It has moments, but for the most part I think is sluggish and diffuse, lacking the crispness of the better performances. It's time I give Sakari and the Icelanders another go, too-I really liked what I recall as their rough and raucous approach, but haven't heard this more than a couple of times so I'm not sure if I'm reading that into it or not!Įdit: just listened to the Sakari 5th and I'm afraid my faulty memory indeed was projecting the qualities I generally like about the set into the 5th. Haven't played it in years but seeing it atop Martin's list inclines me toward giving it another go. It's such a great piece (it ought to be after years of revisions!) that it's rare to hear a bad recording-but Rattle's with the Philharmonia used to strike me as dull, dull, dull. Haven't heard either of Maazel's for awhile, but it was either his WP 5th or Bernstein's NYPO one that opened my heart to this symphony and made it my single most favorite piece of music in the entire repertoire. Segerstam's good but I might prefer his first with the Danes-like Bernstein's first, stirring but not overdone-this ain't a Romantic symphony, it's something brand new, precursor of minimalism with classical grace. Rozhdestvensky with the USSR TV & Radio Symphony is a thrill ride in an aircraft hanger. Blomstedt/SFS and Vänskä/Lahti, of course-leaner and with lovlier sound. Berglund with Bournemouth-similar interpretive qualities-and his HPO outing is great if a little ragged until let down by the brass. What!? No Bernstein!? I love 'em both, but the '60s recording with the NYPO takes pride of place-gorgeous winds, powerful but not excessively dramatic with a great middle movement and a bang up finish.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |