Norrington?
Thu, May 3 2012, 9:09PM
Norrington seems to divide opinion down the middle. Genius or misguided fool? Is the problem largely one of a hatred or a liking for 'period performance' or does the problem go deeper with Norrington (Hogwood seems to be pretty much accepted by everyone). I haven't heard any of his Hansler discs but have picked up a lot of Norrington on the Virgin Veritas label at very cheap prices on Amazon. His Beethoven was criticised for his, or rather Beethoven's metronome markings, it won awards. Is opinion coming to a concensus on Norrington or will he always be a maverick.
Fri, May 4 2012, 12:37AM
#2
RE: Norrington?
I have quite a few of his original EMI recordings with the disbanded London Classical Players, an orchestra that he founded.
I've listed my favourite Beethoven elsewhere but other successes, imo, were a disc of Romantic Overtures, Rossini overtures, Schubert's 6th, 8th and, particularly, 9th, Mendelssohn's Scotch and Italian, Schumann's 3rd and Berlioz' Symphonie Fantastique.
There were others that were deemed not to be a success but I think I might acquire his Bruckner 3rd if it is still available.
I have none of his Hanssler discs.
Fri, May 4 2012, 6:06PM
#3
RE: Norrington?
Norrington's EMI recording of the Schubert 9th with the London Classical Players takes about 59 minutes. He performed this work with the San Francisco Symphony a number of years ago. I was prepared for all the repeats, but he did not do them. The whole thing was over in about 45 minutes. I felt like demanding my money back. I now play the Boult EMI recording and relish all 54 minutes of it. His scherzo is the longest of the four movements, and not a second too long. As mentioned in another Discussion topic about critics, David Hurwitz of Classicstoday hated every minute of it. Anybody agree with him?
Fri, May 4 2012, 6:24PM
#4
RE: Norrington?
I don't have to agree with him. I simply ignore him!
Performances and recorded performances in particular are a very subjective thing, involving a lot of variants (recording quality, venue, Orchestra involved, the conductor's mood of the moment and many more). So, even from experts, critics, reviewers of a certain reputation, etc. the only thing we may expect is mere "opinions" (aka the cheapest commodity).
Parla
Sat, May 5 2012, 12:51AM
#5
RE: Norrington?
Norrington's EMI recording of the Schubert 9th with the London Classical Players takes about 59 minutes. He performed this work with the San Francisco Symphony a number of years ago. I was prepared for all the repeats, but he did not do them. The whole thing was over in about 45 minutes. I felt like demanding my money back. I now play the Boult EMI recording and relish all 54 minutes of it. His scherzo is the longest of the four movements, and not a second too long. As mentioned in another Discussion topic about critics, David Hurwitz of Classicstoday hated every minute of it. Anybody agree with him?
That is the first time, ever, I've read or heard anybody complain about a performance of the "Great" being to short!
Some think its "Heavenly length" is a bit to "heavenly."
Sat, May 5 2012, 1:03AM
#6
RE: Norrington?
No, Troyen, there are quite a few, particularly musicians, who prefer the "Heavenly length". In Schubert the repeats are truly...divine.
In any case, if the composer wanted the repeats, we have to respect his wish. This year, our Chamber Ensemble performed Schubert's "Trout" Quintet. The second and the final movements are structured in two almost entirely identical and symmetrical parts. Because of the length of the work (approx. 40 minutes), we tried to play these two movements without the second parts. The Quintet sounded as another work.
Parla
Sat, May 5 2012, 1:28AM
#7
RE: Norrington?
Norrington's EMI recording of the Schubert 9th with the London Classical Players takes about 59 minutes. He performed this work with the San Francisco Symphony a number of years ago. I was prepared for all the repeats, but he did not do them. The whole thing was over in about 45 minutes. I felt like demanding my money back. I now play the Boult EMI recording and relish all 54 minutes of it. His scherzo is the longest of the four movements, and not a second too long. As mentioned in another Discussion topic about critics, David Hurwitz of Classicstoday hated every minute of it. Anybody agree with him?
That is the first time, ever, I've read or heard anybody complain about a performance of the "Great" being to short!
Some think its "Heavenly length" is a bit to "heavenly."
Well, there is a first time for everything, isn't there? Do you get out much? By the way, it's "too" heavenly, not "to" heavenly. Same applies to "too" short, not ""to" short. You're welcome.
Sat, May 5 2012, 7:59AM
#8
RE: Norrington?
So, even from experts, critics, reviewers of a certain reputation, etc. the only thing we may expect is mere "opinions" (aka the cheapest commodity).
Except when he gives them, of course:
"So, it not when "Parla
says xxx is amazing, etc., it is a matter of fact."" [sic]
Parla, 22
March “The
worst record
covers ever”
thread
Vic.
Sat, May 5 2012, 1:17PM
#9
RE: Norrington?
I've explained time and time again (on various threads), Vic, that (recorded) performances is a subjective matter, since the performer, the Orchestra, the Conductor, the Venue, the producer, the recording itself are elements that change and they cannot be all, at he same time, at a certain level of reference. So, if the performances are subjective, the reviews, etc. cannot be but subjective, if we take also into account the subjective listening of the reviewer (equipment, listening room, etc.).
On the contrary, for the works of Music, because we have the reference standards of the composition (even if you contest them as a listener), then, we (not only me) can state which work is greater and why.
In sum, my views on performances are mere opinions too.
Parla
Sat, May 5 2012, 2:11PM
#10
RE: Norrington?
In sum, my views on performances are mere opinions too.
Then why state: "When [ I ] say xxxx is amazing it is a matter of fact"?
Vic.
Sat, May 5 2012, 4:25PM
#11
RE: Norrington?
Norrington's EMI recording of the Schubert 9th with the London Classical Players takes about 59 minutes. He performed this work with the San Francisco Symphony a number of years ago. I was prepared for all the repeats, but he did not do them. The whole thing was over in about 45 minutes. I felt like demanding my money back. I now play the Boult EMI recording and relish all 54 minutes of it. His scherzo is the longest of the four movements, and not a second too long. As mentioned in another Discussion topic about critics, David Hurwitz of Classicstoday hated every minute of it. Anybody agree with him?
That is the first time, ever, I've read or heard anybody complain about a performance of the "Great" being to short!
Some think its "Heavenly length" is a bit to "heavenly."
We're reduced to correcting grammar now, are we. I thought you were leaving and, yet, here you are hanging around like a bad smell with your constant stream of banality.
How on earth you find my comment so annoying is beyond me but I suspect that you read what you expect to read in posts.
"Do you get out much?" is the best that you can do? Better throw that book of cliches away old man.
Please, do not stay in on my account. Get out...and about.
What is it with you Americans?
Sat, May 5 2012, 4:30PM
#12
RE: Norrington?
No, Troyen, there are quite a few, particularly musicians, who prefer the "Heavenly length". In Schubert the repeats are truly...divine.
In any case, if the composer wanted the repeats, we have to respect his wish. This year, our Chamber Ensemble performed Schubert's "Trout" Quintet. The second and the final movements are structured in two almost entirely identical and symmetrical parts. Because of the length of the work (approx. 40 minutes), we tried to play these two movements without the second parts. The Quintet sounded as another work.
Parla
Did I say or imply differently.
I know some musicians who cannot stand the "Great."
What is your reply, that you know musicians who love it?
Your becoming as banal as Where ignorance is... .
If you have nothing to say, then say nothing, but I know such advice is wasted on you as is proven by the acres of your posts.
Sat, May 5 2012, 7:38PM
#13
RE: Norrington?
Norrington's EMI recording of the Schubert 9th with the London Classical Players takes about 59 minutes. He performed this work with the San Francisco Symphony a number of years ago. I was prepared for all the repeats, but he did not do them. The whole thing was over in about 45 minutes. I felt like demanding my money back. I now play the Boult EMI recording and relish all 54 minutes of it. His scherzo is the longest of the four movements, and not a second too long. As mentioned in another Discussion topic about critics, David Hurwitz of Classicstoday hated every minute of it. Anybody agree with him?
That is the first time, ever, I've read or heard anybody complain about a performance of the "Great" being to short!
Some think its "Heavenly length" is a bit to "heavenly."
We're reduced to correcting grammar now, are we. I thought you were leaving and, yet, here you are hanging around like a bad smell with your constant stream of banality.
How on earth you find my comment so annoying is beyond me but I suspect that you read what you expect to read in posts.
"Do you get out much?" is the best that you can do? Better throw that book of cliches away old man.
Please, do not stay in on my account. Get out...and about.
What is it with you Americans?
My, but you are touchy. It's okay for you to write disparaging comments about others, isn't it? But vice-versa is a little daunting for you. I find nothing wrong in trying to make you a better grammarian. You don't want to appear uneducated, do you? Or don't you care?
Sat, May 5 2012, 7:52PM
#14
RE: Norrington?
Spot on, Bliss! This is Troyen. I'm used to his pattern of behaviour and response.
However, we should not forget Anais Nin's wise saying: "We don't see things as they are. We see them as we are". His behaviour portrays who he is.
Parla
Sat, May 5 2012, 8:38PM
#15
RE: Norrington?
The whole topic of repeats is an interesting one, should have its own thread. As I've said elsewhere, in Mahler 6 the exposition repeat stikes me as being essential to the structure. In Schubert 9 it makes an already too-long work even longer. The Brahms symphonies fall somewhere in between.
In general, if we accept the view that composers used them to acquaint audiences with the main themes, for recorded music at least it would seem they're redundant. If they're there to balance the structure that's a whole different matter.
Definitely, he is controversial and, to quiet a few, even bad in the period orchestras' performances. However, his Hanssler recordings are with normal Symphony Orchestras (mostly the one from Stuttgart) and, some of them are even impressive to some critics and reviewers, like his Mahler's Fifth or Bruckner's Fourth.
For me, he is an interesting figure, nowadays, but I wouldn't chase his first recordings on EMI or Virgin Veritas.
Parla