Originally posted by Petrushka
View Post
Musical questions and answers thread
Collapse
X
-
[FONT=Comic Sans MS][I][B]Numquam Satis![/B][/I][/FONT]
-
-
Originally posted by Petrushka View PostTime for a fresh question.
Why did Herbert von Karajan never record or perform the Sibelius Symphony No 3? It is no lesser a work than any of the others yet, given Karajan's enormous affinity with Sibelius and the fact that he set down the other symphonies more than once, it is puzzling that he never recorded the 3rd. Is he on record (no pun intended) as saying anything about it? Did he have an expressed antipathy to it or did he just never get round to it?
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by ferneyhoughgeliebte View PostEMI wanted him to record it with them (his only recording of the First was the one he made in the '80s with them), and he wasn't exactly against the idea, but Karajan never renewed his contract with them after 1985 and he doesn't seem to have raised the possibility with DG. There was a recording of Carmina Burana chalked in for an unspecified recording date, but ..."The sound is the handwriting of the conductor" - Bernard Haitink
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by ahinton View PostIt's quite something, isn't it?! To me, it's one of the more obviously telling illustrations of the regard in which he held Chopin; in more general terms, what strikes me as one of the most remarkable aspects of the pianistic triumvirate that was Chopin, Liszt and Alkan is how very different from one another their works are - much mutual admiration between the three but never at the expense of the individuality of matter or manner of any one of them.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by pastoralguy View PostAt the risk of sounding facetious, it's possible that the fact the Berlin Philharmonic didn't have the orchestral parts in their library slowed down HvK's plans. I know that when Sir Simon first played the third symphony the Orchestra they had to obtain the parts. Sibelius has never been a popular composer in Germany so it's possible that there was no 'mechanism' for getting the music easily.[FONT=Comic Sans MS][I][B]Numquam Satis![/B][/I][/FONT]
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by ferneyhoughgeliebte View PostPossibly - but this would then have also been the case with the Sibelius Symphonies HvK did record with the Berliners for EMI in the late '70s (Nos 1 - his only recording of the work -,2,4,5 & 6, plus Tapiola and his only recording of En Saga). And Karajan was "KARAJAN": if he'd really wanted to do a work, the publishers would've got the materials to him by chartered aircraft if necessary!
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by pastoralguy View PostAccording to an article by Richard Osbourne in the Gramophone in 2008, Karajan wanted to record Shostakovich 8 but EMI reckoned it wouldn't be economically viable. Perhaps they felt the same about Sibelius three."The sound is the handwriting of the conductor" - Bernard Haitink
Comment
-
-
Roehre
Originally posted by Alison View PostDoes The term Allegro refer primarily to speed or mood ?
As an example it's nice to hear the differences in mood in the first mvts of Mozart's symphonies no.31 KV297 and no.33 319, both marked Allegro assai, or -alternatively- no.32 KV318 and (Posthorn-symphony), KV320a both marked allegro con spirito (the latter being the exact double speed of its preceding Introduction Adagio maestoso, btw)
Comment
-
Originally posted by MrGongGong View Post(from the Jazz wars thread courtesy of mr Oxo)
Why do Jazzers refer to musicians by their Christian names ?
Why do composers (and others ) not always (or often) get the courtesy of their First name, or a title. ?I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered. My life is my own.
I am not a number, I am a free man.
Comment
-
Comment