 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
I did a search on this conductor on this board and am surprised at the passion his interpretations seem to inspire. I purchased a used copy of the CD of Symphonies 1 & 8 over the weekend and found his interpretation and the sound from the London Classical players refreshingly different. A much faster 1st movement in the 6th than I'm used to but variety is the spice of life, provided I suppose, that the spice does not produce the heart burn that it seems to with some!John
Peace at AA
Follow Ups:
A total charlatan. Having pursued some of the same areas of musical study that he baldly exploits, I can tell you he's usually either exaggerating or simply lying shamelessly.His justifications for his Bruckner are so spurious as to be beyond ridiculous; were anyone else to make such statements (say, Solti, were he alive) that person would nailed to the cross, burned alive, and shot full of hollow point bullets - simultaneously.
His Beethoven (and Brahms, and Schumann, and Wagner, and etc. etc) are all one thing: fast and expressionless. What gets me is that now one's ever put it together:
1. He first makes a big show about "HIS" research (as if he's actually conducting any);
2. He then claims to have discovered the one-and-only GEN-YOO-INE, super-authentic history performance practice (yeah, right - see his preface and hokey justification - oops, 'research' - to his Brahms Haydn Variations);
3. Then, INVARIABLY, and that means 110% of the time, he just goes FAST and HARD. Regardless of composer, composition, time, place, historic setting - it's always - ALWAYS - the same. Fast and hard. And, COLD.
He's like Boulez on ecstasy.
You may as well just drop steps 1 & 2, cause the outcome's always the same. It's always going to go just one way.
DARKEST SECRETS UNCOVERED
But, the elitest crowd need some intellectual justification for it's deplorable ignorance of music history (and that includes many music professionals who really do - or ought to - know better). Unfortunately, that would require a lot of arduous study, and even more arduous field research, if you're a professional. Who the hell wants to do that? Who's got time, when there's so much to do on the internet these days, besides just keeping up with and keeping your day job.So, screw it. Just take your authenticity pre-digested, mass-marketed, ready to serve, like any other commodity. This's the consumer age. So, if some aging, originally career-failure, British bozo tells you he's conducted "research", and then he plays the music like some ultra-modern ultra-Communist, fast and hard and anti-feeling, on some old instruments which are likely NOT authentic for the period but sound wierd, so they must be "right", then, hell...IT'S AUTHENTIC!
Have you been drinking?
dh
I hate it when written English doesn't ( <--see?) correspond to the spoken. Contractions are like oxygen in spoken American English. When people type out what they'd ( <--see?) normally speak as a contraction, it bothers me.This's one of those thangs.
Kinda like the way that concocted contraction is. Jus'sounds a li'l' slurry, ya know?
dh
While I share your dislike for Norrington, consider the possibility that he may just not be a very good conductor regardless of his ideology.Listen to the first movement of his Eroica and compare with Toscanini's. Same basic tempo, but the Maestro generates drama, suspense, even terror. Norrington's band sounds like a badly tuned
bunch of weekend players.Beethoven may have been fond of fast tempi (a conclusion based on the famous rapid metronome markings) but was also known for great freedom of phrasing, rather than the rigidity typical of Norrington's work.
Big B
I've lately returned to Toscanini's Beethoven Nine, starting with the cannonical RCA (BMG) set. After listening to this "authenticist" and that over the past 10 years, Toscanini strikes the attentive listner like a bolt of lightning. One is struck by the fact that his is real music, while the rest fade away as mere fashion.
It's not the historical facts (such as types of instruments used, or bowing styles, or tempo indications) that Norrington has appropriated for his use that are at issue--these are genrally agreed upon and accepted, at least in academic circles. And certainly Norrington is not the first to make use of them in performances of the Viennese Classics--for that one would have to go back to the '50s when the Urtext first came into vogue.Rather, it's what Norrington does with the historical facts that bothers many. I also find him to be too literal and inflexible, and often simply too fast and loud. Another HIP conductor who has done Beethoven (and Haydn and Mozart) with much greater success, I think, is Frans Brueggen. His performances have a living, breathing quality missing from Norrington--they have the stamp of personality, proving that HIP doesn't have to be rigid and faceless to succeed.
Just a quick note, that I don't think many will read since the tread is now dated, about those HIP conductors.
Here, in this very small Southwest corner of Europe, people have been considering some conductors as the best available, and Brueggen, Immersel, Harnoncourt, and others, are often raved.
I'm not music expert but I can't help feeling they're doing it wrongly, those conductors. Why do I feel they play Beethoven like it was Haydn (for example)? Why is it so boring?
Brian's example of the Eroica is a really happy one.
OOTD I tried Sir Roger's Scottish symphony. I almost felt asleep. Where's the charming and envolving 3rd movement?
I tried a Harnoncourt's Eroica. Nice, but...
How boring!!!
In these occasions I often ask for Karajan (hopping Hans Hermann didn't touch the sound).
Regards,
Jorge
you can't even spell the possessive pronoun "its" correctly -> But, the elitest crowd need some intellectual justification for it's deplorable ignorance of music history... <
I guess I'm part of that "elitest crowd" you name, since I have undergraduate and graduate degrees in musicology and therefore have traveled much of the same ground as Norrington. For the most part I endorse his research and conclusions--it's all based on source material that is quite commonplace and widely accepted in academic circles. While I don't always agree with Norrington's interpretative decisions, it is entirely wrong to attack him on the supposed weakness of his historical knowledge and application thereof.
If you would like to engage in an offline discusssion with me about the treatises, organological evidence, and other original materials that Norrington cites in his liner notes and elsewhere, then I would be glad to do so.
I'll take you up on your invitation. May not respond immediately, since I'm busy these days and I've sunken deepely into jazz, which takes up much of my free time. However, I might post some of my own "research" (if I can find my notes), and we may perhaps have some material for assessment.And, yes, I know the difference between it's and its. Bad typing, that's all.
Severius,I hapenn to disagree with you about Norrington, but I don't think he is always as convincing as some other HIP conductors.
It seems to me, from reading the book on Beethoven by Ferdinand Ries, and other good primary sources (have you read it?) that he and Norrington may well be right about the speeds LvB wanted.
And please, don't use caps like that; it is the equivalent of shouting, I don't appreciate it, and I don't think I am alone.
Timbo
It's not a matter of speed. Heck, Scherchen went nearly as fast, and sometimes faster, as did Paray and lot's of others.It's the whole package, which as another post in this thread pointed out, presents a cold and unfeeling look at the music.
Besides, know one can really say for sure what tempo Beethoven really wanted. More evidence shows that he varied tempo a whole lot, unlike one-speeder Norrington, and veried it even more from performance to performance. So the whole question is a matter artistry rather than HISTORY or AUTHENTICY, the latter of which is impossible (unless you happen to have been there).
Of greater concern is the orchestral size, which Norrington distorts with impunity. My research (real research) indicates that after Symphony #6, Beethoven, having heard a large orchestra, never went back to small ones, IF HE COULD AVOID IT. I'l post details when I find my notes.
I only use caps to make a point, not to shout. Do you think it's overdone?
yes severius I dobut stick to your guns
timbo
(nt)
f
What gay joke? S/O = significant other, i.e., girlfriend! Loosen up, music is not THAT serious!
I know what sig other is. It's just that most women don't like "it" fast - that would be a guy thing. In fact, women require much more time.Anyway, you're right. I should loosen up. And, I regret offending you. No hard feelings, OK?
"It's just that most women don't like "it" fast - that would be a guy thing. In fact, women require much more time."I always said you were a bit of a charlatan, Severius.
I believe the first volume to be issued in Norrington's set contained symphonies 2 & 8--nos. 1 and 6 came later, which is the volume that you're talking about. Although several of his Beethoven symphonies were indeed taken at a rather fast, even excessive clip (especially no.3), the up-tempo in the first movement of no.6 was really quite enjoyable--"refreshing" is the right word.What I find less enjoyable about Norrington's earlier releases is the variable quality of the orchestral playing. In nos. 2 & 8, there is some rather disagreeable oboe playing, and the overall balance between strings and brass is skewed in favor of the brass, with the strings sometimes inaudible as a result. Both of these problems subsided considerably with later installments of the Beethoven series.
yes John I like it too.mine's on Vinyl!
;-)}
timbo
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
