Post by hiredfox November 1, 2010 (1 of 14)
|
|
Am I missing something? Why would anybody pay £75 for this disc when the source disc is still widely available for around £10?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Why indeed, when accounts of recent years are in almost every respect far better than he managed...
(The only respect they fail in, is that the more modern ones are conducted by people who aren't dead yet and don't have such a high profile name.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Polly Nomial said:
Why indeed, when accounts of recent years are in almost every respect far better than he managed...
I would have said ...are in every respect even better than he managed! And I am not SO sure regarding the 7th on Orfeo, regarding performance, not sound, that the recent ones are not merely equal, to not superior to that Kleiber disc.
|
|
|
Post by Fugue November 1, 2010 (4 of 14)
|
|
What full-sized modern orchestra version beats this one? (in both sound and intensity of performance?)
|
|
|
Post by Lochiel November 1, 2010 (5 of 14)
|
|
Fugue said:
What full-sized modern orchestra version beats this one? (in both sound and intensity of performance?)
I agree...all of the modern (which is hard to understand considering when Kleiber recorded these pieces) conductors have had the benefit of listening to Kleiber. It's almost impossible to compare given how "modern day" CD's, iPods, and the MP3 format have changed things, even from 1976. I once read how Krystian Zimerman said he listened to 120-some recordings of the Brahms First Piano Concerto before recording it with Rattle. That's a pretty astounding admission from an artist of his caliber, but also one that reflects diminished artistic originality and integrity today. It's much easier to listen to a great recording and mimic the style, provided one has the technique, than it is to generate authentic stream-of-consciousness intepretation that many find enjoyable.
Kleiber may simply be one of the pack now, but he was an "original" (no pun intended) who, though he no doubt listened to some recordings, based his interpretation more on what he heard in concert halls and refashioned in his memory than from the result of a mammoth listening effort toward recorded performances. And let's face it, there so little "new" music written that audiences want to hear over and over that we formulate relatively few "interpretative schools" around newer music, which would separate the wheat from the chaff in terms of younger conductors.
|
|
|
Post by Chris November 2, 2010 (6 of 14)
|
|
Fugue said:
What full-sized modern orchestra version beats this one? (in both sound and intensity of performance?)
For number 5 I would say Karajan's 1962 version. And for number 7 Fisher and his BSO on Channel.The BPO Karajan a good vintage analoge recording and the channel one a pure DSD SOTA recording.
No need whatsoever to settle for early bad pcm sound.
Like Karajan Kleiber was a good conductor but not a GOD.
The sometimes obsessive focus on some conductors, reminds me of the joke why is a conductor like a condom?
Answer :It may be safer with one but a lot more fun without one!
|
|
|
Post by Claude November 2, 2010 (7 of 14)
|
|
hiredfox said:
Am I missing something? Why would anybody pay £75 for this disc when the source disc is still widely available for around £10?
Someone why thinks SHM is worth a £65 premium, or the CD layer of a hybrid SACD degrades the hi-rez sound ;-)
|
|
|
Post by LivyII November 2, 2010 (8 of 14)
|
|
Chris said:
For number 5 I would say Karajan's 1962 version. And for number 7 Fisher and his BSO on Channel.The BPO Karajan a good vintage analoge recording and the channel one a pure DSD SOTA recording.
No need whatsoever to settle for early bad pcm sound.
Like Karajan Kleiber was a good conductor but not a GOD.
The sometimes obsessive focus on some conductors, reminds me of the joke why is a conductor like a condom?
Answer :It may be safer with one but a lot more fun without one!
Until you get AIDS...
|
|
|
Post by nydo November 2, 2010 (9 of 14)
|
|
I would take Kleiber's performance over either of these (I have them all). Performance comes before audiophile characteristics here, within reason. It surprises me at times that people can be so fussy about audio quality, and pay so little respect to the actual differences in music making (not that these three performances are lacking).
|
|
|
Post by Ubertrout November 2, 2010 (10 of 14)
|
|
Is this going to be struck from the same master as the regular DG SACD of these works? Also, I had the impression that while the Brahms 4 was an early digital recording, these were analog. Is that incorrect?
Edit: Nevermind on the second part - the readily available conventional SACD of this release - Beethoven: Symphonies Nos. 5 & 7 - Kleiber, was made from a 24/96 PCM dub of the analog multichannel tapes.
|
|
