I had not heard Ormandy’s cut version until working my way thru the Sony early stereo box set. I had played the work in college (with cuts) and thought the cuts undermined the structural integrity of the piece. Previn’s uncut version convinced me there was no going back. Ormandy’s uncut version was a snooze fest for me; I felt he was just too old to get it (I was all of 23). Hearing Ormandy’s early account blew my mind. I was mesmerized by every note in his careful shaping of the opening. And he maintained my attention all the way thru to such an effect that I listened to it 3 times in a row to be sure I was hearing what I was hearing. And, for the first time, I wasn’t even aware of the cuts! You, David, have turned me into a nut case Ormandy fan and my bank account will never forgive you.
Hi Dave, I hope the new reference recordings series continues, it will be fun to do comparisons using those as the reference. I'd never heard the Verdi from your previous video, but sure enough when I streamed it and comparing it against others it made complete sense. And was entertaining to do too!
Classics Today tee shirts are great to wear to concerts. We had a great program here with the Tucson Symphony, Uncut Rach Sym 2 as the 2nd half, and Florence Price Violin Cto 1 on the first half. Opening with Marquez Conga. The symphony did not seem overlong at all. Another regional orchestra with real quality. And innovation. The Temirkanov was my first uncut version. I liked it so much I also got the cassette (back in the day) to play in the car.
Dave, I really enjoy your Reference Recording series. This Rachmaninoff Sym. 2 with Ormandy is a very fine choice. I still remember the thrill I felt in purchasing the Columbia LP of his cut version, and like yourself I love his later uncut recording. May I just share a third available recording, a DVD of Ormandy doing the cut version. It's a real gem ! It's so wonderful to watch the Maestro's sensitive, unobtrusive conducting, and hears the melodies soar forth upon us with their beautiful waves of sound. Thank you, Dave!
I have a number of recordings of this symphony, my own favourite being the Ormandy/Philadelphia version for its full-blooded approach and its presence in a Rach. box set from some years ago. The Previn/LSO (EMI) version introduced me to this wonderful work, and the LSO also made another recording with Gennadi Rohdevensky (spelling?) on a budget label - excellent value. I have the Detroit recording, but for me it lacks the sonic sweep and excitement of the much older Ormandy disc.
Just as a footnote to your views about the English musical establishment, my copy of The Oxford Companion to Music (10th Edition 1984 printing) makes the following comment in its brief entry on Rachmaninoff '. . as a composer he made a mark with a number of works, skilfully written, but for the most part inspired by no very strong national or personal feeling, being cosmopolitan and general in their expression.' If there is such a thing as objectivity in criticism, this must surely count as one of the most misconceived judgements ever.
This presentation was of particular interest to me, since I have been engaged over the past year or so in a renewed exploration and comparison of Rachmaninoff cycles (symphonies and concertos). Ten years ago, I would have said Ormandy/Sony is the likely reference recording. It's wonderful, as is the Previn (more about that later). But recently I've renewed my acquaintance with Slatkin/Vox and his Symphony 2, and indeed his whole cycle, seems worthy of reference recording status. At least for me, personally. It has all the sweep and passion of Ormandy and Previn, but with a more rhythmically propulsive edge that gives the work a sharper profile overall. One final word for potential readers of this comment. Warner has come up with an unbeatable Rachmaninoff package by coupling the entire Previn cycle of orchestral music (including the Bells) with the Lugansky/Oramo concerto cycle. A real winner that, all in a space-saving box.
I grew up with the Previn/LSO recording of the full version (he also recorded the 'cut' version with the LSO earlier), but think his later version with the RPO on Teldec is a much better performance and recording; Jeff Bryant's horn section blaze through the texture at the end of the Finale. I seem to recall an LPO recording of the version with cuts conducted by Adrian Boult on Decca. James Loughran's recording of the full version with the Hallé Orchestra on Classics for Pleasure (EMI) was another one I bought, many years ago. I've got the Ormandy version with the cuts also but would never want to be without Slatkin's earlier St. Louis recording. However, the full Previn/LSO version will always have a special place in my collection.
As I'm watching this video I can see RUclips 's recommendations on the right of the screen. One is for a channel called Classical Music/ Reference Recording and their choice for reference recording is Kurt Sanderling and the Leningrad Philharmonic. Well, maybe that's all they have.
I admire Ormandy in the Columbia recording (I haven't heard his uncut) but I can no longer get too excited about cut versions. However, in the recent stereo box, I thought his Prokofiev 6th was a knockout.
Great video, as usual. I think that the popularity of this series is that you are validating our choices. Ha ha. Could the cuts have been to accomodate the LP recording format? Just asking.
Hello! Watched your Mendelssohn Scottish video recently, and I'm amazed by your depth of knowledge! I'm wondering if you've ever heard the Toscanini version of the Scottish before (the live recording that's available on RUclips)? He ignores the dynamics at the start of the coda and jumps in with a straight forte, but admittedly the whole performance is so amazingly thrilling! It'd be nice to know your thoughts on that performance :)
Dave...have you ever noticed (Im sure you have) that Rachmaninoffs melodies at times dont seem to end? Think of the famous clarinet solo in the Slow movement of the 2nd....and the vocalise....and on and on.....when R. comes to a place where there should be an obvious pause, he extends and extends and extends (not complaining you understand)....
That's what makes them beautiful. The clarinet in the 2nd for example, it's expressing passion and yearning. And that doesn't fill a neat 8 bar box. If it did it would seem trite. Like a person feeling yearning, or desire, or despair it doesn't have a set time limit
On seeing Previn’s Rachmaninoff as your reference recording my shoulders dropped two feet in disappointment. That is, until your analyses of the British critical establishment’s and the EMI promotional apparatus’s hyperventilating investment in Previn’s recording. When buying it way back then at the recommendation of the Penguin Record Guide (a folly of youth - it might have even had a rosette), I found the performance slack and under energized with even a bit of sloppy ensemble. Memories of a record from 50 years ago can certainly be faulty, but I’ve never listened to it since. In total agreement with you on this one!
I sometimes wonder how many people who love classical music and symphonic music in particular have any notion of where the exposition ends or the development starts or when we've started the recapitulation.....
There has been a bone of contention about the very ending note of the first movement. Rachmaninov originally scored it for just the lower strings but many conductors replace it with a timpani stroke on the lower note of E natural on the 32 inch drum Pentrenko with the Oslo Philharmonic Orchestra is an example
@@DavesClassicalGuide I agree, it’s wrong, but I like it. I mean what Stokowski reorchestrated in the 1964 LSO Scheherazade is also wrong, but what a performance!
While 8 times out of 10, I agree with the reference recording, on this occasion, I definitely chose elsewhere. Not saying Previn's recording was bad, it's great, but after listening to all the recommended recordings from various critics and fans...I still stay true to Ashkenazy with RCO ( I know Dave you are not a fan of this one), but for me, it is the Symphony that got me into classical music in the first place 25 years ago, still gives me goosebumps and warmth like no other.
I've been buying what I hope are reference recordings for many years, so I was interested to know what Dave considers them to be. So far I've correctly guessed 5.5 out of the nine he's done so far. (I wasn't expecting both Barbirolli and Szell for the Sibelius 2) Anyway i'm curious to know what's coming next. Thanks Dave.
All the reference recordings you have talked about so far are analogue recordings and are generally heard to best effect on vinyl if clean pressings are available. I am not anti digital but it is interesting to speculate to what extent the sound recording method contributed to the greatness of these recordings. The reference recordings series is excellent.
You are of course entitled to your view. But the fact is that these well respected recordings were made using analogue equipment and the producers and engineers knew that they would be released on vinyl. Thus there is at least a logical view that it is best to listen to then on vinyl. This is not a zero sum game - I am perfectly happy for anybody to use any sound carrier they prefer. But let’s get the history right.
@@davidgow9457 I still have all of my vinyl and I love listening to it, but I have to agree with Dave. A properly mastered recording reissued on CD sounds amazing and is so, so convenient. Just try playing a record in your car.
I did not know about the Ormandy story. My bad. I am always disappointed by the uncut version. The structural connections don’t feel right to me in the complete version.
I believe that prior to the EMI release Previn had a Rachmaninoff 2nd with the LSO released on RCA. I'm thinking that one was abridged too. So the elevation of the later EMI release was Previn's "apology" for doing the cut version, and the earlier RCA was on an American label and maybe wasn't largely available or just not considered British enough by the UK critics. Haven't heard the old RCA so don't know its merits but I suspect the full-length release being on EMI gave the UK critics "permission" to rave.
Right. Previn recorded the Rachmaninoff 2nd three times: 1) cut with the LSO for RCA, 2) uncut with the LSO for EMI, and 3) uncut with the Royal Philharmonic for Telarc. I haven't done an ABC comparison of the three. but I have heard them all at different times I seem to recall that the RCA may have been slightly more energetic than the EMI (possibly that was just a subjective impression caused by the shorter duration), and the Telarc was a disappointment compared to the earlier efforts (perhaps Previn no longer had the "fire in his belly" as Dave has sometimes said in other contexts.)
I’m amazed that Previn’s far too slow performance is considered a reference. Ormandy’s would be the best but surely these appalling cuts should rule it out. (sanctioned or not)
![Chicken P - People's Favorite (Remix) [Feat. 42 Dugg] (Official Video)](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/a6Bn8FEtxmY/mqdefault.jpg)
![Eminem - Temporary (feat. Skylar Grey) [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/ZaK9Wi5ho0o/mqdefault.jpg)
I had not heard Ormandy’s cut version until working my way thru the Sony early stereo box set. I had played the work in college (with cuts) and thought the cuts undermined the structural integrity of the piece. Previn’s uncut version convinced me there was no going back. Ormandy’s uncut version was a snooze fest for me; I felt he was just too old to get it (I was all of 23). Hearing Ormandy’s early account blew my mind. I was mesmerized by every note in his careful shaping of the opening. And he maintained my attention all the way thru to such an effect that I listened to it 3 times in a row to be sure I was hearing what I was hearing. And, for the first time, I wasn’t even aware of the cuts! You, David, have turned me into a nut case Ormandy fan and my bank account will never forgive you.
Sorry!
Hi Dave, I hope the new reference recordings series continues, it will be fun to do comparisons using those as the reference. I'd never heard the Verdi from your previous video, but sure enough when I streamed it and comparing it against others it made complete sense. And was entertaining to do too!
King 😊😊😊😊😅
I really love/enjoy this series, and especially the fact that you give a history & explanation on way/how.
Keep'em coming 👍
So glad you included the Previn recording. It’s hard for me to imagine a better one.
There are quite a few.
I saw Ormandy conduct no.2 and very happy I did! Glorious!
Classics Today tee shirts are great to wear to concerts.
We had a great program here with the Tucson Symphony, Uncut Rach Sym 2 as the 2nd half, and Florence Price Violin Cto 1 on the first half. Opening with Marquez Conga. The symphony did not seem overlong at all.
Another regional orchestra with real quality. And innovation.
The Temirkanov was my first uncut version. I liked it so much I also got the cassette (back in the day) to play in the car.
Dave, I really enjoy your Reference Recording series. This Rachmaninoff Sym. 2 with Ormandy is a very fine choice. I still remember the thrill I felt in purchasing the Columbia LP
of his cut version, and like yourself I love his later uncut recording. May I just share a third available recording, a DVD of Ormandy doing the cut version. It's a real gem ! It's so wonderful to watch the Maestro's sensitive, unobtrusive conducting, and hears the melodies soar forth upon us with their beautiful waves of sound. Thank you, Dave!
I have a number of recordings of this symphony, my own favourite being the Ormandy/Philadelphia version
for its full-blooded approach and its presence in a Rach. box set from some years ago. The Previn/LSO (EMI)
version introduced me to this wonderful work, and the LSO also made another recording with Gennadi
Rohdevensky (spelling?) on a budget label - excellent value. I have the Detroit recording, but for me it lacks
the sonic sweep and excitement of the much older Ormandy disc.
Just as a footnote to your views about the English musical establishment, my copy of The Oxford Companion to Music (10th Edition 1984 printing) makes the following comment in its brief entry on Rachmaninoff '. . as a composer he made a mark with a number of works, skilfully written, but for the most part inspired by no very strong national or personal feeling, being cosmopolitan and general in their expression.' If there is such a thing as objectivity in criticism, this must surely count as one of the most misconceived judgements ever.
You said it!
I have several versions including that one by Ormandy on LP and CD
This presentation was of particular interest to me, since I have been engaged over the past year or so in a renewed exploration and comparison of Rachmaninoff cycles (symphonies and concertos). Ten years ago, I would have said Ormandy/Sony is the likely reference recording. It's wonderful, as is the Previn (more about that later). But recently I've renewed my acquaintance with Slatkin/Vox and his Symphony 2, and indeed his whole cycle, seems worthy of reference recording status. At least for me, personally. It has all the sweep and passion of Ormandy and Previn, but with a more rhythmically propulsive edge that gives the work a sharper profile overall. One final word for potential readers of this comment. Warner has come up with an unbeatable Rachmaninoff package by coupling the entire Previn cycle of orchestral music (including the Bells) with the Lugansky/Oramo concerto cycle. A real winner that, all in a space-saving box.
Yes! Previn was the one I said as soon as I saw title of this video!
I haven't heard this one, but I love the later one (1985) Previn did with the Royal Philharmonic on Telarc.
That one isn't as good. You should try the earlier version.
@@DavesClassicalGuide Will do! If even Telarc sonics can't tip the balance, the earlier one must be awesome! ❤️🎧
I grew up with the Previn/LSO recording of the full version (he also recorded the 'cut' version with the LSO earlier), but think his later version with the RPO on Teldec is a much better performance and recording; Jeff Bryant's horn section blaze through the texture at the end of the Finale. I seem to recall an LPO recording of the version with cuts conducted by Adrian Boult on Decca. James Loughran's recording of the full version with the Hallé Orchestra on Classics for Pleasure (EMI) was another one I bought, many years ago. I've got the Ormandy version with the cuts also but would never want to be without Slatkin's earlier St. Louis recording. However, the full Previn/LSO version will always have a special place in my collection.
It's Telarc, not Teldec, and it's a much inferior performance to the LSO complete version.
As I'm watching this video I can see RUclips 's recommendations on the right of the screen. One is for a channel called Classical Music/ Reference Recording and their choice for reference recording is Kurt Sanderling and the Leningrad Philharmonic. Well, maybe that's all they have.
They also have another Rach 2 video of the Ormandy/Philly recording.
Sanderling is cut too, and it's a bore.
I Love the Philly Rachmaninoff 2 (and other symphonic works).....the perfect Orchestra for Rachmaninoff....
Great music making with Ormandy and to a little lesser extent Dutoit. But YNS? Forget it. The recent DG set doesn't come close.
I admire Ormandy in the Columbia recording (I haven't heard his uncut) but I can no longer get too excited about cut versions. However, in the recent stereo box, I thought his Prokofiev 6th was a knockout.
Neither does Dutoit. That cycle is just awful.
Great video, as usual. I think that the popularity of this series is that you are validating our choices. Ha ha.
Could the cuts have been to accomodate the LP recording format? Just asking.
Both great recordings, with perhaps the NEW reference recording being Slatkin with Detroit, a brilliant part of a brilliant cycle.
Hello! Watched your Mendelssohn Scottish video recently, and I'm amazed by your depth of knowledge! I'm wondering if you've ever heard the Toscanini version of the Scottish before (the live recording that's available on RUclips)? He ignores the dynamics at the start of the coda and jumps in with a straight forte, but admittedly the whole performance is so amazingly thrilling! It'd be nice to know your thoughts on that performance :)
Dave...have you ever noticed (Im sure you have) that Rachmaninoffs melodies at times dont seem to end? Think of the famous clarinet solo in the Slow movement of the 2nd....and the vocalise....and on and on.....when R. comes to a place where there should be an obvious pause, he extends and extends and extends (not complaining you understand)....
That's what makes them beautiful. The clarinet in the 2nd for example, it's expressing passion and yearning. And that doesn't fill a neat 8 bar box. If it did it would seem trite. Like a person feeling yearning, or desire, or despair it doesn't have a set time limit
On seeing Previn’s Rachmaninoff as your reference recording my shoulders dropped two feet in disappointment. That is, until your analyses of the British critical establishment’s and the EMI promotional apparatus’s hyperventilating investment in Previn’s recording. When buying it way back then at the recommendation of the Penguin Record Guide (a folly of youth - it might have even had a rosette), I found the performance slack and under energized with even a bit of sloppy ensemble. Memories of a record from 50 years ago can certainly be faulty, but I’ve never listened to it since. In total agreement with you on this one!
I sometimes wonder how many people who love classical music and symphonic music in particular have any notion of where the exposition ends or the development starts or when we've started the recapitulation.....
Probably very few, which was exactly the situation back in the day as well.
I prefer the intact version with the 1st movement exposition repeat. The repeat is well set up to seem fresh on it's restatement.
Will you please do one for the Rach 3 piano concerto?
I second that motion.
There has been a bone of contention about the very ending note of the first movement. Rachmaninov originally scored it for just the lower strings but many conductors replace it with a timpani stroke on the lower note of E natural on the 32 inch drum
Pentrenko with the Oslo Philharmonic Orchestra is an example
Dave has mentioned this several times. The timpani hit is not in the score. Conductors add it. Rach never added it to the manuscript.
And it's wrong to do it, even though so many do.
@@DavesClassicalGuide I agree, it’s wrong, but I like it. I mean what Stokowski reorchestrated in the 1964 LSO Scheherazade is also wrong, but what a performance!
While 8 times out of 10, I agree with the reference recording, on this occasion, I definitely chose elsewhere. Not saying Previn's recording was bad, it's great, but after listening to all the recommended recordings from various critics and fans...I still stay true to Ashkenazy with RCO ( I know Dave you are not a fan of this one), but for me, it is the Symphony that got me into classical music in the first place 25 years ago, still gives me goosebumps and warmth like no other.
That has nothing to do with what a reference recording is. This is merely your personal choice, and of course you're welcome to it.
Your comment on critics' rivalries at 6:00 made me spit out my tea in laughter, David. Thank you.
I've been buying what I hope are reference recordings for many years, so I was interested to know what Dave considers them to be. So far I've correctly guessed 5.5 out of the nine he's done so far. (I wasn't expecting both Barbirolli and Szell for the Sibelius 2) Anyway i'm curious to know what's coming next. Thanks Dave.
All the reference recordings you have talked about so far are analogue recordings and are generally heard to best effect on vinyl if clean pressings are available. I am not anti digital but it is interesting to speculate to what extent the sound recording method contributed to the greatness of these recordings. The reference recordings series is excellent.
I disagree with that. Getting rid of vinyl was a wonderful thing.
You are of course entitled to your view. But the fact is that these well respected recordings were made using analogue equipment and the producers and engineers knew that they would be released on vinyl. Thus there is at least a logical view that it is best to listen to then on vinyl. This is not a zero sum game - I am perfectly happy for anybody to use any sound carrier they prefer. But let’s get the history right.
@@davidgow9457 I still have all of my vinyl and I love listening to it, but I have to agree with Dave. A properly mastered recording reissued on CD sounds amazing and is so, so convenient. Just try playing a record in your car.
I did not know about the Ormandy story. My bad. I am always disappointed by the uncut version. The structural connections don’t feel right to me in the complete version.
I believe that prior to the EMI release Previn had a Rachmaninoff 2nd with the LSO released on RCA. I'm thinking that one was abridged too. So the elevation of the later EMI release was Previn's "apology" for doing the cut version, and the earlier RCA was on an American label and maybe wasn't largely available or just not considered British enough by the UK critics. Haven't heard the old RCA so don't know its merits but I suspect the full-length release being on EMI gave the UK critics "permission" to rave.
Right. Previn recorded the Rachmaninoff 2nd three times: 1) cut with the LSO for RCA, 2) uncut with the LSO for EMI, and 3) uncut with the Royal Philharmonic for Telarc. I haven't done an ABC comparison of the three. but I have heard them all at different times I seem to recall that the RCA may have been slightly more energetic than the EMI (possibly that was just a subjective impression caused by the shorter duration), and the Telarc was a disappointment compared to the earlier efforts (perhaps Previn no longer had the "fire in his belly" as Dave has sometimes said in other contexts.)
Yes, that's very true.
What would be considered a reference recording of the well tempered clavier?
Glenn Gould, Andras Schiff, Sviatoslav Richter
Guess you don't like the Pletnev on DG 1994?
I’m amazed that Previn’s far too slow performance is considered a reference. Ormandy’s would be the best but surely these appalling cuts should rule it out. (sanctioned or not)