Гениальный дирижер ! Как звучит оркестр! А вторая часть вообще шедевр Почему-то напрашивается параллель с его исполнением Первой части Третьей Симфонии Бетховена -- абсолютный шедевр !
There are so many moments in this symphony, and in the other later Mozart symphonies, where, having the details so clearly articulated, in a way very typical of Klemperer's conducting, you could think it was music written at a later period. It's Mozart, writing in the late 18th century!!! What a remarkable genius!!! The musical form may conform to the classical symphonic construction, but the musical content is often simply timeless, transcending any age.
@@andreaguarino8207 mhhh, I meant his Amsterdam recordings of Mozart 39-41. Böhmerl (like R. Strauss said) hold the tempis, of course, but I like especially his Strauss-recordings. Thx.
While I love Klemperer's Mozart, I think K550 is one of the few symphonies where I disagree with his tempo choices in the outer movements. The first movement not being Molto allegro really robs the music of much of its drama.
Sehr authentische Aufführung dieser erregenden Sinfonie mit seidigen Töne aller Streicher und milden Töne aller Holzbläser. Der geniale Dirigent leitet das ganze Orchester im angemessenen Tempo und ohne überflüssige Agogik. Einfach wunderbar!
Thank you so much for having published this record! I’m brought up with it in the 5ties and 6ties, and keep it still in my collection. But my disc player stopped working long ago and the disc is all worn off. Millions of records succeeded it, ever faster and faster, but never equaled the present one in suggesting so vividly a dance. Dancing has nothing to do with high speed; here’s the evidence!
I like this performance, but absolutely dislike the way the third is played (very much flat and not espressivo) and sometimes I don't like the harshness of some cadenzas.
No. Not enough passion, sturm und drang, not enough tension in the musical line, especially in the First Movement. Mozart was a red blooded man, not a dainty Dresden figurine, and whose music should not reflect lacy undergarments. I much prefer this conductor's Haydn. If you want to know how this goes, listen to Furtwängler/Berlin 1949, or Hans Graf with the Salzburg Mozart Orchestra. Props to Otto for taking the repeat of the exposition in the First Movement, however.
Much as I admire Klemperer, this is Mozart seen through a late-19th century prism and is a travesty. A bit boring too, although the second half is better.
You need to have a more open mind. The doctrine that C18th music should only be performed with C18th instruments, and a small ensemble, is classical music's version of political correctness. Many performance approaches are valid, as long as they aren't rubbish.
@@russellparratt9859 I didn't say anything about historic instruments or orchestra size. I was referring to this performance. As it happens, I think very highly of Bruno Walter, Toscanini, and other classic conductors in this work. Klemperer was not always this stolid in Mozart.
@@karldelavigne8134 OK. However, the phrase "a late-19th century prism" does suggest overall criticism of a particular generation of conductors, even if that's not what you meant. Also, the word "travesty" is pretty harsh criticism. It's the sort of word that period-instrument afficionados would use. Considering the subjective nature of orchestral interpretation, I wonder why you hate it so much. I've always liked Bruno Walter's CSO recordings in general, but have recently been listening to more Klemperer. I'm not familiar with this recording yet, so have not yet formed an opinion, but have liked what I've heard so far. I'll get back to it.
@@russellparratt9859 No, I think you are projecting your own counter-prejudices onto my comments and loading them with more meaning. My main issues here are with tempo and phrasing. After Klemperer had a brain tumour in the 1940s he swung between manic and slow phases. Listen to his postwar Don Giovanni from Budapest and compare it to his later EMI recording and you would not believe it is the same conductor. I have no general criticism of an entire generation of conductors, and I got to know most of the standard works in the orchestral repertoire through recordings by them. If you enjoy this interpretation, good for you. It is inevitable that everyone will react differently.
@@karldelavigne8134 Most likely, you don't like Klemperer's slower tempi. To use his health issues as an excuse to dismiss his interpretation is in complete denial of the reality that he bequeathed one of the greatest recording legacies of all time to us all, with the Philharmonia and EMI before he died. You miss the point about Klemperer. I just gave the Walter/Klemperer recordings a quick A/B test. Walter is more about the lyricism, with a dominating string sound, and the rest of the orchestra as mere accompaniment. It is a very orthodox approach. Klemperer, on the other hand, brings out so much detail that people often don't even notice. He recreates the work, giving new insights into it's construction. He did this to awesome effect with Mahler's 7th Symphony, a recording that can only be described as interpretative genius. I hear him doing the same thing with this Mozart recording. You need to forget about your personal expectations, at least for a little while, and listen intently to the detail. He makes Mozart sound as modern as I have ever heard him, in an orchestral context. All good performances are valid, but of course we prefer some over others. But, the history of orchestral recordings is finite, and Klemperer set a benchmark for a type of approach, that still hasn't been bettered. Compared to this Klemperer recording, the Walter recording sounds like a nice, easy going fog. It sits well in the "easy listening" category. Pretty melody, but a shame about the lack of detail.
Гениальный дирижер ! Как звучит оркестр! А вторая часть вообще шедевр Почему-то напрашивается параллель с его исполнением Первой части Третьей Симфонии Бетховена -- абсолютный шедевр !
There are so many moments in this symphony, and in the other later Mozart symphonies, where,
having the details so clearly articulated, in a way very typical of Klemperer's conducting,
you could think it was music written at a later period.
It's Mozart, writing in the late 18th century!!!
What a remarkable genius!!!
The musical form may conform to the classical symphonic construction,
but the musical content is often simply timeless, transcending any age.
Klemperer's austerity is undeniable. Even Wolfgang might have been awe-struck by the power of the Philharmonia.........
Well said.
I love this music. i love mozart. i love klemperer. i love philharmonia.
The rendition of the Third Movement is the best I ever heard.
Очень люблю музыку Моцарта. А такое великолепное исполнение для меня подарок. Очень благодарна.
It´s the best recording of the 40, even better than Kleiber or Furtwängler, Walter and Böhm. The beginning is pure magic.
I agree
Böhm is overrated in Mozart
@@andreaguarino8207 mhhh, I meant his Amsterdam recordings of Mozart 39-41. Böhmerl (like R. Strauss said) hold the tempis, of course, but I like especially his Strauss-recordings. Thx.
You forget about George Szell!
@@КонстантинСеменов-х2ф i doch Not forget him. He was sure s mozartian.
God Bless Otto Klemperer !
While I love Klemperer's Mozart, I think K550 is one of the few symphonies where I disagree with his tempo choices in the outer movements. The first movement not being Molto allegro really robs the music of much of its drama.
Well articulated, balanced, full value to every phrase. Doesn't rely on speed to generate excitement.
I like your expression "Doesn't rely on speed to generate excitement". That is Klemperer's genius. You get musical excitement at lower speeds.
I love the slow beginning, make so much more sense then the fast historic informed conducters do it. For me the best 3. and 4. movement.
Thanks.
Wonderful ! Thank you very much !
Sehr authentische Aufführung dieser erregenden Sinfonie mit seidigen Töne aller Streicher und milden Töne aller Holzbläser. Der geniale Dirigent leitet das ganze Orchester im angemessenen Tempo und ohne überflüssige Agogik. Einfach wunderbar!
LA.SINFONIA.NUMERO.40..UNA.VERDADERA.JOYA.DEL.GENIAL.MOZART.
Thank you so much for having published this record! I’m brought up with it in the 5ties and 6ties, and keep it still in my collection. But my disc player stopped working long ago and the disc is all worn off. Millions of records succeeded it, ever faster and faster, but never equaled the present one in suggesting so vividly a dance. Dancing has nothing to do with high speed; here’s the evidence!
Beautifully described, good sir.
Hear! Hear!
Great.....
For me Bruno Walter and he choose the very right beginning tempo. But today evrrybody needs it fast and row.
Brilliant
That finale...
9:19 and suddenly , Anton Bruckner ......
I think It’s the best since Ilya Musin, but tempo of 4th movement is little slow-moving. Third is the best!
17:37
22:30
22:59
23:16
I like this performance, but absolutely dislike the way the third is played (very much flat and not espressivo) and sometimes I don't like the harshness of some cadenzas.
No. Not enough passion, sturm und drang, not enough tension in the musical line, especially in the First Movement. Mozart was a red blooded man, not a dainty Dresden figurine, and whose music should not reflect lacy undergarments. I much prefer this conductor's Haydn. If you want to know how this goes, listen to Furtwängler/Berlin 1949, or Hans Graf with the Salzburg Mozart Orchestra. Props to Otto for taking the repeat of the exposition in the First Movement, however.
クレンペラーの演奏は好きだが、残念ながら、セル／クリーブランドの透徹した明晰性には数段劣る。
Much as I admire Klemperer, this is Mozart seen through a late-19th century prism and is a travesty. A bit boring too, although the second half is better.
You need to have a more open mind. The doctrine that C18th music should only be performed with C18th instruments, and a small ensemble, is classical music's version of political correctness. Many performance approaches are valid, as long as they aren't rubbish.
@@russellparratt9859 I didn't say anything about historic instruments or orchestra size. I was referring to this performance. As it happens, I think very highly of Bruno Walter, Toscanini, and other classic conductors in this work. Klemperer was not always this stolid in Mozart.
@@karldelavigne8134 OK. However, the phrase "a late-19th century prism" does suggest overall criticism of a particular generation of conductors, even if that's not what you meant.
Also, the word "travesty" is pretty harsh criticism. It's the sort of word that period-instrument afficionados would use.
Considering the subjective nature of orchestral interpretation, I wonder why you hate it so much.
I've always liked Bruno Walter's CSO recordings in general, but have recently been listening to more Klemperer. I'm not familiar with this recording yet, so have not yet formed an opinion, but have liked what I've heard so far. I'll get back to it.
@@russellparratt9859 No, I think you are projecting your own counter-prejudices onto my comments and loading them with more meaning. My main issues here are with tempo and phrasing. After Klemperer had a brain tumour in the 1940s he swung between manic and slow phases. Listen to his postwar Don Giovanni from Budapest and compare it to his later EMI recording and you would not believe it is the same conductor. I have no general criticism of an entire generation of conductors, and I got to know most of the standard works in the orchestral repertoire through recordings by them. If you enjoy this interpretation, good for you. It is inevitable that everyone will react differently.
@@karldelavigne8134 Most likely, you don't like Klemperer's slower tempi.
To use his health issues as an excuse to dismiss his interpretation is in complete denial of the reality that he bequeathed one of the greatest recording legacies of all time to us all, with the Philharmonia and EMI before he died.
You miss the point about Klemperer. I just gave the Walter/Klemperer recordings a quick A/B test. Walter is more about the lyricism, with a dominating string sound, and the rest of the orchestra as mere accompaniment. It is a very orthodox approach.
Klemperer, on the other hand, brings out so much detail that people often don't even notice. He recreates the work, giving new insights into it's construction.
He did this to awesome effect with Mahler's 7th Symphony, a recording that can only be described as interpretative genius.
I hear him doing the same thing with this Mozart recording.
You need to forget about your personal expectations, at least for a little while, and listen intently to the detail. He makes Mozart sound as modern as I have ever heard him, in an orchestral context. All good performances are valid, but of course we prefer some over others. But, the history of orchestral recordings is finite, and Klemperer set a benchmark for a type of approach, that still hasn't been bettered.
Compared to this Klemperer recording, the Walter recording sounds like a nice, easy going fog.
It sits well in the "easy listening" category. Pretty melody, but a shame about the lack of detail.