Classical Corner Classical Music Corner (thread #51)

Now enjoying Schubert's first piano trio from the big box. I have been listening to the performances from the box that I hadn't heard yet. I have 30 more (of 142) CDs to go.

 

Played as written. I have that recording, and I listened to the last movement while following the score. The last bars are marked perdendosi (fading away).

 

I had those (and the Brahms and Schumann trios) on LP. Looking forward to getting reacquainted.

Listened to a bit of the first disc as well as one of the performances of the Grieg Concertos. My first Rubinstein purchase (in college) was an RCA twofer with the Grieg, Tchaikovsky 1st and Rachmaninoff 2nd.

 

He recorded that Grieg 4 times!

 

Attended a performance this afternoon by the Hagan Quartet of Beethoven's Op. 132 and 59(2). Interestingly, they played the later quartet first. I was not impressed by the performance of the first movement - too warm and easy-going - not enough of a contrast with the slow movement. But the slow movement was gorgeous, and Op. 59 (2) was great from start to finish.

 

I spent yesterday ripping almost all of the discs to my hard drive (lossless, and excepting only recordings already on my hard drive). One of the fun things about doing that is the ability to jump immediately (via my remote) from one recording to another. I skipped between the two recordings he did with Wallenstein. The difference in the sound quality (between 1956 and 1961) was evident. To my ears, by 1961 - at least in the case of this recording - RCA was already over-engineering.

 

Thanks, I will.

 

You need to hear it on the original Victor shellac.

 

Smaller label,70s pressing.Some of my 60s Londons are these pressings too,it's all good.The original has a bigger label.

 

Fading away, both as abruptly and as early as that? Incredible!

 

Dated sound but great playing.

 

Been listening lately to the Paavo Berglund's recordings. For example, I've never heard the 1970's Bournemouth set as digi mastering. 2013 "edition" at least have an awful cover: you just don't find the Alps from Finland: there are just few (gravel?) ridges in the south and couple of tunturis in the north... But otherwise such a cheap box is a lot more than OK. Although after comparing to the 1990's set with COE, I must admit that the Bournemouth set isn't exactly that great as I held it to be for two decades - it was only in the nineties that I bought the next Sibelius sets (by Finnish RSO/Saraste live in St. Petersburg & Lahti Orch./Vänskä). After all, there are murky passages and unarticulated moments if compared to the fabulous COE set: here Berglund makes the very same to Sibelius what Boulez had done to Debussy, clarity and transparency are the tools for revealing the structures of every Takt (as they say in German). There's none of the "mush" or "sauce" that Sibelius and Sibelians have despised so much. And the certainty with which P.B. "tunes" the orchestra according to the main spirit of the symphony - the introspection/meditation of the Fourth, the light/lightness and brightness of the Sixth etc. - as well as the certainty he leads the orchestra through the individual work as if it was a one long breath, one melodic sweep... I've had probably most of the COE set ripped from the library cd's but never bothered to do any sort of comparisons until now when I have both sets in digi and can easily swap the ceedees. Yes, the Berglund/COE set is unbeatable still today. The coming Lahti Orch./Kamu set is a thrilling chance to hear something marvellous, I believe. (I'm not into Vänskä that much, because I'm afraid that he doesn't appreciate the backbone - the strings - of the orchestra enough; Berglund, Kamu and Saraste do that. I'm not sure of Salonen.)

After listening to the Brahms sets of Berglund/COE and Chailly/Gewandhaus Orch., I think that neither is perfect. Not that I'd know Brahms that well at all. But if I begin with the thought that Brahms is a romantic, durch und durch, then I must conclude that Chailly delivers his music perhaps slightly more trustworthy; Berglund leaves a bit of the tones or tinges out - I mean the spectrum of the shades that can be expressed (with strings). Or perhaps it's just sheer mass and tradition-bound know-how of the Leipzig Orch. that shines through. Who knows. On the other hand, Chailly doesn't deliver all the nuances and all the harmonic variations - or perhaps it's just the sheer mass of the orchestra that prohibits it. Who knows. I just must listen to them another time again, and with another stereo set (it's possible that the crappy/bass-heavy Wharfedale speakers twist too much the sound, actually, it's almost obvious).

I don't wonder their decision, while op. 132 is clearly longer work (and at least to me: also "heavier" to follow) than the e-moll quartet. It's easier to the concert-going listener that way. Well, depends partly on the seats, I guess...

 

The fade away starts at ppp. The prior marking (several bars earlier) is f, so it may seem abrupt.

 

Thanks for checking this out! These guys are quite something at controlling their dynamics then!

 

I may have to seek out the COE set. I have always listened to this set. I have many more Sibelius recordings though.

 

In their Shaded Dog series, RCA found that some manipulation and equalization/compression of the tapes made orchestras sound remarkably good on the playback systems of the time. However they stopped short of really messing with tonal characteristics and consciously made good string tone their touchstone. Thus they still have a decent sound on more accurate playback systems. For some reason, they never found a comparable way to record piano and ended up sonically ruining almost all of the later Rubinstein recordings. I find them bass shy and overly percussive. Of course RCA wrecked even the moderate success of the Shaded Dogs by going all out to tailor recordings to the lowest common denominator playback system in Dynagroove.

It must be said that poor playback systems, whether AM radio or rumbly turntables with conical styli, tape cassettes or the current mobile playback devices, have driven lousy recording procedures far more often than engineering incompetence or bad luck. We see the process going on today with the loudness brickwalling being justified by the lower fidelity mobile playback devices people often use.

 

I have never had a serious problem with the sound of his late 50's - 60's Chopin recordings. Maybe not state of the art, but not offensive. The Grieg concerto recording from 1961 (on a brief listen) exhibited the issues you describe.

 

And maybe the real issue is the tone Rubinstein produced—lighter than Richter, Arrau, many others. whereas Kempff is much lighter than Rubinstein, as is Brendel.

 

Ah, Piano tone. A subject that may be deserving of it's own thread. I am of the opinion that it is far more a function of the piano and the hall than it is of the musician. There is a very good reason why string players often have one instrument and consider it an indispensable part of themselves as musicians. And there is a very good reason why, for the most part, pianists don't.

 

Now Listening To

Bach. B Minor Mass. Munchinger, Stuttgart Orch w/ Ameling, Minton, Watts, Krause, Krenn

I also have recordings with Rilling, Corboz and Koopman.

 

Felix Mendelssohn – Trio for Piano, Violin and Cello No.1 Op.49
Maurice Ravel – Trio for Piano, Violin and Cello in A minor
— Arthur Rubinstein, piano / Jascha Heifetz, Violin / Gregor Piatigorsky, Cello (RCA Victor Red Seal Records – Sony Music)

 

True, but I suspect that touch, pedaling, timing also figure into a given pianist's sound. It's a long distance from Glenn Gould To Claudio Arrau. Stick 'em on the same piano in the same hall, they will sound different.

 

I see there's no puppy dog next to the RCA Victor on these CDs.I have high condition copies of most of the non operatic Red Seal LPs bebore Dynagroove.Both the Living Stereo,and the pre 1957 monos,The early LPs like this used to be very common at thrift stores,and were usually unplayed,or rarely played.Not just RCA,but all labels.I know most people had never seen the originals.I wonder if these Original Jacket Collection boxes have created any interest in the original LPs?

 

The attentive dog was leased from HMV in England. Rather unfortuitously for HMV they leased away their trademark to the two countries outside of England that defined analog audiophilia (USA and Japan). That's why EMI LPs had to have a sticker over the dog when selling in the US. I assume the CDs are marketed all over the place so it would be still illegal I think for them to display the dog outside of the US. Maybe someone knows if these trademark restrictions are still operative?

Any interest by whom in the original LPs? They are fairly pricy on the used LP market and always have been. They were the object of a big reissue campaign on LPs from Classic Records.

 

I have been playing the Zinman/Tonehalle Schumann's Second Symphony obsessively this week, the ultra-C major finale in particular. It's casts a radiance like no other.