Originally posted by Alison
View Post
-
No, this was a Kleiber tic, which he is emulating/channelling, consciously or not, to indicate "I'm relaxed, this is going fine". Andris is a noted Kleiber disciple... -
Originally posted by pastoralguy View Post
I think it was better than most recent efforts... but I have just had a quick look at CK in 1992, and you instantly can tell the difference in sound, preparation, feeling.Comment
-
-
Yes, it was unforgettable, the greatest New Year's Day Concert of them all, and that's including all the eight Boskovsky and two Kleiber concerts I heard/saw. Difficult to believe it is 33 years today since that concert. If I could choose any concert to have been present at, it would have to be that one.Originally posted by pastoralguy View PostThe reason I ask is that I always remember watching the Karajan concert with my late grandad who knew nothing about music. He was very impressed with the maestro's total authority over the Orchestra. He was quite taken by Ms. Battle as well, though!
It was one of those very rare occasions when one knew you were witnessing something special and unique."The sound is the handwriting of the conductor" - Bernard HaitinkComment
-
I can never escape the impression that it's bourgeois music for a bourgeois audience – so cosy. They need a bit of 2nd Viennese School in there to pep things up.
Comment
-
1987 (Karajan), 1989 (Kleiber) and 1992 (Kleiber) are the three superfine NYD concerts that demand repeated listening (and watching). Whoever else is on the podium, or indeed wandering towards it tooting a trumpet or scratching a fiddle, my mind sees and hears those two greats and almost switches off from the present. It's a danger that record collectors have to live with: memorable recordings diminishing the impact of live performance. After the concert is over, with champagne flute in hand (Co-op Vintage 2012 - highly recommended!), on goes a Kleiber DVD and a different world is revealed, of well-rehearsed precision, brilliance, charm, grace, and total identification with the music, making some seemingly slight repertoire sound miraculously magical.Originally posted by Prommer View PostComment
-
In its time the music cut across class boundaries, and indeed Johann Strauss II aligned himself with the revolutionaries in the Austrian Empire in 1848. In the meantime of course the music and this concert have become a petrified tradition, and you only need to look at the people in the audience to see the layer of society it's now supposed to cater for. It would be interesting to see their faces if Schoenberg's op.16 were sprung on them by surprise. But don't forget that he and his colleagues (and, famously, Brahms) were great admirers of this music, as an example of the depth of inspiration that "popular music" can have, like the Beatles in the 1960s. So this particular concert is indeed for a bourgeois audience in the Musikverein, but the music isn't bourgeois music.Originally posted by Nachtigall View PostI can never escape the impression that it's bourgeois music for a bourgeois audience – so cosy. They need a bit of 2nd Viennese School in there to pep things up.Comment
-
Indeed so; not only Brahms but also Wagner and Bruckner and later Richard Strauss and the pianists Busoni and Godowsky, among others - and, of course, the Verein für musikalische Privataufführungen that Schönberg founded in 1918 principally for performance of 20th century music embraced in its latter stages arrangements of Johann Strauss II specially made by Webern, Berg and Schönberg himself. The wide conspectus of works aired in that organisation's seasons ws such as to enable J Strauss II to take his place alongside (among others) Bartók, Mahler, Reger, Busoni, Ravel, Korngold, Debussy, Richard Strauss and even Stravinsky. Zemlinsky formed a similar organisation soon after its demise. I cannot help but wonder whether these might have been an inspiration for Erik Chisholm's Society for the Propagation of New Music that flourished improbably in Glasgow during years of economic depression from the latter 1920s until 1936...Originally posted by Richard Barrett View PostLast edited by ahinton; 02-01-20, 11:10.Comment
-
Originally posted by Richard Barrett View Post
Never understood why bourgeois is thought to be a bit of an insult. But looking at the audience with its expensive suits and silk ties weren’t they really more global elite? - the Davos brigade complete with talismanic figures like Kaufmann. Either way I think they would take Berg and Schoenberg in their stride ...Last edited by Ein Heldenleben; 02-01-20, 10:31.Comment
-
Yes you are right it would be loose change....for them that is ....So a pair of top tickets about £2,000. Business class flights from Tokyo Vienna about £8,000 and 2 nights at the Sacher £1000 .. it soon mounts up doesn’t it?Originally posted by BoilkComment
-
-
Depends on one's profession, among other things, presumably...Originally posted by vinteuil View PostComment
-
Why would anyone really want to go to this?
Answers on a postcard, please!Comment
-
-
I would love to for musical reasons, life enhancing stuff for me, repertoire and orchestra.Originally posted by Dave2002 View Post
I wish more of it featured in regular concert programmes including the Proms.Comment
see what you mean.
Comment