I was truing to figure out what was my most impressive musical experience in just past year. After a little consideration and without naming the nominees I'm declaring the winner:

Brahms Symphony #4 by Sir John Barbirolli and Wiener Philharmoniker during thier “live” performance at Musikvereinssaal, December 1967.  This performance is practically not available now. It was released by a small Holland label (ROY 6435) with a mistaken information about the recording venue (the Hollandian Morons clamed that it was recorded at Abbey Road Studio #1 in 1990 or 20 years after Barbirolli was dead). There is no other known to me releases of this performance. It is also was available as LP by EMI ASD2433 (if someone would help me to find this record I would pay a lot of money)

Anyhow, this is an amassing performance, had and shoulders more interesting then any other Brahms #4 that I heard. The opening of the first movement Barbirolli dose something mind-bogglingly transcendent. I never hear anyone play Brahms this way and I hardly ever hear anyone do such hypnotizingly-fantastic thing with music.

The Cat

http://images-eu.amazon.com/images/P/B000027TGF.02.MZZZZZZZ.jpg

Yes the first movement is killer in that Brahms.

For Tchaikovsky’s 4, 5 and 6th the Leningrad/Mravinsky is altogether fine, especially the latest Japanese release of “The Originals”. The mono releases from mid 50s are better, and especially the 6th symphony

Still, here are some more interesting things in the Tchaikovsky’s last symphonies. Here are a few for start:

Sumphony #4: Kusevitsky/Boston 1949 (first movement)
Sumphony #5: Gergiev/ Vienna 1998 (first movement, big surprise!!!)
Sumphony #6: Kleiber/Paris Conservatory 1953, Masur/Leipzig 1987 (surprise)

The Cat

I share your happiness, although I only have the CD I can understand you, that 4th is wonderful.

Would you share with us what other recordings belong to that especial shelf? I'd love listening to them if they're as good as the Brahms'... or maybe better!.

Rgrds,
A

Stringreen wrote:

Have you heard Kent Negano's version?

For Beethoven, piano concerto's try Martha Argerich with Claudio Abaddo.

Consider Prokofiev's symphonies conducted by Gergiev with the LSO, if you like Russian music ... of course pretty much all of V. Gergiev's material is top notch.

Also worth your time (if you don't already have them) are Mozart's piano concertos by Geza Anda ... simply one of the best.  Alternatively you can try Barenboim or Perahia, but Anda rules.

Try some E. Satie when you get a chance, and skip the childish E. Thibodet ... try Pascal Roge for a deeper understanding of Satie's gymnopedies and gnossiemes.  My favorite.

yeah, Argerich and Abbado have a certain chemistry together ... I think they go way back, if I'm not mistaken they went to school together ... and I think Abbado did study the piano there as well.

Gergiev??? I enjoy his interpretations.  To me Russian music is not about joy and musicality (unless you specifically consider Tchaikovsky), but instead it tends to portray the bleak and tragic history of that nation and the iron will that was forged through it.  I find Gergiev's interpretations of Shostakovich 5th and 9th are very much in sync with that era.  The recent Prokofiev release is also quite good.  There is a release of Verdi's Requiem with him conducting.... which features Bocelli ... so that's a total write off unfortunately.  The best piece (by far) is his rendition of Sheherezade ... in typical Gergiev fashion ... grave, dynamic impact with iron-like control, yet musical and subtle with finesse when called for.  I think it is very hard to balance those elements and right now nobody does it better than Gergiev.  Just my personal opinion.

Any suggestions are always welcome.

amperidian wrote:

…in typical Gergiev fashion ... grave, dynamic impact with iron-like control, yet musical and subtle with finesse when called for.  I think it is very hard to balance those elements and right now nobody does it better than Gergiev.

Amperidian, sure I know where you are coming from and I do admit that Gergiev has some interesting recordings (like anyone else). He is unquestionably is a world class conductor but my “issues” with him that for whatever reasons his dynamic and enunciated play is not necessary sound rights to me. I might appreciate what he is trying to do but I very frequently do not appreciate hot it turn out to sound. His inflections sound in many occasions artificial and too-simulated. They are affective but they called attention to themselves creating “micro-process for the sake of the possess themselves”. It gives me some thrill and listening “kick” but it is not the feeling that I’m looking for in musicality.  Gergiev play is great for encores or for Boston Pops for showpieces but not necessarily for the rest music.

Sure I very much generalize and perhaps in the area where I should not generalize but this is general feeling that I have about Gergiev. BTW, for whatever reasons I more appreciate Gergiev as opera (not with Russian cast though – they have no good singer nowadays) or accompaniment connector, where the Gergiev-things are diluted by none-Gergiev-things…

amperidian wrote:

Speaking of impressive technical skill ... I just listened to Cecilia Bartoli's Vivaldi Album released under decca label.  Although very proficient in the technical area, to me it sounds very much like she is missing the whole point of Vivaldi's music.

Interning, I have the very similar feelings about Bartoli. I own quite a number of her recordings and was twice of her recitals. The techniques she demonstrates were nothing short of unparalleled. However, while I was sitting at the concert and I hardly felt it was musical – it was rather an operatic freak show. I kind of get her  since then as  a "very dry dramatically" – good for tweeters time ailment only. Of curse I am kidding, Ms. Bartoli know what she does and she is perfectly capable to do the “musical things” but in any joke there is juts a fraction of joke….