[Punnisher]

I have been thinking about this since I noticed some of my listening habbits/preferences.

Sometimes when I listen to a new interpretation of a favorite classical work, I will reject the newer interpretation. So far it has been the original that has been preferred to me. Though, I would argue that the original is clearly superior. Why is that? Is it because I heard sample A first and therefore am making comparisons and contrasts of sample B?

Two examples of mine:

Mahler Symphony no. 2 (one of my favorite pieces of music, ever).

I heard and owned this version first:
Amazon.com: Mahler Symphony No. 2 "Resurrection" / Kaplan, Wiener Philharmoniker (Multichannel Hybrid SACD): Mahler, Latonia Moore, Nadja Michael, Vienna Philharmonic Orchestra, Gilbert Kaplan: Music

Later, I got a copy from my girlfriend which was conducted by the same conductor but performed by a different major orchestra. The first one was clearly superior for me.

Secondly, Planets by Holst.

My girlfriend got this one for me and I love the performance.

Amazon.com: Holst: The Planets / R. Strauss: Also Sprach Zarathustra: Gustav Holst, Richard Strauss, William Steinberg, Boston Symphony Orchestra: Music

Later I got this one mainly for the Enigma variations.

Amazon.com: Holst: The Planets; Elgar / Karajan, Monteux: Edward Elgar, Gustav Holst, Herbert von Karajan, Pierre Monteux, James Brown, Vienna Philharmonic Orchestra, London Symphony Orchestra: Music

After listening to this performance of the Planets, the original is clearly superior to me.


In both cases, the original is clearly more dynamic and creative in terms of tempo and volume. Is it a coincidence that I chose the superior performance both times or is it because I'm comparing what I'm familiar with to the newer version?

 

[radiohlite]

it's probably the latter, especially if you've only heard one version of the piece for a long time.

think of this: the composer's dead and left no recordings of his own music. no amount of interpretation can make the piece sound EXACTLY as the composer intended, no matter how carefully planned and performed. So even your 'familiar' recording of it is a little bit (or a lot, depending on the case) wrong.


I realized this when I heard Stravinsky's own conducting of 'The Rite of Spring'. As it's a favorite piece of mine I've heard MANY recordings of it, and eventually made up my mind as to what my reference one was, the one I thought got closer to Stravinsky's own intentions. When I heard the composer's own (gasp!!!) it sounded wrong to me. Just goes to show.

of course, BTW, it's all subjective. I once read a review on a British magazine of a composer's own conducting of his music, and the judgement was: "clearly not his own best interpreter...so-and-so conductor did it better". Of course, the reviewer might've just been an idiot.

 

[Quinto]

What you describe is a commen phenomena..

The first time you hear a musical piece, your brain registers it as 'the original', the platonic idea of, for example, Mahler 2nd.. Every next version that differs in tempi, dynamics or any other way, feel wrong, its not 'original'..there for somehow less

Personally I got over it by listening to many other versions of many pieces over a longer period of time, while sometimes my preference remains at my 'original', often it shifts to other renditions, or at least I can now appriciate other versions for what they are.

For me it was a sort of liberation to get, partly, ride of the 'original' syndrom

I might add that I don't believe in the socalled howlyness of the composers intent, because the only real original available is the score, so a rendition is always a interpretation.. Besides, even a composer can be a mediocre conductor (Stravinski) or pianist (Prokofiev in his later days)..

It is great some conductors or musicians try to be faithfull to the composers intent of course, but at least for a part it's a guessing game..
And it's great some conductors/musicians are less concerned with directives in the score and go their own way, as long as they have a talent to add to the piece thats great to, IMO of course.

It gives the genre it's diversity and makes it more interesting

 

[mbhaub]

Another curious effect: take a recording you love and think is just great. Put it away for a long time...years in fact. Listen to other versions in the meanwhile. Then, coming back to the old one, you will often find yourself thinking it wasn't as great as you remembered. There's no question that first hearings imprint a "gold standard" in your brain and rattling those impressions loose takes time. When I was really young I bought my first Beethoven 5th with Bernstein and the NYPO on a Columbia LP. To my impressionable mind, that was THE 5th. Now, some 45 years later, and having heard, and played, the 5th too many times I wondered if that favorite old recording held up. So last summer I was digging around some old stuff and there was that recording. Bonus disk and all. Fire up the turntable and...this is terrible! It's overstuffed, bloated, and frankly dull compared to so many I've heard since.

 

[majid]

Sometimes, not always. My favorite Mahler 2nd is by Ozawa and the Saito Kinen orchestra. It's the fifth Resurrection out of the 6 I bought over time (and three of those are SACDs, while the Ozawa isn't).

I also have the Kaplan, it's not bad but not too inspired either. Kaplan is a rich stockbroker who was so enthralled by the 2nd that he decided to take conducting classes to learn how to direct it, and paid for major orchestras like the Wiener to host him as a vanity project.

 

[vcoheda]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mbhaub /img/forum/go_quote.gif Another curious effect: take a recording you love and think is just great. Put it away for a long time...years in fact. Listen to other versions in the meanwhile. Then, coming back to the old one, you will often find yourself thinking it wasn't as great as you remembered. There's no question that first hearings imprint a "gold standard" in your brain and rattling those impressions loose takes time.

x2

 

[geoges.ravel]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mbhaub /img/forum/go_quote.gif Another curious effect: take a recording you love and think is just great. Put it away for a long time...years in fact. Listen to other versions in the meanwhile. Then, coming back to the old one, you will often find yourself thinking it wasn't as great as you remembered. There's no question that first hearings imprint a "gold standard" in your brain and rattling those impressions loose takes time. When I was really young I bought my first Beethoven 5th with Bernstein and the NYPO on a Columbia LP. To my impressionable mind, that was THE 5th. Now, some 45 years later, and having heard, and played, the 5th too many times I wondered if that favorite old recording held up. So last summer I was digging around some old stuff and there was that recording. Bonus disk and all. Fire up the turntable and...this is terrible! It's overstuffed, bloated, and frankly dull compared to so many I've heard since.

I think it's the same phenomenon, actually the "reference version" is not necessarily the 1st version you heard but the version you remember the best. I try to listen to multiple versions before I can remember every detail, but I can't always stand all versions.

 

[john53]

My first cd with toccata and fugue in d minor(Ton Koopman)is not my best,i prefer Daniel Chorzempa playing this musical piece.So i guess it's not the rule.

 

[mbhaub]

Quote:

Originally Posted by geoges.ravel /img/forum/go_quote.gif I think it's the same phenomenon, actually the "reference version" is not necessarily the 1st version you heard but the version you remember the best. I try to listen to multiple versions before I can remember every detail, but I can't always stand all versions.

That could have something to do with it for sure. The "handicap" I work under is a musical memory akin to photographic memory for pictures. I can hear a work once and esentially have it memorized. I can "hear" an entire work in my head: all the instruments, counterpoint, harmony, etc. When I was in college and doing some conducting it proved invaluable as I don't need a score -- it's in my head. This makes spotting errors in recordings easy. As soon as something doesn't jive with my internal recording, flags go off. I don't know how else to explain it. One trouble though is if the so-called reference recording has flaws, then relearning is difficult. I grew up listening to a heavily cut Manfred of Tchaikovsky, unaware that it wasn't complete. When a complete version finally appeared some 40 years ago, I was shocked to say the least. This complete edition didn't match what it should have been. I still vastly prefer the Tchaikovsky violin concerto in the heavily cut Auer edition that everyone played up until the last 25 years. I listened to Oistrahk/Ormandy so many times that I cannot shake that image from my mind. This ability also makes playing in orchestras nervewracking when other players are lost or playing incorrectly. I try to keep my mouth shut.

 

[geoges.ravel]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mbhaub /img/forum/go_quote.gif unaware that it wasn't complete..

The same happened to me on Francescatti's Paganinin's 1st violin concerto. I still have difficulty to integrate the "extra" passage.

Hopefully the phenomenon will attenuate with age, but I can say if it's because of memory lost or musical maturity

 

[Ham Sandwich]

Quote:

Originally Posted by john53 /img/forum/go_quote.gif My first cd with toccata and fugue in d minor(Ton Koopman)is not my best,i prefer Daniel Chorzempa playing this musical piece.So i guess it's not the rule.

You are fortunate that the Ton Koopman version didn't get imprinted in your brain as the reference standard. Koopman has a tendency to embellish his Bach organ pieces. Things like add some extra trills or other extras. Nothing really wrong with that and it's not bad Bach playing to do that. And some would say that the famous Toccata demands some extra embellishment. But it would make for a different standard than any other organist would play the work.

For me, my reference for the Tocatta & Fugue in d minior, Passacaglia & Fugure in C minor, the little fugue and the jig are all by E. Power Biggs. I'm lucky for that as they're all good playing. I still very much enjoy other versions of those works, but when I want to go listen to one of those works I usually end up pulling up the E. Power Biggs even though it's not the best recording sonically.

 

[john53]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ham Sandwich /img/forum/go_quote.gif You are fortunate that the Ton Koopman version didn't get imprinted in your brain as the reference standard. Koopman has a tendency to embellish his Bach organ pieces. Things like add some extra trills or other extras. Nothing really wrong with that and it's not bad Bach playing to do that. And some would say that the famous Toccata demands some extra embellishment. But it would make for a different standard than any other organist would play the work. For me, my reference for the Tocatta & Fugue in d minior, Passacaglia & Fugure in C minor, the little fugue and the jig are all by E. Power Biggs. I'm lucky for that as they're all good playing. I still very much enjoy other versions of those works, but when I want to go listen to one of those works I usually end up pulling up the E. Power Biggs even though it's not the best recording sonically.

I also have a cd with Edward Power Biggs.It is good,I like it.I like especially the second part(fugue)by Biggs.But i like the toccata a little better by Daniel Chorzempa.Personal preferences i guess...

And you are right that Ton Koopman adds some extras to this piece(At the begining for example).This is not extlacty my problem,i just prefer some other versions.

 

[radiohlite]

either one you yous heard the Alfred Schweitzer accounts of Bach?

 

[Ham Sandwich]

Quote:

Originally Posted by radiohlite /img/forum/go_quote.gif either one you yous heard the Alfred Schweitzer accounts of Bach?

I haven't yet. I just put the books on my Amazon wish list. 900 pages on Bach's life and works and doesn't look to be light reading. It will have to wait for some Winter days when I'm snowed in.

 

[radiohlite]

He wrote books on Bach...didn't know that, but it explains some.

I meant his organ playing.