Repeats?

41 posts / 0 new
Last post
RE: Repeats?

50m, regarding your penultimate post in this thread, I feel compelled to commend you on such a thorough and well-written post with which I cannot agree more. I guess I'm one of the few who finds too Richter's Schubert mesmerizing and magical at the same time. I was not surprised with Brendel's view. He had some strange ones on various composers, but, fortunately, he performs them a bit better.

Parla

RE: Repeats?

BazzaRiley wrote:

50milliarden wrote:

Joke went over my head, Bazza... :) Care to explain?

Sorry, 50milliarden. I just don't remember too much "classical sonata form", "second
exposition" or, for that matter, "key" in Birtwistle's work. ;-)

I'm sure I'm gonna make a fool of myself... but I still don't get it. What's got Birtwistle to do with this?

RE: Repeats?

50M, I see you've been canonized up at the top of this page.

I've waited through a weekend of garbage fixtures for this game. If it ends with 22 men on the field it'll be a letdown.

RE: Repeats?

Chris, you weren't wrong. Darn that Bale.

 

 

RE: Repeats?

Reading through all the posts in this fascinating thread, I reach a disappointing conclusion.

I wrote in my first response that we live in an age where taking every possible repeat seems to be considered necessary, especially in recordings. Reading all the subsequent posts it is obvious that most of think that is going too far or much too far.  And yet there is precious little consensus, in practical terms, on when repeats should be taken. I can't help but think that if I were a record producer reading these posts, I would likely conclude that the safest thing to do is to include the lot: anything else is likely to annoy someone somewhere. Perhaps that's why they do it!

Chris

PS: Bazza: sorry about the result. My Chelsea-supporter friends were all hoping for a different result too!

Chris A.Gnostic

RE: Repeats?

c hris johnson wrote:

 And yet there is precious little consensus, in practical terms, on when repeats should be taken. I can't help but think that if I were a record producer reading these posts, I would likely conclude that the safest thing to do is to include the lot: anything else is likely to annoy someone somewhere. Perhaps that's why they do it!

Chris

Perhaps there's so little consensus because individually we can't make up our own minds. Why I find repeats generally acceptable, even necessary, in Brahms and Mozart (perhaps Beethoven too) but not elsewhere, I can't say. Back when cds were full of index points as well as tracks it was probably feasible for us to make our own choices on the fly. Technically it has to be still possible without awkward gaps.

RE: Repeats?

Quite a can of worms opened. On a general basis I tend to agree with the first 2 paras of Parla's first comment, although for some reason I'm less bothered about repeats in orchestral works than piano.  I have a single sided LP where Arrau is discussing the Beethoven 32 and he states repeats must be observed.

Some interesting comments though on particular works in particular Schubert D960. I'm surprised Brendel misses it but if he does then perhaps it's not surprising his former students Paul Lewis & Imogen Cooper do too. None of my recordings (and none of the live performances I've heard) include the rather odd linking passage referred to by Chris, until recently that is,  and when playing Juana Zayas's rather good (and stunningly recorded) version for the first time this passage greatly startled me in a work I thought I thought I knew pretty well! Schnabel still takes first prize for me though but not being a Richter fan haven't heard his critically divisive version (heard him once live in the 1960s when he was being much hyped - big disappointment).

With regard to H-D's comment on Britten's Mozart 40 this did provoke some critical comment at the time and I do think the very long 2nd mov unbalances the performance. With regard to Schubert 9, much as I rate Pritchard's performance the fact that he takes more repeats than any other recording (according to the Penguin Guide) can perhaps make it a little tedious...

With regard to Chris's last comment the medium has perhaps changed the message. In 78 days if repeats necessitated an extra side or sides there would have been a commercial disadvantage and even in LP days time limitations could have had more effect than today, so now include them all!

 

RE: Repeats?

Just sat through Neville Marriner's 14 1/2 minute rendition of the scherzo from Schubert's ninth. Every repeat taken. Surely too much of a good thing?

RE: Repeats?

Absolutely. There just isn't enough material there for 14 minutes. 

I love Schubert (he is one of my Top Five, after all), but not when the repeats are observed. 

Jane

ps Is it me or is this forum on the brink of death?

RE: Repeats?
BazzaRiley wrote:

Just sat through Neville Marriner's 14 1/2 minute rendition of the scherzo from Schubert's ninth. Every repeat taken. Surely too much of a good thing?

Too much of a good thing? Maybe with Marriner (haven't heard it) but not with Boult in his 1969 Proms concert (14:26) or his 1972 EMI studio performance (14:18). Maybe he followed his dictum of varying the repeats.

By the way Baz, I think I bought something from you on eBay in December of '08, that is if you were "Baz1947cricket" then.

Bliss

Pages

Log in or register to post comments

Gramophone Subscriptions

From£67/year

Gramophone Print

Gramophone Print

no Digital Edition
no Digital Archive
no Reviews Database
no Events & Offers
From£67/year
Subscribe
From£67/year

Gramophone Reviews

Gramophone Reviews

no Print Edition
no Digital Edition
no Digital Archive
no Events & Offers
From£67/year
Subscribe
From£67/year

Gramophone Digital Edition

Gramophone Digital Edition

no Print Edition
no Reviews Database
no Events & Offers
From£67/year
Subscribe

If you are a library, university or other organisation that would be interested in an institutional subscription to Gramophone please click here for further information.

© MA Business and Leisure Ltd. 2018