 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: D Dow
Date: 2004-02-16 16:17
Well, after a few months of listening to the Concertgebouw and Mengelberg in the last 3 of the Brahms Symphonies, I can honestly say I reccommend this set of Naxos recordings to any one who loves the Brahms symphonies. There are very few small reservations which I have, however, the biggest suprises are the fleetness of tempi, and in some cases the modern aspect of this vision of these works...
In Symphony #2 I am very impressed in terms of the speed and cleaness of the textures the Concertgebouw get from Mengelberg. Here we have a superb blend coupled with a wind ensemble which is vastly superior to anything in Europe in the 30s and 40s. I am also pleased that the sound is fairly crisp...this could be a really big problem for a generation growing up on Cds....
As to the Symphony 3 there is a quality of scope which is Epic....I can honestly say that the swagger and sometimes risk taking pays off a good deal. The F Major is not an easy work to make sound fresh, yet here we don't have the modern obscession with refinement...the orchestra in places really goes for it and gets alot in return.
The final E minor is treated to a more old fashioned tread, with some minor exaggerations of phrasing...overall it is great to see how close in some regards Mengelberg is with people like Bohm and Szell. There is very little to criticize in the last 3 movements. The horns and woodwinds are escpecially fine...these are couple with a Academic Overture which is incredibly intense...maybe too much so for some. I hasten to add that this is real eye opener for those who feel Toscannini is the last word in the time period of these records!
David Dow
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: diz
Date: 2004-02-16 21:38
David - I'm glad you enjoyed these interpretations of Brahms' wonderful symphonies ... not my cup of tea, I'm afraid. I'm happier listening to Norrington's more researched approach - and, as to bright tempos, Norrington's are quick-silver.
On modern instruments, I like Mackerras' version with the Scottish Chamber Orchestra ... he takes some questionable liberties with the slow movement of one (using two solo violas---not sanctioned by Brahms), but otherwise beautiful and using an orchestra of the sized Brahms would have been used to.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Alphie
Date: 2004-02-16 23:27
Good recommendation diz. David and Roger are the best friends. ![[toast]](http://test.woodwind.org/clarinet/BBoard/smileys/smiley15.gif)
(putting the foot in my mouth)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Alphie
Date: 2004-02-16 23:36
Nej jag tror inte det. Han kallar honom för "Ignorrington" ![[happy]](http://test.woodwind.org/clarinet/BBoard/smileys/smiley12.gif)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: D Dow
Date: 2004-02-17 18:00
Recently I wonder if it is about learning...Norrington tends to hide behind fast tempi I feel and glosses over the great stuff...modern instruments were around in Brahms time so I think :Norrington is a bit of a dud.
David Dow
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: D Dow
Date: 2004-02-17 19:06
If you really want to suffer listen to Norrinton's Beethoven ...yeech....it does not breathe at that tempi whaTSOEVER.
David Dow
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: D Dow
Date: 2004-02-17 19:11
Some have actually claimed that Roger Norrington's career is the creation of the English press and IS a great hoax before the public.
Norrington uses enthusiasm for the strange squeaks and squeals that he elicits from his band to conceal the fact that he has no ideas about Beethoven WHATSOEVER, that can't be summed up by the words "fast and loud." There is not one shade or gradiation in dynamics without disastrous intonation and squeeling from the winds or hooting from the brass...
Roger Norrington has two basic interpretive modes: louder, faster, except where the music should be grand and exciting, in which case he spares no effort to diminish the impact of Beethoven's inspiration. As to interpretation instead of coming up with a few ideas of his own he actually follows the written markings to conceal a lack of imagination on his own part.
David Dow
Post Edited (2004-02-17 19:18)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: diz
Date: 2004-02-17 20:05
David Dow ... when you're as prolific as Norrington (not saying I like all his stuff by the way, I HATE his Magic Flute recording) you might just be as humble. As to him being a hoax, howso? I've never read that, what's your source?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: graham
Date: 2004-02-18 12:10
Two interesting observations
1. Norrington is a hoax and has no ideas
2. The Concertgebouw winds were vastly superior to any others in Europe in the 1930s and 1940s.
1. Like him or loath him, it is hard to see anyone sustaining the view that Norrington is purely and simply a publicist or showman. I like his Beethoven 2nd and 8th very much. The 9th is good. I do not like the 3rd. But I do feel he has a sense of direction and his input does make a difference. Pre-Norrington, Simon Rattle's approach to Beethoven was very different to his approach now. The original instrument thing, in which Norrington was a front runner, has had a significant influence on orchestral playing as a whole.
2. The Concertgebouw were great, but the wind sections of several other orchestras were very fine. At the time both the London Philharmonic Orchestra and the BBCSO had world class wind sections. Later in the 1940s that was true of the Royal Philharmonic. E.g. LPO: Kell/Goosens; BBCSO: Thurston. All the world class conductors, (notably Toscanini) were happy to conduct the BBCSO in the 1930s. Toscanini did not even use up the full rehearsal schedule allocated to him, because he got such rapid and satisfactory results from that orchestra.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: D Dow
Date: 2004-02-18 21:04
Roger Norrington has really not paid his interpretive dues...when one considers it took Toscannini 30 years of practicing Beethoven to come up with his ideal interpretations and Norrington has basically just recorded his first cycle I feel there are numerous flaw..
In No 1 the winds are not together in the 16th runs in the finale
In No 2 there are obvious glitches in the horn intonation
In No 3 the Scherzo lacks weight and yet is harsh and loud
In # 4 the Bassoon sound is gross and out of tune. Especially in the opening
In #5 the recording lacks proper contrast of dynamics...everthing is loud or louder.
In # 6 the opening movement is fast yet does not sound relaxed...its rather harsh and unrelenting.
In # 7 the oboe articulation does not match the rest of the string's concept of the same rythmn
David Dow
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
