Post by braver May 2, 2006 (1 of 22)
|
|
I completely disagree with the review which writes this recording off on the account of a low-key Hallelujah.
This is the second best Messiah I have, and I have two others on SACD and many more on CD. My favorite one is by Beecham. (It appears big sound like that is just out of fashion nowadays, which is simply narrow-minded in its own turn; they just don't sing it like that in these more jaded of times, and it would take a Beecham to do it again).
Harnoncourt's performance has one feature which is uniquely his -- there's not a single false note, literally of course but also figuratively. Any stylistic dissonance, any questionable passage or tone, possible on other recordings, is simply not to be found here. After listening to many different Messiahs many times, this is the one to rediscover Messiah. I find it happens with everything Harnoncourt does -- his Figaro, his Bruckner (which he literally helped to rediscover)...
I can sympathise with active parishioners singing the choruses out loud, and I enjoy trying to sing it in lovely places -- I did so in Princeton Chapel and hope to attend a Westminster Abbey performance one of Xmases -- but in no way NH's lovely low-keying can color this performance in any way other than refreshing and harmonious.
If you want to enjoy an SACD Messiah, I recommend them in this order:
Harnoncourt
Ohrwall
McCreesh
|
|
|
Post by terence May 2, 2006 (2 of 22)
|
|
braver, i couldn't agree more, and glad to hear someone say it.
i was riveted by this messiah, and funnily enough (given what you say) it was the beecham recording which kept coming to mind when i played the harnoncourt. stylistically of course they're very different, but they have a similar seriousness of engagement with the work's meaning, the same intensity of gesture.
the SACD sound i find superbly involving.
this harnoncourt version has had a very indifferent press in the UK, probably because it's most unlike performances in the "anglican" tradition. it's more confrontational than that, and has a truly dramatic impact.
i hope more people are encouraged to listen.
|
|
|
Post by terence May 2, 2006 (3 of 22)
|
|
P.S. the RBCD of the stereo beecham messiah is eminently worth having, not least for the extraordinarily intense contributions of tenor jon vickers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Just to join the parade here, I just finished listening to disc one again and despite my generally despising the sound of "period instruments" I have to admit, YES this performance is most definitely "riveting". I also did not feel offended or let down by the Hallelujah Chorus, it was different was all. The playing is most expert, thus alleviating my distaste for the whining sound usually associated with such performances. For something I think I don't like (period instruments) it amazes me how frequently I return to this set.
Simply put, Harnoncourt is a genius. Oh yeah, the sound. The sound is superb in multi-channel. I feel like I am there!
|
|
|
Post by Darwin May 2, 2006 (5 of 22)
|
|
I've always liked the moment when everything is cruising along and then comes almost to a full stop for the tone painting "The kingdom of this earth...has become...."
The Harnoncourt version gives me shivers there (a good thing).
|
|
|
|
|
|
I was actually expecting to dislike it, but I purchased it anyways and I was absolutely blown away. The sonics are superb, and the playing is SO good. It is certainly a breath of fresh air and, for me, a recording that touches me greatly each time I listen to it.
|
|
|
Post by terence May 2, 2006 (7 of 22)
|
|
i'm delighted to read these comments - as i say, UK reviews have been generally lukewarm to indifferent, which didn't at all match the enthralling experience actually emerging from the MC mix through my speakers.
|
|
|
Post by toddao May 2, 2006 (8 of 22)
|
|
I suggest that you also try Harnoncourt's Verdi Requiem which was so poorly reviewed in the UK press that it was only a very positive review here that made me seek it out. It's wonderful,especially in MC.
|
|
|
Post by terence May 3, 2006 (9 of 22)
|
|
toddao i agree - again a lukewarm UK reception of an extremely fine performance.
SOME at least of the problem is that UK reviewers appear not to know that SACD multichannel exists. a big work like the requiem can really benefit from it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
terence said:
toddao i agree - again a lukewarm UK reception of an extremely fine performance.
SOME at least of the problem is that UK reviewers appear not to know that SACD multichannel exists. a big work like the requiem can really benefit from it.
Some reviewers, and I think they are past age 50, are aware of multi-channel SACD but they believe it is (as in the case of TACET) intended to do nothing more than provide a gimmicky jazzed up sound with instruments all around you. They reject that idea, want nothing to do with is so they ignore SACD surround. I know this is true from corresponding with the editor of "The American Record Guide" published in Cincinatti Ohio. Boy are they partial to Jarvi and the Cincinatti! In an editorial discussing SACD a few months ago the editor dismissed SACD surround as "a gimmick I am not interested in" Sam Tellig of Stereophile, who should know better has described himself as a "two channel sort of guy" saying he doesn't want instruments coming at him from behind, and the owner cheif designer of Ayre Acoustics, in an interview in Stereophile said his new SACD player was stereo only because "who wants instruments coming at them from behind?".
There is a lot of ignorance out there, not just in the UK.
|
|
