Shostakovitch Symphony No?
Thu, Mar 28 2013, 8:52AM
#2
RE: Shostakovitch Symphony No?
Hi Tagalie
I'm with you, I've never quite understood all the raving about Petrenko's recordings of Shostakovich. The sound, as you say, seems raucous and poorly balanced, like you I've tried it in two systems plus heaphones.
Also the performances, whilst "playing all the notes" and being efficient seem uninvolved and little more than good routine. To compare try Kondrashin!
Thu, Mar 28 2013, 10:30AM
#3
RE: Shostakovitch Symphony No?
Yes it's not like the British music press to rave about a little British Orchestra and tell us they are world beaters is it ?
Thu, Mar 28 2013, 1:52PM
#4
RE: Shostakovitch Symphony No?
So Sidney which are your favourite orchestras then?
Thu, Mar 28 2013, 1:55PM
#5
RE: Shostakovitch Symphony No?
If you factor "Film Music" into the equation, I would say British orchestras are the best in the world - with the LSO clearly top.
And before a certain person panics about wandering off the subject, it must be pointed out that Shostakovich himself was a film music composer.
DSM
Thu, Mar 28 2013, 2:52PM
#6
RE: Shostakovitch Symphony No?
So Sidney which are your favourite orchestras then?
All those who are playing well at the time.
Thu, Mar 28 2013, 6:55PM
#7
RE: Shostakovitch Symphony No?
To compare try Kondrashin!
I have, most of them anyway, and love him in this music. As 33lp says, he was recording when Russian orchestras sounded like Russian orchestras, warts and all.
It can't be the fault of the orchestra or recording venue that the Naxos series is generally so poor. There's nothing wrong with the sound on the Petrenko/RLPO Rachmaninov 3 on EMI and I've been to dozens of concerts at the Liverpool Phil. Acoustics are fine.
My benchmark for recording quality is David Hurwitz. I take his reviews on performance seriously but not when it comes to sound. He's either gone deaf or he listens on an old Walkman while he's doing the laundry. In his view the Petrenko Shostakovich series recordings are A1.
Thu, Mar 28 2013, 7:10PM
#8
RE: Shostakovitch Symphony No?
Fri, Mar 29 2013, 7:16AM
#9
RE: Shostakovitch Symphony No?
33lp (and others involved in this matter), I didn't mean Petrenko's Shostakovich is "superbly recorded" in any equipment. Whatever I call "as great" recording, it is based on how it sounds in my equipment, for which I have no complaints whatsoever and it has the potential to deliver as good as it gets (hi-end).
I won't be surprised if in someone else's equipment the same recording might sound "differently" (so, Mr. Hurwitz was not necessarily "doing the laundry or gone deaf").
I can go along with the description of Symphonies 2,3 & 12 by eyeresist. Eventually, some may see further than the "surface" of this otherwise good and interesting music.
Parla
- « first
- ‹ previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
Eloquent as always.
2, 3 and 12 have in common that they contain a lot of very good music made problematic by a (potentially) very banal ending which casts a pall over the preceding minutes. Rozhdestvensky's recording of 3 is terrific, except he slows down and tries to make the choral coda sound properly grand, when he'd be better off doubling his tempo and making it sound outright crazy, in keeping with the experimentalism of the preceding music. Same with 12 - the deadening "triumph" motto at the end would work better if played in a mocking way.
'Art doesn't need philosophers. It just needs to communicate from soul to soul.' Alejandro Jodorowsky