Thanks, Dave.  I guess I better hear that one (Sanderling's).  Sorry to say
that I haven't.

Best,
John Haley

On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 4:11 PM, Dave Burnham <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> I don't think any Brahms cycle comes close to Kurt Sanderling's. This set
> is perfect in every way, including sound and performance. I can't even
> think of what version would run a distant second.
>
> db
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> > On Sep 23, 2014, at 12:41 PM, John Haley <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >
> > Well, all the great conductors could be impatient with sloppy playing,
> but
> > that's not what happened as a routine matter with the world's great
> > orchestras that Dorati conducted, and not even in very good regional
> > orchestras like Dallas had.  All of the leading orchestras in that era
> had
> > no problem with delivering the goods and did not deserve abuse.  I have
> > never heard anyone describe Dorati as "warm" and "liked."  Obviously he
> > must have been very nice to the record company that was a major factor in
> > sustaining his career.
> >
> > I also like Steinberg's Pittsburgh Brahms cycle, but Munch's Brahms
> > symphonies (the RCA ones, not always the live ones) are also really
> great,
> > altho he never recorded the third symphony and there is no live one
> > either.  Munch (who as a violinist had studied with Flesch had been
> > Furtwangler's concertmaster) brought something of the sense of urgency
> and
> > orchestral phrasing to the Brahms Symphonies that we hear in great older
> > recordings, such as the superb Weingartner's, which can make "modern"
> > recordings seem very pale by comparison, and RCA recorded Munch/BSO
> > stunningly.  Reiner also "got it right" with Brahms, as he did with
> > virtually everything he ever conducted.  His Brahms Third Symphony with
> CSO
> > is magnificent in every way.  And Walter's mono cycle with the NY Phil is
> > wonderful.  I guess everyone has favorites with staples like this.  With
> > Dorati, things are correct but not inspired.  I never tire of the Brahms
> > symphonies.
> >
> > Best,
> > John Haley
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 11:48 AM, Tom Fine <[log in to unmask]>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Hi John:
> >>
> >> Musicians who recieved Dorati's wrath, for sloppy playing or ill
> >> preparation, tended to feed the "reports" of his alleged ill temper. He
> >> actually was a warm person, much liked by those who made recordings with
> >> him. He was also known to be generous and to take regional orchestras to
> >> very high levels of competence. I'm sure he battled hard with American
> >> unions, and he got into quite a fight with unions and management when he
> >> was in Detroit late in his career. We very much disagree on his
> recordings,
> >> many of his are my favorites for various pieces (definitely at least
> partly
> >> a product of being brought up on those performances, but I have
> listened to
> >> the other "consensus favorites" for most works). He was interested in
> >> making precise and exciting recordings, but less coldly precise than
> Szell
> >> (who I also like very much). Dorati, especially in his Mercury era,
> rarely
> >> turned out dull moments. His later work on Haydn, both the symphonies
> and
> >> the operas, is still considered "the canon." I find it interesting that
> he
> >> was so good with Haydn but also with Stravinsky and Copland. I happen to
> >> agree that his Brahms cycle is OK but not great, to my taste. I'm not a
> >> huge fan of Brahms in the first place, so I'm picky. I think that's a
> case
> >> where the Szell treatment is quite good, but I really like what
> Steinberg
> >> did with Pittsburgh (again, probably because that's what I was brought
> up
> >> on), and also Solti/Chicago (which surprised me because I usually don't
> >> consider Solti "the best" at any symphonic recordings but never "the
> worst"
> >> -- Solti/Chicago also made a surpringly excellent "Rite of Spring"
> >> recording, more furious than you'd ever expect). Anyway, Dorati was very
> >> much liked and admired by the Mercury team, despite the occasional
> meltdown
> >> when the orchestra wasn't getting it right. His approach to music
> matched
> >> their approach to recording (get it right, overcome all obstacles, have
> no
> >> patience for sloppiness, do things boldly and with great intensity, be
> >> ambitious and optimistic).
> >>
> >> -- Tom Fine
> >>
> >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Haley" <[log in to unmask]>
> >> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> >> Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2014 10:47 AM
> >>
> >> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Records Ruin the Landscape
> >>
> >>
> >> Re Tom's comments on Dorati.  Dorati was the conductor in Dallas for a
> >>> while, and he left behind him there a reputation as a particularly
> nasty
> >>> character, personally, to work for or with, and I recall having seen
> >>> elsewhere some comments that orchestral musicians generally disliked
> him
> >>> very much.  Of course he was not alone in that.  The Mercury CD's of
> his
> >>> Brahms Symphony cycle are all in stereo, and it is very good, not
> great.
> >>> Try as I might, I have never been able to "fall in love" with his
> records.
> >>> Extreme competence as a conductor, but not the heart that other great
> >>> ones brought to the task, including the three other great Hungarians
> who
> >>> preceded him with leading conducting careers in the US, Reiner, Ormandy
> >>> and
> >>> Szell, all of whom made greater records (musically) than Dorati.  I am
> >>> sure
> >>> Dorati must have his great fans; I am just not one of them.
> >>>
> >>> Best,
> >>> John Haley
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 9:40 AM, Dennis Rooney <
> [log in to unmask]>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> À propos the above comments, it was Doráti who conducted the MSO in the
> >>>> local premiere of Mahler's Third (I believe the year was 1953), but
> >>>> Mitropoulos had earlier recorded the First and Ormandy did an
> important
> >>>> "Resurrection" there, recorded in concert by Victor in 1935. Steve
> >>>> Smolian's recollection of academic opposition to Mahler is important
> to
> >>>> note; however, Mahler was played by the larger U.S. orchestras,
> >>>> sporadically but regularly from the teens on. Ernst Kunwald led a
> >>>> performance of the Third in Cincinnati (May Festival) in 1913.
> >>>> Unquestionably, Mahler was a beneficiary of the long-playing record,
> even
> >>>> before stereo, with important recordings by Scherchen, Adler, Rosbaud,
> >>>> etc.
> >>>>
> >>>> DDR
> >>>>
> >>>> On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 2:24 PM, Tom Fine <
> [log in to unmask]>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Hi Don:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Mercury didn't adhere to any "standard canon of classical music"
> except
> >>>> in
> >>>>> that Paray and Dorati both liked Beethoven and Dorati liked Brahms
> and
> >>>>> Tchaikovsky so those composers were well represented. Otherwise,
> Dorati
> >>>>> made plenty of records of Hungarian, Russian, Czech and other Eastern
> >>>>> European composers, plus an on-going series of well-received American
> >>>> and
> >>>>> European modern-classical composers. Paray usually stuck to French
> >>>> music
> >>>>> and Romantic era classical. Hanson was all about modern American
> music,
> >>>> for
> >>>>> the most part. Fennell was into a variety of things from marches to
> >>>> "pops"
> >>>>> to wind arrangements of symphonic music. None of this was "standard
> >>>> canon,"
> >>>>> and it was Mercury's main point of difference (note that there is
> not a
> >>>>> complete Beethoven cycle on Mercury Living Presence, never a 9th
> >>>> recorded
> >>>>> and no released stereo 4th or 8th; if I recall correctly one of
> >>>> Dorati's
> >>>>> Brahms symphonies was mono-only too). I would say the reason no
> Mahler
> >>>> was
> >>>>> recorded was that none of Mercury's conductors or orchestras
> performed
> >>>> or
> >>>>> advocated Mahler, the exception being Barbirolli (who was actually
> >>>> under
> >>>>> contract with Pye). It's also worth noting that Walter and Bernstein
> >>>>> started making well-received Mahler recordings in the "golden era"
> >>>> (late
> >>>>> mono/early stereo LP era). No sane record producer would spend very
> >>>> many
> >>>>> resources competing with Columbia's Bernstein publicity machine.
> >>>> Columbia
> >>>>> and RCA were much more obsessed with recording every note of every
> >>>> piece
> >>>>> from Beethoven to the 20th century, "standard canon" material,
> usually
> >>>> by
> >>>>> multiple conductors and orchestras. Finally, it's worth noting that
> >>>> Dorati
> >>>>> brought forth a lot of new-to-recordings material from Tchaikovsky
> like
> >>>>> original scoring for the ballets, first recording of "1812" as it was
> >>>>> originally conceived, first recording of the complete Suites. Dorati
> >>>> also
> >>>>> premiere-recorded several modern pieces. Hanson's recording tally is
> >>>> full
> >>>>> of premieres by the very nature of his American Music Festivals.
> >>>> Fennell
> >>>>> hunted down original band music never recorded and not heard since
> the
> >>>>> original bands, including Confederate sheet music found in attics for
> >>>> "The
> >>>>> Civil War" albums. None of this is "standard canon of classical
> music"
> >>>> by
> >>>>> any stretch. Mercury buyers were not wanting the Reader's Digest
> Guide
> >>>> To
> >>>>> Great Music, but Mercury made sure not to get so out there on every
> >>>> release
> >>>>> that they couldn't sell records. This was part of what doomed Everest
> >>>> --
> >>>>> too much stuff that no one had heard of, no matter how well recorded.
> >>>> The
> >>>>> last thing they did, as they were in the midst of shutting down, was
> a
> >>>>> mediocre Beethoven cycle with Krips.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> To part of your point, it's doubtful that Mahler symphonies were
> being
> >>>>> performed out in places like Minneapolis or Detroit in that period,
> or
> >>>> that
> >>>>> audiences were demanding it. But, I think if you checked concert
> >>>> repertoire
> >>>>> around the US, they were being performed here and there through the
> >>>> years.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> -- Tom Fine
> >>>>>
> >>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Don Cox" <[log in to unmask]>
> >>>>> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> >>>>> Sent: Monday, September 22, 2014 2:47 PM
> >>>>> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Records Ruin the Landscape
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> <snip>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> There are no Mercury recordings of any of these (or of Mahler), which
> >>>>>> shows they were not in the standard canon of classical music in the
> >>>>>> 1950s.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Regards
> >>>>>> --
> >>>>>> Don Cox
> >>>>>> [log in to unmask]
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> 1006 Langer Way
> >>>> Delray Beach, FL 33483
> >>>> 212.874.9626
> >>>
> >>>
>