Classical Corner Classical Music Corner (thread #56)

I'm a big MJQ fan, but I don't have any of those. Closest I have is "Blues on Bach" which I enjoy.

 

Beethoven: Eroica Variations; Variations in c minor; Variations in F Major. Claudio Arrau. Philips early red label.

You don't see these works from the early 1800s played that much now but I can understand why Beethoven was proud of them.

 

Mathis der Maler was assigned listening back in my music school days, not long after Hindemith passed. Back then, Ormandy/Philly was about the only version in the Schwann catalogue. It is still my imprint, although I enjoy the Blomstedt/SF recording as well. Even though I find most of Hindemith rather bloodless, Mathis struck a special chord in a young student then and it still thrills me today. You probably already know the piece is excerpts from an opera Hindemith wrote. I heard the whole thing once. Pretty boring actually, except for the instrumental music, most of which is in the 3 movement suite Hindemith cobbled together.

Some of Mathis is quoted in William Walton's very enjoyable "Variations on a Theme of Paul Hindemith".

 

Welcome and thanks for posting your thoughts. Sometimes you just don't run across the recording(s) that make sense of a work to you. Also IMO some composers are not generally well performed. Then there is the issue of genre in which composers may interest someone in one form and not another.

Handel is more of his period than Bach and primarily an opera and oratorio composer. We don't realize how much performers were expected to embellish and ornament written parts. We are used to later composers who fanatically inscribed each little accent every which place. Composers before Beethoven were pretty relaxed about part notation or even dynamics because musicians were all familiar with the prevailing style. In addition, most earlier composers supervised the playing of their (commissioned) pieces. So when performers today just play the written part it falls a bit flat. Handel would be incredulous.

It is also useful to remember that historically speaking instrumental music was much slower to develop than vocal music. It wasn't until the later Baroque that extended instrumental works really became routine. So audiences were less sophisticated in listening to them and thus required simpler more obvious progressions to not get lost. With respect to Mozart most of his instrumental works were composed as a teenager or in his early 20s. His best instrumental works were composed significantly later.
Speaking personally I don't find early classical instrumental works are performed that well, so it took years to assemble a modest collection of Mozart pieces apart from the widely famous works.

I assume you like Vivaldi and Corelli because they motor along faster than Handel does in the instrumental works, not because of any intrinsic difference in the musical content. If you like vocal music too I would check out something like Handel's Semele.

 

Yes and coupled on the original EMI LP with a great performance of Bartok's Music for Strings Percussion Celesta.

Actually I find Hindemith's music rather awkwardly phrased rather than bloodless except for some very late works when he was losing interest. Revealingly when he used a few folk song melodies as the basis for his "Schwanendreher" Viola Concerto the whole piece flows wonderfully. As for the opera Mathis, I find the vocal writing extremely labored, especially when two or more voices are singing (which is fairly often). Tough to listen through it. I find the same awkward quality in much of Schoenberg's atonal instrumental works in contrast to those by Berg and Webern whose music flows much better (leaving aside whether you like atonal music or not).

 

Thanks for the welcome - from your username, we must share a passion. I played DB in jazz for about 6-7 years back in the '90s-early 2000s and then spent four years in a local symphony orchestra. I tend to reinvent myself musically every 6-8 years, so I spent much of the past 8 years playing fretless electric in a prog band and then a stint in a jam band. My latest incarnation is to learn jazz guitar; hence my username.

I have too many CDs. I'm afraid if I try to search out 3-4 different recordings of my favorite stuff, my house will implode. Suffice to say that I like what I like, for whatever the reason. I suppose I like Vivaldi and Corelli because they really nailed what you can do with melody in a largely diatonic approach. Sure, there are key changes, but nothing like what came into vogue with the Romantic composers. Of course, I'm generalizing, but I also really like to experience how music evolved from the Baroque through Romantic to Modern, so I suppose a few key composers from different eras appeal to me simply because when I listen to their works, I get that sense of blood swelling through my body and warming me up, leading to that moment of wow that only certain music can bring to me.

Perhaps the subjectivity of this is due to a lack of good interpretation of modern players and certain performances are so much better than are others. So, one CD out there is the one vehicle to really get a particular piece of music, and perhaps I don't have it. Specific examples, such as George P's mention of Bartok Quartets by the Hungarian Quartet on DG are always appreciated, as long as I can find a place to stack them.

 

I heard Jeremy Denk perform them in recital several years ago. I have to admit it was not my favorite part of the concert. (The 32nd sonata and an Ives encore were more memorable0.

 

I don't know that much Hindemith. Certainly the piece I know the best is his clarinet sonata, which I have studied. I also worked on his clarinet concerto, but it doesn't impress me as much.

 

That may be part of the problem with them vis a vis current performers. It takes a top notch artist familiar with the form to keep their structure intact and coherent. Variation form was more common in earlier music and perfected by Bach and Beethoven. Sonata form is much easier to grasp. When Romantic composers attempted variations it typically sounded more muddled from a structural standpoint whatever the surface charm.

 

Except Brahms.

 

Now listening to "Bizet - Carmen & L'Arlesienne Suites" performed by the National Philharmonic Orchestra led by Leopold Stokowski on CBS CD.

 

Feel the same about the trombone sonata, which I chose no to play for my senior recital.

 

One of the maestro's final recordings if I am not mistaken.

 

This was recorded in 1976. In an online discography I see four recordings from 1976 and two from 1977, so you are correct.

 

Here's one when Stoky was a spring chicken at 75 or so. Bless him for living so long and giving us so many great stereo recordings.

Shostakovich: Symphony 11. Stokowski and Houston Symphony.Capitol Top Logo.

 

First listen to CD 4 "Carmina Burana - Officium Lusorum" from the "Love, Revelry And The Dance In Mediaeval Music" box set performed by Millenarium/Choeur de Chambre de Namur/Psallentes/Choeur d'enfants de lecole de musique de Forbach on Outhere.

 

If I am not mistaken, Ruth Cunningham is/was a nun ...

 

...and, in my book, Reger!

 

Words that describe probably 99.44% of this thread's denizens. (100% if you add in "records.") You've come to the right place!

I note the absence of Schubert from your list. If you haven't explored his music, please do--it's some of the most sublime in the literature. Searching back through this thread will offer plenty of advice about where to start, but for my money the best choices would be either the chamber music, particularly the second piano trio and the great quintet with second cello (not to be confused with the more popular "Trout" quintet--a delightful work, to be sure, but not quite on the same plane) or else his late piano sonatas. If starting with the symphonies, might as well dive into the deep end and begin with the 9th, the so-called "Great C Major" (to distinguish it from the "Little C Major," no. 6, although descriptive in all other senses of "Great" as well). And if you are at all susceptible to classical vocal music, you owe it to yourself to make the acquaintance of Schubert's songs. Probably any collection of the "greatest hits" will do to start, although if pressed for a performer I'd probably think first of Dietrich Fischer-Diskau, Gerard Souzay, or Elly Ameling.

 

Seconded!

Every time I hear his name I think of this guy:

 

And one of the better sounding Classical recordings from those quarters if I'm not mistaken.

 

I'm a Schubert fan and I approved this message.

 

Archtop said" I have too many CDs."

Sigh, I'm the outlier once again.

 

Now playing the SACD layer of the following recording for a first listen ...

 

Yes, "records" too.
OK, it's time to 'fess up: while I love piano in jazz, I'm not a fan of it in classical. Horns in jazz = great; horns in classical = well, OK. If the only genre I could listen to were string quartets, I'd probably be satisfied. But I enjoy the symphonies as well. I studied (among many others) Schubert in college, some 32 years ago, and since he is known most for his songs, I don't rank him highly (not for a lack of brilliance, but for a relative lack of output in the genres I prefer). I do own Symphonies 7 and 8 (or 8 and 9, depending on which numbering convention you subscribe to), and these are excellent. I will look around for the "great quintet with second cello" you mentioned.