add to wish list | library


23 of 26 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: Elgar: Symphony No. 2, In The South - Hickox

Posts: 63
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 next

Post by Peter August 23, 2005 (1 of 63)
Castor, many thanks for such a helpful review. I haven't had a chance to listen to my copy yet and now look forward to it even more. Strangely enough I do enjoy both Thomson and Solti (who takes about the same time as Elgar), and Haitink, who is quite slow overall, and Boult (1944 and 1956) who is quicker and paces beautifully, and Handley who includes the organ to great effect, and both of Barbirolli's, one much slower than the other. I think Sinopoli's is the only one I haven't yet heard. Spoilt for choice!

Post by Castor August 23, 2005 (2 of 63)
Peter said:

Castor, many thanks for such a helpful review. I haven't had a chance to listen to my copy yet and now look forward to it even more. Strangely enough I do enjoy both Thomson and Solti (who takes about the same time as Elgar), and Haitink, who is quite slow overall, and Boult (1944 and 1956) who is quicker and paces beautifully, and Handley who includes the organ to great effect, and both of Barbirolli's, one much slower than the other. I think Sinopoli's is the only one I haven't yet heard. Spoilt for choice!

Hello Peter,
I hope you enjoy the Hickox as much as I did and look forward to your views on it.
The Boult recording I enjoyed most was the one he did for Lyrita. I used to have the Sinopoli but did not care for DGG's recording, although I did enjoy his performance.
Do remember to turn up the volume when you try it.I was initially disappointed with the sound until I realised the low level of the transfer.
I would love Hickox to record the Elgar Ist symphony with the NOW before he disappears to Australia!

Post by akiralx August 23, 2005 (3 of 63)
Peter said:

Castor, many thanks for such a helpful review. I haven't had a chance to listen to my copy yet and now look forward to it even more. Strangely enough I do enjoy both Thomson and Solti (who takes about the same time as Elgar), and Haitink, who is quite slow overall, and Boult (1944 and 1956) who is quicker and paces beautifully, and Handley who includes the organ to great effect, and both of Barbirolli's, one much slower than the other. I think Sinopoli's is the only one I haven't yet heard. Spoilt for choice!

Yep, I'm looking forward to this too, it's on order. I agree with Peter, Haitink's is excellent.

Sadly Sinopoli's Second is generally acknowledged as a disaster, at well over an hour, and a bad editing error which eliminates one of the harp chimes. A pity as his First is perhaps my favourite for that work.

Post by armenian August 23, 2005 (4 of 63)
A pity as his First is perhaps my favourite for that work.
First is my all time favourite, have both 1st and the 2nd on Chandos w/Bryden Thomson. The sound is real good on this 1986 recording, very little of that typical Chandos HF glare. The slow movement is magnificent, to me this movement comes pretty close to Mahlers Adagietto from his fifth in its overall mood. Hope to see a SACD of this symphony soon.

Vahe

Post by viktor September 19, 2005 (5 of 63)
Check this out. http://www.classicstoday.com/review.asp?ReviewNum=9269
For once I agree with Mr Hurwitz.

Post by Castor September 19, 2005 (6 of 63)
viktor said:

Check this out. http://www.classicstoday.com/review.asp?ReviewNum=9269
For once I agree with Mr Hurwitz.

Well I don't!
Hurwitz obviously has a thing about Hickox.
He seems to have listened to this recording without turning up the volume sufficiently. No bass - rubbish!
Later he describes the Halle as 'a lousy orchestra' so his judgement is at the very least suspect.
I generally enjoy Hurwitz's reviews, but he does seem to go over the top from time to time either for or against a recording. An example of the former was the Barenboim set of the Schumann symphonies which few other critics seemed to like.
Perhaps he is trying to reinforce the Gramophone view of him as "something of a polemicist, hostile to what he perceives as the English insularity of our music criticism"
Did you also agree with his review of the Jennifer Higdon on Telarc Viktor?
http://www.classicstoday.com/review.asp?ReviewNum=748

Post by Scott September 19, 2005 (7 of 63)
Castor said:

Well I don't!
Hurwitz obviously has a thing about Hickox.
He seems to have listened to this recording without turning up the volume sufficiently. No bass - rubbish!
Later he describes the Halle as 'a lousy orchestra' so his judgement is at the very least suspect.
I generally enjoy Hurwitz's reviews, but he does seem to go over the top from time to time either for or against a recording. An example of the former was the Barenboim set of the Schumann symphonies which few other critics seemed to like.
Perhaps he is trying to reinforce the Gramophone view of him as "something of a polemicist, hostile to what he perceives as the English insularity of our music criticism"
Did you also agree with his review of the Jennifer Higdon on Telarc Viktor?
http://www.classicstoday.com/review.asp?ReviewNum=748

Hurwitz, at least in my estimation, has a gripe with Chandos when it comes to sound. He regularly castigates Chandos' discs for having no bottom end and for being insufficiently focused. Hickox has fared poorly with him in terms of the RVW cycle, which I personally find to be generally good to very good in terms of both performances and sound.

Post by viktor September 19, 2005 (8 of 63)
Castor said:

Well I don't!
Hurwitz obviously has a thing about Hickox.
He seems to have listened to this recording without turning up the volume sufficiently. No bass - rubbish!
Later he describes the Halle as 'a lousy orchestra' so his judgement is at the very least suspect.
I generally enjoy Hurwitz's reviews, but he does seem to go over the top from time to time either for or against a recording. An example of the former was the Barenboim set of the Schumann symphonies which few other critics seemed to like.
Perhaps he is trying to reinforce the Gramophone view of him as "something of a polemicist, hostile to what he perceives as the English insularity of our music criticism"
Did you also agree with his review of the Jennifer Higdon on Telarc Viktor?
http://www.classicstoday.com/review.asp?ReviewNum=748

I said "FOR ONCE I AGREE"...

Post by viktor September 19, 2005 (9 of 63)
Scott said:

Hurwitz, at least in my estimation, has a gripe with Chandos when it comes to sound. He regularly castigates Chandos' discs for having no bottom end and for being insufficiently focused. Hickox has fared poorly with him in terms of the RVW cycle, which I personally find to be generally good to very good in terms of both performances and sound.

I agree with Hurwitz when it comes to appreciating the, overrated, sound by Chandos as well as the sub-par RVW-cycle. Compare with Previn on RCA and you are in a diferent world.

Good to very good...not enough I´m afraid. Competition is stiff.

Post by DSD September 20, 2005 (10 of 63)
viktor said:

I agree with Hurwitz when it comes to appreciating the, overrated, sound by Chandos as well as the sub-par RVW-cycle. Compare with Previn on RCA and you are in a diferent world.

Good to very good...not enough I´m afraid. Competition is stiff.

Viktor I was not impressed with Previn's performaces of Vaughan Williams Symphonies Nos. 2 & 5 he did for Telarc on CD, and I like the Hickox performances much, much better. Was Previn's EMI cycle that much better than his Telarc recordings? Chandos in their 24 Bit 96kHz PCM and their DSD recordings have excellent sound with lots of bass.

Have you heard Walton's "Christopher Columbus" 24/96 PCM again with Hickox conducting? Or how about Chandos' "Klezmer" recorded pure DSD?

Also I think all the Hickox Vaughan Williams symphonies are top notch performance wise. And all but the Symphony No. 5 (recorded 20 Bit) top notch sonically as well. All the others are 24/96 PCM. Still waiting for Hickox to finish the Vaughan Williams cycle he has not recorded Nos. 1, 7 and 9, I checked they are not on CD either. I will buy the 7th and 9th as soon as he records them. I am quite please with my Spano & Atlanta Symphony version of No.1 on Telarc SACD.

Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 next

Closed