|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
75.214.48.250
In Reply to: I haven't heard the BSO in many years, but..... posted by Rick W on February 11, 2007 at 14:49:49:
"Who -- other than possibly touring soloists and conductors -- gets to hear a variety of music played by even 10 orchestras in a variety of halls over, say, a three year span? How else could informed judgements be made?"The great ones in history, Stokowski's Philadelphia, Koussevitzky's Boston, Reiner's Chicago, Szell's Cleveland, Karajan's Berlin, and Dutoit's Montreal had distinctive tonal character that could make one pick these bands out when listening to something for the first time. Even over the radio. (I personally think Charles Dutoit has been the best conductor I've experienced during my lifetime.) For example, the Koussevitzky Boston had a clarity of melodic line that IMO was never equalled. (This was still notable early in Charles Munch's tenure.) No orchestra had better chops and tonal nuance than Szell's Cleveland. (Which may have actually peaked under Lorin Maazel.) Chicago's brass was overpowering and easily recognized. Berlin had a unique articulation for composers like Wagner that was unmistakable. I thought Montreal combined the sonorities of Cleveland and the melodic integrity of Boston. Even Vienna, with its superb string tone and raw in the brass.
But for the past decade, in my opinion, no orchestra had such uniqueness in character to pick it out like at one time. (Although I have not heard Montreal or Cleveland in recent time.) I will also say that the digitization of music has stunted our ability to discern such character.
Follow Ups:
nt
...to enjoy music, or even convey its power. But let's face it, most people accept CD's shrill, edgy sound -- especially "musicians", who as I've often noted make terrible audio critics.The advantage we have in Boston with the BSO broadcasts ( pace those who spout off without ever having listened, an altogether too typical circumstance here at AA), is that the Symphony Hall link is not PCM digital, rather "delta-mod", which eliminates many or most of PCM's enharmonic artifacts.
About radio: Radio has brought us the Metropolitan Opera since the Thirties. In the decades I've been listening, never did I find that the broadcast sound, never really very good, intruded on the music; I can give myself over wholly to the performance (if it's gripping, like last week's Cav/Pag). Radio has brought us Toscanini, Koussevitzky, Ormandy, Mitropoulos and other greats, all *live* and in performances far better than the chilly studio stuff they turn out on discs for the hi-fi addicts.
Radio (at least in Boston) brings more new music into our lives than going to a concert every day would. And for whatever it's worth, I do still go.
Back to the Boston Symphony, I would argue that its peak sonicwise over the FM was back in the Sixties, when all was analog and all was tubes . That may not sit well with some sorts, but I have a couple tapes to demonstrate my allegation. I mention this because it shows that the FM medium is capable of great things. One of those tapes -- a Mahler 6th, 2-track 15ips -- sounds quite better than Leinsdorf's RCA outing. Not to mention the superior, live performance!
Finally, regarding live concerts over the radio, what should involve one is the music, not the sound. MUSIC IS NOT ABOUT SOUND.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: