Dear Cheese,

"We'll see..."

You write as if there is a definitive answer as to whether there really is a difference in qualitative greatness between the various artists you, other people, and I have mentioned here in performing this piece of music or that. Clearly not, in objective reality, as music and its performance mean nothing beyond what it means to the individual. A good deal of music has a response in a good many people, but this is certainly never a Universal response for all people. Bach's works are loved and revered by many, but the response, even in this case, is by no means Universal. How much less Universal then will the reaction to different performances of the works themselves?

Thus if you enjoy the 1947 Karajan album of 78s of Brahms German Requiem more than Klemperer's LP set, or the Kempe recording, this certainly does not mean one is finer than the others in a generally applicable way! You will have a preference in all likelyhood, but this proves nothing objective! I think we can probably agree that the three performances you mention are all cut from similar great cloth, but vary as to cut and style somewhat. As I said above, I don't care to compare the music of Bach and Mozart. I know which I prefer but that does alter the consensus that both are widely regarded as composers of great music, which is about as close as it is possible to being objective as can be managed in matters musical. [Of course there are stylististic and technical issues which are clear cut, but this more a question of craft than art, and I don't suppose it is contentious to say that "great craftmanship is not necessarily the progenitor of great artistry!"]

So I suspect that "you will see" which you like the best for you, but certainly not that "We'll see..." anything beyond which performance you prefer! A nice review of what it is you enjoy about this or that performence would be a fascinating read, just like Todd's many writings on Beethoven and so forth. As it happens I don't always agree with Todd's conclusions, but his post here are among the most compelling because he explains his reasoning.

If I post about a piece of music or a performance of it, my motivation is only to spread interest in something, perhaps not so mainstream. The mainstream largely looks after itself. My reasoning for posting about Klemperer's Beethoven performances in this Thread is only to dispel some of the myths and legends that suround him, and generate some interest in his legacy which still has [by wide ranging critical opinion] something to offer us even nowadays. The best of the recordings that make up Klemperer's legacy are frequently not always the most widely distributed ones, and in that way I want to point out some very special performances that are hardly well know about nowadays.

You quote me:

Originally posted by Fredrik_Fiske:
"Karajan, though arguably at his finest at this time, was not nearly so remarkable a musician as Klemperer at his greatest."

I should certainly have added the rider, in my opinion, though those who regularly read what I have written in the Music Room will know that the only time I am not expressing my opinion is on matters of fact like correct reading of music, avoiding anachronisms and so forth, where there is clear evidence about stylistic propriety. On matters subjective, I prefer it if others actually disagree and propose their own view [or on ocassion agree!], as this surely is more interesting for everyone else who looks at the thread, though I suspect none of us can claim to sit in the "Objective Throne Of Truth" regarding comparing the great with the great in music.

I was hoping to post about the Pastoral Symphony this evening, but time is short...

Kindest regards from Fredrik

Klemperer leads Beethoven's Fifth and Sixth Symphonies with the Vienna Symphony Orchestra in Mono studio recordings on the Vox label.

Dear Friends,

Today I was given the old mono Vox recording of the Pastoral Symphony with Klemperer and the VSO that pe-zulu mentions on the previous page. I already have the coupled recording of the Fifth, and that is very similar to the set Klemperer recorded in Mono for EMI in about 1955. The slightly older Vox performance is not better than the Philharmonia Orchestra's one under Klemperer for EMI in any detail though it is a very splendid performance all the same. The rugged opening seems to make the First Movement inevitably powerful from the very opening bars, and so it proves. The Second movement is surprisingly beautiful in its phrasing and poise, but not a breath of Romanticism is to be found. It is rather austere, but none-the-worse for that in my view.

Klemperer’s sense of Architectural expressive control lead to the an integration of tempos for the last two movements allows for a perfectly judged change of mood at the end of the mysterious pianissimo passage that leads into the blaze of joyful C Major at the opening bar of the Finale seemingly without perceptible adjustment of tempo [so accute is the judgement, giving a true sense of natural power to the new music], and when this mysterious music returns in the course of the Finale, there is no sense that the tension is lost in a slowing. Klemperer simply avoids either a too slow a tempo for the Scherzo or a too fast one for the Finale, so that there is enough room for the accelerando in the Coda, which becomes noble and inevitable - a real clincher in the Classical conflict between the darkness of the earlier part of the Symphony and the sense of hope for human strength in the face of life's strife, that eventually holds sway. Klemperer completely avoids any sense of bombast thatcan so easily plague this movement in over-wraught readings. Beethoven frequently moves from chaos to order in his music by the end, but never the other way round. He was the last of the Classicists.

This the first half of the disc, with the Pastoral following, and given that pe-zulu considers that the Vox performance of this is very similar to the subsequent London [EMI Stereo] set, I was wondering what, apart from Orchestral style might be significant.

In my view, the differences are both small and very significant. The First Movement [exposition repeat taken] is no faster than his famous EMI recording, but the small lithe sounding Vienna Symphony Orchestra, though more frail sounding, are more alert to subtle expression than the Philharmonia, who are more polished, but to my mind slightly less involving. There is nothing slow about it, but nothing rushed either. The Movement's title, “Happy Feelings On Arriving In The Countryside," could hardly be better characterised.

The Scene by the Brook carries straight on in this direct and unstressed way, and is simply as beautiful as you could wish. Nothing eccentric in any way, and leading into the high spirits of the Peasants Merrymaking…

This is the point in the London recording where Klemperer famous disagreed with Walter Legge [the recording producer] about the tempo for the Dance! In my view the later recording teeters on the edge of parody. You expect a village band to play in a relaxed and fairly steady fashion – this is not a high-class concert band, but the musicians of the village. In Vienna, the tempo is almost identical, but the mood is different. Only a fraction faster in parts, because Klemperer allows himself a few tempo modifications along the way, and the movement become not only gamesome fun, but also, inevitably a real preparation for the Storm. Here the drama inherent in the music is driven like the “Clappers of Hell” by Klemperer, but never loosing sight of clear balance and articulation, Furtwangler’s description of the movement as a “Recitative for Full Orchestra” becomes entirely apt. I don’t recall this from the London recording, which is made on a larger band, and this perhaps explains the lithe muscularity here. The lower strings really dig into the rolling over phrases, though these will never come out clearly, considering the impossibility of fingering them accurately! What is striking is that the tension of it is managed without simply playing very loudly. The small band will not manage the dynamic width of a much larger Orchestra like the Philharmonia, and yet the gain in tension here is down to “clarity, and musical balances, and playing only just within the possibilities of the speed!"

The Storm itself dies away in the music and the transition to the Finale is as well judged as I have ever heard it – seamless. The Finale then becomes much more a joyful conclusion than the title, “Sheppard’s Thanksgiving” might suggest. It is one of those movements where Beethoven exalts in music, and this performance brings this out fully. I would be glad to ever attend a concert with the Pastoral Symphony so beautifully played.

It becomes my favourite performance on records, now, so let me hope that the Testament “live” first issues give me as much pleasure.

Kindest regards from Fredrik

[PS: Note: The recording is adequate, very clear and not nearly so resplendant as the EMI ones from slightly later. The winds are very forward as befits a fairly small orchestral scale].

Fredrik,

Thanks for the above. An excellent and most informative post.

Thanks Fredrik,

I can remember hearing Isaac Stern saying that a conductor is someone who has to convince an orchestra that he knows more about the score, than all the members of the orchestra COMBINED. That's only the beginning. In this same program I heard Yehudi Menuhin describing what it was that made Klemperer so special, after moments of being tongue tied and sputtering, he finally says "He was a kind of magician"

I remember attending a performance of the Metropolitan opera many years ago. I met a couple from Budapest and the husband remembered Klemperer from his days at the Budapest Opera. He says moments after he and his dad sat down the first time they saw the Great conductor, the orchestra started playing (The beginning of Lohengrin with the strings) he looked at his dad, who looked at him. The orchestra was familiar to them from a hundred performances but the sound they heard was entirely new. The strings had such a purity, transparency and power, that they were startled.

There is a film of Klemperer conducting the very same Beethoven fifth, he looks fairly young so it would be about the time of the Vox records. A giant of a man with horn rimmed spectacles who looks as if he is casting an incantation on the orchestra.

I know the Vox records are fairly crude in sound and hardly ideal. It's good to have your views on the differences between those and the earlier EMI records that are more familiar.


BB

quote:

Originally posted by Fredrik_Fiske:

You write as if there is a definitive answer as to whether there really is a difference in qualitative greatness [etc.]

Good grief, Fredrik, slow down ! I must have done something dreadful to you in a past life, I deeply apologize for whatever it was.

My post was merely a slightly off-topic (as you are sometimes too) occasion to talk about something Klemperer did well besides Beethoven, and I happen to have ordered HvK's disc a few days ago to see if there were things he did better than Klemperer.

Being not a native English speaker, I did not understand everything in your post, but I presume you want to tell me that there is no such thing as an absolute interpretation. Thank you very much Fredrik. On the other hand, when I like a work like the Deutsches Requiem, then I look for the best performance and this may well end up in a comparison between musicians. Where's the trouble here ?

Oh and by the way, when you write ...

quote:

Karajan, though arguably at his finest at this time, was not nearly so remarkable a musician as Klemperer at his greatest.

... you will certainly agree that you can't tell me afterwards ...

quote:

You write as if there is a definitive answer as to whether there really is a difference in qualitative greatness between the various artists

As far as I can read you just did (first quote) what you allege me to have done.

Now let's cool down and get back to music.

Dear cheese,

I don't think that you did anything to me in a a past life.

If there is anything that you do not understand in my posts please let me know which part, and I can clarify it for you.

Yours sincerely, Fredrik

quote:

but not a breath of Romanticism is to be found

Fredrik

I think it's an important point that the terms Classical and Romantic are in themselves highly subjective. To call Furtwangler a 'Romantic' and Klemperer a 'Classicist' is to lose the point altogether. The terms objective and subjective might come closer to the mark but even there we must be careful.


Does Romanticism mean distorting the tempo relationships so that the piece's structure becomes amorphous and chaotic ? The goal of the first true 'Romantics' (i.e. Goethe) or was this more a question of feeling and subjectivism, i.e. Romantic in the sense that it is a unification of human emotions and the forces of nature, to which we associate Romanticism at its undiluted finest. For me, a classical approach does not preclude the latter. It is possible to be as moved by the ancient Greeks as by say...Emily Bronte. Let no one imagine that a recording by say the later Stravinsky, Klemperer, Toscanini wold yield anything in the way of emotional involvement to their Romantic counterparts.

Since you mentioned Adrian Boult in another thread, it is interesting to note that his musical icon was Aurtur Nikish. Has anyone heard that conductors recording of Beethoven's Fifth ? It is by turns highly eccentric and classically severe, not what we would expect from one who we have come to regard as an echt Romantic. Many would view Beethoven as the first Romantic, but your characterization of him as the last Classicist would be just as apt.



BB

Dear BB,

I have the first movement only of the Premiere recording of The Fifth under Nikisch! It is extra-ordinary. Not at all what you would expect from the written words about his style. Boult regarded him as his idol, and studied his style by attending about twelve months worth of rehearsals in Leipzig.

I think that the most devastatingly emotional music I know comes from Bach, and that is surely a unification, as you mention it above, of human emotion and the force of Nature. Beethoven manages this as well in my view. In a way I think that the Opera "Fidelio" is the least operatic of all Operas, but in the Prisoners Chorus, I find a depth of human feeling that is unparalleled in any other opera I know. More like a Mass than an opera really, such is the intensity...

This music measn more than I can express to me.

Kindest regards from Fredrik

This pertains to this Thread as much as the one I posted it to:

Originally posted by Fredrik Fiske, Fri 25 May 2007 22:21, in the "What Are You Listening To Now" Thread:

___________

Quotation: Originally posted by Tam:

I only know the EMI stereo recordings with the Philharmonia and, to be honest, I find them rather lacklustre. [On Klemperer's EMI Complete Stereo Beethoven Symphonic recordings with the Philharmonia, issued as an integral cycle of CDs].

regards, Tam. Quotation Ends.
___________

Fredrik Fiske replied:

Dear Tam,

That is, in my view, an unfortunate over-simplification. When this was last discussed, I pointed out that among Klemperer's stereo Beethoven recordings, perhaps the Fifth, and Seventh were, if not dull, certainly monumental. This might seem peculiar* because these two works are to be found much more compelling, incredibly viscerally powerful, readings in the slightly earlier Mono reordings for EMI. The Mono recording from these forces [and company] of the Eroica Symphony has yet to be eclipsed in my view.

Even these three symphonies' performances, better served by their earlier, mono takes, are hardly to be called lack-lustre however - in my humble opinion. Controversial perhaps, but not lack-lustre.

As for 1, 2 and 4, these are exemplary. The Pastoral has one eccentricity, and 8 and the Choral are tremendous. Many times I have I have warned against buying cycles. As a whole I have never found any orchestral cycle in any commercially issued set of Beethoven that is entirely satisfying, and strongly urge people to buy individual issues of the individual pieces. It is quite possible with Klemperer to make a complete Beethoven Symphonic Cycle that is wonderful, but that would involve buying recordings from more than one company, and also being happy to take a compilation of stereo and mono recordings in individual works. I imagine that my ideal cycle of Beethoven Symphonies, uniquely possible for me with Klemperer, will never happen commercially because of copyright and technical reasons. EMI, however will continue to release the stereo integral, which in my view does Klemperer's posthumous reputation no favours as it is uneven in its qualities in three [possibly four] of the Nine Symphonies, but of which in each case Klemperer left great alternative versions.

If anyone is interested, no doubt all will be made clear over the following months in my Thread on Klemperer's Beethoven!

* NB: though it may not be realised generally nowadays, Klemperer suffered from a Bi-polar illness, which meant that while his greatest work was trully inspired, on occasion no person could more displeased with the result than Klemperer himself. There are some harrowing comments on some of his own performances of the Missa Solemnis, and yet his studio recordings of this are both still available, and still not eclipsed.

Kindest regards from Fredrik

______________________________________

For continuity, I hope Tam will not be offended that I post his reply here, as it adds to things in a positive way in my view:


Posted Fri 25 May 2007 23:38; Tam wrote:

Dear Fredrik,

It is something of a simplification, however, I really didn't get on with the set at all. Even now, listening to the first, it just fails to engage me. Whether lacklustre is the best word, I don't know but it seemed to me to sum up how I felt, particularly about some of the lighter symphonies (such as the 1st, 4th) or the seventh which I do feel needs to be taken fairly swiftly. Of course, many of these symphonies respond wonderfully to a grander approach (especially works like the 3rd, 5th and 9th) but it didn't seem to be here - at least not in the manner of Jochum's LSO eroica and 9th or Furtwangler. I had particularly high hopes for the 8th after the emotionally draining experience Davis made of it (have read his was a cycle in the Klemperer mould), but again it did little for me. In honesty, if the set didn't contain the Barenboim concertos, I think I would part with it, which I very much enjoyed.

It's odd, as I find Klemperer's mono, live recording of Fidelio on Testament absolutely thrilling, so I had looked forward to these. And, no doubt, I shall explore some of the testament releases at some point.

As a rule, I agree with you that sets tend to have symphonies that work well and others that don't, but I still enjoy buying them as wholes. I would still maintain that there isn't a weak link in the Mackerras cycle (though most of the performances have been bettered elsewhere), I would say almost as much of the first Jochum cycle and I would think one could come fairly close cobbling together a Furtwangler one from various sources.

regards, Tam

__________________________________

Dear Tam,

On the issue of the Choral, it is monumental, but not slow like Furtwangler, whose tempi in the Andante/Adagio are so slow that it never fails to make the horn parts unplayable, and a brief inspecttion of the times [and a consideration of the appropriate repeats taken by Klemperer], will soon show that he is consistently faster even than Toscanini! I think Norrington is just a little faster, but not much - perhaps a minute in 65 odd ...

Kindest regards from Fredrik

Dear Fredrik,

I'm just curious if we're talking about the same recordings - the choral on my set runs to about 72 minutes (as against 61 with Mackerras, 75ish for Furtwangler and even more for Bernstein in his last reading). Of course, comparing just timings can always be a little misleading.

regards, Tam

Dear Tam,

Good point to clear up. Yes, the studio set from Autumn 1957 in Stereo, which was released in the EMI cycle on LPs in 1971 [first stereo release on full price HMV, having been issued in Mono 12 years earlier on English Columbia], and also all subsequent EMI CD re-issues. Testamant released the live sets. I think you will find that with Klemperer in the three [Philharmonia] recordings the Scherzo has every repeat shown and takes 14 minutes, while Furtwangler at a slower tempo and without all the sonata form repeats takes about 12 minutes. If one scaled up the Furtwangler it would be nearly 17 minutes long as I remember it from marking the score up many years ago now! The most startling statistic is the Slow "Andante/Adagio" Movement, to which Klemperer brings splendid emotional thrust combined a tenderness which is entirely appropriate, and poise [as well as architectural cogency by observing Beethoven's metronome markings, which are crucial to get the two different tempi to relate] and is taken in about 14 minutes as compared to Furtwangler taking between 19 to 22 minutes long in various performances.

The Finale in much the same time duration between Klemperer and Furtwangler, and also Toscanini, but Klemperer's way welds the set of Variations into one Arc, without any sense of it being constructed in episodic fashion. The most incredible build up of power is to be found in the section begining with the Turkish March leading through the subsequent orchestral fugue and into the related chorus, joined by the bridge passage of paired repeated notes on the Horn. Taken as marked at one [quite fast] tempo, there comes a massive release in terms of the strength and sheer joy of that chorus after the extra-ordinarily build-up through the preceding minutes.

In the First movement Klemperer, again provides a clear and classical view, and rather fast basic tempo, which is only obviously fast when one puts on a recording by Toscanini or Furtwangler afterwards, so aptly judged is the basic chosen tempo. Like the slow movement, this defies the legend, and is the most compelling in the 1961 Testamant RFH set! All three have incredible forward momentum, which characterises the forbidding, even terrifying resonance of the music culminating in a coda of quite catastrophic emotional doubt as the basses slide their chromatic line up and down under the torment in the strings and timpani above! The storm in the Pastoral is merely an April Shower comapred to this - a "cosmic clash" if ever there was one in music!

The two live RFH Phiharmonia recordings are currently both issued Testament, released in recent times - one from the same week as the studio album [same soloists], and the other from 1961 [the best of all] - where the spur of live performance is palpable and which I would persoanlly consider as the two most wonderful performances of this music I have encountered.

Kindest regards from Fredrik

I have listened to the live recorded concert of the Choral under Klemperer at the Royal Festival Hall from the 27th November 1961 this evening! Extra-ordinarily fine.

Though I have now looked out my metronome I have yet to get to my score which is boxed away. Then I will be able to post on the issue of the actual tempi with regard to Beethoven's [sometimes controversial] metronome markings, but one thing is for sure: this is not slow!

The playing conveys something verging on desperation of spirit in the first movement such is the probing nature of the music making. This is a long way from comfortable, or smooth music making. Rarely have I actually noted the Philharmonia bass section to rattle their finger boards with their projection other than here! Overal I would say that it is by some distance my favourite reading on records [CD, sorry], and at 68 minutes including applause, easily the fastest performance that I have found that is not driven at the music's expense! Also to be born in mind is that Scherzo contains all the marked repeats, which even today is not always the case. Thus it is longer in time duration by two minutes [much longer of course in bars played] than the slow movement!

This is a great antidote to the notion that Klemeprer was a slow conductor. The slowness would sadly come in some later performance over the next decade, and seems to coincide with something of a loss of grip in his extreme old age, though by no means on every occasion. The old fires could still burn brightly even later on, such as the great Missa Solemnis recording done for EMI.

For those not aquainted with the performance, may I heartily recomend it: Testament 1332. A recording held by the British Libraray, such is its significance. It is from the same time as the performances of Fidelio at Covent Garden, when something of a legend started about Klemperer's style. The general Manager wrote to Klemperer that "We have conquered the House!" I know a member of the Orchestra and have a few tales about how Klemperer got on with Opera House orchestra rather than his regular band - the Philharmonia - and it was not all sweetness and light at the rehearsals, but the results speak for themselves even now, and audable on the recent testament first issue of that rather wonderful occasion. I wish the CDs themselves were not verging on full price!!

I shall be getting the other new issues next week, and hope they live up the standard of this.

Kindest regards from Fredrik

Fredrik ,My father gave me a shed load of 78s years ago.So many of them were the music you tam and others talk about on hear the 40s and 50s recordings.I would love to have the knowlege you lot have.

Hi Munch,

Not that it's a shortcut to Fredrik's or Tam's knowledge but you can do worse than pick up a full Penguin guide to classical CDs. W.H Smiths or Amazon.

I learnt a lot through following up recommendations and comparing versions - you soon learn which reviewers favour your preferred styles and interpretations. There's no magic formula just a bit of learning and a lot of listening to do.

And of course, you never stop learning. You get to understand why well regarded interpretations might not be to your own taste. Alternatively, you may come across versions that you prefer and they don't even feature as a qualified recommendation. Solti's Mahler 2 is an example of this for me.

In Beethoven Symphonies for example, some people love Klemperer. I find his later versions eccentrically slow (with one or two exceptions). But I've listened to them, enjoyed finding out and moved them on.

On the other hand I like the intensity and pace that Toscanini often produces - others find it hurried and lacking stature. You never know how you will react but it's fun finding out.

Steve

For BB Dan to have alook at, if interested... Fredrik

quote:

Originally posted by graham55:
Tam, the EMI box of symphonies and piano concertos show a conductor well past his best.

But Klemperer was able to go on to great things in his last years: his Flying Dutchman is extraordinary!

The jury will always be out over Erich vs Carlos, but I just wanted to point out that there was a far greater Beethoven interpreter than Klemperer working in the studio in the early Fifties. Fredrik won't agree, of course!



How can you come to that conclusion,you talk as though its a competition,i borrowed a Kleiber recording of the 5th,can't remember which one and much prefered the Klemperer,so what.

This comes back to my disagreement with Fredrik over Glenn Gould,you can say that one musician has better technique than another,but a better musician,i think not.

Lots of love BB

Dear Dan,

I can see that we shall be getting on fine from now on! I must emphasis that none of the quotation above was originally by me!

In our recent discussion I actually worked something new out about performers whose work I do not enjoy, and I shall modify my way of expressing it from now on! That will please you, Dan.

Kindest regards from Fredrik

Dear Fredrik,
Perhaps Graham could explain how Kleiber is greater(better)than Klemperer?

For me a musician can touch my soul on a one to one basis,i dont care or am influenced by anyone else's opinion,i think if you do not enjoy it Fredrik, its not worth expressing.

However when i read your musings on artists that move you on a one to one basis,i am all ears.

Lots of love BB

Dear Dan,

I try to avoid being negative. I absolutely guarantee it from now on.

Otto Klemperer was my first musical hero after Beethoven as a ten year old. By the age of thirteen I had all nine symphonies from him is the same recordings currently issued in the EMI boxed CD set. There are very fine. Still my benchmark actually.

Kindest regards from Fredrik

Dear Fredrik,
There used to be a Classical record shop in Needless Alley in Birmingham called Vincents,run by a couple of boffins,eccentric and wonderfull.
It was one of them that recomended the EMI stereo version as the one to go for and i was glad he did.

Ironicaly i got into Glenn Gould as i wanted to listen to some Bach on the Harpschord (my first experience of Bach was Julian Bream)by ignorance.

It was Wednesday Vincents was closed so i could not ask the expert,so i went into Rackhams and browsed the Bach section and came across a boxed set of TWTC by GG on Klavier,i did not know this meant piano,he looked very intense on the cover so i bought it.

Got home popped the stylus in the groove 1st prelude(now this says something about his tone)and i was not sure,was it a Harpsichord or Piano,by the second prelude i did not care i was hooked and still am,it was though he had made the recording just for me.

I am glad i did not rely on the expert that day

Lots of Love BB