Jared wrote:Karajan can have a tendency to be slow, stodgy and ponderous in large scale choral works, but that can mostly be accounted for in the legacy he inherited from Klemperer at the Berliner...
Furtwangler?
I do enjoy the Gardiner and Hogwood recordings most of all, but I did enjoy the Barenboim recording on a purely visceral level (it was with the ECO so I don't think the forces were quite at BPO quantity; but certainly the choir sounded like they had been enlarged...). I do have the Karajan - it's ok..... ;-)
Quite right btw Jared: no need for another enlongated debate on HIP vs Romantic orchestras. I'm sure most of us see the pros and cons in both approaches, and let our own tastes decide :-D
Re: Mozarts Requiem
Posted: Wed Apr 25, 2012 4:31 pm
by Jared
bombasticDarren wrote:
Jared wrote:Karajan can have a tendency to be slow, stodgy and ponderous in large scale choral works, but that can mostly be accounted for in the legacy he inherited from Klemperer at the Berliner...
Furtwangler?
Quite right... sorry for getting two references mixed up... although this section from the Wikipedia highlights the problem:
The passing years show a clear trend with respect to tempo: as Klemperer aged, he took slower tempi. In 1954, his first movement lasts 15:18 from beginning to end; in 1970 it lasts 18:41. In 1954 the main tempo of the first movement was about 135 beats per minute, in 1970 it had slowed to about 110 beats per minute. In 1954, the Eroica second movement, "Funeral March", had a timing of 14:35; in 1970, it had slowed to 18:51. Similar slowings took place in the other movements. Around 1954, Herbert von Karajan flew especially to hear Klemperer conduct a performance of the Eroica, and later he said to him: "I have come only to thank you, and say that I hope I shall live to conduct the Funeral March as well as you have done".
I do enjoy the Gardiner and Hogwood recordings most of all, but I did enjoy the Barenboim recording on a purely visceral level (it was with the ECO so I don't think the forces were quite at BPO quantity; but certainly the choir sounded like they had been enlarged...). I do have the Karajan - it's ok..... ;-)
I have no argument with any of that paragraph... I also have a trmendous soft spot for LvB's Missa Solemnis performed by Klemperer, although I'm not too sure what the former would make of it if he heard it.. the Karajan is still critically highly acclaimed, and it appears to be a staple in most collections..
Quite right btw Jared: no need for another enlongated debate on HIP vs Romantic orchestras. I'm sure most of us see the pros and cons in both approaches, and let our own tastes decide :-D
Quite right... we're all friends here, first and foremost.. ;-)
Re: Mozarts Requiem
Posted: Wed Apr 25, 2012 4:33 pm
by Diapason
Well I'm very pro-HIP, but I'm first and foremost pro-Music!!
Re: Mozarts Requiem
Posted: Wed Apr 25, 2012 9:08 pm
by fergus
Well done for starting the thread J. I am quite time poor at the moment but I will join in soon!!
Re: Mozarts Requiem
Posted: Thu Apr 26, 2012 9:24 am
by jaybee
maybe it's the gulf between how a top class hifi renders BIG orchestral pieces and how anything else renders the same piece as a sonic wall of mush that makes such music ever popular on fora such as this....
Personally I find most orchestral works very wearying to "listen" to (great for background music though!)
I get far more enjoyment from a sonata or chamber piece, similarly with non-classical music I'm a big fan of less is more...
Re: Mozarts Requiem
Posted: Thu Apr 26, 2012 11:25 am
by Ciaran
Two versions I like:
Peter Schreier's version got Gramophone Awards in its time. It's from the 1980s, but the soloists are excellent, it's light on its feet.
This is an excellent period performance from Siberia, alive, almost startling, and with Simone Kermes on the soprano line! Beautifully recorded.
On the downside, it's only 46 minutes with no fill-up, so you might feel it's short measure. Also there's an outbreak of bell-ringing at the end of the Lacrimosa which is just wierd!
Re: Mozarts Requiem
Posted: Thu Apr 26, 2012 12:19 pm
by Jared
^^ trust you to find a version which no-one else has heard of, Ciaran.. ;-)
Re: Mozarts Requiem
Posted: Thu Apr 26, 2012 2:01 pm
by Ciaran
I'm sure Paul or Pepe could manage the same!
Re: Mozarts Requiem
Posted: Thu Apr 26, 2012 6:01 pm
by Seán
Ciaran wrote:Two versions I like:
This is an excellent period performance from Siberia, alive, almost startling, and with Simone Kermes on the soprano line! Beautifully recorded.
On the downside, it's only 46 minutes with no fill-up, so you might feel it's short measure. Also there's an outbreak of bell-ringing at the end of the Lacrimosa which is just wierd!
That excerpt is gorgeous, I love it.
Re: Mozarts Requiem
Posted: Fri Apr 27, 2012 8:15 pm
by fergus
The very dramatic and visually compelling film Amadeus does certainly have a lot to answer for in the realm of fact but of one thing in which it is correct in is that this music is very powerful and emotionally engaging. This is a somewhat curious fact that not only was it unfinished by the genius of Mozart but large parts of it were in fact written by another composer of inferior ability* (which of course begs the question what would the final Requiem have sounded like if Mozart had lived to complete it himself?).
Current convention states that when Mozart died he himself had completed (?) the opening movements of the Requiem i.e. the Introit and the Kyrie. The next eight sections had full vocal lines, figured basso continuo and outline sketches for orchestration. The final sections of the Sanctus, Benedictus, Agnus Dei and the Communio were apparently composed by Sussmayer who also “completed” the orchestration that was missing in the other sections. Debate and controversy regarding exactly what Mozart did and did not write still continues and adds to the mystery and romantic appeal of this work. That is one of the very many charms of the romanticism surrounding the work for me; that “what if” factor. I think that it is also curious that, to be fair to Sussmayer, considering all that has been written about him and his ability, his is still probably the version that is still most often heard.
In relation to period or modern instrument performance that is of course a very subjective thing and a matter of personal taste (and I have almost equal quantities of both approaches in my collection) but one fact in relation to the scoring stands out for me and that is that the scoring says something about what way the composer wanted the work to be heard; the music is spiritual, dramatic and atmospheric (possibly that of a young man terrified by the belief that he was going to die) and the scoring reflects that i.e. two basset horns, two bassoons, two trumpets and three trombones with timpani, strings and organ which give the work a dark, rich texture and which also lends to a “big” sounding performance statement.
It is a work that I have found particularly appealing ever since I first started listening to it many years ago.
*Anyone who has any question in this regard will get a very good indication of this when the two works of the respective men are very well compared on this CD....
