BaL 21.04.12 - Prokofiev's Symphony no. 5

[BBMmk2]

Ah, JLW, I am glad that you liked the Jurowski recording, because I find it rather absorbing interpretation.

[amateur51]

It is terrific -recommended with all possible enthusiasm-far too thrilling a performance to worry about the odd cough or two.

Good to hear from another listener who can cope with coughing if the performance & musical standards are the priority

[BBMmk2]

I actually didn't mind the coughing. I didn't think it was too obstusive at all.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

Good to hear from another listener who can cope with coughing if the performance & musical standards are the priority

A phlegmatic attitude with which I heartily concur, Ammie!

[amateur51]

A phlegmatic attitude with which I heartily concur, Ammie!

Conspicuous consumption I calls it

[HighlandDougie]

Conspicuous consumption I calls it

That Ammie, well-slaying them in the aisles, down the old Rat and Ferret ..... Well, it made me laugh anyway. And cheered me up enough to buy the Rozhdestvensky - and the Ashkenazy/Sydney SO - just to add to the existing cornucopia of Prokofiev 5s on my shelves. JLW's post above so brilliantly summarised this BaL that I may not listen again but rely solely on her impeccable judgement (although I do still have a great liking of the HvK recording). I thought the second illustration of the Mitropoulos to be a bit of showboating on GN's part and - to use one of my favourite big words - to be wholly otiose.

[PJPJ]

I thought the second illustration of the Mitropoulos to be a bit of showboating on GN's part and - to use one of my favourite big words - to be wholly otiose.

The Mitropoulos performance didn't quite come off, did it. I do think HvK's is superb and it's probably the one I'd keep when I'm forced to, but for the moment feel moved to add the BBC Legends Rozhdestvensky. GN was right to raise its disadvantage - however, I don't share the snotty-nosed views of some who go blue in the face about audience noises and applause, and for coughing on a grand scale is there anything to beat the audience at Mravinsky's Mozart 33/DSCH8?

Inter-movement expectoration if considered egregious can be removed by ripping, and a wave editor.

[Dave2002]

Dear me, don't use Spotify to judge SQ! As I've already said, the original Rattle CD is a technical tour-de-force but might prove hard for some systems to do justice to because of its very wide dynamic range. I simply can't recognise any description of the ending as "restrained" or compressed, played back here it has a huge impact, as does the slow movement - scarily powerful! And there's enough ambience to place the orchestra in the hall (though EMI's Symphony Hall efforts were never quite as airy as their Warwick Uni Arts centre ones). But that is at high volume levels, I guess it could sound restrained or "dull" in balance if you're worried about your speakers...

I always prefer Rattle to HvK now - the latter is a "legend" of a kind, but a rather unimaginative choice for a BaL, I feel (haven't heard the prog. yet, try to later.). But the problem really is having to choose one; it seems rather late-in-the-day , with so many recordings around, to have a single "library choice". Gramophone's recent Collection articles have an imaginative approach, naming various choices - "setting the scene" "other realms" and "the watershed" were 3 recent recommendations of Mozart's Clarinet Concerto!

Firstly, I have a premium subscription. Not that that really says much - it just means that the obvious failings of low bit rate encoding are often avoided. I agree that one cannot reliably tell whether the quality of the original CD or SACD was good - because one doesn't know what processing has been done. Maybe they compressed the dynamics for Spotify. That said, I really didn't like Rattle that much in what I heard, whereas the Kletzki performance was superb, even if you might not like the sound - but even there I'd say it was pretty good. I'm not a great fan of Karajan though, and generally I would prefer Rattle - though Karajan is superb in some pieces - as indeed is Rattle. Here I'd say that probably Karajan does "win", but there are others that are even better IMO.

Also, even though there are questions about Spotify, it is a viable way to hear music quickly, and sometimes music which may not be available any other way.
Regarding SQ I do have to say that I was seriously disappointed about an earlier recommendation of yours to buy some CDs from Japan - those Glazunov symphonies by Fedoseyev. I cannot believe that even in the "new" remastering that the original LPs would not have sounded better, so I bought copies of some to check - which I've not yet done though. Remastering from seriously damaged tapes, which is clearly what happened with symphony 5, doesn't really deliver results which are a lot better than my earlier MP3 in that particular symphony.

OK - I'm old enough now, and my hearing may be going off - but not that much. I don't believe that playing on better equipment would do much in many cases other than to show up even more faults - though I may come back with a proviso later. I often listen on headphones if I really want to assess quality.

[Alf-Prufrock]

Turn it up!

look guys and gals, just TURN IT UP!

JLW as usual hits the nail on the head. Over the years I have heard too many complaints about distant recordings, and have given JLW's advice on several occasions, occasionally more forcefully even than she. If you are listening to a symphony orchestra you have got to try for the effect of a symphony orchestra, which is never subdued.

In more technical terms I advise people that there is an optimum volume level for every recording, which can of course differ considerably. Aim for a setting where you can distinctly hear the start of every note even at ppp. That is, all transients must be clearly heard. As a result you will often get fortissimos that blast you off your seat, but that is how it should be, and damn your neighbours. Anything less and you are really not fit to judge a performance adequately.

All this is IMHO, of course.

[jayne lee wilson]

Firstly, I have a premium subscription. Not that that really says much - it just means that the obvious failings of low bit rate encoding are often avoided. I agree that one cannot reliably tell whether the quality of the original CD or SACD was good - because one doesn't know what processing has been done. Maybe they compressed the dynamics for Spotify. That said, I really didn't like Rattle that much in what I heard, whereas the Kletzki performance was superb, even if you might not like the sound - but even there I'd say it was pretty good. I'm not a great fan of Karajan though, and generally I would prefer Rattle - though Karajan is superb in some pieces - as indeed is Rattle. Here I'd say that probably Karajan does "win", but there are others that are even better IMO.

Also, even though there are questions about Spotify, it is a viable way to hear music quickly, and sometimes music which may not be available any other way.
Regarding SQ I do have to say that I was seriously disappointed about an earlier recommendation of yours to buy some CDs from Japan - those Glazunov symphonies by Fedoseyev. I cannot believe that even in the "new" remastering that the original LPs would not have sounded better, so I bought copies of some to check - which I've not yet done though. Remastering from seriously damaged tapes, which is clearly what happened with symphony 5, doesn't really deliver results which are a lot better than my earlier MP3 in that particular symphony.

OK - I'm old enough now, and my hearing may be going off - but not that much. I don't believe that playing on better equipment would do much in many cases other than to show up even more faults - though I may come back with a proviso later. I often listen on headphones if I really want to assess quality.

Oh dear, D2002! It was the Svetlanov Glazunov Symphonies on the Russian Venezia label I was recommending from HMV Tokyo, not the Fedoseyev, which I've never even heard! Very sorry if my post wasn't clear and I misled you into a purchase! Still recommend the Svetlanov, FWIW...

My experience of revealing ever more about the virtues and vices of classical recordings, older analogue ones especially, is that you hear more of both - but because it's easier to tell what's gone wrong, it usually bothers you less; the bigger, clearer acoustic setting, the physical presence of the orchestra, is usually ample compensation for the audible faults in old recorders or tapes etc... in the same way that coughing (well, up to a point...) or air conditioning, students swigging from water bottles, older people who should know better unwrapping "throat sweets" etc., doesn't bother you too much if you're at a live concert - at least not if you're involved.

It's really shocking to hear recordings through big, active studio monitors like ATC; I found them too forward to live with (not to mention the second-mortgage pricing), but the difference between one recording and another was devastatingly clear - utterly fascinating! I ended up with a more laid-back version of that approach, but heavens it took ages to find and get right...

Good example from the other end of the sonic telescope occurred last night: finding the Rozh Leningrad PO Legends of the Prok.5 at ClassicalShop, I listened to the excerpts and found it more impressive than it sounded on the BaL - yet both should have been at 320kbps, the AAC of the BaL should favour that... and no, I wasn't bothered by the coughing at all.

[Bryn]

Good example from the other end of the sonic telescope occurred last night: finding the Rozh Leningrad PO Legends of the Prok.5 at ClassicalShop, I listened to the excerpts and found it more impressive than it sounded on the BaL - yet both should have been at 320kbps, the AAC of the BaL should favour that... and no, I wasn't bothered by the coughing at all.

I have that Rozhdestvensky/Leningrad PO Prom recording of the 5th in its 1995 BBC Radio Classics manifestation. That was remastered by Floating Earth. Any idea whether the later Legends issue is a different transfer?

[Oh, and many thanks for the Rattle recommendation. It arrived yesterday and though I have so far only listened to it in the car, I am much taken with it.]

[jayne lee wilson]

I have that Rozhdestvensky/Leningrad PO Prom recording of the 5th in its 1995 BBC Radio Classics manifestation. That was remastered by Floating Earth. Any idea whether the later Legends issue is a different transfer?

[Oh, and many thanks for the Rattle recommendation. It arrived yesterday and though I have so far only listened to it in the car, I am much taken with it.]

Bryn - you can download the Legends issue booklet of the Rozh. at theclassicalshop - remastering is credited to Tony Faulkner...
reason enough, no wonder, etc. etc...

But I haven't yet heard the CD or lossless download myself.

[Bryn]

Bryn - you can download the Legends issue booklet of the Rozh. at theclassicalshop - remastering is credited to Tony Faulkner...
reason enough, no wonder, etc. etc...

But I haven't yet heard the CD or lossless download myself.

So that would make it Mike Hatch v. Tony Faulkner. Hmm, difficult. Might try the Faulkner if I see it at a suitably competitive price, though I am pretty happy with what I have.

[Charles_Smith]

Haven't heard the studio Rozh Melodiya in a while... I wonder...

I gave it an outing yesterday and it sounds very well - tight cohesive performance, good (1965) sound. Certainly deserved a mention on BAL.

[BBMmk2]

That's why I thought that the Neeme Jaarvi recording was not mentioned or rather just a cursoiry one. It deserves to be in the front runner. I have the Karajan one to, and imo that is becoming slighjly dated now?