On Nov 30, 11:41 pm, "Matthew B. Tepper" <oyþ@earthlink.net> wrote:
> "jrsn...@aol.com" <jrsn...@aol.com> appears to have caused the following
> letters to be typed innews:0920ff34-5e98-4b94-99cb-6f2f323b873b@v39g2000pro.googlegroups.com:
>
> > On Nov 30, 11:09 pm, rkhalona <rkhal...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> but as much as I love the Beecham, there is no such thing as best.
> >> I even derived great pleasure from Celi's Scheherazade, which I found
> >> positively Brucknerian :-)
>
> > Indeed the Celi Munich performance is marvelously Celicious.
>
> Is there a filler on CD2?

Yes...on EMI the second disc has a 40-minute rehearsal excerpt
focusing exclusively on the first three chords.

--Jeff

On Dec 1, 7:59*am, "jrsn...@aol.com" <jrsn...@aol.com> wrote:
> On Nov 30, 9:02 pm, "Royke" <ro...@canada.com> wrote:
>
> > But the writer does not seem to have heard Kondrashin, Concertgebouw Orkest,
> > and Krebbers ...
>
> There does seem to be a dearth of modern recordings on this survey,
> but I wouldn't bet on his not having heard Kondrashin. He seems to
> have heard a fair number and probably has heard some others he didn't
> mention.
>
> Why he didn't mention Kondrashin, or Mackerras, Spano, Barenboim,
> Ozawa, Muti, Ormandy, Masur, Chailly, Karajan, or Dutoit, is a
> mystery, but no more mysterious than this comment like
>
> "Golovanov constantly varies the textures with emphatic gestures of
> huge crashing cymbals, boiling tympani, pounding bass pizzicato, and
> outrageously commanding harp punctuation – and since this is a studio
> recording, these embellishments can't be shrugged off as inadvertent
> flukes of microphone placement in a concert hall setting."
>
> --Jeff

You had me at "...is a mystery..." There are so many good version of
this, but he does not include discussion of them. He does seem to be
stuck mostly in a certain era. I remember that cover though - very
cool.

<artsy6@gmail.com> wrote:
> So proclaims this article:
>
> [url]http://www.classicalnotes.net/classics2/rimsky.html[/url]

Mr. Gutman is a Washington lawyer with strong interests and knowledge of
music. His comments on the GPE were among the more expert I read on the
subject. Ditto his comments on EMI's Great Cobductors series.

Naturally he does not mention ALL recordings of R-K's work. But he hits
most of the highlights and really doesn't go far off the track in any of
his advice.

A nice piece, I think.
--
TD

On 1 Dic, 06:43, Neil <nhmil...@aol.com> wrote:
> > So proclaims this article:
> >[url]http://www.classicalnotes.net/classics2/rimsky.html[/url]
>
> I remember critics in the 1960s judging it the best.

To be fair to the writer, he actually says that Beecham is "the
runaway favorite among most critics" (certainly true if "most critics"
means those that wrote for Gramophone in the 60s and 70s) without
specifically saying it's his own favorite. It's clear he admires it,
but it's equally clear he admires a lot of others. I think it's good
that he DOESN'T try to make a top choice, just describes the qualities
of the different versions.

The trouble is, how useful is a survey like this if it doesn't include
every recording (tall order though that may be)?

By the way, my introduction to Scheherazade was the LSO/Goossens on
World Record Club (probably Everest originally). I've never heard it
since my schooldays but it seemed good enough then. Anyone know it?

Chris Howell

Richard Schultz wrote:
> In article <ebfdfbdd-c2f8-43a6-96e5-4d880cc38404@l33g2000pri.googlegroups.com>, [email]artsy6@gmail.com[/email] wrote:
>
> : So proclaims this article:
> :
> : [url]http://www.classicalnotes.net/classics2/rimsky.html[/url]
>
> I personally find it -- as I do with almost every recording deemed "best"
> by so-called critics -- to be overrated. Frankly, I prefer Previn/LSO.
> Yes, you read that right.
>
> -----
> Richard Schultz [email]schultr@mail.biu.ac.il[/email]
> Department of Chemistry, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel
> Opinions expressed are mine alone, and not those of Bar-Ilan University
> -----
> It's a bird, it's a plane -- no, it's Mozart. . .

Previn's recording with the Vienna Philharmonic is also very nice.

IIRC, this was the first recording of Scheherazade that the Vienna
Philharmonic ever made (December 1981).

--Thomas

Thomas Liebert <talxvcd@comcast.net> wrote:
> Richard Schultz wrote:
> > In article
> <ebfdfbdd-c2f8-43a6-96e5-4d880cc38404@l33g2000pri.googlegroups.com>,
> [email]artsy6@gmail.com[/email] wrote:
> >
> > : So proclaims this article:
> > :
> > : [url]http://www.classicalnotes.net/classics2/rimsky.html[/url]
> >
> > I personally find it -- as I do with almost every recording deemed
> "best"
> > by so-called critics -- to be overrated. Frankly, I prefer
> Previn/LSO.
> > Yes, you read that right.
> >
> > -----
> > Richard Schultz [email]schultr@mail.biu.ac.il[/email]
> > Department of Chemistry, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel
> > Opinions expressed are mine alone, and not those of Bar-Ilan
> University
> > -----
> > It's a bird, it's a plane -- no, it's Mozart. . .
>
> Previn's recording with the Vienna Philharmonic is also very nice.
>
> IIRC, this was the first recording of Scheherazade that the Vienna
> Philharmonic ever made (December 1981).
>
> --Thomas

Perhaps I am wrong but if memory serves Monteux recorded this with the
VPO. Victrola via Decca, perhaps?
--
TD

On Dec 1, 3:46�pm, Tom Deacon <tomdedea...@mac.com> wrote:
> Thomas Liebert <talx...@comcast.net> wrote:
> > Richard Schultz wrote:
> > > In article
> > <ebfdfbdd-c2f8-43a6-96e5-4d880cc38...@l33g2000pri.googlegroups.com>,
> > art...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > > : So proclaims this article:
> > > :
> > > :[url]http://www.classicalnotes.net/classics2/rimsky.html[/url]
>
> > > I personally find it -- as I do with almost every recording deemed
> > "best"
> > > by so-called critics -- to be overrated. �Frankly, I prefer
> > Previn/LSO.
> > > Yes, you read that right.
>
> > > -----
> > > Richard Schultz � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �schu...@mail.biu.ac.il
> > > Department of Chemistry, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel
> > > Opinions expressed are mine alone, and not those of Bar-Ilan
> > University
> > > -----
> > > It's a bird, it's a plane -- no, it's Mozart. . .
>
> > Previn's recording with the Vienna Philharmonic is also very nice.
>
> > IIRC, this was the first recording of Scheherazade that the Vienna
> > Philharmonic ever made (December 1981).
>
> > --Thomas
>
> Perhaps I am wrong but if memory serves Monteux recorded this with the
> VPO. Victrola via Decca, perhaps?
> --
> TD

It was the LSO, circa 1958. RCA Victor Red Seal to start. Then
perhaps on Victrola, surely later on Decca.

Don Tait

In article <ebfdfbdd-c2f8-43a6-96e5-4d880cc38404@l33g2000pri.googlegroups.com>,
[email]artsy6@gmail.com[/email] says...
>
>So proclaims this article:
>
>[url]http://www.classicalnotes.net/classics2/rimsky.html[/url]

The article is OK, but it doesn't mention a few of my favorites: Semkow/St.
Louis on Vox (probably my single favorite Scheherazade); Maazel/Cleveland on
London/Decca (probably the most spectacularly played Scheherazade I've ever
heard; the interpretation is pretty neutral, but what an orchestra!); and, in
the historical division, Oskar Fried (once available on the Koch Historical
label). Another top-tier one is with the Royal PO/James Walker (who?) on the
Readers Digest label - dramatic, well-played, and superbly recorded in the usual
Gerhardt/Wilkinson manner.

In article <gh1s6q02tq7@drn.newsguy.com>, Paul Goldstein says...
>
>In article <ebfdfbdd-c2f8-43a6-96e5-4d880cc38404@l33g2000pri.googlegroups.com>,
>artsy6@gmail.com says...
>>
>>So proclaims this article:
>>
>>[url]http://www.classicalnotes.net/classics2/rimsky.html[/url]
>
>The article is OK, but it doesn't mention a few of my favorites: Semkow/St.
>Louis on Vox (probably my single favorite Scheherazade); Maazel/Cleveland on
>London/Decca (probably the most spectacularly played Scheherazade I've ever
>heard; the interpretation is pretty neutral, but what an orchestra!); and, in
>the historical division, Oskar Fried (once available on the Koch Historical
>label). Another top-tier one is with the Royal PO/James Walker (who?) on the
>Readers Digest label - dramatic, well-played, and superbly recorded in the usual
>Gerhardt/Wilkinson manner.

Correction - the article does mention Fried, and I agree with Gutman's
assessment of the recording. It is probably the most sultry of Scheherazades
this side of Stoki.

On Dec 1, 3:32 pm, Paul Goldstein <pgold...@newsguy.com> wrote:
> In article <ebfdfbdd-c2f8-43a6-96e5-4d880cc38...@l33g2000pri.googlegroups.com>,
> art...@gmail.com says...
>
>
>
> >So proclaims this article:
>
> >[url]http://www.classicalnotes.net/classics2/rimsky.html[/url]
>
> The article is OK, but it doesn't mention a few of my favorites: Semkow/St.
> Louis on Vox (probably my single favorite Scheherazade); Maazel/Cleveland on
> London/Decca (probably the most spectacularly played Scheherazade I've ever
> heard; the interpretation is pretty neutral, but what an orchestra!); and, in
> the historical division, Oskar Fried (once available on the Koch Historical
> label). Another top-tier one is with the Royal PO/James Walker (who?) on the
> Readers Digest label - dramatic, well-played, and superbly recorded in the usual
> Gerhardt/Wilkinson manner.

Paul, I think he did praise the Fried, which I agree is quite worthy
(along with the Golvoanov).

I can't remember ever seeing the Semkow (there's a picture of it at
Amazon)...if it's as good as his other St. Louis recordings, I can see
why it is a favorite.

--Jeff