Where to start with classical music
Posted by: Foot tapper on 15 November 2008
Apologies in advance, as this topic will no doubt have croped up before, but..
I have pretty accommodating tastes in modern music, from Enya to Kings of Leon with lots of blues along the way (Muddy Waters, E Clapton, Peter Green etc.), but classical is almost virgin territory.
Opera and chamber music don't do much for me, but I have a very few, 30+ year old, tired vinyl records of Vivaldi 4 seasons, Tchaikovsky violin concerto, Mozart symphonies 39 & 40 and Holst the planets.
Call me impetuous, but I am in the mood to go out and buy a dozen decent recordings of clasical music to kick-start the collection.
Someone recommended buying the Classic FM guide to classical music and also the Penguin guide to CDs. so I will pick those up on the way.
Any recommendations for this classical virgin?
I have pretty accommodating tastes in modern music, from Enya to Kings of Leon with lots of blues along the way (Muddy Waters, E Clapton, Peter Green etc.), but classical is almost virgin territory.
Opera and chamber music don't do much for me, but I have a very few, 30+ year old, tired vinyl records of Vivaldi 4 seasons, Tchaikovsky violin concerto, Mozart symphonies 39 & 40 and Holst the planets.
Call me impetuous, but I am in the mood to go out and buy a dozen decent recordings of clasical music to kick-start the collection.
Someone recommended buying the Classic FM guide to classical music and also the Penguin guide to CDs. so I will pick those up on the way.
Any recommendations for this classical virgin?
Posted on: 22 November 2008 by zappadaddy
To Manni:I was just about to wonder that nobody included these 2 names.I love Smetana/Ma vlast and Dvorak Novy svet=New world.These 2 are so emotional and beautifull.I recommend Kubelik version of Dvorak on Xrcd.
Posted on: 22 November 2008 by Foot tapper
Thanks Manfred
Beethoven's 7th was also a thundering tour de force.
Now know that Sibelius violin concerto is not for me, but Tchaikovsky's violin concerto is much better. The EMI recordings aren't up to much though.
Looks like Dvorak and Franz Schubert are next on the shopping list...
Beethoven's 7th was also a thundering tour de force.
Now know that Sibelius violin concerto is not for me, but Tchaikovsky's violin concerto is much better. The EMI recordings aren't up to much though.
Looks like Dvorak and Franz Schubert are next on the shopping list...
Posted on: 22 November 2008 by Tam
Kubelik's Dvorak is great (with the Berlin Philharmonic, also he did the tone poems and slavonic dances with the Bavarian radio orchestra, which rank among my favourite recordings). Mackerras has recorded 8 and 9 twice, once with the 7th on a two disc set with the LPO which is dirt cheap, and also in a recent and stunning disc with the Prague Symphony Orchestra on supraphon.
My Schubert recommendations would be for the D960 piano sonata, which is stunning beautiful (there are lots of great recordings, I like Kempff and Brendel's recent live recording most) and the great C major 9th symphony (the Mackerras/SCO disc is probably my favourite but Jochum, Giulini, Rattle and Erich Kleiber all conduct versions well worth hearing).
regards, Tam
My Schubert recommendations would be for the D960 piano sonata, which is stunning beautiful (there are lots of great recordings, I like Kempff and Brendel's recent live recording most) and the great C major 9th symphony (the Mackerras/SCO disc is probably my favourite but Jochum, Giulini, Rattle and Erich Kleiber all conduct versions well worth hearing).
regards, Tam
Posted on: 22 November 2008 by DMC
quote:Originally posted by Tam:
Kubelik's Dvorak is great (with the Berlin Philharmonic, also he did the tone poems and slavonic dances with the Bavarian radio orchestra, which rank among my favourite recordings). Mackerras has recorded 8 and 9 twice, once with the 7th on a two disc set with the LPO which is dirt cheap, and also in a recent and stunning disc with the Prague Symphony Orchestra on supraphon.
My Schubert recommendations would be for the D960 piano sonata, which is stunning beautiful (there are lots of great recordings, I like Kempff and Brendel's recent live recording most) and the great C major 9th symphony (the Mackerras/SCO disc is probably my favourite but Jochum, Giulini, Rattle and Erich Kleiber all conduct versions well worth hearing).
regards, Tam
Very good recommendations. Kempf is particularly inspired in Schubert and Jochum, well, he's one conductor who's recordings I never pass by.
DMC
Posted on: 22 November 2008 by Tam
You might like to check out this thread:
http://forums.naim-audio.com/groupee/forums/a/tpc/f/38019385/m/9662902407
(Though I should add that in the two and a half years since I have almost completely revised my views of the BPO Brahms set and now rate them very highly.)
regards, Tam
http://forums.naim-audio.com/groupee/forums/a/tpc/f/38019385/m/9662902407
(Though I should add that in the two and a half years since I have almost completely revised my views of the BPO Brahms set and now rate them very highly.)
regards, Tam
Posted on: 22 November 2008 by mikeeschman
quote:Originally posted by Tam:
You might like to check out this thread:
http://forums.naim-audio.com/groupee/forums/a/tpc/f/38019385/m/9662902407
(Though I should add that in the two and a half years since I have almost completely revised my views of the BPO Brahms set and now rate them very highly.)
regards, Tam
BPO Berlin?
with which conductor?
i have two : Jochum and Abbado, totally different, both excellent.
Posted on: 23 November 2008 by Tam
Sorry - Jochum.
Posted on: 23 November 2008 by JamH
Hello Foot Tapper,
I would suggest you stop [I mean pause] at this stage ...
Don't get all 9 Beethoven symphonies .. listen to the ones you have [actually IMHO two of his best -- the other good ones -- IMHO-- are 3 and 9] and enjoy them and listen to them multiple times .. then try new stuff.
James H.
I would suggest you stop [I mean pause] at this stage ...
Don't get all 9 Beethoven symphonies .. listen to the ones you have [actually IMHO two of his best -- the other good ones -- IMHO-- are 3 and 9] and enjoy them and listen to them multiple times .. then try new stuff.
James H.
Posted on: 23 November 2008 by mikeeschman
quote:Originally posted by James Hamilton:
Hello Foot Tapper,
I would suggest you stop [I mean pause] at this stage ...
Don't get all 9 Beethoven symphonies .. listen to the ones you have [actually IMHO two of his best -- the other good ones -- IMHO-- are 3 and 9] and enjoy them and listen to them multiple times .. then try new stuff.
James H.
they're all good...
Posted on: 23 November 2008 by JamH
Agreed mikeeschman,
De gustibus non est disputandum
but with Beethoven I really only like the odd numbers [apart from 1].
James H.
De gustibus non est disputandum
but with Beethoven I really only like the odd numbers [apart from 1].
James H.
Posted on: 23 November 2008 by JamH
Hello mikeeschman,
My reference to "De gustibus non est disputandum
" means that I am saying that this is my taste and I am not implying anything wrong with yours -- we just differ.
Looking at my post I saw it could possibly be misintrepreted.
James H.
My reference to "De gustibus non est disputandum
" means that I am saying that this is my taste and I am not implying anything wrong with yours -- we just differ.
Looking at my post I saw it could possibly be misintrepreted.
James H.
Posted on: 23 November 2008 by u5227470736789439
It is funny how some Beethoven Smphonies are more liked than others.
I think it is fairly normal for people to go for the more extravert odd numbered ones, and yet I can honestly say that even from a ten year old I worked through all of them not particularly having special favourites, which seems a most unusual reaction.
Even today, I suppose I have a marginal favouring for the even numbered ones, and count possibly the high point as number Eight!
Is there another such phenomenal symphony Finale [not counting the Ninth, which does not quite fit in m view, any sort of comparison with any other symphonic Finale, as the one in the Eighth?
But the all stand repeated listenings, and each time there is something more to find in them!
Anyway, even the very opening bar of the First is a challenge to the order of smphonic thought left by Haydn! It is off-hand, and shows a questing mind full of challenging ideas, which only seem to build in significance through the whole series.
Does Four challenge Three? Not in an overt sense, but it is a more unified and dense work, compact and perfectly formed, it askes more questions than it answers. Possibly the one which is most enigmatic ...
Is the Pastoral really some rambling iddle? It can seem so, but a strong performance, such as Erich Kleiber or Otto klemperer give it, reveals an extra-ordinarily symphonic compositional take on a piece that overtly also claims programmatic elements.
It does seem to me that Beethoven had raised the expectation by the time of the Ninth, that something beyond a normal symphonic Finale became inevitable, and yet the Ninth is easily the least robust one in terms of requiring a true genius of the podium to really make its impact. And of course a tremendous choir, and four superb soloists, and an orchestra that is of the first rank with immense stamina ...
Ah well, the is something for everyone in the music, and they remain a phenomenon ...
ATB
I think it is fairly normal for people to go for the more extravert odd numbered ones, and yet I can honestly say that even from a ten year old I worked through all of them not particularly having special favourites, which seems a most unusual reaction.
Even today, I suppose I have a marginal favouring for the even numbered ones, and count possibly the high point as number Eight!
Is there another such phenomenal symphony Finale [not counting the Ninth, which does not quite fit in m view, any sort of comparison with any other symphonic Finale, as the one in the Eighth?
But the all stand repeated listenings, and each time there is something more to find in them!
Anyway, even the very opening bar of the First is a challenge to the order of smphonic thought left by Haydn! It is off-hand, and shows a questing mind full of challenging ideas, which only seem to build in significance through the whole series.
Does Four challenge Three? Not in an overt sense, but it is a more unified and dense work, compact and perfectly formed, it askes more questions than it answers. Possibly the one which is most enigmatic ...
Is the Pastoral really some rambling iddle? It can seem so, but a strong performance, such as Erich Kleiber or Otto klemperer give it, reveals an extra-ordinarily symphonic compositional take on a piece that overtly also claims programmatic elements.
It does seem to me that Beethoven had raised the expectation by the time of the Ninth, that something beyond a normal symphonic Finale became inevitable, and yet the Ninth is easily the least robust one in terms of requiring a true genius of the podium to really make its impact. And of course a tremendous choir, and four superb soloists, and an orchestra that is of the first rank with immense stamina ...
Ah well, the is something for everyone in the music, and they remain a phenomenon ...
ATB
Posted on: 23 November 2008 by mikeeschman
quote:Originally posted by James Hamilton:
My reference to "De gustibus non est disputandum"
means that I am saying that this is my taste James H.
nice catch!
Posted on: 23 November 2008 by mikeeschman
quote:Originally posted by GFFJ:
It is funny how some Beethoven Smphonies are more liked than others.
I think it is fairly normal for people to go for the more extravert odd numbered ones, and yet I can honestly say that even from a ten year old I worked through all of them not particularly having special favourites, which seems a most unusual reaction.
Even today, I suppose I have a marginal favouring for the even numbered ones, and count possibly the high point as number Eight!
Is there another such phenomenal symphony Finale [not counting the Ninth, which does not quite fit in m view, any sort of comparison with any other symphonic Finale, as the one in the Eighth?
But the all stand repeated listenings, and each time there is something more to find in them!
Anyway, even the very opening bar of the First is a challenge to the order of smphonic thought left by Haydn! It is off-hand, and shows a questing mind full of challenging ideas, which only seem to build in significance through the whole series.
Does Four challenge Three? Not in an overt sense, but it is a more unified and dense work, compact and perfectly formed, it askes more questions than it answers. Possibly the one which is most enigmatic ...
Is the Pastoral really some rambling iddle? It can seem so, but a strong performance, such as Erich Kleiber or Otto klemperer give it, reveals an extra-ordinarily symphonic compositional take on a piece that overtly also claims programmatic elements.
It does seem to me that Beethoven had raised the expectation by the time of the Ninth, that something beyond a normal symphonic Finale became inevitable, and yet the Ninth is easily the least robust one in terms of requiring a true genius of the podium to really make its impact. And of course a tremendous choir, and four superb soloists, and an orchestra that is of the first rank with immense stamina ...
Ah well, the is something for everyone in the music, and they remain a phenomenon ...
ATB
i love them all too.
but especially the last seven.
the first and second are wonderful, but i can feel beethoven spread his wings in the third, then never let up.
every time i listen to the first two i say "hello papa haydn" (no bad thing), even though beethoven shows all over them.
Posted on: 26 November 2008 by Foot tapper
Before branching out on to other Beethoven symphonies (here's plenty of time yet), I have sampled some more of the first batch of discs:
Elgar Enigma Variations & Holst the Planets by London Philharmoic & London Symphony Orchestras + Adrian Boult managed to hit the spot rather well.
A 25 year old LP of Tchaikovsky & Mendelssohn violin concertos by Kyung Wha Chung & Montreal Symphony Orchestra on Decca was great music but not a great recording.
Any recommendations for a better version of these 2 great works? Either vinyl or CD would be fine, though I have a slight preference for vinyl and the LP12 is kicking the CDX2/XPS2 since its recent service by Peter at Cymbiosis...
Elgar Enigma Variations & Holst the Planets by London Philharmoic & London Symphony Orchestras + Adrian Boult managed to hit the spot rather well.
A 25 year old LP of Tchaikovsky & Mendelssohn violin concertos by Kyung Wha Chung & Montreal Symphony Orchestra on Decca was great music but not a great recording.
Any recommendations for a better version of these 2 great works? Either vinyl or CD would be fine, though I have a slight preference for vinyl and the LP12 is kicking the CDX2/XPS2 since its recent service by Peter at Cymbiosis...
Posted on: 26 November 2008 by Jet Johnson
quote:Originally posted by Fender:
Foot Tapper - trust me on this buy Beethoven V and VII combined together on DG by the Vienna Phil conducted by Carlos Kleiber. It's on Amazon. About £13 but for the 2 performances on one CD it's a bargain. Oh make sure you get the standard red book version not the SACD hybrid - unless you have a SACD player that is!
Fender (Strat)
Foot tapper sounds like a kindred soul to me so my thanks go out to him on behalf of other classical virgins (like my good self) for prompting these recommendations.
I also wondered about SACD's as mentioned above ...I've got a whole heap of rock music DVD-A's SACD's DTS CD's etc. but what's the general thinking from Classical buffs re 5.1 surround sound and it's suitability for that type of music?
Posted on: 26 November 2008 by u5227470736789439
Not personally enthusiastic about suround sound for clasical music, but if there were to be a forced choice between listening to 5.1 and not listening I'd take the 5.1 over silence ...
I managed to work out that 57% of the recordings I have are mono, which gives a clue that many of my favourite performers were active before stereo became the norm. I do own some fantastic music making in the latest and most technically advanced recordings as well, where these exceed, IMO, the musical qualities of the old ones.
To negate what I consider is a false artifact in recording [if it is exagerated which it mostly is] I have much reduced the impact of stereo width by putting my speakers very close together - about two feet between the cabinets related to listening from eight or nine feet away.
Others may [almost certainly will] differ on this and all that it does for me is is minimise artificiality in replay, and thus reduce a distraction. I would not say that it increases Hifi accuracy, for all that, but it does no harm either ...
George
I managed to work out that 57% of the recordings I have are mono, which gives a clue that many of my favourite performers were active before stereo became the norm. I do own some fantastic music making in the latest and most technically advanced recordings as well, where these exceed, IMO, the musical qualities of the old ones.
To negate what I consider is a false artifact in recording [if it is exagerated which it mostly is] I have much reduced the impact of stereo width by putting my speakers very close together - about two feet between the cabinets related to listening from eight or nine feet away.
Others may [almost certainly will] differ on this and all that it does for me is is minimise artificiality in replay, and thus reduce a distraction. I would not say that it increases Hifi accuracy, for all that, but it does no harm either ...
George
Posted on: 26 November 2008 by mikeeschman
strictly mono and stereo. speakers are nine feet apart, i listen from about 9.5 feet away.
5.1 is an abomination.
5.1 is an abomination.
Posted on: 27 November 2008 by Jet Johnson
quote:Originally posted by mikeeschman:
strictly mono and stereo. speakers are nine feet apart, i listen from about 9.5 feet away.
5.1 is an abomination.
......Don't sit on the fence Mike tell us what you really think!
Posted on: 27 November 2008 by mikeeschman
quote:Originally posted by Jet Johnson:quote:Originally posted by mikeeschman:
strictly mono and stereo. speakers are nine feet apart, i listen from about 9.5 feet away.
5.1 is an abomination.
......Don't sit on the fence Mike tell us what you really think!
actually, i regret my statement about 5.1. i'd like to try "The Nightmare Before Christmas" and "Pulcinella" with the 52' flatscreen and 5.1.
but i think it's more than OK in stereo.
too damn much equipment!