Repertoire: The BEST Stravinsky Rite of Spring Among the Many
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 1 июл 2024
- Another work that everyone wants to play and record, some much better than others. Before someone chimes in with a correction, I know that Boulez recorded the work three times, and not two, but he did do it twice in Cleveland, and I always ignore the first one because he made it in France before he had learned now to conduct.
Видеоклипы
Hey David! The story of Boulez with Cleveland is a great one. The morning of the session, the players were ready for lots of cuts, and recording section to section, as is quite common and easy with this cellular work. Well, Boulez began the session, and the great players of the Cleveland Orchestra quickly realized that he was not going to stop until the entire first and second parts were finished. What you hear is a practically "live" performance, and it sounds like that with its great excitement and the "on the edge of your seats" feel.
Thanks for sharing this. Yes, there are moments when it all just goes right!
I agree 100% with this. The Boulez is outstanding, the Chailly is stupendous, and the Ozawa has always been my #1 since I'm a kid.
Thank you for making these videos! I find them incredibly helpful!
Your analogies are priceless and hysterical!
Thank you for this! I haven't found "my" Rite of Spring yet, but I'm sure these will be worth checking out. Keep on doing these very welcome videos - you've been doing them at an astonishing pace!
The Boulez recording is detached emotionally in the way a sacrifice would be...and that's a good thing for this piece.
Thank you for mentioning MTT. That was my first Rite recording and my favorite. I never hear anyone else mention this performance. Although Jim Svejda of KUSC did talk about the incredibly raw and exciting and youthful recordings MtT made with BSO in the early days. He seems to have softened up over the years.
I have probably heard this piece fifty times, but never the Seji Ozawa with Chicago recording. Truly outstanding!
Great list, and a good half that I look forward to hearing. I cut my teeth on Markevitch's stereo recording, before expanding to numerous others. A recent favorite is Salonen in LA on DG. One of my earliest live concert experiences was of him conducting this piece with the NY Phil and I remember him stopping conducting during a particularly furious (yet rhythmically stable) section of the piece as the orchestra continue playing with gusto-so thrilling.
I like the Gergiev/Kirov on Philips very much. I watched them in Toronto playing all the 3 Stravinsky ballets in one concert...with 3 sets of Tympani!! I was sitting on row 5 and my chest and ears hurt after the concert, it was just a lifetime experience. I like the Chailly/Cleveland too and just to say their Rite was recorded by Stanley Goodall, the recording engineer who made the majority of the wonderful ASMF/Sir Neville Marriner recordings on Argo.
Absolutely Chailly and the Cleveland Orch. It was like listening to a new piece of music
LOVE this review of the Rite of Spring recordings. THANK YOU!!! I too think both the Chailly/Cleveland and Multi/Philadelphia recordings are AWESOME!!!
MUTI... not "Multi" ffs
A brilliant round up David, thank you! I am slightly biased to your recommendation of Chailly’s Cleveland orchestra recording, as back in 1990’s when I was a reviewer for Gramophone I made Chailly’s version my top recommendation in my round up of The Rite of Spring recordings in The Gramophone Collection, much to admonishment of some of my fellow reviewers I may add. It caused quite a stir but I stand my choice to this day. It really is a wonderful recording and interpretation. Incidentally, your overview of the John Ireland Piano Concerto was excellent!
Glad to hear you recommend two of my favorites: the bone chilling 1st Boulez/Cleveland recording and the punch-packing Muti performance. I have not heard the Chailly recording but he was supposed to first recording it with the Los Angeles Philharmonic in the early 80s. They performed it first before recording it but the performances were such a disaster that Giulini (then music director) had the recording sessions cancelled, much to the relief of the orchestra.
A solid group of excellent recommendations. I like the Solti/CSO recording for its drive and the superbly disciplined playing. My current favorites are Chailly/Cleveland. Bernstein/NYPO, and Abbado/LSO.
thank you. I went on youtube and listened to the Michael Tilson version that I had decades ago on vinyl. Wow! I forgot how amazing that is :)
Glad you mention Tilson Thomas, my introduction to the piece (on record, that is. First time was at the Concertgebouw).
It's so refreshing to see someone comparing many versions of The Rite of Spring to one another
I've seen people do comparisons to many things like movies and games but I've never seen someone do this before with classical music
Welcome to my world!
Loving your videos, David! My favorite is still Sir Colin Davis 70s recording w/ the London Phil.
The Salonen LA Phil is my absolute favourite. I know everyone loves the sacrificial dance but for me the Ritual Action of the Ancestors is where the real juice is and Salonen’s is both creepy and savage.
Bernstein's NY recording remains my favourite, and I've loved the Tilson Thomas for decades; I first bough it on vinyl in the 1980s. My "sleeper" recommendation, which has a similar lyricism to Tilson Thomas,I feel, is Abbado with the London Symphony Orchestra.
The Rite of Spring is still an unnerving, even frightening work. I heard it live with the NYPO in the 1990s (can't recall the conductor) and was amazed by how revolutionary, innovative, and fresh it was a century after its infamous Parisian premiere. The music felt like a savage assault on the ears of the audience. It's the only classical piece that affects me this way. I'll never forget the collective sigh of relief from the audience when the piece ended - a sigh in a good way. Rite is riveting with the right conductor and orchestra. The Boulez/Cleveland recording is terrific in its vividness, terror, and how Boulez seamlessly changes the mood of each section.
I’ll bet the conductor was Leonard Slatkin. Because I saw him do it with NY Philharmonic in the 90s.
I streamed the Muti a few months back and found it so powerful and dynamic that I immediately bought it on vinyl! And I listened to a Stravinsky version and found it dull, slow and absolutely plodding! I thought was THIS what caused a riot??!! I know that Stravinsky only attended the premiere, he didn't conduct, but was that the way he wanted it in 1913? I can't imagine.
I haven't heard all the recordings of this piece, so I'm in position to have a favorite. There could be a recording among all that I haven't heard and has the potential to be my favorite of them all.
The Ancerl recording is absolutely SAVAGE !!!!
Thank you for leading with the Ancerl. It was my "imprint" Sacre on an ancient Parliament L.P. when I was in junior high school. I was more recently taken by the EMI Muti/Philadelphia; but I'm not here to suggest recordings, being a lifelong musical illiterate.
One interesting version is the one by Neeme Järvi and the Orchestre de l Suisse Romande. Among other things, Järvi does an accelerando on the 11/4 measure! Maybe it’s a bit of a sacrilege, but I enjoyed it and it seemed to work. ☺️
2:41 I love the way David's face lights up when he says "disaster"
Thanks for a very informative and enjoyable episode. I feel propitiated.
On July 28, 1969, I flew into Cleveland for my theory-placement testing at the Institute of Music and walked past Severance Hall twice. I had NO idea that, at that very moment, Boulez was recording his phenomenal "Rite" onstage with the Cleveland Orchestra. It's still my FAVORITE: gutsy, brilliant, and powerful as heck. TWO INTERESTING FACTS:
1.) The Sacrificial Dance as heard in the recording was their SOUND CHECK..the first thing they recorded that morning!!
Everyone agreed that they couldn't do it better, so why try?? 2.) The awesome Tam-Tam strokes during the "Spring Rounds" were played by percussionist Joe Adato, who would set up TWO great old Paiste tams facing him, stand between them and play BOTH simultaneously. I saw him do the same in the Mahler 4th (1st Mvt), Carmina Burana (10/72) and the Shostakovich 13th (4/71); during the latter two, I was sitting about 15 feet away from him in the chorus.
Other favorite SACRES: 1.) DORATI/Minnesota..the SECOND (1959) version. Awesome precision (very fast), and stunning clarity. 2.) ANCERL/Czech..I agree, it's unique. Amazing clarity and detail, and thrilling. 3.) Markevitch/Philharmonia..the Mono (1951). Something indescribably cool about this performance, despite its congested sound. PLUS they use a GONG instead of a Tam-Tam (as does Kletzki in his Manfred Sym) and what sounds like a TUNED bass drum (check "Entrance of the Sage"); it's totally PRIMITIVE!!
Monteux/Boston (mono) is wonderful, as are Bernstein/NY (his first recording as music director) and Markevtich #2 (1959), the session of which was apparently planned OVERNIGHT..thus much of the wildness in the playing, I suppose.
I MUST HEAR Muti and Chailly, which I managed to miss. Thanks for the tip! LR
Thanks for the inside info! It's one of the bonuses of doing this, for sure.
Thank you David! A very interesting survey. I agree completely with you for the "Stravinsky conducts Stravinsky": he's interesting but only on a historical point of view in my opinion. Boulez is overrated indeed...Robert Craft, for example, is much better. Muti's Rite with Philadelphians is really one of the best; Bernstein is probably the king of Rite of Spring: he deserves to stay at first place in the list. If I can suggest you a very thrilling performance, this is it: Yuri Simonov and the Royal Philharmonic Orchestra. Absolutely terrific: raw, savage and, at the same time, with a care of details, colors, lyricism and so on. I really love this performance and I have never heard a Rite of Spring like this. I like also the two versions of Karajan - one of these Stravinsky once criticized - but I don't think they're so bad like most commentators said. In particularly the second for DG (1977) is really good; perhaps on the slower side, but very interesting. One of the worst ever Rite is Vladimir Fedoseyev with Moscow Radio Symphony Orchestra (1984): too much slow, too much rhetoric, too much big in the worst sense...stay away from this! Stay safe and congratulations for your channel
I think the Robert Kraft one on Naxos is quite good. Right up there.
Two more I think are great: Salonen and LAPO on DG, and Paavo Järvi with Cincinnati SO on Telarc
I've always thought this particular work, maybe more than any other, showed off the superior virtuosity of the George Szell-built Cleveland Orchestra, prior to 1990.......... During that time, the Cleveland Orchestra always performed it extraordinarily well, regardless of who conducted it.
For me it still has to be Lenny and the New York Philharmonic, despite (or maybe because of?) a few rough edges. I'm glad you included Karel Ancerl, one of the great conductors of 20th century music. One that I thought might get a mention is the Ferenc Fricsay from 1954, truly hair-raising.
In Charles Rosen 's book, Piano Notes, he covers quite a range of musical and pianistic matters from the inside out.
One thing he noted was the eerie experience of heating Le Sacre ballet with the curtain down, rather than seeing the first set design. This could also enhance the experience of an opera overture. Some of the smaller Stravinsky works, Concerti in D, Apollo, etc. have cleaned the aural pallette a month of Wagner Götterdämmerung study. Anyone going to Dallas in October for the Ring?
I haven't heard it in decades, because I don't think it was ever released on CD, but I'm surprised to read your dismissal of Boulez's first recording on Nonesuch. I had originally gotten to know the work through Bernstein's NY Phil recording, and even so, I found Boulez's take to be eye-opening, or rather ear-opening.
So? It still sucks. Such bad playing (and sound). Yech. Sometimes a rotten performance still does the trick, if only because it sounds so different. It's the contrast that matters, not the quality of the results.
@@DavesClassicalGuide I can't speak authoritatively about it, because I haven't heard it in something like 50 years, but what I remember about it what was I, at least at the time, considered some surprisingly savage-sounding sonorities. Perhaps that's the "contrast" you speak of.
I like the later Boulez recording of Sacre, though. I'm not really sure how to describe it, but to me, it feels so hyper-analytical and rational and machine-like as if being played by a high-tech computer of sorts that it feels like witnessing a heathens engaging in a sacrifice but more like a World War 1 tank, mercilessly destroying everything that is getting in its way. It kinda reminds you that this piece was written shortly before World War 1 and is, in a way, set in Stravinsky's day and age and not in this mystical heathen pagan Russia folk days if that makes sense now...
Yes! MUTI, BERNSTEIN and OZAWA. Brilliant. Bernstein is my favorite and you explained why. The Muti shocked me! I was delightfully blown away! Ozawa: a powerhouse performance. The sacrificial dance is terrifying.
Unfortunately, I don't know the Chailly. What do you think about the Maazel/Cleveland on Telarc? Boring? Perverse? For some reason (I can't identify) I've always liked it. The orchestra plays the hell out of it.
My favorites are Pierre Monteux with Boston and Seji Ozawa with Chicago.
Hey David! Otmar Suitner with Staastkapelle Dresden recording in 1962 is a wonderful version
Like I said.
Your recommendations for this are all terrificly good. I might add as a supplement Benjamin Zander's performance with the Boston Philharmonic. An exciting orchestral performance is coupled with a bizarre, brain blowing piano roll performance of the piece that was originally supervised by Stravinsky.
Just listened to the piano roll version - truly bizarre, but really hard to put down once it gets going!!
As I am sitting here, I pulled out, by chance, Karajan's recording. One of the most lifeless recordings of this work that I have in my collection. I may use it as a coaster under something that has more kick to it.
I have many of the same recordings: Tilson-Thomas/Boston; Muti/Philly; Boulez/Cleveland; Chailly/Cleveland (excellent sound!); Ozawa/Chicago - I agree, those are all excellent picks. I think there are a few other really good American performances as well: Levi/Atlanta; Paavo Jarvi/Cincinnati; Dorati/Detroit (not great, but still fairly good); Slatkin/St. Louis (coupled with Ginastera's "Popol Vuh"). I was also pleasant surprised by Mehta/N.Y. Phil. It was better than I thought it would be. I also like Markevitch's faster one.
In my humble opinion (which along with $5.00 or so will get you breakfast at McDonald's), composers aren't always the best interpreters of their own music, nor do they always know the best tempos for bringing out the best in their music. But of course, that's all extremely, extremely subjective. I also learned a new word today - propitiate. And I have to second your Fantasia reference. I understand that Stravinsky's arrangement of the Star-Spangled Banner also caused some consternation. I heard it at Ravinia years ago, along with a performance of Mahler's 8th, and like it, although it's rather innocuous to modern ears. Thanks again for your enlightening reviews.
Cut my teenage teeth on the Mercury/Dorati (1st Recording in mono), released in the early ‘50s.
I would be curious to know what you think of the brand new Sacre on RCA with Paavo Jarvi conducting the NHK Symphony. I discovered it while looking for a recording of the newly-discovered Chant Funebre (Stravinsky's memorial piece to his teacher, Rimsky-Korsakov, found in a pile of dusty manuscripts in a Russian library in 2014 - I somehow missed that headline). It is visceral and fiery, although it is only available as an expensive import. Chailly also recorded the Chant and Le Sacre with the Lucerne Symphony on Decca.
Oh ALSO the Les Siècles/Roth recording on period instruments is amazing too.
I laughed out loud at his comment about the word "propitiate!"
Almost nobody mentions the superbly recorded Mehta and the Los Angeles Philharmonic Rite, one of the best I've heard. I'm also a huge fan of both Markevitch Rites.
My favourites are Dorati/Detroit and Ancerl/Czech.
My first taste of the Rite - my absolute favorite savage piece of music!! - was Jascha Horenstein, Symphony Orchestra of the Southwest German Radio, Baden-Baden from 1962. Never really hear anything about that recording - any thoughts?
Hurwitz isn't a fan of jascha
My dad gave me an album with Le Sacre and Revuelta's The Night of Mayas, by Simon Bolivar Youth Orchestra of Venezuela and Dudamel, on Deutsche Gramophon... Have you listened to it? I'm not quite a Dudamel fan, but this is a astonishing performance.
Best regards!
Kent Nagano on Virgin...the best recording and also superior interpretation.
And not to forget Sir Colin Davis and the Concertgebouw Orchestra on PHILIPS.
You must be kidding.
Great video! I also am quite fond of Stravinsky's own recording with the Columbia Symphony Orchestra (coupled with Petroushka). What are your thoughts on that one?
Mediocre.
There is also wonderful recording made by Salonen with LAPO with that gigantic bass drum in splendid acoustic of Walt Disney Hall !
The LAPO seems to be particularly good with pieces that requires a lot of drums and savagery. They've also done a great Symphonie Fantasique with Dudamel.
John Lenin indeed!
Salonen is one of my favorite contemporary conductors.
Salonen's recording with Philharmonia is more superior imo. The LA recording acoustics sounded too boomy
I'm no music critic but I know what I like and The Rite is the one piece I try to collect as many recordings of as I can, it's my favourite piece bar none. I was happy to see your final 3 are also in my top 4 (which I find hard to separate but are a way ahead of the rest). The one missing from your list is the Levi/Atlanta recording from 1991 - did you consider that?. The first two you mention (Ancerl/Czech and ???/Dresden) are not in my collection, so I'll have to try to find those.
Suitner/Dresden. You'll love it. I like Levi too.
I like Dorati’s Decca digital recording, but haven’t heard Ozawa or Chailly.
Hello. I'd like to thank you for all the videos and the recommendations on specific recordings. They 're really helpful for beginners like me. I have on cd the rite of spring by Yuri Simonov with the royal philharmonic orchestra. Any thoughts?
Antal Dorati and the "Minneapolis" orchestra on Mercury ...ancient but very exciting.
I am not a great admirer of Rattle but his Rite of Spring with CBSO is wonderful.....anybody agree?
Chailly also gets my vote in first place! Followed by Boulez (who has left us a superb Petrushka in New York too). I would have liked to see a Dorati (Detroit) on your list, but you still have my vote and your choices are relevant!
Where to start? My introduction to it was Abbado with the LSO on an LP record (good performance but one of DG's multi-miked monstrousities IMHO). Haitink's LPO version on Philips I think is admirable. Recently Litton's Bergen performance on BIS (fantastic in all respects, particularly in resisting the temptation just to play it as a showpiece); and last but not least, Currentzis on Sony which to me really seemed to reveal details I'd not heard before, is very well played, and again as a performance doesn't feel it's just marking time until the next loud climax. The only thing annoying about it is the migraine inducing front cover Sony has devised for the CD - don't stare too long at it is my advice!
my best version of the rite of spring....james levine , the met ( new york ) orchestra,dgg...ouf....!!!!
I don't have too much versions although I've heard the Sacre many times in concert. My favorite is Simonov with The Royal Philharmonic Orchestra in a cheap CD reissue. (Coupled with a great Firebird suite.) Maybe not the most imaginative version but the recorded sound is so smashing with huge percussion sound that every other recording seems powerless to me compared to this version. But I will give a try to your recommendations also.
The Ozawa is the one where Clevinger comes in one bar early. They turned down his channel for that part n post-production, but you can still hear him.
Yep. You caught him...
@@DavesClassicalGuide And of course, it was the horn players I went to college with, who turned me onto this.
Dave, I am surprised that in your assessment of Muti's recording of the Rite of Spring with the Philadelphia Orchestra, you didn't mention that Stokowski and the Philadelphians gave the American premiere of this work in 1922. By the way I have the Muti recording (along with Bernstein/NYPO, Chailly, Monteux/BSO, Monteux/Paris, Ozawa, and Tilson Thomas/BSO,), and it is a thrilling performance.
Well shame on me!
I have a real fondness for Raphael Frühbeck de Burgos conducting the LSO on Collins (re-released on Alto). It has absolutely knockout sonics and I find it a very passionate and unbuttoned rendition. I also have Gergiev’s with the Kirov, which was much lauded when it came out. Meh. I don’t see it. At least, not yet. I like its primitivism and its darkness, but to my ears it doesn’t have the searing flame or the clear recording of de Burgos. If you don’t know this one, it’s worth checking out.
BSO / Monteux. He conducted the premiere and captures the savagery very well.
I was surprised not to find even a slight mention of an excellent recording and I think, a classic, Antal Dorati and the Detroit Orchestra on Decca. All the mentioned ones are good but this one was missing. A shame.
Um, no, it's not a shame. It's just average.
Hey David!
Have you heard the Vasily Petrenko with the Royal Liverpool Philharmonic version?
I would like to now your opinion about it
Here is Victor Carr, Jr's review at Classicstoday.com, with which I agree entirely. www.classicstoday.com/review/vasily-petrenkos-beguiling-spring-rites/?search=1
Thank you!
Has Chailly made a bad recording? I’ve never been disappointed by him!
He did! First Brahms symphonies cycle with Concertgebouw!
His Leipzig Brahms cycle was mostly bland
David, what do you think of the Dorati with the Minneapolis Symphony, on Mercury Living Presence?
Better than his remake, but not a favorite. The orchestra just isn't topnotch and other versions are more exciting.
I’ve always had a preference for the early Boulez on Nonesuch...later on Ades CD.
Excellent choice. I love that one, too, and it never gets mentioned. It's clean and scaled down but very powerful.
Outer Galaxy Lounge _by kevin r. I find it very powerful , yet introspective. Very well recorded. On Nonesuch LP, it was a real bargain.
Sounds like Monteux is out of the money! The performances coming out now, for me at any rate, are just too well played. My God, today even student orchestras can get through the Rite. The music should hold terror for the orchestra, and maybe it’s okay to be rough around the edges especially in the bassoon solo.
My choice too!
This is one piece, that at the age of 49, I've been putting off. I MAY now give it a go, maybe. I can always go and hide in Haydn if shizz gets too real.
Any thoughts on Vasily Petrenko with the RLPO?
www.classicstoday.com/review/vasily-petrenkos-beguiling-spring-rites/?search=1
@@DavesClassicalGuide Thanks!
Before I listen: 1. Muti/Philadelphia Orchestra, 2. Monteux/Paris Conservatory Orchestra, 3. Bernstein/NY Philharmonic.
David, have you never seen a production of the ballet with the original staging? It didn't feature gauzy ballerinas at all, but dancers in heavy, blocky costumes performing anything but classical ballet moves. Part of the outrage at the performance was precisely that: they expected the usual revealing and sexy tutus but instead got what amounts to stylized overcoats.
Yes, I know all about it.
Cleveland Boulez is sensational but my favourite is Concertgebouw/Colin Davis
I really, REALLY like Colin Davis' "Firebird" and "Petrushka" from Amsterdam
I have several recordings of the Rite and my longtime favorite is Chailly’s, too. That being said, I would recommend supplementing it with David Zinman’s Zürich Tonhalle recording on RCA (now Sony if still available) that came out a few years ago. It’s a 2-CD set containing a reconstruction of the 29 May 1913 version and Stravinsky’s final one. What makes it worthwhile are not the performances, which unfortunately are rather underwhelming, but Zinman’s interesting discussion of the differences between the versions with examples.
I like Dutoit at Montreal on Decca. And Bruno Maderna on Stradivarius Records
EDIT: The Classics Today review I mentioned in this comment was actually written by Victor Carr Jr., not you. Sorry!
You talked about the Michael Tilson Thomas & Boston Symphony Orchestra recording in this video, so I'm curious why you didn't mention the same conductor's recording with San Francisco Symphony, which you reviewed about 19 years ago (also mentioning Yoel Levi & Atlanta Symphony Orchestra) and gave it 10s on both ratings.
Maybe your taste has changed over the years?
No, it hasn't. Why do I need to talk about everything? It's enough.
@@DavesClassicalGuide Fair enough. I just realised that you upload quality videos daily, which is a lot of work indeed. Thanks anyway for the recommendations!
The recording Of The Rite Of Spring I have in my collection is by Zubin Mehta And The Los Angeles Philharmonic. It's contained on a six CD compilation for the 70th birthday of Maestro Mehta on Decca 475 7470. Any opinions on this recording? I know nothing about music, all I know it sounds good.
Take a look at my Zubin Mehta box video.
@@DavesClassicalGuide Will Do, Dave !!!! You have so many GOOD videos out there, or is it here, I haven't came across it yet.
@@FREDGARRISON You can search Mehta via thesearch feature on my channel home page, and there are also reviews of his Rite of Spring at ClassicsToday.com (but not the LA one--but it doesn't matter. He always did it well).
Esa Pekka Salonen with philarmonia.
Yes, Salonen is also excellent--and very quick!
@@DavesClassicalGuide i heard salonen conduct an unforgettable Sacre in Paris with the orchestra of the Paris Opéra at the Palais Garnier in the Pina Bausch choreography a couple of years ago, it was an absolute knock out and one of the most exciting Sacres i've ever heard (maybe the hall played part of the experience). With some works, like the Sacre or the Mahler 8, i've come to the conclusion that it should be experienced live in a concert hall, home listening on your stereo just doesn't seem to work for me anymore i'm afraid, crazy thought isn't it?
@@hiphurrah1 Not at all.
What about Solti and the CSO! I've never heard french horns sound like that before! I thought it was great! Oh well.
Mr. Hurwitz, I beg to differ. The best Rite of Spring is the Columbia Symphony Orchestra version conducted by Stravinsky himself. How can one improve upon a composer's own interpretation, since he would know better than anyone how it should sound?
One is just as free to dislike the composer's interpretation as choosing to not like the work in the first place. And, of course, the composer being the conductor does not automatically make the engineering of the recording good.
@@robertromero8692 The engineering can have a lot to do with the enjoyment of the work, but a bad recording is not a deal-breaker for me. For instance, no one (IMHO) has ever topped Prokofiev's own interpretation of his Piano Concerto #3, even though the recording itself is extremely primitive.
The only time I have ever not liked a composer's own interpretation is when he/she had to speed up the work in order to fit it into a radio time slot. This was the case with Gershwin performing Rhapsody in Blue, Paul Whiteman conducting. They had to shorten it to ten minutes (!!!) and it is painful to listen to -- no feeling whatsoever.
I agree with Mr. Felstein. The most authentic Rite is Stravinsky himself. You just have to hear the rhythm and the articulation that he presents in that recording and you will see that practically all conductors with exception of Boulez and Monteux exaggerate and I mean exaggerate. Solti is a disaster and Muti brutal. No the Stravinsky is wonderful so is the 1962 live Robert Craft performance.
Stravinsky made the Columbia recording late in his life, when his abilities as a conductor were not so great. I heard a talk in Detroit by a percussionist with the Detroit Symphony, who had been a freelancer in NY City in the late 1950's when the Columbia version was made--he played on that session. According to him, Stravinsky was simply not up to the challenge of keeping the orchestra together, so they resorted to signaling each other and keeping their own time regardless of what Stravinsky did. They had already played a live performance of the piece in Carnegie Hall, under the direction of Robert Craft, which preparation no doubt helped them in the recording session.
A small favour to request, if possible. Background; the household CD player blew up long ago (my wife testifies that she saw it generating large amounts of smoke before she hastened to dispose of it...), so for eons now i of limited budget have been content to listen to youtube videos on a smartphone--- with variable sonics as a result. Thus, it would be very instructive if you were to compare two available YT "Rites", namely, the Yoel Levi / Atlanta SO and the L. Bernstein NYPO. The consensus from most of the commentators is that the Levi is markedly superior, with many comments directing scorn at both Bernstein's tempi (lots of whining and lamentation about how slow it is) and his supposed rhythmic inaccuracies--- inaccuracies, it must be said, i personally do not detect while following the niftily-attached score provided (self-aggrandizement alert: while by no means claiming to be a great scholar of the work, i have encountered it many times, both as an audience member [E.g., MET orch / J. Levine / Roy Thomson Hall Toronto] and from the inside as a performer [three different occasions on a viola part--- principal, associate, and tutti--- yes, embarrassingly, in that descending order^^]). If you can sort through that long digression, a side-by-side contrast of merits / demerits of Leonard vs. Yoel might be informative. Admittedly, it is entirely possible you would reject the idea as excessive detail or nit-picking, but an insight into your thought process as you compare two different performances of a given work, and whether you give any credence to what other critics say, may well prove to be enlightening.
Thank you for your consideration of this request, in any event...
(^-_-^)
Thank you for your request. To be honest, I have never heard anyone characterize the Bernstein Rite (I assume you're talking about the NYPO Sony version) as you have, nor would I. I don't think the comparison would be instructive for that and many other reasons. Certainly the Levi, being more recent and a Telarc recordings besides, has better sonics, but as a performance, good though it may be? I think you yourself have pointed out the limited appeal of such an effort, even if I did have copyright permission to use the recordings in question (which would be very difficult if not impossible to obtain).
Stravinsky and Bernstein - there's some interesting stories there from some of the players. Bernstein performed his interpretation in '57, with Stravinsky in the audience. The players remember (especially those who would later be part of the Columbia Stravinsky recordings supervised by Craft in the 60s, part of that great 24-cd set) that Stravinsky came back and complained about some parts of it, *especially* the tempos. That played that way, it was undance-able. There was no way the dancers could see the conducting and accomodate.
So this '58 recording became better because Bernstein incorporated that criticism (which COULD have been received very poorly) and achieved what we all now hear - all of the energy that the work demands, but now tempered to staying within the tempos that a ballet also demands. Stravinsky, perhaps by accident, managed to ensure that this recording was always going to be better than what he and Craft produced a few years later.
now, in the criticism (and Bernstein found the PERFECT middle-ground) is a matter of where does interpretation lie. Bernstein's first take on it was absolutely a *Romantic* interpretation. Dynamics and tempos all over the place, everything on the table to get the note on the page to extract every ounce of what it could be. (and with that many notes...)
Stravinsky at this point in his own career was rather subdued. Between the economic efficiencies of the depression and then the lack of finances during the war and after, he'd become very economical with how he approached his own work. He'd come to re-interpret his memories of the Rite with the constraints of the neo-classical he'd made the bulk of his career until Agon.
What's interesting is that a few years later, Bernstein himself would come to face this dichotomy between the Romantic orchestra and the needs of the classical and the neo-classical, and presented that in his young persons concerts in a brilliant way, showing Haydn as played by a 105 piece Romantic orchestra with all the dynamics and tempo changes, vs Haydn played by a 65 piece classical orchestra with limited dynamics and rather straightforward tempos and how it was better in the latter.
The wonder of Bernstein in the 60s is how much was still a learner as much as a teacher, all at the same time, and we have the proof of it in those young persons concerts now digitally preserved.
When it comes to Haydn's "London" symphonies, apparently Salomon (the impresario who brought him to London) provided Haydn with an unusually large orchestra for the time, roughly equivalent to modern symphony orchestras. Therefore, one can argue that the Haydn London symphonies should be played with the full, modern string complement, as that is equivalent to what Haydn himself wrote for in those particular works.
Dear David, thank you for another interesting and inspiring video! I’m very curious about your thoughts about The Rite that was recorded in Poland in 1967 by the Polish National Radio Symphony Orchestra under Bohdan Wodiczko, one of the most important (and now sadly neglected) Polish conductors of the 20th century. It may be completely forgotten, but for me it has punch, drama and blood that are so needed in this piece!
ruclips.net/video/8rGVpnpij-Y/видео.html
I wish I had heard it, but I'm sorry to say that I don't know it.
@@DavesClassicalGuide ruclips.net/video/8rGVpnpij-Y/видео.html
Link is right here 😉
David Hurwitz it is really great recording !you should listen to it /it will be surprise for you Just like Kord Alpine Symphony /
Holy crap. Stravinsky said that music had no emotion.?? Wow, so he was completely bored by all of it huh 🤔
For an explosive performance I turn to the Gergiev/Kirov Orchestra.
One of the worse ever. Inexcusably bad.
@@DavesClassicalGuide Say more. I bought his version because it's so highly praised. Even Jim Svada (sp) loved it and he doesn't like Gergiev. I find it incredibly exciting.
@@trevorpsy That's fine, but factually speaking, it's a dreadfully recorded, shipwreck of a performance. There are many other very exciting versions that are vastly better played, conducted and recorded. I'm just letting you know. You must do what pleases you, naturally, and I respect that.
@@DavesClassicalGuide I don't know why but we often disagree over recording quality. For instance, I find the Eugen Jochum Bruckner symphonies unlistenable, because of sonic problems. (The same goes for his Brahms. It's wonderful, but it sounds like it was recorded underwater.) Perhaps the fussiness of electrostatic speakers is the problem.
Certainly, I haven't heard nearly as many recordings of the Rite as you. I have heard the Salonen, Stravinsky (which I happen to like), Tilson Thomas, Rattle, Boulez, and von Karajan versions. (The first Karajan is interesting, but terrible. The second is dead on arrival.) Of these, the Gergiev pulls me in and raises my blood pressure the most. The words "building intensity" come to mind, and my electrostats don't mind the sonics. I also love his Firebird, which to my ears, is simply gorgeous.
So, oh well. Thanks for taking the time to get back to me.
On another other topic. Which performance of the Sibelius 4th do you prefer? I think the mid-60's Karajan rendition life-changing. Can we agree on this to some extent?
@@trevorpsy You can watch the video on Sibelius 4th. It's in the Sibelius playlist.
This sort of “modern Classical” music once really offended my ears, not to mention my need for cognitive satisfaction, if you will. Not to mention wanting to hear melodious music. Most of what’s come out in this genre is just garbage, in my opinion. But I just listened to it again on the radio, and, for the most part, it had me entranced. I recall reacting to it eons ago and found it interesting. I think it could’ve been about 3-5 minutes shorter. But Stravinsky knew how to construct music, like him or not. I pretty much don’t, with exceptions. It’s barbaric, yet cerebral. I wish he’d recapitulated on the wonderful opening with the winds, rather than the unsatisfactory end that goes nowhere.