add to wish list | library


6 of 7 recommend this,
would you recommend it?

yes | no

Support this site by purchasing from these vendors using the links provided below. As an Amazon Associate SA-CD.net earns from qualifying purchases.
 
amazon.ca
amazon.co.uk
amazon.com
amazon.de
 
amazon.fr
amazon.it
 
jpc

Discussion: Mahler: Symphony No. 4 - Stenz

Posts: 7

Post by Windsurfer May 5, 2013 (1 of 7)
One line review: A startlingly realistic MC recording. An original and convincing performance. Anyone else ?

Post by sylvian May 6, 2013 (2 of 7)
Windsurfer said:

One line review: A startlingly realistic MC recording. An original and convincing performance. Anyone else ?

I prefer Nott over Stenz. Furthermore Nott 2nd is closest to Mehta/Israeli symphony recording from 1982 (wonderfully resored for DVD-A release by Sony) which I consider as referrence recording.

Post by hiredfox May 6, 2013 (3 of 7)
sylvian said:

I prefer Nott over Stenz. Furthermore Nott 2nd is closest to Mehta/Israeli symphony recording from 1982 (wonderfully resored for DVD-A release by Sony) which I consider as referrence recording.

Why deflect the thread when you have not even heard the disc? This is not a discussion about your Mahler preferences. Please stay on topic.

Post by samayoeruorandajin May 7, 2013 (4 of 7)
hiredfox said:

Why deflect the thread when you have not even heard the disc?

And you know this how?

And since when have you ever stayed on topic?

Post by sylvian May 7, 2013 (5 of 7)
hiredfox said:

Why deflect the thread when you have not even heard the disc? This is not a discussion about your Mahler preferences. Please stay on topic.

I heard this particular Stenz disc (although I have not listed it in my library), I consider myself as a slight-expert to Mahler (If you could check my library, you will find that I already have more than one rendition of great symphonies).

I just expressed my preferrences with allowing as much room for other peoples preferrences as I can. I simply stated that I am not preferring Stenz as much as I am not preferring Zinman or MTT/SFO (his 2nd is not awful but it is not loveable as well - which also does not mean that I have not heard others by MTT/SFO).

Post by hiredfox May 7, 2013 (6 of 7)
samayoeruorandajin said:

And you know this how?

And since when have you ever stayed on topic?

When I stray off topic there's usually a good reason for doing so...

Post by Windsurfer May 8, 2013 (7 of 7)
sylvian said:

I prefer Nott over Stenz. Furthermore Nott 2nd is closest to Mehta/Israeli symphony recording from 1982 (wonderfully resored for DVD-A release by Sony) which I consider as referrence recording.

The Nott 4th is excellent and I enjoy it. But the Stenz is beautifully phrased also and (I need to relisten to the Nott to be certain) I think the Stenz is more vividly, realistically recorded. I would not want to say to anyone: "You should get this one, not that one." I would recommend both and if your preference is to vivid recorded sound, and only want one, Stenz is wonderful.

Closed