The performances are:
Heifetz/Primrose/Feuermann, 1941 (on 2-CD Opus Kura set);
Budapest SQ (Roisman/Kroyt/M.Schneider), 1944 (live LOC, on 2-CD Bridge
set); Dumay/Caussé/Hoffman, 1990 (on 3-CD EMI Dumay Mozart set);
Trio Zimmermann (Zimmermann/Tamestit/Poltéra), 2009 (BIS hybrid SACD);
Trio à cordes français, 1966 (FLAC download from a 4-CD Doremi set at Presto).
(i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) (vi)
HPF 5'31" 7'31" 4'13" 6'12" 4'01" 5'31"
Bud. 5'35" 8'22" 5'07" 6'47" 4'57" 5'22"
DCH 12'48" 12'49" 5'16" 7'22" 5'52" 6'32"
Zim. 12'15" 11'10" 5'18" 7'00" 5'11" 6'16"
Tcf 5'50" 9'13" 5'29" 7'48" 5'12" 5'48"
The first movement has the form AABA'B'A (maybe that last is A''). The
three older performances essentially do ABA. I this (in particular the
early arrival of the development) distorts the musical balance of the movement. The second movement is in sonata form, AABA; the three older performances omit the exposition repeat. The two more-recent recordings
are complete.
I have long regarded the Divertimento for String Trio (K563) as one
of Mozart's 3 (or 4) greatest chamber works. I have a modest four CD recordings. In recent days I have listened to those performances,
and downloaded one more which had drawn some past praise in rmcr.
I did not do much side-by-side comparison, but I did take some notes.
This information was for my own benefit and, while I doubt there is much interest in today's rmcr for this sort of thing, I decided to post it.
The performances are:
Heifetz/Primrose/Feuermann, 1941 (on 2-CD Opus Kura set);
Budapest SQ (Roisman/Kroyt/M.Schneider), 1944 (live LOC, on 2-CD Bridge set);
Dumay/Caussé/Hoffman, 1990 (on 3-CD EMI Dumay Mozart set);
Trio Zimmermann (Zimmermann/Tamestit/Poltéra), 2009 (BIS hybrid SACD);
Trio à cordes français, 1966 (FLAC download from a 4-CD Doremi set at Presto).
Two characteristics which of importance tto me are the repeats in the first two of the six movements, and the chosen tempos. A summary of timings:
(i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) (vi)
HPF 5'31" 7'31" 4'13" 6'12" 4'01" 5'31"
Bud. 5'35" 8'22" 5'07" 6'47" 4'57" 5'22"
DCH 12'48" 12'49" 5'16" 7'22" 5'52" 6'32"
Zim. 12'15" 11'10" 5'18" 7'00" 5'11" 6'16"
Tcf 5'50" 9'13" 5'29" 7'48" 5'12" 5'48"
The first movement has the form AABA'B'A (maybe that last is A''). The
three older performances essentially do ABA. I this (in particular
the early arrival of the development) distorts the musical balance
of the movement. The second movement is in sonata form, AABA; the three older performances omit the exposition repeat. The two more-recent recprdongs are complete.
Apart from not pesenting the whole work, the Heifetz et al. (HPF)
excels, especially the second movement, the heart of the trio: simply gorgeous, yet with ample momentum and intensity; I only wish it had
gone on longer (i.e., with the repeat). Some tempos seem overly fast,
e.g., in (iii) and the theme of (iv). The finale would also be so,
save for their wonderful light touch, a sort of miracle. The recorded
sound is quite decent.
The Budapest performance has similarities to HPF's. They have their expectd intensity in (ii), but do not reach the heights of HPF there. The Budapest's tempos in (iii)-(v) are apt (more relaxed), but their rapid (vi) lacks the lightness of HPF, and simply sounds too fast. There is also a mild background hum throughout, which I find distracting.
The Trio à cordes français recording is in good sound. (i) is light
and lively, suffering only from the cuts, but (ii) is slower and less effective than the HPF and Budapest. I like the varied well-balanced approach to the variations movement (iv), while (vi) strikes me as intermediate between the above two performances.
Nearly all of these groups maintain good instrumental balance, but Dumay seems too violin-centric. That is not helped by a recorded sound that
is screechy at higher registers. Dumay sometimes tosses off quick
flourishes which do not seem right for Mozart, and the group's use of
rubato sometimes strikes me as misjudged. The middle movements are quite effetive, but (ii) seems too slow, too often losing the pulse.
The Trio Zimmerman, by contrast, has excellent balance, with no quirky violin-playing. Their tempo choices strike me as just "right". Some
urgency and flexibility in the minuets raise them above just interludes, while the finale has much of the HPF lightness but at a more comfortable pace. (ii) may not quite reach the highs of HPF, but it's close. And
they play the work complete. Recorded sound is excellent.
If I had to choose just one of the above, it would be the Zimmermann.
But I would also not want to be without HPF and probably the French group. The work itself is priceless, with its final rondo a pure joy.
By coincidence: just in time for Mozart's birthday.
On Thursday, January 26, 2023 at 8:58:53 PM UTC-8, Al Eisner wrote:
I have long regarded the Divertimento for String Trio (K563) as one
of Mozart's 3 (or 4) greatest chamber works. I have a modest four CD
recordings. In recent days I have listened to those performances,
and downloaded one more which had drawn some past praise in rmcr.
I did not do much side-by-side comparison, but I did take some notes.
This information was for my own benefit and, while I doubt there is much
interest in today's rmcr for this sort of thing, I decided to post it.
The performances are:
Heifetz/Primrose/Feuermann, 1941 (on 2-CD Opus Kura set);
Budapest SQ (Roisman/Kroyt/M.Schneider), 1944 (live LOC, on 2-CD Bridge set);
Dumay/Caussé/Hoffman, 1990 (on 3-CD EMI Dumay Mozart set);
Trio Zimmermann (Zimmermann/Tamestit/Poltéra), 2009 (BIS hybrid SACD);
Trio à cordes français, 1966 (FLAC download from a 4-CD Doremi set at Presto).
Two characteristics which of importance tto me are the repeats in the first >> two of the six movements, and the chosen tempos. A summary of timings:
(i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) (vi)
HPF 5'31" 7'31" 4'13" 6'12" 4'01" 5'31"
Bud. 5'35" 8'22" 5'07" 6'47" 4'57" 5'22"
DCH 12'48" 12'49" 5'16" 7'22" 5'52" 6'32"
Zim. 12'15" 11'10" 5'18" 7'00" 5'11" 6'16"
Tcf 5'50" 9'13" 5'29" 7'48" 5'12" 5'48"
The first movement has the form AABA'B'A (maybe that last is A''). The
three older performances essentially do ABA. I this (in particular
the early arrival of the development) distorts the musical balance
of the movement. The second movement is in sonata form, AABA; the three
older performances omit the exposition repeat. The two more-recent
recprdongs are complete.
Apart from not pesenting the whole work, the Heifetz et al. (HPF)
excels, especially the second movement, the heart of the trio: simply
gorgeous, yet with ample momentum and intensity; I only wish it had
gone on longer (i.e., with the repeat). Some tempos seem overly fast,
e.g., in (iii) and the theme of (iv). The finale would also be so,
save for their wonderful light touch, a sort of miracle. The recorded
sound is quite decent.
The Budapest performance has similarities to HPF's. They have their expectd >> intensity in (ii), but do not reach the heights of HPF there. The Budapest's >> tempos in (iii)-(v) are apt (more relaxed), but their rapid (vi) lacks the >> lightness of HPF, and simply sounds too fast. There is also a mild
background hum throughout, which I find distracting.
The Trio à cordes français recording is in good sound. (i) is light
and lively, suffering only from the cuts, but (ii) is slower and less
effective than the HPF and Budapest. I like the varied well-balanced
approach to the variations movement (iv), while (vi) strikes me as
intermediate between the above two performances.
Nearly all of these groups maintain good instrumental balance, but Dumay
seems too violin-centric. That is not helped by a recorded sound that
is screechy at higher registers. Dumay sometimes tosses off quick
flourishes which do not seem right for Mozart, and the group's use of
rubato sometimes strikes me as misjudged. The middle movements are quite
effetive, but (ii) seems too slow, too often losing the pulse.
The Trio Zimmerman, by contrast, has excellent balance, with no quirky
violin-playing. Their tempo choices strike me as just "right". Some
urgency and flexibility in the minuets raise them above just interludes,
while the finale has much of the HPF lightness but at a more comfortable
pace. (ii) may not quite reach the highs of HPF, but it's close. And
they play the work complete. Recorded sound is excellent.
If I had to choose just one of the above, it would be the Zimmermann.
But I would also not want to be without HPF and probably the French group. >> The work itself is priceless, with its final rondo a pure joy.
By coincidence: just in time for Mozart's birthday.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E8c83bpOVXo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9uSuQcD-_OA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ifMZIe_DWQ0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gyr8TE0ZhiI
On Fri, 27 Jan 2023, Dan Koren wrote:
On Thursday, January 26, 2023 at 8:58:53 PM UTC-8, Al Eisner wrote:
I have long regarded the Divertimento for String Trio (K563) as one
of Mozart's 3 (or 4) greatest chamber works. I have a modest four CD
recordings. In recent days I have listened to those performances,
and downloaded one more which had drawn some past praise in rmcr.
I did not do much side-by-side comparison, but I did take some notes.
This information was for my own benefit and, while I doubt there is much >> interest in today's rmcr for this sort of thing, I decided to post it.
The performances are:
Heifetz/Primrose/Feuermann, 1941 (on 2-CD Opus Kura set);
Budapest SQ (Roisman/Kroyt/M.Schneider), 1944 (live LOC, on 2-CD Bridge set);
Dumay/Caussé/Hoffman, 1990 (on 3-CD EMI Dumay Mozart set);
Trio Zimmermann (Zimmermann/Tamestit/Poltéra), 2009 (BIS hybrid SACD); >> Trio à cordes français, 1966 (FLAC download from a 4-CD Doremi set at Presto).
Two characteristics which of importance tto me are the repeats in the first
two of the six movements, and the chosen tempos. A summary of timings:
(i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) (vi)
HPF 5'31" 7'31" 4'13" 6'12" 4'01" 5'31"
Bud. 5'35" 8'22" 5'07" 6'47" 4'57" 5'22"
DCH 12'48" 12'49" 5'16" 7'22" 5'52" 6'32"
Zim. 12'15" 11'10" 5'18" 7'00" 5'11" 6'16"
Tcf 5'50" 9'13" 5'29" 7'48" 5'12" 5'48"
The first movement has the form AABA'B'A (maybe that last is A''). The
three older performances essentially do ABA. I this (in particular
the early arrival of the development) distorts the musical balance
of the movement. The second movement is in sonata form, AABA; the three >> older performances omit the exposition repeat. The two more-recent
recprdongs are complete.
Apart from not pesenting the whole work, the Heifetz et al. (HPF)
excels, especially the second movement, the heart of the trio: simply
gorgeous, yet with ample momentum and intensity; I only wish it had
gone on longer (i.e., with the repeat). Some tempos seem overly fast,
e.g., in (iii) and the theme of (iv). The finale would also be so,
save for their wonderful light touch, a sort of miracle. The recorded
sound is quite decent.
The Budapest performance has similarities to HPF's. They have their expectd
intensity in (ii), but do not reach the heights of HPF there. The Budapest's
tempos in (iii)-(v) are apt (more relaxed), but their rapid (vi) lacks the
lightness of HPF, and simply sounds too fast. There is also a mild
background hum throughout, which I find distracting.
The Trio à cordes français recording is in good sound. (i) is light
and lively, suffering only from the cuts, but (ii) is slower and less
effective than the HPF and Budapest. I like the varied well-balanced
approach to the variations movement (iv), while (vi) strikes me as
intermediate between the above two performances.
Nearly all of these groups maintain good instrumental balance, but Dumay >> seems too violin-centric. That is not helped by a recorded sound that
is screechy at higher registers. Dumay sometimes tosses off quick
flourishes which do not seem right for Mozart, and the group's use of
rubato sometimes strikes me as misjudged. The middle movements are quite >> effetive, but (ii) seems too slow, too often losing the pulse.
The Trio Zimmerman, by contrast, has excellent balance, with no quirky
violin-playing. Their tempo choices strike me as just "right". Some
urgency and flexibility in the minuets raise them above just interludes, >> while the finale has much of the HPF lightness but at a more comfortable >> pace. (ii) may not quite reach the highs of HPF, but it's close. And
they play the work complete. Recorded sound is excellent.
If I had to choose just one of the above, it would be the Zimmermann.
But I would also not want to be without HPF and probably the French group.
The work itself is priceless, with its final rondo a pure joy.
By coincidence: just in time for Mozart's birthday.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E8c83bpOVXo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9uSuQcD-_OA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ifMZIe_DWQ0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gyr8TE0ZhiIDan, you have said repeatedly that when you post bare links like this,
you are not necessarily saying you like the performances. Frankly, I've heard enough of the work recently that I am not going to listen to a
random performance in youtube sound. If you recommend one of
them (even better, with a reason), I might well decide to listen.
WAYLT means "What Are You Listening To".
It does not mean: Tell posters to listen to Something Else.
Nor: Post every link there is on youtube.
On Saturday, January 28, 2023 at 2:38:39 AM UTC-8, Herman wrote:
WAYLT means "What Are You Listening To".
Sez who?
On Saturday, January 28, 2023 at 9:08:29 PM UTC+1, dan....@gmail.com wrote:
On Saturday, January 28, 2023 at 2:38:39 AM UTC-8, Herman wrote:
WAYLT means "What Are You Listening To".
Sez who?
Sez the title, you illiterate racist moron.
I have long regarded the Divertimento for String Trio (K563) as one
of Mozart's 3 (or 4) greatest chamber works. I have a modest four CD recordings. In recent days I have listened to those performances,
and downloaded one more which had drawn some past praise in rmcr.
I did not do much side-by-side comparison, but I did take some notes.
This information was for my own benefit and, while I doubt there is much interest in today's rmcr for this sort of thing, I decided to post it.
The performances are:
Heifetz/Primrose/Feuermann, 1941 (on 2-CD Opus Kura set);
Budapest SQ (Roisman/Kroyt/M.Schneider), 1944 (live LOC, on 2-CD Bridge set);
Dumay/Caussé/Hoffman, 1990 (on 3-CD EMI Dumay Mozart set);
Trio Zimmermann (Zimmermann/Tamestit/Poltéra), 2009 (BIS hybrid SACD);
Trio à cordes français, 1966 (FLAC download from a 4-CD Doremi set at Presto).
Two characteristics which of importance tto me are the repeats in the first two of the six movements, and the chosen tempos. A summary of timings:
(i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) (vi)
HPF 5'31" 7'31" 4'13" 6'12" 4'01" 5'31"
Bud. 5'35" 8'22" 5'07" 6'47" 4'57" 5'22"
DCH 12'48" 12'49" 5'16" 7'22" 5'52" 6'32"
Zim. 12'15" 11'10" 5'18" 7'00" 5'11" 6'16"
Tcf 5'50" 9'13" 5'29" 7'48" 5'12" 5'48"
The first movement has the form AABA'B'A (maybe that last is A''). The
three older performances essentially do ABA. I this (in particular
the early arrival of the development) distorts the musical balance
of the movement. The second movement is in sonata form, AABA; the three older performances omit the exposition repeat. The two more-recent recprdongs are complete.
Apart from not pesenting the whole work, the Heifetz et al. (HPF)
excels, especially the second movement, the heart of the trio: simply gorgeous, yet with ample momentum and intensity; I only wish it had
gone on longer (i.e., with the repeat). Some tempos seem overly fast,
e.g., in (iii) and the theme of (iv). The finale would also be so,
save for their wonderful light touch, a sort of miracle. The recorded
sound is quite decent.
The Budapest performance has similarities to HPF's. They have their expectd intensity in (ii), but do not reach the heights of HPF there. The Budapest's tempos in (iii)-(v) are apt (more relaxed), but their rapid (vi) lacks the lightness of HPF, and simply sounds too fast. There is also a mild background hum throughout, which I find distracting.
The Trio à cordes français recording is in good sound. (i) is light
and lively, suffering only from the cuts, but (ii) is slower and less effective than the HPF and Budapest. I like the varied well-balanced approach to the variations movement (iv), while (vi) strikes me as intermediate between the above two performances.
Nearly all of these groups maintain good instrumental balance, but Dumay seems too violin-centric. That is not helped by a recorded sound that
is screechy at higher registers. Dumay sometimes tosses off quick
flourishes which do not seem right for Mozart, and the group's use of
rubato sometimes strikes me as misjudged. The middle movements are quite effetive, but (ii) seems too slow, too often losing the pulse.
The Trio Zimmerman, by contrast, has excellent balance, with no quirky violin-playing. Their tempo choices strike me as just "right". Some
urgency and flexibility in the minuets raise them above just interludes, while the finale has much of the HPF lightness but at a more comfortable pace. (ii) may not quite reach the highs of HPF, but it's close. And
they play the work complete. Recorded sound is excellent.
If I had to choose just one of the above, it would be the Zimmermann.
But I would also not want to be without HPF and probably the French group. The work itself is priceless, with its final rondo a pure joy.
By coincidence: just in time for Mozart's birthday.
--
Al Eisner
On Friday, January 27, 2023 at 4:58:53 AM UTC, Al Eisner wrote:
I have long regarded the Divertimento for String Trio (K563) as one
of Mozart's 3 (or 4) greatest chamber works. I have a modest four CD
recordings. In recent days I have listened to those performances,
and downloaded one more which had drawn some past praise in rmcr.
I did not do much side-by-side comparison, but I did take some notes.
This information was for my own benefit and, while I doubt there is much
interest in today's rmcr for this sort of thing, I decided to post it.
The performances are:
Heifetz/Primrose/Feuermann, 1941 (on 2-CD Opus Kura set);
Budapest SQ (Roisman/Kroyt/M.Schneider), 1944 (live LOC, on 2-CD Bridge set);
Dumay/Caussé/Hoffman, 1990 (on 3-CD EMI Dumay Mozart set);
Trio Zimmermann (Zimmermann/Tamestit/Poltéra), 2009 (BIS hybrid SACD);
Trio à cordes français, 1966 (FLAC download from a 4-CD Doremi set at Presto).
Two characteristics which of importance tto me are the repeats in the first >> two of the six movements, and the chosen tempos. A summary of timings:
(i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) (vi)
HPF 5'31" 7'31" 4'13" 6'12" 4'01" 5'31"
Bud. 5'35" 8'22" 5'07" 6'47" 4'57" 5'22"
DCH 12'48" 12'49" 5'16" 7'22" 5'52" 6'32"
Zim. 12'15" 11'10" 5'18" 7'00" 5'11" 6'16"
Tcf 5'50" 9'13" 5'29" 7'48" 5'12" 5'48"
The first movement has the form AABA'B'A (maybe that last is A''). The
three older performances essentially do ABA. I this (in particular
the early arrival of the development) distorts the musical balance
of the movement. The second movement is in sonata form, AABA; the three
older performances omit the exposition repeat. The two more-recent
recprdongs are complete.
Apart from not pesenting the whole work, the Heifetz et al. (HPF)
excels, especially the second movement, the heart of the trio: simply
gorgeous, yet with ample momentum and intensity; I only wish it had
gone on longer (i.e., with the repeat). Some tempos seem overly fast,
e.g., in (iii) and the theme of (iv). The finale would also be so,
save for their wonderful light touch, a sort of miracle. The recorded
sound is quite decent.
The Budapest performance has similarities to HPF's. They have their expectd >> intensity in (ii), but do not reach the heights of HPF there. The Budapest's >> tempos in (iii)-(v) are apt (more relaxed), but their rapid (vi) lacks the >> lightness of HPF, and simply sounds too fast. There is also a mild
background hum throughout, which I find distracting.
The Trio à cordes français recording is in good sound. (i) is light
and lively, suffering only from the cuts, but (ii) is slower and less
effective than the HPF and Budapest. I like the varied well-balanced
approach to the variations movement (iv), while (vi) strikes me as
intermediate between the above two performances.
Nearly all of these groups maintain good instrumental balance, but Dumay
seems too violin-centric. That is not helped by a recorded sound that
is screechy at higher registers. Dumay sometimes tosses off quick
flourishes which do not seem right for Mozart, and the group's use of
rubato sometimes strikes me as misjudged. The middle movements are quite
effetive, but (ii) seems too slow, too often losing the pulse.
The Trio Zimmerman, by contrast, has excellent balance, with no quirky
violin-playing. Their tempo choices strike me as just "right". Some
urgency and flexibility in the minuets raise them above just interludes,
while the finale has much of the HPF lightness but at a more comfortable
pace. (ii) may not quite reach the highs of HPF, but it's close. And
they play the work complete. Recorded sound is excellent.
If I had to choose just one of the above, it would be the Zimmermann.
But I would also not want to be without HPF and probably the French group. >> The work itself is priceless, with its final rondo a pure joy.
By coincidence: just in time for Mozart's birthday.
--
Al Eisner
This one quite interesting I think -- good sound too
https://www.prestomusic.com/classical/products/8615402--mozart-divertimento-k-563-preludes-and-fugues-k-404a
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E8c83bpOVXoDan, you have said repeatedly that when you post bare links like this,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9uSuQcD-_OA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ifMZIe_DWQ0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gyr8TE0ZhiI
you are not necessarily saying you like the performances. Frankly, I've
heard enough of the work recently that I am not going to listen to a
random performance in youtube sound. If you recommend one of
them (even better, with a reason), I might well decide to listen.
Incorrect. I like the performances, however
that does not mean I recommend them to
others.
dk
On Fri, 27 Jan 2023, Dan Koren wrote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E8c83bpOVXoDan, you have said repeatedly that when you post bare links like this,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9uSuQcD-_OA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ifMZIe_DWQ0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gyr8TE0ZhiI
you are not necessarily saying you like the performances. Frankly, I've
heard enough of the work recently that I am not going to listen to a
random performance in youtube sound. If you recommend one of
them (even better, with a reason), I might well decide to listen.
Incorrect. I like the performances, however
that does not mean I recommend them to
others.
Not incorrect, but I'm certainly not going to expend any effort digging
up old posts to document it.
For this case: just 10 minute before posting the above response, in
another post, Dan said "I recommend recordings". So it's telling that
he did not recommend any of these four, and I have no intention of
clicking on them. Of course, Dan doesn't care if I or anyoine does
or dessn't, so all is well.
On Saturday, January 28, 2023 at 11:38:26 PM UTC-8, Al Eisner wrote:
On Fri, 27 Jan 2023, Dan Koren wrote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E8c83bpOVXoDan, you have said repeatedly that when you post bare links like this, >>>> you are not necessarily saying you like the performances. Frankly, I've >>>> heard enough of the work recently that I am not going to listen to a
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9uSuQcD-_OA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ifMZIe_DWQ0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gyr8TE0ZhiI
random performance in youtube sound. If you recommend one of
them (even better, with a reason), I might well decide to listen.
Incorrect. I like the performances, however
that does not mean I recommend them to
others.
Not incorrect, but I'm certainly not going to expend any effort digging
up old posts to document it.
For this case: just 10 minute before posting the above response, in
another post, Dan said "I recommend recordings". So it's telling that
he did not recommend any of these four, and I have no intention of
clicking on them. Of course, Dan doesn't care if I or anyoine does
or dessn't, so all is well.
Aren't there already enough strict literalits
in this ng? Otherwise, welcome to the club!
dk
On Sun, 29 Jan 2023, Dan Koren wrote:
On Saturday, January 28, 2023 at 11:38:26 PM UTC-8, Al Eisner wrote:
On Fri, 27 Jan 2023, Dan Koren wrote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E8c83bpOVXoDan, you have said repeatedly that when you post bare links like this, >>>> you are not necessarily saying you like the performances. Frankly, I've >>>> heard enough of the work recently that I am not going to listen to a >>>> random performance in youtube sound. If you recommend one of
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9uSuQcD-_OA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ifMZIe_DWQ0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gyr8TE0ZhiI
them (even better, with a reason), I might well decide to listen.
Incorrect. I like the performances, however
that does not mean I recommend them to
others.
Not incorrect, but I'm certainly not going to expend any effort digging
up old posts to document it.
For this case: just 10 minute before posting the above response, in
another post, Dan said "I recommend recordings". So it's telling that
he did not recommend any of these four, and I have no intention of
clicking on them. Of course, Dan doesn't care if I or anyoine does
or dessn't, so all is well.
Aren't there already enough strict literalits
in this ng? Otherwise, welcome to the club!
Thank you. :)
And apologies for my misquote. Being literal,
what you said was "I recommend performances".
That's what I was looking for.
On Fri, 27 Jan 2023, Dan Koren wrote:
On Thursday, January 26, 2023 at 8:58:53 PM UTC-8, Al Eisner wrote:
I have long regarded the Divertimento for String Trio (K563) as one
of Mozart's 3 (or 4) greatest chamber works. I have a modest four CD
recordings. In recent days I have listened to those performances,
and downloaded one more which had drawn some past praise in rmcr.
I did not do much side-by-side comparison, but I did take some notes.
This information was for my own benefit and, while I doubt there is much >> interest in today's rmcr for this sort of thing, I decided to post it.
The performances are:
Heifetz/Primrose/Feuermann, 1941 (on 2-CD Opus Kura set);
Budapest SQ (Roisman/Kroyt/M.Schneider), 1944 (live LOC, on 2-CD Bridge set);
Dumay/Caussé/Hoffman, 1990 (on 3-CD EMI Dumay Mozart set);
Trio Zimmermann (Zimmermann/Tamestit/Poltéra), 2009 (BIS hybrid SACD); >> Trio à cordes français, 1966 (FLAC download from a 4-CD Doremi set at Presto).
Two characteristics which of importance tto me are the repeats in the first
two of the six movements, and the chosen tempos. A summary of timings:
(i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) (vi)
HPF 5'31" 7'31" 4'13" 6'12" 4'01" 5'31"
Bud. 5'35" 8'22" 5'07" 6'47" 4'57" 5'22"
DCH 12'48" 12'49" 5'16" 7'22" 5'52" 6'32"
Zim. 12'15" 11'10" 5'18" 7'00" 5'11" 6'16"
Tcf 5'50" 9'13" 5'29" 7'48" 5'12" 5'48"
The first movement has the form AABA'B'A (maybe that last is A''). The
three older performances essentially do ABA. I this (in particular
the early arrival of the development) distorts the musical balance
of the movement. The second movement is in sonata form, AABA; the three >> older performances omit the exposition repeat. The two more-recent
recprdongs are complete.
Apart from not pesenting the whole work, the Heifetz et al. (HPF)
excels, especially the second movement, the heart of the trio: simply
gorgeous, yet with ample momentum and intensity; I only wish it had
gone on longer (i.e., with the repeat). Some tempos seem overly fast,
e.g., in (iii) and the theme of (iv). The finale would also be so,
save for their wonderful light touch, a sort of miracle. The recorded
sound is quite decent.
The Budapest performance has similarities to HPF's. They have their expectd
intensity in (ii), but do not reach the heights of HPF there. The Budapest's
tempos in (iii)-(v) are apt (more relaxed), but their rapid (vi) lacks the
lightness of HPF, and simply sounds too fast. There is also a mild
background hum throughout, which I find distracting.
The Trio à cordes français recording is in good sound. (i) is light
and lively, suffering only from the cuts, but (ii) is slower and less
effective than the HPF and Budapest. I like the varied well-balanced
approach to the variations movement (iv), while (vi) strikes me as
intermediate between the above two performances.
Nearly all of these groups maintain good instrumental balance, but Dumay >> seems too violin-centric. That is not helped by a recorded sound that
is screechy at higher registers. Dumay sometimes tosses off quick
flourishes which do not seem right for Mozart, and the group's use of
rubato sometimes strikes me as misjudged. The middle movements are quite >> effetive, but (ii) seems too slow, too often losing the pulse.
The Trio Zimmerman, by contrast, has excellent balance, with no quirky
violin-playing. Their tempo choices strike me as just "right". Some
urgency and flexibility in the minuets raise them above just interludes, >> while the finale has much of the HPF lightness but at a more comfortable >> pace. (ii) may not quite reach the highs of HPF, but it's close. And
they play the work complete. Recorded sound is excellent.
If I had to choose just one of the above, it would be the Zimmermann.
But I would also not want to be without HPF and probably the French group.
The work itself is priceless, with its final rondo a pure joy.
By coincidence: just in time for Mozart's birthday.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E8c83bpOVXo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9uSuQcD-_OA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ifMZIe_DWQ0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gyr8TE0ZhiI
Dan, you have said repeatedly that when you post
bare links like this, you are not necessarily saying
you like the performances.
Frankly, I've heard enough of the work recently that I
am not going to listen to a random performance in
youtube sound. If you recommend one of them (even
better, with a reason), I might well decide to listen.
Others of course might react differently (in either case).
On Sunday, January 29, 2023 at 1:07:49 PM UTC-8, Al Eisner wrote:
On Sun, 29 Jan 2023, Dan Koren wrote:
On Saturday, January 28, 2023 at 11:38:26 PM UTC-8, Al Eisner wrote:
On Fri, 27 Jan 2023, Dan Koren wrote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E8c83bpOVXoDan, you have said repeatedly that when you post bare links like this, >>>>>> you are not necessarily saying you like the performances. Frankly, I've >>>>>> heard enough of the work recently that I am not going to listen to a >>>>>> random performance in youtube sound. If you recommend one of
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9uSuQcD-_OA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ifMZIe_DWQ0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gyr8TE0ZhiI
them (even better, with a reason), I might well decide to listen.
Incorrect. I like the performances, however
that does not mean I recommend them to
others.
Not incorrect, but I'm certainly not going to expend any effort digging >>>> up old posts to document it.
For this case: just 10 minute before posting the above response, in
another post, Dan said "I recommend recordings". So it's telling that
he did not recommend any of these four, and I have no intention of
clicking on them. Of course, Dan doesn't care if I or anyoine does
or dessn't, so all is well.
Aren't there already enough strict literalits
in this ng? Otherwise, welcome to the club!
Thank you. :)
And apologies for my misquote. Being literal,
what you said was "I recommend performances".
That's what I was looking for.
IIRC I said "I do not recommend performers".
And in the following sentence I added "I
recommend performances". Taken in
context this means I recommend
performances on merits alone WHEN I
recommend them, rather than based on
the identity of the artist (or their hair or
gender or age or their wardrobe or skin
color). Mentioning a performance does
not amount to a recommendation.
On Sun, 29 Jan 2023, Dan Koren wrote:
On Sunday, January 29, 2023 at 1:07:49 PM UTC-8, Al Eisner wrote:
On Sun, 29 Jan 2023, Dan Koren wrote:
On Saturday, January 28, 2023 at 11:38:26 PM UTC-8, Al Eisner wrote:
On Fri, 27 Jan 2023, Dan Koren wrote:
Incorrect. I like the performances, howeverhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E8c83bpOVXoDan, you have said repeatedly that when you post bare links like this, >>>>>> you are not necessarily saying you like the performances. Frankly, I've
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9uSuQcD-_OA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ifMZIe_DWQ0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gyr8TE0ZhiI
heard enough of the work recently that I am not going to listen to a >>>>>> random performance in youtube sound. If you recommend one of
them (even better, with a reason), I might well decide to listen. >>>>>
that does not mean I recommend them to
others.
Not incorrect, but I'm certainly not going to expend any effort digging >>>> up old posts to document it.
For this case: just 10 minute before posting the above response, in
another post, Dan said "I recommend recordings". So it's telling that >>>> he did not recommend any of these four, and I have no intention of
clicking on them. Of course, Dan doesn't care if I or anyoine does
or dessn't, so all is well.
Aren't there already enough strict literalits
in this ng? Otherwise, welcome to the club!
Thank you. :)
And apologies for my misquote. Being literal,
what you said was "I recommend performances".
That's what I was looking for.
IIRC I said "I do not recommend performers".
And in the following sentence I added "I
recommend performances". Taken in
context this means I recommend
performances on merits alone WHEN I
recommend them, rather than based on
the identity of the artist (or their hair or
gender or age or their wardrobe or skin
color). Mentioning a performance does
not amount to a recommendation.
Understood. That is how I interpreted it.
(Although there seem to be performers
you blanket disrecommend - am I wrong
about that?)
I have long regarded the Divertimento for String Trio (K563) as one
of Mozart's 3 (or 4) greatest chamber works. I have a modest four CD recordings. In recent days I have listened to those performances,
and downloaded one more which had drawn some past praise in rmcr.
I did not do much side-by-side comparison, but I did take some notes.
This information was for my own benefit and, while I doubt there is much interest in today's rmcr for this sort of thing, I decided to post it.
The performances are:
Heifetz/Primrose/Feuermann, 1941 (on 2-CD Opus Kura set);
Budapest SQ (Roisman/Kroyt/M.Schneider), 1944 (live LOC, on 2-CD Bridge set);
Dumay/Caussé/Hoffman, 1990 (on 3-CD EMI Dumay Mozart set);
Trio Zimmermann (Zimmermann/Tamestit/Poltéra), 2009 (BIS hybrid SACD);
Trio à cordes français, 1966 (FLAC download from a 4-CD Doremi set at Presto).
Two characteristics which of importance tto me are the repeats in the first two of the six movements, and the chosen tempos. A summary of timings:
(i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) (vi)
HPF 5'31" 7'31" 4'13" 6'12" 4'01" 5'31"
Bud. 5'35" 8'22" 5'07" 6'47" 4'57" 5'22"
DCH 12'48" 12'49" 5'16" 7'22" 5'52" 6'32"
Zim. 12'15" 11'10" 5'18" 7'00" 5'11" 6'16"
Tcf 5'50" 9'13" 5'29" 7'48" 5'12" 5'48"
The first movement has the form AABA'B'A (maybe that last is A''). The
three older performances essentially do ABA. I this (in particular
the early arrival of the development) distorts the musical balance
of the movement. The second movement is in sonata form, AABA; the three older performances omit the exposition repeat. The two more-recent recprdongs are complete.
Apart from not pesenting the whole work, the Heifetz et al. (HPF)
excels, especially the second movement, the heart of the trio: simply gorgeous, yet with ample momentum and intensity; I only wish it had
gone on longer (i.e., with the repeat). Some tempos seem overly fast,
e.g., in (iii) and the theme of (iv). The finale would also be so,
save for their wonderful light touch, a sort of miracle. The recorded
sound is quite decent.
The Budapest performance has similarities to HPF's. They have their expectd intensity in (ii), but do not reach the heights of HPF there. The Budapest's tempos in (iii)-(v) are apt (more relaxed), but their rapid (vi) lacks the lightness of HPF, and simply sounds too fast. There is also a mild background hum throughout, which I find distracting.
The Trio à cordes français recording is in good sound. (i) is light
and lively, suffering only from the cuts, but (ii) is slower and less effective than the HPF and Budapest. I like the varied well-balanced approach to the variations movement (iv), while (vi) strikes me as intermediate between the above two performances.
Nearly all of these groups maintain good instrumental balance, but Dumay seems too violin-centric. That is not helped by a recorded sound that
is screechy at higher registers. Dumay sometimes tosses off quick
flourishes which do not seem right for Mozart, and the group's use of
rubato sometimes strikes me as misjudged. The middle movements are quite effetive, but (ii) seems too slow, too often losing the pulse.
The Trio Zimmerman, by contrast, has excellent balance, with no quirky violin-playing. Their tempo choices strike me as just "right". Some
urgency and flexibility in the minuets raise them above just interludes, while the finale has much of the HPF lightness but at a more comfortable pace. (ii) may not quite reach the highs of HPF, but it's close. And
they play the work complete. Recorded sound is excellent.
If I had to choose just one of the above, it would be the Zimmermann.
But I would also not want to be without HPF and probably the French group. The work itself is priceless, with its final rondo a pure joy.
By coincidence: just in time for Mozart's birthday.
--
Al Eisner
I have long regarded the Divertimento for String Trio (K563) as one
of Mozart's 3 (or 4) greatest chamber works.
This information was for my own benefit and, while I doubt there is much interest in today's rmcr for this sort of thing, I decided to post it.
On Sunday, February 12, 2023 at 7:19:53 AM UTC+1, Notsure01 wrote:
On 1/26/23 11:58 PM, Al Eisner wrote:Why would that content have to be 'canonical'?
I have long regarded the Divertimento for String Trio (K563) as one
of Mozart's 3 (or 4) greatest chamber works.
Alas, the best we can do is to try to bring the discussion back to the
canonical content - so thanks Al!
No one here is a beginner 'building a library'.
You're the most recent arrival and you appear to be over sixty and you've been busy with CM for decades.
In other words, rather than discussing light bulbs or mideast peace it
would be better to stick, when possible, to discussing what a reasonable person would consider to be part of the set of "Classical Music".
By "canonical" I meant the following:
The adjective canonical is applied in many contexts to
mean "according to the canon" – the standard, rule or
primary source that is accepted as authoritative for
the body of knowledge or literature in that context.
On 1/26/23 11:58 PM, Al Eisner wrote:
I have long regarded the Divertimento for String Trio (K563) as one
of Mozart's 3 (or 4) greatest chamber works.
Alas, the best we can do is to try to bring the discussion back to the canonical content - so thanks Al!
"Authoritative" is meaningless in art. It is in fact
retrograde and counterproductive. You reveal
the mindset of a clerk.
dk
On Sunday, February 12, 2023 at 8:51:50 AM UTC+1, Dan Koren wrote:
"Authoritative" is meaningless in art. It is in fact
retrograde and counterproductive. You reveal
the mindset of a clerk.
Says the guy who's forever pressuring peeps to
listen to the same dozen Chopin etc pieces over
and over again in fractionally different performances.
In other words, rather than discussing light bulbs or mideast peace it
would be better to stick, when possible, to discussing what a reasonable person would consider to be part of the set of "Classical Music".
On Saturday, February 11, 2023 at 11:34:31 PM UTC-8, Notsure01 wrote:
In other words, rather than discussing light bulbs or mideast peace it
would be better to stick, when possible, to discussing what a reasonable
person would consider to be part of the set of "Classical Music".
One's person's notions of "reasonableness" might be, and
often is, another one's notion of "as mad as a March hare".
You seem to be fishing again for some undefined, common
shared belief system. You really need to stick your head in a
toilet and flush several times.
dk
On 2/12/2023 5:45 PM, Dan Koren wrote:
On Saturday, February 11, 2023 at 11:34:31 PM UTC-8, Notsure01 wrote:
In other words, rather than discussing light bulbs or mideast peace it
would be better to stick, when possible, to discussing what a reasonable >>> person would consider to be part of the set of "Classical Music".
One's person's notions of "reasonableness" might be, and
often is, another one's notion of "as mad as a March hare".
You seem to be fishing again for some undefined, common
shared belief system. You really need to stick your head in a
toilet and flush several times.
dk
He seems unaware that "it would be better" simply means "In my opinion."
On 2/12/23 10:31 PM, Frank Berger wrote:
On 2/12/2023 5:45 PM, Dan Koren wrote:
On Saturday, February 11, 2023 at 11:34:31 PM UTC-8, Notsure01 wrote:
In other words, rather than discussing light bulbs or mideast peace it >>> would be better to stick, when possible, to discussing what a reasonable >>> person would consider to be part of the set of "Classical Music".
One's person's notions of "reasonableness" might be, and
often is, another one's notion of "as mad as a March hare".
You seem to be fishing again for some undefined, common
shared belief system. You really need to stick your head in a
toilet and flush several times.
He seems unaware that "it would be better" simply means "In my opinion."
Frank, you are usually the most reasonable and rational of
contributors. The fact that when I state my opinion it is ...
an opinion appears to me, IMHO, to be rather obvious.
Wife to man: "Close the window - it is cold
outside!" Husband to wife: "So if I close
the window it won't be cold outside?"
And I do suspect that most RMCR fans
come here for discussions of recordings
of Classical Music and would rather tune
in to the World Wrestling Foundation if they
enjoy conflict..
On 2/12/23 10:31 PM, Frank Berger wrote:
On 2/12/2023 5:45 PM, Dan Koren wrote:
On Saturday, February 11, 2023 at 11:34:31 PM UTC-8, Notsure01 wrote:
In other words, rather than discussing light bulbs or mideast peace it >>>> would be better to stick, when possible, to discussing what a reasonable >>>> person would consider to be part of the set of "Classical Music".
One's person's notions of "reasonableness" might be, and
often is, another one's notion of "as mad as a March hare".
You seem to be fishing again for some undefined, common
shared belief system. You really need to stick your head in a
toilet and flush several times.
dk
He seems unaware that "it would be better" simply means "In my opinion."
Frank, you are usually the most reasonable and rational of contributors. The fact that when I state my >opinion it is ... an opinion appears to me, IMHO, to be rather obvious.
Wife to man: "Close the window - it is cold outside!"
Husband to wife: "So if I close the window it won't be cold outside?"
And I do suspect that most RMCR fans come here for discussions of recordings of Classical Music and would rather tune in to the World Wrestling Foundation if they enjoy conflict...
On 1/26/23 11:58 PM, Al Eisner wrote:
I have long regarded the Divertimento for String Trio (K563) as one
of Mozart's 3 (or 4) greatest chamber works.
I agree - I would add the K. 515 quintet, and the clarinet quintet - but wonder which other works folks here would choose? And virtually all the quartets, violin sonatas, and piano trios are interesting, but which are the greatest?
This information was for my own benefit and, while I doubt there is much
interest in today's rmcr for this sort of thing, I decided to post it.
Here I disagree! I suspect that there are very many lurkers here, drawn by the occasional crumbs of insights and perspectives around works and recordings, but wary of involvement in the bar fights to avoid injury from the flying whiskey bottles - there is no barkeep here to keep order...
Alas, the best we can do is to try to bring the discussion back to the canonical content - so thanks Al!
And here I go - whining again - but I'll try to get back to the subject -- I also have the Trio Zimmermann version - I think it is one of the most perfect performances of anything - rather than being just a note perfect rendition there is distinctive phrasing throughout - and it is very well recorded.
On Sun, 12 Feb 2023, Notsure01 wrote:
On 1/26/23 11:58 PM, Al Eisner wrote:
This information was for my own benefit and, while I doubt there is much >>> interest in today's rmcr for this sort of thing, I decided to post it.
Here I disagree! I suspect that there are very many lurkers here,
drawn by the occasional crumbs of insights and perspectives around
works and recordings, but wary of involvement in the bar fights to
avoid injury from the flying whiskey bottles - there is no barkeep
here to keep order...
Alas, the best we can do is to try to bring the discussion back to the
canonical content - so thanks Al
Thanks for the comments.
I would take partial exception to "canonical". Similar reports on
less familiar works could be even more interesting. We used to have
some partiipants here who were very good at this sort of thing.
Dan was kind enough to advise me how to fix up my ears: "stick your head
in a toilet and flush several times". Unfortunately I tried that - I
think I've gotten all the water out now - but I find I still don't
enormously appreciate H. J. Lim!!
Dan was kind enough to advise me how to fix up my ears: "stick your head
in a toilet and flush several times". Unfortunately I tried that - I
think I've gotten all the water out now - but I find I still don't
enormously appreciate H. J. Lim!!
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 300 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 91:09:07 |
| Calls: | 6,697 |
| Calls today: | 2 |
| Files: | 12,232 |
| Messages: | 5,348,574 |