Classical music bargains

[Bigshot]

I have no interest in "proper" performances. I want *vital* performances. Sometimes vital performances are proper, sometimes not. I've heard performances, both romanticized and HIP that I like. I used to think I just liked the old timers. But I have softened, largely because of the box sets I've gotten of HIPish period music. My only objection to buying another baroque box is that they take up so many disks with the "regular suspects"... Brandenbergs, Four Seasons, etc. I can have fifteen different Mahler or Beethoven Symphony performances and enjoy them all for different reasons, but I don't find that to be as much the case with Baroque music. After three sets of Brandenbergs, there isn't as much point picking up another any more.

[Larry Kart]

Not sure ... I'm always cautious about these kinds of "progress" dogmatics - each and every reading, recording, interpretation has to be seen in light of its time and knowledge of sources etc. (and of course that includes denial of knowledge and such, too) - and this again applies as much to Stokowski or Furtwängler or ol' Klemp as it does to the self-proclaimed beginning and end of HIP (NH) or any other, more modest artist.

Obviously some stuff gets old and unlistenable, but what might indeed differ from person to person. Some here like to make fun of me because I love listening to older recordings a lot of the time ... to my ears they are new, I didn't know them before and I want to know. Other things (and I think this SEON box might well be one of those) aren't of much interest to me on the other hand. I guess it all boils down to taste and preference, as so often - and of course some are better in making or defending their points than others, but that doesn't necessarily make it more a valid stance. However of course, lots can be learned and absorbed (by way of listening and re-listening with new ears or rather: an other or expanced mindset) from discussions on such topics (but I still lack the answer from Moms why Perahia's Mozart concertos suck - still want to know!)

Ubu, it is clear that Moms has very strong opinions which is fine. He does not like Perahia's Mozart Concertos.

To say they suck is, ridiculous. The Mozart concertos are among my classical music favorites. I have versions of the concertos by a variety of pianists. There is no one "correct" way to play these pieces, and I personally enjoy hearing them played by Perahia, Serkin,

Casadesus, Curzon, Brendel, Fleisher, Rubinstein, and quite a few others. Each pianist brings something of themselves to the music, and hearing a variety of interpretations is, for me, an enriching experience. So, in my opinion, Moms is simply wrong, though reading his posts can be very interesting.

FWIW, a representative anti-Perahia comment from the rec. music.classical.recordings list, where anti-Periaha feelings tend to run high:

"If you want pretty, soft-grained, dresden-china mozart, then Perahia's your man. Personally I like a little more testosterone in my Mozart than Perahia's willing to provide."

Such folks can't stand Uchida either, for similar reasons.

[soulpope]

Hantai naive 8-CD set for €15 at amazon.de: http://www.amazon.de/gp/product/B00EO7XQ2E/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o00_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

Content:

CD1 ARCANGELLO CORELLI | CONCERTO DE NOËL & SONATES

CD2 BACH | GOLDBERG VARIATIONS

CD3 JOHANN SEBASTIAN BACH | SONATE A FLAUTO, VIOLIN E BASSO

CD4 DOMENICO SCARLATTI | 22 SONATES POUR CLAVECIN

CD5 JOHANN SEBASTIAN BACH | CONCERTOS POUR CLAVECIN

CD6 JOHN BULL | DOCTOR BULL’S GOOD NIGHT

CD7 GIROLAMO FRESCOBALDI | PARTITE & TOCCATE

CD8 GEORG PHILIPP TELEMANN | ESSERCIZII MUSICI

SEON 85-CD set to be released soon. I am interested in this repertoire, any comments on performances?

http://www.amazon.it/Seon-Collection-Musica-Registrazioni-Catalogo/dp/B00KXJD58M/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1406534508&sr=8-1&keywords=seon+85

Set content from JPC website: https://www.jpc.de/jpcng/classic/detail/-/art/seon-collection/hnum/5281618

Sublabel of Sony Classical founded by Wolf Erichson as series on the Philips label.

"My founding of the SEON label (1970-1980) came about from my desire to begin recording emerging stars of the early music movement. After several years of experimentation and pioneering work during the infancy of Das Alte Werk, I felt the time was ripe to create a record label for period music, which, with the benefit of the most advanced recording techniques then available, would ensure that the extraordinary performances of Frans Brüggen, Anner Bylsma, the Kuijkens, Gustav Leonhardt andKonrad Ruhland would be preserved, and, beyond that, take their rightful place beside the acclaimed greats of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries." —Wolf Erichson

As mentioned in Wolf Erichson`s statement these recordings from the 70`s mirror the infancy of early music`s rediscovery, are sometimes quite adventurous but nevertheless (or hence ?) worthwile....do own a number of these individually....

Well, that's what concerns me - that these are older HIP recordings. I am not too familiar with Bylsma, but Lenhardt, for example, I find very stiff. I have a lot of stuff by him from the Sony Baroque Masterpieces box, and hated most of it.

ok, than you`ve made your decision already and should not bother furthermore.......still wondering about the ongoing discussion and the "right" or "wrong" approach....each interpretation stands for a personal view, the listener can like it...or not.....

P.S In the mid 90`s a well known Record Store in Vienna sold off individually CD`s from the EMI Early Music "Reflexe" Series - a bought a number of these (for some 50 Schillings a piece, baby...) and we are talking here about VERY early Savall, Hilliard Ensemble etc - for sure I don`t listen to these nowadays a lot (or even at all), but they stand for the view on Early Music in the 70`s and early 80`s...no more - no less......and some collectors are (still) offering serious money for some of these CD`s........the beauty (or even luxury) of having a choice.....

Edited July 29, 2014 by soulpope

[Peter Friedman]

Not sure ... I'm always cautious about these kinds of "progress" dogmatics - each and every reading, recording, interpretation has to be seen in light of its time and knowledge of sources etc. (and of course that includes denial of knowledge and such, too) - and this again applies as much to Stokowski or Furtwängler or ol' Klemp as it does to the self-proclaimed beginning and end of HIP (NH) or any other, more modest artist.

Obviously some stuff gets old and unlistenable, but what might indeed differ from person to person. Some here like to make fun of me because I love listening to older recordings a lot of the time ... to my ears they are new, I didn't know them before and I want to know. Other things (and I think this SEON box might well be one of those) aren't of much interest to me on the other hand. I guess it all boils down to taste and preference, as so often - and of course some are better in making or defending their points than others, but that doesn't necessarily make it more a valid stance. However of course, lots can be learned and absorbed (by way of listening and re-listening with new ears or rather: an other or expanced mindset) from discussions on such topics (but I still lack the answer from Moms why Perahia's Mozart concertos suck - still want to know!)

Ubu, it is clear that Moms has very strong opinions which is fine. He does not like Perahia's Mozart Concertos.

To say they suck is, ridiculous. The Mozart concertos are among my classical music favorites. I have versions of the concertos by a variety of pianists. There is no one "correct" way to play these pieces, and I personally enjoy hearing them played by Perahia, Serkin,

Casadesus, Curzon, Brendel, Fleisher, Rubinstein, and quite a few others. Each pianist brings something of themselves to the music, and hearing a variety of interpretations is, for me, an enriching experience. So, in my opinion, Moms is simply wrong, though reading his posts can be very interesting.

FWIW, a representative anti-Perahia comment from the rec. music.classical.recordings list, where anti-Periaha feelings tend to run high:

"If you want pretty, soft-grained, dresden-china mozart, then Perahia's your man. Personally I like a little more testosterone in my Mozart than Perahia's willing to provide."

Such folks can't stand Uchida either, for similar reasons.

Perhaps a jazz illustration might fit with this discussion. I can enjoy the more delicate alto playing of Paul Desmond, and the higher testosterone playing of Jackie McLean. Liking one does not mean what may not like the other.

[king ubu]

Not sure ... I'm always cautious about these kinds of "progress" dogmatics - each and every reading, recording, interpretation has to be seen in light of its time and knowledge of sources etc. (and of course that includes denial of knowledge and such, too) - and this again applies as much to Stokowski or Furtwängler or ol' Klemp as it does to the self-proclaimed beginning and end of HIP (NH) or any other, more modest artist.

Obviously some stuff gets old and unlistenable, but what might indeed differ from person to person. Some here like to make fun of me because I love listening to older recordings a lot of the time ... to my ears they are new, I didn't know them before and I want to know. Other things (and I think this SEON box might well be one of those) aren't of much interest to me on the other hand. I guess it all boils down to taste and preference, as so often - and of course some are better in making or defending their points than others, but that doesn't necessarily make it more a valid stance. However of course, lots can be learned and absorbed (by way of listening and re-listening with new ears or rather: an other or expanced mindset) from discussions on such topics (but I still lack the answer from Moms why Perahia's Mozart concertos suck - still want to know!)

Ubu, it is clear that Moms has very strong opinions which is fine. He does not like Perahia's Mozart Concertos.

To say they suck is, ridiculous. The Mozart concertos are among my classical music favorites. I have versions of the concertos by a variety of pianists. There is no one "correct" way to play these pieces, and I personally enjoy hearing them played by Perahia, Serkin,

Casadesus, Curzon, Brendel, Fleisher, Rubinstein, and quite a few others. Each pianist brings something of themselves to the music, and hearing a variety of interpretations is, for me, an enriching experience. So, in my opinion, Moms is simply wrong, though reading his posts can be very interesting.

FWIW, a representative anti-Perahia comment from the rec. music.classical.recordings list, where anti-Periaha feelings tend to run high:

"If you want pretty, soft-grained, dresden-china mozart, then Perahia's your man. Personally I like a little more testosterone in my Mozart than Perahia's willing to provide."

Such folks can't stand Uchida either, for similar reasons.

Perhaps a jazz illustration might fit with this discussion. I can enjoy the more delicate alto playing of Paul Desmond, and the higher testosterone playing of Jackie McLean. Liking one does not mean what may not like the other.

Yup, I can see all that ... and many times I'm in that boat, too - I mean I enjoy Haskil playing Mozart as much as I do Bilson (and several of those on your list, Peter!). I'd just like Moms to use a word or two more to describe/specify his opinion!

What I think is reasoned and informed opinion: what you think is dogma?

That's just my assessment. I don't think I'm alone.

Oh well, "dogma" may be a bit of a strong word, but then let me add ideology

Seriously now, the general concept of "latest is best" is foreign to me, at least in the absoluteness you stated it (granted in short manner, I don't think we necessarily are in disagreement here). It's just that with "Mozart" not being available (except maybe as an idea in somebody's head), I find the many ways of articulating, expressing, interpreting, translating, perusing, abusing Mozart and the way all of this evolved a most interesting thing to glance at (if not to study, I'm nowhere near as deeply into any of this yet that I could pretend doing that). So there might indeed be ways of judging "validity" (Bigshot uses another word: "proper") - and there is of course no going back behind knowledge gained and available (if that is "progress", so be it - but don't forget the knowledge lost at the same time). And of course I don't want to foster a "anything goes" approach at all - it's just that I'm intrigued by how things develop, how one thing morphs into another ... and when and why this takes place. And that, of course, prevents me from ever taking the "in HIP I always need the lastest version"-route.

Obviously I'm not saying that position is wrong or anything, neither that you're alone - it's just not mine.

[Stefan Wood]

Can't bring up the link, but there is a second Bernstein Sony box. A whopping 80 discs of

Concertos and Orchestral Works. You can preorder at amazon.co.uk (approx$" $100 shipped)

Edited July 30, 2014 by Stefan Wood

[ejp626]

Can't bring up the link, but there is a second Bernstein Sony box. A whopping 80 discs of

Concertos and Orchestral Works. You can preorder at amazon.co.uk (approx$" $100 shipped)

This one?

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Leonard-Bernstein-Edition/dp/B00LL4U1TE/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1406698479&sr=8-1&keywords=bernstein+sony

Tempting...

[king ubu]

HMV has contents for discs 1-6:

CD 1

Bach - Violin concerto (Stern), Violin and oboe concerto (Stern, Gomberg)

Vivaldi - Piccolo concerto (Heim)

Bach - "Piano" concerto no 1 (Gould)

CD 2

Barber - Violin concerto (Stern)

Bartok - Concerto for orchestra

CD 3

Bartok - Piano concertos 2 and 3 (Entremont)

CD 4

Bartok - Violin concerto 2 (Stern)

Bartok - "Orchestral percussion and two pianos" with Saul Goodman on timpani

CD 5

Berg - Violin concerto (Stern)

Bartok - Rhapsodies (ditto)

CD 6

Beethoven - Piano concerto 1 (Bernstein)

Beethoven - Piano concerto 2 (Gould)

http://www.hmv.co.jp/en/artist_Bernstein-1918-90_000000000034572/item_Leonard-Bernstein-Edition-concertos-Orch-works-Recordings-Ltd_5850277

Edited July 30, 2014 by king ubu

[Stefan Wood]

Yup. Preordered.

Edited July 30, 2014 by Stefan Wood

[paul secor]

Not sure ... I'm always cautious about these kinds of "progress" dogmatics - each and every reading, recording, interpretation has to be seen in light of its time and knowledge of sources etc. (and of course that includes denial of knowledge and such, too) - and this again applies as much to Stokowski or Furtwängler or ol' Klemp as it does to the self-proclaimed beginning and end of HIP (NH) or any other, more modest artist.

Obviously some stuff gets old and unlistenable, but what might indeed differ from person to person. Some here like to make fun of me because I love listening to older recordings a lot of the time ... to my ears they are new, I didn't know them before and I want to know. Other things (and I think this SEON box might well be one of those) aren't of much interest to me on the other hand. I guess it all boils down to taste and preference, as so often - and of course some are better in making or defending their points than others, but that doesn't necessarily make it more a valid stance. However of course, lots can be learned and absorbed (by way of listening and re-listening with new ears or rather: an other or expanced mindset) from discussions on such topics (but I still lack the answer from Moms why Perahia's Mozart concertos suck - still want to know!)

Ubu, it is clear that Moms has very strong opinions which is fine. He does not like Perahia's Mozart Concertos.

To say they suck is, ridiculous. The Mozart concertos are among my classical music favorites. I have versions of the concertos by a variety of pianists. There is no one "correct" way to play these pieces, and I personally enjoy hearing them played by Perahia, Serkin,

Casadesus, Curzon, Brendel, Fleisher, Rubinstein, and quite a few others. Each pianist brings something of themselves to the music, and hearing a variety of interpretations is, for me, an enriching experience. So, in my opinion, Moms is simply wrong, though reading his posts can be very interesting.

FWIW, a representative anti-Perahia comment from the rec. music.classical.recordings list, where anti-Periaha feelings tend to run high:

"If you want pretty, soft-grained, dresden-china mozart, then Perahia's your man. Personally I like a little more testosterone in my Mozart than Perahia's willing to provide."

Such folks can't stand Uchida either, for similar reasons.

Perhaps a jazz illustration might fit with this discussion. I can enjoy the more delicate alto playing of Paul Desmond, and the higher testosterone playing of Jackie McLean. Liking one does not mean what may not like the other.

Yup, I can see all that ... and many times I'm in that boat, too - I mean I enjoy Haskil playing Mozart as much as I do Bilson (and several of those on your list, Peter!). I'd just like Moms to use a word or two more to describe/specify his opinion!

Moms has made his position pretty clear:

Whether you agree with him is up to you.

[king ubu]

Okay, now I feel asinine for insisting - I've obviously read that thread ... if all there is is Perahia is too soft and sweetening and stuff, well, that's it.

[paul secor]

I think he wrote a bit more than that. And at least what he wrote says more than someone writing, "I like Uchida and Perahiah," and nothing more.

[jazzbo]

I like Perahia's interpretations of Mozart. Watching the DVDs in the recent collection of rehearsals and recitals and intererviiews recorded in London I get the sense that he has really studied Mozart and come up with his own vision and version of how his work should be rendered. And I like the results. I haven't heard GOBS of interpretations, but don't need to in order to like Perahia's. He may not be the most macho of men, but he sure can play and conduct.

[king ubu]

I think he wrote a bit more than that. And at least what he wrote says more than someone writing, "I like Uchida and Perahiah," and nothing more.

Oh, wow, look, I'm really not picking a fight - I'm a newbie and I do try to articulate my likes and dislikes on music every now and then (but more so on other than this board, after all it IS difficult to talk about music, even more so in a language that isn't my own). I did indeed read that thread and I know there's *more*, but there's little specific on Perahia, and that's all i was asking about, really. So that's that and I'm outta this discussion again, I guess ...

[MomsMobley]

Assuming everyone here can-- sonics aside-- identify the Hot Five/Seven from the All-Stars and Bird Dial versus Verve etc...

Can ya'll tell the differences between Mahler 2, 3, 6?

Bartok String Quartet 2 and 5?

"Macbeth" v. "Rigoletto" v. "Falstaff"?

The three Brahms string quartets versus Zemlinsky's four?

This isn't to imply criticism of anyone just learning those works, period, but the idea that these giant boxes are a way to achieve greater understanding of music and cultural history is, for the most part, wishful thinking.

I hope, at least, people are supplementing these sets with any # of books about classical music generally, composers and eras specifically etc.

EVERYONE reading this thread should own no fewer than THREE Nicolas Slonimsky books.

Otherwise, less is more and the ONLY complete Haydn box kinda worth buying is Hogwood's, which is least flawed thoough for smaller subset, Frans Bruggen is tops, weird its not more regularly available.

[jazzbo]

I think it's totally unnecessary to have to know in detail tons about the music we listen to. If we hear it and enjoy it, understand it enough to do so, then fine and dandy. We don't have to pretend to be some genius savant on the internet, and even if we did want to, in depth knowledge is not really necessary for that either!

I'm content to move along listening to things and determining what I like, and feeding music to my Dad, who knows what he likes and is informed enough to enjoy it and look forward to hearing more. I read a little here and there, but I'm not going to immerse myself in books about classical music.

[Larry Kart]

Assuming everyone here can-- sonics aside-- identify the Hot Five/Seven from the All-Stars and Bird Dial versus Verve etc...

Can ya'll tell the differences between Mahler 2, 3, 6?

Bartok String Quartet 2 and 5?

"Macbeth" v. "Rigoletto" v. "Falstaff"?

The three Brahms string quartets versus Zemlinsky's four?

This isn't to imply criticism of anyone just learning those works, period, but the idea that these giant boxes are a way to achieve greater understanding of music and cultural history is, for the most part, wishful thinking.

I hope, at least, people are supplementing these sets with any # of books about classical music generally, composers and eras specifically etc.

EVERYONE reading this thread should own no fewer than THREE Nicolas Slonimsky books.

Otherwise, less is more and the ONLY complete Haydn box kinda worth buying is Hogwood's, which is least flawed thoough for smaller subset, Frans Bruggen is tops, weird its not more regularly available.

Don't know Hogwood's Haydn, but based on other Hogwood recordings I'd be surprised if it was that good. I like Adam Fischer's Haydn.

[David Ayers]

I'd have thought these sets were for people who already know the repertoire, and probably several of the actual recordings, so can work through them quickly.

Uh, end of post.

[David Ayers]

Oh no not the end. In general for core repertoire hearing different versions is the key. These boxes help those who are listening comparatively.

Baroque music, to me, is mainly for listening to, not learning (with the obvious exception) so quality over quantity applies there more than ever.

[TedR]

I enjoy learning and having my ears opened (which I mainly credit this jazz forum for helping me do that) but if I put Mom's demands on myself, my enjoyment of music would turn into a chore. And as far as the giant boxes, I'll use the Rubenstein box as one example: When I read here how much Larry or Ubu loves a Rubenstein version of a Mozart concerto, I can leaf through the box and pick out that specific recording. If I didn't have the box I would not have that luxury. To me the boxes are a like a reference book. I don't read reference books cover to cover but as information or opinions present themselves, I can read (or in the case of cd box sets, listen to) that subject of interest.

[David Ayers]

Oh and just to clarify, I don't own any of these boxes, except the recent DG Strauss, which I stand by.

[Van Basten II]

Lili Kraus set of 31 cds for 32 Euros

http://www.amazon.fr/gp/product/B00LLHG94W/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1642&creative=19458&creativeASIN=B00LLHG94W&linkCode=as2&tag=bpclass-21

[Bigshot]

This isn't to imply criticism of anyone just learning those works, period, but the idea that these giant boxes are a way to achieve greater understanding of music and cultural history is, for the most part, wishful thinking.

A broader frame of reference is ALWAYS a good thing. I would much rather know a little bit about a lot than a lot about very little.

Can't bring up the link, but there is a second Bernstein Sony box. A whopping 80 discs of

Concertos and Orchestral Works. You can preorder at amazon.co.uk (approx$" $100 shipped)

Oh man. That's a buy. Ordered. The first Bernstein box was terrific.

[A Lark Ascending]

These box sets are all about marketing - the way the record companies realise their assets. They're presented as a quick, off the shelf acquisition of approved, validated culture. It's not surprising that they promote the idea that to really 'appreciate' music you must play maestros and divas (preferably dead ones) and amass multiple interpretations. When I see the lorry loads of these sets being bought in this thread It's clear the marketing strategy is working perfectly.

Buy 'em cheap. Stack 'em high.

I can see why these sets are attractive to people wanting to explore 'classical' music and build a core collection; or to more experienced listeners who are in a position to notice differences in interpretation (rather than parrot what they are told they should be thinking).

But for me the real thrill still comes from buying a single disc of unknown music and then following that composer or style, single disc by disc. You usually end up in very unexpected places.

With these mega boxes you rarely get beyond 'the canon'. Which is fine if you are happy buying into canons (of composition or performance).

I agree with Lon that you don't need any great expertise to listen to this music. Most of it will reveal its interests and beauties with repeat listening (the idea that you need to listen to different versions to reveal that is again a myth the record companies are all to keen for us to believe). But reading about it, if time or inclination allow, can add so much more, providing historical context and the beginnings of an understanding of how classical music is structured. That in turn increases the pleasure of listening.

Edited August 1, 2014 by A Lark Ascending

[David Ayers]

Most of these box sets sell for less than a set of brake pads for the car. It is just inexpensive fun isn't it, not 'capitalist exploitation'? In fact they have a good answer as to how to get out the back catalog to people who want it.