And the funny thing is that if you read Gramophone, literally every release is like the second coming of Jesus. I tried one of their most celebrated cd's and it was promptly discarded..
I think it's the same story at Musicweb. I haven't read all their reviews of Wilson's releases, but multiple reviewers there unanimously praised his pretty dismal Respighi disc. I don't get it!
I doubt Gramophone actually listens to most of the discs they "review". Their modus operandi is to just "LOVE!" everything - because that sells magazines.
Dear Dave, Sometimes I totally disagree with your opinions, but I just listened to this recording in 5.0 surround sound, and I have to admit that you are right. It gave me none of the mystery, atmosphere, ecstasy, sensuality, and excitement that other performances gave me such as Levine/Boston, Monteux/London, Munch/Boston, Chung/Radio France, Dutoit/Montreal, Boulez/Berlin. The climaxes were dull. There was also a major balance problem with the chorus, The chorus was too heavily weighted to the left side of the "stage". Also, there was no depth to the soundstage even in 5.0 surround sound everything seemed close up yet there were details in the orchestration that were totally missing or barely audible, like the wind machine was barely audible, and the tam-tam non-existent, etc. And that sunrise sounded like it happened on an overcast morning. When it was over, I was so disappointed. Looking at the positive side, the recording had nice reverberation and bass response. 😉Ralph Cousens, you need to and have done much better than this.
Dave and the other: somebody knows about the son of Sanderling, Thomas Sanderling, which seems to have recorded al 4 symphonies around 1996 with the Philarmonia Orchestra ? Think it came out in Italy.
i somehow think bbc radio 3 record review critics will give this thumbs up some British folks will think you dislike British conductor s such as Wilson and Simon Rattle ?
Well, Dave, yet another British-Classical-Industrial-Complex critic - one Stephen Barber, by name, from MWI - mentioned your name (without mentioning it!) in regards to your dismissal of this thoroughly dismal and unlistenable rendition of Ravel's Daphnis. He concludes his frivolous and sophomoric review thusly: "This recording has been greeted with plaudits on many sides and brickbats from at least one. I am with the first group." Dave, when your "brickbat" shows signs of irreversible wear, I will personally buy you a new one! Your reviews have changed my listening-life BECAUSE you have chosen to beat the stuffing out of irrelevant recordings that richly deserve it. All the best! Mike D.
I have listened to this performance twice now and I don't know what to think of it. It certainly is different and I'll need some time with it. Wilson prepared a new edition of the score during the covid lockdown and I only have a copy of the Dover score so I am unable to listen and follow the score.
It doesn't matter. The bad bits have no justification in any score. Don't get suckered by the "new edition" BS that so often substitutes for interpretive vision.
I don't get suckered by fads, I just want to follow the correct score. I've listened to it a third time and it's growing on me. Things change and we must adjust our prejudices and change with them.@@DavesClassicalGuide
Here’s what confuses me-sometimes there seems to be two camps of music reviews, those who are drawn to what Dave has to say, and those who like Gramophone, which often at odds with each other. How can David Gutman conclude in Gramophone that this is the best Daphnis in a generation, and Dave decide it’s a waste of plastic?! For me, a listener without a deep musical background, such extreme divergence is unsettling.
I'll make it easy for you. Gutman has no idea what he's talking about! But seriously, I described quite clearly what bothered me, and those things were audible facts. If those facts would bother you as well, then you will agree with me. If you read Gutman's review and think the facts he describes (if any) appeal to you more, then go with him.
Dave, I appreciate your honest review, which has depth to it unlike the recording. Wilson seems to miss out on atmosphere and nuance in some of his recordings. Incidentally, he did a RVW Tallis Fantasia "live" on youtube that I enjoyed, but again, I didn't feel the deep mystical dimension so beautifully realized by Silvestri, Boult, Barbirolli, Stokowski, and (more quickly but deeply) Mitropoulos. I feel that one has to live a while with great pieces of music in order to gain deeper access into their depths. Thank you, Dave!
The dying, embarrassing Classical Court (courtesy Audio Asylum) is panning your review having clearly not watched it. One would think that Objectivity would be kryptonite to their Head-Patter in Chief, but no. And his sycophants are too weak to think for themselves.
This Album received a Gramophone this month so I had to listen to it after seeing this review on youtube. Well I couldn’t listen until the end. This has nothing to do with Ravel (I am French from Pays Basque). I immediately put Dutoit’s version on, but my preferences are still Monteux and Martinon. A fundamental question I have is how is it possible that professionals are getting it so wrong? I am talking about Wilson, but also the Gramophone person…
Just to note that John Wilson prepared his own edition of the score for this recording (doing so was his "Lockdown project") to correct numerous discrepancies between the published score, the manuscript score and the orchestral parts. This might explain some of the differences with what's in the Dover score (even the dynamics, as Wilson said some of those are different), although it certainly wouldn't explain all the problems Dave identifies with the performance (and is part of the problem that Mr Wilson just churns out too many recordings too quickly?). The November 2023 issue of The Magazine That No-one Likes has an interview with Wilson on his amendments to the published score and the reasons behind them.
Making something out of nothing. Everyone who knows the work knows that there are issues with the published score, and preparing a new edition doesn't mean that the differences are any greater than they normally would be from one performance to the next using older parts. The "I have a new score" PR only serves to suggest a spurious interpretive "authenticity" where, absent a great performance, none exists.
@@DavesClassicalGuide Showing a "Dover score" with hundreds a d hundreds of never-corrected original mistakes to support your argument is nothing but a sad intellectual sham!
I think in general John Wilson's recordings of musicals/'show music'/light music I've heard are estimable. But I've not enjoyed his forays into more complicated or 'serious' repertoire much at all. So I can't really imagine him tackling Daphnis and Chloe! I believe Dave. I'm happy to give this one a miss. Also, I think Gramophone can be 'useful' at times, but you always have to keep perspective that it's an Anglophile publication still, and they, ahem, seem to take 'care' of their advertisers. ;)
I heard this talked about on BBC's Record Review. They played some extracts, even from that I realised it's awful. It's a chorus of middle class dilettantes and an orchestra no better than a fine amateur band. I wonder what sort of ears these reviewers have.
Hahahaha. This is ultimate humiliation for conductor, Dave explaining and teaching him basic score reading. And even singing lines. This is hilarious. I hope Wilson will watch one day this craziness.
Daphnis has been one of my very favorite pieces for decades. I've listened to them all. Despite Wilson's extremely mixed output, I was rather excited to hear this one. I needn't have been. The sound is, as Dave mentioned, pretty lousy, unusually for Chandos. Ridiculous spot miking of, especially, the winds, showcasing the dry playing. The solo horn cracks multiple times. The ensemble playing is generally indifferent & lacking in the sensuousness & excitement the piece generates almost by default. It sounds like a runthrough by an orchestra unfamiliar with the work. After listening through once, I did A-B comparisons of the various sections the whole way through. My comparison was Abbado, whose recording is in my top ten, but not at my very peak. In literally every aspect, at every step of the way, Abbado was immeasurably superior, and the DG engineering was just right. I haven't listened to it yet since hearing Wilson's, but my recollection is that Tortelier, also on Chandos, was vastly better. So why did Chandos feel the need to duplicate their catalog? I don't know if this is the absolute worst Daphnis, but it's certainly in the running. A huge letdown.
without wanting to denigrate your words (I listened to this Daphnis yesterday, and yes, it is very different from the others) I was wondering if the "new approach" that several musicians and conductors apply to well-known music shocks us at this point where I wonder if we are so purist that from then on, when we go off the beaten track it makes us uncomfortable that NON-RESPECT for the notations of a score is not respected... .?.... since the dawn of time how many musicians have applied this ''rubato'' by speeding up or slowing down certain passages of a score. If this gives added value to a work, why deprive yourself of it .....? Can this new conception make a work evolve....? after all, if it gives an excellent result to our ears....and over the years, in 10 years, in 100 years in 1000 years, who says that a new design will not - on occasion_ give good results ....?
Not in this case. Garbage is as garbage sounds. There is always freedom for interpretation, but when a composer writes "fast" and the player read it as "slow," we have a problem. And there were many others besides, as I noted. Difference in and of itself has no value. Every performance is different from every other.
I have to say, nothing captures my curiosity more than David destroying an album in a review. I automatically download and listen the record with some sort of malignity. And man he never got it wrong so far!
I've only enjoyed Wilson when he's doing one of his Broadway show projects, especially at the Proms. Maybe he paid for this Daphnissery (Daphni-cide?) venture himself? Sad. Or should I say triste.
And this is the title of today's (5-star of course) review on the Guardian "generations will thank John Wilson for this glorious recording"..I guess that British understatement is gone, at least when it's about British conductors.
I have not heard this recording so I can't comment.John Wilson is another Simon Rattle he is treated like a god.The English think (I am English but don't agree) that people like these two can do no wrong.I have seen both and I do think they are overrated,it is the publicity which has got them where they are.John Wilson thinks he can do all sorts of music and get great acclaim.He may do best staying with musicals and light music and keep away from major classical composers especially symphonic works. He like rattle will always be overrated. The trouble is today music and the recording industry are run by people who no little or nothing about music but too much about money grabbing
Too much scholarship and not enough heart! The dynamic range is too wide, with the 'piano' sections just not registering. Decca used to lift those sections a couple of dB, just to keep everything ' front and centre' as their chief engineer 'Wilkie' used to say. I think the climaxes are still pretty impressive though, and the choir is terrific. I agree with Dave that the opening is way too fast!
Note to Simon Rattle and all future conductors: If you can't afford a chorus for Daphnis and Chloe, then don't schedule it! Its not worth it
Wow Dave, another hilarious comedy act - if ever I feel down I turn to your chanel and your nonsense always give my day a lift!!! Keep it up!
Boulez always did it wonderfully, utterly beautifully.
I can’t stop replaying 6:45. We don’t deserve you!
Haha Dave, someday in your honor I'll try to compose a little guitar piece called "Pancreas and Cilia"...lol.
I still enjoy my old RCA - Boston - Munch. Must have recorded this in the late 50’s.
He did it twice--1955-ish and 1962-ish.
And the funny thing is that if you read Gramophone, literally every release is like the second coming of Jesus. I tried one of their most celebrated cd's and it was promptly discarded..
Gramophone is an absolute joke.
I think it's the same story at Musicweb. I haven't read all their reviews of Wilson's releases, but multiple reviewers there unanimously praised his pretty dismal Respighi disc. I don't get it!
I doubt Gramophone actually listens to most of the discs they "review". Their modus operandi is to just "LOVE!" everything - because that sells magazines.
@@davidrowe1004 Well, they're doing their job well because I've spent thousands of dollars on substandard releases from Hyperion over the years, lol.
I completely agree with you about Gramophone their "reviews" are worthless. BBC radio 3 is the same.
Dear Dave, Sometimes I totally disagree with your opinions, but I just listened to this recording in 5.0 surround sound, and I have to admit that you are right. It gave me none of the mystery, atmosphere, ecstasy, sensuality, and excitement that other performances gave me such as Levine/Boston, Monteux/London, Munch/Boston, Chung/Radio France, Dutoit/Montreal, Boulez/Berlin. The climaxes were dull. There was also a major balance problem with the chorus, The chorus was too heavily weighted to the left side of the "stage". Also, there was no depth to the soundstage even in 5.0 surround sound everything seemed close up yet there were details in the orchestration that were totally missing or barely audible, like the wind machine was barely audible, and the tam-tam non-existent, etc. And that sunrise sounded like it happened on an overcast morning. When it was over, I was so disappointed. Looking at the positive side, the recording had nice reverberation and bass response. 😉Ralph Cousens, you need to and have done much better than this.
Dave and the other: somebody knows about the son of Sanderling, Thomas Sanderling, which seems to have recorded al 4 symphonies around 1996 with the Philarmonia Orchestra ? Think it came out in Italy.
i somehow think bbc radio 3 record review critics will give this thumbs up some British folks will think you dislike British conductor s such as Wilson and Simon Rattle ?
I like a large number of British conductors. Who cares about those two?
Well, Dave, yet another British-Classical-Industrial-Complex critic - one Stephen Barber, by name, from MWI - mentioned your name (without mentioning it!) in regards to your dismissal of this thoroughly dismal and unlistenable rendition of Ravel's Daphnis. He concludes his frivolous and sophomoric review thusly: "This recording has been greeted with plaudits on many sides and brickbats from at least one. I am with the first group." Dave, when your "brickbat" shows signs of irreversible wear, I will personally buy you a new one! Your reviews have changed my listening-life BECAUSE you have chosen to beat the stuffing out of irrelevant recordings that richly deserve it. All the best! Mike D.
Thank you. I try to keep my brickbats in good shape!
I have listened to this performance twice now and I don't know what to think of it. It certainly is different and I'll need some time with it. Wilson prepared a new edition of the score during the covid lockdown and I only have a copy of the Dover score so I am unable to listen and follow the score.
It doesn't matter. The bad bits have no justification in any score. Don't get suckered by the "new edition" BS that so often substitutes for interpretive vision.
I don't get suckered by fads, I just want to follow the correct score. I've listened to it a third time and it's growing on me. Things change and we must adjust our prejudices and change with them.@@DavesClassicalGuide
@@DavesClassicalGuide This comment is completely off topic and shows your total lack of knowledge!
Dave, might I recommend you review John Wilson's album of new contemporary works by Kenneth Fuchs.
Here’s what confuses me-sometimes there seems to be two camps of music reviews, those who are drawn to what Dave has to say, and those who like Gramophone, which often at odds with each other. How can David Gutman conclude in Gramophone that this is the best Daphnis in a generation, and Dave decide it’s a waste of plastic?! For me, a listener without a deep musical background, such extreme divergence is unsettling.
I'll make it easy for you. Gutman has no idea what he's talking about! But seriously, I described quite clearly what bothered me, and those things were audible facts. If those facts would bother you as well, then you will agree with me. If you read Gutman's review and think the facts he describes (if any) appeal to you more, then go with him.
"Sounds like some sort of digestive problem," is one of the greatest kiss-off review statements ever, lol.
Hahahaha. I 1000% agree. Dave as always sharp and honest.
Dave, I appreciate your honest review, which has depth to it unlike the recording. Wilson seems to miss out on atmosphere and nuance in some of his recordings.
Incidentally, he did a RVW Tallis Fantasia "live" on youtube that I enjoyed, but again, I didn't feel the deep mystical dimension so beautifully realized by
Silvestri, Boult, Barbirolli, Stokowski, and (more quickly but deeply) Mitropoulos. I feel that one has to live a while with great pieces of music in order to gain deeper access into their depths. Thank you, Dave!
The dying, embarrassing Classical Court (courtesy Audio Asylum) is panning your review having clearly not watched it. One would think that Objectivity would be kryptonite to their Head-Patter in Chief, but no. And his sycophants are too weak to think for themselves.
No surprise there.
He's pretty good with English music, particularly of a lighter vein. Nothing wrong with sticking to that!
Nope.
This Album received a Gramophone this month so I had to listen to it after seeing this review on youtube. Well I couldn’t listen until the end. This has nothing to do with Ravel (I am French from Pays Basque). I immediately put Dutoit’s version on, but my preferences are still Monteux and Martinon. A fundamental question I have is how is it possible that professionals are getting it so wrong? I am talking about Wilson, but also the Gramophone person…
It's a puzzlement (to quote "The King and I").
Just to note that John Wilson prepared his own edition of the score for this recording (doing so was his "Lockdown project") to correct numerous discrepancies between the published score, the manuscript score and the orchestral parts. This might explain some of the differences with what's in the Dover score (even the dynamics, as Wilson said some of those are different), although it certainly wouldn't explain all the problems Dave identifies with the performance (and is part of the problem that Mr Wilson just churns out too many recordings too quickly?). The November 2023 issue of The Magazine That No-one Likes has an interview with Wilson on his amendments to the published score and the reasons behind them.
Making something out of nothing. Everyone who knows the work knows that there are issues with the published score, and preparing a new edition doesn't mean that the differences are any greater than they normally would be from one performance to the next using older parts. The "I have a new score" PR only serves to suggest a spurious interpretive "authenticity" where, absent a great performance, none exists.
@@DavesClassicalGuide Showing a "Dover score" with hundreds a d hundreds of never-corrected original mistakes to support your argument is nothing but a sad intellectual sham!
I know an even worse Daphnis: Kazem Abdullah with the Aachen Symphony on Coviello label…my God, you have to listen to believe…
I think in general John Wilson's recordings of musicals/'show music'/light music I've heard are estimable. But I've not enjoyed his forays into more complicated or 'serious' repertoire much at all. So I can't really imagine him tackling Daphnis and Chloe! I believe Dave. I'm happy to give this one a miss. Also, I think Gramophone can be 'useful' at times, but you always have to keep perspective that it's an Anglophile publication still, and they, ahem, seem to take 'care' of their advertisers. ;)
Thank you for the honest review, Dave. I listened to the sampler at PrestoMusic and was not impressed. Give me Monteux any day!
I heard this talked about on BBC's Record Review. They played some extracts, even from that I realised it's awful. It's a chorus of middle class dilettantes and an orchestra no better than a fine amateur band. I wonder what sort of ears these reviewers have.
Hahahaha. This is ultimate humiliation for conductor, Dave explaining and teaching him basic score reading. And even singing lines. This is hilarious. I hope Wilson will watch one day this craziness.
The way Prestomusic is promoting this album is insane.
They're being well paid by Chandos for that.
@@robhaynes4410 I believe it.
I’m guessing that’s how Presto really makes money. Their CD prices tend to be the lowest in the biz.
Daphnis has been one of my very favorite pieces for decades. I've listened to them all. Despite Wilson's extremely mixed output, I was rather excited to hear this one. I needn't have been. The sound is, as Dave mentioned, pretty lousy, unusually for Chandos. Ridiculous spot miking of, especially, the winds, showcasing the dry playing. The solo horn cracks multiple times. The ensemble playing is generally indifferent & lacking in the sensuousness & excitement the piece generates almost by default. It sounds like a runthrough by an orchestra unfamiliar with the work. After listening through once, I did A-B comparisons of the various sections the whole way through. My comparison was Abbado, whose recording is in my top ten, but not at my very peak. In literally every aspect, at every step of the way, Abbado was immeasurably superior, and the DG engineering was just right. I haven't listened to it yet since hearing Wilson's, but my recollection is that Tortelier, also on Chandos, was vastly better. So why did Chandos feel the need to duplicate their catalog? I don't know if this is the absolute worst Daphnis, but it's certainly in the running. A huge letdown.
without wanting to denigrate your words (I listened to this Daphnis yesterday, and yes, it is very different from the others) I was wondering if the "new approach" that several musicians and conductors apply to well-known music shocks us at this point where I wonder if we are so purist that from then on, when we go off the beaten track it makes us uncomfortable that NON-RESPECT for the notations of a score is not respected... .?.... since the dawn of time how many musicians have applied this ''rubato'' by speeding up or slowing down certain passages of a score. If this gives added value to a work, why deprive yourself of it .....? Can this new conception make a work evolve....? after all, if it gives an excellent result to our ears....and over the years, in 10 years, in 100 years in 1000 years, who says that a new design will not - on occasion_ give good results ....?
Not in this case. Garbage is as garbage sounds. There is always freedom for interpretation, but when a composer writes "fast" and the player read it as "slow," we have a problem. And there were many others besides, as I noted. Difference in and of itself has no value. Every performance is different from every other.
I have to say, nothing captures my curiosity more than David destroying an album in a review. I automatically download and listen the record with some sort of malignity. And man he never got it wrong so far!
"A complete waste of plastic".....
Unfortunately you could say that about a lot of CDs.
Dave, I listened to a few minutes of this cd. That was all I could take. Don’t know what I heard but it was not Ravel.
I've only enjoyed Wilson when he's doing one of his Broadway show projects, especially at the Proms. Maybe he paid for this Daphnissery (Daphni-cide?) venture himself? Sad. Or should I say triste.
And this is the title of today's (5-star of course) review on the Guardian "generations will thank John Wilson for this glorious recording"..I guess that British understatement is gone, at least when it's about British conductors.
Negative reviews are always a lot of fun. A little creative vitriol helps to brighten my day.
I have not heard this recording so I can't comment.John Wilson is another Simon Rattle he is treated like a god.The English think (I am English but don't agree) that people like these two can do no wrong.I have seen both and I do think they are overrated,it is the publicity which has got them where they are.John Wilson thinks he can do all sorts of music and get great acclaim.He may do best staying with musicals and light music and keep away from major classical composers especially symphonic works.
He like rattle will always be overrated.
The trouble is today music and the recording industry are run by people who no little or nothing about music but too much about money grabbing
Too much scholarship and not enough heart! The dynamic range is too wide, with the 'piano' sections just not registering. Decca used to lift those sections a couple of dB, just to keep everything ' front and centre' as their chief engineer 'Wilkie' used to say. I think the climaxes are still pretty impressive though, and the choir is terrific. I agree with Dave that the opening is way too fast!