So do I - if you look carefully, you'll see that she plays in my version tooOriginally Posted by Chops
So do I - if you look carefully, you'll see that she plays in my version too
Senior Member
Location: Newcastle
Posts: 196
I'm Chris.
So do I - if you look carefully, you'll see that she plays in my version tooblame the iPod - screen too small
Senior Member
Location: gone
Posts: 11,510
I'm gone.
So, insults now, eh? What have I ever done to you?Whoa! - Jerry with expressions like that, you should be writing for The Gramophone!
Yep, and Previn, for the most part. His RVW remakes with Telarc were dead boring.
And, oh his Telarc Rachmaninov 2nd symphony.His early EMI recording is fantabulous.
I have the Karajan 1960's set of Beethoven symphonies - very fine. Oh dear, what a change with his later digital recordings.
I guess we all lose it a bit as we get older!
.
Klemperer's final Beethoven 9th is also an exercise in drawing it out.
Gunther Wand's final Beethoven cycle was very good.
Senior Member
Location: Newcastle
Posts: 196
I'm Chris.
Martin, think I might have your recording as well, repackaged:Vivaldi - Gloria, Preston, AAM, Decca [cd]
One of the most sublime recordings I have ever bought. The singing in the Gloria is simply magical. I have loved it for years and it gets regular play - everyone who has ever heard it on my system agrees with me.
Its the same performers, AAD and recorded in the 1976.
The FLAC can be bought & downloaded here for those interested: http://www.deutschegrammophon.com/ca...UCT_NR=4557272
Chris
That looks to be the one, Chris. The solo and choral singing are just outstanding.
Senior Member
Location: Newcastle
Posts: 196
I'm Chris.
Thanks Martin.
Done a quick A/B of the two versions, just Gloria in excelsis and Et in terra pax.
- Hickox runs a bit of a quicker pace on Gloria - I prefer the slower tempo of Preston. Hickox feels a little rushed. Track times 2:14 versus 2:22.
- This is reversed in terra pax - 5:12 versus 5:00. I didn't notice when listening, though.
- Preston sounds more closely miked, wider soundstage, more detailed, greater dynamic contrasts - voices more clear and apparant.
- Preston is a little more musically dynamic. I noticed a few things more forward in the mix, not just the voices.
- Preston sounds a little louder than Hickox.
- I felt Preston's trebles sounded just a little too forward and 'breathy' (or maybe hoarse - I'm trying to find the right adjective here) at times.
- In contrast, Hickox sounds maybe more 'romantic' (modern?) - it could wash over you more easily.
My vote would be for Preston, but then I like my hifi the same - detailed and dynamic, maybe at the expense of smooth.
I had a recent similar experience with Charles Avison - 12 Concerti Grossi after Scarlatti. I compared the Brandenburg Consort on Hyperion (http://www.hyperion-records.co.uk/fi...t=Search&vw=dc) with Avison Ensemble on Divine Arts (http://www.avisonensemble.com/listen...y/default.html). You can hear the difference immediately on the samples you can play, eg No.3. I bought Avison Ensemble.
Chris
Nice comparison, Chris. I like my hi-fi the same as yours, given the choice.
Grumpy Old Git
Location: Guildford, Surrey
Posts: 925
I'm Bob.
Just plugged the gaps in my Shostakovich Symphony list with a two-fer of 13, 14, and 15 (actually a FLAC download from Universal).
Neeme Jarvi conducting the Gothenburg Orchestra on DG. Maybe not the last word on the symphonies, but having played through no.15 twice now I've been bowled over by the music, the performance and the recording.
I have to admit classical solo vocalists are not my cuppa tea. <ducks for cover>Opera is spoilt by all the screeching! </ducks for cover>. So having dipped into no.14, I'm a little, er, apprehensive. But I'll get in the mood to try it one day . . . .
Try the 13th, Bob. It's dark and sobering and a little terrifying. The solo singing simply adds so much to the tension.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
