As they occur to me I can name Kletzki, Walter, Dorati, Schuricht, Sargent, Beecham, Wood, Szell, Weingartner, Heger, Bernstein, Previn, Klemperer, Hanson, Goossens, Ruth Gipps, Kubelik, Martinon, deSabata, Clarence Raybould, Svetlanov, Boulez, Stokowski, Barbirolli Anthony Collins and Stanford Robinson and, I feel sure, there are quite a few more which escape me at present.
This gave these conductors insights into how a piece of music "Works" which might have escaped those who look at it purely from the standpoint of performance. Even conductors who I don't know as composers like Reiner and Ormandy must have benefitted from their association with some of the leading composers of the twentieth century. How many of today's conductors could compose a substantial orchestral piece? Where are the Strausses, Bartoks and Brittens who they can learn from ?
Another question arising from this thread: With umpteen versions of the Beethoven Symphonies starting with Weingartner and Mengelberg and traversing examples from most of the "Greats" of the last century , do we really need yet another cycle to weigh down our library shelves ?
I think there are still examples of conductors who have honed a particular sound over time with an orchestra and apply a specific interpretative stance - but I certainly agree that a bland and reliable "international" sound is now more frequently encountered. Perhaps two such conductors who spring to mind are Honeck with the Pittsburg and Currentzis at Perm and with Musica Aeterna; for better (usually) or worse (occasionally) they have produced wholly individual and identifiably original interpretations, so independent artistic endeavour has not yet been entirely subsumed into generalised music-making. I am sure others could make other suggestions.
The Government’s “Levelling up”, if it works is probably a good thing. But what about “Levelling up” musically?
Back in my youth (a long time ago) I could listen to a Beethoven symphony and, despite being in no way an expert, I could generally differentiate between a performance by, say, Klemperer, Karajan or Kleiber. I could sometimes identify the orchestra (Czech Philharmonic, Berlin Phil etc) I also remember some, let us say, not very good orchestras and I have no doubt at all that the general standard of orchestral playing has progressed significantly. This is surely good, but they have become faceless and have a uniform sound.
Nowadays with Beethoven sets coming thing and fast from every likely and unlikely source this it seems impossible to differentiate let alone identify orchestras and conductors. European orchestras sound like American ones and I heard a Korean orchestra a few days ago that was excellent but anonymous and “international”.
The modern breed of jet-setting maestro rarely has his or her “own” orchestra, even so called principal conductors rarely conduct more than half of a season’s concerts. I attend quite a few concerts and almost never hear a conductor who is not fully competent – technically. Unfortunately, in many cases their musical thought seems lagging behind their ability. I could name only a dozen or so conductors who seem to have actually thought behind the notes and come up with a real interpretation, quite a few “famous names” would not be included.
Is the blame for this with record companies? Are they desperate for Maestro X and Maestro Y to have as much exposure as possible, usually accompanied by hyperbolic marketing.
Is this good due to the hight standard of playing and conducting or a bad thing due o a loss of individuality?
Apologies to Ludwin van, just an obvious example! I will stop rambling now.
Message Thread
« Back to index | View thread »
Thank you for taking part in the MusicWeb International Forum.
Len Mullenger - Founder of MusicWeb