Repertoire: The BEST (and WORST) Saint-Saëns Organ Symphony (No. 3)
Vložit
- čas přidán 2. 07. 2024
- One of the great challenges to recording engineers, the Saint-Saëns Organ Symphony has an impressive number of recorded failures, but also, happily, quite a few notable successes.
- Hudba
My dad loved organ music, and the piece of music that worked by osmosis more than any other in the house, was dad's reel-to-reel recording of the Organ Symphony with Ormandy and Biggs. To this day, whenever I listen to the Organ Symphony, the visual I have is of the cover of that Ormandy/Biggs recording. But, yes, Munch is the one to die for! Thanks as always for such great discussions.
Most informative and helpful. Thank you.
Dear Dave. I love how sharp and honest you are. Story with Ludwig Beck follows.
De gustibus and all that; I came here because I can't stand the Martinon recording, which to my ear is muddy in every sense. The Munch recommendation is brilliant; it turns out that there's an SACD remastering, and it shows that this isn't just the best recording of the "organ" symphony, it's one of the best recordings of anything ever. Thanks so much.
Dear Dave
sorry if I resume this trade after some time, but the other day I found (for a few euros) a direct edition in a second-hand market stall (now in Sardinia/Italy there are no longer any CD/Classical shops!) by Peter Maag with Daniel Chorzempa and the Bern Symphony Orchestra.
Excellent sound recording and...what a great conductor Peter Maag was!!!!
a CD of only 37 minutes but which would also be worth full price!
Thanks and regards to everyone.
I looked it up out of curiosity since I grew up with the Munch and Ormandy recordings as yes, the 1962 Philly recording was made in the Academy Of Music (one of the few times Ormandy recorded there) with their new Aolean-Skinner organ. Munch is still the winner for me, especially because of Boston's 32 foot pedal stops.
I love the Ormandy/Phila/Biggs EARLIER mono recording - Ormandy did two recordings with Biggs, and the mono had more punch than the stereo one. It's in the box set! My introduction was the Munch/BSO/Zamkochian that I still listen to a lot.
I had not known of the Mata recording. Thanks for pointing it out! I loved his Ravel - particularly his Alborada del Gracioso and La Valse with Dallas on RCA.
Is that the one from 57 ish? That was a great record
@@czarnick2 Yes.
Chiming in for Chung (DG). The most moving interpretation of the Poco adagio I have heard.
Excellent observation about this particular work of the composer. I happen to have the recording of the SFS recording - My first Saint Saens & The Telarc with Ormandy & the Phila' Orc. My 2 favs & The BSO with Charles M.
It's really funny, but your off-key dad-da-da-da-dump way of verbalizing the music always recall the music you're mimicking, because your tempo is almost always accurate! And, highly entertaining too! Thanks!
Ormandy/PO all the way for me. The sound is absolutely spot on. The coupling is all important and no duds. A remarkable disc from beginning to end. With Munch, i get slight sound distortion with the organ which i find annoying. Performance is a great one though
I actually like the Murray best of the 3 Ormandys. Biggs is great too, but disappointed with Fox, the organ is horrible and playing is too idiosyncratic
re: Munch BSO recording: The original 3-channel master on SACD is revelatory. The presence of that center channel places the organ dead center with perfect balance. RCA invented the "microphone ring" with 2 mics on either side and one center forward. What a difference that makes. That original 3-channel master was taken out of the box where it sat for about 45 years, played back on an Ampex 3-head deck and fed directly into an analog-digital converter. This is the sound the engineers heard on the day they recorded it in Symphony Hall, Boston. Remarkable! Highly recommended.
I agree. The SACD is superlative.
I agree. The SACD is superlative.
Dear Mr. Hurwitz: I KNEW from the beginning that your favourite would be the Munch!! I learned the Symphony with that version in a Chilean LP pressing in the sixties and simply erased it playing and playing it. Now I have two CD pressings (just in case). Also in my collection: the Paray (still sounds wonderful) the Martinon (EMI), and the Barenboim! Plus the Pretre (signed by him) and the Maazel. I've found the Mata in Apple Music. Thanks again!
The Pretre is my favorite recording ( 1968 ). With Dupre on the organ. I also have DSD superior recording of Eschenbach. Also wonderfull. Alwsys liked the Marie Claire Alain version on Erato.
Will investigate on SFO Edo the Waard, the Ormandy and the Much. The advise on Ormandy being the best in the Moussorgsky/Ravel pictures at an exhibition I do not support Dave. Its filled with tempo flaws and unregularity's and socially not so very good compared to for instance Solti on DECCA which he does not mention at all. Also his recommendings on Mahler symphonies I do not support at all. Dave has an sort of taste which favours spontanity which I also like a lot but his recommendings are sometimes spontanity to too much faults and unstable tempos. I love his overall vision very much and always investigate his ideas but its not strange to do not follow him in every respect. His enthusiasm is simply wonderfull and only on that aspect I hear him a lot on several of his vlogs....
The Fremaux CBSO performance - wonderful and fantastic recording quality. Had it on LP in the days when quadrophonic sound was considered a neat idea.
Keith Parmenter Agree!
Agree too, I have Munch, Martinon & Paray, so-so recordings, none of the forward momentum/cohesiveness of the Fremaux. Much underrated conductor.
Amazing content! thank you so much!
The most reverberant version I ever had was the Pierre Segon with the La Suisse Romand. It actually broke a thin crystal goblet I had in the dining room breakfront
The engineering skills of Lewis Layton, and the production skills of Richard Mohr are documented forever in the Munch/ BSO recording.
The Edo de Waart is also available in Apple Music. Thanks again!
How about the James levine, Berlin philharmonic orchestra ?
That’s an excellent recording!
Surprised it wasn't on the list, to my ear it's absolutely wonderful
Absolutely and unquestionably.
I'm surprised you didn't blow a special raspberry for the Bernstein recording, which was one of the major recording disappointments of my life. Before each of the three massive chords that introduce the organ, he inserted a deadly ritardando that completely saps that climactic moment of energy and power. It's like having someone next to you at the movies who keeps poking you in the ribs and saying, "Watch what happens next!"
Thanks for your insightful reviews. As for the Saint-Saens, Munch has been my favorite ever since I replaced my old Ormandy (his first one) on LP with it. The only problem and admittedly it’s minor is the horn bobble in the finale when he has the solo-3rd or 4th horn I think, as Saint-Saens scored the 1st and 2nd horn parts for natural horn. I also can recommend Leonard Slatkin’s Lyon recording for Naxos-a wonderful performance-that you also praised in your Classics Today review.
These ears heard no bobble.
Love the shirt!
Ormandy/Philadelphia Orchestra recorded a mono version for Columbia in October 1956 with E. Power Biggs in Boston Symphony Hall. It is quite well recorded (for a Columbia mono), and a great performance, and in the same acoustic as Munch's 1959 RCA. The Ormandy Columbia stereo version was recorded in 1962. Paray/Detroit for me in the classic/legacy department, Mata/Dallas for a modern recording. Thanks for your reviews!
Yes, the earlier Ormandy/Biggs is a less "swimmy" sounding recording. It's my favorite
Dave: The organ on the Ormandy Saint-Saens was indeed a pipe organ. It was built by Aeolian Skinner. I agree with you on your final recommendation and your appreciation of the Ormandy. Both phenomenal recordings. There's a story about that organ. Dan Hinger was timpanist of the Philadelphia at the time the organ was put it, and he claimed that it changed the acoustics, and not for the better. He used to use bamboo or cane shafted mallets in his playing, but the change in acoustics forced im to be creative and experiment with aluminum, which to his ears, and those of his colleagues, spoke better. IMHO he aced the Saint-Saens on the recording, and on my copy, there is both the Danse Macabre and the Bacchanale from Samson et Dalila that are just smoking hot!
Is yours the Sony Essential Classics? I just got the same disc in the mail today and the first two pages of the booklet (the track listings) are from a completely different album 😂 luckily, it's the correct disc though!
I just randomly listened to the Gillian Weir, Ulster Orchestra, Yan-Pascal Tortelier version and I was really impressed. I only listened to the finale but it was well phrased, sound was great and the playing, especially the brass! 👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻
Of course, Munch. Mata is indeed great, and don’t forget his awesome Chausson and Ibert disc on Dorian (which I’ve practically worn out). I also LOVE the new Jansons with the Bavarian Radio Symphony
When our classical station, KFSD 94.1, abandoned the format, Kingsley McLaren announced that they were "going out with a bang," and he proceeded to play the Saint-Saens Third Symphony. The work was also selected by an organist friend of mine when I installed his stereo system in his new house.
Since I own both the Munch recording and the de Waart, I can vouch for your taste. :)
If I had to recommend anything myself, it would have to be the Deutsche Gramophone digital recording of the Berlin Philharmonic Orchestra's performance conducted by James Levine. The performance is spot on. It's very passionate and expressive while not sounding too fast or too dry. The recording itself sounds great coming from 1987. I highly recommend it.
P.S. I liked some of the recommendation and because of you, I would probably be lost while looking for a good recording of music I like since I'm new to classical music. Keep up the great work Dave.
I, for one, fully concur! I've had the Levine performance for many years and have always found it to be intense and vital, with Levine drawing the very best from the BPO. (I heard the Munch recording at about the same time as my purchase, and thought it was awful! - a flaccid effort, with decidedly second rate playing and poor recording.) The only downside with Levine is the organ -- which sounds, a tad, underwhelming, and needs to be more dominant. Generally, though, I've always been pretty satisfied. (Top class Danse Macabre coupling, too.)
I completely agree about the Guillou-Mata, very excitingly played and splendidly recorded. As to the 1963 Ormandy recording: It was recorded in the Philadelphia Academy of Music, which had a fairly recent (1959) Æolian-Skinner four-manual organ. It was even sensational in that, being a full-scale 32-foot instrument, it could be moved on railtracks in its entirety for some feet, out of its storage onto the stage and back. The organ is gone today, I don’t know where it went (perhaps it was digested in the Crystal Cathedral behemoth, as have so many). I doubt whether an electronic back then could have made such an impact. And yes, that is indeed a very fine recording as well.
P. S. About “electronic” again: In Æ-S Opus 1376 at Philhadelphia, there were two 32-foot “flue” ranks that were indeed electronic, the rest having been as real as your tamtam.
The Ormandy recording that used an electronic is the one with Virgil Fox as organist. As stated above, the Biggs used the pipe organ.
Being a timpanist, I love the timpani solo at the very end with the organ pulling out all the stops!!!!
I have the Paray and the Munch on vinyl but the one I love and play all the time is an early digital on the Telarc label. It is Ormandy with Michael Murray on organ. Recorded in a church in Philly in 1980. Absolutely stunning recording to me with a great sounding organ with big pipes (haskell). On vinyl of course. The CDs don't sound as good.
Another Ormandy is the quadraphonic recording he did for RCA with Virgil Fox, who played the Rodgers Touring Organ, which is a great performance.
The organ in that Ormandy recording is a pipe organ, built by Aeolian Skinner, donated by Mrs Zimbalist, who also commissioned Barber to compose the Toccata Festiva, also recorded at The Philadelphia Academy, as was the Organ Symphony.
If you didn't choose the Munch I was never going to watch your videos again. Just kidding, of course. It's a performance to die for. I've lost count of how many different versions I have of it either on CD or SACD,, including the fairly recent Analogue Productions SACD from Acoustic Sounds. Just magic! I bought a recent Erato set of the complete symphonies and I won't comment further.
Wow, the Mata/Guillou got mentioned! The Fisk organ at the Meyerson is one of the great concert organs anywhere in the world.
Agree totally. Lightening doesn't strike twice and neither can another version to match Munch's.
Thanks for your very thoughtful reviews! While all your recommendations have their unique strengths, the pace, layering, and overall balance of the Ormandy/Biggs and both Mata and de Waart’s Guillou poco adagio’s are sublime. Sadly, on streaming platforms of the de Waart a rare but grievous digital-skip jars at 2:55 (echo of the early days of CD players!) a casualty of an apparently flawed Universal QC process🙁. Can you confirm it’s not a manufacturing error on the original CD?
For me, another notable is Michel Plasson and the Orchestre Du Capitole de Toulouse. The sonics are incredible!
Wow, no comments? I'll just say that I marginally prefer Martinon's Erato outing to his EMI; sound is sumptuous. Great selections!
Unfortunately the sound for the other symphonies is not so good.
Very fond of the Fremaux, but agree the Munch has always been something special, a “go to” recording by the best French Orchestra of it’s time.
You mean the BSO is French?
The relatively recent Kansas City Symphony version on reference sounds great! Very good organ sound. The orchestra performance is pretty good.
The Mercury Living presence version with the DSO is a bit disappointing in my mind. I do not like the dead acoustic of Ford Auditorium.
The organ sound in the CSO/barenboim disappoints me. I do not like recordings that dub in the organ. If you do not have an organ in your hall, oh well, you miss out then on your recording opportunity.
I concur with the Edo de Waart/San Francisco version.
Many thanks for this survey. I've got different versions of the Organ Symphony - is one of the Symphony that I love most and one of the most important and beautiful pieces in the french repertoire, a masterpiece in my opinion - I've got the Barenboim's (wonderful), Dutoit / Hurford & OSM (Spectacular), Martinon / Gavoty at the organ (very french sound, lovely), Dupré / Paray and DSO (absolutely stunning) and so on. But if I should recommend one about many good recordings, I would probably choose Feike Asma / The Hague Philharmonic Orchestra with Willem van Otterloo conducting. It's astonishing, with a very great and true sound: no dubbing, or post-adjustment for the organ... no no, you know nothing of all this: it's all true (also the organ had pitch problems before the reocording sessions, but they were able to solve the problem a few minutes before starting the performance to record). One of the worst ever instead is the Louis de Froment with J.P. Kenner at the organ and the Luxembourg Radio Orchestra. The orchestra sounds good, and his conductor is terrific, but the organ...is simply awful and dull! Low registers, dull sonics, no power and no grandeur...all in the organ is on the mute, dumper side, if I can use this expression. What a pity!
I have a vinyl record of Otterloo conducting Mahler's 1st and it's very good. It's a shame that he is one of the conductors who was forgotten when vinyl died.
There's also a mono Munch version with the NYPO that Columbia recorded in the late 1940's. The performance is a bit quicker, but the mono sound cannot compare to the RCA remake.
Mi versión favorita de la Sinfonía es la de Paul Paray porque la ejecución es muy buena y no deja detalles al azar.
Interested to hear you say that Munch & the Boston didn't speed to the ending of the finale. The old cheap vinyl copy I had in the 60s was by some unknown (to me) orchestra conducted by Jo Bloggs and it was my first connect with this work. It did not pay close attention to the score but went for the inherent majesty of the ending. So later when I went to concerts I was stunned by the 'wheel down a hill' endings and a bit disappointed though I accept that Saint-Saens scored it so .
I have the Ormandy Recording on Sony..A Cherished CD!
Ormandy recorded it with Philadephia Orchestra for Telarc too and it’s sounds fabulous!
That’s my favorite one
Mine too on vinyl.
I have the Ormandy/Biggs version and adore it. Speaking of the Jongen which is one of my favorite pieces, have you reviewed that one yet?
Not yet.
I have Eschenbach/Philadelphia on Ondine SACD. The performance lacks in some ways but the sonics are outstanding, especially in the finale. It will always be a personal favorite. I also really want to pick up Ormandy and Munch.
Absolutely agreed, the sonics are head-and-shoulders above every other that I have heard.
The Eschenbach/Philadelphia is a favorite of mine. The Poco Adagio in particular. As Dave points out: this piece really shines when it’s a concert hall with a concert organ. The sonics really shine in this performance and the tempo and balance between orchestra and organ are what I would consider reference quality.
Yes, Munch doesn't speed up at figure FF even though the score there says Stringendo... but it does work on its own terms. Far worse for me is the molto rit. that all too many performances impose on the second last measure - Saint-Saëns could have written this in if he'd wanted it but he didn't!
My favourite is still the Barenboim - more than any other recording this one seems to get the tempo changes and transitions just right, and there are lots of them. And the orchestra is sensationally good, you just feel a sense of excitement in the playing.
Are you serious? here the only discussion, would be which one is the best version after Munch's. Period!
We like the Munch/BSO, Levine/BPO, De Waart/SFSO, Barenboim/CSO, Mata/Dallas, Martinon/ORTF/EMI, and Fremaux/CBSO recordings. I imprinted on the Ormandy/Philadelphia recording on RCA, with Virgil Fox, spectacularly recorded for its day.Yan Pascal Tortelier on Chandos, with the Ulster Orchestra, is good but somewhat plain.I've always thought that the Karajan recording is a joke, but if you listen very objectively to the second half of the first section you will note some well-judged pizzicati (accompanying the main theme)executed by the BPO strings; apart from that, a bust. Any thoughts on Maazel/Pittsburgh?
Sure. It sat in the can for something like 5 years until the decided to dub in an organ. They never should have let it out.
Could not agree more with you regarding the brilliant recordings of Paray and Munch. But there is one other magnificent French recording with you did not even mention, which I think should be included among the best ever. For me personally I would choose if it far abovefpr example the Ormandy recording you mentioned, namely George Pretre with the Orchestra of the Paris Conservatory.
Exactly that recording is my favorite too. Not all advise of Dave is to our taste or preference. Its not a shame. Its great we all have our own tastes and good choices. No need to think others should choose the same top favo. Its our own favo choice and we all can inspire on each others choices and maybe once and a while be even more inspired by each other advises. The main thing is all our passionate love for music which will never end.
I d like to recommend Nezet-Seguin on LPO's own label. Best digital recording imo
Just a reminder: even stereo is a gimmick, although it is easy to do without harm. Analogue recording had become an art (give credit to recording engineers by 1950) into the 1970's, and I consider the analogue recordings (Munch, Paray, Ormandy, Martinon, Barenboim) highly satisfying. I am surprised to have heard them all, and I could endorse any of them without qualms.
I can't tell whether the first effect of digital recording was to petrify the old recording artists or to introduce engineers with good control of the technology but at best crude knowledge of music; either way recording was marred.
I have always loved Munch's recording. For a later recording I like Batiz and the LPO. I'm going to get Ormandy.
There are two pieces of music that I will unhesitatingly and unapologetically play at maximum volume: the "Chorus of the Hebrew Slaves" from Verdi's opera "Nabucco" and the last 8 minutes of Saint-Saëns' Organ Symphony.
There are actually quite a few recordings that dub pipe organs. Many are quite successful. (Apparently Ormandy did an earlier mono account, also with Biggs...)
Yes, probably the majority of them now.
I really like the more 'authentic' French organ that's used on the Leonard Slatkin one, done in Lyon for Naxos. As you know, the notes give all kinds detailed info. about the historic organ they used (a topic I know next to nothing about). I like the Ormany/Columbia one as well. Whatever the reason, the Munch just doesn't click for me. However, there's no denying the great value of THAT particular Living Stereo issue (includes "La Mer" and Ibert's "Escales"). For me, in spite of the rather dry acoustic, my overall favorite is Barenboim/Chicago. There was a DG "The Originals" reissue of it, so maybe the sound is a bit better on that (?). I'd like to hear the M. Stern/K.C. one sometime (Reference Recordings). I too have a special fondness for De Waart/S.F. The disc they made of Respighi's "Pines"/"Fountains" is really good too.
Yes, the sound in the Barenboim/CSO performance as issued in the DG Originals series is improved over previous issues.
Barenboim and CSO were pretty good. I will try Martinon.
I really prefer Martinon’s version. This recording captures all the power of the Les Invalides huge organ and a magnificent interpretation of this French music specialist...
I agree with all of your selections and have all of the recordings you have cited; however, I do have one additional recording for which I regard as a guilty pleasure - and I first heard it at a high end audio store where they were demonstrating a very fine set of speakers with a world class sub woofer. The recording they were playing was Andrew Litton with the Royal Liverpool Philharmonic - the work is performed in a cathedral (sorry!) - and with the largest cathedral based pipe organ in the world. It is a guilty indulgence I admit - no jokes about the size of the organ please - really shakes the timbers of the home. Delightful!
I use to have a DG recording with, I think, Abbado and CSO? It was amazing!
No, they never did it. Barenboim made the DG recording with Chicago.
@@DavesClassicalGuide oh. Ok. Well, it was really good!
I have four or five recordings and i agree that Michael Murray is outstanding - and so much better because it is an SACD
I have the Martinon LP in the original SQ matrix surround. I also own a Involve Audio Surround Master decoder that virtually provides discreet sound and decodes this recording incredibly well. ( You should hear Jim Croce 4 channel recordings!). My all time absolute favorite though is the George's Prêtre and Maurice Duruflé recording (1960's?) and yes I do also own the Charles Munch on an original early 1960's shaded dog pressing. Comments?
About what? You own what you own and you like what you like. Have fun.
@@DavesClassicalGuide I am! Love classical and a hi-fi nut since 10. Will also check out other recordings you mentioned. Thanks!
Too bad my hero Solti didn't record this with Chicago. His intense style might just work here. Would certainly have the brass to do it. I'll go listen to the Barenboim/Chicago recording that you approve instead. Love watching your videos. They have brought me to some sense of maturity and away from my childish "loud brass is best" approach in analyzing recordings. Guess playing trombone for a lot of years did it to me. Thanks for leading me out of this land of make believe and pointing me toward reality. I'm still not giving up my discs,like the first recording of Mahler 5 with Solti/Chicago, but am gaining a broader view of classical music thru your ongoing education in these wonderful videos. Long live listening to AND collecting classical music. You have my emotional and monetary support. Keep up the great work!!
Thank you!
Just heard our beloved friend Karajan. Its really a desaster. Insensitive and loud, he performs it like Wellingtons Vittoria. He is often overrated, but on the other hand: the finest Tschaikowsky I ever heard...
Dave: I mentioned Munch and the BSO - that recording is incredible, but when I first got it it almost blew out my speakers - the bass range was phenomenal for the day. But your right - Charles Munch had the piece in his blood, and with Monteux is one of the greatest interpreters of the French school. I also like Eduardo Mata. His death was a tragedy, and love his Chasusson Symphony and Ibert Escalkes.
With the Karajan recording on early digital: it is worth remembering that Deutsche Grammophon was actually slow to start digital recording in contrast to other record labels. Late-analogue recordings by Karajan's Berlin Philharmonic demonstrate that Karajan could get excellent sound, as on his recordings of Brahms, Dvorak, and Tchaikovsky symphonies (and those composers are contemporaries of Saint-Saens) from the late-digital era. By the time that DG got to record Karajan (Bruckner 8, but with the Vienna Phil) well he already had a foot in the grave.
The recording engineers of the final years of the analogue era were artists, and conductors who recorded much music (like Karajan) knew how to get good sound in an analogue recording. Microphone placement is everything, and I can guess that the rules are different with analogue and digital recording.
I will take a well-mastered analogue recording from the 1970's over an early digital recording almost every time.
I have the 1957 Ormandy Biggs version. Munch gets a bit more detail, but, for my taste, he rushes the tempos and the sound is harsh, better suited for Shostakovich.
The recording by Ormandy/Philadelphia/Biggs uses a real organ, not electronic -- the Aeolian-Skinner organ in the Academy of Music. An electronic-imitation was used for Ormandy's next recording, after the switch to RCA, with Virgil Fox. His last recording was at Girard College, played on an E. M. Skinner organ (same maker as the Yale Wolsey Hall organ). The acoustic is much too reverberant, alas (and I who say this tend to like reverberant rooms). Ormandy had the good sense and musicianship to moderate the tempos to accommodate the room -- but it required so much slowing down that it harms the music.
OTOH -- Was this symphony composed for the Royal Albert Hall, which is hardly a dry room?
In general symphonies, even with organ parts, are not composed for rooms.
Dubbed in the organ?! Good god. How awful. You could get worse if you used a Wurlitzer Fun Maker, but that may well be the only way.
My all time favourite is the San Fran with De Waart. Glad you mentioned it. It's real, and it's real cool. Get your copy today! I agree ^ with you. If I gush, it's because it really is that good. Being a retired violist, I take music very seriously. The San Fran organ is to this piece what pure gut strings and pointy bows are to baroque music. It just sounds right.
Worse than the Sir Colin Davis 1812 was the Slatkin / St Louis Symphony Orchestra recording on the Telarc label. It wasn't that Slatkin and the St.LSO was that bad. They were not. They were quite good. But I think that when they recorded the cannon, they must have stuck the mic right down the throat of the thing, then engineered it up even further. You could look at the groves in the disk and when it came to the cannon shots, the record had the Grand Canyon carved in it. For most record player needles it was un-navigable, and for the few rafts that didn't jump right off the surface of the record it sounded horribly distorted and pretty much buried any sound that the orchestra made. I think it was more of a show-off recording for Telarc and for people who thought their stereo system was the best in the world, but couldn't really hear the problems. In that regard, that recording was an absolutely epic gimmick. I wouldn't recommend it for anyone looking for a really good recording of the piece though.
The Newberry Organ in Yale's Wolsey Hall is an E. M. Skinner, before his firm was merged with Aeolian and control handed over to G. Donald Harrison.
Yes, I know.
The Pascal Rophe/Olivier Latry/Orchestre Philharmonique de Liege (on Cypres) version sounds very good!
The recording quality is superb, and I like their performance.
Im wondering why you have not even mentioned Myng-Whum Chung with orchestra de L'Opera Bastille ? Did you have a chance to hear this recording ? If you did, is there any particular reason to ignore it ? IMO it is the best performance of the Symphony 3.
I've heard it, and it's nothing special.
Munch adds a timpani drum roll at the end which is not in the score. How can this be justified?
You must be kidding. Conductors routinely tinker with details of orchestration, and they always have. It's entirely within their prerogative, and it represents an integral part of the art of interpretation. Whether you like it or not is simply a question of personal taste in each individual case. Sometimes the composer's original version sounds better, and sometimes not. These videos discuss many such instances, not just of changes in scoring, but also of tempo, dynamics, cuts, and other bits of musical "plastic surgery." It's totally commonplace.
You must stay honest with the composer s wishes. It could be the reason why the composer did not want an ending roll on the timpani was to give the organ centre stage with all stops out!!!!
@@richardwilliams473 oh my god I'm so sorry 🤣
@@detectivehome3318 Don't be sorry. I've played the timpani part and there is definitely not a timpani roll on the very last chord
@@richardwilliams473 who cares about what's written if its more exciting?
Digress a little. But what do folk see in Herbert Von Karajan?! He actually did very few desirable recordings. His Beethoven, Schumann and Brahms was as dull as dishwater... What was it about him that appealed to the masses? Maybe like a celebrity conductor or something. He just rarely knew how to get the best out of the music. Instead just stripped it of character and individuality. Does anybody recommend a recording by him of anything?.
He made many great recodings, as I have mentioned many times in many videos. You are simply wrong about him. If you dislike him, that's fine, but it's on you.
I do like his mono recordings on Angel records of Tchaikovsky's Nutcracker and Handel's Water music with the Philharmonic Orchestra.
Barenboim still the best for me.
He really is
he have two versions of french canadian conductors yannick nezet seguin of organ symphonies of saint saens....first with orchestre metropolitain ( atma) and the second with london philarmonic...(lpo).i love this two versions.....but you don't talk about this in your videos.....and ...charles dutoit versions....? ( london decca) other versions i like......
Well, that's because I don't like them as much as you do, so I see no need to talk about them.
@@DavesClassicalGuide thank you and have a Nice Day
I've usually been underwhelmed by Munch/BSO (Chuck Munch & His Bunch), but should probably try to listen again.
One that really surprised me by how wonderful it was when I heard it on the car radio some years ago-- Maazel/Pittsburgh. Can't comment on the engineering, but it was a lucid, beautifully-played account with none of Maazel's usual eccentricities. Perhaps French music of this ilk didn't give him much room to explore that. Anyway, worth a listen.
Hardly surprising the DG version with Karajan sounds so bad. DG engineering is dire at best.
@Isaac Sanevich-Fogel Yes.
When I've seen #3 live, the organ has overpowered the orchestra. On records they seem to go the other way.
I agree about the HvK recording. Personally, I think the slow movement sounds too saccharine when played slowly and that was certainly the case with that recording.
Not that I think he ever recorded it... this would have been perfect for Gunter Wand. Giving up one supreflous Bruckner recording for this... it would be Germanic, but so? This work is a spoof of the Germanic repertory. Only the spoofing fails, and nobody cares about that.