Post by Ernani71 September 29, 2011 (1 of 9)
|
|
The only problem with Brahms' violin concerto in d is that the introduction is so great, evokes such a degree of excitement in me (I can hardly describe what I feel when I listen to it), that the rest is a little anticlimactic, although I love the whole thing. I've come to appreciate Heifetz's playing here, even if I was a bit tepid about it at first. Can anybody recommend another recording of this concerto? I already have the Fischer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Many others but not on SACD. ;-)
Kal
|
|
|
Post by seth September 29, 2011 (3 of 9)
|
|
Ernani71 said:
The only problem with Brahms' violin concerto in d is that the introduction is so great, evokes such a degree of excitement in me (I can hardly describe what I feel when I listen to it), that the rest is a little anticlimactic, although I love the whole thing. I've come to appreciate Heifetz's playing here, even if I was a bit tepid about it at first. Can anybody recommend another recording of this concerto? I already have the Fischer.
Oistrakh/Szell/Cleveland.
And if you must have it on SACD, you can pay Esoteric's through the roof price.
|
|
|
Post by jdaniel September 29, 2011 (4 of 9)
|
|
To me, the real gem is the finale of the Tchaikovsky. I know of none more exciting; more quicksilver with every note perfectly-placed, even in the fastest runs.
|
|
|
Post by akiralx October 2, 2011 (5 of 9)
|
|
seth said:
Oistrakh/Szell/Cleveland.
And if you must have it on SACD, you can pay Esoteric's through the roof price.
Oistrakh's Cleveland version is certainly very good, and well recorded for the period (1969 I think) even if the violin is a little too prominent.
Heifetz's version with Koussevitzky is phenomenal but obviously in elderly sound.
My favourite in modern sound is Hilary Hahn on Sony, her playing of the solo part is wonderful,in the Heifetz class. Marriner is actually quite a good accompanist here even though others are better.
|
|
|
Post by chenzl October 3, 2011 (6 of 9)
|
|
akiralx said:
Oistrakh's Cleveland version is certainly very good, and well recorded for the period (1969 I think) even if the violin is a little too prominent.
Heifetz's version with Koussevitzky is phenomenal but obviously in elderly sound.
My favourite in modern sound is Hilary Hahn on Sony, her playing of the solo part is wonderful,in the Heifetz class. Marriner is actually quite a good accompanist here even though others are better.
For performance, this version is a classic.
Sound wise, Chung/Montreal/Dutoit on Decca is hard to beat, naturally not say its performance was inferior in anyway.
|
|
|
Post by Ernani71 October 24, 2011 (7 of 9)
|
|
I'm suffering from Brahmsmania. For the last six months or so, whenever I play anything other than Brahms I get impatient and immediately have to revert to Brahms again. The only exception is Wagner. Thanks for the recommendations. Will definitely try them.
|
|
|
Post by Ernani71 November 18, 2011 (8 of 9)
|
|
seth said:
Oistrakh/Szell/Cleveland.
And if you must have it on SACD, you can pay Esoteric's through the roof price.
The Oistrakh floored me, just floored me. I guess you can argue that Heifetz plays with more virtuosity, but Oistrakh plays with much more feeling.
|
|
|
Post by Ernani71 April 24, 2012 (9 of 9)
|
|
Mariss Jansons conducts a wonderful Brahms Violin Concerto with Julian Rachlin on violin. At least in the second and third movements it beats Heifetz and Oistrakh in my opinion
|
|
