Hi Nick - well im not a musician (to my lifetime regret) and to be honest some critics are so full of musical jargon i dont really understand their point - apart from sibelius 4 and 6 my favourite composition is Tapiola - the only version i really know is again Karajan - are their any others you can recommend - i think with this piece in particular interpretation is so important as i find it all depends on the right atmosphere - heard Rattle once on tv but imo ruined it by going too fast - maybe i am wrong who knows 

Hi Offbeat

Tapiola is certainly a work that can go wrong if the conductor doesn't draw the threads together well enough.

As it happens I have two versions by Karajan (both DG, one mid-sixties and the other 1984) and both are glorious, in my view (particularly the later one). It sounds like you will already be hearing a very sophisticated view of the score.

BUT if you would like more recommendations.....I rather like the Segerstam (coupled with wonderful account of the Lemminkainen Legends) which is very atmospheric, but also makes structural sense. Much the same could be said about the Vanksa (I'm a great fan of his Sibelius in general) and Ashkenazy is good to! Come to think of it, I don't think I've heard a recording of it that I really don't like (I think I have 13 versions for some inexpicable reason!). Both Jarvi versions are rather enjoyable, Blomstedt makes sense of it, berglund brings some real Finnish insight, Gibson seems to know how to make it hang together, Sakari's is powerful.........

I'll tell you what though, I think Karajan 1984 is the one I would turn to if pushed, though I can't imagine being without the others.

I was thinking today that I would love to play in an orchestra (I went to hear the LSO play some Brahms and Janacek tonight - marvellous!) but I never really tried for that. Oh well, I do rather enjoy being  maths teacher anyway!

Regards

Nick

Hey Tam

Both my Karajan recordings are DG. I don't have an EMI version (though I have some of hi EMI Symphony recordings).

The only part of Oramo's set that I have heard is the Fifth/Karelia/Pohjola's Daughter and I stopped there because there were many other versions that I wanted to get first. Should I complete the set? I'm not overly fond of the recorded sound on the 5th (though the performance of Pohjola;s daughter is rather outstanding!).

Nick

Hi Nick
tks yr info re Tapiola - with that many versions must be quite a puzzle over which one to play !! Not sure date of my Karajan recording although its coupled with the 5th...Yes i agree would be great to play in an orchestra - always like to see the youth orchestras because they seem to have the enthusiasm of youth before years of habit come into play..

I am listening to that third movement just now actually. 'Bleak' is certainly a better description than 'cool'. I have ordered the Turangalila Symphony. There are several versions on two CDs, but I have ordered the one CD version, which the expert salesman at HMV says is a good one.

Just because it's too big a question doesn't mean we shouldn't carry on with it though. Continuing with the Celibidache Tchaikovsky 5, which I acquired a while ago at OS's recommendation, one effect it has is to make me listen to everyone else's Tchaik 5 in a different way and somehow appreciate them more.

First impressions are also very important, I think, especially with recordings: the recording of a work you get to know first is the one that most likely will be your benchmark, consciously or unconsciously, from then on.

Getting back to the original question ...

A performance or recording means nothing in itself and cannot be judged except in the context of the audience.  I would judge a performance by how the audience reacts to it.  In short, if the audience is gripped by it, it's a good performance, in spite of any technical imperfections such as wrong notes or poor intonation.  If they aren't, then technical perfection is to no avail.

In the concert hall, the good performances are those where the audience sits perfectly still.  There isn't the slightest sound nor any sign of any motion.  Nobody is reading the programme.  Nobody is fanning themselves, no matter how hot it may be.  Nobody is looking around or up at the ceiling.  Some may be in tears.  I've been present at a few of these - Sinaiski conducting the BBC Phil in Schostakovich 8, Edward Downes with the same orchestra in Shostakovich 7, a performance of Howells's Collegium Regale canticles at evensong at St Albans Abbey, Peter Grimes at Opera North last year.

Another feature of a good performance is that, as a member of the audience, no time appears to pass between the beginning and end of the piece.  The music is all.

More difficult to judge of course in the case of recordings because you can't see how the audience is reacting.  A great recording will result in meals being burnt and people having to stop their cars to devote all their attention to the music.

Of course, the less technically perfect a performance is, the less likely the audience is to be gripped by it, because the imperfections remind the listener that he is in the real world of the concert hall, and not the world of the composer's imagination.

One thing I always notice about what I think is a great performance is the amazing amount of detail the performers get into the piece.  You know what I mean?  Articulation varying from note to note, tiny amounts of rubato (yes, even in early music!) and constant change of dynamic.  George Guest in his autobiography says that no two consecutive notes should ever be sung at the same volume.  And so it is in any music.  Conductors who can pull that off with an orchestra, and then go on to reveal the architecture of the piece as a coherent whole are the ones who produce great performances.

I remember someone (possibly the dreaded Rafferty) asking John Lill what made a perfect performance.  He said he didn't know, but that sometimes it worked, and sometimes it didn't.  I guess that in the end, that's all there is to be said on the subject. 

But no doubt our good friend Mr. Grew will pop up with an objective scheme for classifying performances into seven levels of excellence and prove me to be a complete idiot.  Has the good Syd not joined this forum yet?  We hope he soon will and give us all a laugh.

My favourite performance as a player are the ones where I get off stage at the end and I can't remember them! I think that must be something similar...