Posted by Rick Denney on February 18, 2002 at 12:07:08:
In Reply to: Re: Re: Re: Re: Old CSO Low Brass......overrated???????? posted by but... on February 16, 2002 at 17:37:40:
No, the way to avoid getting slammed is to not post at all. Everyone gets slammed from time to time, without any exceptions that I can recall.
The best way to minimize getting slammed is to say something that makes people think instead of merely making them react. But that distinction is fluid and often fails, so you have to be prepared to defend your positions, or to be humble if you learn something new.
On the subject:
I've heard lots of bad recordings from famous players. So, are the famous because of some mass-induced hypnotism? Of course not. They are famous because they made it happen at the time, in ways others didn't. Judging them by standards other than that isn't really fair to them, and it has the effect of minimizing their accomplishments. I have heard Mr. Jacobs and Mr. Herseth perform with the CSO only twice, and both occasions on tour when Mr. Jacobs's health had already started to decline. I had no doubt in my mind that the two of them had earned their reputations, based on those two imperfect samples. Oh, to be so imperfect myself!
I also have a recording of one of the British orchestras hacking its way through the Vaughan Williams Fourth Symphony, with the composer on the podium. The recording was made in 1937, with poor instrument technology and recording technology, and even reduced standards of performance induced by the privations imposed on Britain in the late 30's as a result of depression and looming war. Richard will probably tell you that it remains in print, under one guise or another, because despite its flaws it is still the most dynamic and powerful recording of that extremely difficult work available. I cringe at some of the obvious mistakes, but it is still my favorite because it is most true to the music. That doesn't mean it's the only version I listen to, however.
Let's face up to the fact that standards of play have changed over the years. In many ways, we value technical perfection over musical interpretation these days, with standards driven in some ways by our ability to reconstruct bits of recordings into "perfect" presentations. Also, musical standards have changed, with conducting and performing practices coming and going according to fashion (e.g. portamento or not, vibrato or not, slower tempi than what is marked, rigid adherence to marked tempi, etc.). I respect and admire the performances conducted, for example, by Fricsay or Furtwangler, even though their choice of tempi seem an assault on the composer's intentions.
Brass playing in orchestras is what it is today in part because of the CSO brass section of the 50's. There are good and bad aspects to that, I'm sure, but they established a foundation of sound and blend on which many modern performers are still building. At some point (and maybe we are already there with the generation coming up), their approach will seem dated and misguided, just as Fricsay's romanticized Beethoven seems to me misguided. That doesn't make them any less brilliant. The challenge to the younger generation is to exercise humility. Their preferences are part of a process of ebb and flow, and they will laugh at their early positions when they grow older and standards change yet again.
Rick "who used to think Fricsay defined Beethoven" Denney