I grew up with the Minneapolis Orchestra (Minnesota Orchestra after 1968) in the 1960s, under Skrowaczewski (Dorati left after 1960). My first classical music concerts would have been in Northrop Auditorium, so all of this is highly nostagic for me. I have the Mercury Living Presence Collector's Edition, Volume 1 which contains many but not all of these recordings (they may be in other volumes). I love these performances; perhaps they are not the best in the catalogue, but just about all of them are full of character and marvelous sound, in my opinion. As I write this, I am listening to Tchaikovsky: Capriccio Italien, Op. 45, from 1955! It astonishes me the sonic quality of these first stereo albums.
Lucky you! To grow up with this wonderful ensemble. A long, long time ago in a distant suburb of Cleveland - Shaker Heights - 7th &8th graders took a course that included music appreciation. We heard classical recordings in glorious mono sound of diverse works. One of the ensembles was the Minneapolis Sympony under Dimitri Mitropoulos on 10" Columbia vinyl discs. After hearing the selections, at the end of the course, we were bussed down to Severance Hall to hear the Cleveland Orchestra perform the music . I date the beginning of my life long love of music to these recordings and these concerts. The Minneapolis Orchestra was instrumental (no pun intended) in nurturing my musical tastes. I think we lived in more civilized times way, way back then.
Simple. They were recorded with the tube ampex 300 tape recorder and the legendary Telefunken 201tube ribbon mikes. I believe early bill Evans albums used these mikes too. That's why transparency is imm distinguishable from brubeck and Oscar Peterson recordings.
I love the sound of many of those old MLP recordings, particularly the Rimsky-Korsakov. Minneapolis/Minnesota tends to be underrated at times, they'd fare better if they had more reviews in New York papers. Look at the these four conductors,; Ormandy, Mitropoulos, Dorati, and Skrowaczewski.
The Northrop Auditorium in Minneapolis (on the Univ. of Minnesota campus) where Dorati worked was drastically remodeled around 10-12 years ago and now has superb acoustics. We can dream what recordings by Ormandy, Mitropoulous, Dorati, and Skrowacewski (until 1973) would have sounded like in the transformed hall.
No doubt that the dry acoustic and vivid, "Living" presence of these recordings will highlight (and exacerbate) any defects in the playing (3rd-rate orchestra?), but Dorati's Mercury output represents a true historic legacy. If one doesn't appreciate that aspect of these recordings, then I guess the point is moot. (As I think I recently mentioned), I once asked the late Bernie Adelstein (principal trumpet on most of these recordings before G.Szell hired him to take over in Cleveland in 1960): "how did you guys ever manage to play that (1960) Rite of Spring so FAST and precise??, to which he answered: " I think we had to stop a lot because things kept breaking down..", implying that the recording was pieced together. But however it was done, it's a amazing, explosive recording (has the "Dance of the Earth" ever been played faster??), made at a time when orchestras were JUST beginning to become familiar/comfortable with "Le Sacre". LR
If it's been spliced together, the engineers did a super job, because I can't hear evidence of that on the recording (I'm referring to the mono recording from the first boxed set). Too many splice jobs -- even by the engineers for the major recording companies -- are so obvious, it's cringeworthy.
I meant to comment on your assessment of Dorati's Prokofiev 5th and I agree entirely with you. The original CD of that also has Dorati's LSO Prokofiev and what a difference! Mind you, the music is very different too, with the Scythian Suite and the Suite from "The Love for Three Oranges" but in my opinion both of those performances are magnificent.
Hi Dave, great video! It takes me back some 50 years...a friend and I had this sort of rivalry about who was best: My friend favored Dorati, whereas I favored Eugene Ormandy, in general, and in particular on some Tchaikovsky works, like Capriccio Italiano and the 1812 Overture. I think the rivalry was never resolved up to this day...Two great Hungarian conductors...O tempora...I enjoy watching your video, as usual...cheers, GV
The Smetana items were originally fillers for the Albeniz CD, when the Mercury CD's were first released, along with the two excerpts from Mussorgsky's "Khovanshchina".
Will I or wont I? I receive an email every month from a local record supplier and the Dorati mono set featured in this month's email, so I decided to order that - mainly, I have to admit, for a decent copy of the Copland 3rd and the Respighi "Church Windows" with that magnificent tam-tam. However, I'm sure I'll enjoy a lot more than that. The supplier, a long-standing friend, is allowing me to pay for the set in instalments, so much a month.
I'm a big fan of the Mercury Recordings, especialliy when it comes to vinyl. However I don't know the Dorati "Church Windows". But one of my favourit recordings ever is the "Church Windows" of Reference Recordings, conducted by Keith Clark and played by the Pacific Symphony Orchestra. I don't know whether you can find it on CD (or streaming maybe?), as I have the RR-15 on 45rpm-Vinyl. Good luck!
@@retohofmann5878 Thanks for your comments. I've owned the Dorati "Church Windows" on LP for decades and have longed hoped it would appear on CD. I love the performance and don't want any other. I do have a Chandos recording of it but much of that is rushed. Dorati's tempi seem ideal to me.
Which box to choose? Largely unknown "state of the art" mono first recordings or their well-known remakes in "dated" stereo. This should be an easy choice for "serious" collectors.
@@peterboer9572 Certainly, more of the stereo recordings exist in other "sanctioned" releases, so there are alternative options there. But I wouldn't want to be without either one of these boxes.
I'm not a fan of the very small amount of music on each disc. The three cubes cover these and many of Dorati's other Mercury recordings in well-filled discs, plus some of the original artwork. No doubt many people value this original-album concept more than I do. I appreciate that Eloquence needs to make money, but the jump in prices is a pain.
Well, the cubes are routinely selling for 200-300 on ebay whereas you can find this for under 100. I can see the allure of the original couplings as it tends to introduce the listener to new and unusual repertoire on the "B" side. As an owner of the cubes I will skip this but I can see the appeal.
It’s a pity they didn’t issue Dorati’s LSO recordings on Mercury. He’s a rather underrrated conductor. I’m sorry being off-topic but could you do a talk on Humperdinck’s Hansel and Gretel opera, and the best recordings of it? Thank you.
I have the three Big-Boxes-O-Mercs…so as far as Dorati/Minneapolis…I’m good. Most of those recordings just don’t sound very good to my ears. Minneapolis was a 3rd rate orchestra and recording a group like that so up close and in such a dry acoustic…well…the result just isn’t memorable. Now, if you want to talk about Dorati’s LSO recordings from that era, those are as good as any ever made. Better orchestra and better acoustic.
If the sonics are poor or even mediocre I don’t give a damn who is playing, I don’t need such recordings in my collection. Some MLP recordings sound good and are worth having, but I’m quite sure much of the content of these huge, expensive boxes won’t get much play, as sound quality is an integral part of the recorded music listening experience. I own the first MLP cube AND I admire Paul Paray’s La Mer on MLP from 1955, I know what I’m talking about.
People listen for different reasons and with different interests and perspectives. Thanks for sharing yours. As a historian I particularly enjoy listening to historical recordings and the development of orchestras and conductors over time so for me this is definitely of interest.
On Qobuz, I ‘”favorited” the 16 / 44.1 Monteux 1929 “Rite of Spring”. It’s almost horrifying to listen to because of the technical limitations of the time and it would never be my go-to, ever. BUT “Monteux” and “1929” mean that it’s historically irreplaceable and in its own category as the first full recording (e.g. not a rehearsal).
I agree with you that the 1955 Paray/DSO recording of La Mer is really, really good (and puts most newer recordings of that piece to shame). But there are many other recordings in the MLP catalogue that are equally memorable.
@@Danzig987 Thank you. I would love to hear your top 3 or top 5. The great effect of the La Mer is for me a personal one. When I saw a Debussy concert bij the Concertgebouw Orchestra on the television, I bought the MLP recording on CD, 17 or 18 years old. It was one of my first purchases in classical music more than 20 years and over 1500 classical CDs ago now.
Northrop Memorial Auditorium may have a reputation for being cavernous and "where sound goes to die," and it was easy to criticize the acoustics "back in the day." But when Orchestra Hall in downtown Minneapolis opened in the 1970s, it was the opposite extreme, with overly reverberant sound that seemed closer to sitting in a cathedral with marble walls and floors. The acoustics at OH were at once so strangely echoey and diffuse, it was a major disappointment. Many Minneapolitans jumped at the chance to cross the river and see the orchestra play at its performing venues in St. Paul -- first at the College of St. Catherine and later at Ordway Hall downtown. Meanwhile, it took 30 years of tinkering, and then throwing up hands and embarking on a major multi-million dollar overhaul of Orchesta Hall's acoustics (completely shutting down the auditorium for more than a year) to finally end up with the magnificent sound the hall has today. But in the decades prior, many recordings were made at OH that are hugely disappointing. A case in point: Compare Dorati's complete Daphnis & Chloe recording from 1954 at Northrop with Stanislaw Skrowaczewski's recording at OH for Vox in 1976:; even though it was recorded more than 20 years earlier, the Dorati has far more natural sound, along with with greater presence. (Dorati's interpretation is the more compelling one as well, while Skrowaczewski inexpicably cuts out nearly 20% of the score, despite which Vox labeled it as "complete" anyway -- not exactly truth in advertising.)
I also lived through the period your describe in Minneapolis-St Paul and heartily disagree with your assessment of Version 1 of Orchestra Hall, which also is a lonely minority among numerous critics and people who attended concerts. Specific historical claims you make are just wrong: The orchestra played some a few concerts annually in St Paul years ago to reach people living on the east side of the Metro and to reach people who wanted to attend on specific days of the week. The orchestra used the hall at the College of St Catherine's for that purpose only during the Northrop years. They later also performed at the then-new Ordway theater in St Paul (home of the St Paul Chamber Orchestra & Minnesota Opera) because it is a major venue. I never heard a soul say or write that they went to those venues because of dissatisfaction with Orchestra Hall acoustics. Also, the Orchestra Hall renovation indeed adjusted the acoustics but not in a dramatic way for the audience; one of the goals was to enable the musicians to hear each other better. The bulk of the renovation had to do with greatly expanding the lobby, offices and backstage areas, and adding a second performance hall for chamber concerts.
@@brentstahl204 Clearly, you and I have a different circle of musical friends. Every person I knew who attended concerts at Ordway lived in Minneapolis or its suburbs, not St. Paul, and they could have attended OH concerts more easily. But they preferred Ordway's acoustics far more -- "worth the drive," as it were. I wasn't particularly enamored with St. Catherine's auditorium, but still found it preferable to the overly resonant, diffuse sonics at OH. To my ears, the "new" sound at OH is dramatically better -- and dramatically different from what we had to deal with in the decades prior. And that's from my seat in the hall, not the orchestra stage.
I grew up with the Minneapolis Orchestra (Minnesota Orchestra after 1968) in the 1960s, under Skrowaczewski (Dorati left after 1960). My first classical music concerts would have been in Northrop Auditorium, so all of this is highly nostagic for me. I have the Mercury Living Presence Collector's Edition, Volume 1 which contains many but not all of these recordings (they may be in other volumes). I love these performances; perhaps they are not the best in the catalogue, but just about all of them are full of character and marvelous sound, in my opinion. As I write this, I am listening to Tchaikovsky: Capriccio Italien, Op. 45, from 1955! It astonishes me the sonic quality of these first stereo albums.
Lucky you! To grow up with this wonderful ensemble.
A long, long time ago in a distant suburb of Cleveland - Shaker Heights - 7th &8th graders took a course that included music appreciation. We heard classical recordings in glorious mono sound of diverse works.
One of the ensembles was the Minneapolis Sympony under Dimitri Mitropoulos on 10" Columbia vinyl discs.
After hearing the selections, at the end of the course, we were bussed down to Severance Hall to hear the Cleveland Orchestra perform the music .
I date the beginning of my life long love of music to these recordings and these concerts.
The Minneapolis Orchestra was instrumental (no pun intended) in nurturing my musical tastes.
I think we lived in more civilized times way, way back then.
Simple. They were recorded with the tube ampex 300 tape recorder and the legendary Telefunken 201tube ribbon mikes. I believe early bill Evans albums used these mikes too. That's why transparency is imm distinguishable from brubeck and Oscar Peterson recordings.
I love the sound of many of those old MLP recordings, particularly the Rimsky-Korsakov. Minneapolis/Minnesota tends to be underrated at times, they'd fare better if they had more reviews in New York papers. Look at the these four conductors,; Ormandy, Mitropoulos, Dorati, and Skrowaczewski.
FINALLY we get all these wonderful recordings all boxed up together.
Great performances, Great legacy....a MUST have 👍
That bookie cover bending was painful to watch.
God, that really made me cringe. I’m such a fuss-pot!
Aren't we all?
I actually gasped.
The Northrop Auditorium in Minneapolis (on the Univ. of Minnesota campus) where Dorati worked was drastically remodeled around 10-12 years ago and now has superb acoustics. We can dream what recordings by Ormandy, Mitropoulous, Dorati, and Skrowacewski (until 1973) would have sounded like in the transformed hall.
No doubt that the dry acoustic and vivid, "Living" presence of these recordings will highlight (and exacerbate) any defects in the playing (3rd-rate orchestra?), but Dorati's Mercury output represents a true historic legacy. If one doesn't appreciate that aspect of these recordings, then I guess the point is moot.
(As I think I recently mentioned), I once asked the late Bernie Adelstein (principal trumpet on most of these recordings before G.Szell hired him to take over in Cleveland in 1960): "how did you guys ever manage to play that (1960) Rite of Spring so FAST and precise??, to which he answered: " I think we had to stop a lot because things kept breaking down..", implying that the recording was pieced together. But however it was done, it's a amazing, explosive recording (has the "Dance of the Earth" ever been played faster??), made at a time when orchestras were JUST beginning to become familiar/comfortable with "Le Sacre". LR
If it's been spliced together, the engineers did a super job, because I can't hear evidence of that on the recording (I'm referring to the mono recording from the first boxed set). Too many splice jobs -- even by the engineers for the major recording companies -- are so obvious, it's cringeworthy.
I meant to comment on your assessment of Dorati's Prokofiev 5th and I agree entirely with you. The original CD of that also has Dorati's LSO Prokofiev and what a difference! Mind you, the music is very different too, with the Scythian Suite and the Suite from "The Love for Three Oranges" but in my opinion both of those performances are magnificent.
I have that recording. I bought it for the 5th but was disappointed with the sound. The LSO recording better.
I love this channel.
Hi Dave, great video! It takes me back some 50 years...a friend and I had this sort of rivalry about who was best: My friend favored Dorati, whereas I favored Eugene Ormandy, in general, and in particular on some Tchaikovsky works, like Capriccio Italiano and the 1812 Overture. I think the rivalry was never resolved up to this day...Two great Hungarian conductors...O tempora...I enjoy watching your video, as usual...cheers, GV
The Smetana items were originally fillers for the Albeniz CD, when the Mercury CD's were first released, along with the two excerpts from Mussorgsky's "Khovanshchina".
Aha! Thank you. I had quite forgotten.
@@DavesClassicalGuide No problem. I immensely enjoy your videos, BTW. I've compiled hundreds of playlists based on your recommendations.
This looks like a really nice set! I wonder how many of the CDs overlap with the three Mercury Living Presence CD sets?
Will I or wont I? I receive an email every month from a local record supplier and the Dorati mono set featured in this month's email, so I decided to order that - mainly, I have to admit, for a decent copy of the Copland 3rd and the Respighi "Church Windows" with that magnificent tam-tam. However, I'm sure I'll enjoy a lot more than that. The supplier, a long-standing friend, is allowing me to pay for the set in instalments, so much a month.
I'm a big fan of the Mercury Recordings, especialliy when it comes to vinyl. However I don't know the Dorati "Church Windows". But one of my favourit recordings ever is the "Church Windows" of Reference Recordings, conducted by Keith Clark and played by the Pacific Symphony Orchestra. I don't know whether you can find it on CD (or streaming maybe?), as I have the RR-15 on 45rpm-Vinyl. Good luck!
@@retohofmann5878 Thanks for your comments. I've owned the Dorati "Church Windows" on LP for decades and have longed hoped it would appear on CD. I love the performance and don't want any other. I do have a Chandos recording of it but much of that is rushed. Dorati's tempi seem ideal to me.
Which box to choose? Largely unknown "state of the art" mono first recordings or their well-known remakes in "dated" stereo. This should be an easy choice for "serious" collectors.
Yes, an easy decision: both of them.
If I could choose only one Dorati box. It has to be .... The Mono Recordings!
@@peterboer9572 Certainly, more of the stereo recordings exist in other "sanctioned" releases, so there are alternative options there. But I wouldn't want to be without either one of these boxes.
I like also the gorgeous sound of the stereo recordings.
I'm not a fan of the very small amount of music on each disc. The three cubes cover these and many of Dorati's other Mercury recordings in well-filled discs, plus some of the original artwork. No doubt many people value this original-album concept more than I do. I appreciate that Eloquence needs to make money, but the jump in prices is a pain.
Well, the cubes are routinely selling for 200-300 on ebay whereas you can find this for under 100. I can see the allure of the original couplings as it tends to introduce the listener to new and unusual repertoire on the "B" side. As an owner of the cubes I will skip this but I can see the appeal.
It’s a pity they didn’t issue Dorati’s LSO recordings on Mercury. He’s a rather underrrated conductor.
I’m sorry being off-topic but could you do a talk on Humperdinck’s Hansel and Gretel opera, and the best recordings of it? Thank you.
The Dorati London stuff is planned for next year, "market-willing", according to one insider I heard from via e-mail ...
I have the three Big-Boxes-O-Mercs…so as far as Dorati/Minneapolis…I’m good. Most of those recordings just don’t sound very good to my ears. Minneapolis was a 3rd rate orchestra and recording a group like that so up close and in such a dry acoustic…well…the result just isn’t memorable.
Now, if you want to talk about Dorati’s LSO recordings from that era, those are as good as any ever made. Better orchestra and better acoustic.
If the sonics are poor or even mediocre I don’t give a damn who is playing, I don’t need such recordings in my collection. Some MLP recordings sound good and are worth having, but I’m quite sure much of the content of these huge, expensive boxes won’t get much play, as sound quality is an integral part of the recorded music listening experience. I own the first MLP cube AND I admire Paul Paray’s La Mer on MLP from 1955, I know what I’m talking about.
People listen for different reasons and with different interests and perspectives. Thanks for sharing yours. As a historian I particularly enjoy listening to historical recordings and the development of orchestras and conductors over time so for me this is definitely of interest.
Do you?
On Qobuz, I ‘”favorited” the 16 / 44.1 Monteux 1929 “Rite of Spring”. It’s almost horrifying to listen to because of the technical limitations of the time and it would never be my go-to, ever. BUT “Monteux” and “1929” mean that it’s historically irreplaceable and in its own category as the first full recording (e.g. not a rehearsal).
I agree with you that the 1955 Paray/DSO recording of La Mer is really, really good (and puts most newer recordings of that piece to shame). But there are many other recordings in the MLP catalogue that are equally memorable.
@@Danzig987 Thank you. I would love to hear your top 3 or top 5. The great effect of the La Mer is for me a personal one. When I saw a Debussy concert bij the Concertgebouw Orchestra on the television, I bought the MLP recording on CD, 17 or 18 years old. It was one of my first purchases in classical music more than 20 years and over 1500 classical CDs ago now.
Northrop Memorial Auditorium may have a reputation for being cavernous and "where sound goes to die," and it was easy to criticize the acoustics "back in the day." But when Orchestra Hall in downtown Minneapolis opened in the 1970s, it was the opposite extreme, with overly reverberant sound that seemed closer to sitting in a cathedral with marble walls and floors. The acoustics at OH were at once so strangely echoey and diffuse, it was a major disappointment. Many Minneapolitans jumped at the chance to cross the river and see the orchestra play at its performing venues in St. Paul -- first at the College of St. Catherine and later at Ordway Hall downtown. Meanwhile, it took 30 years of tinkering, and then throwing up hands and embarking on a major multi-million dollar overhaul of Orchesta Hall's acoustics (completely shutting down the auditorium for more than a year) to finally end up with the magnificent sound the hall has today. But in the decades prior, many recordings were made at OH that are hugely disappointing. A case in point: Compare Dorati's complete Daphnis & Chloe recording from 1954 at Northrop with Stanislaw Skrowaczewski's recording at OH for Vox in 1976:; even though it was recorded more than 20 years earlier, the Dorati has far more natural sound, along with with greater presence. (Dorati's interpretation is the more compelling one as well, while Skrowaczewski inexpicably cuts out nearly 20% of the score, despite which Vox labeled it as "complete" anyway -- not exactly truth in advertising.)
I also lived through the period your describe in Minneapolis-St Paul and heartily disagree with your assessment of Version 1 of Orchestra Hall, which also is a lonely minority among numerous critics and people who attended concerts. Specific historical claims you make are just wrong: The orchestra played some a few concerts annually in St Paul years ago to reach people living on the east side of the Metro and to reach people who wanted to attend on specific days of the week. The orchestra used the hall at the College of St Catherine's for that purpose only during the Northrop years. They later also performed at the then-new Ordway theater in St Paul (home of the St Paul Chamber Orchestra & Minnesota Opera) because it is a major venue. I never heard a soul say or write that they went to those venues because of dissatisfaction with Orchestra Hall acoustics. Also, the Orchestra Hall renovation indeed adjusted the acoustics but not in a dramatic way for the audience; one of the goals was to enable the musicians to hear each other better. The bulk of the renovation had to do with greatly expanding the lobby, offices and backstage areas, and adding a second performance hall for chamber concerts.
@@brentstahl204 Clearly, you and I have a different circle of musical friends. Every person I knew who attended concerts at Ordway lived in Minneapolis or its suburbs, not St. Paul, and they could have attended OH concerts more easily. But they preferred Ordway's acoustics far more -- "worth the drive," as it were. I wasn't particularly enamored with St. Catherine's auditorium, but still found it preferable to the overly resonant, diffuse sonics at OH. To my ears, the "new" sound at OH is dramatically better -- and dramatically different from what we had to deal with in the decades prior. And that's from my seat in the hall, not the orchestra stage.