the 70s - has the
fastest finale that I ever heard with the caveat that I don't listen to HIP.
In general Celibidache from the Stuttgart era and earlier is
could be very fast or very slow or both during the same concert - or even
piece. If you want a sample of early "normal" Celi try the Great Conductors
set that Mr. Watkins is discussing elsewhere. It would be unfair to judge
Celi only from his late phase of the career in the same way that it would
give us an incomplete picture of Klemperer to judge him only from his
Philharmonia years (and similar comments can be made about Bernstein,
Giulini, and in our days Rozhdestvensky and even Levine is going towards
slow tempi at an earlier age than Celi).
Lenny became generally slower too. In fact I haven't yet heard his
"supposedly" ridiculously slow Tchaik Pathetique. In fact, I don't really
think I want to either.
Ray H
Tare
Don't hold back, Ray. It is perhaps one measure of Bernstein's greatness that
his late Tchaikovsky 6 did not actually seem too slow when he and the NYPO
performed it in concert. In fact, it had an overwhelming impact the time I
heard it. The recording does reasonable justice to this memory.

--Jeff
Gerrit Stolte
2004-11-28 09:33:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by JRsnfld
Post by Raymond Hall
Lenny became generally slower too. In fact I haven't yet heard his
"supposedly" ridiculously slow Tchaik Pathetique. In fact, I don't really
think I want to either.
Ray H
Tare
Don't hold back, Ray. It is perhaps one measure of Bernstein's greatness that
his late Tchaikovsky 6 did not actually seem too slow when he and the NYPO
performed it in concert. In fact, it had an overwhelming impact the time I
heard it. The recording does reasonable justice to this memory.
--Jeff
Seconded,

Regards,
--
Gerrit

"In Deutschland gilt derjenige als viel gefährlicher, der auf den Schmutz
hinweist als der, der ihn gemacht hat." (Carl von Ossietzky, 1889-1938)
George Murnu
2004-11-28 19:29:35 UTC
Permalink
[snip]
Post by George Murnu
It would be unfair to judge
Celi only from his late phase of the career in the same way that it would
give us an incomplete picture of Klemperer to judge him only from his
Philharmonia years (and similar comments can be made about Bernstein,
Giulini, and in our days Rozhdestvensky and even Levine is going towards
slow tempi at an earlier age than Celi).
Regards,
George
And let me make another point: when I made the parallel with Klemperer,
Lenny, et. all I did not mean that I generally dislike their late works;
quite the contrary, I do like most of their late recordings. My point was
that conductors do evolve and change their approach to music and often -
though by no means always - this means slower tempi. In this respect Celi
was not unique.

Regards,

George
VECTOR 1
2004-12-02 12:26:36 UTC
Permalink
Are you kidding? Mozart 40 was the weakest?
Obviously you have no idea what Mozart *should sound like.
Matthew B. Tepper
2004-12-02 15:36:42 UTC
Permalink
"VECTOR 1" <***@gmail.com> appears to have caused the following
letters to be typed in news:1101990396.521590.74170
Post by VECTOR 1
Are you kidding? Mozart 40 was the weakest?
Obviously you have no idea what Mozart *should sound like.
Well, there's a persuasive argument for you.
--
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
Take THAT, Daniel Lin, Mark Sadek, James Lin & Christopher Chung!
George Murnu
2004-12-03 03:28:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by VECTOR 1
Are you kidding? Mozart 40 was the weakest?
Obviously you have no idea what Mozart *should sound like.
No, I have no idea what Mozart should sound like and neither does anybody
else except for Mozart himself (OK, that's a bit too radical..:-) But I do
know whether I like a performance of Mozart - or anyone else - or not, and
whether anyone else likes that performance or not is not of my concern. In
the specific case of the Celi's Munich / EMI recording of Mozart's 40 my
issue is not that is a weak performance. Rather, I feel it is a
conventional performance, tempi are pretty much standard for big band Mozart
and it does not contain the same kind of revelations that Celi's best
performances bring.

Regards,

George
VECTOR 1
2004-12-04 03:27:46 UTC
Permalink
Thanks for the clarification, George. I can accept your point now.
VECTOR 1
2004-12-05 21:05:38 UTC
Permalink
That is a very lively description of your memory. Thanks, Jeff.
Dan Koren
2004-12-05 21:20:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by George Murnu
Post by VECTOR 1
Are you kidding? Mozart 40 was the weakest?
Obviously you have no idea what Mozart *should sound like.
No, I have no idea what Mozart should sound like and neither does anybody
else except for Mozart himself (OK, that's a bit too radical..:-) But I do
know whether I like a performance of Mozart - or anyone else - or not, and
whether anyone else likes that performance or not is not of my concern.
In
Post by George Murnu
the specific case of the Celi's Munich / EMI recording of Mozart's 40 my
issue is not that is a weak performance. Rather, I feel it is a
conventional performance, tempi are pretty much standard for big band Mozart
and it does not contain the same kind of revelations that Celi's best
performances bring.
Regards,
You are missing the point completely.

Celi's K550 is not a performance that
goes well on record. It is as simple
as that.

I heard it live in Munich, and I must
say I never heard anything like it. I
was lucky enough to have enough tissues
in my pocket.



dk
George Murnu
2004-12-06 02:01:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by Marc Bridle
Post by George Murnu
Post by VECTOR 1
Are you kidding? Mozart 40 was the weakest?
Obviously you have no idea what Mozart *should sound like.
No, I have no idea what Mozart should sound like and neither does anybody
else except for Mozart himself (OK, that's a bit too radical..:-) But I
do
Post by George Murnu
know whether I like a performance of Mozart - or anyone else - or not, and
whether anyone else likes that performance or not is not of my concern.
In
Post by George Murnu
the specific case of the Celi's Munich / EMI recording of Mozart's 40 my
issue is not that is a weak performance. Rather, I feel it is a
conventional performance, tempi are pretty much standard for big band
Mozart
Post by George Murnu
and it does not contain the same kind of revelations that Celi's best
performances bring.
Regards,
You are missing the point completely.
Celi's K550 is not a performance that
goes well on record. It is as simple
as that.
I heard it live in Munich, and I must
say I never heard anything like it. I
was lucky enough to have enough tissues
in my pocket.
I wish I knew more about music when I heard Celi live... (only once in my
life, in New York) As for the Mozart performance, I will take your word
that it sounded great live. Unfortunately, I'm stuck with a recording...
Post by Marc Bridle
dk
VECTOR 1
2004-12-06 11:18:24 UTC
Permalink
I still believe there're some truths in Celi's recordings, altough
they're not as perfect as live performance. It's just a matter of
time... Have you listened to the Don Giovanni overture on the Italian
opera overtures disc? I think it is perfect. Why? Because there's
nothing left can be taken away. Maybe that's also the reason I cannot
feel anything 'special' about it.
Matthew B. Tepper
2004-12-06 15:44:28 UTC
Permalink
"VECTOR 1" <***@gmail.com> appears to have caused the following
letters to be typed in news:1102331904.325452.95650
Post by VECTOR 1
I still believe there're some truths in Celi's recordings, altough
they're not as perfect as live performance. It's just a matter of
time... Have you listened to the Don Giovanni overture on the Italian
opera overtures disc? I think it is perfect. Why? Because there's
nothing left can be taken away. Maybe that's also the reason I cannot
feel anything 'special' about it.
Does it use a concert ending, or just ... ?
--
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
Take THAT, Daniel Lin, Mark Sadek, James Lin & Christopher Chung!
VECTOR 1
2004-12-07 15:08:17 UTC
Permalink
Yeah. It has a concert ending, like his Die Meistersinger von Nurnberg
overture.
Matthew B. Tepper
2004-12-07 15:39:42 UTC
Permalink
"VECTOR 1" <***@gmail.com> appears to have caused the following
letters to be typed in news:1102432097.326454.192290
Post by VECTOR 1
Yeah. It has a concert ending, like his Die Meistersinger von Nurnberg
overture.
THe _Meistersinger_ Vorspiel is easy -- tack on the last few chords of the
opera itself. For _Don Giovanni_, you have to fake something.
--
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
Take THAT, Daniel Lin, Mark Sadek, James Lin & Christopher Chung!
VECTOR 1
2004-12-07 16:44:07 UTC
Permalink
Humm... Don't know much about that. I wonder who wrote that ending.
David7Gable
2004-12-08 01:16:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by VECTOR 1
Humm... Don't know much about that. I wonder who wrote that ending.
Ever hear the story about Rossini and the soprano who performed an excessively
ornamented version of one of his arias? After hearing her sing it, he said,
"Beautiful. Who wrote it?"

-david gable
Ssg217
2004-11-26 19:56:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by George Murnu
Post by Matthew B. Tepper
Fast? FAST???? A Celibidache performance?
THUD (sound of Matthew fainting onto the floor)
Come on Ducky, you played this joke to death. Should I give specific
examples of fast Celi performances from all his phases of his career?
Regards,
George
What Mr. Tepper NEVER told us was the story of how he listened to Celi's
Bruckner in concert. (-;

regards,
SG
Matthew B. Tepper
2004-11-27 08:27:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ssg217
Post by George Murnu
Post by Matthew B. Tepper
Fast? FAST???? A Celibidache performance?
THUD (sound of Matthew fainting onto the floor)
Come on Ducky, you played this joke to death. Should I give specific
examples of fast Celi performances from all his phases of his career?
Regards,
George
What Mr. Tepper NEVER told us was the story of how he listened to Celi's
Bruckner in concert. (-;
I went to the Dorothy Chandler Pavilion. I bought a ticket. I went to my
seat in the auditorium. I listened to the performance of the 4th, which
took about 77 minutes. Then I left. I actually hung around the back door
for a while and watched the Munich Philharmonic members leave. Then I went
home. Is that insufficient for you?
--
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
Take THAT, Daniel Lin, Mark Sadek, James Lin & Christopher Chung!
George Murnu
2004-11-28 00:48:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Matthew B. Tepper
Post by Ssg217
Post by George Murnu
Post by Matthew B. Tepper
Fast? FAST???? A Celibidache performance?
THUD (sound of Matthew fainting onto the floor)
Come on Ducky, you played this joke to death. Should I give specific
examples of fast Celi performances from all his phases of his career?
Regards,
George
What Mr. Tepper NEVER told us was the story of how he listened to Celi's
Bruckner in concert. (-;
I went to the Dorothy Chandler Pavilion. I bought a ticket. I went to my
seat in the auditorium. I listened to the performance of the 4th, which
took about 77 minutes. Then I left. I actually hung around the back door
for a while and watched the Munich Philharmonic members leave. Then I went
home. Is that insufficient for you?
You did not applaud??????? :-)

Regards,

George
Post by Matthew B. Tepper
--
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
Take THAT, Daniel Lin, Mark Sadek, James Lin & Christopher Chung!
Matthew B. Tepper
2004-11-28 18:50:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by George Murnu
Post by Matthew B. Tepper
Post by Ssg217
Post by George Murnu
Post by Matthew B. Tepper
Fast? FAST???? A Celibidache performance?
THUD (sound of Matthew fainting onto the floor)
Come on Ducky, you played this joke to death. Should I give specific
examples of fast Celi performances from all his phases of his career?
Regards,
George
What Mr. Tepper NEVER told us was the story of how he listened to
Celi's Bruckner in concert. (-;
I went to the Dorothy Chandler Pavilion. I bought a ticket. I went to
my seat in the auditorium. I listened to the performance of the 4th,
which took about 77 minutes. Then I left. I actually hung around the
back door for a while and watched the Munich Philharmonic members
leave. Then I went home. Is that insufficient for you?
You did not applaud??????? :-)
Regards,
George
Guess.
--
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
Take THAT, Daniel Lin, Mark Sadek, James Lin & Christopher Chung!
Alan Watkins
2004-11-26 21:17:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Matthew B. Tepper
Post by Marc Bridle
I agree about the Bach B minor - outstanding (and outrageously fast in
places), in a very different league from the Verdi Requiem on these
discs which I must try and listen to again without dozing off (though
the Mozart is tremendous). I agree about the Tchaikovsky 4 as well -
and second your view of the earlier Fifth and Sixth symphonies.
Fast? FAST???? A Celibidache performance?
THUD (sound of Matthew fainting onto the floor)
Based on VERY VERY limited experience (recordings only), he is fairly
fast in the Trepak Nutcracker on Great Conductors (see other post from
me) and quite fast in the finale of Mendelssohn 4 but in both cases
playably so. He is also pretty fast in the finale of Berwald 3 but,
again, playably so. In my only recorded comparison in Berwald, he is
marginally faster than Mr Schmidt-Isserstedt although both are
wonderful performances.

Mercifully, in the Mendelssohn, he seems to realise that the only
really fast bit IS the Saltarello. It is very easy to make the first
movement a "gabble" which he manages to avoid as have some others like
Mr Maag, but not all.

When you have come round you might like to say why Mr Maag did not
become "famous"?

Kind regards,
Alan M. Watkins
VECTOR 1
2004-12-02 11:47:54 UTC
Permalink
I've heard two old 'Classical's with Berlin and the new one. The new
one is just so much better and maturer, both sonically and musically.
It's wrong to compare concerts just based on one note. But just listen
to the first note of the last movement. The difference!!! There's so
much more internal energy! And the vivid gesture which is so hard to
describe by usingwords. If you still have the old Classical on mind,
you should probably put it aside for a while. And free your mind for
the Munich concert. I've never listened to the LSO fifth. But based on
the great things I've experienced from the Munich one, it's a great
loss to miss it!

As for speed, I found the discussion pretty boring. Celibidache pointed
out many times tempo is not the same thing as speed. Some people think
Celi is slow simply because they cannot get a feel for the tempo and
also because of the limitations of CD recordings. Comparing speed is
really meaningless. It's like comparing two cars with different speed
in terms of musical performance. And the description that music is
really 'fast' is actually inappropriate in this respect. Sometimes I
just feel like we should delete the word 'speed' from our dictionary
once for all. But after all the word 'speed' isn't in some music
dictionaries either. After all, the problem ends up to one thing: the
mechanical world ruined the tempo...
Matthew B. Tepper
2004-12-02 15:36:41 UTC
Permalink
"VECTOR 1" <***@gmail.com> appears to have caused the following
letters to be typed in news:1101988074.791748.48770
Post by VECTOR 1
I've heard two old 'Classical's with Berlin and the new one. The new
one is just so much better and maturer, both sonically and musically.
It's wrong to compare concerts just based on one note. But just listen
to the first note of the last movement. The difference!!! There's so
much more internal energy! And the vivid gesture which is so hard to
describe by usingwords. If you still have the old Classical on mind,
you should probably put it aside for a while. And free your mind for
the Munich concert. I've never listened to the LSO fifth. But based on
the great things I've experienced from the Munich one, it's a great
loss to miss it!
As for speed, I found the discussion pretty boring. Celibidache pointed
out many times tempo is not the same thing as speed. Some people think
Celi is slow simply because they cannot get a feel for the tempo and
also because of the limitations of CD recordings. Comparing speed is
really meaningless. It's like comparing two cars with different speed
in terms of musical performance. And the description that music is
really 'fast' is actually inappropriate in this respect. Sometimes I
just feel like we should delete the word 'speed' from our dictionary
once for all. But after all the word 'speed' isn't in some music
dictionaries either. After all, the problem ends up to one thing: the
mechanical world ruined the tempo...
Bibble bibble bibble bibble bibble bibble! (moving forefinger up and down
lips) The problem some of us have with Celibidache tempi is that they're
just freakin' bizarre and grotesque. That's it.
--
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
Take THAT, Daniel Lin, Mark Sadek, James Lin & Christopher Chung!
Slavoj Ken-Lum
2004-12-02 21:31:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Matthew B. Tepper
Bibble bibble bibble bibble bibble bibble! (moving forefinger up and down
lips) The problem some of us have with Celibidache tempi is that they're
just freakin' bizarre and grotesque. That's it.
Not only bizzare and grotesque but downright interventionist and
morbid.
Check out the choral parts of beethoven 9, and the tchaikovsky romeo
and juliet-depressing as hell.


Sure, his Munich Bruckner [4,5,6,8] and Schumann 3 is revelatory, but
only becuase we are so used to such bloated, fascististic bruckner
performances.
VECTOR 1
2004-12-03 08:26:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Slavoj Ken-Lum
Post by Matthew B. Tepper
Bibble bibble bibble bibble bibble bibble! (moving forefinger up and down
lips) The problem some of us have with Celibidache tempi is that they're
just freakin' bizarre and grotesque. That's it.
Not only bizzare and grotesque but downright interventionist and
morbid.
Check out the choral parts of beethoven 9, and the tchaikovsky romeo
and juliet-depressing as hell.
Sure, his Munich Bruckner [4,5,6,8] and Schumann 3 is revelatory, but
only becuase we are so used to such bloated, fascististic bruckner
performances.
If you really think so, you should get away from classical music and
listen to Black Eye Peas instead. Play anything Bruckner, Stravinsky
or Prokofiev to anyone listens to Black Eye Peas, they will probably
tell you the same thing: morbid and crazy. And your idea that music
should be entertaining is simply wrong. Why shouldn't be romeo and
juliet overture be depressing? It's a tragedy, man.
e***@aol.com
2004-12-06 19:31:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by VECTOR 1
Post by Slavoj Ken-Lum
Post by Matthew B. Tepper
Bibble bibble bibble bibble bibble bibble! (moving forefinger up and down
lips) The problem some of us have with Celibidache tempi is that they're
just freakin' bizarre and grotesque. That's it.
Not only bizzare and grotesque but downright interventionist and
morbid.
Check out the choral parts of beethoven 9, and the tchaikovsky romeo
and juliet-depressing as hell.
Sure, his Munich Bruckner [4,5,6,8] and Schumann 3 is revelatory, but
only becuase we are so used to such bloated, fascististic bruckner
performances.
If you really think so, you should get away from classical music and
listen to Black Eye Peas instead. Play anything Bruckner, Stravinsky
or Prokofiev to anyone listens to Black Eye Peas, they will probably
tell you the same thing: morbid and crazy. And your idea that music
should be entertaining is simply wrong. Why shouldn't be romeo and
juliet overture be depressing? It's a tragedy, man.
VECTOR 1
2004-12-03 08:38:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Slavoj Ken-Lum
Post by Matthew B. Tepper
Bibble bibble bibble bibble bibble bibble! (moving forefinger up and down
lips) The problem some of us have with Celibidache tempi is that they're
just freakin' bizarre and grotesque. That's it.
Not only bizzare and grotesque but downright interventionist and
morbid.
Check out the choral parts of beethoven 9, and the tchaikovsky romeo
and juliet-depressing as hell.
Sure, his Munich Bruckner [4,5,6,8] and Schumann 3 is revelatory, but
only becuase we are so used to such bloated, fascististic bruckner
performances.
The use of the word 'revelatory' is not appropriate. Music is not to
reveal something as a show or a movie, something you can just keep
wondering with apathy. Things are always revealed at different levels.
But how well that is constructed relates directly to the musical
experience. Again, if you just prefer listening with indifference,
stay away from Celibidache. Don't know what 'fascististic' means. But
I don't expect you to have a good idea of Bruckner based on my reasons
above.
George Murnu
2004-12-03 03:45:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Matthew B. Tepper
letters to be typed in news:1101988074.791748.48770
Post by VECTOR 1
I've heard two old 'Classical's with Berlin and the new one. The new
one is just so much better and maturer, both sonically and musically.
It's wrong to compare concerts just based on one note. But just listen
to the first note of the last movement. The difference!!! There's so
much more internal energy! And the vivid gesture which is so hard to
describe by usingwords. If you still have the old Classical on mind,
you should probably put it aside for a while. And free your mind for
the Munich concert. I've never listened to the LSO fifth. But based on
the great things I've experienced from the Munich one, it's a great
loss to miss it!
As for speed, I found the discussion pretty boring. Celibidache pointed
out many times tempo is not the same thing as speed. Some people think
Celi is slow simply because they cannot get a feel for the tempo and
also because of the limitations of CD recordings. Comparing speed is
really meaningless. It's like comparing two cars with different speed
in terms of musical performance. And the description that music is
really 'fast' is actually inappropriate in this respect. Sometimes I
just feel like we should delete the word 'speed' from our dictionary
once for all. But after all the word 'speed' isn't in some music
dictionaries either. After all, the problem ends up to one thing: the
mechanical world ruined the tempo...
Bibble bibble bibble bibble bibble bibble! (moving forefinger up and down
lips) The problem some of us have with Celibidache tempi is that they're
just freakin' bizarre and grotesque. That's it.
Strangely, there may in fact be a case to be made for Celi's statements.
Let's compare two performances of the Sheherezade, the one from 1982 with
the Stuttgart Radio Orchestra and the one from 1984 with the Munich
Philharmonic. The Stuttgart performance is faster by over 5 minutes! It
does often happen that two Celi performances of the same work by Celi have
significantly different timing: the Stuttgart Bruckner 8 from 1974 (DG) is
faster by almost 20 minutes than the 1993 Munich performance. Yet rarely
have I seen such a significant difference within such a short period of
time. Thus, perhaps the answer should be somewhere else. According to
Celi, the tempo depends on various factors. While I don't know the
differences between the two concert halls - Liederhale in Stuttgart and
Phiharmonie am Gasteig in Munich - I think it is fair to assume that the
sonorities of an orchestra in general also depends among other things on the
acoustics of a concert hall; this is a small factor, granted, but it is a
factor. Let's also compare the sonorities of the orchestras. The Stuttgart
band has a leaner sound, thus the faster tempo. The Munich band has a
richer - especially string - sound, and thus Celi takes his time here.
Also, let's now examine one of Celi's fastest performances from his Munich
years: the Mass in B Minor (aside from a slow - and magnificent - Kyrie).
In this performance Celi only uses a reduced section of the Munich
Philharmonic and the performance is HIP-influenced. Thus the textures are
much more transparent than is generally the case with the orchestra.

And let me repeat that if you want fast Celi, try his earlier recordings;
the Great Conductors set is a good place to start- even the slower Mozart
was not slower than was the norm in 1948.

Regards,

George
Post by Matthew B. Tepper
--
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
Take THAT, Daniel Lin, Mark Sadek, James Lin & Christopher Chung!
JRsnfld
2004-12-03 07:58:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by George Murnu
Strangely, there may in fact be a case to be made for Celi's statements.
Let's compare two performances of the Sheherezade, the one from 1982 with
the Stuttgart Radio Orchestra and the one from 1984 with the Munich
Philharmonic. The Stuttgart performance is faster by over 5 minutes! It
does often happen that two Celi performances of the same work by Celi have
significantly different timing: the Stuttgart Bruckner 8 from 1974 (DG) is
faster by almost 20 minutes than the 1993 Munich performance. Yet rarely
have I seen such a significant difference within such a short period of
time. Thus, perhaps the answer should be somewhere else. According to
Celi, the tempo depends on various factors. While I don't know the
differences between the two concert halls - Liederhale in Stuttgart and
Phiharmonie am Gasteig in Munich - I think it is fair to assume that the
sonorities of an orchestra in general also depends among other things on the
acoustics of a concert hall; this is a small factor, granted, but it is a
factor. Let's also compare the sonorities of the orchestras. The Stuttgart
band has a leaner sound, thus the faster tempo. The Munich band has a
richer - especially string - sound, and thus Celi takes his time here.
Also, let's now examine one of Celi's fastest performances from his Munich
years: the Mass in B Minor (aside from a slow - and magnificent - Kyrie).
In this performance Celi only uses a reduced section of the Munich
Philharmonic and the performance is HIP-influenced. Thus the textures are
much more transparent than is generally the case with the orchestra.
And let me repeat that if you want fast Celi, try his earlier recordings;
the Great Conductors set is a good place to start- even the slower Mozart
was not slower than was the norm in 1948.
Regards,
George
Bingo! Although I think an argument can be sustained that Celi generally slowed
down considerably over time, and quite precipitously at the end, his
achievements had little to do with tempo, per se. People have misunderstood
this consistently, especially when listening to two dimensional recordings. He
was all about sound and space; the fourth dimension was subservient to the
other three. At least, that's how I felt in the only concert I ever heard him
conduct. Issues of time dissolved; the orchestra (MPO) filled the hall (the
Kennedy Center) completely--the music caressed the room. It was a revelatory
experience in sound and space; the interpretation hardly went beyond that
singular sensation--rhythm may have been accurate, and pulse steady, but one
could hardly focus on those qualities. I think of Celibidache as a rare
conductor in his total commitment to the here and now, and to the physicality
and vibrancy of sound.

--Jeff
VECTOR 1
2004-12-05 22:01:15 UTC
Permalink
That is a very lively description of your memory. Thanks, Jeff.
VECTOR 1
2004-12-03 08:49:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by George Murnu
Post by Matthew B. Tepper
letters to be typed in news:1101988074.791748.48770
Post by VECTOR 1
I've heard two old 'Classical's with Berlin and the new one. The new
one is just so much better and maturer, both sonically and musically.
It's wrong to compare concerts just based on one note. But just listen
to the first note of the last movement. The difference!!! There's so
much more internal energy! And the vivid gesture which is so hard to
describe by usingwords. If you still have the old Classical on mind,
you should probably put it aside for a while. And free your mind for
the Munich concert. I've never listened to the LSO fifth. But based on
the great things I've experienced from the Munich one, it's a great
loss to miss it!
As for speed, I found the discussion pretty boring. Celibidache pointed
out many times tempo is not the same thing as speed. Some people think
Celi is slow simply because they cannot get a feel for the tempo and
also because of the limitations of CD recordings. Comparing speed is
really meaningless. It's like comparing two cars with different speed
in terms of musical performance. And the description that music is
really 'fast' is actually inappropriate in this respect. Sometimes I
just feel like we should delete the word 'speed' from our dictionary
once for all. But after all the word 'speed' isn't in some music
dictionaries either. After all, the problem ends up to one thing: the
mechanical world ruined the tempo...
Bibble bibble bibble bibble bibble bibble! (moving forefinger up and down
lips) The problem some of us have with Celibidache tempi is that they're
just freakin' bizarre and grotesque. That's it.
Strangely, there may in fact be a case to be made for Celi's statements.
Let's compare two performances of the Sheherezade, the one from 1982 with
the Stuttgart Radio Orchestra and the one from 1984 with the Munich
Philharmonic. The Stuttgart performance is faster by over 5 minutes! It
does often happen that two Celi performances of the same work by Celi have
significantly different timing: the Stuttgart Bruckner 8 from 1974 (DG) is
faster by almost 20 minutes than the 1993 Munich performance. Yet rarely
have I seen such a significant difference within such a short period of
time. Thus, perhaps the answer should be somewhere else. According to
Celi, the tempo depends on various factors. While I don't know the
differences between the two concert halls - Liederhale in Stuttgart and
Phiharmonie am Gasteig in Munich - I think it is fair to assume that the
sonorities of an orchestra in general also depends among other things on the
acoustics of a concert hall; this is a small factor, granted, but it is a
factor. Let's also compare the sonorities of the orchestras. The Stuttgart
band has a leaner sound, thus the faster tempo. The Munich band has a
richer - especially string - sound, and thus Celi takes his time here.
Also, let's now examine one of Celi's fastest performances from his Munich
years: the Mass in B Minor (aside from a slow - and magnificent - Kyrie).
In this performance Celi only uses a reduced section of the Munich
Philharmonic and the performance is HIP-influenced. Thus the textures are
much more transparent than is generally the case with the orchestra.
And let me repeat that if you want fast Celi, try his earlier recordings;
the Great Conductors set is a good place to start- even the slower Mozart
was not slower than was the norm in 1948.
Regards,
George
Post by Matthew B. Tepper
--
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
Take THAT, Daniel Lin, Mark Sadek, James Lin & Christopher Chung!
Let me just repeat my point too: people who are looking for so-called
'fast Celi' should really look elsewhere, at least for the moment. The
whole notion base on 'speed' is just ridiculous IMO.
VECTOR 1
2004-12-03 08:55:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by George Murnu
Post by Matthew B. Tepper
letters to be typed in news:1101988074.791748.48770
Post by VECTOR 1
I've heard two old 'Classical's with Berlin and the new one. The new
one is just so much better and maturer, both sonically and musically.
It's wrong to compare concerts just based on one note. But just listen
to the first note of the last movement. The difference!!! There's so
much more internal energy! And the vivid gesture which is so hard to
describe by usingwords. If you still have the old Classical on mind,
you should probably put it aside for a while. And free your mind for
the Munich concert. I've never listened to the LSO fifth. But based on
the great things I've experienced from the Munich one, it's a great
loss to miss it!
As for speed, I found the discussion pretty boring. Celibidache pointed
out many times tempo is not the same thing as speed. Some people think
Celi is slow simply because they cannot get a feel for the tempo and
also because of the limitations of CD recordings. Comparing speed is
really meaningless. It's like comparing two cars with different speed
in terms of musical performance. And the description that music is
really 'fast' is actually inappropriate in this respect. Sometimes I
just feel like we should delete the word 'speed' from our dictionary
once for all. But after all the word 'speed' isn't in some music
dictionaries either. After all, the problem ends up to one thing: the
mechanical world ruined the tempo...
Bibble bibble bibble bibble bibble bibble! (moving forefinger up and down
lips) The problem some of us have with Celibidache tempi is that they're
just freakin' bizarre and grotesque. That's it.
Strangely, there may in fact be a case to be made for Celi's statements.
Let's compare two performances of the Sheherezade, the one from 1982 with
the Stuttgart Radio Orchestra and the one from 1984 with the Munich
Philharmonic. The Stuttgart performance is faster by over 5 minutes! It
does often happen that two Celi performances of the same work by Celi have
significantly different timing: the Stuttgart Bruckner 8 from 1974 (DG) is
faster by almost 20 minutes than the 1993 Munich performance. Yet rarely
have I seen such a significant difference within such a short period of
time. Thus, perhaps the answer should be somewhere else. According to
Celi, the tempo depends on various factors. While I don't know the
differences between the two concert halls - Liederhale in Stuttgart and
Phiharmonie am Gasteig in Munich - I think it is fair to assume that the
sonorities of an orchestra in general also depends among other things on the
acoustics of a concert hall; this is a small factor, granted, but it is a
factor. Let's also compare the sonorities of the orchestras. The Stuttgart
band has a leaner sound, thus the faster tempo. The Munich band has a
richer - especially string - sound, and thus Celi takes his time here.
Also, let's now examine one of Celi's fastest performances from his Munich
years: the Mass in B Minor (aside from a slow - and magnificent - Kyrie).
In this performance Celi only uses a reduced section of the Munich
Philharmonic and the performance is HIP-influenced. Thus the textures are
much more transparent than is generally the case with the orchestra.
And let me repeat that if you want fast Celi, try his earlier recordings;
the Great Conductors set is a good place to start- even the slower Mozart
was not slower than was the norm in 1948.
Regards,
George
Post by Matthew B. Tepper
--
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
Take THAT, Daniel Lin, Mark Sadek, James Lin & Christopher Chung!
This is easy to explain. Something evolved for a long time and finally
reached the revolutionary point. For Celibidache, this point was
between Stuttgart and Munich. And he acquired the idea of Zen during
that period. Simple as that. Unfotunately, for most modern conductors,
they don't even seek to evolve.
Roland van Gaalen
2004-12-13 21:34:03 UTC
Permalink
The.Bach B-minor mass is available separately.
It is excellent.
--
Roland van Gaalen
Amsterdam
r.p.vangaalenATchello.nl (AT=@)
Ssg217
2004-12-13 22:46:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Roland van Gaalen
The.Bach B-minor mass is available separately.
It is excellent.
--
Roland van Gaalen
Good to hear you've nuanced your opinion about Celi . . . (-:

regards,
SG
Roland van Gaalen
2004-12-14 21:29:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Roland van Gaalen
The.Bach B-minor mass is available separately.
It is excellent.
--
Roland van Gaalen
No no no -- back in 1996 I was the first recommend this performance in RMCR.

Time flies! Five years ago we had a brief exchange about the bootleg
recording on the "Exclusive" label,
and I recommended waiting for an official release. Here it is -- my position
appears to be consistent!
--
Roland van Gaalen
Amsterdam
r.p.vangaalenATchello.nl (AT=@)
Roland van Gaalen
2004-12-14 21:32:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Roland van Gaalen
The.Bach B-minor mass is available separately.
It is excellent.
--
Roland van Gaalen
No no no -- back in 1996 I was the first to recommend this performance in
RMCR.

Time flies! Five years ago we had a brief exchange about the bootleg
recording on the "Exclusive" label, and I recommended waiting for an
official release.

Here it is -- my position appears to be consistent!
--
Roland van Gaalen
Amsterdam
r.p.vangaalenATchello.nl (AT=@)
Ssg217
2004-12-14 21:51:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Roland van Gaalen
Here it is -- my position appears to be consistent!
--
Roland van Gaalen
OK. Mea culpa.

regards,
SG

VECTOR 1
2004-12-02 11:53:41 UTC
Permalink
I've heard two old 'Classical's with Berlin and the new one. The new
one is just so much better and maturer, both sonically and musically.
It's wrong to compare concerts just based on one note. But just listen
to the first note of the last movement. The difference!!! There's so
much more internal energy! And the vivid gesture which is so hard to
describe by usingwords. If you still have the old Classical on mind,
you should probably put it aside for a while. And free your mind for
the Munich concert. I've never listened to the LSO fifth. But based on
the great things I've experienced from the Munich one, it's a great
loss to miss it!

As for speed, I found the discussion pretty boring. Celibidache pointed
out many times tempo is not the same thing as speed. Some people think
Celi is slow simply because they cannot get a feel for the tempo and
also because of the limitations of CD recordings. Comparing speed is
really meaningless. It's like comparing two cars with different speed
in terms of musical performance. And the description that music is
really 'fast' is actually inappropriate in this respect. Sometimes I
just feel like we should delete the word 'speed' from our dictionary
once for all. But after all the word 'speed' isn't in some music
dictionaries either. After all, the problem ends up to one thing: the
mechanical world ruined the tempo...
p***@hotmail.com
2004-12-06 14:38:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by George Murnu
Well, I have listened to a few of those CDs; a lot is still to go but here
Bach Mass in B Minor - Already discussed, magnificent.
Regards,
George
Will someone please post or e-mail me the number that EMI has assigned
to the boxed Celibidache
set.

Peter Schenkman
Terry Marsh
2004-12-06 16:09:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by p***@hotmail.com
Will someone please post or e-mail me the number that EMI has assigned
to the boxed Celibidache
set.
Peter Schenkman
7243 5 57861 2 8
p***@hotmail.com
2004-12-07 13:50:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Terry Marsh
Post by p***@hotmail.com
Will someone please post or e-mail me the number that EMI has assigned
to the boxed Celibidache
set.
Peter Schenkman
7243 5 57861 2 8
Thanks,

Peter Schenkman
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...