Thread: Korngold

Posts: 53
Page: prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 next

Post by seth July 6, 2010 (41 of 53)
Cherubino said:

Granted an open air concert is at the extreme end of the spectrum (and more of an event than it is a concert), but certainly yield bad acoustics, and if used as a concert venue, criticism of its limitations is legitimate. My point being there is a performance/acoustics continuum, and that individual tolerance within that continuum varies, and while we'll have our differences, there’s no right or wrong, only preferences.

Outdoor concerts are about listening to music outside, and the music is almost secondary to the outdoor activity you're doing during the concert, such as picnicking.

Post by DSD July 6, 2010 (42 of 53)
Windsurfer said:

I would think it is obvious that a love and commitment to sacd MUST be an outgrowth of a love of music - otherwise what could possibly be the purpose?

I agree totally and completely. To use a food analogy, if one loves food one prefers to eat at a fine restaurant not a fast food joint. Music is the same, it is most enjoyable when presented in the best possible sound.

And Korngold is an excellent composer, thought I admit I like his film scores better than his dedicated classical works. He is easily one of the top five film composers IMHO.

Post by seth July 6, 2010 (43 of 53)
DSD said:

I agree totally and completely. To use a food analogy, if one loves food one prefers to eat at a fine restaurant not a fast food joint. Music is the same, it is most enjoyable when presented in the best possible sound.

That's a specious analogy.

Post by tream July 6, 2010 (44 of 53)
Prompted by this thread, I have been listening to Korngold's Symphony in F-sharp over the past two evenings. There have been a handful of recordings over the years, but I have the premiere recording conducted by Kempe, on an RCA LP, featuring the Munich Philharmonic. Kempe gave the live premiere in 1972 and I believe this recording was a result of those concerts. Kempe would seem to have the ideal profile for this music, given that the symphony, although composed in 1950, fits right in with the tone poems of Strauss.

The Symphony is not an absolute masterpiece, but it is well worth hearing, and contains a magnificent Adagio - the liner notes on my LP are written by none other than Nicolas Slonimsky, who calls this movement the most important slow movement since Mahler and Bruckner - it is that good. The symphony was written as a tribute to FDR, and the last movement seems to contain quotations from the Irving Berlin's "Over There" and the same folk tune that Copland mined for Appalachian Spring - or so I hear.

Was it a conservative piece for 1950? Absolutely, but that should not concern us now, 60 years later. I personally would rather hear this than an anonymous 12 tone work by some composer aping Schoenberg, which of course proved to be a dead end in music. It is a shame that Korngold never heard it live - the premiere occured some 15 years after his death- and it is a tragedy that he never got to write a second, or third symphony. This one is an excellent first effort. I would rank it below other early 20th century symphonies written by composers like Mahler, Sibelius, Vaughan Williams (for me)but equal to Nielsen and higher than someone like Atterberg, whose symphonies sound fine while listening to them but are totally unmemorable.

Kempe was an authoritative conductor, of course, but the recording itself is rather boxy and airless, and does no justice to Korngold's magnificent scoring. I know this gets into the sound vs. performance issue, but the sound of a performance, especially of a complex score, has some intrinsic value, so I look forward to Pentatone's upcoming release.

Post by Cherubino July 6, 2010 (45 of 53)
seth said:

Outdoor concerts are about listening to music outside, and the music is almost secondary to the outdoor activity you're doing during the concert, such as picnicking.

The question under consideration is at what point do acoustic deficiencies make it impossible to enjoy the music being played, regardless of the quality of the music or of the performers. Picnics have nothing to do with that question.

Post by Vaan July 7, 2010 (46 of 53)
DSD said:

I agree totally and completely. To use a food analogy, if one loves food one prefers to eat at a fine restaurant not a fast food joint. Music is the same, it is most enjoyable when presented in the best possible sound.

Wrong. I have heard some of the greatest chefs in the world say that the best food they have ever had was from fast food stands in Bankok. And I can heartily agree with that.

Post by DSD July 7, 2010 (47 of 53)
Guess it's where one lives? In Reno you can't beat a great restaurant. Fast Food is good for when I'm in a hurry but it's not the real thing and it is no where near as good.

Post by seth July 7, 2010 (48 of 53)
DSD said:

Guess it's where one lives? In Reno you can't beat a great restaurant. Fast Food is good for when I'm in a hurry but it's not the real thing and it is no where near as good.

Vaan's point is that inexpensive food does not equal fast food. Fast food might happen to be cheap, but that doesn't mean all cheap food is fast food.

Post by seth July 7, 2010 (49 of 53)
Cherubino said:

The question under consideration is at what point do acoustic deficiencies make it impossible to enjoy the music being played, regardless of the quality of the music or of the performers. Picnics have nothing to do with that question.

I feel like a broken record.

People put up with the mediocrity of outdoor concerts because they want to picnic outside and listen to music at the same time. If you took away that activity from the outdoor concert experience, fewer people would attend outdoor concerts because it is not an environment conductive to playing and listening to music. That's the whole reason there is lawn seating.

Post by Cherubino July 7, 2010 (50 of 53)
seth said:

I feel like a broken record.

People put up with the mediocrity of outdoor concerts because they want to picnic outside and listen to music at the same time. If you took away that activity from the outdoor concert experience, fewer people would attend outdoor concerts because it is not an environment conductive to playing and listening to music. That's the whole reason there is lawn seating.

That's a bit simplistic and just not true. Many who attend such concerts do not go to have a picnic. In fact there are many outdoor venues (Caramoor, Planting Fields Arboretum for example) with concert like seating that requires a ticket for that particular seat, and those who buy those tickets, suprise, sit there and just listen to the music. Just because some are there for a picnic first, music second, doesn't mean everyone is.

Page: prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 next

Closed