Review: The WORST Stravinsky Rite of Spring
Вставка
- Опубліковано 28 тра 2020
- OK, I'll reveal the surprise: it's the Gergiev/Mariinsky version, formerly on Philips. Since it's in the big Rite of Spring 100th Anniversary Box with dozens of other versions, you can make easy comparisons to confirm just how lousy it really is.
Thank you for another very educational video. It is a great idea to present what the worst perfomance of a piece is and to explain the criteria, thus making clear, how it shouldn't b done.
Thank you! I had the opportunity to hear Gergiev/Mariinsky play the Rite in 2000 right before they made this recording and, to me, the recording is not that far off from the actual sound of the orchestra. It was huge and dark back then. Nowadays the orchestra's sound has tamed quite a bit.
The Gergiev/Kirov Orchestra performance struck me as raw and brutal, closer to the tank battle you alluded to in your best video. I found the recording values wanting, but still enjoyed the unusual, if primitive performance. I thank you for pointing me away from this to the Riccardo Chailly/Cleveland Orchestra performance. Much better recording technique and superb performance. Also greatly enjoyed the Ančerl/Czech Philharmonic Orchestra performance. Thank you. Wish I had the redbook CD's you have at hand. Some difficult to find on Qobuz.
Alas! I have not heard that version.After your savage review I am not particularly inspired to listen to it, although I will eventually do so since a friend has the box. I'm still waiting for the ultimate version played by dinosaurs.
I've seen Gergiev many times when he was the conductor of the Rotterdam Philharmonic and he could be fantastic and inspirational but also dull and uninterested (when he buried his head in the score you knew enough). He just conducts too much (poor Mariinsky players i sometimes thought, travelling from one country to another). I first saw him making his debut in the Netherlands in the 80s, he was practically unknown in the west and it was sensational, you knew he was something special, and afterwards he became a regular, these were great saturday matinees, he did lots of russian operas and introduced many Mariinsky (Kirov as the Mariinsky was then known) singers. But he has become a little bit lazy, repertoire wise, and more obsessed with statistics about the amount of concerts he gives. I aways wondered why he never did the Ilya Murometz symphony, it would suit him perfectly, it's a wonderful piece. Maybe something for a video?
Possibly. I enjoy the work!
Disney was sued by Boosey and Hawkes in 1992 over the use of "Rite of Spring" for home video release of "Fantasia". The suit is similar to Peggy Lee suing for royalties for her work in "Lady and the Tramp" when that movie was released on home video. I don't know how the case was settled but you can read about it in "Who Owns the Rights to Rite" in the NY Times.
My main experience of Gergiev is his Prokofiev recordings. His Alexander Nevsky was a mess and a bore, his symphony cycle was mostly a write-off except for the 2nd symphony, which benefited from clear recording and accurate playing (something this difficult work rarely gets). His disc of Ivan the Terrible was terrific! So I would say he can rouse an orchestra but is no good with structure. My other memory of Gergiev is a video of a conducting "master class" in which he went on at length about a young conductor needing to tuck his elbows in more, as if it would make any difference to the sound.
David, could you show us your hifi listening system?
I have more than one and don't care to discuss them.
I'm not sure if that was the box I once had in my hands on (if there was a 38-CD box with 76 recordings of Le Sacre, thern it was that one) and was thinking of buying it. Instead, I came across a Leonard Cohen box with his first 11 LPs (he subsequently whispered through another one) and bought that for around the same price, ca. 40 euros. If I remember correctly, I attended a performance of Prokofiev's War and Peace conducted by Gergiev, at the
Teatro Real in Madrid around the turn of the century. The War sectrion after the intermission was quite powerful. My doubt is whether it was Gergiev conducting. I know I caught him live once or twice back then.
My guess - and it's only a guess - is that Gergiev tried to form an 'interpretaton' by sitting with the Philips engineers and turning lots of knobs, a la Stokowski (but without Stokowski's usual success at knob turning).
I generally agree with you about this recording. I also think that the early versions of the sacrificial dance (Monteux, Ansermet, Stokowski) were pretty bad, until Ancerl showed them how to to do it.
Sounds about right to me.
Who has the disposable income to buy a twenty cd box of one composition?
I guess that's why it was a limited edition.
Don't know how I missed it but in 2013, I would have made the sacrifice so to speak.
People from Washington DC and the surrounding counties
Regarding that box set, I quite literally laughed out loud during the 1950 Ansermet/Suisse Romande recording that is on CD 1. Talk about a clam fest. And some of the most unusual tempi and phrasing choices I've ever heard. I'm not a huge Gergiev fan per se, so I'll take your word on his version. But I would venture to say that there are more bad recordings of this work than there are good ones in this box set.
Would this preformance be fair to start a riot over like the works premiere?
That box is completely insane. Interesting to hear your assessment of the Gergiev. The Radio 3 guys and the gramophone guys rated this as one of the very best versions - so I bought it. I am going to have to listen to it again now, against the others I have (Boulez, Rattle).
Oh my, it's such a mess. If you have a score have a look--you won't believe how inaccurate and careless the whole thing is.
Yes, I must disagree with Mr. Hurwitz; the performance is terrific, even if it's not the epitome of technical perfection. 2906nico, I'd be interested to hear your conclusions.
EDIT: The version I've got specifies the Kirov Orchestra, not Mariinsky. Perhaps Gergiev recorded the Stravinsky twice?
@@bcarr1122 Yes, there a number of Gergiev recordings that appear to be duplicated - the Nutcracker is available in two recordings, one from the Kirov and one from the Mariinsky. I think these are two names for the same orchestra, so I'm not sure why the recordings are marketed under different names.
I've listened again to the Gergiev Rite (on Phillips, listed as Kirov) and, whilst Mr H is right about faithfulness to the score, in some places, as far as I can see (not being a very fluent score reader), I can't deny that this is a very satisfying performance in its own way. But I'm not a critic either, so I can't speak with any authority. It's one of those pieces that I think one can have several recordings of - although not twenty! - and get different things from each of them.
@@2906nico Mariinsky is the original name. Under communism it was changed to the Kirov. After the fall of the USSR it was changed back, but the Kirov name continued to be used because it was better-known in the west than Mariinsky.
Too bad I mentioned Gergiev in your first video. I respect your opinion, thanks!!
No, it isn't. You have a right like what you wish; you may or may not care about the same things that I do; and you may or may not have enough experience of the work to judge--in other words, you should like what you like and to hell with anyone else. Your opinion may change over time or it may not. This is all just entertainment, and you were entertained. So fair enough.
@@SCHEPPEL It's the Philips recording (now Decca). That's the easier way to think about it.
Dear Mr Hurwitz: I had always wanted to ask this question of knowledgeable critics/reviewers such as yourselves. Why should we expect conductors to have huge repertoire? Pianists dont, vocalists (singers) certainly do not. My take on the spate of horrendous recordings (interpretations (i am not too particular abut sound!)) is that the conductors expand repertoire because "it is there". Mountaineers climb Mt Everest because it is there and a huge number of them do not make it. But they at least do this for private welfare. When conductors try this philosophy and conduct everything they create public nuisance. Oh by the way i was one of those that ought this box! Tried giving this away to my father and he spoke to me in Sanskrit!. Fantastic post. Warmly. Hari
A very interesting question! The "generalist conductor" is a relatively modern phenomenon, and I think you're right to say that many (if not most) aren't always very good at it. It's simply expected that with today's large, full-time orchestras, the repertoire will be chosen broadly to provide variety. Also, you say, for example, the pianists, violinists, and singers don't have a large repertoire, but that is not really true. It depends on the artist, and a pianist, for example, will not only be expected to play solo works, but also concertos and chamber music as well. So even in a pianist limits their repertoire to, say, the German school of Beethoven and Brahms, that's still a huge amount of music. Think about that. And conductors have to play not just major international orchestral works spanning more than two centuries, they have to accompany all of those pianists, violinists, and singers. So the conductor always had to be more of a generalist if only because he or she will be working with all of those other artists, and the amount of music they have to know quickly adds up! I hope that this answers your question.
Mr. Hurwitz: Many thanks. The point about providing variety and having to accompany the soloists is hugely interesting. I had not thought of it this way. A pianist can hugely minimize this is it not? One could be a colorotura soprano or a "heldentenor"? And add to this the record companies expect the conductors to do a Beethoven or a Brahms cycle and market it as the greatest ever. I suspect that as a result conductors cannot refuse to conduct Bruckner or Mahler because they just have no feel for it or quite simply do not like the music (i am yet to come across Mravinsky conducting the Rite of Spring). So there you go. Complete menace. Warmly. Hari
@@DavesClassicalGuide I'm just discovering the wonderful voice of Fritz Wunderlich (I used to think he was some kind of matinee idol), and he certainly sang everything imaginable, even embarking on Wagner, which would have ruined him. But his high Cs in Italian opera, sung in German, are perhaps his weak spot.
Gergiev is ok for the Tchaikovsky operas. But I once sat through his Götterdämmerung in the Ueno hall in Tokyo. The cast were dressed either as mushrooms or in evening dress. The language was nominally German but sounded more like some unknown dialect of Russian. Gergiev went off to London then and played the whole Ring and all the Mahler symphonies. A critic judged: "Anyone involved in these performances should be deeply ashamed of themselves."
Ah ah ah :D you know that the first time I heard this recording of Gergiev's Rite of Spring coupled with Scriabin, I really liked it for the raw savagery and for the chaos that orchestra and conductor create?! No, the worst isn't this, or Karajan either...give a shot to Fedoseyev and Moscow Radio Symphony on Melodya, too much slow and awful, or listen to the first recording of Rite by Boulez with O.R.T.F. orchestra...simply icy. These are really dreadful performances...
Ah, yes, Fedoseyev often was the very definition of "slapdash". However, when he was on fire the results were astounding - try his Taneyev 2nd to get some idea. However, that was a bit like following a rubbish football team for an entire season: there's going to be that one great game, but all the others will be disasters.
@@bomcabedal Thanks for the Taneyev recommendation - I'm listening to it now!
ua-cam.com/video/99OWoUHo3ag/v-deo.html
@@ThreadBomb Oh it has a great sweep!
It’s weird for me because I think you’re totally right about the performance, it basically is horrible yet it’s sort a “so bad it’s good” so I put it on once in a while
Well, I hear you, but don't say "so bad it's good," say "so bad it's interesting." That I'll grant you!
Dave, when this recording was released in 2001 it got rave reviews from all of the critics except you. How could all of them be so wrong?
They either (a) didn't know the work or (b) didn't listen to this version or (c) didn't care or (d) some combination of these. Happily, I don't have to explain why they are a bunch of incompetent fools--I only report what I hear and make the necessary comparisons.
I have three copies of Antal Dorati - Mercury Living Presence LP's, one is the original pressing, another a later pressing of the same issue, and then the first reissue. I've really never been anything but disappointed with any other version. I guess I'm very emotionally involved with that recording.
Sounds like it!
Such an interesting post... I have always been surprised by the mixed feelings that Gergiev's recordings of the Rite provoke - they always sound clumsy, hugely imperfect, unsuccessfully original and with a too strong presence of the point of view of the conductor. But ... it seems this is the way Gergiev does things. Honestly, there are worse recordings worth mentioning. This particular recording is failed first by the recording engineers or it was from a live performance, then it is somewhat scattered. But is it degrading the experience? Definitely no. Boulez on the other hand ... well, he can be perfect technically and destroy it all for me.
Agreed! I'm stunned by Mr. Hurwitz's pronouncements. Perhaps the sonics aren't the best and the playing isn't perfect, but the music has a raw, propulsive intensity that's surely quite rare.
EDIT: The version I've got specifies the Kirov Orchestra, not Mariinsky. Perhaps Gergiev recorded the Stravinsky twice?
Worst one I've ever heard is Goosens on Everest records. I don't think it has ever been issued on CD (I sure hope not).
@HankDrake I'm afraid your hopes have been dashed. Goossens' Rite was released on an Everest CD paired with his Rachmaninov Symphonic Dances; out of print but still floating around. And also reissued on its own--and still in print--for $3.99 at Amazon. Enjoy!
@@TheCastlepoet That will be a hard pass on my part. :)
I once went to Rite's live performance of St Petersburg Philharmonia in Athens. I thought that a Russian orchestra would perform a Russian composer the way it's meant to be... my god that was the worst live orchestra performance I've ever heard. I think Russian musical institutions were taught to dislike anything modern and avant-garde during the soviet era so now it's kind of an unusual thing for an official Russian artist to deal with anything that has to do with contemporary styles.
I am HOLLERING at Gergiev’s Dance of the Earth…are you KIDDING ME?!?! 😂😂 literally just playing whatever you want whenever you want
Gergiev also did the absolute worst conducted Die Walküre of all time, right after a very interesting and compelling Parsifal. What's with this guy?
He's careless and often indifferent. I think he's distinctly second rate as often as not.
I thought it was difficult to find a worst performance than Karajan's!
I did just listen to Gergiev conducting LSO that had been uploaded onto UA-cam and.....well.....I wasn't impressed. One or two good 'bits' ( though short lived) but his choice of tempos was rather bizarre and didn't work for me. Quality of the recording was poor but it was only a UA-cam upload.
I have seen Gergiev actually conduct with a TOOTHPICK .His conducting style is all over the place! It's a wonder that the musicians in the orchestra can even follow him ?
I didn't know they did. 😀 (Actually, having read your post -- the first box Dave holds up looks a bit like Tooth ... Edition!)
NO!...the Tam-Tam player got lost? Say it isn't so... I just finished listening to Tools "Lateralus" and you tube algorithm suggested this... maybe you should give "Lateralus" a go... ride the spiral!
I wonder how many people here are both fans of Tool and of enough classical music to have watched this video? (Excuse me while I change out my Bernstein/Israel ROS disc for Lateralus now, I haven’t given that one a spin for too long of a time.)
I can't stand this work, but I assume Karajan gets a "dishonorable mention."
He deserves it.
@@DavesClassicalGuide What did Stravinsky say? Tempo di Hoochie Koochie?
@@HankDrake Supposedly regarding Karajan's first recording. The second was a Tempo di Samba.
Gergiev did the worst Shostakovich 4th I've ever heard. The way he handles the fugue in the first movement is extremely weak.
The way Gergiev did the 1st movement of Prokofiev's 2nd symphony (the video is on UA-cam btw) and the tempo is hilariously slow haha! Such a shame