I went for the DG Martinon because it was available separately--but you're certainly right--it's an equally fine performance. Good call!

Bernstein and Martinon/Chicago are my go to performances as well. I can understand why David picked the other because it was available individually but shouldn't the Martinon/Chicago box belong in everyone's collection? 😉

Todd...great choice. This is my go to recording as well, not the least for the wonderful oboe playing; the incisive, joyous playing by the rest of the orchestra doesn't hurt. But the principal oboe part on that record is by the superb De Vere Moore. He is credited on the LP notes. I believe he had slid over a seat to fill in the principal chair during the brief period after Martinon had fired Ray Still and before Still was reinstated. I could imagine Martinon scheduled the Bizet out of spite, but I have no idea if that's the case.

@@therealdealblues Especially since they fixed the Nielsen 4th!

@@therealdealblues Nothing belongs in everyone's collection. That's what individual choice is for!

My pleasure!

If it's the best for you, that's all that matters.

Bychkov is a great choice--prime example of a romantic approach, which in the Adagio especially tends to mean "rubato." Check out also the Jarvi with the same orchestra a couple decades later on Virgin--very similar suppleness in the tempo/phrasing in the adagio and not just in the gorgeous oboe solo (different player, I think, but very similar approach). For ultra romantic, overt rubato hear Stokowski's first recording with Robert Bloom oboe (my favorite). Strangely, Stokie's later recording has rubato in the string playing, and he slows up before each theme statement, but almost zero flexibility during the oboe solo. The king of rhythmic creativity and playfulness is Leon Goossens, the oboist in the first recording, by Walter Goehr (1930s, rubato, portamento galore).

Thank you. You've got to go with the one that appeals to you best! Benzi is fine too, and as you say, very different, so it's all good.

I don't want to say without listening again first, and I don't have it here.

David Hurwitz makes sense. I’ve never hear the other Munch, I’ll give it a listen. I agree Haitink is outstanding here.

The ORTF/Munch is my favorite recording of this. It has a the lightness and playful quality that I associate with Munch in this kind of repertory, the ensemble is just better than the Royal Phil recording that he made, and the oboe solo in the slow movement is one of the best examples of the French oboe school of that time around; it is phrased so beautifully and directly, that several of the other very good oboists on recordings that I have sound a bit contrived and pedantic by comparison.

Oh, that's easy. Here's one example. There were some Herreweghe Beethoven symphony recordings that I praised initially, then trashed subsequently, and in print both times. A member of the orchestra called me on it. I was mortified, but it was my honest reaction on both occasions, even though I felt awful about it. I think there are times when we listen for specific musical qualities, or are struck by certain details that then become emblematic of the entire performance, rightly or wrongly. It's a particular problem with music we know very well, because we look for something different or unusual. Live and learn!

The Amsterdam Concertgebouw is my favorite orchestra on record, for sure. On their classic albums they’ve got the most gorgeous colors, and such great conductors at the helm. I’ll listen to their Bizet for sure.

The Haitink was originally coupled, I believe, with his recording of Bizet's "Jeux d'enfants" and the Debussy "Danses sacree et profane" That compilation is on KZfaq but you have to search for it.

Well, yes, but I need to pull together all the recordings. They got spread around when I was working on my Mendelssohn book.

That's it.

Just 5?

I agree with you completely. It is one of my favorites, right up there with Haitink (I don't find it "unsmiling" at all), and I should have mentioned it--but I was concerned about availability issues. If you have a source for it, perhaps a digital download, please let everyone know. I have the old Berlin Classics release.

@@DavesClassicalGuide I have the Suitner as part of an Edel Classics "Legendary Recordings" box containing most of his recordings with the Staatskapelle Dresden (most of which I found are terrific). The Bizet is available on Amazon Music: www.amazon.com/Bizet-G-Symphony-Dresden-Staatskapelle/dp/B004ZFZ0T2/ref=sr_1_1?dchild=1&keywords=bizet+suitner&qid=1601337819&rnid=2941120011&s=dmusic&sr=1-1

@@jeremylee9696 Cool. Thanks.

You beat me to it. I was going to recommend the Suitner/Dresden recording as well. It's a great one and my personal favorite.

Many thanks for bringing Suitner version to my attention. I have the Haitink on the (Philips label) and its a glorious recording. The sound is slightly drier. Suitner/staatskapelle sound seems to be more forward and vibrant which definitely suits the music.

Yes, it does, but if you file it under T you forget about the B, and vice-versa. It's good having a disc that goes definitively under B and nowhere else, unless of course you are a big enough fan of the conductor to stick it under M.

@@DavesClassicalGuide Excellent point! Actually that happens to me a lot!

@@DavesClassicalGuide Problem is solved by having a compilation section in your collection... then you just have to remember, that it's a two-composer disc! And at least you don't have to rummage through the whole collection from A to Z when you can't remember the disc mate...only through the compilation section! 😁😁😁

@@jensguldalrasmussen6446 That's a good idea, but I never have a problem remembering why I put something where I did.

@@DavesClassicalGuide With this, as in so many other venues of (musical) life, one should follow one's preferences and what one finds work! The craziest - and at the same time earth-shattering impressive filing systeme, I've heard of, was that of the late Earl of Harewood. He was especially a vocal connaiseur and had a vast record collection (I gather that it had a size and scope, that would have even the content of the Overflow Room seem on the minuscule side!). His records were, alledgedly, all ordered after date of composition, and he was able to find whatever he was after within the twinkling of an eye! That's quite hard to beat, aye?

I do (or did) know it--I no longer have it so I don't want to trust my memory and say anything about it, especially if you like it, which is all that matters. If you want to listen to other versions, I suggest you do that and draw your own conclusions--and then let us know how you feel.

No, I haven't heard it.

Orpheus is another chamber orchestra performance (as is Hugh Wolff's). One of the problems with West/SF Ballet recording is the small orchestra. It's missing the full dynamics and plush strings of a bigger orchestra.. Fortunately the Orpheus recording (and to a lesser extent Wolff's on Teldec) is more lively. Ballet conductors (perhaps West?) often are too focused on a crisp, steady beat and not much else--the only value of the SF Ballet reocording for me is Laura Griffiths' first-class oboe solos--languid, great colors, high polish.

@@jeffrosenfeld5781 I disagree 100%. I actually see this piece as more of an augmented chamber orchestra piece. Having too full of an orchestra is not the way to go here, in my view. As you note, there are chamber orchestra recordings that are good. The performances do not sound undersized at all. I have heard the SPCO do this live and it was excellent. That is not the problem. The problem with Martin West is the fact that there is no energy at all. It's dull beyond belief. Increasing the size of the orchestra is not going to help that!

@@kend.6797 I don't see that as a disagreement...there are indeed good chamber orchestra performances. Among them, the West recording alone has some moments of "scrawny" string tone (also, to be fair, some lovely string tone at times) and most alarmingly, a deficit of interesting dynamics, not just a lack of dynamicism. We agree 100% that the performance lacks character and energy--to my ear, it's just all too typical of excessive focus on a steady dancing beat, which I do not equate with "energy" in terms of moving phrases into lines into structures. To be honest, West kind of matches the worst aspects of the Balanchine choreography--formal, predictable, often tedious--but then I'm no ballet maven. A relatively larger orchestra is a plus, don't you think, if their strings are refined to the hilt, like Chicago or Amsterdam? (You're lucky to hear the SPCO!) We do agree that there's such a thing as "too full of an orchestra" here...I just haven't heard it much--the Beecham and Cluytens flirt with this problem (partly an engineering thing), and at times I find Munch and Rodzinski too emphatic, etc. as if they've unleashed too much on the music.

@@jeffrosenfeld5781 I'm pretty sure whatever problems you are hearing with the strings are not due to the size of the orchestra, but likely due to the studio, the engineering or the orchestra. I do know that I've heard 3 recordings made in Skywalker sound, of which this is one, and they all sound pretty bad. There is no reverb, ambience or warmth in that room. Of the discs I have heard, the Reference cd is the best sounding, but it is like trying to work a miracle. And no, I don't think bigger necessarily means better. I don't know what this score calls for as far as number of players, but it is a work that screams out for lively tempos, crisp playing and energy. So it can sound FRESH.

@@kend.6797 Agreed: the engineering and acoustic is a big part of it, just as a momentary lapse in intonation is crucial to "sounding" scrawny in a dry acoustic: bigger orchestras can fudge a few lapses like that with more players. Anyway, West is bleah. By contrast, the Teldec sound for Wolff/SPCO is not dry but not overblown, and of course they sound fantastic. In fact I'd hazard most people listening to it forget all about the size of the orchestra--it sounds "big" just Haitink's Concertgebouw can sound "small" at times, when they want too. Not even Ormandy's Philadelphians (thinking the older Columbia from 1955-ish) sound particularly "big" in this symphony except maybe a brief moment here or there. I doubt he downsized his forces all that much for this recording. The score doesn't really say how many players, but I'm sure nobody is doubling winds and most are probably limiting the size a bit. I'm listening now to one where you might find it distasteful, but I'd be curious, because I think it is extremely fresh, even when the tempo is very slow. Try the adagio (easy to find on YT)--it's the Pretre/Stuttgart on Hanssler, and it's got to be one of the slowest ever at 11 plus minutes (young Celibidache is a peppy 9:04). I don' t think this extreme slow speed limits the lively character, albeit this is a highly romantic approach. They do sound big, but not too big for this concept. (The finale is quite speedy, by contrast.)

Yes. I heard it but didn't think much of it at the time.

My honest opinion is that I don't care. I think we make far too big a deal over trivia. As I've said many times, the classics are like weeds--they are quite hardy and can take a lot of abuse. Sure, we should try to get the text right, but if we don't know for sure, it's usually no big deal, as here.

@@DavesClassicalGuide OK, thanks for that. I just wish there was a way of "un-hearing" these various niggles!

I've always find that part very interesting!

The restraint bothers me somewhat--I find it a bit bland, although as you say the sonics may be partly to blame.

I agree. The measured (restrained) pacing in many ways enhances its impact, and at times a surprising intensity. I don't hear many other conductors trying Cluytens' approach, which is one reason it is a version worth hearing.

I did.

Ok . I can't find it. What is it called?

@@fred6904 I talked about the opera in various places but haven't done a dedicated video, it seems. So thanks for bringing it up. Clearly I should do it.

@@DavesClassicalGuide thank you very much for your answer.

Did you see my talk on Delius' Brigg Fair?

@@DavesClassicalGuide One of the very few I have not yet enjoyed - just my luck

Are you talking about his Roma Symphony? If so than I also agree that it’s a completely misunderstood masterpiece! Bizet was just an amazing composer!

I second the love for this composer. But Carmen is such a can of ear-worms that its hard for me to listen to and then not hear it in my head for another week. Even as I type, I can hear the overture and, unless I put something on, will get well into the first act. My hard drive has the Ozawa, Norman, but I was trained on Abbado, Berganza, so that's always what I hear.

In the cracks.

@@DavesClassicalGuide I have the old UK Columbia LP. I'll have to pull it out and give it a try.

@@LyleFrancisDelp It's a bit tame.

There's a lot to say in Cluytens' favor. He may seem, on the surface, to be plain and stiff, but actually he gets great dividends from rhythmic steadiness and long-breathed phrasing (the oboe solo, remarkably so, but this is consistent with Cluytens' phrasing throughout). I think you can argue of all the recordings, Cluytens is one of the best at underplaying the moment to ease the longer flow, and cumulative impact of various sections of the work. I like it much more than I expected, and you get a peak at what made Cluytens a great Wagner composer with the control of flow and tension in the middle of the adagio (rehearsal 4 through 6, including the little fugue). But this is just an example of how his "serious" approach works well, assuming you're not demanding more charm a la Beecham, or warmth a la Bychkov.