First of all, I agree entirely about Chailly's Beethoven. In fact, I can't come to terms with his Bruckner and Brahms either. He must think he's the reincarnation of Arturo Toscanini on steroids.
I find Vanska's Beethoven strange also, ditto Haitnink's LSO, but then again, not much of Haitink's work has ever made sense to me.
I will endeavour to listen to Sir Simon's recording via my Spotify app.
What I also find interesting is the point you make that different times bring out the need for 'modern' interpretations, as though the spirit and the notes have to somehow be always re-interpreted. I'd have to think about that because every now and then, I come across an interpretation which defies the logic of the time, which somehow becomes an incandescent and holistic achievement. I can nominate the Furtwangler WW2 Eroica and 9th. In the end, Furtwangler wasn't making a fashion statement, he was making music from an urgent and timeless inner source, a source surely closer to Beethoven than any utterance from Harnoncourt, Chailly and Rattle.
To finish, I find Abbado's conducting, especially post his Berlin appointment - though his last Lucerne recordings are totally an exception - also afflicted by something which simply doesn't sound quite right to my ears.
Message Thread | This response ↓
« Back to index | View thread »
Thank you for taking part in the MusicWeb International Forum.
Len Mullenger - Founder of MusicWeb