Conductors you trust, and ones you don’t

[Tony L]

Its OK, I prefer Bach on a synthesizer. (Partially joking, Bach is one composer I really struggle to like....)

Bach is the classical composer I connect with the most. To my mind it works the same way as jazz, electronica, minimalism etc. All about counterpoint, changing loops etc. I love it, and the more minimal the better, e.g. the solo piano, violin and cello stuff etc. By saying that most of my favourite classical is small scale, e.g. I far prefer Beethoven’s string quartets and piano sonatas to the symphonies.

 

[gustavm]

Bach is the classical composer I connect with the most. To my mind it works the same way as jazz, electronica, minimalism etc. All about counterpoint, changing loops etc. I love it, and the more minimal the better, e.g. the solo piano, violin and cello stuff etc. By saying that most of my favourite classical is small scale, e.g. I far prefer Beethoven’s string quartets and piano sonatas to the symphonies.

You'll get there. Most of us do...eventually.

I have tried over many years to like Bach. I thought I was maybe in a small minority among those who otherwise love classical music, but I was gratified recently to see an article by someone (Dave Hurwitz I think) who summarised very well exactly my feelings and reasons for not liking it. I think its largely about phrasing - to my ear, Bach's music just doesn't "breathe" in the way of music by other composers that I love (e.g. Mozart, Haydn and many more) The word I would use is relentless, or mechanical. Often I am immediately struck at the start of a piece by a sense of beauty and ascetic purity (e.g. the Well Tempered Clavier) but very quickly it then overloads the musical processing section of my brain, and I really can't bear to listen to it. Funnily enough some jazz arrangements of Bach work better for me because they do place more emphasis on phrasing.

But observing the extraordinary diversity of musical tastes, it suggests to me that what we individually seek and enjoy in music varies enormously.

 

[pianoman]

Yes we non-Bach lovers used to call it 'sewing-machine' music that was more fun for the performers than the listeners...I know that is sacrilege to Bach lovers but that's probably why I prefer say the keyboard stuff on a modern grand with romantic phrasing, or even better transcriptions from the likes of Busoni, Rachmaninov, or good old Stokowski and his big symphony orchestra

 

[gustavm]

Yes we non-Bach lovers used to call it 'sewing-machine' music that was more fun for the performers than the listeners...I know that is sacrilege to Bach lovers but that's probably why I prefer say the keyboard stuff on a modern grand with romantic phrasing, or even better transcriptions from the likes of Busoni, Rachmaninov, or good old Stokowski and his big symphony orchestra

I'm glad I'm not the only one. Mozart once said something to the effect "the music is not in the notes, but in the silences in-between". There don't seem to me to be many silences in Bach....

 

[Alex S]

Ironic: ‘Too many notes’ in Mozart as Salieri probably didn’t say.

 

[gingermrkettle]

Bach really can depend on the conductor. I don't like John Elliot Gardiner for that reason but Herreweghe in the B minor mass or St Matthew Passion is a completely different thing.

 

[kasperhauser]

I came to this thread hoping to learn how those in-the-know rated Mehta and Ozawa, as I have a fair bit of both. I suppose their absence means they run hot and cold(?).

 

[camverton]

I have tried over many years to like Bach. I thought I was maybe in a small minority among those who otherwise love classical music, but I was gratified recently to see an article by someone (Dave Hurwitz I think) who summarised very well exactly my feelings and reasons for not liking it. I think its largely about phrasing - to my ear, Bach's music just doesn't "breathe" in the way of music by other composers that I love (e.g. Mozart, Haydn and many more) The word I would use is relentless, or mechanical. Often I am immediately struck at the start of a piece by a sense of beauty and ascetic purity (e.g. the Well Tempered Clavier) but very quickly it then overloads the musical processing section of my brain, and I really can't bear to listen to it. Funnily enough some jazz arrangements of Bach work better for me because they do place more emphasis on phrasing.

But observing the extraordinary diversity of musical tastes, it suggests to me that what we individually seek and enjoy in music varies enormously.

Completely get what you’re saying. Up to about 7 or 8 years ago I liked the cello suites and admired the solo violin works but just couldn’t get the hang of any keyboard works. Then all of a sudden it twigged and now barely a day goes by without listening to Bach on piano and more recently even harpsichord! And to think I hated harpsichords. I always thought Bach too mathematical but now I find it completely at one with the world. Odd ly enough the more I listened to “modern” classical music the more I got Bach.

Funny enough two of my cats had a penchant for Bach in that when I played Bach they would come into the room and take up residence on my lap; I suppose there’s just something right about it. Certainly jazz bassists take to Bach, current favourite being Dieter Ilg.

Now then, conductors. Guilini, Abbado, Haitink, Boult and Britten almost always reliable and often inspired. Bernstein in a world of his own going from indulgent to out of this world within a bar. As for one I don’t particularly like it has to be Rattle although I have to admit he is rather good with Second Viennese and Thomas Ades.

 

[Alex S]

Haitink is reliable but I can nearly always find someone else more to my liking. Bohm is good.

 

[Tony L]

Haitink was my introduction to a lotof stuff, e.g. Mahler, so still my goto in many respects. I replaced quite a bit of fairly random vinyl with the big Philips Symphonies CD box that collects his various cycles for that label.

 

[Barrymagrec]

Haitink is always good, rarely the best, his Mahler 2 is excellent though, much better than Rattle and nearly as good as Klemperer.

In my opinion.....

 

[Tumeni Notes]

Haitink is always good, rarely the best, his Mahler 2 is excellent though, much better than Rattle and nearly as good as Klemperer.

In my opinion.....

OK, if we're getting into Mahler 2, dontcha feel we need more detail to say WHY a particular version is "excellent" .... ?

 

[Barrymagrec]

OK, if we're getting into Mahler 2, dontcha feel we need more detail to say WHY a particular version is "excellent" .... ?

Not specially, it`s just my opinion but for me it generally hinges around speeds and whether a performance feels "right".

Pretty nebulous eh?

 

[GavinA]

I came to this thread hoping to learn how those in-the-know rated Mehta and Ozawa, as I have a fair bit of both. I suppose their absence means they run hot and cold(?).

I don’t have much Mehta and he suffers from being the go to guy for big outdoor events with a star soprano. But I think his Turandot is the best I have heard.

 

[GavinA]

Two recent conductors not yet mentioned that I rate highly: Francois-Xavier Roth and his band Les Siecles and Ivan Fischer and the Budapest Festival Orchestra. In both cases excellent in their own national music, eg Ravel and Kodaly, respectively.

 

[Tony L]

Haitink is always good, rarely the best, his Mahler 2 is excellent though, much better than Rattle and nearly as good as Klemperer.

His 9th was what hooked me in. I found the vinyl on a market stall back in the early ‘80s. It was my introduction to the work and the closing section is just amazing in the way it just hangs there almost weightless yet massive. I’ve not heard another version I’ve preferred.

 

[Tumeni Notes]

Pretty nebulous eh?

Yup. Details, we need details. Especially on the scale of Mahler II. It's not like we're dealing with 90 seconds of The Ramones here .....






/S

 

[camverton]

Haitink is reliable but I can nearly always find someone else more to my liking. Bohm is good.

Back in the day when I lived at Elephant and Castle and walked to the South Bank Haitink and Solti were in residence. Solti’s excitement, particularly in Mahler was quite addictive but didn’t give lasting satisfaction. Haitink, whilst less exciting, revealed to me the inner depths of work. I suppose Bernstein could, at his best, do both at the same time but as is the way with tightrope walks could easily descend into crass or over indulgent.

I always liked Boult and then I went to his office in Wigmore Street to photograph him and liked him even more. In some ways he was of the same ilk as Haitink in that he could appear steady and unemotional but somehow that approach brought out the emotion in the music rather than the performance emotion of more flamboyant conductors.

One conductor I missed out previously was Colin Davis. He had a way of bringing Mozart alive, maybe helped by his consummate skills in conducting Tippet. Karajan is the conductor I wanted to hate, arrogant persona and polished sound, but he again brought an infectious lilt to Mozart and I haven’t heard a better recorded version of Prokofiev 5.

Oh, and then there is the fearsome Mravinksy. Those last three symphonies of Tchaikovsky and the way he accompanies Oistrakh in Shostakovich’s first violin concerto.

 

[camverton]

Yup. Details, we need details. Especially on the scale of Mahler II. It's not like we're dealing with 90 seconds of The Ramones here .....






/S

Not really. one could argue that if one can convert a great piece of music into words then that music - or performance is lacking. As the great photographer, Edward Weston, once said “If you could explain a Bach fugue then you would explain away its very reason for existence”.

 

[windhoek]

His 9th was what hooked me in. I found the vinyl on a market stall back in the early ‘80s. It was my introduction to the work and the closing section is just amazing in the way it just hangs there almost weightless yet massive. I’ve not heard another version I’ve preferred.

This is the version you're looking for: