Decca Original Masters
Posted by: Todd A on 29 May 2003
So impressed was I with the three DG Originals boxes I bought earlier in the year that I thought it would be worthwhile to buy some of the Decca offerings. I have started slowly, buying only the Josef Krips box to start. But what a box! This should be considered a high-priority collector’s item for collectors of historical recordings of core repertoire. Hell, if you like any of the repertoire in the box, you should buy this one.
The are no really bad performances in the set and only a few performances are ho-hum. Among those, surprisingly, is Mozart’s Jupiter symphony. The oddly balanced early stereo contributes to the problem, but the 1957 Israel Philharmonic is not a world-beater, either. At times the work drags a bit, so I rate it a ho-hum performance. Beethoven’s Ah Perfido and the closing scene from Strauss’ Salome both fall into the ho-hum category, too. The singer, one Inge Bhorke (sic?), is not exactly the most ingratiating soprano I can think of, her vibrato sounding like warble tones at times. In the Strauss, they left out the King’s final response to Salome; that makes the whole scene if you ask me! I don’t think any of these will be on my frequently played list.
Better, but not great, are the Schumann Fourth and the Dvorak Cello Concerto. The Schumann suffers from some relatively sluggish playing at times, at least relative to Kubelik (on Sony) or Szell, but still has some nice things on offer. The Dvorak Concerto is unlike any other recording I have heard. Firstly, it sounds much more German than usual. Secondly, this is one of the most syrupy-romantic versions I have heard. There are some incredibly beautiful passages that might fit in some movies. It is quite nice to listen to, but it does not sound like the Concerto necessarily should. Zara Nelsova, whoever that is, does a commendable job as soloist.
The rest of the works go from strength to strength. The Haydn 94 and 99 are wonderfully played, the VPO playing near peak form. There is just enough playfulness and wit. Likewise, the Mozart 31, 39, and 40 all are outstanding. Perhaps other performances are better in certain areas, but these are all worth hearing. Period purists may balk, but all others should love them as I did. The Schubert 8 and Mendelssohn 4 are both great performances, no question. Maybe the Mendelssohn does not quite sound Italian enough, but beyond that either of these make possible first choices. Not being a huge fan of Schubert’s 8, I must say that this is one I do like a lot more than most.
That leaves the two biggest works: the Brahms 4 and the Tchaikovsky 5. I am now convinced that the E Minor is Brahms’ greatest symphony, and, somewhat to my surprise, this one stands up well to the greatest recordings of the work. If ultimately Furtwangler and Walter (and maybe Carlos Kleiber) still remain my standards for this work, this one is openly welcomed into my collection and will be played numerous times going forward. An even bigger surprise is the Tchaikovsky. Again, this sounds more German than normal, but in every other regard it is outstanding. Generally speaking, I’m not a big fan of the depressing Russian’s music – the Sixth excepted – but this made me sit up and listen. And I played it loud enough to give my 250 a workout!
As to sound, well, most of the recordings are mono and the rest are in early, somewhat oddly balanced stereo. I would say that they are transferred very well – they definitely sound better than most of the Legends reissues I have heard – and some of the mono transfers have as broad a dynamic range as many stereo recordings. The Mozart 40 suffers from what sounds like simulated stereo (I must assume that the original master was in fact not used – it was recorded in 1953), but there are few surprises. Overall, very highly recommended. Next up, the Grumiaux set.
The are no really bad performances in the set and only a few performances are ho-hum. Among those, surprisingly, is Mozart’s Jupiter symphony. The oddly balanced early stereo contributes to the problem, but the 1957 Israel Philharmonic is not a world-beater, either. At times the work drags a bit, so I rate it a ho-hum performance. Beethoven’s Ah Perfido and the closing scene from Strauss’ Salome both fall into the ho-hum category, too. The singer, one Inge Bhorke (sic?), is not exactly the most ingratiating soprano I can think of, her vibrato sounding like warble tones at times. In the Strauss, they left out the King’s final response to Salome; that makes the whole scene if you ask me! I don’t think any of these will be on my frequently played list.
Better, but not great, are the Schumann Fourth and the Dvorak Cello Concerto. The Schumann suffers from some relatively sluggish playing at times, at least relative to Kubelik (on Sony) or Szell, but still has some nice things on offer. The Dvorak Concerto is unlike any other recording I have heard. Firstly, it sounds much more German than usual. Secondly, this is one of the most syrupy-romantic versions I have heard. There are some incredibly beautiful passages that might fit in some movies. It is quite nice to listen to, but it does not sound like the Concerto necessarily should. Zara Nelsova, whoever that is, does a commendable job as soloist.
The rest of the works go from strength to strength. The Haydn 94 and 99 are wonderfully played, the VPO playing near peak form. There is just enough playfulness and wit. Likewise, the Mozart 31, 39, and 40 all are outstanding. Perhaps other performances are better in certain areas, but these are all worth hearing. Period purists may balk, but all others should love them as I did. The Schubert 8 and Mendelssohn 4 are both great performances, no question. Maybe the Mendelssohn does not quite sound Italian enough, but beyond that either of these make possible first choices. Not being a huge fan of Schubert’s 8, I must say that this is one I do like a lot more than most.
That leaves the two biggest works: the Brahms 4 and the Tchaikovsky 5. I am now convinced that the E Minor is Brahms’ greatest symphony, and, somewhat to my surprise, this one stands up well to the greatest recordings of the work. If ultimately Furtwangler and Walter (and maybe Carlos Kleiber) still remain my standards for this work, this one is openly welcomed into my collection and will be played numerous times going forward. An even bigger surprise is the Tchaikovsky. Again, this sounds more German than normal, but in every other regard it is outstanding. Generally speaking, I’m not a big fan of the depressing Russian’s music – the Sixth excepted – but this made me sit up and listen. And I played it loud enough to give my 250 a workout!
As to sound, well, most of the recordings are mono and the rest are in early, somewhat oddly balanced stereo. I would say that they are transferred very well – they definitely sound better than most of the Legends reissues I have heard – and some of the mono transfers have as broad a dynamic range as many stereo recordings. The Mozart 40 suffers from what sounds like simulated stereo (I must assume that the original master was in fact not used – it was recorded in 1953), but there are few surprises. Overall, very highly recommended. Next up, the Grumiaux set.