Preview: Karajan's 5 Worst Recordings As Keys To His 10 Best
Vložit
- čas přidán 20. 06. 2024
- Herbert von Karajan was a conductor of very strong sonic preferences, and this made him especially well suited to some kinds of music, and spectacularly unsuited to others. Not that he knew the difference... His 5 worst recordings, surveyed here, give a good sense of what his strengths and weaknesses were. Then, if you're a ClassicsToday.com Insider subscriber, hop on over there to see (and hear samples from) his 10 best recordings. If you haven't signed up yet, please consider joining by clicking on this link: www.classicstoday.com/classic...
- Hudba
Absolutely wonderful, Mr. Hurwitz! Your entire presentation put a big smile on my face and inspired a great week of nostalgia I spent with James Galway. He arrived in town several days early and we found a Chinese restaurant which appealed to both of us immensely, to which returned each day at lunchtime for the next three consecutive days. I can say with great confidence that approximately 90% of the time we spent conversing was devoted to his years in the Berlin Philharmonic and if I am not mistaken his first recording sessions in that position were devoted to the Schumann Second Symphony. Please be sure that your observations have been reinforced by at least one additional orchestral legend. Thank you for all that you do for all of us as not a day goes by where I do not follow at least one of these highly insightful, informed and perceptive presentations.
Gee thanks! Keep up the good work!
Mr. Kuchar's Nielsen with the Janácek Philharmonic Orchestra is my number one recommendation for Nielsen cycles!
I resent having to admit that his Bruckner 8 is in all respects spectacular. ( the last one) . He did occasionally do something really great. The problem is he recorded everything sometime 2 or 3 times. It skews the average when he is competing with his younger self. Do you want youthful vigor or profound depth? Because you may not get either.
Very insightful and interesting. Thank you so much for sharing your perspective on these recordings and Von Karajan in general.
Karajan's sonic preferences and his prioritization of beauty (which I do not experience as merely superficial) largely accord with my own. This does not mean that I am unable to appreciate other approaches or that I think all of his work is equally great, but it does mean that I was likely to disagree with some of the assertions in this video. I do agree that the Hindemith is far from his best work--Blomstedt's is the best recording I know--and that the 1960s German Requiem is not his best (but I do love his 1980s VPO recording). On the other hand, I disagree about the Saint-Saens and especially about the Schumann and Nielsen recordings. I understand that his recordings of French and Danish music are not the most idiomatic ones available, but his approach still agrees with me. His Nielsen recording introduced me to that composer and, whatever its minor shortcomings, thrills me to this day.
Despite occasional (and sometimes strong) disagreements, I have on the whole enjoyed your videos and respect the breadth of your knowledge and appreciation for great music. I look forward to learning which recordings you think are Karajan's best (although I can guess some of them from other videos).
Yeah, but there are all different kinds of beauty. Von Karajan imposed his sense of beauty onto the music he was conducting, rather than allowing the composer to dictate what kind of beauty there should be. He succeeded where the composer's aesthetics were already aligned to his style and not vice versa.
Dear David, thank you so much for a stirring talk, both here as well as in the Insider video. May I make a plea for a similar treatment of his Philharmonia period, the best and worst or perhaps an overview. There is so much stuff there that is similar yet different. And for some of us like me, the first introduction to Karajan on LP
I'll think about it. He just did so much...
A funny Karajan recording is Schubert's 9th from 1968 (DG). It's extrodinary, because this time he is not all strings. The brass are sharp and rough, in fact the orchestra sounds a bit like the CSO on steroids. Amazing.
It's one of my favorites too. The Penguin Guide hated it but High Fidelity gave it a rave.
He did a recording of the 8th, the Unfinished, on EMI. For me one of the greatest recordings HVK ever did make with the Berlin Philharmonic.
@@antoineduchamp4931 Which one? HvK did TWO recordings of the 8th for EMI: first in 1955 with the Philharmonia, then again about 20 years later with the BPO, to kick off their complete Schubert Symphony cycle.
The Philharmonia recording was of course issued as a mono Lp, but EMI did also make stereo tapes of the recording sessions, which is what they eventually used for the cd reissue.
I remember he was everywhere in the 1970s. A shop in Salzburg selling sewing machines with, actually, some sewing machines in the window but mostly with a large poster "HERBERT VON KARAJAN" as the prominent background.
I’d like do read your thesis on Hindemith! Can it be found archived online or is it published?
I really have no idea. I believe it was archived, but it wasn't published. I wouldn't release it today with some revision.
As always, I will not give away the game, and I have no idea--well, okay, one idea, which shall remain unmentioned here--about which item I might have swapped out of that (as always) magnificent list to accommodate something else. But I just have to say--and I know you love them too--that Karajan's analog Sibelius 6 and his digital Sibelius 1 are as magnificent as any orchestral recordings of his I know. That First is especially shocking--it's just ferocious! And I guess one might mention that the man also did some very fine Tchaikovsky, and that very late Bruckner 8 is a miracle of sorts too. What is one to do, though? He was a great artist for all his many flaws, and with a discography that size, any top 10 list will leave out immensities. I've owned the ones you chose for decades now, and they have brought me immense pleasure over the years. Thanks as always, Dave. The Insider videos are terrific! Sign up, people!
Thanks so much!
Thanks for another great honest critic 🏆
Loved the insider video, agree 100%. A couple of your ‘Worst” choices I nevertheless like, but all your points are valid…
That's an interesting comment about Nielsen - a violinist! - hating violins. I've quite often been to concerts where it suddenly becomes apparent to me that the musician (most often a pianist) hates not only the piece they're playing but also their chosen instrument (not that pianists can always choose!) and even music in general. Probably it has something to do with all the practice involved, especially for perfectionists. Even when listening to a record or CD, I can also get a sense that the conductor and the orchestra aren't getting on at all well with each other. That may or may not be a good thing (I can think of some glorious performances by martinets) but it would be really interesting to hear a talk from you about how those kind of relationships can affect the musical result.
There is a special kind of futility to playing in orchestras. I can count on one hand the number of times I came away feeling like the composer, conductor, most of the players, and I, personally, were all on the same wavelength. When that does happen, there is nothing like it in the world.
But usually, the conductor is harping on about something that will make no difference while actively doing things that will make the music worse. The players are usually more preoccupied with hating the people they are stuck with every day than with the music. It's a very, very alienating environment.
It's such a miracle that every now and again, the clouds part, and we see the mountain.
Karajan seemed best suited for Beethoven, perhaps Haydn . He is often overlooked for his Tchaikovsky imho. The recording of the Third is the best I've heard. Which is no easy task, given that the inner movements are slower and more introspect. Which Karajan of Bruckner or Dvorak would you recommend.
About the Notre Dame organ: the instrument has been gradually built upon for centuries, and still contains elements from the 1700s. The contemporary core of the instrument dates from the 1860s and the celebrated French builder Cavaille-Coll. That instrument in that form was truly one of the finest in the world and can actually be heard on early recordings dating pre-1960. The general style was known as the romantic organ and several fine examples from that builder still exist... look for recordings at Saint Sulpice in Paris for example ... that instrument is absolutely beautiful in every respect and dates from the same period in the 1860s. However, Notre Dame being in the spotlight as it were, the organ was always a candidate for modernizing or updating or adapting to more contemporary trends in organ building. One of those which took place through the 50s and 60s generally was called the organ reform movement in which beautiful rich romantic organs were bastardized to try to make them into baroque screamers. The incumbent organist at Notre Dame at the time, Pierre Cochereau, who plays on Karajan recording, oversaw a particularly egregious modernizing of the tonal palette of the organ, the worst of which was the grafting of incredibly screaming bright Spanish-inspired trompette en chamade batteries, which Cochereau loved and used (overused) with great regularity and which feature prominently on the recording. I agree with David that they are a hideous white noise sound, and lend nothing to the musical cohesiveness of the instrument. There are many other French organs that would have much better suited the character of the requirements of the work, not the least of which would have been the organ of La Madeleine where Saint-Saens was organist himself. And bad news, for David at least ... the organ did survive the fire intact.
Thank for this detailed discussion. I am well aware of the mess that Cochereau created--I didn't want to go into it on the video, but you've summed up the situation far better than I could have. Well, maybe a little soot will "tame the beast" a bit. You never know...
Karajan was always at his best in music he was relatively unfamiliar with. For me, his CD of Schoenberg’s Variations For Orchestra is his best work ever.
Adorno (who is no hero of mine) grudgingly admitted that Karajan of all people did better performances of Schoenberg than some of the supposed experts. That Variations recording is to this day one of the best.
I agree but I believe he did reorganise the seating of the orchestra for each variation.
Karajan made a real effort for that set of Second Viennese School works as did the Berlin Philharmonic. He paid for the recording and the advertising (a full page in _Gramophone_ ). It really paid off; the recordings are miraculous. Much as I love Gielen and Boulez in this repertoire there is something special in Karajan's recording.
@@sbor2020 The Mehta LA Phil recording of the Variations is also quite good.
Hi David ! Thank you for this video, even though I am a great admirer of his, I agree with most of what you said about Karajan. The only "Deutscher als Deutsch" repertoire in which I like him sincerelly is Wagner, somehow...
I just wanted to let you know, by the way, that the organ of Notre Dame was nos destroyed by the fire ! In fact I think it was left completely immaculate from the disaster !
Really appreciate your work and sorry for my english
Best regards from France
Anthony
I have read recently that the Notre Dame de Paris grand organ has been dismantled and is being fully restored and returned in time for the partial re-opening of the Cathedral in 2024. Thank god the instrument - along with the North and South windows, were spared.
Most of the organ is undamaged, but there is soot and dust and lead all over, and I think the electronics were beyond repair. But those are easily replaced.
As a hardcore Karajan, his worst five recordings, in no particular order, are, imho:
His first recording of Brandenburg concerts: unidiomatic, uninvolving, absolutely atrocious.
His Eine Kleine NachtMusik of the late 50s with Emi: one of the most reverberant recordings I've ever been able to listen. They seem to have played in some gigantic cave.
Monteverdi's l'Incoronazzione di Popea: not a studio recording, but a Vienna State Opera live concert release authorized by HvK. Even worse than his 60s Brandenburgs
80's Don Giovanni: badly recorded, pachidermic, not so well played, slow, boring as hell. Utterly excruciating. His worst opera recording by far.
Carl Orff's De temporum fine comoedia: possibly HvK's absolute worst recording. Not interested in the work at all, he recorded it with a regional radio orchestra.
Your take on his German Requiem is perfect.
Always so bluntly informative and opinionated, this time you taught me Nielsen, and I'm Danish!
Thank you, David, I enjoyed your video and appreciate your commitment to great music. I grew up with HvK’s recordings, which for the most part have always sounded idiomatic and compelling to me, as they still do. I have also appreciated many other conductors during my life, but never lost my admiration for him. Unfortunately, I’m unable to attend your “10 Best” as an Insider because of some limitations! And this is my contribution to the list of his “worst recordings”:
1) Don Giovanni, 1986 (DG)
2) Le sacre du printemps (both DG recordings)
3) Brahms. Piano Concerto No. 2 In B Flat Major, Op. 83 (Richter-Haaser, CBS)
4) Mozart : Le nozze di Figaro, 1974 (Decca)
5) Strauss: Vier letzte Lieder, 1986 (Tomowa-Sintow, DG)
6) Rimsky-Korsakov: Scheherazade (DG)
7) Haydn: Die Schöpfung, 1982 (DG)
My “Bests” are numerous, btw.
I'm sure they are. He made numerous great recordings. Thanks for sharing this.
And of course:
8) Beethoven. 5 Piano concerti, 1970s (Weissenberg, EMI) ;-)
My favourite Karajan quip was Beecham's double-edged remark that HvK was 'a kind of musical Malcolm Sargent'! Genius.
More Beecham quotes, please! More, more, more...^^
"Good evening, gentlemen (dating the anecdote^^) of the orchestra. As you can see, you have a Richard Strauss opera on your stands. The singers are of the opinion they are going to be heard, but we are jolly-well going to make sure they are not..."
Sargent seems to receive quite a bit of rancor and even hyperbolic criticism, but (lamentably deceased as of Jan., 2017) former member and eventually concertmaster of the London Phil., Dr. Howard Leyton-Brown, O.C. [Order of Canada] // actually Australian-born but an RAF Bomber pilot in WW II and later Canadian citizen, testified that Sargent, although he may have driven musicians hard, was an absolute wizard in the use of the baton. Apparently he could show everything, whether pitch, dynamics, texture, unfailing cues, etc. Contrariwise, colleagues of "Doc Brown" (Sorry, i could not resist, but he HATED when his pupils were too lazy to say his full title and name^^) admitted that they [e.g., Simon Streatfield, principal viola of the LSO before leaving to form the core of St. Martin-in-the-Slough and then eventually a conductor himself] testified that they never looked at the podium when characters like Beecham were stick-waving. "What an indictment", Dr. H. L.-B. would say. Anyway, today is the 103rd anniversary of his (the good doctor's) birth, but he retired from playing at the end of the season of his 70th birthday, continued teaching until he was 97, and finally passed aged 98 in the aforementioned year 2017. The likes of him will likely never be seen again, and i still kick myself for not learning more about his remarkable career. Kick myself for this neglect of the Sforzando, i must...^^
@@colinwrubleski7627 An audience once greeted Beecham with complete silence. He glanced at it for a moment, then turned to the orchestra and said: 'Let us pray.'
I wonder about Karajan and early digital: both Parsifal and the 9th sound excellent.
Some did, some didn't, although the Parsifal was not admired for its sonics.
@@DavesClassicalGuide Although it did make use of some snazzier bell sounds than one finds in one's usual Knappertsbusch Bayreuth Bühnenweihfestspiel/Rheinland Pfaltz (every German name sounds funnier when "Rheinland Pfaltz" is attached). That Parsifal has two things going for it besides the string sonorities: Kurt Moll and Jose van Dam.
@@michaelmasiello6752 Agreed. Interestingly, both Moll and van Dam had beautiful, sonorous voices, which complemented the strings perfectly :)
Listening to Karajan's Schumann cycle is like using toothpaste without water, and I agree with the other assessments as well. I also dislike his recordings of Mozart's Requiem and the Coronation Mass from the 80's. They sound a lot more like Karajan than Mozart. On the other hand Karajan's very best recordings are among the best anyone has ever made. It is essential to acknowledge both the flops as well as the peaks, and I'm glad you're doing just that.
😂 toothpaste without water
Hey I use toothpaste without water…
Toothpaste without water. Hmmm. Pretty apt. Its what I don't like about HVK. Smooshy, all corners are sanded off.
Karajan is music without corners. The edges were rounded off. Strangely, he was great in Italian opera!
Simon Rattle said pretty much the same.
That is just as I hear his work, as if he wanted everything from Vivaldi to the present to sound like Richard Strauss, but he was a great opera conductor.
@@kennethwayne6857 I know there are many Rattle- haters here, to which I do not subscribe. He wanted the Berlin Phil. to sound French in Debussy, Russian in Shostakovich, English in Elgar etc, and this, added to his desire to bring new music into their repertoire, was an important reason for his appointment.
@@Horichdaslicht1858 I'm not a Rattle-hater. I admire him in many types of music, particularly Mahler and Bernstein.
@douglasbateman9075 i like Rattle. His style in interviews is a little overheated, but his is a fine musician. Berlin would have ground him into a fine powder if he weren't.
Many years ago, Karajan praised the work Rattle was doing in Birmingham, in an interview on the BBC. He inferred Rattle was 'the kind of conductor who would succeed in Berlin' in the future.
I sooo agree on Haitink (and most of the stuff you're saying). And Gergiev...
I grew up on Lenny's NY Phil Nielsen 4, which always sounded shrill and ugly to me. I bought the Karajan recording when it came out, and honestly, I don't remember almost anything about it, except that it was less ugly than Lenny's, which sounded like it had a high school marching band in places with blaring brass and shrieking piccolos.
I think Nielsen is one of the very hardest composers to get the music to sound. He writes thick string textures like Bruckner, but has his heavily doubled forces play extremely difficult rhythms. It's just brutal. Don't get me wrong. I love Nielsen, but damn, it's hard to play well.
Bernstein's performance is awful too.
The only Nielsen played by the Thailand Philharmonic Orchestra was the 6th symphony, done in two different seasons, with the same conductor (name hidden to protect the guilty...!^^) and actually sounding worse the second time around. As to its extreme technical difficulty, though, this violist / violinist hybrid can well testify that such is the case. Some of the variations in the last movement are pushing the string players to terribly-difficult feats of execution...
@@DavesClassicalGuide It's interesting that his 4th was so bad, while his 3rd was so good. (Yes, they're very different symphonies; but still...)
I love Karajans Nielsen 4. Yes it doesn’t sound like Nielsen. Yes the sound is bad. And yes the tympani volleys in movement 4 are wretchedly underplayed. Yes it is slow. The selling point is the magnificent orchestral playing.. Martinons famous CSO brass sound like dogs compared to the BPO ( relatively speaking of course) Karajan didn’t like woodwinds? Listen to movement 2 for some of the most exquisite wind playing on record. Slow tempi give the climaxes majesty and splendour, and the tempi aren’t that slow. 3rd movement sounds weird, but heck, it is one hell of a weird piece😀 . Rumour has it that Karajan also recorded symphony no. 5, but sadly It wasn’t released. Would probably have made your list😀
The orchestral playing is horrible. That's the main problem.
i really love his pastoral i do - i'd love to know where he said he hated it its interesting
It's a bit boring to me. You can't really point out why but it just is. But still, my favorite conductor, a total chad.
@@vjekop932
you know i think he just paces everything perfectly. i find it hard to listen to anyone elses beethoven 7th movement 1 for the same reason. but hey ho what can you do
I really like Karajan's Pastoral from 1963 Beethoven cycle too - it has the sense of urgency, which a few other performances miss - for example Klemperer or Bohm take movements 1 and 2 too relaxed, too open-ended for me. The strings push forward with the music, the dynamic range is big, that's how I like this symphony, but it's a matter of what you want to hear.
Very interesting!
Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Myself, I am keeping von Karajan's Hadyn's Creation and the Beethoven violin concerto with Ferras, among a few others. But in most cases I find that his personality or his huge ego overwhelmed any sense of duty he had to the composer. Szell and Toscanini, two conductors with big egos, could be faithful to the intent of the composer, but his was a constant struggle with himself. You once mentioned how good his Tapiola was and I relented and bought one of his recordings of it and the second cut was the Swan Of Tuonela. Well, you could barely hear the English horn over the strings. How did they even record it like that? The shimmering waters of that lake nearly drowned the poor swan, which didn't have that long to live. How could he have thought that this made sense?
Was that the DG recording? I think HvK's later EMI recordings are generally better.
@@ThreadBomb They were both DG.
@@bigalfactotum9935 I haven't listened to it in a while, but it is overall a wonderful piece of music. It makes you happy.
I prefer Karajan's Philharmonia & his early 1960s Vienna recordings. In these he benefited from powerful producers looking over his shoulder. In his later Berlin recordings he's almost a caricature of himself.
I agree. That's how it sounds. And, based on all I've read, that apparently was exactly the case.
To the list of ten that you mentioned, I would also put in a kind word for his best Sibelius; it is distinctive and to my ears reveals a deep respect and sympathy for the composer (even though I prefer Davis/Boston, Ormandy and Blomstedt.)
I absolutely love his recording of Sibelius’s 4th. The great, despairing sweep of the third movement especially, is, imho, without compare. I’ve worn out two CDs already….
If this is a list of his worst recordings then it's a bit of a statement on his overall achievement: most conductors' worst recordings are more outrageously repellent than these; and for some of them, like the Nielsen, there is at least something that stands outside the mainstream recommended performances that makes them worth listening to. So for me the Nielsen, like his 1975 Rite of Spring, is a good "third version."
Can we talk someday about Karajan's absolutely awful performances of baroque music? One thing is not being interested in HIP practices, and another entirely different thing is not even try to minimally bother with phrasing, dynamics, counterpoint, affect or anything that made musical sense. His Vivaldi was already bloated, plain and dismal, but his Bach was so slow and dirgy he made Klemperer's Passion to sound almost like a party. With his trademark BPO lusty sound, anything baroque sounded just like dentist-waiting-room relaxing muzak, and boring, featureless muzak at all.
What else is there to talk about? Looks like you said it.
No Bach on this list? The only good thing I can say about his 1950s B-minor Mass is that the 1970s version is even worse. Back in the late 1950s, Denis Stevens wrote: "Karajan might not be your ideal Bach conductor, but he can hypontise you into thinking that he is". That might be true in more than just Bach -- but nonetheless, Bach was a composer whom Karrajan was usually quite dreadful at. For one thing, he seemed to have no sense of polyphony whatsoever.
True.
I expected one of Karajan's baroque recordings to be on this list. His 1960s Bach Brandenburg concertos are almost comically unidiomatic. The harpsichord is dwarfed by the huge string section in the 5th concerto. Transverse flutes instead of recorders sound out of place in the 2nd and 4th concertos. In the 6th concerto he managed to create a performance with no texture, smooth as melted chocolate.
Bach's Brandenburg Concertos are completely unsuited to full modern orchestras. Modern chamber orchestras can do well (think of Britten, who is not a baroque specialist). The Berlin Philharmonic? No! The Chicago Symphony? No! The Concertgebouw? No! The Vienna Philharmonic? No!
That's a great description of his 6th! Mind you, I have a certain affection for Herbie's 1960s Brandenburgs, as they were the first LPs of those works I owned, and I played them to death! They've aged badly, of course.
The Polonaise/minuet from the 1st Brandenberg is ridiculously slow even judged by the standards ( ie. not so informed about tempo and instrumental forces ) of the time.
Don't think the Nielsen deserves to be in this company. It's certainly kind of weird but I find it strangely enjoyable on (rare) occasions. For me, Karajan's worst recording is his digital Missa Solemnis, and his Mahler 4 is pretty terrible: at the climax of the slow movement there is ... no climax, but a strange kind of sonic fuzz .
How about a list of the 10 best "LIVE" single performance recordings.
Love these debunking presentations, David. I would find a place for Grieg's Holberg Suite somewhere, perhaps in the Ten Worst. I can remember how shocked I was by the unmusical sluggishness, utter turgidity, of the first movement when I first heard it. It was then that I realised that Karajan was way past his used-by date, but that DG management hadn't realised it yet. Love your presentations and have recommended them to many friends here in Sydney, who are now big fans too.
Thank you!
I often wonder what Karajan would have made of the Elgar symphonies, had he recorded them.
I choked on coffee at "those pipes were designed by Pratt and Whitney" indeed yes!
Your criticisms of the five "worst" Karajan recorings are just, insofar as you provide solid evidence for your claims. Why, then, do I enjoy four out of these five recordings so much, particularly Karajan's Schumann 2 and Nielsen 4? Why do I resonate with those glutinous textures and slithery strings? Ironically, I just bought Karajan's Saint-Saens Organ Symphony (because I wanted a better sounding recording than the one in my collection); and this one, I agree, is simply appalling, not just because the Notre-Dame organ in full cry sounds like an orchestra of kazoos on steroids, but even more because the engineers (at H v K's behest?) kept the organ sonority so muted everywhere else, its presence hardly tells. That may be a blessing in disguise, but in the slow movement it's nearly inaudible, and and finale needs those interjections to keep tension from sagging. I wonder if Karajan disliked organs because after all they are wind instruments?
Agree with you on Karajan's Tchaikovsky, it really is very good. Also agree on his weaknesses. Simon Rattle must have used the same agent.
I agree with you about all these recordings, and I might add another one, but in the overrated Category. I have never understood why most people swear over his EMI Rosenkavalier. For me, it's not bad, but it is in no way THAT good. I think time has passed quite badly over this recording, and others like Solti, the Kleiber family, or Karajan himself in Salzburg 1960, are much better, but perhaps it's only me.
I would add to your list his horrible Schubert's Great C Mejor symphony.
Old Karajan refused to admit that he couldn't hear high frequencies as clearly as Young or Middle-Aged Karajan. It happens to all of us.
He boosted the highs on his digital recordings until they sounded right to him.
Hence the shrillness attributed to the early DDD process was largely undeserved.
Interesting observation.
That may explain something. It was with the Karajan Schumanns that I first noticed a change in DGG recordings. For my taste at least, his mid-60s lps sounded excellent, particularly his Sibelius symphonies. The Schumann set is excessively bright and airless, as are most of Karajan's DGGs thereafter. Pablo's observations in his post above are also relevant. Altogether, you have to wonder how much is due to the conductor and how much to recording engineers.
"Those pipes were designed by Pratt & Whitney..." - LoL!!
Maybe Dave's best line ever!
One of von K’s oddities was his choice of singers: the glassy, hard-toned and strained Janowitz, the bass-baritone van Dam for Sarastro, Freni and Carreras for Aida and Radames etc etc.
I'm always amazed that he managed to miscast almost all the leads in his Ring cycle with (1) Dietrich Fischer-Dieskau as Wotan, (2) Régine Crespin as Brünnhilde, and (3) Jess Thomas as Siegfried (the second half of his "so schneidet Siegfrieds Schwert" just disappears).
Freni, Carreras, Janowitz, Dernesh--Karajan led more than one singer astray.
@@johnrichmond1495 Absolutely - He wanted Elizabeth Harwood to sing Tosca but she flatly refused. Perhaps his bruising encounter with Birgit Nilsson had something to do with it.
Karajan had previously tried to get Fischer-Dieskau to sing Sigmund! Can you imagine?
Almost every singer sounded their worst under HvK, straining to be heard over the orchestra in roles that had been written for much larger and heavier voices.
Fundamentally, HvK just didn't understand voices. He prized a smoothness and purity above all else, and thought that smaller, lighter voices would give him that. But smoothness of line, and beauty and purity of tone, can NEVER be produced by a singer who is "in over their head", stuck in a role too big for them and struggling just to be heard and to fill out and sustain the musical line in the first place. These things can only be achieved by a singer who's singing comfortably, well within his or her natural resources.
So HvK's consistent under-casting made impossible the very thing he had hoped to achieve by that under-casting.
Karajan deigned to the Dane, huh?
Ha, I like a lot of Karajan.... but yes, the EMI Mathis der Mahler is not a great recording, so many better ones. Leonard Bernstein's, for example (pretty much a contemporary to Karajan), is much better.
I'm no music officianado but I know when something sounds wrong and when Karajan goes his own way, I think you can tell. I bought the not too cheap Decca recording of his Madama Butterfly with Pavarotti/ Freni and to this day I am unable to listen to it! It's slow and lumbering and awful! My sister in law can't stand it, either! Stick it on 45 and it might sound better. Sorry if it's in your HvK favourites. Cheers 🇬🇧
That's your prerogative.
@@DavesClassicalGuide Indeed. Thx for the reply. I do have Karajan recordings I like, especially his 84 version (among others I have) of Sibelius 'Tapiola'
The other stinker is the string sound in the Also Sprach Zarathustra of the 80s. It is shockingly horrible sounding.
A lot of very good points in here, particularly on what's wrong with Karajan's German Requiem or Beethoven Fidelio or Missa Solemnis - he doesn't do 'humanist'. When he tries to do that it just sounds fake.
Two comments. One is, I think you're wrong to be surprised when Karajan does 'savage' or 'intense' or 'violent' or 'brutal' or 'nasty'. I think this was a part of his personality, and it comes out in lots of places, including in things like the Verdi Trovatore. It doesn't come out consistently, I agree, but it's too often to be an exception to the rule.
The second is, I think recorded sound has a part to play in all of this. Given how manufactured Karajan's recordings were, I think it's perfectly right to judge them on this, but as an example, that very reverberant sound in the Berlin Jesus-Christus-Kirche in the early 1970s contributes to the special gloopiness of many of those recordings. Sometimes the best of Karajan's many efforts is just the one with the most clear and balanced and natural recording.
I agree on all points.
David - You'll be relieved to hear that the organ of Nôtre Dame survived the fire! It's at the other end of the church from the spire. Just a light sprinkling of dust! It'll be right as rain.
So people have said. Drat. What's a good fire for?
If this were about Karajan's six worst recordings, I would additionally nominate his Bruckner cycle, certainly one of the most consistently overrated symphony cycles in existence. Totally dull, lifeless, homogenized readings with often substandard playing from the Berlin Philharmonic. Why this abominable cycle is often praised to the skies and considered a sort of Rosetta stone by many totally mystifies me.
Whenever Karajan made an opera recording, they always sounded like he was conducting through molasses. Everything was slow and meandering.
His Turandot should have been retitled Slow Boat To China.
Am disappointed you missed out the most revolting Karajan recording: his first Stravinsky le sacre recording
Tempo de Hoochie Coochie? :) :)
I recently snapped the Nielsen 4th in a second hand store thinking:
"Wow At last I've got IT!"
After listening I thought:
"Good that I got it that cheap!"
My experience, too. I was getting a secondary collection for on-road use, and Nielsen was the last gap. Karajan-- so it should be adequate? I've heard plenty of late-romantic works that he conducted very well, including such contemporaries as Mahler and Sibelius.
Maybe he should have reied his hand on Mahler #1, Rachmaninov #2, or Shostakovich #5 instead. He just didn't "get" Nielsen, and nobody else on contract for DG wanted to touch it.
That we did not get to hear a Sjostakovitj 5 from Karajan is a great miss in my opinion, and I tend to imagine that he would have achieved something better with Nielsens 3rd or 5th symphony @@paulbrower3297but that's all contrafactual thinking...
And you actually were nice, and left out a number of other bad ones…
It's the holiday season...
As confirmed Karajan fan (heard him a number of time live in Berlin.. great concerts…) I can nevertheless add these further recorded misfires: Sibelius 2 (finale), Schubert 8 ( 2nd mvt, EMI recording), ANY slow movement from a Mozart Symphony, not to mention all the Brandenburgs… gotta say though, his batting average was pretty great… cheers David, and thanks for all you do!
In other words, Karajan turned Nielsen's Inextiguishable Symphony into the Indistiguishable Symphony. 📯
Suggestion: more repertoire-centric videos and less conductor-centric ones? You’ve been doing a lot of the latter recently, but I find the former much more interesting. Then again, I’m probably in the minority in that regard.
Tell you what--go back and count the 900+ videos I have done so far and let me know how many are "repertoire-centric," then we'll see about your suggestion.
@@DavesClassicalGuide fair enough. All I’m saying is that I’ve seen a trend towards conductor-centric videos recently. But I know many people enjoy these, so I guess I can’t blame you!
@@kylejohnson8877 I started doing more artist-based videos because the entire focus up till now has been repertoire based, and as you say, people enjoy them.
@@DavesClassicalGuide I’ve never understood the hype and cult mentality surrounding some conductors. For me, it’s the playing of the orchestra and, above all, the *music itself* that matters.
@@kylejohnson8877 I agree with you.
"Never mind the music; listen to my orchestra!"
Preferred your videos before you had to start peddling t-shirts and subscriptions.
Of course you did. Everyone wants to get something for nothing. Feel free to stop watching them at your convenience.
Apparently Karajan had a big ego. When you see his CZcams performances the camera is mostly on him and him only.
and he was the director.
@@johnfowler7660 Karajan was not only the director, but he owned the production/distribution company too! His videos are all Karajan in the Karajanverse
Doesn't hold true for the Tchaikovsky Piano Concerto with Alexis Weissenberg as soloist. Perhaps it's a tad over-choreographed but this is incredibly imaginative and certainly doesn't look as if from the late 1960s!
Because he was the conductor...
@@adrianosbrandao Karajanverse, lol!
As bad as Karajan's conducting, his piano playing is even worse.
So I broke into the Palace with a sponge and a rusty spanner; She said, "I know, and you cannot sing." I said, "That's nothing, you should hear me play piano"
@@Sean-zx8uy Spot on! God save the Queen.
Karajan was a great manager. He built an empire (DG). But as a conductor, there are many better than him.