Classical Court

From Perotin to Prokofiev (and beyond), performed by Caruso to Khatia, it's all here.

Return to Classical Court

Message Sort: Post Order or Asylum Reverse Threaded

Top 10 world's best orchestras.... I would tend to agree....

47.147.216.236
Posted on April 21, 2020 at 10:48:04
TWB
Audiophile

Posts: 7408
Location: Long Beach, California
Joined: January 5, 2001
 for the most part... except I would rank the CSO and LAPO a little higher and Berlin a little lower.. also where is Leipzig on this list, not sure that Clevland should be in the top 10...

 

Hide full thread outline!
    ...
Based solely on recent recordings..., posted on April 21, 2020 at 14:56:17
krisjan
Reviewer

Posts: 929
Joined: May 6, 2001
 I would put the Leipzig Gewandhaus Orchestra way up on that list - maybe even at #1. They are a delight to hear.

 

RE: Based solely on recent recordings..., posted on April 21, 2020 at 16:50:49
PAR
Audiophile

Posts: 1732
Location: South London, UK
Joined: June 4, 2019
 I am not convinced that you can really judge an orchestra from recordings. You have no idea how many takes or patches for errors were necessary, if specialist players were brought in for the session etc. Even the overall sound is partly the result of the record producer and engineers' input.

I really think you need to hear them live. Of those in the list that I have heard I generally agree with the ranking though I agree that the omission of Leipzig Gewandhaus is an error.


"We need less, but better" - Dieter Rams

 

I certainly raised an eyebrow at the inclusion of the BFO, posted on April 21, 2020 at 17:05:20
Chris from Lafayette
Audiophile

Posts: 26477
Location: SF Bay Area
Joined: February 17, 2004
Contributor
  Since: February 6, 2012
 And that's even though I DO love many of their recordings with Ivan Fischer. I agree with PAR's point about how recording quality and engineering can deceive us in our judgments about orchestral quality - and Jared usually provides the BFO with state-of-the-art sonics! (And, yes, I've heard the BFO live in concert - but it was a fairly long time ago.)

And I agree with krisjan and PAR below about the LGO - which I have heard live in concert (at least a couple of times), but it was during the Masur era (before the Iron Curtain had even fallen).

Anyway, I'd take out the BFO from the list and replace it with the LGO. All the other selections are unsurprising IMHO.

 

LSO has noplace in the top 10, posted on April 21, 2020 at 19:11:15
Analog Scott
Audiophile

Posts: 9933
Joined: January 8, 2002
 not even top 50. This purely a legacy rating.

 

huh.. where is Boston?, posted on April 21, 2020 at 19:37:15
kuma
Audiophile

Posts: 10273
Location: IN
Joined: July 8, 2001
 Haven't heard live with Nelsons, but they were marvelous with Haitink.

And London Symphony beat Chicago? hhmm.......

 

"legacy rating"... I agree and I would also add Berlin and Vienna...., posted on April 21, 2020 at 19:37:52
TWB
Audiophile

Posts: 7408
Location: Long Beach, California
Joined: January 5, 2001
 to the "pass" on legacy... What have you done for me lately? As you can see from the link here though the previous link was not the only ones to have a similar list...

 

They always have sounded great to me, posted on April 21, 2020 at 20:49:14
Chris from Lafayette
Audiophile

Posts: 26477
Location: SF Bay Area
Joined: February 17, 2004
Contributor
  Since: February 6, 2012
 The last time I heard them live was not quite ten years ago (at the Barbican). Pretty impressive, I thought. Are you being facetious? If not, what is it you don't like about them? If they're so bad, then what is the best orchestra in London IYO?

 

RE: They always have sounded great to me, posted on April 22, 2020 at 00:28:45
Analog Scott
Audiophile

Posts: 9933
Joined: January 8, 2002
 They are loud and sloppy as crap. Maybe you don't remember, I went to the bars with a number of them after a couple concerts. We talked about it. I was asked my opinion and I told them straight up what I thought. They collectively hung their heads and then told me about the hardship of being in the LSO and how they are over worked, under paid and demoralized as a group. And that is exactly what they sound like to me.I have heard them three times at Barbican and 4 times on the road with Yuja and MTT. They overloaded every concert hall on that road trip and couldn't stay on tempo. twice at Barbican they pulled it together and didn't suck. Which actually impressed having sat in on th rehersals where they did suck badly, were unfocused and just plain disrespectful to the guest conductor James Gaffigan. I feel badly for them. When you get to see the human side of it you feel empathy.But the truth is they sucked 5 times and managed not to suck twice. Not a good resume for being a top 10 orchestra.

 

berlin is an interesting case, posted on April 22, 2020 at 00:34:20
Analog Scott
Audiophile

Posts: 9933
Joined: January 8, 2002
 I think it would be fair to say that they are far and away the most virtuosic orchestra in the world. They have at least a dozen musicians who could easily be world class soloists. They are all superb musicians. With that said though I have found them to sound a lot like 101 soloists with no interest in being in an orchstra. But there is no sound quite like the Berlin Phil. In the right hall with the right material it can be quite impressive. In the wrong hall with the wrong material it can be quite overbearing. I have experienced both. I think they are an exciting orchestra to visit but I would not want to live with them.

 

And for me the glaring ommision is...., posted on April 22, 2020 at 00:40:47
Analog Scott
Audiophile

Posts: 9933
Joined: January 8, 2002
 St Petersberg. As fine an orchestra as I have ever heard. And with a distinctive sound. Honestly I think I would consider putting the Simon Bolivar in there. They always bring down the house. Perhaps not even a top 50 for individual talent but for energy, passion, presence and a distictive sound they are something special. I asked Yuja how she felt about recording with them because they too can be pretty sloppy and she doesn't generally like that in an orchestra. But she loves them. Why? because they would stay up all night and reherse with her if she asked them to. they were 100% there to give her what she wanted. It meant a lot to her.

 

RE: Top 10 world's best orchestras.... I would tend to agree...., posted on April 22, 2020 at 01:23:02
Todd Krieger
Audiophile

Posts: 37333
Location: SW United States
Joined: November 2, 2000
 Based on what I've heard over the past ten years.....

10. Staatskapelle Dresden
9. London Symphony Orchestra
8. Leipzig Gewandhaus Orchestra
7. Chicago Symphony Orchestra
6. Bavarian Radio Symphony Orchestra
5. WDR Sinfonieorchester
4. Vienna Philharmonic
3. Royal Concertgbouw Orchestra
2. Berlin Philharmonic
1. NHK Symphony Tokyo

 

RE: LSO has noplace in the top 10, posted on April 22, 2020 at 02:33:51
Todd Krieger
Audiophile

Posts: 37333
Location: SW United States
Joined: November 2, 2000
 Of the prominent symphony orchestras right now, the LSO will reveal how good, bad, and/or ugly the conductor is...... (The New York Philharmonic is also like this.)

Contrast Concertgebouw, which sounds good even with Franz Welser Most....... (His read of the Beethoven Nine isn't much better than his Cleveland performance, but the RCO kind of bails him out.)

 

Saito Kinen Orchestra......., posted on April 22, 2020 at 02:59:04
Todd Krieger
Audiophile

Posts: 37333
Location: SW United States
Joined: November 2, 2000
 That article had Saito Kinen Orchestra in the top 20...... This orchestra drew musicians from other Japanese orchestras, but was a part time orchestra that operated only a few months out of the year.

The few times I've heard Saito Kinen, it sounded decent, but not the best in Japan..... I'd put Yomiuri Nippon Symphony Orchestra well ahead of it, along with NHK.

This orchestra may have been disbanded several years ago... Nothing recent has been posted on YouTube, and the website is no longer operational.

 

Czech Philharmonic?, posted on April 22, 2020 at 04:44:32
andy evans
Audiophile

Posts: 4382
Joined: October 20, 2000
 Going back a few years I heard the CPO and the Dresden on successive nights at the Proms in London. The CPO were SO much more fun, more personality, more interesting especially the woodwinds and brass, and just a better listening experience. The Dresden were slick and bland. That's not enough for me as a live listening experience.

 

Ranking orchestras by YouTube, posted on April 22, 2020 at 09:00:49
pbarach
Audiophile

Posts: 3307
Location: Ohio
Joined: June 22, 2008
 Ranking world-best orchestras is a waste of time. Who has heard the MAJORITY of professional orchestras around the world on multiple occasions? Forthermore, even great orchestras have great days and not-so-great days. I heard a superb concert with the Royal Phil under Kempe decades ago--on that night, maybe, they were one of the world's great, but you never see them on these lists.


 

yeah I disagree, posted on April 22, 2020 at 09:03:12
Analog Scott
Audiophile

Posts: 9933
Joined: January 8, 2002
 When they were falling off tempo with MTT it was definitely not MTT that was causing it. In rehersals he was scolding them for it. They just weren't listening. And they definitely were not following him in performance. MTT got pretty animated to try to keep them on tempo to no avail. Love him or hate him MTT does not have rhythmic issues. And teh LSO was always sloppy. I saw them with 4 different conductors and the sloppiness was consistant. Can't blame conductors for that. Oh, and they were just plain way too loud. They even managed to overload Davies Hall in san Francisco. That's almost impossible.They were told before each performance to bring it down. Again they just didn't listen.

 

I think you're being overly influenced by your bar conversations, posted on April 22, 2020 at 09:18:25
Chris from Lafayette
Audiophile

Posts: 26477
Location: SF Bay Area
Joined: February 17, 2004
Contributor
  Since: February 6, 2012
 Yes I did remember your post about that. Again, I ask, which orchestra in London is better than the LSO? (You've got 4 or 5 more to pick from.) And I don't think that there's any evidence on the LSO Live recordings that they are"sloppy" - yes, I know that "surgery" can be performed on nominally "live" concerts, but if the problem were as pervasive as you seem to indicate, I'm sure some of the sloppiness would spill over to the recordings too. Furthermore, what you call "loudness" is what I think most listeners would call "brilliance", including critics (who, I admit, may or may not know what they are talking about). In any case, when I've heard them, the LSO has had the qualities of the best American orchestras, including a certain brashness and brilliance.

As for being disrespectful, there are a number of orchestras which have that problem/reputation, or who get that way from time to time. I don't like to see it or hear about it either.

 

Actually, I think MTT DOES have rhythmic issues, at least. . . , posted on April 22, 2020 at 09:21:53
Chris from Lafayette
Audiophile

Posts: 26477
Location: SF Bay Area
Joined: February 17, 2004
Contributor
  Since: February 6, 2012
 . . . from MY bar room conversations with a couple of SF Sym members. ;-)

 

Time Frame........., posted on April 22, 2020 at 09:42:15
Todd Krieger
Audiophile

Posts: 37333
Location: SW United States
Joined: November 2, 2000
 I thought the Czech Philharmonic was a top ten orchestra when Karel Ančerl directed it (1950s, 1960s)......

I thought the Montreal Symphony Orchestra was the best in the world when Charles Dutoit directed it (1990s)......

I thought Philadelphia had the best orchestra in the U.S. when Riccardo Muti (who's now directing Chicago) directed it (1990s).....

I thought Cleveland had the best in the world (and one of the best ever) when George Szell and Lorin Maazel directed it (1960s, 1970s, 1980s)......

I thought Boston had the best in the world (and one of the best ever) when Serge Koussevitzky and Charles Munch directed it (1940s, early 1950s)......

Ten years from now, the top ten will be a lot different from the top ten today.

If there are orchestras that have sustained "top 10" over a past 50 years, I think Vienna, Berlin, and maybe London would be in there.

 

Yes, I think both your post and Andy's get to the heart of the matter, posted on April 22, 2020 at 09:47:25
Chris from Lafayette
Audiophile

Posts: 26477
Location: SF Bay Area
Joined: February 17, 2004
Contributor
  Since: February 6, 2012
 Aside from the expected technical competence, one big factor for a lot of listeners in rating an orchestra is the orchestra's interesting, individual sound, as well as their "corporate spirit", as Andy observes about the CzPO (although this orchestra seems to have lost a lot of their individual sound over the years, especially in, say, the last 25 years IMHO). I would also make the same claim about Witt and the Warsaw NPO when I saw them a few years ago. They just seemed to have a lot of spirit about them. (Or maybe they were just happy that SF was the last stop on their tour - LOL!) In fact, check out this performance of the Enigma Variations - it's really a different approach and a different sound from what we normally expect in this work:








View YouTube Video



And then your point (that no one can possibly see all the world's orchestras in a short amount of time) is also well taken - and even if we were able to attend all these live concerts, we would still not know how a given orchestra works and sounds on a day-in day-out basis.

In addition, it's just too tempting to give in to local boosterism and think that one's local orchestra is always one of the big dawgs. English critics are notorious for their local chauvinism, but I think we all indulge in it. ;-)

 

The ups and downs of orchestras..., posted on April 22, 2020 at 10:04:46
andy evans
Audiophile

Posts: 4382
Joined: October 20, 2000
 Even 5 years ago the Czech PO was exciting to listen to, but I can imagine it also had better days. The Czechs are a very patriotic and proud people after all they went through - very obvious team spirit. Plus they have a rich musical tradition. I love the more raw sound of the winds and brass - the clarinets are very reedy and the trumpets are wide and brassy. Does it for me. I wonder if the Warsaw PO has a similar style.

 

RE: Actually, I think MTT DOES have rhythmic issues, at least. . . , posted on April 22, 2020 at 18:27:23
Analog Scott
Audiophile

Posts: 9933
Joined: January 8, 2002
 I have yet to witness any such issues with him conducting the SFSO. But there was no question about the issues when he conducted the LSO and no question as to the source of those issues.It was the LSO. Heck if MTT does have rhythmic issues then that is all the more reason to question the ranking of the LSO. It's bad enough that an orchestra should be rightly chastised by a conductor for failing to keep the tempo. Even worse when it comes from a conductor who is not particularly good at it himself.

 

RE: I think you're being overly influenced by your bar conversations, posted on April 22, 2020 at 18:42:53
Analog Scott
Audiophile

Posts: 9933
Joined: January 8, 2002
 You think I am being overly influenced by my bar conversations? Wait...didn't you just express an opinion about MTT based on your conversations with a few members of the SFSO?

"Yes I did remember your post about that. Again, I ask, which orchestra in London is better than the LSO? (You've got 4 or 5 more to pick from.)"

Actaully I have only heard one other on multiple occassions. The Royal Phil. And IMO they were substantially better. So IME that puts the LSO in 2nd place out of two orchestras in London. But these were world rankings not London rankings. And I can easily name 10 other orchestras that I have heard multiple times that IMO were suybstantially consistantly just plain better than the LSO.

"And I don't think that there's any evidence on the LSO Live recordings that they are"sloppy" - yes, I know that "surgery" can be performed on nominally "live" concerts, but if the problem were as pervasive as you seem to indicate, I'm sure some of the sloppiness would spill over to the recordings too."


I judge by what I hear in person. IME you get insight into the true virtues of a classical artist in person that you simply never get on recordings, even live ones.

"Furthermore, what you call "loudness" is what I think most listeners would call "brilliance", including critics (who, I admit, may or may not know what they are talking about)."

1. You can't speak for "most listeners" 2. You didn't hear what I heard so you are in no position to form an opinion about it. There have only been two orchestras IME that have actually been told to play less loud. The LSO was told on all four of their road performances. Including Davies Hall. You've been to Davies Hall. Can you even imagine an orchestra overloading Davies Hall? that's not an "oops" thatspeaks to deeper issues.

"In any case, when I've heard them, the LSO has had the qualities of the best American orchestras, including a certain brashness and brilliance."

But the last time you heard them was 10 years ago? And maybe you caught them on a good night. You did hear them in Barbican. their home concert hall.One would expect any orchestra to know their own hall better. And yeah, in Barbican was when they didn't suck IME. But not sucking 2 out of 7 times is hardly resume material for top 10 in the world



"As for being disrespectful, there are a number of orchestras which have that problem/reputation, or who get that way from time to time. I don't like to see it or hear about it either."


Sure, but the real issue is does it creep into the performance. And it does. But not alwasy in the same ways. And as much as we can reduce bar conversations to "gossip" (goes for both of us) Not a lot of artists are going to tell a stranger/new friend "yeah you are right, we SUCKED but we have all these excuses why." And that is exactly what they did. Not just one of them. There were about 6 or 7 of them that jumped into this conversation. I felt like the leader ina group therapy session. And it should come as no surprise really. They are under paid and over worked. And that takes it's toll on them. It makes it hard to keep the betetr msuicians who have options and it makes it hard to get the best out of the ones who endure the hardship.

 

Well, at least my conversations weren't at a bar ;-), posted on April 22, 2020 at 20:25:15
Chris from Lafayette
Audiophile

Posts: 26477
Location: SF Bay Area
Joined: February 17, 2004
Contributor
  Since: February 6, 2012
 OK - I don't know if this is worth it, because, as I stated in a post above, trying to rank orchestras based on catch-as-catch-can live performances is going to be like the parable of the blind men and the elephant. No two people are going to have the same experiences, so they start arguing about the whole based only on the knowledge of the parts. So while each of our subjective experiences can be "true" (to each one of us at least), we get into trouble when we try to extrapolate our limited subjective truths into a general truth. So. . . I am not disputing your own reactions to the LSO at all. What I do say is that you're the only one I know who has expressed the idea that the LSO doesn't rank in the top 50 orchestras, and my own subjective reactions to their live music making differ from yours - and rather substantially at that.

If you think the RPO is better, then more power to you. (I haven't heard them live.) I will point out though that I know of no one else who ranks the two orchestras like that (i.e., with the RPO ahead of the LPO). But that does not show that you're wrong - it only shows that you have had certain subjective experiences which lead you to your opinion.

As for dismissing recordings as a factor in making an assessment of the quality of an orchestra, yes, I think one must be careful with this, but I certainly disagree that one should throw out recordings entirely. I think we're all sophisticated enough to know what goes on in the making of commercial recordings, and, just as certainly, we're also sophisticated enough to take those practices into account when we listen.

When I referred to most listeners calling what you term "loudness" as "brilliance", I was referring to other listeners I've talked to, corresponded with, or read in print. I did not mean to imply that I was speaking for most listeners in general - sorry if I wasn't clear on that point. In regard to loudness, yes, I've seen the LSO a couple of times at Davies, and on neither occasion, IMHO, did they "overload" the hall - and they were playing repertoire which certainly COULD have overloaded the hall: Tchaikovsky Fourth, Bartok Miraculous Mandarin, Stravinsky Firebird Suite among other things.

As for the LSO's resume, their resume for you consists of the seven times you've heard them live. OK, that's fine - but it's also completely subjective, somewhat limited, and, frankly, probably meaningless to other listeners, unless they attended the same concerts that you did. That, BTW, is why one can't throw out recordings in making assessments of orchestras: they're the only common frames of reference we have - unless we're talking about a particular live concert which we've both attended. (Actually though, if you can find a review or two of these various concerts you've attended, that might strengthen your claim.)

Getting back to the bar again, I don't think we can be sure what "yeah, we sucked" actually means. I've certainly been in work situations and meetings where this strain of negativity gets going and the whole discussion becomes a somewhat funereal experience - all it takes is one or two to get the mood going, especially with a little alcohol involved! ;-)

Finally, I just want to repeat that limiting our discussion to live performances only removes any common basis for discussion, unless we've all been to the same live performances. In a way, it's a kind of useless discussion. But when you make an extraordinary assertion (i.e., that the LSO doesn't even belong in the top 50 orchestras), then I'd like to see something a bit more compelling than your impressions from attending seven of their live concerts. But, for one last time, I'm not disputing at all that your assertion is a kind of truth (to you) - but you're the only one I've encountered who feels this way.

 

I definitely don't follow that logic, posted on April 22, 2020 at 20:38:48
Chris from Lafayette
Audiophile

Posts: 26477
Location: SF Bay Area
Joined: February 17, 2004
Contributor
  Since: February 6, 2012
 The old Dunning-Kruger effect could be in play here!

In the case of MTT, he may not even be aware he has rhythmic issues, and, indeed, may think he's God's gift to rhythm! ;-)

 

I will explain the logic, posted on April 22, 2020 at 21:57:23
Analog Scott
Audiophile

Posts: 9933
Joined: January 8, 2002
 when an expert find flaws in something the flaws may very well be subtle in nature. It is after all an expert critique. When a hack finds flaws in something chances are greater that the flaws aren't so subtle. When the artists themselves see the flaws and make excuses for them the flaws are pretty incontravertable. I am hardly a human metronome, and it is quite possible that MTT may have less than stellar sense of rhythm as per your sources. And yet we both heard substantial issues in the LSO maintaining a tempo and controlling their dynamics as did the members of the LSO that I talked with. I suppose we could all be wrong....

 

But conversations at the bar can actually be the most enlightening thing, posted on April 22, 2020 at 22:13:00
Analog Scott
Audiophile

Posts: 9933
Joined: January 8, 2002
 And that really is the thing that sticks with me here. everything you said is quite true. 7 samples while not insignificant does not make an all encompassing experience. And you can rightfully point to the lack of collaberation of critics and other people. However my views of those concerts were very much collaborated by other listeners some of whom I think can call themselves true experts. But it's the bar conversation that to me is the most telling. If they were having an off night or just having a bad tour one would think that at least one of them would say as much. "yeah we sucked tonight but that isn't our best." But no. What I got was a chorus of why they were bad. And it wasn't limited to that tour. That is not meaningless by a long shot. especially when they are spilling their guts to someone they had really just met. And doing so, by the way, in the presence of a particular soloist. Now your point about the challenges of ranking orchestras is absolutely correct. we do it on very spotty information. And I have no idea if they belong in the top 50 or not.That's a lot of orchestras. But I can't see them in the top 10 either. There are too many orchestras that are consistantly quite excellent for there to be room for one in the state I saw and heard with the LSO. Yes, I too have friends in the SFSO and here some gossip. But having heard them at least 30 times I feel pretty confident in making at least a basic assessment of them. I would say that they are substantially better than the LSO. They aren't on the list. Do they belong? I dunno. There are a lot of orchestras. But that is why it is easy for me to take the LSO out of the top 10. There are a lot of really good orchestras.

 

RE: I will explain the logic, posted on April 23, 2020 at 01:08:58
Chris from Lafayette
Audiophile

Posts: 26477
Location: SF Bay Area
Joined: February 17, 2004
Contributor
  Since: February 6, 2012
 "When the artists themselves see the flaws and make excuses for them the flaws are pretty incontravertable."

I would say just the opposite: the artists themselves probably have a high degree of sensitivity, and flaws that are obvious to them may not be so obvious to others (such as listeners in the audience, or even, dare I say it, critics!)

I do agree with you that "[w]hen a hack finds flaws in something chances are greater that the flaws aren't so subtle". I guess the question is who do you mean to be the "hack"? ;-)

 

I guess it depends on the amount of alcohol ;-), posted on April 23, 2020 at 01:13:23
Chris from Lafayette
Audiophile

Posts: 26477
Location: SF Bay Area
Joined: February 17, 2004
Contributor
  Since: February 6, 2012
 And, yes, there are a lot of really good orchestras these days. There are even a lot of really good second-tier and third-tier orchestras these days, IMHO.

 

RE: Top 10 world's best orchestras.... Where's the TSO? , posted on April 23, 2020 at 12:24:21
B. Scarpia






View YouTube Video

 

TSO? Man, that's Tatarstan to me!, posted on April 23, 2020 at 18:36:33
Chris from Lafayette
Audiophile

Posts: 26477
Location: SF Bay Area
Joined: February 17, 2004
Contributor
  Since: February 6, 2012
 Here they are on a tour of pre-COVID COMMUNIST China in 2018:








View YouTube Video

 

Toronto Symphony Orchestra is pretty good..................., posted on April 23, 2020 at 18:41:49
Kal Rubinson
Reviewer

Posts: 12436
Location: New York
Joined: June 5, 2002
 but far from Top-10 consideration.

 

And they've had some outstanding engineering on some of their recordings, posted on April 23, 2020 at 20:13:16
Chris from Lafayette
Audiophile

Posts: 26477
Location: SF Bay Area
Joined: February 17, 2004
Contributor
  Since: February 6, 2012

 

RE: Toronto Symphony Orchestra is pretty good..................., posted on April 24, 2020 at 13:17:16
Todd Krieger
Audiophile

Posts: 37333
Location: SW United States
Joined: November 2, 2000
 There's also a "Tokyo Symphony Orchestra"...... (Tokyo has more symphony orchestras than London. And Suntory Hall probably holds more orchestral concerts in a calendar year than any other concert hall in the world.)

 

RE: Yes, I think both your post and Andy's get to the heart of the matter, posted on April 25, 2020 at 08:58:42
Todd Krieger
Audiophile

Posts: 37333
Location: SW United States
Joined: November 2, 2000
 ".... it's really a different approach and a different sound from what we normally expect in this work:"

It's indeed a different sound..... The "intonation" was perfect.......

 

RE the RCO, posted on April 27, 2020 at 16:02:42
goldenthal
Audiophile

Posts: 1001
Location: Ontario
Joined: March 28, 2003
 I tend to agree with you -- they make a lovely sound, helped by their extraordinary room. But boy do they ever tolerate a lot of undernourished conducting!

Jeremy

 

I haven't seen musicians bounce around like that since Furtwangler's mesmerized Brits. : ), posted on April 28, 2020 at 06:45:45
jdaniel@jps.net
 I like the broad ending. Sinopoli's with the Philharmonia still a favorite.

 

RE: Czech Philharmonic?, posted on May 17, 2020 at 17:23:49
Dr. Fuse
Audiophile

Posts: 48
Location: BC
Joined: May 12, 2020
 I too am a fan of the Czech Phil's recordings, from the Golden Age when Ancerl directed them. I've been a fan of the 1960/61 Rite of Spring LP since I was 13, and of their 70s Prokofiev Symphony Cycle (No. 6 and No. 2, especially).
Back in the mid 90s, when I became Principal Violist with the Victoria Symphony, there was an excellent and eccentric violist in my section, by the name of Jaroslav Karlovsky. I remember playing for him when I wrote a viola concerto which I had to perform in Vancouver and Victoria (a piece I later performed with Yannick Nezet-Seguin conducting, but that's another story). A highlight was when Jaro said "You are ARTIST!", and then demanded I get drunk on Slivovitz with him.
A few years later I was in NYC, and found a CD of the Bartok Viola Concerto, with the Czech Phil and Ancerl. And the viola soloist was...JARO!
He was almost embarrassed when I enthusiastically told him how amazing his recording was. "Izzz terrible recording! Izz NEW MUZICK, back zhen!" Indeed it was. It was recorded in 1960, and Jaro explained that Primrose's 15 year exclusionary contract had just expired, and he was the first one to record it after the Scottish violist. So it was indeed new music for all the Czech musicians involved.
It also turns out Jaro was principal viola on the Rite of Spring session from 1960/61, one of my desert island discs.
I cherish his memory and artistry. Jaroslav Karlovsky, RIP, passed away 1997.

 

RE: Czech Philharmonic?, posted on May 18, 2020 at 04:53:12
pbarach
Audiophile

Posts: 3307
Location: Ohio
Joined: June 22, 2008
 Lovely story! I like many of the Czech Phil's recordings from the Ancerl days, including Mahler 9, Rite of Spring, Symphony of Psalms, Till Eulenspiegel,...I could go on.

 

RE: RE the RCO, posted on May 27, 2020 at 11:51:33
Todd Krieger
Audiophile

Posts: 37333
Location: SW United States
Joined: November 2, 2000
 I was watching this B-9, and someone watching the video told me, "His (FWM) conducting looks like Johnny Sokko's robot"....... (I was familiar with the tacky Japanese adventure series from the 1970s, and I had to agree...... )

Most's conducting style to me looks like he's in over his head...... (Especially after watching Celibidache conduct, just linked elsewhere on this board. Talk about contrasting styles.) There is no cohesiveness in the playing by the orchestra, it looks like 100 people doing their own individual things...... Even with RCO......

I don't think the RCO would have performed this much differently had this been done without a conductor...... (Most top orchestras are very capable of doing that.)

 

Page processed in 0.039 seconds.

[ Top Top of Page ] [ Contact Us ] [ Support/Wish List ] [ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
[ General ] [ Speakers ] [ Tubes ] [ Vinyl ] [ Digital ] [ Hi-Rez ] [ Video Asylum ] [ Cables ] [ Tweaks/DIY ] [ Music ] [ Films ]