Conductors Re-recordings

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

In the case of Barbirolli's many recordings of Elgar's Introduction and Alleqro, I wonder whether this zeal had something to do with the compliment paid to him by Elgar, who did not record the work himself, in view of his admiration of JBs first version.

[Pabmusic]

In the case of Barbirolli's many recordings of Elgar's Introduction and Alleqro, I wonder whether this zeal had something to do with the compliment paid to him by Elgar, who did not record the work himself, in view of his admiration of JBs first version.

Good point. I suspect that, where a conductor becomes associated with a particular piece, for whatever reason, the pressure must be quite strong to record it more than once during his career.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

I won't get involved with discussions about Karajan's personality - they only lead to a Mobius strip of claim and counter-claim varying only in the heat in which these are couched. But I think that the dismissal of Karajan's 1977 Beethoven cycle is a little sweeping: the Third, Fifth, Sixth, Seventh and Ninths from that set are very different from the '60s set (in the case of the 3rd, a change for the worse, in that of the 6th - and the 9th, IMO - for the better). The '80s set also contains fine performances (his best 6th and 8th IMO) - showing differences in approach from the earlier sets (and the worst sound of them all!) If for nothing else than that they all demonstrate the falsehood of the myth that Karajan merely repeated the same performances again and again, they are all evidence. I also happen to think that they all contain some remarkably good performances.

An actor would love to be able to return to the role of Hamlet as often as some conductors/pianists return to reassess the Eroica - but after their mid-thirties, they'd look ridiculous in the part. (Just when they're getting to know how they'd really like to do it, they're too old - that's why so many of them become directors!) Musicians are far luckier: they can keep returning to their core repertoire as obssessively as they feel the need, in the vain attempt to pin it down definitively just once. Never happens, never can happen, so the bug keeps biting.

[akiralx]

Yes! I was going to say that the 1977 Eroica is fabulous, one of my favourites for the work, and with its fast opening movement totally different from his earlier, or later, recordings.

[pastoralguy]

I remember my Grandad giving me £4.15 for my 13th birthday so I could buy Karajan's 1978 'Pastoral' symphony. I LOVED the covers of that cycle.

I really hope there's a follow up to DG's recent Karajan's 60's tribute.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

Yes! I was going to say that the 1977 Eroica is fabulous, one of my favourites for the work, and with its fast opening movement totally different from his earlier, or later, recordings.

Oops! I don't like the 1977 Eroica nearly as much as the '60s version: but that we can differ about it suggests that it's not just a "clearly superfluous" re-run as stated in the OP.

[richardfinegold]

Come on - it's not that big a deal!
Please forgive me - it's Sunday anyway.

Thanks for highlighting the issues regarding acoustic recordings, and missing performances/recordings.

Richard

I'm interested in your comments re Ormandy. I had assumed that many of the RCA recordings were in fact the same as some of the earlier Sony/CBS ones, though perhaps remastered.
I have been thinking of getting this Sony set - http://www.sainsburysentertainment.c..._source=google even though it contains some works which I have already, which is I think the set you have been listening to.

One of the first Ormandy recordings I had was of Mendelssohn Violin Concerto with Oistrakh - superb.

I didn't realise that Ormandy redid some of his performances later on as you have mentioned. Most of my CDs and LPs are the Sony or CBS ones. I also didn't know about Ormandy's gradually increasing deafness - but I suppose it tends to happen to us all to a greater or lesser extent. A pity - both for him and for us!

That is the Ormandy box that I am referencing.. At that price these reissues are impossible to resist.

[richardfinegold]

I won't get involved with discussions about Karajan's personality - they only lead to a Mobius strip of claim and counter-claim varying only in the heat in which these are couched. But I think that the dismissal of Karajan's 1977 Beethoven cycle is a little sweeping: the Third, Fifth, Sixth, Seventh and Ninths from that set are very different from the '60s set (in the case of the 3rd, a change for the worse, in that of the 6th - and the 9th, IMO - for the better). The '80s set also contains fine performances (his best 6th and 8th IMO) - showing differences in approach from the earlier sets (and the worst sound of them all!) If for nothing else than that they all demonstrate the falsehood of the myth that Karajan merely repeated the same performances again and again, they are all evidence. I also happen to think that they all contain some remarkably good performances.

An actor would love to be able to return to the role of Hamlet as often as some conductors/pianists return to reassess the Eroica - but after their mid-thirties, they'd look ridiculous in the part. (Just when they're getting to know how they'd really like to do it, they're too old - that's why so many of them become directors!) Musicians are far luckier: they can keep returning to their core repertoire as obssessively as they feel the need, in the vain attempt to pin it down definitively just once. Never happens, never can happen, so the bug keeps biting.

Very true. Bernstein's last recordings make me think of an aging actor seeing all roles thru the prism of ageing eyes. Hamlet as acted by Lear. Von Ks last 2 Beethoven cycles took some luster from his legacy.

[Mandryka]

Very true. Bernstein's last recordings make me think of an aging actor seeing all roles thru the prism of ageing eyes. Hamlet as acted by Lear. Von Ks last 2 Beethoven cycles took some luster from his legacy.

I've warmed to some of Bernstein's re-recordings in recent years. His 87 NYPO Pathetique is incredible in its cumulative emotional force - maybe not what Tchaikovsky intended but LB was always a 'personal input' conductor..

I'm less keen on his late - and first - recording of Tristan; I would have liked to have heard him record this one in the 60s.

[Ferretfancy]

That is the Ormandy box that I am referencing.. At that price these reissues are impossible to resist.

I bought the Ormandy 20th Century Classics set recently, along with the Stokowski set of Columbia Stereo Recordings. They are both bargains of a kind, but both conductors made recordings in some rather unsatisfactory venues in Philadelphia, notably the Scottish Rite cathedral, and to my ears these recordings leave a lot to be desired, with a curious combination of brashness and reverberation and very odd balances. Van Cliburn's performance of Rachmaninov's 3rd was recorded in Philadelphia Town Hall, and suffers from similar shortcomings, with a very artificial balance.
Ormandy's Rachmaninov Symphonies, which are not in this box, were made at the Manhattan Centre in New York, and sound better than anything in this set.

The Stokowski box is a better sounding bargain with some fascinating performances, notably his La Vida Breve with Shirley Verrett, his excellent Sibelius 1, and an oddly quirky Emperor from Glenn Gould. The Brahms 2 was made at Abbey Road, and it's a pity that he did not make more recordings there. This box includes several discs recorded by Bob Auger at West Ham Central Mission, and in quite awful sound as if it was in a airship hanger at Cardington. West Ham was also the venue for Bernstein's Mahler 8 with same engineer and dismal results.

All in all. I would say that both these collections are worth buying, but do listen first if you can. Of the two, the Stokowski is the better fun, just listen to his Brandenburg No. 5. You won't hear that sort of performance again, poor old JS Bach !

[richardfinegold]

Agree about this being very interesting.

Of course, younger conductors who've only recorded in digital are also inclined to re-record. One only has to think of Herreweghe with Bach's Mass in B Minor. First, on Virgin Classics in pretty weedy sound; second, on Harmonia Mundia, with those stellar soloists; and now on his own label (PHI), and no doubt in SACD.

I wonder if anyone has compared these three versions to see how they differ as performances, not just in recording quality.

I have the HM recording but have never heard the other two. It is hard to imagine the HM recording being improved upon, either in performance or the sonics.

[Thropplenoggin]

I have the HM recording but have never heard the other two. It is hard to imagine the HM recording being improved upon, either in performance or the sonics.

Here it is: http://www.prestoclassical.co.uk/r/PHI/LPH004 Some stellar reviews.

It's available on Spotify here, if you fancy trying it out: spotify:album:5v5OqOvBpaM2cTgINiP7Sr

[cloughie]

Karajan always fascinates with what he recorded and re-recorded.

Nielsen 4 and Shostakovich 10 both twice but no other Nielsen or Shostakovich are in his rep to my knowledge.

Previn as soloist in Mozart PCs 17/24 recorded twice but no other Mozart PCs!

The Ormandy question which started this thread has become more complex with the merging of SONY and RCA - recording dates are now important to identify recordings - the 20th Century box includes Rite of Spring - a Columbia recording from 1955 and some of his latest RCA recordings from the late seventies. It would be good to have his complete Sibelius recordings in one box even if, or particularly if it repeated works he recorded more than once.

[Barbirollians]

Karajan always fascinates with what he recorded and re-recorded.

Nielsen 4 and Shostakovich 10 both twice but no other Nielsen or Shostakovich are in his rep to my knowledge.

Previn as soloist in Mozart PCs 17/24 recorded twice but no other Mozart PCs!

The Ormandy question which started this thread has become more complex with the merging of SONY and RCA - recording dates are now important to identify recordings - the 20th Century box includes Rite of Spring - a Columbia recording from 1955 and some of his latest RCA recordings from the late seventies. It would be good to have his complete Sibelius recordings in one box even if, or particularly if it repeated works he recorded more than once.

Surely the most fascinating repertoire wise is Argerich . Repeatedly performs Beethoven 1 and 2 , occasionally 3 never 4 &5 . Liszt 1 but not Liszt 2 . Ravel G Major but never the Concerto for Left Hand. Bartok 3 but not 1 and 2 , Prokofiev 1 and 3 but not 2,4, & 5 etc . Used to perform both Chopin concertos but recently only No1 , Schumann but never Grieg .

Mozart K453 and K466 but none of the others !

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

Karajan always fascinates with what he recorded and re-recorded.

Nielsen 4 and Shostakovich 10 both twice but no other Nielsen or Shostakovich are in his rep to my knowledge.

I'd love to get my hands and ears on a different Nielsen #4 from his 1980s digital CD, cloughie! DSCH loved his performances of the 10th, but HvK never performed anything else by the composer AFAIK: a great pity.