...which if anything only serves to illustrate that Der Freischütz consists of more than just the music Weber wrote for it. He wrote the music to fit a certain context and what he wrote assumes the dramatic framework he had in mind, in its pacing and in its content. I can't seriously entertain any notion that the arias of Der Freischütz have the same dramatic effect beginning out of the blue as they do with the dialogue which establishes their situation. (For some reason it's Ännchen's arias that are particularly springing to mind - of course her part in the action is exactly the sort of thing a narration centred on Samiel is going to have a hard time finding a context for and as I remember they jar particularly uncomfortably on the Weil recording.)

Mozart didn't write all that much of the recitatives for La Clemenza di Tito; Bizet didn't write recits for Carmen. That doesn't mean a performance which simply inserts new ones and substitutes an arbitrary dramatic framework for the one the composer had in mind can necessarily be considered an adequate representation of the work.

It may illustrate that to Mr O Sudden, but what it illustrates to me is that there's space in (between?) Weber's music for different angles on what that music can mean, embedded as it is in the very centre of what's generally called "German romanticism" and all that might (have come to) stand for. I'm not suggesting that such a radical approach is the only way of doing this or that this new version of the text should in any way replace the original. Anyone producing this work especially in Germany has to enter into a relationship not just with the work itself but also with its history and position within the culture, and this I think the Weil version does in a creative and expressive way, even if not always comfortably.

What I meant was "replace" in the sense of "superseding" the original version. Der Freischütz has been performed thousands of times in many different ways. I don't see that there's anything "unacceptable" about doing it this way, even if some don't like it. I find it a convincing and consistent piece of work (though of course I would never want to be without Kleiber et al.) The wording on the CD cover is

CARL MARIA VON WEBER
DER FREISCHÜTZ
Mit neuen Texten von Steffen Kopetzky

which I think is as much of a "health warning" as anyone might need. On the basis of this recording I think Kopetzky is an interesting writer whose other work I look forward to seeing.

There is a whole tradition of 19th century work involving spoken text and music (ollie and autoharp in particular know lots about this tradition), in which I couldn't imagine one could change the spoken text and still be able to claim to be performing the works in question. Changing the spoken text in Die Freischütz would seem to me to be a similar situation. Would anyone think one could do this with Schumann's Manfred, say (actually, people have, and cut the spoken text significantly for recordings, but I feel that to be a travesty, especially with such a literary-inclined figure as Schumann who was extremely careful with his use of text)?

I must admit I almost never listen to the spoken dialogue. If I were fluent in German it might be different (we are mainly talking about certain operas by Mozart and Weber here) but should I sit through it just as a means of punctuating the songs?

I have four versions of The Magic Flute, all with dialogue. Abbado and Mackerras squeeze it on to two CDs, Bohm on to two and a half but Colin Davis takes three. That is because his version lasts for over 162 minutes and, considering the need for a suitable break, for it to be put on to two one of the CDs would have to last almost 90 minutes. I don't know whether that is because he is slower than the others or because the others trim the dialogue. (After Pamina's second-act aria, Makerras has some interesting lion noises thrown in, whereas Bohm has no dialogue at all.)

That makes me wonder. If I were interested in buying a full-price recording of a certain opera and I had the choice of getting all the music and dialogue on three CDs or just the music on two (and at two thirds of the price), I must admit I would be tempted by the latter.

What I don't like is extra noises over the music which can become tiresome on repeated listening. With Mackerras, there is talking over the introduction to the Bird-catcher's song. Surely some people will want to listen to that aria on its own at times and the talking will quite spoil such a famous part of the opera.

Not going to rise to that one but I will point the curious hither.

Perhaps Member Barrett might like to seek out M. Castil-Blaze's early 'radical reinterpretation'.

Thanks, ollie.