New Klemperer releases on EMI

Thanks to this thread I am inspired to delve deeper and deeper into the Klemperer recorded legacy - last night the turn of Haydn,the Military symphony.Brilliant.
I think it should be mentioned that Klemperer was fortunate in having a first class orchestra,the Philharmonia,at his disposal during his Indian summer.The wind instruments particularly were outstanding.This can be clearly heard on those marvelous Walter Legg produced Columbia recordings.

I would not call Klemperer's Mozart "not so perfect" in fact quite the opposite.Lacking in sentimentality it certainly was. He freely admitted colour and style did not interest him, as he said on the famous Face to Face interview "I leave that to (Bruno) Walter". Be it Mozart or Mahler or anyone else, you always get the "architecture" of a piece with Klemperer,and I disagree with Parla in so far as Klemperer was always true to the spirit of the composer he was performing, that has nothing to do with the style or size of the orchestra.It goes deeper then that.

Fair comment Parla and each to his own. If in fifty years time Mackerras Linn recordings are being listened and talked about as we are now.Then you are right.
Say what you like about old Klemperer,this is a long thread and we are discussing recordings at least half a century old! I wonder why.

I can certainly agree with the general idea of your post, Chris. I have already said, on various threads and different occasions, that the performances we appreciate reflect, to a high degree, the perception we have for the work in question.

Having said that, I cannot exclude this rare and divine possibility a gifted and versatile conductor to achieve both to be profound (going to retrieve the "spirit" of the composer and its work) and stylistically correct (choosing the right orchestra, instruments, playing style and practices etc.). Mackerras, in his Linn recordings of the Late Symphonies, has achieved, to a safe degree, both.

Parla

For what it’s worth: I fully agree with the views put forward by hewett_dick, History Man and
uliwer. I’m also glad uliwer mentioned the beautifully produced Audite-set of Klemperer’s
complete Rias-recordings (much appreciated by Rob Cowan in Gramophone 1/12, p.
84). I’m even gladder his lordship dislikes Klemperer’s Mozart: it means
there’s still hope for me having some taste of my own, since I happen to
believe that Klemperer’s recorded legacy of Mozart constitutes some of the most
important additions to the catalogue. I’m also not sure that describing
Klemperer’s Mozart as inflexible, pompous, ponderous and lacking in finesse
shows a – dare I use the word? – profound knowledge of his discography. Not
only has Klemperer shown a lifelong commitment towards Mozart, but there also
exist a lot of recordings, either live or from the studio (the earliest being,
as far as I know, a Los Angeles radio recording of the Haffner symphonie from
1938 on Symposium). Even more than that: apart from Beethoven, there’s no
composer Klemperer recorded more often. Granted: Klemperer’s Mozart can be
unrelenting (which I don’t mind) and some of his late Mozart recordings (opera
and wind serenades) are unlucky for being too slow, but these are hardly pars
pro toto! Especially his Rias- and early Philharmonia- recordings (available
through Testament) present some of the symphonies like no other conductor of
his generation did: truly symphonic (with arguments and counter-arguments
clearly stated), nothing sentimental or rococo-like. Also, Klemperer helped
liberate Mozart from the Wagnerian aesthetic of blending orchestral colours; his
Mozart-recordings always have – very unusual for the time – winds forwardly
balanced without the strings dominating. In that sense Klemperer’s
uncompromising way with Mozart even helped pave the way for Mackerras. No refinement? Perhaps his lordship would deign to point out where exactly in Klemperer’s 1964 Zauberflöte-recording Tamino’s “Dies Bildnis…” or Pamina’s “Ach, ich fühl’s…” is lacking in that department. No
smile in the Papageno arias and duets? Just listen again!

I completely agree with you Lilian. Klemperer's Mozart is some of the greatest I know, 'stylish' or not.

I've just noticed (on Amazon,UK) that EMI will be issuing (cheaply) in January a set of all Klemperer's Mozart orchestral recordings; symphonies, serenades, overtures.  Since it runs to 8 CDs it presumably will contain both the earlier and later versions of the symphonies, but I haven't been able to find the detailed contents anywhere yet.

Parla, I'm by no means averse to MacKerras's Mozart.  I have and very much admire his complete recording of the symphonies as well as the two Linn sets. And both Zauberflöte and Magic Flute. And piano concerti with Brendel. He was a great Mozartian, and a great conductor all round. Like his hero, Janacek, he became an even greater conductor quite late in life.

Chris

PS: Following your comment Parla, I just now compared Klemperer and Mackerras in the Zauberflöte overture.  No contest! There's nothing heavy about Klemperer's version: Mackerras just sounds breathless by comparison. For seriously heavy (and slower), go to Böhm's (Berlin) recording (nevertheless a really great performance). More haste less speed perhaps.

Parla, first of all, to quote Eliza Frost from another thread: you do not have the
right to lord over this forum! I fail to see what agreement has been reached on
the topic of Klemperer’s Mozart as far as your over-simplified dismissing him
is concerned. Just listen to any of his recordings of the little G minor symphony
(K. 183 uliwer mentioned – a Klemperer favourite) and the first and last
movement are simply exhilarating! Also, in its way and for its time Klemperer’s
Mozart is very stylish: no doubling of the wind parts, violins seated
antiphonally, a relatively small body of strings compared to his contemporaries,
the 1963 recording of the E flat major (K. 543) you mention being a case
in point: after a suspenseful introduction comes a majestically first movement,
yet with the themes having a spring in their step (to describe that as
ponderous would be a travesty!). It’s all there in the score. Secondly, is it
that difficult to admit you only know a small, late part of Klemperer’s
Mozartian output? I don’t mind admitting his Nozze and Così are unlucky (I said
as much in my post) but these aren’t exemplary: his Don Giovanni and
Zauberflöte are a different matter altogether! Thirdly, to use a favourite
tactic of yours: you really should read my post better – I never stated that Klemperer
established a tradition with his approach to Mozart. How could he? The man was
one of a kind! I only pointed out he helped unWagnerize Mozart and was one of the first to approach his music truly classical. Finally, whether or not I’m British (in fact I’m not) is irrelevant: I never knew nationality is instrumental in the appreciation of a conductor’s art. In so far as Klemperer’s Mozart is considered obsolete (happily, in any case, not by those folks at Emi): just name those who do…

Parla, I think we've been over most of this enough now. But I must say I was surprised to read (from you particularly): "The fact that he is true to the score does not ensure he is correct all the way." 

Regarding Mozart symphony No.39, I think there has been some discussion of the EMI SACD set before and someone pointed out that the recording on that set, though stated to be the 1956 one, is actually the later one. You can easily check: if the timing given for the first movement is 8' 18" then it is the later version.

We should find time (perhaps on a new thread) for a discussion of 'Cosi fan Tutte' and how it should be performed.

Chris

PS: Your mentioning Klemperer's Wagner reminded me of a previous discussioin about Konya's superb Lohengrin inadequately represented in recordings. Klemperer conducted Lohengrin at Covent Garden with Konya (and Crespin as Elsa).  The BBC were NOT in attendance.