※ 引述《kerziage (a life so changed)》之铭言： : 我想要请问一下,为什麽很少看到巴毕罗里的CD在市面上? : 是因为他本身录音不多还是比较少被人重视? : 因为之前听了他的马勒九和艾尔加大提琴协奏曲(杜普雷拉的), : 觉得其实他的指挥感觉上有一定功力,而朋友也说他是很强的马勒指挥家, : 但是为什麽他的音乐这麽少? 我把Mark Kluge的post偷偷贴在这里（当然是无断）。 寄件者：MWKluge ([email protected]) 主旨：Re: Your Barbirolli Recommendations? View: Complete Thread （共 37 条留言） Original Format 网上论坛：rec.music.classical.recordings 日期：1998/10/31 In article <[email protected]>, Michael Weston <[email protected]> writes: >Furtwangler and Barbirolli ...[snip] - might I ask where these two men rank >in your affections? Not a ranking, but merely as someone who might enjoy >more positive words on a conductor more easily dismissed (I have bad >memories of a "engineer for a major record label" who claimed to have >worked on the Berlin Mahler sessions and considered Barbirolli a "midget >talent" and worthy of the company of Carlos Piata) than Furtwangler. Please forgive my delay in responding, but I felt your question deserved some thought rather than merely a superficial assessment. I quite agree that Barbirolli is a conductor easily underestimated. A number of factors play into this, perhaps the most important being the large number of recordings he made near the end of his life after his physical condition deteriorated. Certainly his late Ein Heldenleben, Verdi Requiem, and La Mer show little of the fire easily discernible in his performances from the 1950s. Even so, some of the late Sibelius and Mahler records shed a new light on the works, even though they lack the sheer physical excitement others have found in these works. Another factor is that Barbirolli My personal assessment is that Furtwangler was a true genius, and Barbirolli a very fine conductor. They shared certain attributes, and sometimes unexpected corners of the recorded repertoire (e.g., Tchaikovsky's Serenade for Strings, Strauss's Metamorphosen, the Franck Symphony, or Nicolai's Merry Wives of Windsor Overture). I would love the opportunity to compare the two in many other works they both performed, such as the Tallis Fantasia and La Mer (recorded only by Barbirolli), or Bartok's Concerto for Orchestra and the Mahler Third (recorded by neither). While one identifies Furtwangler strongly with Beethoven and Brahms, Barbirolli conducted those composers much less often. There is a concert tape of the Brahms Second with the Boston Symphony (1959) that is one of the best I have ever heard, absolutely at the same level as a Furtwangler performance. The latter found more depth in his interpretations of the Brahms First Symphony than did Barbirolli, at least to my ears. Sir John is reported to have had a particular affinity for the Beethoven Seventh, but never recorded the piece. His recorded Beethoven Fifth is not in the same league as Furtwangler's best efforts in that work. In other pieces, such as Tchaikovsky's Fourth and Fifth, Barbirolli demonstrated more affinity than did Furtwangler in surviving recordings (althoguh Furtwangler mastered the Pathetique). Both Barbirolli and Furtwangler could be very flexible indeed, but I personally find Furtwangler's manipulations more closely attuned to the structure of a work. Barbirolli tended to be more openly emotive, responding to the moment (even vocally!), and Furtwangler more spiritual. Barbirolli had a strong working knowledge of the mechanics of instrumental playing, which he used to good effect. Barbirolli achieved in particular a very expressive string sound, despite working with an orchestra of fewer players than the majors. His favored tonal palette was sunny and Italianate, without short-changing any section of the orchestra. Furtwangler also created a very distinctive sound, richer and darker, with weighty, bass-founded layering, but I believe the process by which he achieved it was more intuitive. I am puzzled that the producers of the "Great Conductors" video chose Barbirolli to make a very unsubtle point about effective rehearsal. Certainly both the short excerpt from his Bruckner Seventh and the snippet of an interview with Beecham both should be viewed within a larger context. I admire Beecham very much, but his remarks in the video about efficient rehearsal must be balanced against Jerome Toobin's story of Beecham's 1956 appearance with the Symphony of the Air. Beecham dismissed both of his allotted rehearsals early, despite protestations from the orchestra(!) that more rehearsal was needed. The resultant concert drew criticism that it did not represent Beecham's art well, because it all sounded underrehearsed. The Barbirolli excerpt seemed to me wrenched out of context. Although Sir John conducted Bruckner fairly often, his Halle Orchestra was a group that experienced considerable turnover (mostly because the major orchestras constantly raided the Barbirolli-trained players). This repertoire was unquestionably less familiar to them than was Delius or Elgar. Therefore, it is reasonable that the Halle would require more effort to prepare the Bruckner Seventh than, say, the Vienna Philharmonic. I found Sir John's attempts to make the opening of the Scherzo sound more ominous quite interesting, and was frustrated that the excerpt fades out just as he obtains the character he wants. Judging Barbirolli's art solely from this brief excerpt makes about as much sense as evaluating Hemingway as a writer by watching him make a few false starts and scratch-outs on a single page. I would welcome a recorded performance of the Bruckner Seventh from Barbirolli, because I have heard tapes of both the Third and Eighth that preserve compelling interpretations (the Eighth is now on CD). He also conducted the Fourth a number of times. As for Furtwangler, one can hear similar instances of repetition (and of less-than-articulate instructions to the orchestra) in rehearsals of the beginning of the Schubert Eighth and the coda of Leonore No. 3. I don't think any less of him as a conductor either just because he couldn't get exactly what he wanted the first time. It is interesting that one conductor who admired Barbirolli was Stokowski, who also admired Furtwangler. Stoki of course conducted a great deal in Britain. When Barbirolli's name came up in conversation, he remarked, "Barbirolli, a great conductor - what power!" This was an interesting attribute for the great colorist to seize upon, but Barbirolli could indeed generate great considerable power in his best interpretations. I personally believe Furtwangler did so more consistently. I first heard Sir John in recordings of Vaughan Williams, Bax, Butterworth, and Sibelius nearly twenty-five years ago. I have since heard probably 70% of his recordings, including many of the numerous 78s, and various live tapes. While he did not consistently reach the highest plane of music-making, I would feel poorer for not knowing his art. Mark K. -- 没有反对党公开竞争的选举叫假选举。 --

※ 发信站: 批踢踢实业坊(ptt.cc) ◆ From: 163.29.8.200