Ten Perfect Orchestral Recordings...

I love lists if only because it annoys people who think anything outside their peculiar universe is a dumbing down.

Interestingly, the author prefers the Gramophone guide to the Penguin not realising it is the same people.

Also, Karajan resigned in 1989. A resignation that was, clearly, the death of him! I struggle with his Mahler 9 and prefer Abbado's with the same orchestra.

I do not know the Bernstein Mahler 7th but I do know his 6th, which the author mentions, and it is the most sastisfying performance I know.

I fell out of love with Reiner's Ein Heldenleben (another work some people can get awfully sniffy about) after an acquaintance of a number of years finding it, like much of Reiner's discography, chilly beside the warmth of understanding of Kempe, which remains my favourite performance on disc.

No argument about Kleiber's Beethoven 5 and 7th or, for that matter, Beecham's Scheherezade.

All very mainstream and reasonably safe.

Perhaps others could do better (he said in the hope that they will at least have a bash).

Re perfect recording, we all agree that there is no such a thing, whether technically or artistically. But I believe in the art of performing a musical piece, therefore we may have we our preferences based partially or entirely on subjective aspects. We can even share them as well, provided you're prepared to accept different views. One or two things about this list:

*I'm on the side of those who think that Kleiber's Beethoven's 5th & 7th recording is good but a bit overrated...there are many better recordings imo;

* Bernstein's Mahler's 7th is not among the best on his DG cycle (perhaps on his CBS-Sony cycle....): I agree that 6th and mainly the 9th (WPO) fare much better;

* Kubelik's readings of Dvorak's last symphonies is somewhat polite and round-edged in my view: Ancerl (9th) & Fricsay (9th) & Dorati (8th) go further.....don't they?

And so it goes.....

Just a clarification on a small fact - Karajan actually DID resign from the Berlin Philharmonic before his death. They had fallen out very badly and the orchestra no longer accepted his style of leadership.

I agree that the Beethoven/Kleiber, Mahler/Bernstein and Mahler/Karajan are great recordings, but I could easily add a few others not mentioned. Obviously this is a personal choice.

Indeed but it did strike me as odd that the author should mention it.

I think we all could and I did.

The Kubelik Dvorak symphony cycle has always had a mixed review and I cannot say that I prefer any of it to others such as Kertesz, Rowicki, Ancerl and Davis in individual symphonies. However, Kubelik's tone poems have yet to be surpassed. A better choice than any of his symphony recordings.

It makes me wonder how many other recordings of these particular works the author knows.

That first movement repeat is such a vital, integral part of the work. It generates a feeling of numbness, not as sharp as despair but a treadmill effect and the ensuing development shocks you awake.

I found every other performance of the work unlistenable until I came to the Chailly. The first movement is slower than the Bernstein - as is most people's - but he seems to have a valid view. Trouble is, it's a piece I don't want to hear too often. Mahler 6 always leaves me unable to listen to any other music for days.

I some time wonder how much of the Bernstein you actually know or are you preternaturally prejudiced against him because he wrote pop musicals and his later recordings of Beethoven sound like Mahler (go to his late Haydn, then, as he makes that sound like Beethoven) or perhaps he lauded the Beeb?

Anyway, why would you want it firmly placed in the symphonic canon? Surely it would be more interesting both as a piece of music and a symphony if it wasn't?

Somehow I cannot see Mahler promoting any of his symphonies by insisting that they are firmly in the symphonic canon.