5 comments about Medtner: Complete Piano Sonatas, Forgotten Melodies / Hamelin.

1. Medtner is one of the greatest composers from the romantic style period. He was a fine pianist and recorded many of his own pieces although he did this in old age. The romantic spirit of exile we know from German lieder and Rachmaninov meet in Medtner's music. This music is sometimes projected as being only for the aesthete specialist or piano fanatic. One of my teachers seemed to suggest that the works could really only be fully appreciated with the score at hand. I feel this music is accessible and can be enjoyed by all music lovers. I love Medtner's music, the melodies can be whistled. The music is memorable and moving. Listen to the last movement of the Sonaten Triade Op. 11 if you doubt this. It has a stormily explosive power and atmosphere that is very compelling. I believe Marc Hamelin is the only person to record all of Medtner's sonatas. I strongly recommend for this Medtner cycle for all who appreciate romanticism in music.



2. Excellent (if you like Medtner's music). the piano is clear and wonderful.
   
   Martin



3. When this 4CDs-album came out in 1998 I was one of the first in the states to purchase a copy, and even without knowing whether Medtner is my taste or not. I loved Hamelin's Scriabin-sonatas album so I didnt care about the high price of this Medtner-sonatas album. And I was right. With the first scanning of each disc I fell more and more in love with this gorgeous, rich, imaginative, romantic, melodic&rhythmic, intense, serious, profound, passionate...simply *beautiful* music. Medtner does not seem to strive for creating something extraordinary, innovative, modern, interesting per se but for pure musical intent. What you hear is pure (and absolute?) music by a genuine musician (Medtner) as natural and pianistic as one could imagine, with nothing else intended or presumed.
   For comparative listeners, Geoffrey Tozer's boxed Medtner-sonatas set includes the complete Forgotten Melodies (I-III), not only I and II (Hamelin), but in the sonatas Hamelin plays with much more verve, drive, energy and speed. However, in the past years I tend to listen more of TozerPlayingMedtner...simply because he has been recording the complete Medtner solo music (prospected 9 volumes on Chandos) and I really enjoy the wealth of non-sonata music by Medtner which is less complex, of lighter content and much easier to understand. Many pianophiles whom I borrowed the Hamelin album thought that these sonatas were way too dense and heavy, yet in the end they fell in love with Medtner, too, when listening to his non-sonata pieces (Fairy Tales, etc.). They have become Medtner fans, yes!
   As for my part, after having listened to Medtner sonatas for almost ten consecutive years, I somehow obtain the feeling that his other solo piano music is more enjoyable on a long-term basis. I cant listen to the sonatas nearly any more but I experience still lots of pleasure, fun and enjoyment listening to his other pieces. So thanks Hamelin for the convincing introduction to Medtner's world, and even more thanks to Tozer on Chandos (and Hamish Milne on CRD) for making this world my new home.



4. that such beautiful music should be ignored! i never understood why rachmaninoff enjoyed more popularity than his more ingenious colleague, scriabin. i similarly don't understand why rach is deemed greater than medtner. perhaps it was sergei's larger-than-life presence as a pianist and conductor? i deem rachmaninoff one of the greatest pianist-conductors in history, but as a composer he ranks below both scriabin and medtner.
   listen to medtner's music and be blown away by the intricacy and intimacy of his music. the density, the poignant lyricism. counterpoint unfolds and reveals music that is ten times more dense than rachmaninoff's (possibly excluding rach's 2nd and 3rd piano concerto).
   you hear explosive genius, innovations, and emotions. a different trajectory from scriabin's music - not apocalpytic, but more rustic. more pastoral and fairy-like, if not as charged with pathos.
   if you are a fan of piano music, or just keyboard music as a whole, if you're looking for something sexy, medtner's sonatas are the answer.
   and hamelin's playing, i presume, does not need my vouching.



5. Medtner is a trult great composer and Hamelin is a truly great pianist, not just a technician.

5 comments about Sibelius: The Complete Symphonies.

1. Trust me. You have no need to read the rest of this review. This is the symphonic cycle to own. I always knew that Sibelius's music was extraordinarily beautiful, but it was obvious from other recordings I used to own that the interpretations I heard were sub-par. I took a chance on an orchestra I had never heard of, and I was blown away. The precision and care with which these great works are handled is simply unmatched by any major orchestra's recorded performances. The closest I came to hearing a rendition of the Fifth this good was a tape from Deutsche Grammaphon, but I cannot find a CD of that particular recording. No matter. It is no longer necessary. I am intent on eventually purchasing all of Sibelius's orchestral fare strictly from this conductor and orchestra.
   
   Every time the brass enter, it is an incisive cut through the ephemeral strings. The woodwinds are always playful, the strings precise and finely tuned. With Sibelius's complicated phrasing and enigmatic rhythms, it is vital that the subtleties don't get lost in mushier playing, and the fact that this orchestra survives on a smaller string section helps a great deal in keeping the sound clean and fresh, like you would imagine the air of Finland to be.
   
   Highlights include the superb and highly dramatic entrances of the strings and then the brass in the opening of the First, followed by respite with a jaunty little passage for harp and woodwinds; the pastoral first movement of the Second, followed by a lightning-fast Scherzo; the somber and tremulous passages in the Fourth; the frightening screech of the Horns at the climax of the Seventh, shortly before the prolonged leading tone in the penultimate chord; there's even the original version of the Fifth for your enjoyment. But what sets this recording above other cycles in my opinion is the way that the Fifth and Sixth are handled.
   
   The Horns are crucial in the Fifth, and here there are no complaints, only pure, harmonious playing. The strings also have a vitally important part in the first movement as they climb chromatically in oscillating chords behind fragmented melodies in the woodwinds, and Vänskä interprets this increase in dramatic tension perfectly, with a wonderful slurred motion that accentuates the rhythm without drowning the winds. The end of the first movement is beautifully done, as the timpani releases the rest of the orchestra to scurry to the finish in the higher registers. In the final movement, the Horns once again prove their mettle by keeping their layered playing expertly connected, slurring up and down to make mountaintops while playing harmony in thirds. The final staccato chords with the pauses in between are so often given to the occasional false start, but not here. The finale is a satisfying and powerful finish.
   
   The Sixth took me entirely by surprise. I had never heard this symphony played so well, therefore its immense power was hidden from me for quite some time. The strings take their time giving their mournful opening over to a lighter passage for harp and woodwinds; the brass are reliable in their ability to cut through everything with a surgeon's knife, and they do not disappoint here. The second movement consists mostly of scales, and fragments of scales for melody, with an almost baroque-like fortspinnung for strings in the final section. Here the delicacy of tension, just as in the opening movement of the Fifth, is held with exactness. The scherzo-like third movement showcases the Horns heralding the midsection and the finale with a magnificent dropping of the harmony back into the tonic with a few decisive chords. They also appear in the final throes of the fourth movement, bringing this magnificent symphony to glorious life once more.
   
   The Lahti Symphony is apparently devoted almost entirely to the study of Sibelius's music. On this set, it most definitely shows. I cannot recommend it highly enough.



2. This could have been a great cycle. As it is, it's quite quite good. There are some thrilling moments, some pedestrian moments, and one 25-minute long horrible moment. It's this mixed quality that makes the set so frustrating: first I want to cherish it and then I want to get rid of it. Overall, though, it's a keeper.
   
   The First is an okay reading, but it won't displace favorites Maazel/Pittsburgh on Sony (the only reading in that cycle that's worth a darned), Davis/Boston/Philips, Ormandy/Minneapolis Symphony/ or Sanderling/Berlin Symphony/Brilliant Classics and others I'm sure I'm forgetting. The scherzo here is particularly disappointing: tightly wound, it has no humor or joy or life, only speed. The Second lacks the drama, the heft, of the great readings, and is a bit boring by the end. The orchestra here (and elsewhere in this set) can get lifeless at times. Although this is far from my favorite Sibelius symphony, some great recordings are...oh screw it. I'm not nuts about this symphony, so you'll have to find your own great recordings. Colin Davis/Boston usually works well enough for me. If I recall, Barbirolli/Halle/EMI is also an intense experience, but the sound isn't nearly as good.
   
   Number Three is where things take off. This is a *great* reading, full of energy and nuance that the first two lacked. There are subtle adjustments of tempo in the first movement that show off the structure to great advantage: Vanska finds drama and playfulness here where other conductors don't. The lyrical slow movement is gorgeous and reflective, and the ending brims with energy. It's close to tops in my book, with Davis/BPO/Philips being just about the only peer. (Davis' most recent performance, live with the LSO on that orchestra's own label, is also very good.)
   
   But in the Fourth Vanska can't compete with some heavy hitters: Beecham/LPO/EMI, Maazel/VPO/Decca, Karajan/BPO/EMI, Davis/Boston/Philips again. (You'll get lots of recs for this set--I think it may be the best all-around set out there and a real bargain to boot--but avoid his two more recent goes, one RCA studio, one live, both with the London Symphony, both tired and pointless and the sound isn't even as good!) Here I get neither a chilling effect (Maazel, Karajan) nor a warmer, almost neo-Romantic effect (Davis). I don't get any effect, actually. I don't hear much structure here, and without an understanding of "where you are" at all times, it's easy for this symphony to fall apart into a sort of disembodied state.
   
   For the Fifth we have two versions, the original, thought for many years to be lost, and the current edition we all know and love. For the current edition, they turn in a sparkling performance that really pays attention to all the subtle dynamics in the score. In particular I have never heard the ppp markings observed as strictly as here. Two spots stand out: in the first movement the bassoon solo over ppp arpeggiated strings. And in the last movement, at about halfway through, as the strings start their quiet murmur of the big closing theme for the first time. Talk about breathing on the strings! Majestic stuff, brought to life with fantastically clear engineering. I've never heard this much detail before, yet it all sounds natural--no spotlighting. This recording compares favorably with Davis (again), Karajan/BPO/EMI, Barbirolli/Halle/EMI, Bernstein/NYPO/Sony, without displacing any of them.
   
   The original version of the Fifth is utterly fascinating. It's like meeting an old friend in a different form, so familiar and yet so new. In some ways I like it more than the standard version, but maybe that's just because it's new and fresh to my ears. Maybe it's because it's grimmer and more brooding and there's more drama in the struggle before we reach the finish line. At any rate, with no recordings to compare it to, I can just say Vanska and friends tear into it with passion and intensity. I recommend it highly, and I think you'll find his original thoughts particularly for the finale to be fascinating and very satisfying in a way the official version is not. Why Sibelius was not satisfied I'll never understand, but I'm grateful we have two versions to enjoy. Now if only that fabled Eighth symphony would turn up...
   
   The Sixth Symphony is the other great performance in this box. This is a spirited nymph of a performance, full of joy and love and longing. And this is a symphony I can find few good recordings of. This is one, arguably the best thing in the set. So many conducts take this so somberly and "inwardly" that it becomes dull. No such concerns of Scandinavian angst concern Vaska. This is my top recommendation for this work, though Beecham/RPO/EMI is pretty special too.
   
   After all that energy from the two versions of the Fifth and the stunning Sixth, you'd think we'd be reading for a Seventh to end all Sevenths, right? Wrong. This is my favorite Sibelius symphony, and one of my favorite symphonies period, yet I can never find a good recorded performance for it. My current favorite is Maazel/VPO/Decca. It's not perfect, but I can't find one that is, save for a live performance in 2004 by Simon Rattle and the BPO while they were touring San Francisco. They took the roof off of Davies Hall with a triumph that just may be the concert-going highlight of my life. I hope somebody recorded it.
   
   This present performance is slow, lifeless, and lacks all majesty and drama. I turned it off the first time at about the ten minute mark, bored to tears. It takes a lot to make me turn off a Sibelius Seventh. Finally I forced myself to listen to it to write this review. It's horrible. No sense of architecture. No nobility, no build. And the tone poem Tapiola, which is sort of a "sequel" to the Seventh, is equally unsatisfactory for the same reasons.
   
   So there you have it, after four days of slogging, some limited comparison listening, and checking some scores borrowed from the local library. It's a good set, beautifully recorded, with real attention paid to dynamics (micro-dynamics, really) but despite all that, some of the performances just don't gel. How much you need to get this set depends on how much you treasure these works, how much sound matters to you (this may be the best sounding set out there), how curious you are to hear alternate Fifth (my advice, be *very* curious), and how many other Sibelius boxes you have on your shelf. Overall I would recommend this set, but it's not as enthusiastic a recommendation as it could be.



3. Jean Sibelius remains somewhat of an enigma to concertgoers: nearly everyone is enraptured with the second symphony and many swoon over the fifth and seventh symphonies, but so often symphonies one, three, four, and six are overlooked. Yes, his violin concerto is well represented in nearly every contemporary violinist's repertoire, but the tone poems evade popularity. That is why it is exciting to own this fine set of four discs that not only surveys all seven symphonies but also adds the Tapiola as an encore.
   
   Osmo Vänskä conducts the Lahti Symphony Orchestra in an echt recording of Sibelius. Yes, some may prefer a different approach to the more familiar symphonies such as the second, but taken as a whole Vänskä coaxes stunning performances from his ensemble. He allows the massive 'organ pedal' sustaining notes that occur repeatedly in all of the symphonies to sound as if they are the earth itself emerging through splits in the glacial craters of the Scandinavian landscape. His tempi are so correct that they constantly encourage the sense of urgency few other conductors find in the works. If this listener had to select a favorite among the works it would clearly be the performance of the rarely heard and somewhat musically retrospective Symphony No. 3. Rarely has this work seemed so coherent and so ripe with all the ideas that constantly sprang from Sibelius' mind. It is a gem of a performance.
   
   Not one for boxed sets usually, this particular one, recorded with some of the finest sound available, is a mighty exception. It is a solid, consistently inspiring reading of the Sibelius symphonies. Grady Harp, November 06



4. Perhaps I've heard more memorable performances of some of these symphonies -- which, along with Debussy and Ravel's orchestral music, are my all-time favorite symphonic works -- but taken as a whole these are quite well played, with tempi reasonably judged and plenty of Sibelian atmosphere. The strings are a tad thin but have an appealing and appropriate "chill" to their sound, and the woodwinds and brass parts are persuasively characterized.

   As a bonus, you get BIS' wonderfully natural recorded sound, superior examples of how to properly record a symphony orchestra. If you're looking for one-stop Sibelius symphony shopping, you will be pleased with this collection.




5. I own three sets of the Sibelius symphonies: Maazel/VPO, Davis/LSO, and this one. There are still a lot of other ones out there that I haven't heard yet, but if were to make a recommendation this one would be my pick. Vanska and the Lahti Symphony Orchestra give some really fine performances of these works. A few bonuses with this Sibelius cycle is the symphonic poem Tapiola, and the 1915 version of the 5th symphony which is very interesting to compare with the final version. The sound quality is great, and the rather extensive liner notes give some very helpful information about each piece. This set costs a little bit more than some of the other ones available out there, but I think it's worth it.

   To be truly honest, my only disappointment with this set was the the 2nd symphony, which seemed to lack some of the intensity that I find in all the other performances in this collection. It's probably because the 2nd is my favorite Sibelius symphony and I'm really picky about it (I own 6 recordings of the 2nd). All I can say is don't let that keep you from buying this set. There are plenty of good recordings of the 2nd out there, so don't be discouraged.

   Still, I highly recommend this set. Just listen to some Sibelius. More people need to hear his music.

5 comments about Beethoven: Symphonies Nos. 1-9 (Box Set).

1. I first encountered Kegel's Beethoven when the series was released on Pro Arte Sinfonia series LPs, later replacing the vinyl with the boxed CD set (which unfortunately doesn't include the miscellaneous overtures performed by the same forces).
   
   Kegel's view of these warhorses is in the solid middle European tradition - big string section, more moderate tempos than might be considered the norm today, and perhaps not the last word in excitement. Even so, they are satisfying and pretty well recorded in early digital sound. The biggest disappointment in the set is the first movement of the "Eroica" - a little too laidback and too much legato for my taste. Having said that, Kegel's readings are a good introduction to the Beethoven symphonic canon and will also give more experienced listeners food for thought.
   
   The Dresden Philharmonic, not to be confused with Dresden's "first" orchestra, the Staatskapelle, plays well. Despite a big string section, woodwind detail is nicely to the fore. The ensemble may not have the glamour of its better known municipal rival but it responds very well to Kegel's baton.
   
   Anyone looking for a good budget set of the symphonies could do far, far worse than this set. I'm familiar with a couple of sets in competition with this one. Krips (Everest) is well played but the sound shows it age. Sawallisch's EMI cycle with the Amsterdam Congertbegouw has been licensed to Brilliant Classics at a similar price, but the Kegel set is more consistent in quality.



2. I've owned this set for more than a decade. When I first heard it, I put it away and didn't listen to it at all for over 5 years, such was my disappointment. After recently upgrading my sound system, I thought I'd give it another try, since it's DDD and my only other set is the Von Karajan which, while wonderful (well, who am I to say; it's what I was weaned on), is ADD. I tried the 3, 5 and 9 and was disappointed I came away calling Herr Kegel "Mr. Metronome," such was his playing style. No spirit, but maybe that just means not Karajan.
   
   However, just today I listened to the 2, 4 and 7 and was quite impressed. Maybe it was just my mood, but they all really came through powerfully, and made the set well worth the price. I particularly love the timpanis, which sound so much more like real life in DDD than in ADD. Crank the volume up a couple of notches above whatever level you use for Karajan and you'll have the ride of your life. I think I'm going to take another listen to the 3, 5, and 9, as well as the pastorale and the 8th. Maybe I just didn't have the volume cranked up enough.
   
   Enjoy.
   
   PS: Dresden is where the demonstrations took place that resulted in the dissolution of the East German government. The spirit of the city should make for good Beethoven. Freiheit und Leben!



3. The thrill of bargain hunting is finding a great value at a mere pittance. This results in left brain/right brain nirvana. I picked up the 10 CDs for about $10 and they sound great, especially Beethoven's 9th Symphony. They are also very well recorded including excellent db master line levels.
   
   My other Beethoven Bargain Cycle is by Joseph Krips and the London Symphony Orchestra. I got the original LPs for $2.98 at Half Priced Books and they had a fancy CD Box Set in a Tin Box for sale last Christmas for $10. The Krips set has been around and in production since circa 1960 and I would give it the edge over Kegal's.
   
   If you shop around you may be able to find a top notch set for $30 or less. I got the Karajan Berlin Phil 9 symphony cycle from circa 1961 on CD for und $18 including s/h thru Ebay and the early 70s Karl Bohm/ Vienna Phil on CD thru Amazon Marketplace (come in 3 separate 2 fer CD albums) for a little over $20.
   
   The reason I bring these options up is that I recently did a side by side listening taste test. I cued up Beethoven's 5th by Bohm, Karajan, Kegal, and Carlos Kleiber. Kegal sounds OK if you just listen to Kegal. If you hear Kegal with these other performances side by side, Kegal is not at all in their league. Bohm and Karajan are two of the all time classic Beethoven Symphony cycles and Kleiber's Beethoven 5th is regarded by many as the best ever recorded. Kegal is fine as a bargain option, but there are other options available.



4. This is a fine set of Beethoven symphonies, well played and recorded, except I think the recording level of the ninth is a bit lower than the rest of the symphonies (might just be my ears). You don't get fancy liner notes or fabulous photographs of the orchestral forces, but the performances are quite solid; the best being the opening of the fifth and the chorale finale of the ninth.



5. The performance of Symphony No. 5 in this set absolutely kicks serious butt- it's the most powerful, driven Fifth I've ever heard- worth the price of the whole set alone!!!! The rest of the CD's are excellent as well, but the Fifth in this set reigns supreme!

3 comments about Rubinstein Collection, Vol. 24.

1. If you appreciate classical chamber music, then you MUST acquire this CD. It's a reprint from old analog recordings (1950s) and features four giants of musical performance at the height of their powers. Rubinstein and Heifetz collaborate on both trios and they are truly magnificent. Piatigorsky and Feuermann more than hold their own. The Mendelssohn Op. 49 trio is, to my mind, the most perfect piece of chamber music ever composed. Its digital reproduction is clear and compelling. The Brahms reproduction is pretty scratchy -- you should prepare to listen as if to an old AM radio.



2. Heifetz was not an easy going man, as could be seen from the immaculate perfection he demanded of himself. All the great violinists of his time, including Jan, Kreisler, Elman, Milstein... all were suffering from the so-called "Heifetz disease". Consciously or unconsciously, Heifetz might have displayed some disapproval of Rubinstein. But on that score, Heifetz was not alone: Moriz Rosenthal as well as Ignaz Friedman, two of the top 5 or 6 pianists of the century, took the same stance and the latter two was even more open...and there came a time when Rubinstein himself was so troubled of his own deficiency that he undertook a seclusion tying himself to the piano for months before going before the public again.

   Among the trio, Feuermenn was rare in the sense that Heifetz "liked" him, calling him "his fireman". Naturally, Heifetz recognised him -- well, Toscanini saw him as the greatest cellist and Casals saw him as the greatest artist of the century! That Feuermenn was a better and more worthy partner is undoubted.

   In any event, when we listen to Rubinstein, we need to take a different standard than the modern one-- one aiming at precise rendition of the notes like Horowitz (or even Serkin ) somehthing which is not exactly his strength. However, his playing and his music is natural and very easy to listen to. In any event, Paderewski also sounded more or less like Rubinstein ( or even Horszowski ) and like Rubinstein, he was also hailed as the most popular pianist of his time. But whether he was up the the standard of the other two or whether the three mixed well is a different matter.




3. Volume 24 of RCA's complete Arthur Rubinstein Collection features the pianist in collaboration with violinist Jascha Heifetz and cellists Emanual Feuermann and Gregor Piatigorsky.

   With the outbreak of World War II in 1939, many of Europe's finest musicians took refuge in the United States. Rubinstein settled in Southern California, where he remained until the 1950s. The pianist came into frequent contact with fellow Californian Jascha Heifetz, where both were persuaded by RCA to return to the recording studio and build on the success of their earlier collaboration, the Franck Violin Sonata, recorded in 1937 (Volume 7).

   Rubinstein disliked Heifetz, and his distaste for the violinists domineering personality (which clashed with Rubinstein's own need to be the center of attention) grew with the passage of time. All the more surprising then, that they managed to obtain excellent results.

   The Mendelssohn Trio was recorded in 1941, in collaboration with Emanuel Feuermann. The performance is more boldly expressive and intense then is usually heard today, and played on a larger dynamic scale. One of the tricks with performing chamber music is the expression of the individual personalities of the players, while still achieving unanimity of interpretation. Rubinstein, Heifetz, and Feuermann meet and surpass this goal superbly. One never forgets the fact that these are three top rate instrumentalists playing--particularly with Heifetz--but they never unduly overshadow each other.

   Feuermann died in 1942. Russian cellist Gregor Piatigorsky signed on, and the three became known as the Millian Dollar Trio, a name which amused Heifetz and disgusted Rubinstein. Many of the same attributes heard in the Mendelssohn are also present here. Heifetz is a bit more dominant in this performance, and is accorded the closest microphone balance. Still, this performance is far superior to Rubinstein's 1972 stereo remake with violinist Henryk Szeryng and cellist Pierre Fournier (Volume 72). Tempos are brisker here, with the first movement being played as a true Allegro con brio. In the Scherzo, Heifetz phrases the stacatto passages in a manner which gives the piece more character than in the later version--although it seems at times that Rubinstein is scrambling just to keep up.

   The mono sound is fine here, although there are the inevitable balance problems (Heifetz is rumored to have manuvered himself closer and closer to the microphone when recording). Surface noise has been resuced without excessive filtering. However, there is an annoying pitch change during the first movement of the Mendelssohn.

5 comments about Beethoven - Symphonies 1-9 · Overtures / London Classical Players · Sir Roger Norrington.

1. I have long been a fan of Roger Norrington and the London classical players.
   Every piece they play sounds fresh.
   I have several of his works on LP but not all of these so this was a double opportunity.



2. I got this recording to hear how Beethoven might sound on period instruments. That sort of thing interests me; I play early woodwinds, myself. The playing is good; and I think I got my money's worth.



3. If you're after superb recordings of the 2nd, 4th, 6th and 8th symphonies, look no further. However, I find Norrington's interpretations of the odd numbered symphonies much less effective for some reason. I've had this set for some years now (I own several recordings of the Beethoven symphonies, five complete cycles, in fact) and I have come to the conclusion that Norrington's recordings of the 2nd, 4th and 8th symphonies are amongst the best available. However, he is weaker in some of the other symphonies. Yet this is a very enjoyable cycle and I do enjoy listening to it, albeit a little critically.
   
   Many or most music lovers will be aware that this was probably the first complete set of recordings on period instruments which took Beethoven's metronome marks very seriously and endeavoured to adhere to them as much as humanly possible. I am inclined to agree with Nikolaus Harnoncourt on this subject and he suggests that Beethoven's metronome markings were worked out in his head and represent how these works might sound in the imagination rather than in the concert hall, does that make any sense?
   
   Hogwood's slightly earlier pioneering H.I.P. recordings of Beethoven symphonies please me a little more than Norrington's. Hogwood wasn't as dogmatic about the metronome markings and I feel that his set is a little more dramatic and "potent" than Norrington's. Those are my feelings.
   
   If you're after a very cheap set of Beethoven symphonies on period instruments, look no further. If you're "cashed up" and a little more choosy, go for Gardiner or Brüggen or, perhaps, Goodman's.



4. This was recorded back in the 1980's when the period instrument movement was still just getting off the ground and the incompetence level of period instrument performers and conductors was off the charts! The instruments themselves were weezy, scratchy and just plain pathetic. Performance standards have improved today but I can't believe anyone in their right mind prefered Beethoven played this way, back in the 1980's, today or even 200 hundred years ago.
   
   Since these performances are so pathetic as to be almost unmentionable, I'll zero in on two symphonies in particular, the Eroica and the 9th. The tempos for all the movements of the Eroica are very fast, the first movement with the exposition repeat observed is only 15:20. Very fast, so it should be exciting, explosive, right? Wrong. It's flat out boring and I was actually getting drowsy. It goes without saying that the instruments have no weight, no depth and no power but the performance lacks any insight at all, especially so in the great Funeral March, here played like a stroll in the park.
   
   The Ninth Symphony is even worse, far, far worse. The first two movements rattled off without even a thought or care. The great, spiritual adagio becomes whiney, rushed nonsense in Norrington's hands and the choral finale was so awful I had to stop it several times.
   
   To call the London Classical Players the equals of a high school orchestra would be an insult to high school orchestras everywhere. The London Classical Players are much more like elementary school children with their first instruments.
   
   This kind of mockery of Beethoven might be fine in England but I'm sure the Germans and Austrians had a good laugh as their hearts filled with rage against the idiotic Englishman! Of course I didn't buy this crappy Norrington set, I just borrowed it from the library and returned it as soon as possible. I feel sorry for anyone who thinks this is good and I feel even more sorry for anyone who thinks that this is how Beethoven should actually be played! With no joy, no soul, no power, no spirituality. If you insist on period instruments ( why would you insist on that you moron? ), go get John Eliot Gardiner. If you actually want to hear drama and beauty in this music, go to Karajan or if you want to experience the full depth and profundity of these works, go to Furtwangler.



5. Roger Norrington's controversial and ground breaking period instrument Beethoven Symphony cycle with the London Classical Players, recorded and released in the mid-late 1980s, is here offered by Virgin Classics at budget price. Norrington's recordings have great sound, and Symphonies 1, 2 and 4 are the best recorded and played here. Perhaps it is also true that the lighter, more Haydn like textures of these symphonies work better on period instruments than do the sterner, more muscular symphonies, such as 3 "Eroica", 5, 6 "Pastoral", 7, 8, and 9.
   
   This is an interesting alternative view of Beethoven, but it should by no means be one's only set of these famous works. For the "larger" symphonies, I would recommend: 3, "Eroica": Szell/Cleveland (Sony); Bruno Walter/Columbia (Sony); Karl Bohm/Vienna Philharmonic (DG); for 5, Reiner/Chicago (RCA);
   Bohm/Vienna (DG); Karajan/Berlin (DG, 1975 recording, with complete symphonies); Carlos Kleiber/Vienna (DG); for 6, "Pastoral": Bruno Walter/Columbia (Sony); Bohm/Vienna (DG);
   Andre Clutyens/Berlin Philharmonic (Seraphim); for 7, Bohm/Vienna (DG); for 8, Bohm/Vienna (DG); Ormandy/Philadelphia (Sony); Bernstein/Vienna (DG); for 9, Szell/Cleveland (Sony), Karajan/Berlin (DG, 1962);
   Furtwangler/Philharmonia (Tahra, Lucerne VIII/1954, perhaps hard to find at the present date); Bohm/Vienna (DG, 1970).
   Norrington's fast tempos seem to gloss over important points in many movements of these symphonies, especially 3:I, III; 5: III, IV (blazing intensity, but too fast); 6:I (too fast!); and 9: III and IV are positively bizarre, really turning the Beethoven I know and love inside out, with wildly different tempos from section to section.
   
   Still, I give this 5 stars and applaud Norrington's bravery in recording Beethoven as he was not recorded previously, with period instruments, and different ideas of tempo, articulation, and phrasing. Norrington's recordings will not be confused with others: there are none others quite like them.

1 comments about Haydn: Symphonies Nos. 70 - 81.

1. With volume 5, Nimbus Records is one volume away from completing the entire collection of Haydn symphonies. Again, Adam Fischer conducts the Austo-Hungarian Haydn Orchestra and delivers a truly amazing listening experience.

   When I began my quest for a complete Haydn symphony collection, there were a few options. But this collection won out and I have not been disappointed with any of the volumes. Every CD is fully digital, from the recording to the mastering process. They are technically flawless.

   I don't profess to be a musical scholar so I cannot comment on the conducting, or the playing. I won't rant on about the choice to use modern instruments to play Haydn.

   All I will say is that I love music and that this volume, like the others in the collection are joy to listen to.

   In case you are wondering, according to Nimbus Records, the entire set should be finished sometime in October of 2001 - concluding with Volume 2.

5 comments about Dmitri Shostakovich: Complete String Quartets (20 bit Remaster).

1. Although I haven't heard the 2nd and 3rd quartets from this cycle (my local library lacks these two), it's safe to say that this set has an emotional depth and feeling for the music that can't be matched by the Emerson or Fitzwilliam SQ. I hate saying that, because the latter two are both excellent in their own way (the Fitzwilliam SQ certainly doesn't lack soul, and the Emerson especially shines when the music calls for violence and fireworks), but there is something about the Borodin complete set that seems to capture this music perfectly and gets the subtleties just right.
   
   A couple of examples: the very eerie beginning of the second movement of the 15th - the Borodin SQ is right on the money with how it seems the music should sound. One instrument picks up from the other perfectly. The second example is the wild conclusion of the 12th. This is music that seems to be lashing out against something in a life or death struggle (against the old Soviet system, perhaps?), and the Borodin SQ jumps on it with a ferocity that brings a smile to my face. It's as if the Borodin SQ were playing the music for the first time, but having the fantastic luck of nailing every note exactly as it should be played.
   
   For now this set is barely available, and for $99 at that. I did some research on the Internet, however, and it appears that Melodiya (the Russian label that released this originally, apparently in partnership with EMI) has re-issued this set complete with new packaging. It appears to have been released abroad, but not in the U.S. yet. When this set reappears in the states, I'm definately buying it.
   
   I discovered this music recently out of curiosity. Now I'm hooked. If music from the 20th Century is a little bit too biting or obscure for your tastes (if pressed, I'd have to say that I enjoy chamber music from the Romantic Era most of all), I think that these quartets will be a pleasant surprise. They are definately modern, but they retain enough elements of music of the past to make them very accessible.



2. This set brilliantly portrays the genius of these 15 Quartets better than any other. Technically and artistically powerful, moving performances.
   
   The Fitzwilliam Quartet cycle is a close second.



3. There now exist several recordings of the complete Shostakovich string quartets. Some of them are very fine ones: the Emersons, the Fitzwilliams, the Beethovens, and the Borodins to name a few. While each of these collections of interpretations has their strengths, the Borodin Quartet delivers probably the most satisfying and definitive renditions. In what are otherwise fine cycles, the Fitzwilliam Quartet tends to sound jagged and shrieking at times, and the Emerson Quartet offers much perfection and less character. With the Borodins the irony and dark humor comes into play the best, and in the more tranquil moments (like the final movement of the third) the timbres created are breathtaking. In fact, the Borodins seem to succeed better than anyone in illutrsating the gamut of emotions the quartets offer. No doubt older members of the quartet's personal contact with Shostakovich as well as training in Shostakovich's Russia helped develop this ability. The quartets of Shostakovich radiate mystery and depth. To date it seems to me that the Borodins achieve this the best.



4. The 15 Shostakovitch Quartets are almost the mirror image of the 15 Symphonies. While the Symphonies are big public statements, albeit statements filled with many private meanings, the quartets are intensely private. Listening the the entire cycle is like reading a locked diary. You feel as if you are listening in on Shostakovitch's private thoughts. And while the symphonies are primarily works of his early years (the first ten were written before the early fifties) the most of the quartets were written later in his career, the last ten date from about 1950 onward.

   These are wide ranging works, from the almost Haydnesque 1st quartet through the almost serial 13th quartet, and onward to the intensely elegaic 15th quartet, composed of 7 slow movements. The early quartets are mostly written in Shostakovitch's middle style as reflected in the 5th symphony. The music is clear and very tonal, as most works of Shostakovitch's Soviet Realist style would be. But they reveal underlying secrets in the occasional dissonances and dark moments. And starting with the 6th quartet the music begins to transition into the composer's late style. These works are more enigmatic. The musical language is more chromatic...based on the same synthetic scales that inspired Scriabin and Messiaen...and much more dissonant than the earlier quartets. Shostakovitch is much more experimental, stretching his language and formal structures. Also, there seems to be crytic messages in the music based on numerical symbolism, hidden letter messages, and references to the composer's other music.

   These performances are definative. The Borodin Quartet, along with the Beethoven Quartet, have the best pedigree with these works, having worked personally with the composer, and actually premiering some of these works. This boxed set is a beautifully remastered version of the original Meloydia recordings. Where the Meloydia pressings were muddy and boxy, this remastering sounds spacious, like they would sound in a concert hall. And the emotional content of the playing is stunning. If you can get it, this is the recording to have of these seminal pieces. Get them now!




5. Sure there are other good recordings by other quartets of the complete String Quartets of Dmitri Shostakovich -- for double (or triple!) the price. But not only are the Borodin Quartet recordings cheap, they are the best. The Borodins give an unshakably consistent reading of every quartet (and Shostakovich fires no blanks!). They even throw in the Piano Quintet and the two String Octet movements. Each performance is among the best ever recorded and some ARE the best ever recorded, especially the immensely convincing and coherent readings of the middle-late dodecaphonic quartets (12, 13) and the late 'introverted' quartets (14, 15). Even the over-recorded 8th quartet sounds amazingly fresh here. I can't recommend this set enough. You won't regret the purchase for a nanosecond.

5 comments about Tchaikovsky: The Ballets / André Previn.

1. 
   This is fine as a bargain, but there's a lot more that can be done with these works. In all his Tchaikovsky ballet performances Previn sounds correct and sensible, but in that virtue he misses a lot more. There isn't a grian of passion or fire in this performance and not much buoyancy or fun, either. I guess you could call tis a very English approach to the music, and UK critics seem to like Previn a great deal in Tchaikovsky. I think you need to go Russian, or Ansermet, or Monteux, or Karajan for the suites.



2. This collection of the complete ballets is absolutely spectacular. The orchestration, the tempo, the conducting, and the overall quality of music are absolutely immaculate, and have provided me with many hours of delightful entertainment. I particularly love the performance of Swan Lake and the Nutcracker on here. With the Nutcraker, the music really does paint pictures in your heads, of fairies and dancers and sugar plums and flowers etc. etc., and the Pervin's rendition here really does help with that. Wonderul music.
   
   As another reviwer commented, chopping up music for the sake of marketing one less CD is an absolute disgrace. The 3 stars is not for the quality of music (which deserves 5 stars), but rather for a uncultured uncivilized marketers who have commited an absolute travesty by cutting off sections from Swan Lake for the sake of CD space. Regardless, this set is well worth listening to as what is actually on the CD makes it worth the price.



3. Tchaikovsky's three ballets may well be his finest works. Each of these ballets -- Swan Lake, Sleeping Beauty, and Nutcracker -- is a masterpiece of melody, orchestration, and compelling atmosphere. Together they represent a body of music of such a level of genius as to be worthy to stand with such other great collections as Beethoven's symphonies and Chopin's piano music. The performances of these ballets conducted by Andre Previn are outstanding -- only Richard Bonynge can compete with Previn in this reperoire. If you like music from the height of the Romantic era -- or simply great music, regardless of era -- treat yourself to this outstanding set.



4. These are good performances of each of these great ballets. The performances could, however, be a bit more vibrant.

   What really ruins this box set is the packaging. EMI bureaucrats decided that rather than running Sleeping Beauty over to a third disc (disc five, by the way, which plays for forty minutes) that they would cut two movements from this great ballet. Presumably these bureaucrats would also cut Joyce's Ulysses in order to bring the book in at the primo manuscript page length in order to keep costs down. Personally, I prefer to hear what the composer wrote in full, rather than what some bureaucrat or some conductor thinks is preferable cost wise or aesthetically.

   Once again, boos and hisses to EMI who continually are doing such things (see my review of their Lehar, Merry Widow reissue).




5. If you are looking for the three ballets Swan Lake, Sleeping Beauty and Nutcraker in a single set, this is the best one out there. DO NOT repeat DO NOT buy Herbert Von Karajan's 60's recording with the Weiner Philharmonic under the cd label of Decca "Legends". That is the worst one. It has excerpts from the ballets rearranged for concert suites. This cd is far superior in that it has the entire ballets in 3 disks. Andre Previn is a marvelous conductor and the London Philharmonic is known the world over. The music of Tchaikovsky comes alive in a colorful and expressive fashion, although not as masterfully rendered as any of the ballets conducted under the baton of Antal Dorati. If you are looking for an individual recording of the Sleeping Beauty or the other ballets(full score in addition to divertissements and variations) get the recordings with Dorati conducting. But the music to these ballets are excellent. You wil love the Swan Lake's powerful main theme, the spell-casting music of the Sleeping Beauty (from the Introduction to the Apotheose) and the festive and lyric Nutcraker. This is the best ballets ever made and by the genius of the man known as Peter I. Tchaikovsky. Viva Tchaikovsky !

5 comments about Beethoven: The Complete Piano Sonatas (Box Set).

1. I struggled for months over which cycle to pick as my favorite. I grew up listening to Kempff, although I find his way of playing too brittle for my taste. I love individual moments in Arrau and Barenboim, although their liberties with the tempi can drive me nuts some times. Brendel's third cycle No. 15 is one of my favorites for all time.
   
   But FOR THE ENTIRE CYCLE I find O Conor the most satisfying.



2. Last night I was in my car and there was a recording of Beethoven's Sonata No. 11 on the radio. I didn't know who the pianist was and was struck by how unimaginative and dull the performance was. Having grown up listening to recordings of Arrau, Richter, Kempf, and Brendel in this repetoire I was bemused that such a dull performance as the one I was hearing would be broadcast nationally. Beethoven should never be uninteresting!!! It's such great music! Well, the pianist I was listening to turned out to be John O'Coner. I have heard O'Coner before and had the same reaction but listening blind only strengthens my opinion that his playing is pedestrian. Avoid this set. Get Arrau's or Brendel's instead!



3. Well, I am not very good at describing the joy of things so see the other positive reviews if you want an intelectual response. For me I just enjoyed every minute of every CD. I have listened to it several times and there is something that cannot be described present that I have not heard in any other recording.
   
   If you are looking for a complete set this is the one to get. Any one of the CD's in this set can hold its own against any single recording to date.



4. I've been a fan of Irish pianist John O'Conor ever since I picked up a used copy of his Telarc recording of the Schubert Impromptus, plus I think a Trout Quintet with the Cleveland Quartet. I think getting Schubert right on a modern piano is quite difficult. Too many repeated notes that tend to come out clunky sounding and percussive, when actually Schubert was using them to keep the harmony going while he played out his long, lyric motives. I am happy to put O'Conor on my Schubert shelf, right along with Lili Kraus and the absolutely phenomenal Arcadi Volodos.
   
   I read in the booklet that Mr. O'Conor won first prize in the Vienna Beethoven competition (1973, by unanimous jury vote) and first prize in the Bosendorfer Competition, after. Equally to the point he has performed complete cycles of the Beethoven sonatas in New York, Boston, and London.
   
   I agree with the other reviewers who like this set. Let me explain my positive responses.
   
   First off, the sound is superior. The piano as it happens is difficult to record well as an instrument, partly because of the challenge of striking just the right balance between the immediate sounding board resonances from whatever instrument is being played, and the intermediate air space right around that chosen piano, and finally the remainder of the room or hall acoustic. Large halls usually don't help, just because the large modern concert auditorium is a Late Romantic/Modern expansion, and most of the earlier rooms or halls were much more intimate. Like expanded palace salons or ballrooms or conservatories.
   
   Mechanics Hall in Worcester, Massachusetts, USA, helps return us to this smaller venue; but the challenges of recorded balance are still there to test the recording engineer. The piano in question is a fine example of the Hamburg Steinway, and the engineer does as good a job as I have heard lately of getting the three zones of articulation and ambience in good order.
   
   Now a good instrument and a workable recording balance are not much unless the player knows what he wants to do, relative to his repertoire. Happily again, my ears tell me that Mr. O'Conor has an intelligent, warm, and incisive musical view of Beethoven in these core keyboard literature sonatas.
   
   Though the pianist studied with Wilhelm Kempff, he is not simply an extension of Kempff when it comes to Beethoven. He does achieve a similarly clean and direct approach as I think I recall from the Kempff sets; but he brings additional warmth and even a playful wit that perhaps we don't often enough link to Beethoven's style. Conductor Eugen Jochum supposedly once remarked to an orchestra, The sforzando is the key to playing Beethoven. Neglect the sforzando and the vigor tends to droop.
   
   Mr. O'Conor is not a droopy sounding Beethovenian. He has a smiling and deft way with inner voices, always in keeping with where Beethoven's harmony is going next. He can play loud, but never gets metallic or percussive in a modern sense. In the first rounds, I thought maybe I would find his playfulness eventually too arch, too much imposed on the music from the outside; but I'm almost all the way to the last disc in this set, and I think I can safely conclude that the wit of Beethoven is drawn out successfully here, reminding us that making music is at least as fun as it may be deep.
   
   I hear this approach as giving me a wonderful sense of Beethoven the human being, rather than the larger than life Romantic Giant that a later era perceived and dramatized. This reminds me, if anything, of Bruno Walter's approach to Beethoven - plenty of punch, but not just only muscularity.
   
   I think this set goes way up toward the top, along with my other great favorite (whose sound is not quite so good as this one), i.e., Anton Kuerti. I have never finally warmed up to the Goode set, partly because to me the piano sound comes through as so relentlessly grey-toned. I suspect that if Bruce Hungerford had been able to finish his cycle of the 32 sonatas, I would have had a third candidate, while as it is I must make do with he could leave behind for us. Lili Kraus didn't do the Beethoven sonatas on disc, so far as I know, but I imagine that if she had, her approach might have sounded a bit like John O'Conor. Brilliant, but nevertheless very warm, full of heart. Playful, but capable of communicating the deeper intelligence of Beethoven's harmonic plans.
   
   Five stars. I think Mr. O'Conor must have been happy to record this set, and I for one am quite happy to be able to hear it.



5. One man's view:
   Mr. O'Conor plays with great fluidity, speed--if needed--and a kind of light touch, like dancing fingers--if that's needed. Where did this man come from as a Beethoven player? He can really cut it!
   I like his work in the ways I like Brendel's: the rhythms are always sure and steady--and notes are not slurred over at all, even in the fastest runs. Every note is sounded with clarity. And I hear the all important PASSION and SINCERITY here.
   I'd recommend this set to anyone! Great, resonant playing of brilliant works! *** And my thanks to all the positive reviews here which convinced me to buy this set! You guys were right....

5 comments about Wagner: The Ring Cycle (Box Set).

1. This *was* the first Ring I was exposed to (I've since listened to the Solti and Levine recordings), and it remains my favorite. As has been mentioned, the immediacy of having it in your own language makes a difference (and the plot isn't *that* flawed; come on, look at a modern *cough* Dan Brown *cough* novel!)
   
   Alberto Remedios is truly amazing. All other Siegfrieds sound like cardboard in comparison:). Norman Bailey (Wotan) and Rita Hunter (Brunnhilde) also do a wonderful job--I was so blown away by the end of Gotterdammerung that it was about 1:00 A.M. before it was finished, and I didn't even notice!
   
   Granted, it's good to get the other recordings as well; it was, after all, *meant* to be listened to in German. But this Ring really is a service to English-speakers, and a beautiful and awe-inspiring one. Yes, the pace is a bit slow, but that allows you to really *focus* on the music (the most important part, in my humble opinion)and (at least in my mind) it never gets *so* slow that you want to fast forward or turn it off. Better than TV.
   
   If you'd prefer to understand the plot, and to hear every nuance of the wonderful music, this Ring is a Wotan-send.



2. Having heard this cycle on the radio in England back in the 1970s, I am thrilled to see it on CD, in brilliant sound on Chandos, at a reasonable price. Three big positives. First, Goodall's slow tempi (resulting in 5 CDs instead of the usual 4 for Gotterdammerung, for instance) make every note audible, and allows one to explore once gain the magic of Wagner's complex score. The ENO orchestra plays beautifully, with the transparency that comes from a live performance. Secondly, the English text, an excellent translation by Andrew Porter, is lucid, and in fact an improvement on Wagner's own turgid libretto. Understanding the convoluted and somewhat inane plot as it unfolds, I think, will attract new listeners, and also bring back some who gave up trying to figure out what is going on. And thirdly, the singing. Rita Hunter, Alberto Remedios and Norman Bailey, are superb, equal to their counterparts in the Boehm and Solti recordings of the Ring. The only disappointment is Aage Haugland, the Hagen in the Twilight of the Gods (Gotterdammerung). An otherwise fine actor-singer (listen, for example, to the award-winning recording of Nielsen's 'Maskarade' under Ulf Schirmer), Haugland is totally miscast here, a blemish on an otherwise perfect recording. Listening to the 16 CDs is a rediscovery of great musical theatre, no matter how silly the story.



3. Okay, so we have the Furtwangler, Krauss, Solti, Bohm, Karajan, Goodall, Boulez, Janowski, Levine, Haitink, Sawallisch, and Barenboim Rings on the market (I haven't listened to the other Ring recordings yet, sorry to say). And all of these leave me to one conclusion: the many differences lead me to believe that all of these ring sets have their own authenticities and setbacks. And here they are:
   
   TIMING (Estimate):
   Furtwangler's Ring: 15 hours, 0 minutes
   Krauss's Ring: 14 hours, 10 minutes
   Solti's Ring: 14 hours, 30 minutes
   Bohm's Ring: 13 hours, 30 minutes
   Karajan's Ring: 14 hours, 50 minutes
   Goodall's Ring: 16 hours, 50 minutes
   Boulez's Ring: 13 hours, 40 minutes
   Janowski's Ring: 14 hours, 0 minutes
   Levine's Ring: 15 hours, 20 minutes
   Haitink's Ring: 14 hours, 10 minutes
   Sawallisch's Ring: 14 hours, 0 minutes
   Barenboim's Ring: 14 hours, 50 minutes
   
   YEAR(S) OF RECORDING
   Furtwangler: 1953
   Krauss: 1953
   Solti: 1958-1965
   Bohm: 1967
   Karajan: 1966-1970
   Goodall: 1973
   Boulez: 1980
   Janowski: 1980-1983
   Levine: 1987-1989
   Haitink: 1988-1991
   Sawallisch: 1991
   Barenboim: 1991-1992
   
   CONDUCTING:
   Furtwangler: The 1953 RAI Ring should be a must-have (even if you have another Ring on your shelf). Yes, it's true that Furtwangler favors slow tempi, but he makes even the slowest of his tempi intense and spine-tingling. Just listen to how he handles "Hagen's Night Watch" and "Descent/Ascent into/from Nibelheim". Now you can't call that atrocious, can you? I should remind you: there are two different box sets for this RAI Ring, one from EMI and one from Gebhardt. Best take the Gebhardt version because it has much better sound than EMI.
   
   Krauss: This is the first Bayreuth recording of the Ring, and it sure is one hell of an interpretation. Unlike Furtwangler, maestro Krauss goes for quicker tempi and greater suspense. Compare his "Siegfried vs. Fafner" and "Waltraute's Narrative" to later recordings and you'll see that he is a musical champion. There are about four different box sets that are out there right now, but you will only need one: the Opera D'oro release.
   
   Solti: Everyone knows that this is the first studio recording of the Ring. And everyone knows that Solti has become a famous name that's attributed to this. Solti's conducting is driven with sheer muscle, but sometimes he makes the Ring overemotional. His "Donner's Song" & Gotterdammerung Preludes are clear examples: they're annoyingly loud and bombastic. Nonetheless he almost seldom loses control with anything. His clear focus on the drama is astonishing.
   
   Bohm: I must say his live Bayreuth recording brings out some of the best. He puts more faith in the orchestral score, but he also gives it more intensity. His tempi are some of the quickest, but they still don't seem rushed at all (except maybe Rheingold Prelude). I especially like his "Flight of the Valkyries" & "Forging Scene"; both are the most energetic on disc.
   
   Karajan: Karajan's chamber approach is very interesting. Instead of going for the drama or the energy, the conductor goes for the beauty. Almost everything in his Ring sounds very ethereal because of his excessive use of lyricism. His orchestral preludes (except Walkure Act 1) sound more beautiful than others, and much of the soft parts (such as "Brunnhilde's Awakening") are controlled nicely. His "Entrance to Valhalla" and "Funeral March" are recommendable. Siegfried Act Three Scene Two could have improved with more tension.
   
   Goodall: Oh, boy. While I do praise Goodall with his amazing attention to detail, his ridiculously sluggish tempi will tick some Wagnerites off: nothing is faster than andante. But I did enjoy listening to the slow beauty of his "Immolation". This was recorded live and sung in English.
   
   Boulez: Here it is, folks - the controversial Centennial Ring. To fit the Ring Cycle in the industrial age, Boulez gives it a very Schoenbergian, Bartokian atmosphere. Much of his tempi are very quick, very Bohm-like, though they're still not as fast as Bohm. Keep in mind, though, this live Ring works better if you hear AND see it (the DVD's work best).
   
   Janowski: This is a very classical Ring. Instead of bombast, spacious, or lyrical passion, maestro Janowski gives us the straightforward approach. He goes straight for Wagner's original intentions (precise tempi, dynamics, flow of leitmotivs, etc.), which makes this another exquisite Ring. "Hagen Summons the Vassals" is probably the fastest I've ever heard (along with Boulez's). Rheingold Scene Four can be best described as "sensational".
   
   Levine: This conductor has his own fair share of lyricism, too. Only, his lyricism is softer and much slower than Karajan's. Sometimes you'll be annoyed at his plodding tempi in parts such as "Wotan confronts Siegfried" or "Loge confronts Alberich", but you'll be amazed by the stunning splendor of "Annunciation of Death" and "Forest Murmurs". Be on the sharp lookout, also, for Levine's perfect "Erda's Warning".
   
   Haitink: This might be seen as a disappointment. If you want great conducting, then this is for you. If you want a persuasive array of singers, look somewhere else. Haitink's conducting saves this work from being a total flop. There is nothing quite like his Rheingold & Gotterdammerung ("Siegfried's Rhine Journey" is a bit forced, but magnificent nonetheless).
   
   Sawallisch: I guess you can say that Sawallisch is half-Karajan, half-Janowski. While he does stay true to the orchestral score like Janowski, he also puts in a little Karajan-like lyricism. At some points he loses track with orchestra and singers (as does every live recording) but Bohm has more control. This was also recorded live.
   
   Barenboim: It's hard to describe Barenboim's Ring. I believe that he uses a little bit of everything: bombast, lyricism, intensity, beauty, fast tempi, slow tempi, measured phrasings, yada yada yada. And he uses all of them so well, that this Ring ranks with Furtwangler, Krauss, Bohm, and Janowski as one of the greats.
   
   ORCHESTRA:
   Furtwangler's RAI Rome: I think that much of the criticism that's been given to RAI are simply insensitive. Yes, it doesn't rank with other, more experienced orchestras, but what you get is the final result of what the great Furtwangler wanted. Woodwinds in "Wotan's Farewell" are marvelous, the brass in "Wotan Summons Erda" simply stunning. Maybe if people listened to the Gebhardt release instead of the EMI, then they would appreciate the orchestral playing a bit more.
   
   Krauss's Bayreuth Festival: Due to limited rehearsal time, the orchestra sounds robotic a few times. However, that's only a minor flaw: there's everything that you need for a 14-hour Wagner opera. From the thunderous brass to the smooth woodwinds, from the loud percussion to the saintly strings, it's [almost] everything that you need for a Bayreuth performance. "Magic Fire Music" in mono sounds even better than Barenboim's "Fire Music" in stereo.
   
   Solti's Vienna Philharmonic: The woodwinds aren't really the most beautiful in Solti's Ring, but they are still a plus. French horns and Wagner tubas make this a recommended listening. The strings could've added a bit more work, but they are strikingly spectacular everywhere else. The orchestra gives it their all in Siegfried Act Two & Three, but they are at their weakest in Walkure Act One & Three (Bohm's Bayreuth does it better). Overall, it's the loudest and certainly most bombastic out of all the Ring orchestras combined.
   
   Bohm's Bayreuth Festival: The ultimate Wagnerian orchestra gives it their all. The brass both high and low are the most powerful, while the woodwinds are some of the most delicate. The strings are muffled only a few times, otherwise the eighteen anvils are perfectly loud and clear. Scenes involving Erda and Three Norns aren't as effective as Janowski's, but the entire Walkure is more successful than Janowski's when it comes to tension. Overall, this orchestra is the most energetic.
   
   Karajan's Berlin Philharmonic: The entire orchestra sounds polished, not to say that it is bad. Indeed the drama is still there, but much of the suspense is lacking (the scenes with Fasolt and Fafner come to mind). The brass sometimes overpowers the strings, which can be a serious problem. Gotterdammerung Act Two Scene One sounds very mysterious, very eerie.
   
   Goodall's English National Opera: This orchestra sounds nice, even if the sluggishness can bring them down at times. "Forging Scene" doesn't sound too good in a slow tempo, but the entire orchestra does sound lucid here. Siegfried Act Two Prelude is the creepiest; Act Three Prelude is the dullest. All of the leitmotivs are heard loud and clear, just like in Janowski's version.
   
   Boulez's Bayreuth Festival: Boulez turns this orchestra into an almost chamber orchestra (like Karajan's). While it doesn't really pack the same punches as Bohm's Bayreuth, it still delivers a stunning performance. Orchestral interaction between characters (Ex. Siegfried's motifs mixed in with Rhinemaidens' motifs) fares better than Berlin's, but is crushed when compared to English National's. Rhine maiden motifs are given more wit, while the Dragon motifs are played with less eeriness.
   
   Janowski's Staatskapelle Dresden: This orchestra has only half the force & flair of Solti's Vienna, but Dresden sounds much clearer due to the fantastic digital sound. All the minor details that are found nowhere else are heard in this Ring. The strings imitate the Siegfried forest very well, while the woodwinds representing the songbird are wonderful (but not as wonderful as Karajan's songbird). Dresden's "Magic Fire Music" (along with Berlin's) is the most extravagant.
   
   Levine's Metropolitan Opera: The brass and woodwinds are the true stars. The strings sound a bit too tired to continue on in Siegfried & Gotterdammerung. The Finale to Rheingold is absolutely stunning (the trumpets and trombones will not disappoint), and the Second Act of Walkure is the most impressive, the most refined.
   
   Haitink's Bavarian Radio Symphony: This may very well be like Metropolitan, because it sounds just as poignant. While the woodwinds are not as good, the strings sound better and the percussion sound clearer. The leitmotivs are almost never screwed up. First scene of Rheingold will take one's breath away.
   
   Sawallisch's Bavarian State: Wrong notes in this live recording won't matter, as the entire orchestra gets everything going in all four nights at the opera. The strings never surrender to imperfection, and the winds are marvelously aligned. I just wish that some of the singers would keep up with the orchestra.
   
   Barenboim's Bayreuth Festival: Do I really have to tell you that Bayreuth in the really 90's still went strong after all these years? Do I really have to tell you that the brass and percussion are kept under control, and that the strings and woodwinds outstrip Berlin and Bavarian Radio? Do I really have to tell you that almost everything is as it should be? . . . Fine.
   
   SINGERS:
   -Wotan
   Furtwangler: Ferdinand Frantz has something that other Wotans can't touch. Maybe it's that when he sings "Abendlich strahlt der Sonne Auge" he makes people swoon (back in the day, of course). Maybe it's that when he sings "In eig'ner Fessel fing ich mich" he scares the hell out of people. I think it's that when he sings "Auf wolkigen Hoh'n wohnen die Gotter" amazement spreads like . . . I can't think of a perfect simile at the moment. So anyway, Frantz is a great Wotan.
   
   Krauss and Solti: Hans Hotter is the superior Wotan. He sounds powerful throughout the Ring (except Solti's Rheingold, in which a less stellar George London performs). It's true that he gives an utterly heartbreaking performance during "Der Augen Leuchtendes Paar", and it's true that he was well past his prime when he did Solti's Ring (but don't let that stop you from listening to his classic "Dir unweisen ruf' ich's in's Ohr"). Makes me wish I heard Keilberth and Knappertsbusch's Ring recordings sooner.
   
   Bohm and Janowski: Theo Adam in Bohm's live recording is another treat. While he is not as equally impressive as Hotter, he can certainly conjure up everlasting emotions. Adam sounds weaker in Janowski's studio recording ("Der Augen Leuchtendes Paar" is wobbly), but he still doesn't disappoint.
   
   Karajan: Dietrich Fischer-Dieskau plays Wotan in Rheingold, while Thomas Stewart replaces Fischer-Dieskau in Walkure and Siegfried. I don't think Fischer-Dieskau was a good choice; he sounds too humane and too light. Stewart makes an astounding improvement in both Walkure and Siegfried.
   
   Goodall: Norman Bailey has that divine spark that Hotter used to cherish. He's heavy and unblemished, and he handles the English text with flair and sheen. I enjoyed his singing during Siegfried Act One.
   
   Boulez: If you watch Donald McIntyre on the Centennial Ring production, then you can tell that he's a fine "industrial" Wotan. If you just hear him on CD, then you'll be disappointed. His diction is weak, his emotions are forced, and his voice sounds robotic. The DVD's will do.
   
   Levine and Haitink: James Morris is a notch below Hotter, Adam, and Bailey, but he overpowers Fischer-Dieskau and McIntyre pretty much throughout both Rings. His multi-dimensional performances are compelling in Walkure. "Nicht send ich dich mehr aus Walhall" should not be missed.
   
   Sawallisch: I may be biased, but Robert Hale just didn't do it for me. He sounded dull and tedious, and his "Leb Wohl, du Kuhnes herrlisches Kind" wasn't enough to astound me.
   
   Barenboim: The rough, deep voice of John Tomlinson should keep people up during the night. You can tell right away after his entrance in Rheingold that he will be flawless later on in Walkure and Siegfried. No, he is not Hotter. And no, he is not horrible.
   
   -Brunnhilde
   Furtwangler: The only thing that Martha Modl's voice lacks is sensitivity. She's rough, she's sensuous, she's lyrical, and that's pretty much it. There seems to be no innocence or intelligence in the voice. But I could be wrong, since my ears are different than everyone else's.
   
   Krauss: Astrid Varnay matches Martha Modl, only that she is the one that has innocence in her voice. She gets five out of five stars from me.
   
   Solti and Bohm: Birgit Nilsson is the best Brunnhilde on the market. Her Valkyrie cry is delightful, and her "Soll fesselnder Schlaf fest mich binden" is brilliant beyond belief.
   
   Karajan: Regine Crespin is without a doubt one of the finest Brunnhildes after Nilsson. She's fantastic in Walkure Act Three. I just wish she stayed on as the Valkyrie later on in the Ring (Helga Dernesch is no good in Siegfried and Gotterdammerung, sorry to say).
   
   Goodall: Rita Hunter is at her strongest in Walkure and Siegfried. She is at her weakest in Gotterdammerung. What may have caused her downfall in the fourth installment? "The world may never know."
   
   Boulez: How can anyone not be impressed by the Brunnhilde of Gwyneth Jones? One can almost feel her excitement during Siegfried Act Three, and her fear in Walkure Act Three. Her weakest point is probably during her Gotterdammerung Prologue (a bit too stressed).
   
   Janowski: Jeannine Altmeyer is basically the most controversial Brunnhilde on CD. Some people say that she's too light and weak, while others say she sounds young and very enchanting. I'm with those who think Altmeyer was a good choice, but you yourself (the shopper) are going to have to decide whether she's good or not.
   
   Levine and Sawallisch: Hildegard Behrens is just like Nilsson and Crespin. While she's not the best, she is definitely another perfect Brunnhilde of choice. She's at her most dazzling when she performs Walkure (Levine) and Siegfried (Sawallisch).
   
   Haitink: Hmph. I was hoping that Eva Marton would do well here. I was seriously let down by her strained singing. She does okay in "Annunciation of Death", but she is at her worst in "Immolation".
   
   Barenboim: It sure feels like a cycle when Anne Evans sings as Wotan's favorite daughter. In Walkure, she sounds like a young girl, but as the story progresses, so does she. Her voice and personality changes dramatically during the Gotterdammerung Prologue and especially during the final days of the Gods. Absolutely striking.
   
   -Siegmund & Sieglinde
   Let's see. For the Siegmunds, we have Wolfgang Windgassen for Furtwangler, Ramon Vinay for Krauss, James King for Solti and Bohm, Jon Vickers for Karajan, Alberto Remedios for Goodall, Peter Hoffman for Boulez, Siegfried Jerusalem for Janowski, Gary Lakes for Levine, Reiner Goldberg for Haitink, Robert Schunk for Sawallisch, and for Poul Elming for Barenboim. For the Sieglindes, we have Hilde Konetzi for Furtwangler, Regina Resnik for Krauss, Regine Crespin for Solti, Leonie Rysanek for Bohm, Gundula Janowitz for Karajan, Margaret Curphy for Goodall, Jeanine Altmeyer for Boulez, Jessye Norman for both Janowski and Levine, Cheryl Studer for Haitink, Julia Varady for Sawallisch, and Nadine Secunde for Barenboim. Hmm . . . Jerusalem is good . . . and so is Vickers . . . Janowitz is charming, and so is . . . Oh, what the heck? All the singers for Siegmund and Sieglinde are fantastic. Two exceptions, though: Goldberg doesn't sound heroic enough, and Norman for Levine doesn't sound young and innocent enough.
   
   -Siegfried
   Furtwangler: I'll just describe the singing of Ludwig Suthaus in three words: Oh So Good!
   
   Krauss and Solti and Bohm: Wolfgang Windgassen may very well be the best Siegfried for the ages. His `Forging Scene" in the latter renditions are defiantly inspiring. His last scene in Gotterdammerung is celestial and overwhelming. Be careful, though: during Krauss's "Forging Scene" he makes tons of mistakes, but they'll get used to later on.
   
   Karajan: Jess Thomas (Siegfried) and Helge Brilioth (Gotterdammerung) may not be as ideal as Windgassen, but they do know how to be a magnificent heldentenor. Thomas pulls it off with Act One and Three.
   
   Goodall: Wow! What a singer that Alberto Remedios! He never drags in either of the last two installments, and he uses the correct emotions in every scene that he is in.
   
   Boulez: Is Manfred Jung a good tenor? Yes. Is he a good Heldentenor? NO. He doesn't have that heroic voice like Windgassen and Remedios. I like him better when he's performing as Mime in later Ring productions. Again, the DVD's are your safest bet.
   
   Janowski and Sawallisch: Rene Kollo's Siegfried is a poetically expressive one. In Janowski's version he sounds playful when he's in Mime's home, and he sounds willed when he's in the Gibich Hall. He is not good enough in Sawallisch's version, however. His tiresome "Forging Scene" is obvious evidence of that.
   
   Levine: Oh, Reiner Goldberg. At least you tried. Seriously, he sounds too tedious (especially in Gotterdammerung Act Three Scene Two) and too old. Levine should've chose Kollo or Jerusalem when he recorded his studio Ring.
   
   Haitink and Barenboim: Have you ever seen Siegfried Jerusalem on the Levine/Metropolitan DVD? Well, here he is again, and this time, he sings with more valor and enthusiasm in both renditions. Bravo!
   
   -Alberich
   Furtwangler and Krauss and Solti and Bohm: Gustav Niedlinger has a heaviness that overwhelms a few other baritones. When he sings his only sequence in Gotterdammerung Act Two Scene One, his emotion is so pure that his son Hagen would've drowned himself in tears (Too melodramatic? Sorry about that.). The only problem is that his character sounds too one-dimensional. Alberich isn't just some cardboard-cutout bad guy. He has a very good reason why he wants to take revenge on the world. Overall, Niedlinger is amazing throughout Wagner's Ring (He deserves many awards for "Bin ich nun frei?"). Reminder: In Furtwangler, Neidlinger is replaced by Alois Pernerstorfer in Siegfried and Gotterdammerung.
   
   Karajan: I guess you can say that Zoltan Kelemen tries his best throughout. He is not good in Rheingold, but he gets better in Siegfried and Gotterdammerung.
   
   Goodall: Derek Hammond-Stroud is three-dimensional, but not that much. Still, he can sound very demanding in Rheingold Scene One and Siegfried Act Two Scene One.
   
   Boulez: What we have here is the weak Alberich of Hermann Becht. When he's in Nibelheim, the authority isn't there. When he's in the Neid-Hohle forest, the creepiness isn't there. And when he's near the Gibich house, the misery isn't there. Even on DVD he's unsatisfactory.
   
   Janowski: Siegmund Nimsgern may be the most humane Alberich yet, but it's all good. He sings with more passion than Kelemen and more robustness than Hammond-Stroud. Niedlinger's ferociousness puts him below, however. "Schaf'st du, Hagen, mein sohn?" is noteworthy.
   
   Levine and Sawallisch: Ekkehard Wlaschiha is one hell of a vigorous Alberich. I praise him in Rheingold Scene One and Three. His performance in Siegfried (both versions) could've improved with more distrustfulness towards Mime and the Wanderer.
   
   Haitink: No offense, but Theo Adam as Alberich? Come on . . .
   
   Barenboim: Gunther von Kannen doesn't completely eclipse Neidlinger and Wlaschiha, but he joins in with Nimsgern and Hammond-Stroud for his humane performance. "Bin ich nun frei?" was good, but not great.
   
   -Mime
   Furtwangler and Krauss: What do Julius Patzak (F) and Paul Kuen (K) have in common? Why, they both sing their parts without any caricaturing in the way. They both sound luminous and painless in every way possible. Kuen is slightly below Patzak's level, but that's okay. They're both excellent Mimes.
   
   Solti and Karajan: Gerhard Stolze is the creepiest Mime ever known to humankind. This dwarf outsings other Mimes on the market. When he sings "Die stucken! Das Schwert!" his anger and fear is the most effective to almost all Ring listeners. But of course, Stolze's truly unsettling caricaturing of Alberich's brother will catch on after repeated listening.
   
   Bohm: Erwin Wohlfahrt wins second place. He gives a first-rate performance in Siegfried Act One, but loses some of his edge in Act Two. He is an exceptional Mime nonetheless. Look for him in Karajan's Rheingold, also.
   
   Goodall: Gregory Dempsey isn't emotional enough. He doesn't sound fearful or depressed at all, which makes him the dullest Mime for the Ring.
   
   Boulez and Levine: Heinz Zednik is yet another excellent Mime, VERY fun to listen to. There is much humor and eccentricity in his voice, and that's what makes his dwarf much more compelling than Dempsey's dwarf. His performance in Rheingold Scene Three is pure gold, while his performance in Siegfried (particularly "Willkommen, Siegfried!") is a stunning achievement.
   
   Janowski: Peter Schreier is for Siegfried, while Christian Vogel is for Rheingold. Vogel is just above average, while Schreier is way beyond outstanding. Schreier is less ghoulish and more benevolent, more three-dimensional than Stolze and Wohlfahrt. He is equal to Zednik when it comes to humaneness and lyricism. The only flaw I can find is his handling of "Die stucken! Das Schwert!" He could've added a bit more fear in that sequence.
   
   Haitink: Peter Haage sounds like he's entertaining young kids. His version of Mime is a bit childish, and the dark humor that the dwarf brings out sounds-over-the-top here. Nonetheless, he is still entertaining to listen to ("Wer halfe mir?" has never sounded better).
   
   Sawallisch: Helmut Pampuch is just like Schreier and Zednik: he's very VERY good. Nuff said.
   
   Barenboim: Graham Clark is also like Schreier and Zednik. he's very VERY good. Again, nuff said.
   
   -Loge
   Furtwangler and Bohm: Why the heck would the conductor have Wolfgang Windgassen play both Siegmund/Siegfried AND Loge? The demi-god needs to sound different from a Walsung, or a son of a Walsung. All in all, a Loge that's marred by lack of cunning.
   
   Krauss: When listening to Erich Witte's Loge, I kept thinking to myself, "why doesn't he sound like Windgassen, and not a Norse clown?" I don't know, maybe Loge (or Loki) isn't supposed to sound like a clown, but maybe he is. I guess it's all up to the conductor's casting choices.
   
   Solti: Set Svanholm may be the weakest Loge. He is not very ominous throughout all of his scenes, and his lack of a sinister atmosphere greatly affects the entire Rheingold. But he'll soon be forgotten later on during the Trilogy.
   
   Karajan: Gerhard Stolze is easily one of the most entertaining Loges to listen to. He has the wit, the craftiness, and the untrustworthiness that the character deserves. His scenes in Scene Three are delightful.
   
   Goodall: Emile Belcourt isn't as good as Stolze, but he certainly can make some of the best of an English-speaking Loge.
   
   Boulez and Haitink: I can summon Heinz Zednik's performance in just three words: Brilliant Beyond Belief! Scene Two is when he's at his finest.
   
   Janowski: Peter Schreier is the most eccentric out of all of them, and that's a fact. Much of his singing involves imagination, peril, vengeance, and deviousness. Belcourt and Zednik depend only on imagination and deviousness, Stolze only vengeance and deviousness, Windgassen and Witte only peril. His odd conversations with Alberich and the gods/goddesses are classic.
   
   Levine: Siegfried Jerusalem doesn't seem like a good choice for Loge. He's better off playing Siegmund or Siegfried, but not a demi-god.
   
   Sawallisch: Robert Tear is on par with Stolze and Zednik. Sometimes he takes things too low, but all is forgiven with his management of character development.
   
   Barenboim: Graham Clark? Well, he's no Gerhard Stolze, but he does stay in tune with most of the music in Rheingold. "Immer ist Undank Loge's Lohn" will certainly be somewhere in the top.
   
   -Everyone Else
   Uh-huh, what can I say? Everyone else does a good job in all Ring recordings. Matti Salminen is the perfect Hagen (Janowski, Levine, and Sawallisch), while Christa Ludwig is the most brilliant Fricka (Bohm and Levine). Levine contains the most memorable Gutrune of Cheryl Studer, while the most brilliant Valkries are found in Krauss, Bohm, Boulez, and Haitink. Goodall, Boulez, Janowski, and Sawallisch contain the best Freias, Frohs, and Donners. The Norns and Rheinmaidens do a splendid job in Furtwangler, Solti, Janowski, and Levine. The Vassals (male choir) are at their unsurpassed in Bohm, Boulez, and Barenboim. The only flawed Erda is Anne Collins (Goodall), maybe too light and too heavy at times. All in all, no one here is graded C or lower.
   
   CONCLUSION: I have yet to listen to Neuhold's Badische presentation, Haenchen's Netherlands version, and two more mono recordings (Keilberth and Knappertsbusch), but I'm pretty sure that have their advantages and disadvantages. So there you have it. We have the legendary Furtwangler, the undeniable Krauss, the histrionic Solti, the energetic Bohm, the otherworldly Karajan, the spacious Goodall, the industrialized Boulez, the truthful Janowski, the unhurried Levine, the abnormal Haitink, the serious Sawallisch, and the futuristic Barenboim Rings. They have their own authenticities and setbacks, and they certainly have their own significances for Ring listeners everywhere.



4. Many reviewers, whether they are the Amazon kind or the professional news-writing type, will be split about this version of the Ring.
   
   The first thing that many a novice Wagnerite will tell you (and trust me, many of them have been quite loud about this Ring) is that the recording loses its original essence due to its transcription to the English language. It is true that the Ring is more beautiful in the original mittel-hoch Deutsche that Wagner wrote the piece in, but how fluid and beautiful Andrew Porter's translation is! Everything in the text seems to leap out from the page as if Wagner had written the opera in English. I don't find it bothersome, I find it very intricate and beautiful in fact, that the Ring was translated to English. I've heard the Ring sung in Italian too, and while the pure vowels of Italian and the translation they used were very good, it was nowhere close to the artful linguistic play of words that Porter uses for this Ring. I could almost describe it as noble and Shakespearean.
   
   The second quibble that most reviewers would have about this Ring is Goodall's choice of tempi. If Wagnerians thought Knappertsbusch was slow, they had better listen to Goodall and see what slow really means. Goodall's Ring is spread out over 16 (!!) CD's, unlike most Rings which come in a box of 14. However slow his tempi may be though, I find that Goodall mastered the art of bringing the flowing structure of Wagner's music in such a way that no other conductor has ever done after Knappertsbusch and Furtwangler. Wagner's Leitmotifs have never been so played more distinctly and beautifully that each intricate detail is exposed. The way the composer wanted a conductor to conduct his music is to have a transparent, incandescent, yet heavy interpretation (grand). I think, of all the conductors who have done the Ring, only Furtwangler, Knappertsbusch, Clemens Krauss, and Reginald Goodall have fulfilled that request. Other great Ring conductors include of course, Karajan, Solti, Bohm, Levine, Keilberth, Janowski, and Boulez, but all of these conduct Wagner in a way that detracts slightly from what the composer wants from the music. Of course, Karajan brought a most beautiful lyrical vision to his Ring, and Solti brought a drive that no other conductor has matched since, and Bohm, while producing one of the most lyrical and organic Rings (it is my favorite), does not bring the Leitmotif structure to life the way Goodall does. This recording shows each detail of Wagner's massive score, and for that reason I would recommend this Ring for those who want to understand what Wagner truly wanted for his masterpiece. The English National Opera Orchestra plays magnificently, much more so thirty years ago when this Ring was recorded than they do now in their pedestrian playing. In short, I would say that the conducting in this Ring is very Wagnerian in the sense that it is transparent and grand, certainly an interpretation that must be examined and learned by other leading Wagnerian conductors today.
   
   Of course, with such a great vision of the orchestra, you must not miss out on the singers. What I have to say of course about the soloists, is nothing but praise for their excellent vocalizing and dramatic rendering of Wagner's text. In my opinion, Rita Hunter is the best Brunnhilde who sings all the notes and gives us an excellent portrayal of Brunnhilde's character in all the three operas with her Valkyrie. Period. She gives us Nilsson's thrilling vocal power combined with Dernesch's sensitive and sensual lyricism and Gwyneth Jones' acute dramatic powers where needed. She has a very beautiful voice, and I think if this Brunnhilde was captured in the original German, she would have made the reference Brunnhilde. Alberto Remedios not only sings Siegfried's notes well, but beautifully too! Not even Windgassen had the gorgeous tone of his instrument. Again, if this were done in German, he would have made the best Siegfried. His tone is simply ravishing and young. His Siegmund is amazing too. Norman Bailey's Wotan is simply amazing. I have never heard a better Wotan since Hotter and Stewart. It is intense and dramatic at the same time that it is vocally beautiful. Clifford Grant as Fafner and Hunding is a must-hear, and the rest of the cast from the Norns and Valkyries (with Anne Evans singing Helmwige and the Third Norn!!!!) to the Rhinemaidens, giants, gods, Nibelung, Alberich, Mime, and Gibichungs are well-characterized and beautifully vocalized. A top cast for a top Ring.
   
   If only this Ring were sung in German, I would think that Solti's Ring would easily be dethroned from its status as opera's definitive Ring cycle. This, I don't think should be your first Ring, but if you can make it your second, give it a listen and bask in the beauty of Goodall's interpretation.



5. Clearly Der Ring des Niebelungen can be many things to many people. When I lived abroad I purchased the Goodall Siegfried on EMI out of curiosity ... and was completely won over by this performance. Having always been obsessive about opera in the original language, I found myself astonished by the clarity of the sung translation and how well Andrew Porter had crafted the words so that they fit the music like a glove. Now, 33 years later, I still enjoy the Goodall Ring ... and I am sure a true Wagnerite will find the performances moving and excellent. Yes, Sir Reginald does not rush through the score, but I enjoy the nuanced detail ... and he is most emphatically moving the drama along. These ENO performances were warmly received at their initial issue and remain a fascinating documentation of a great musical event. My favorite studio recording of The Ring remains the recordings that introduced me to the work: Decca's Solti. (Second favorite: Levine, because I've seen the cycle with essentially the same cast three times when it was new.) For "live" cycles, I like the Krauss and Kielberth mono sets from Bayreuth on Archipel label the best ... although after hearing the 1955 Kielberth Siegfried in true stereo as released on Testament, I think that when the remaining 3 in the cycle are released, they may well be my all-time favorites, even beating the studio Solti. Particularly if you're trying to demonstrate the power of Wagner to non-Germanic speakers the Goodall is excellent ... not my first choice, but a performance I relish.
   
   Incidentally, I do not care for the Böhm Bayreuth stereo set for I find it TOO rushed. I do like the Furtwängler RAI and La Scala cycles immensely. My gut reaction to Furtwängler's conducting and care with Wagner is unmitigated adoration. I'm also a great admirer of Martha Mödl and Ferdinand Frantz.
   
   I deducted a star from the Goodall cycle because it is in English. Is this being a snob? I hope not. I do feel after years of exploring the Ring, it's best experienced in Wagner's "antiquated" German libretto.