BaL 19.12.20 - Mahler Symphony no. 1

[Ein Heldenleben]

Why do I feel that Walter coming out on top is some kind of moral victory? What a tremendous performance that is and I don’t find the recording quality in any sense “historic” . Bet it was recorded with a max of six mics....

[Barbirollians]

Well I was wrong - it’s Bruno Walter.

Right choice IMO . Shame she did not play his treatment of the funeral March before the trio.

Though I am tempted to add the Ivan Fischer .

[Barbirollians]

Why do I feel that Walter coming out on top is some kind of moral victory? What a tremendous performance that is and I don’t find the recording quality in any sense “historic” . Bet it was recorded with a max of six mics....

I feel the same way . I rather liked her dig at other contributors raving about older performances and then suddenly declaring them historic . The last time I think a reviewer refused to do that was when Furtwangler was chosen for Brahms 1.

[Goon525]

I think she did a pretty reasonable job of explaining why versions fell by the wayside. And I share her vivid memories of Klaus Tennstedt performances in the RFH in the 80s! I must say I thought she’d go for Fischer, not least on sound quality grounds, but the old Walter wasn’t sounding so bad...

[Ein Heldenleben]

I feel the same way . I rather liked her dig at other contributors raving about older performances and then suddenly declaring them historic . The last time I think a reviewer refused to do that was when Furtwangler was chosen for Brahms 1.

The 1960’s is not historic in recording tech terms - some involved in the business think it was the apogee - providing you can tolerate a bit of hiss. More gear often means worse.

[Wolfram]

Why do I feel that Walter coming out on top is some kind of moral victory? What a tremendous performance that is and I don’t find the recording quality in any sense “historic” . Bet it was recorded with a max of six mics....

She also called the Kubelik 'historic'. Now that really does make me feel old.

[DoctorT]

Is the Walter currently available on CD?

[Goon525]

The 1960’s is not historic in recording tech terms - some involved in the business think it was the apogee - providing you can tolerate a bit of hiss. More gear often means worse.

But it often doesn’t - the Fischer is superbly recorded. And, ok, Walter is ‘the 60s’ but only by the skin of its teeth. It’s only five years into stereo recording.

[Ein Heldenleben]

But it often doesn’t - the Fischer is superbly recorded. And, ok, Walter is ‘the 60s’ but only by the skin of its teeth. It’s only five years into stereo recording.

I would agree the Fischer sound was better - ravishing really . So much of the end result in those days (60’s);was down to mastering and pressing that even good tape masters could be massively degraded in mass production - even in the CD era when there was a temptation to cram too much on one cd . I wonder whether the term historic should be reserved for mono or experimental stereo?,

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

Is the Walter currently available on CD?

Yes

[Goon525]

I would agree the Fischer sound was better - ravishing really . So much of the end result in those days (60’s);was down to mastering and pressing that even good tape masters could be massively degraded in mass production - even in the CD era when there was a temptation to cram too much on one cd . I wonder whether the term historic should be reserved for mono or experimental stereo?,

Yes, I tend to agree. It turns out that many CBS recordings sounded rotten because of poor mastering and pressing rather than an inherent weakness in the recording. There’s a high res transfer of the Walter available which I intend to listen to soon.

[Ein Heldenleben]

Yes, I tend to agree. It turns out that many CBS recordings sounded rotten because of poor mastering and pressing rather than an inherent weakness in the recording. There’s a high res transfer of the Walter available which I intend to listen to soon.

I think CBS were notorious in that respect . A cd of the Walter is £27 on Amazon - there are several YouTube “salutes” . Though the YouTube pay per stream is a tiny fraction of Qubuz’s

[Bryn]

. . . the YouTube pay per stream is a tiny fraction of Qubuz’s

Please elucidate. Tiny fraction of price, data rate, audio quality . . . ?

[Nimrod]

So Ms Moore talked about 'pioneers' in recording this music and (is this a national trait of ours?) completely ignored our English pioneer, Barbirolli. His 1957 recording with the Halle, recently remastered by Warner, was surely worth mentioning and is a fine performance. Still in the 'historic' era are his recordings with the NYPO and Czech Philharmonic; still not a peep out of this and many reviewers who pay scant attention to his pioneering work in the history of British music making. Shameful!

[Ein Heldenleben]

Please elucidate. Tiny fraction of price, data rate, audio quality . . . ?

Sorry I mean the royalty payment not the consumer cost - streaming content on YouTube means a tiny payment to the artist. qubuz is very considerably more generous . To be honest after Years spent on a career in content production I don’t like YouTube’s flagrant copyright abuse