|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
73.222.105.47
In Reply to: RE: Kind of a general response. posted by Rick W on January 08, 2017 at 09:04:28
BTW, I'll be gone the rest of today, and won't have an opportunity to reply until tonight. (And who knows, the way things are going, the electricity may be out here by then!)
But just to reiterate, I'm in agreement that what you've posted will work for a lot of listeners, including yourself, and I have no problem with that at all. But there are other listeners, including me, who get all worked up over the relatively small differences in performances of certain classical works. It's all part of the spice of life! ;-)
Follow Ups:
I was listening to classical music almost around the clock from early childhood. So, I've heard the top 500, or even the top 1,000 classical hits, a whole lot. I can play large sections of many of them by ear, even if I've never seen the score. So a spiffy new high-def multi-channel of the New World, or the Pathetique, or the Spring, or the Jupiter, or the Pastoral, or the Inextinguishable, or the "- Of A Thousand" (hey, this is fun), is fine, but probably not as interesting to me as a convincing performance of something entirely new, or old but infamiliar. Even if most of what is entirely new is less than convincing.
I just listened. Kertesz and the LSO take the first movement of the New World a touch too slow. For me, it should canter along at a confident clip, as do Neumann and the Czech Phil on Supraphon, which is very nice and idiomatic, though to me Kertesz has the better orchestra. Better flute solo in the first movement, better English horn solo in the second, better brasses and percussion. Better playing overall.
You could parse stuff like that endlessly. No doubt there are a lot of good New World recordings out there.
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: