Simon Rattle Talks About Karajan....

[Conchis]

Not a new interview, so apologies if some have seen it already.

I think S.R. has some fascinating insights here ..... and I'd agree with him, overall. He's not the first person to talk about being 'repelled, while being impressed' by a Karajan performance and he's very illuminating on the reasons as to why there will never be 'another Karajan'.

https://youtu.be/5ceXbC9SF1E

[Alison]

Yes good interview.

All the same that ‘repelled/impressed’ phrase is not a bad way of putting how I’ve felt about some of SSR’s performances!

[jayne lee wilson]

I listened to Karajan’s recordings and performances all through the 1970s, on LP and extensively on Radio 3. Gorgeous, glorious, thrilling, beautiful, unique….. I would arrange my week or my weekend to ensure I was at home for the next Vienna or Berlin taping of his Brahms 2, Bruckner 8, Mahler 6….
A musical phenomenon I would never dare to miss.

But It would never have occurred to me to call any of them “repellent”. What do people - actual listeners - mean when they say that? Too…what? Perfect, powerful?
Or are they just jumping on a particular bandwagon? A recent denigratory fashion? “Too smooth, too slick”.. too…oh yes…legato.
That one again…
I don’t find that true of his Schoenberg, Honegger, Stravinsky - or even of his Bruckner - at least not consistently.
I sometimes found it true of his Haydn or his Mozart.

Was the sound-palette or character too consistent across different composers and musical styles? Possibly, sometimes. The character of Karajan’s Berliners was always distinctive. But his Honegger or his Stravinsky is still differentiated enough from his Beethoven, his Sibelius or his Bruckner. They don’t all sound the same - and were often vividly evocative - of landscape, an atmosphere. And that especial orchestral character was a source of profound musical pleasure for many of us, even if we would ask for greater range of colour, texture, dynamic and overall characterisation from a given conductor and orchestra now.

Anyway, didn’t other conductors display a similar tendency to create their sound upon their orchestra? Szell in Cleveland, Solti in Chicago, Dorati in London …
That earlier stereo era was characterised by those partnerships - whose sound their listeners relished, compared and contrasted, for and in themselves.

Nor is it entirely absent today…Yannick Nézet-Séguin with the COE - a certain purity, refinement and transparency; tonal beauties often encouraged...

[BBMmk2]

Do people still think that orchestras’s sound is homogeneous? I think there are orchestras who still have their sound, eg LSO, Weiner and Berliner Philharmonikers, etc.

[Conchis]

I listened to Karajan’s recordings and performances all through the 1970s, on LP and extensively on Radio 3. Gorgeous, glorious, thrilling, beautiful, unique….. I would arrange my week or my weekend to ensure I was at home for the next Vienna or Berlin taping of his Brahms 2, Bruckner 8, Mahler 6….
A musical phenomenon I would never dare to miss.

But It would never have occurred to me to call any of them “repellent”. What do people - actual listeners - mean when they say that? Too…what? Perfect, powerful?
Or are they just jumping on a particular bandwagon? A recent denigratory fashion? “Too smooth, too slick”.. too…oh yes…legato.
That one again…
I don’t find that true of his Schoenberg, Honegger, Stravinsky - or even of his Bruckner - at least not consistently.
I sometimes found it true of his Haydn or his Mozart.

Was the sound-palette or character too consistent across different composers and musical styles? Possibly, sometimes. The character of Karajan’s Berliners was always distinctive. But his Honegger or his Stravinsky is still differentiated enough from his Beethoven, his Sibelius or his Bruckner. They don’t all sound the same - and were often vividly evocative - of landscape, an atmosphere. And that especial orchestral character was a source of profound musical pleasure for many of us, even if we would ask for greater range of colour, texture, dynamic and overall characterisation from a given conductor and orchestra now.

Anyway, didn’t other conductors display a similar tendency to create their sound upon their orchestra? Szell in Cleveland, Solti in Chicago, Dorati in London …
That earlier stereo era was characterised by those partnerships - whose sound their listeners relished, compared and contrasted, for and in themselves.

Nor is it entirely absent today…Yannick Nézet-Séguin with the COE - a certain purity, refinement and transparency; tonal beauties often encouraged...

Karajan once made the notorious analogy of music being like 'a beautiful woman in a fur coat. It would be shocking if she had a cold sore on her lips.' His quest for 'beauty of sound' was lifelong and unapologetic. I like his Second Viennese School recordings but I think the charge that he 'smooths over the jagged edges' carries some weight.

His films are fascinating for different reasons. Contrary to popular belief, he didn't direct all of them - I think Henri-Georges Clouzot collaborated with him on the Verdi Requiem film. Clouzot was a born misanthropist and his film is all about depicting the fallibility of orchestral musicians (but not Karajan, of course).

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

Karajan once made the notorious analogy of music being like 'a beautiful woman in a fur coat. It would be shocking if she had a cold sore on her lips.'

Did he? Do you have a source for this quotation please, Conchis?

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

All the same that ‘repelled/impressed’ phrase is not a bad way of putting how I’ve felt about some of SSR’s performances!

With me it's more a case of some of Rattle's performances deeply impress me, whilst the others I find deeply repellant.

[richardfinegold]

I listened to Karajan’s recordings and performances all through the 1970s, on LP and extensively on Radio 3. Gorgeous, glorious, thrilling, beautiful, unique….. I would arrange my week or my weekend to ensure I was at home for the next Vienna or Berlin taping of his Brahms 2, Bruckner 8, Mahler 6….
A musical phenomenon I would never dare to miss.

But It would never have occurred to me to call any of them “repellent”. What do people - actual listeners - mean when they say that? Too…what? Perfect, powerful?
Or are they just jumping on a particular bandwagon? A recent denigratory fashion? “Too smooth, too slick”.. too…oh yes…legato.
That one again…
I don’t find that true of his Schoenberg, Honegger, Stravinsky - or even of his Bruckner - at least not consistently.
I sometimes found it true of his Haydn or his Mozart.

Was the sound-palette or character too consistent across different composers and musical styles? Possibly, sometimes. The character of Karajan’s Berliners was always distinctive. But his Honegger or his Stravinsky is still differentiated enough from his Beethoven, his Sibelius or his Bruckner. They don’t all sound the same - and were often vividly evocative - of landscape, an atmosphere. And that especial orchestral character was a source of profound musical pleasure for many of us, even if we would ask for greater range of colour, texture, dynamic and overall characterisation from a given conductor and orchestra now.

Anyway, didn’t other conductors display a similar tendency to create their sound upon their orchestra? Szell in Cleveland, Solti in Chicago, Dorati in London …
That earlier stereo era was characterised by those partnerships - whose sound their listeners relished, compared and contrasted, for and in themselves.

Nor is it entirely absent today…Yannick Nézet-Séguin with the COE - a certain purity, refinement and transparency; tonal beauties often encouraged...

Let us not forget Stokowski/Ormandy in the Conductor/Orchestra Sound Pairings.
I was listening to Karajan/Berlin In Bruckner 9 on Monday night, after a long grueling day at work and while struggling with a nasty cold. Although I badly needed to go to bed, I just couldn’t rouse myself out of the listening seat. So much sheer beauty and layering of sound requires no other justification. There were a couple of times one can detect a bit of manipulation for effect, but who cares? The end result feels spiritual, as if one has been transported off this mortal coil and given a vista of what lays beyond Human Experience. Could the intentions of the Composer possibly have been better served?
I like Karajan’s Second Viennese School recordings precisely because they seem to show continuity with the Art that preceded them, the milieu from which they arose. I often wonder if those Composers themselves would have preferred his recordings.
Karajan had a remarkable range. By temperament he was a Romantic and yes his Mozart and Haydn aren’t as stirring as his other music making (the analogy of driving a Rolls Royce in a parking lot comes to mind) but they are enjoyable and Solti, Ormandy and other contemporaneous Conductors didn’t thrive in that repertoire either. His Bach was anachronistic but so was everyone else of that era.
Repellant? Only if one is somehow embarrassed by unabashed perfection in sound, if one feels that something is somehow scary if it doesn’t have the blemish that makes us human. One doesn’t criticize Michelangelo for not placing a syphillitic chancre on his David, and if HvK wanted to present us with otherworldly beauty, I will gladly accept the offering

[Richard Barrett]

I think like everyone else HvK was good at the things he was good at. When I hear people talk about "perfection in sound" I always wonder why they think there's actually some kind of agreed definition of that term, since obviously there isn't. One person's "perfection in sound" is someone else's... something else. His Berlin Philharmonic sound was a unique musical phenomenon, either you like it or you don't, but none of the orchestra's subsequent musical directors seem to have been inclined to go for something so individual. My admiration for Claudio Abbado as a conductor, for example, is enormous, but I don't much like listening to his Berlin recordings, preferring what he achieved in London and Lucerne before and after that period. Returning to Karajan, his recording is the only Ring des Nibelungen I am happy to hear from start to finish - every other one loses me at some point. Same for most of Strauss.

[cloughie]

I think like everyone else HvK was good at the things he was good at. When I hear people talk about "perfection in sound" I always wonder why they think there's actually some kind of agreed definition of that term, since obviously there isn't. One person's "perfection in sound" is someone else's... something else. His Berlin Philharmonic sound was a unique musical phenomenon, either you like it or you don't, but none of the orchestra's subsequent musical directors seem to have been inclined to go for something so individual. My admiration for Claudio Abbado as a conductor, for example, is enormous, but I don't much like listening to his Berlin recordings, preferring what he achieved in London and Lucerne before and after that period. Returning to Karajan, his recording is the only Ring des Nibelungen I am happy to hear from start to finish - every other one loses me at some point. Same for most of Strauss.

I think I agree witn a lot of what you said there and maybe what you say about Abbado appllies also to Rattle. What Rattle achieved with the CBSO was in many ways more memorable than that with the BPO, and maybe both Abbado and Rattle were less able to stamp their individuality, nor maybe did not feel the need to, when working with the BPO, well oiled machine. They were not in an orchestra building mode - the love of the music was there but, and I hesitate to say this because I do not know enough about the relationships with the orchestra, was the love of the music makers there? Also with Rattle and EMI was he as well served by recording engineers in Berlin as he was in Birmingham or London?

[Once Was 4]

Karajan once made the notorious analogy of music being like 'a beautiful woman in a fur coat. It would be shocking if she had a cold sore on her lips.' His quest for 'beauty of sound' was lifelong and unapologetic. I like his Second Viennese School recordings but I think the charge that he 'smooths over the jagged edges' carries some weight.

His films are fascinating for different reasons. Contrary to popular belief, he didn't direct all of them - I think Henri-Georges Clouzot collaborated with him on the Verdi Requiem film. Clouzot was a born misanthropist and his film is all about depicting the fallibility of orchestral musicians (but not Karajan, of course).

With regard to the Karajan Second Viennese School recordings: somebody in the recording industry told me that these were, yes, wonderful but totally unlike any possible live performance as the orchestra layout was not only unusual but changed radically between different sections of each work. Can anybody confirm or deny this?

And listen to:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JCAEtEnm9j4

As students we used to talk about 'Karajan Smooth' playing. Smooth this aint but it certainly, as somebody said, kicks ass! Karajan at this time was living in the Adler Hotel where he had the indignity of having to cower in the air raid shelter with the hoi poloi. He eventually fled just before the hotel was bombed.

I prefer to speculate on what was about to happen to the wonderful players that we can hear.

[Conchis]

With regard to the Karajan Second Viennese School recordings: somebody in the recording industry told me that these were, yes, wonderful but totally unlike any possible live performance as the orchestra layout was not only unusual but changed radically between different sections of each work. Can anybody confirm or deny this?

And listen to:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JCAEtEnm9j4



As students we used to talk about 'Karajan Smooth' playing. Smooth this aint but it certainly, as somebody said, kicks ass! Karajan at this time was living in the Adler Hotel where he had the indignity of having to cower in the air raid shelter with the hoi poloi. He eventually fled just before the hotel was bombed.

I prefer to speculate on what was about to happen to the wonderful players that we can hear.

Yes, the famous 'experimental stereo' recording of Bruckner &. Shame that that one movement is missing?

[Conchis]

Did he? Do you have a source for this quotation please, Conchis?

It's in the Conversations with Karajan book by Richard Osborne.

[Conchis]

Let us not forget Stokowski/Ormandy in the Conductor/Orchestra Sound Pairings.
I was listening to Karajan/Berlin In Bruckner 9 on Monday night, after a long grueling day at work and while struggling with a nasty cold. Although I badly needed to go to bed, I just couldn’t rouse myself out of the listening seat. So much sheer beauty and layering of sound requires no other justification. There were a couple of times one can detect a bit of manipulation for effect, but who cares? The end result feels spiritual, as if one has been transported off this mortal coil and given a vista of what lays beyond Human Experience. Could the intentions of the Composer possibly have been better served?
I like Karajan’s Second Viennese School recordings precisely because they seem to show continuity with the Art that preceded them, the milieu from which they arose. I often wonder if those Composers themselves would have preferred his recordings.
Karajan had a remarkable range. By temperament he was a Romantic and yes his Mozart and Haydn aren’t as stirring as his other music making (the analogy of driving a Rolls Royce in a parking lot comes to mind) but they are enjoyable and Solti, Ormandy and other contemporaneous Conductors didn’t thrive in that repertoire either. His Bach was anachronistic but so was everyone else of that era.
Repellant? Only if one is somehow embarrassed by unabashed perfection in sound, if one feels that something is somehow scary if it doesn’t have the blemish that makes us human. One doesn’t criticize Michelangelo for not placing a syphillitic chancre on his David, and if HvK wanted to present us with otherworldly beauty, I will gladly accept the offering

Of course we'll never know, but I suspect you may be right about this. The 2ndVSers would have been pleased as punch to hear Karajan conducting the BPO in their works, I'm pretty sure.

[cloughie]

Let us not forget Stokowski/Ormandy in the Conductor/Orchestra Sound Pairings.
I was listening to Karajan/Berlin In Bruckner 9 on Monday night, after a long grueling day at work and while struggling with a nasty cold. Although I badly needed to go to bed, I just couldn’t rouse myself out of the listening seat. So much sheer beauty and layering of sound requires no other justification. There were a couple of times one can detect a bit of manipulation for effect, but who cares? The end result feels spiritual, as if one has been transported off this mortal coil and given a vista of what lays beyond Human Experience. Could the intentions of the Composer possibly have been better served?
I like Karajan’s Second Viennese School recordings precisely because they seem to show continuity with the Art that preceded them, the milieu from which they arose. I often wonder if those Composers themselves would have preferred his recordings.
Karajan had a remarkable range. By temperament he was a Romantic and yes his Mozart and Haydn aren’t as stirring as his other music making (the analogy of driving a Rolls Royce in a parking lot comes to mind) but they are enjoyable and Solti, Ormandy and other contemporaneous Conductors didn’t thrive in that repertoire either. His Bach was anachronistic but so was everyone else of that era.
Repellant? Only if one is somehow embarrassed by unabashed perfection in sound, if one feels that something is somehow scary if it doesn’t have the blemish that makes us human. One doesn’t criticize Michelangelo for not placing a syphillitic chancre on his David, and if HvK wanted to present us with otherworldly beauty, I will gladly accept the offering

Interesting you mention Stokowski - I think his case was different to other conductors in that he could deliver his wizardry at will with any orchestra as is shown in his later recordings for Decca!