8 of 12 people found the following review helpful
A dissenting voice,
This review is from: Beethoven: Symphonies Nos. 5 & 7 (Audio CD)
One of the great things about being alive is that you get to hold opinions which are different from all the other people ... like ...
"Mozart is rubbish, Haydn wrote much better tunes"
or ... about the present recording of the Beethoven Fifth Symphony ...
"This is the most over-rated and over-hyped recording of any piece ... ever"
Firstly Kleiber does not seem to understand which parts of Beethoven's textures give the music its forward momentum and, in his obsessive desire to clarify every strand of the rhythmic texture, he keeps on emphasising things which actually drag the music down. This is especially true in the finale.
BUT WHAT REALLY WON'T DO IS... at the great transition from Scherzo to Finale, where the piece moves from darkness into blazing light in the space of a few bars, the very moment which everyone has always raved about in this recording as being so "overwhelming", Kleiber and his recording engineers simply cheat. Listened to closely it is obvious that the first chords of the finale are recorded in a different take from the preceding build up, and then spliced in so closely that the music seems to BURST FORTH. BUT in order to achieve this effect the attack of the first chord of the Finale is actually cut into - it actually jerks and blurts at you. (Go on - I dare you - put on some headphones and listen really carefully). No other recording sounds like this, because it is impossible to do in real life. IT IS CHEATING AND BELONGS IN THE BIN.
Good - I feel much better now!
Tracked by 3 customers
Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-10 of 11 posts in this discussion
Initial post: 18 Oct 2013 17:06:39 BDT
Hamish McPenguin says:
I enjoyed your review very much; always room for a dissenting voice as you say and I Agree - I may still get this however since the only thing that seems to get as good reviews is the collection By Karajan and he was a Nazi (Wikipedia even has his party membership number) So thanks for the review - Oh one more thing, just what did Haydn write that was as good as the Requiem? Just askin.
In reply to an earlier post on 22 Oct 2013 09:46:35 BDT
I am aware that many peolpe think Mozart a divine genius. All I hear is disorder and chaos. but I am not in any way asking you to agree with me!
Posted on 18 Jan 2014 23:08:21 GMT
R. EVANS says:
You're assertion that Kleiber 'cheated' through using recording engineers is utter tosh. There are live recorded performances available which strangely enough do the same thing with Kleiber conducting. Unless you have actual proof, I call shenanigans.
In reply to an earlier post on 13 Mar 2014 20:38:49 GMT
A Pedant says:
.... and I enjoyed both the OP and your reposte.
The OP mentioned tunes. I admire Mozart's Requiem, love it even but there are tunes and then there are tunes. There is never-ending Bellinian melody with obvious and to some boring dominant and tonic harmonies and there are other approaches that are less long-breathed but tunes nonetheless and with more interesting (perhaps) underpinning (Dvorak? Brahms?.
Now for H vs M. The comment was about melody (I think). Mozart wrote finer elsewhere than in K.626. Try K.584, K.427 or K.492? Or from 1791 K.620 or K. 621! Then turning to Papa Haydn, there is an open, joyful vivacity about parts of the Missa in Angustiis or the Creation that Mozart never matched. Then again there is an exquisite sweetness tinged with melancholy that was one of M's gifts but not so much H's. How lucky we are to have both legacies.
In reply to an earlier post on 2 Apr 2014 14:38:52 BDT
Come on men...the comment was just flippant!!
I openly admit to being just flippant - most especially I am just flippant about Mozart.
Posted on 10 May 2014 17:48:51 BDT
I have been in the business of music making some 70 years. My parents were both musicians and so it could be argued my experience began pre-natal. I was brought up on a diet of Beethoven and his contemporaries and a lot more besides: soloist, vocal, chamber and orchestral experience. I can say with much frustration that the number of satisfactory performances of the 7th (to my brain at least) listing well over 100 may be counted on the fingers (excluding thumb) of one hand. WHY? Because, almost without exception, the Assai meno presto section of the third movement is taken far too slowly. (Conductors appear to drool over the thing!) And yes, I have conducted the work myself and taken the directions to the best of my ability according to assai (very quick) meno (less than) presto (very fast).
I am not acquainted with this performance and would hesitate getting it for fear of further disappointment.
In reply to an earlier post on 27 May 2014 20:04:16 BDT
Mr. T. Y. W. Kent says:
The Creation, Nelson Mass, Paukenmesse for a start. Not that i dislike the Requiem.
In reply to an earlier post on 27 May 2014 20:14:23 BDT
Mr. T. Y. W. Kent says:
Is 'assai' not 'enough' a bit like andante but not really very quick. It does get taken a bit slow at times but it is not alone e.g. the Mahler 5 Adagietto or the Andante in Bruckner 4. Maybe there is no perfect performance to suit all tastes. Try listening to the scramblefest by RVW in his own recording of his 4th. I rather like it. I'll bet the band didn't. Tom.
In reply to an earlier post on 1 Sep 2014 12:11:10 BDT
Last edited by the author on 1 Sep 2014 12:11:58 BDT
Sorry Mr Evans!
Listened to this several times over the summer.
I am correct.
The finale begins with a very clumsy edit.