Conductors who avoid certain composers....

[Nick Armstrong]

Actually, if he did believe this [Karajan - "Elgar = second-rate Brahms"], it's peculiar that he should conduct and record Music by composers who would have given various limbs to produce a work that could be described as "second-rate Brahms": there are very, very few for whom the expression would be an insult!

Couldn't agree more !!

I admit to being somewhat puzzled by Haitink's avoidance of a lot of Scandinavian composer, one would have thought the expansive nature of many of these works would appeal to a Brucknerian like Haitink.

Also my thoughts entirely.... One just remembers that Walton 1 with the Philharmonia, I seem to recall he made it sound very Sibelian. (Note to self: get this out for a listen...)

Boulez has also refused to conduct Shostakovich.... he is more a specialist than a generalist as far as conductors go: I don't know that he's done much with e.g. Handel, Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven, Schubert, Schumann, Brahms, Bruckner, Dvořák—to name a few. His repertoire seems limited to a chosen corner around 1890-1930 + himself.

To be fair to him, isn't he basically a composer who has had the luxury of branching out as a conductor of scores that interest him, rather than a 'career conductor' ?

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

Boulez ….
His repertoire seems limited to a chosen corner around 1890-1930 + himself.

That in itself excludes most Tchaikovsky and Shostakovich.

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

To be fair to him, isn't he basically a composer who has had the luxury of branching out as a conductor of scores that interest him, rather than a 'career conductor' ?

In that case, it was a bit high-handed of him to accept the post with the BBC SO, just so he could grind his axe with his limited repertoire.

[Nick Armstrong]

In that case, it was a bit high-handed of him to accept the post with the BBC SO, just so he could grind his axe with his limited repertoire.

That's a good point! (as is your previous one!)

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

In that case, it was a bit high-handed of him to accept the post with the BPO, just so he could grind his axe with his limited repertoire.

Karajan

In that case, it was a bit high-handed of him to accept the post with the RPO, just so he could grind his axe with his limited repertoire.

Beecham

In that case, it was a bit high-handed of him to accept the post with the LeningradPO, just so he could grind his axe with his limited repertoire.

Mravinsky

In that case, it was a bit high-handed of him to accept the post with the MunichPO, just so he could grind his axe with his limited repertoire.

Celibidache

In that case, it was a bit high-handed of him to accept the post with the Hallé, just so he could grind his axe with his limited repertoire.

Loughran

In that case, it was a bit high-handed of him to accept the post with the NYPO, just so he could grind his axe with his limited repertoire.

Toscanini.

In that case, it was a bit high-handed of him to accept the post with the LSO, just so he could grind his axe with his limited repertoire.

Previn

Boulez (former principal conductor of the NYPO, the BBCSO and regular with the CSO, VPO, BPO amongst other orchestras) is something of a throwback to a much older tradition of conducting (that of Bulow or Richter, for example), in that he programmes only works by his contemporaries and those figures from the immediate past who most influenced them.

[Bryn]

Boulez recorded some Handel (perhaps it would have been better if he had not) and was the first to record Beethoven's 5th Symphony with the third movement repeat, IIRC. His only Bruckner recording is of the 8th, and is very fine, despite the fact that he freely admitted he confused it with the 5th. There are also recordings of him conducting Mozart, Haydn, Brahms and Schubert (orch. Webern). There again, there is also a CD of Stockhausen conducting Mozart and Haydn.

[Pianoman]

His only Bruckner recording is of the 8th, and is very fine, despite the fact that he freely admitted he confused it with the 5th. .

He has my sympathy

[Pianoman]

Karajan

Beecham

Mravinsky

Celibidache

Loughran

Toscanini.

What a riposte :ok

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

That's a good point! (as is your previous one!)

Ferney didn't think so. However, the other conductors he mentioned in making his point did have a much broader repertoire than PB.

Having said that, Boulez's Mahler 6 is my favourite by a big margin.

[slarty]

[QUOTE=ferneyhoughgeliebte;422241]
Karajan

Beecham

Mravinsky

Celibidache

Loughran

Toscanini.

Previn

Limited repertoire -based on what? their recored legacies?
Apart from Karajan - whose repertoire was certainly not small - most conductors became pigeonholed as specialists in this or that composer and ended up recording mostly them, although their concert repertoires were much more diverse. Kempe is a prime example, the ultimate Strauss specialist who was much happier conducting Puccini and Verdi, but rarely got the chance.
It is a bit unfair to use Celibidache, as he refused to make recordings after 1948, and everything of his recorded legacy has been released since his death and are all live performances.
The ultimate mini repertoire performers would be, Carlos Kleiber and Arturo Benedetti Michelangeli.

[Lento]

Oramo's view of Mozart.... would never choose to conduct Mozart's Requiem.

Understandable to some extent imv: the Requiem does suffer by not all being Mozart, and some of the symphonies can be pretty hum-drum. Can't agree with his overall assessment of Mozart, though.

[Black Swan]

That in itself excludes most Tchaikovsky and Shostakovich.

I have few issues with Boulez as he conduct the repertoire I like best. And as for his exclusion of Tchaikovsky and Shostakovich. The exclusion of Shostakovich is fine by me..

[PJPJ]

The ultimate mini repertoire performers would be, Carlos Kleiber and Arturo Benedetti Michelangeli.

and Gilbert Kaplan.

[pastoralguy]

Boulez has also refused to conduct Shostakovich, regarding him as a second-rate Mahler epigone; but then he is more a specialist than a generalist as far as conductors go: I don't know that he's done much with e.g. Handel, Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven, Schubert, Schumann, Brahms, Bruckner, Dvořák—to name a few. His repertoire seems limited to a chosen corner around 1890-1930 + himself.

Of course, Boulez doesn't exactly have conductors tripping over themselves to conduct his music. (Having said that, I bought his DG 'big box' which I must open one day SOON!

I was thinking of the story of the BBCSO's principal percussionist, Gary Kettle, who, I believe, did not have a good relationship with PB. One Saturday morning they bumped into each other in the lift at Maida Vale. After some whistling and floor staring the conversation went thus...

PB. 'What are you doing in on a Saturday morning?"

GK. "It's always quite so I thought I'd sort out stuff for next week".

More floor staring.

GK. "What are YOU doing in this morning?"

PB. I've got auditions".

GK. "Good luck, mate!"

[pastoralguy]

Talking of mini-repertoires, there's a story about the great French violinist, Jacques Thibaud who did not play many works.The reasons were that the French were happy to hear his Bon-bons over and over again and that Thibaud would rather spend his time chasing beautiful woman and experiencing good food and wine than spend hours practicing his fiddle.

He was asked after, a recital, to write a few words for an admirer.

"What should I write?" he asked his accompanist.

"How about your repertoire?" came the reply.