eyeresist
500+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2006
- Posts
- 652
- Likes
- 21
[size=xx-small]Continuing from http://www.head-fi.org/forums/showthread.php?t=180732[/size]
Continuing my exploration of Prokofiev's symphonies, I now have sets by Kuchar (Naxos), Gergiev (Philips), and Rozhdestvensky (Venezia, inc. piano concertos).
The Rozhdestvensky performances are good but not great; a bit underplayed and impersonal IMO. The 1960s recording has dated tonal quality, plus flattening of dynamics common to Russian close-miked recordings.
The Kuchar recordings are troubled by a veil of reverb, probably a problem with the mix rather than the hall, although the Kuchar recording of Kalinnikov's symphonies has the same problem. Others have commented on shrillness and lack of detail, but that hasn't been a problem for me.
I think the performances really lack shaping of the line, but are otherwise reliable and committed.
Others have mentioned the sound problems of the Gergiev set. The Barbican is notorious for its dry unflattering sound (I actually think a dry acoustic works with Prokofiev), but the problem here is tonal balance. High frequencies are over-emphasised, and the mid-low range is lacking except for the occasional deep bass "wallop". Since some of the mics must have been reasonably close to the players (with headphones you can hear Gergiev breathing during the more vigorous moments), the hall cannot shoulder all the blame.
The performances themselves are very good, but I dislike Gergiev's musical personality. He is, for want of a more musical term, too "butch" for this music. I think Prokofiev contains not only power and passion, but also delicacy and sophistication, an over-all wry humour, and restrained melancholy - I don't find these in Gergiev's work. (Though I do feel I need to listen to this set a few more times.)
I've yet to committ to the Jarvi set - he is reliable but has never impressed me as Great. He's on the list though. I'm now returning to individual recordings: after listening to various samples on Amazon, I now have Abravanel's recording of the 3rd on the way (2-CD set with Somary's P1, and Rossi with Alexander Nevsky & Lieutenant Kije). Apart from Karajan in the 5th, I'm also thinking about Depreist's 4th and Rosty's 6th, which I've read good things about.
Actually, I'd like to hear some of the "historically-informed" crowd attempt this work, or perhaps Boulez, who strangely doesn't seem to have recorded any Prokofiev at all. Apart from the above-mentioned qualities, clarity and energy are what I want from performances of Prokofiev's symphonies.
Continuing my exploration of Prokofiev's symphonies, I now have sets by Kuchar (Naxos), Gergiev (Philips), and Rozhdestvensky (Venezia, inc. piano concertos).
The Rozhdestvensky performances are good but not great; a bit underplayed and impersonal IMO. The 1960s recording has dated tonal quality, plus flattening of dynamics common to Russian close-miked recordings.
The Kuchar recordings are troubled by a veil of reverb, probably a problem with the mix rather than the hall, although the Kuchar recording of Kalinnikov's symphonies has the same problem. Others have commented on shrillness and lack of detail, but that hasn't been a problem for me.
I think the performances really lack shaping of the line, but are otherwise reliable and committed.
Others have mentioned the sound problems of the Gergiev set. The Barbican is notorious for its dry unflattering sound (I actually think a dry acoustic works with Prokofiev), but the problem here is tonal balance. High frequencies are over-emphasised, and the mid-low range is lacking except for the occasional deep bass "wallop". Since some of the mics must have been reasonably close to the players (with headphones you can hear Gergiev breathing during the more vigorous moments), the hall cannot shoulder all the blame.
The performances themselves are very good, but I dislike Gergiev's musical personality. He is, for want of a more musical term, too "butch" for this music. I think Prokofiev contains not only power and passion, but also delicacy and sophistication, an over-all wry humour, and restrained melancholy - I don't find these in Gergiev's work. (Though I do feel I need to listen to this set a few more times.)
I've yet to committ to the Jarvi set - he is reliable but has never impressed me as Great. He's on the list though. I'm now returning to individual recordings: after listening to various samples on Amazon, I now have Abravanel's recording of the 3rd on the way (2-CD set with Somary's P1, and Rossi with Alexander Nevsky & Lieutenant Kije). Apart from Karajan in the 5th, I'm also thinking about Depreist's 4th and Rosty's 6th, which I've read good things about.
Actually, I'd like to hear some of the "historically-informed" crowd attempt this work, or perhaps Boulez, who strangely doesn't seem to have recorded any Prokofiev at all. Apart from the above-mentioned qualities, clarity and energy are what I want from performances of Prokofiev's symphonies.
