Post by fafnir March 11, 2009 (1 of 47)
|
|
For a drastically different take on this performance see the review on classicstoday.com. It seems as though two entirely different performances were being reviewed. It would be well to bear this difference in opinion in mind before calling any performance "the best," or even worse "definitive." What is really meant is "my favorite for now."
|
|
|
Post by krisjan March 11, 2009 (2 of 47)
|
|
I saw both of these reviews and you are right - they couldn't be more different. Just goes to show how subjective performance evaluations are. I have generally tracked pretty well with David Hurwitz's opinions over the years so personally I will avoid this one (not that I would have purchased it anyway as I have plenty performances of this on RBCD and SACD already).
|
|
|
Post by Peter March 11, 2009 (3 of 47)
|
|
I have just heard from the UK distributor that the SACD version will not be imported.
|
|
|
Post by wehecht March 11, 2009 (4 of 47)
|
|
krisjan said:
I saw both of these reviews and you are right - they couldn't be more different. Just goes to show how subjective performance evaluations are. I have generally tracked pretty well with David Hurwitz's opinions over the years so personally I will avoid this one (not that I would have purchased it anyway as I have plenty performances of this on RBCD and SACD already).
With seven versions on my shelves, including three on sacd, this won't be on my list either, but I can't resist the opportunity to observe that while I also generally track with Mr. Hurwitz, it seems he's never learned how to dislike something other than in the strongest possible terms (see his savage review of the BIS set of Handel's opus 6, a set which has been favorable reviewed elsewhere and which I think is delightful). Also, he frequently seems to be influenced by extraneous matters: whether this is Haitink's first, fifth, or twentieth Mahler 1 has nothing to do with whether it's a good performance and it's hard to imagine that his evident upset over Haitink's "hypocrisy" plays no part in his judgment of the recording. By the way, and off topic, have you noticed that the 10/10 rated Ondine recording of Asrael has never been listed as an sacd on classicstoday.com?
Bill
|
|
|
Post by krisjan March 11, 2009 (5 of 47)
|
|
Hi Bill,
Yes, David Hurwitz can go over the top in denigrating something he doesn't like (another example is the recent Bruckner 5 Telarc review). I just take it with a grain of salt and realize that its probably not as bad as he makes it out to be.
Hadn't noticed that about the Ondine/Suk release. I am holding out for the BIS recording of this work (which Robert has promised is coming in the future) and until then my other RBCD's of this work will tide me over.
Mark
|
|
|
Post by fafnir March 11, 2009 (6 of 47)
|
|
For as long as I can remember, this work has elicited contrary opinions concerning performance quality. The total disagreement on the new Haitink is certainly nothing new. Back in the early 1950s there was a virtually simultaneous release of two new versions - Walter and the NYP and Kubelik with the VPO. Naturally there was no agreement as to which was the better, with advocates on both sides. Most recently the Nott version on Tudor has been lauded by the Grannyphone and attacked by Hurwitz. In between these events 50 years apart there has never been anything approaching a consensus, and nor, I think, should there have been.
IMHO nearly all criticism of the playing of competent professions is totally subjective. The full scope of great music is only fully revealed through the impact of varied interpretations. There is no such thing as "the best."
|
|
|
|
|
|
krisjan said:
I saw both of these reviews and you are right - they couldn't be more different. Just goes to show how subjective performance evaluations are. I have generally tracked pretty well with David Hurwitz's opinions over the years so personally I will avoid this one (not that I would have purchased it anyway as I have plenty performances of this on RBCD and SACD already).
I wouldn't pay too much attention to what David Hurwitz says anyway...
|
|
|
Post by krisjan March 20, 2009 (8 of 47)
|
|
notelover said:
I wouldn't pay too much attention to what David Hurwitz says anyway...
I disagree. While he can be over the top at times (both positively and negatively), I find his criticism perceptive. I believe there are too many "nice" (or perhaps the better word is "uncritical") critics. To each his own.
|
|
|
|
|
|
fafnir said:
Back in the early 1950s there was a virtually simultaneous release of two new versions -
Wow, buddy - you have been around for a while haven't you? :)
I completely agree with your post initializing this thread. I also have come pretty recently to take what any critic says with a huge grain of salt. One must bear in mind the question, when one sees scathing criticism, of whether or not the inflamed critic happens to be sitting on an inflamed hemorrhoid at the time he wrote his little missive.
What really impresses me in a negative fashion is the phenomenon wherein a critic forms an opinion of an artist and makes general statements, perhaps I mean implicitly predictive statements in the context of generalizations. I have learned that such generalizations are meaningless. I am referring to such statements as Mickey Mouse is boring, or Mikey Mouse doesn't know how to conduct Mahler, or Mozart or Beethoven or whatever.
|
|
|
Post by hiredfox March 20, 2009 (10 of 47)
|
|
Peter said:
I have just heard from the UK distributor that the SACD version will not be imported.
Where can we get it? It's not on Amazon uk either.
|
|
