Karajan

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

Pedantic point - the Symph Fant referred to by akiraix was the conductor's second recording with the BPO and for DG, but there was an earlier HMV recording with the Philharmonia - astonishingly good "stereophonic" sound for a Mono recording!

[akiralx]

Pedantic point - the Symph Fant referred to by akiraix was the conductor's second recording with the BPO and for DG, but there was an earlier HMV recording with the Philharmonia - astonishingly good "stereophonic" sound for a Mono recording!

Yes, quite correct!

[Richard Barrett]

Yes, it's unusual to hear Webern recorded in such a spacious acoustic (the J-L-C in particular) and maybe that has given rise to the comments about "murkiness" but there is nothing murky about these recordings to my ears. Jayne's, "weight, clarity and dynamic impact", strikes me as pretty much bang on the nail.

Clearly we are all listening to (and for) different things! While the orchestral sound certainly packs a punch when it needs to, as I said I find the space rather too heavily present in these recordings: it suppresses higher frequencies while putting the lowest ones out of focus, and emphasises the many (too many for my liking in a recording without an audience) extraneous noises of page-turning, preparation etc. I don't much like the sound of the Philharmonie at the best of times, and for me these recordings emphasise the things I don't like about it. Other people like it of course. Opinions about acoustics are no more objective than opinions about aesthetics.

[HighlandDougie]

Clearly we are all listening to (and for) different things! While the orchestral sound certainly packs a punch when it needs to, as I said I find the space rather too heavily present in these recordings: it suppresses higher frequencies while putting the lowest ones out of focus, and emphasises the many (too many for my liking in a recording without an audience) extraneous noises of page-turning, preparation etc. I don't much like the sound of the Philharmonie at the best of times, and for me these recordings emphasise the things I don't like about it. Other people like it of course. Opinions about acoustics are no more objective than opinions about aesthetics.

Indeed - and I share your view of the Philharmonie's sound (those HvK recordings made in the J-L-C, like the 1962 LvB cycle or most of the Webern serve to point up the Philharmonie's shortcomings as a recording venue). Listening to these recordings has reminded me that, much as I admire HvK for his enterprise in persuading DGG that, with his name on the front and that of the BPO, the set would be a commercial success, I have to admit that I don't greatly care for the performances. Maybe it's because Boulez, Abbado and Rosbaud were the conductors whose recordings I listened to over the years, not HvK, that I just don't take to the latter in this repertoire.

[Stanfordian]

Can I put in mention for his 'Mathis der Maler' Symphony, his EMI 'Music for Strings, Percussion and Celesta, and 'Don Quixote' with Rostropovich.

Also his early 70s EMI 'Pathetique' that was the BAL choice a couple of years ago and his Wagner Preludes and Overtures for EMI. Oh, and any of his Sibelius (especially the 80s Tapiola).

I greatly admire Karajan's recordings of Haydn symphonies especially those he recorded with Berliner Philharmoniker in 1980/82.

[Tevot]

Hello there,

A number of Karajan's recordings introduced me to particular works - for example Nielsen 4 and Honegger 2 and 3. Likewise I first encountered Mahler 6 via the DG recording released iirc in 1978 ( I first heard it in the early eighties)

Likewise I'd give a shout to his recordings of other Mahler Symphonies - the 4th , 5th and the two versions of the 9th. I remember listening to a live relay of the 9th broadcast on Radio 3. I also like Karajan's interpretations of Richard Strauss - Tod und Verklarung and Metamorphosen spring to mind.

Haven't listened to any of his Bruckner - which is my loss - as I gather a number of his recordings back in the day garnered glowing reviews.

It is interesting to note - approaching 30 years since his death (where does the time go !!?) Karajan's work and legacy being reassessed.

Best Wishes,

Tevot

[Richard Barrett]

I have to admit that I don't greatly care for the performances. Maybe it's because Boulez, Abbado and Rosbaud were the conductors whose recordings I listened to over the years, not HvK, that I just don't take to the latter in this repertoire.

I know what you mean. After listening to HvK's Webern op.10 today I listened to Boulez (with the same orchestra in the same venue) which is free of extraneous noise (and tape noise!) and everything is much more clearly defined, as befits a performance by someone who not only knows all the notes but also why each one is there, and of course as befits a modern digital recording.

[jayne lee wilson]

I only wish he had recorded Op.10....

I guess it is that very unusual spaciousness that draws me to the Karajan Webern Op.21. Most of my other recordings of Op.21 and perhaps Webern generally (e.g. Boulez, or the excellent Cleveland/Dohnanyi anthology) treat the music as indeed a chamber symphony, chamber music with a correspondingly close or immediate balance. Fascinating to hear some space around it. Shame Karajan didn't do Op.24!

Listening to the Schoenberg OP.31 complete late-on, I was struck by how uniquely phantasmagorical the Karajan sounds. In the Variations themselves he intensifies the coloristic fantasy of the music, draws you into different imaginative realms compared to Boulez or say, Rattle. (The live LeipzigRSO/Rögner approaches this dreamlike, softer effect though without such a virtuoso orchestra. It would be interesting to revisit the Mehta - my very first Schoenberg record).

But then, after the distracted, chamber-musical playing of the Variations Karajan unleashes a full-on ferocious onslaught in the finale; it makes you jump when those double-basses come in; feels as if the orchestra has suddenly been augmented; I don't recall another recording which has quite this contrasted effect.

***

Oh, it is hard to find words to describe music. What I really wanted to say about the Bruckner 2nd after sampling it last night was just how spare or lean the orchestral tone is. On the extraordinary Philharmoniker, it isn't too warm or full at all; it has great discipline and a fiery directness. At his best, HvK knew how to adapt his astonishing orchestral palette to different works and styles.
So the Debussy Pelléas is - delicate yet dynamic, but warmer-toned than usual for the work; and as someone who can't tolerate much if any Opera, it is a relief to hear the voices set well back with, or behind, the Orchestra.

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

I know I've said this before, but I think many of HvK's finest recordings were those he made for Decca: Aida, Tosca, Holst's Planets, Also Sprach Zarathustra, Otello... Some of his digital DG ones are spoilt by insensitive over-engineering: Eine Alpensinfonie, Turandot, The Planets (again) ...

EMI produced a few gems too, though Decca engineers did the work in Salome.

[Richard Barrett]

I only wish he had recorded Op.10....

Well, you know, this modern music all sounds the same

[richardfinegold]

I only wish he had recorded Op.10....

I guess it is that very unusual spaciousness that draws me to the Karajan Webern Op.21. Most of my other recordings of Op.21 and perhaps Webern generally (e.g. Boulez, or the excellent Cleveland/Dohnanyi anthology) treat the music as indeed a chamber symphony, chamber music with a correspondingly close or immediate balance. Fascinating to hear some space around it. Shame Karajan didn't do Op.24!

Listening to the Schoenberg OP.31 complete late-on, I was struck by how uniquely phantasmagorical the Karajan sounds. In the Variations themselves he intensifies the coloristic fantasy of the music, draws you into different imaginative realms compared to Boulez or say, Rattle. (The live LeipzigRSO/Rögner approaches this dreamlike, softer effect though without such a virtuoso orchestra. It would be interesting to revisit the Mehta - my very first Schoenberg record).

But then, after the distracted, chamber-musical playing of the Variations Karajan unleashes a full-on ferocious onslaught in the finale; it makes you jump when those double-basses come in; feels as if the orchestra has suddenly been augmented; I don't recall another recording which has quite this contrasted effect.

***

Oh, it is hard to find words to describe music. What I really wanted to say about the Bruckner 2nd after sampling it last night was just how spare or lean the orchestral tone is. On the extraordinary Philharmoniker, it isn't too warm or full at all; it has great discipline and a fiery directness. At his best, HvK knew how to adapt his astonishing orchestral palette to different works and styles.
So the Debussy Pelléas is - delicate yet dynamic, but warmer-toned than usual for the work; and as someone who can't tolerate much if any Opera, it is a relief to hear the voices set well back with, or behind, the Orchestra.

I had forgotten about the Karajan 2V recordings until this discussion but I had listened to the lps about 2 years ago prior to selling off my tt. I understand where HD is coming from but I share Janes enthusiasm here. HvK makes the music sound more like an extension of Late Romantacism -Mahler on Acid, perhaps—and I enjoyed it. I also like Dorati’s Mercury recordings for the same reason, although there seems to be paprika added. I view HvK as complementary to Boulez, not competing with him

[Richard Barrett]

HvK makes the music sound more like an extension of Late Romantacism

Of course there are many ways of interpreting that music, and some of it indeed is "an extension of Late Romanticism" although the specific influence of Mahler isn't so very apparent except in Berg's op.3, of which HvK indeed gives a beautiful account. (That work has become a favourite of mine in the last year or two, it took a long time to get there!) Also it shouldn't be forgotten that beyond the "Second Vienna School" label, these three composers are as individual as any artists of their time - each is recognisable within a few seconds and there are very few moments when any of them could be mistaken for one of the others, any more than Stravinsky's "neoclassicism" could be mistaken for Hindemith's, or Debussy's "impressionism" for Ravel's.

Anyway, I hope I'll have time today for the Schoenberg Variations, not a work I know at all well. Possibly also Pelleas, although that's not so much my cup of tea.

[Bryn]

Of course there are many ways of interpreting that music, and some of it indeed is "an extension of Late Romanticism" although the specific influence of Mahler isn't so very apparent except in Berg's op.3, of which HvK indeed gives a beautiful account. (That work has become a favourite of mine in the last year or two, it took a long time to get there!) Also it shouldn't be forgotten that beyond the "Second Vienna School" label, these three composers are as individual as any artists of their time - each is recognisable within a few seconds and there are very few moments when any of them could be mistaken for one of the others, any more than Stravinsky's "neoclassicism" could be mistaken for Hindemith's, or Debussy's "impressionism" for Ravel's.

Anyway, I hope I'll have time today for the Schoenberg Variations, not a work I know at all well. Possibly also Pelleas, although that's not so much my cup of tea.

Karajan conducting "Berg's Op. 3"? I'll doulbe that number. Or were you thinking of the Lyric Suite in its orshestral guise.

[Conchis]

Of course there are many ways of interpreting that music, and some of it indeed is "an extension of Late Romanticism" although the specific influence of Mahler isn't so very apparent except in Berg's op.3, of which HvK indeed gives a beautiful account. (That work has become a favourite of mine in the last year or two, it took a long time to get there!) Also it shouldn't be forgotten that beyond the "Second Vienna School" label, these three composers are as individual as any artists of their time - each is recognisable within a few seconds and there are very few moments when any of them could be mistaken for one of the others, any more than Stravinsky's "neoclassicism" could be mistaken for Hindemith's, or Debussy's "impressionism" for Ravel's.

Anyway, I hope I'll have time today for the Schoenberg Variations, not a work I know at all well. Possibly also Pelleas, although that's not so much my cup of tea.

My Granny loved to take Schoenberg's Pelleas with her tea.

[Richard Barrett]

Karajan conducting "Berg's Op. 3"? I'll doulbe that number. Or were you thinking of the Lyric Suite in its orshestral guise.

As Jayne noticed previously, I'm getting my opus numbers mixed up in the last couple of days. Normal service will be resumed shortly.