Multiple versions - how many is enough?

Anyone care to share their motivations, obsessions, addictions on the subject of purchasing different versions of the same composition over and over again...

Enough??? What does that word mean???

A subject very close to my own heart Mancheeros and Henry. I have thought about this a lot and I'm finding that I am having what I hope is temporary paralysis when it comes to buying things lately. Once I'd just pop them in the cart and proceed to checkout. Now, I'm constantly indecisive about what should take priority in my wish lists.

On point, I feel increasingly guilty when I buy 'repeats'. I am up to six Toscas, seven Four Last Songs, four Aidas and four Der Rosenkavaliers, not to mention four Ring cycles now. I do think: is enough enough? A recent favourite opera discovery (or rediscovery) as been Boito's Mefistofele. Now I want to buy another version of it, but think that it might be excessive considering that my Decca version is very fine and satisfying.

A quandary that constantly comes up is whether I should repeat buy over buying something that is completely new to me. That also throws a spanner in the works. At the end of the day though, I always try to ask myself: 'will I get my money's worth and play the item to its fullest potential, even if I might not be totally satisfied with the performance?' If the answer is yes, then I know I should buy them. Eventually I will overcome my guilt :-)

When you listen to a CD, you're hearing a performer's response to the music. It's the response which is the principal work of art.

It is far cheaper than going to a concert (and, if you live in a rural area, far easier) to buy a new version by a noted performer of a work you love.

Some works I only have one version of and find that is enough, others I have multiple versions of. Some works or composers I find endlessly fascinating and keep on buying new recordings.

Wagner, for example, falls into both categories. I have multiple Ring Cycles and discs of excerpts but only one complete recording of each of the rest of his operas though I do have numerous discs of orchestral excerpts and some recitals of favourite arias, choruses etc.

I've got 8 versions of each Mahler symphony and although I prefer certain symphonies to the others (and certain recordings) I like symmetry in this instance. I was going to supplement this lot with Levine's recordings but have decided enough is enough - at least for the foreseeable future. I will want a supplementary Shostakovich symphony cycle at some point - my solitary Haintink set has served me well but I'm hankering for an earthier Russian/Soviet experience; even drawbacks such as rasping coughs and (within reason) sonic limitations will not be an issue here.

Well, you won't beat the Kondrashin set, SCH - Shostakovich - Complete Symphonies - but it is no longer available at the old bargain price.

I have @ 20 performances of Beethoven's Emperor Piano Concerto
- 6 - alone with Michelangeli and will continue to look for other noble versions.

I have OCD - Obsessive Collecting Disorder.

To modify an Ives title " The Unanswerable Question".

Like Geoffrey there are a number of works that one version will probably be enough for me for example the Stenhammer Symphonies and Piano concertos. Others works appear to have a multitude of recordings that add something worthwhile. Favourite composers and particular works attract me to buy multiple recordings and on the whole I will play them all from time to time but as the collection gets larger things disappear into corners and perhaps will never be played again.
Sadly, I have just gone and checked my complete Beethoven Symphony sets (10) I had forgotten about a couple, so maybe, mancheeros, 10 is too many! But then again maybe not.

I would hate to be restricted to one, to use Mandryka's description, 'response' to major works in fact I now tend to buy a few different recordings with hopefully differing approaches when filling the few major gaps I still have in my collection.

To answer the OP's question - "pass".

Looks like I'm a deviant.

One of the ways (one of the few ways) in which I try to curtail the expansion of my CD collection is to prevent duplicates. Granted - there is in most work ample scope for different approaches. But I did find, over the years, that when I reach for certain music, it is first and foremost the music I reach for, less than the performance. As soon as the performance becomes a major issue, then I have often found that performers are putting hemselves ahead of the music. And my choice will then fall on the self-effacing musician every time. That doesn't mean I'm denying the possibility of different approaches - that would be simplistic. But for me to find a performance that's 'top', egos won't be involved.

When I'm faced with two attractive and different (or not so different) versions, I will compare. That inevitably (yes, really) leads to a favourite. And once I have a favourite, I know that, when I want to hear that music again, that will be the performance I'll put on. Which in turn means that the other one becomes expendable.

I'd much rather pay to explore music I do not yet know, than pay for music I do know played by different performers (should I get another Beethove cycle, or get to know - say - the Röntgen symphonies? It really is 'or', as I can spend each Pound only once, unfortunately). If I do think that I can improve on a version of a work I do already have, I may still go for it. If, after some time, I find I prefer the new one, then the old one goes out. Experience taught that I very rarely if return to a previous favourite, once displaced. Otherwise, I'll get rid of the new one that I did not, ultimately, find an improvement.

All this doesn't mean that I have no duplicates. Of course it doesn't. But there's just one Beethoven cycle (CGO/Haitink, by the way), one set of Mahler symphonies (cobbled together between Abbado, Haitink, Chailly), no duplicate Bruckners. Duplicates there are, are almost invariably caused by CDs having couplings that cause duplication.

For most of the forum members, this will go very much against the grain. But it works for me.

MacDoom,

Not a deviant, just vive la differance. Are you fully booked this week?

To attempt to sum up (so far)....

(1) There is the noble search for the best, most satisfying recording, which may involve the jettisoning of recordings that don't meet the necessary requirements (whatever they are).

(2) There is the innocent pleasure of hearing different interpretations of the same work.

(3) There is the gnawing GUILT of spending yet more money (and time) on different versions of the same work at the expense of hearing/buying new works.

(4) There is the (dysfunctional?) pleasure of collecting mountains of similar CDs for reasons of symmetry and deviance.

(5) There is the denial of deviance.

Malx,

I wish. There's this crisis thingy going on...

I'm not sure I will come to you, Mancheeros, for client centred therapy and I don't get the same summary as you from reading the thread! The main message I am getting is captured by your #2. As for deviance ... most CM collectors must be aware of deviance because, unless we are musicians (and perhaps even if we are!), so few people we come across in life listen to a lot of CM. Certainly, I spend my life among people who are relatively knowledgeable about art history and literature but not at all about CM. So it is obvious to me that I am deviant.

Of course, it is wonderful that there are so many deeply inspiring and rewarding accounts of so much great music and that much of it is available so cheaply these days. But a question I have for other collectors concerns how many times they listen to a CD over the, say, five years that follow their purchase of it? Is it true that some get heard a lot while others fairly quickly disappear onto the shelves? And do other collectors think that to be considered a successful purchase a CD should "demand to be heard" regularly?

"is to prevent duplicates"

But that assumes two versions of the same work are similar - in many cases they can be wildly different.

I have versions of Beethoven's 9th with big orchestras which emphasise the Romantic nature and sound closer to Bruckner in places than anything else.

I have "period" orchestra performances of the 9th which make it sound closer to Haydn and Mozart! Both are great to listen to - but entirely different - why choose, just one approach?

Also - how about things like "unfinished" works that have been completed? For many years I loved Bruckner's 9th as a 3 movement symphony - but now I also love the completed versions. I wouldn't want to miss out on either.

The other thing is that many of the best performances can have terrible sound quality and while they are indispensible - it might actually be more pleasurable to listen to a more modern recording, where the sound doesn't get in the way of the music.

I have also found that some pieces benefit tremendously from surround sound or being seen as well as heard - owning a piece on a Blu Ray disc can make for a totally different experience to just hearing it on stereo CD.

So for example I just got the latest War Requiem on Blu Ray, where the surround sound and visuals allow you to appreciate the separation between the chamber group with males singers, the chorus with soprano soloist and the child singers off in the rear and high up - plus you hear and feel the huge acoustic of the Cathedral.

As you can play the Blu Ray disc in stereo or Dolby surround - it's easy to compare and the sound is totally different - with the surround mix revealing far more of the true cathedral experience and spatial reverberation!

Good points, Bruce, but I'm very much of the MacDoom school of thought on this. I'm happy to leave sampling those other aspects of a work to concerts (and, less often, radio performances) and don't feel I need to own them all myself.

There are factors other than artistic ones. It depends how long you have been collecting and your disposable income. I bought my first LP over 40 years ago and have been accumulating recordings of all kinds ever since. For most of the LP era my financial resources were limited and I generally only had one version of each work though even then there were exceptions. My CD buying fluctuated with my financial situation but mostly I was in the happy situation where I didn't have to decide between buying another version of a favourite work and trying something new. Also, it depends how you choose to spend your disposable income. For example, I have never smoked and as nowadays you can buy a CD for considerably less than a packet of cigarettes that could make a difference.

Bruce says:
"But that assumes two versions of the same work are similar - in many cases they can be wildly different."

I think what shoud have been my main point got rather snowed under in irrelevant detail when I wrote my post. The main thing is, that once I have heard differing versions a couple of times, I WILL have a prference for one or the other. And that will, when I desire to hear the music, be the one I go to. So the other won't be played, and might as well free up shelf space to make room for music I don't know yet.

I wouldn't dream of denying the difference between versions! But experience has taught me that my reaction over time will not change significantly. Which is why this way works for me.

"But experience has taught me that my reaction over time will not change significantly.."

This sounds dangerously like the recipe for a "closed mind"..? Not something that I would recommend. I always think that with music, it is best to approach it with an open mind. Music always has something new to say to us.

I also believe that most people grow and develop - this is a good thing! I know I am not the same person I was in my teens or my twenties and I look back and see somebody who heard things differently and missed an awful lot!

I find it much better advice to try and learn more about music every year, develop your ears, try to hear new things and not just accept that what you heard ten years ago will always sound the same to you.

That appears to be based on an assumption that consistency of reaction equals a closed mind. That, with respect, doesn't even begin to follow. Not everything has to change with the passage of time.

Not everything has to change with the passage of time but things frequently do. Beethoven's Eroica Symphony is possibly my most duplicated work. The first version I ever owned was Kleiber (Erich)/VPO; it is my No 1 choice but for many years I preferred Bernstein/NYPO (a fine account, the best of his NY cycle). The first versions of Beethoven 5 & 6 I owned were from Steinberg and the Pittsburgh SO and I loved them and played them frequently. Eventually I gave the LPs away but recently acquired the recordings again on CD in a box set. I enjoyed them but, 40 years on, they are nowhere near my first choice.

I think you're all seeing things wrongly. You can't ever (for example) listen to Mozart's K550. You have to listen to it as realised by someone. These people who do the performing are creating the music you hear -- what Mozart created is lost to history,

So when you buy a recording of the G minor symphony, what you're getting is the vision of Harnonourt or Kocsis or Bruggen or Furtwangler or Klemperer or whatever.

These are the people who I buy Cds to hear. For that reason I want Harnoncourt, Bruggen, Kocsis, Klemperer, Furtwangler all conducting the symphony.

Music is an event. Musicianship is performance art. It's ephemeral not eternal.

Any post beginning "I think you're all seeing things wrongly" should ring warning bells, not least in the writer's own mind.

Mandryka says:
"So when you buy a recording of the G minor symphony, what you're getting is the vision of Harnonourt or Kocsis or Bruggen or Furtwangler or Klemperer or whatever."

And that is exactly why I prefer performers who I feel do not stand between me and the composer. That's very personal, of course. But those putting their mark on music are almost invariably not for me. That includes Gould, Bernstein, Toscanini, Furtwängler - a lot of what are called 'the greats'. My aim is not, when listening to music, to hear how Klemperer moulds Beethoven into his shape. Give me conductors who egolessly shape the music into a believable picture.

I have no quarrel with your statement 'You have to listen to it as realised by someone. These people who do the performing are creating the music you hear -- what Mozart created is lost to history' - in fact, I completely agree. I don't even see how I could go about disagreeing.

It seems the difference between our music appreciation is that one of us buys for the performance, the other for the music.

I wouldn't call either right or wrong. Just different.