Many thanks to Dave Hurwitz for this honest reality check. It is shameful that it was necessary. It never ceases to amaze me what comes out of the cultural woodwork. As a solid European person I have been enjoying this part of western culture for almost 70 years thanks in no small measure to Uncle Sam ❤

Another piece of the puzzle is the work done by Seiji Ozawa in Boston and, later, back in Japan. Japanese conductor, American and Japanese orchestras in a mainly European repertoire. Great great conductor!

Speaking of reference recordings that combine supposed European-ness and supposed American-ness: The Vier Letze Lieder and Jessey Norman.

Wonderful video. You are a true force and your videos have brought me and brought me to so much pleasure

Thanks for the history lesson. Wish we paid more attention to history in all fields.

Back in the 1980's, I went to East Berlin (when the wall was up) with a concert pianist friend of mine from Ann Arbor who was premiering the work of an East German composer. We had this exact same discussion (I started to collect and listen to vinyl back then), and I made the comment "I really like Dvorak, but am making sure to only purchse recordings by Czech orchestras and conductors since they know the music the best". It was the worst possible thing an ignorant amateur (myself) could have said to these professional musicans!

I think you make an excellent case for your view in this video. I also think one of the interesting features of these videos is that they *do* come from a perspective from the US. The Szell and Munch recordings of Schubert 9 are worthy references. UK and continental European critics might not have focused on those two conductors, but that is perhaps their problem. I do not see what you are doing as bias or unfair preferencing, but basically a matter of making sure the US contributions are not overlooked. You have helped draw my attention to Munch and Szell, of whom I heard little in the UK (where I live), so Thank You for that!

As an expatrriate who left the U.S. for Germany in 1969, I can only say: "Well roared!"

I have been in the world of classical music for more than fifty years.....I listen to it, read it, I find out about this subject whether in French or in English....in general I am I agree with your choice of reference recording, because in general I know the reference recordings of works that are rather well known, because over all these years these recordings constantly came back to compare a new recorded work to the said reference.... if the consensus was made around a reference recording it is through its publication which has never ceased, it is also not its musical quality, or the fact that the said recording "forged" standards which continued after....example, the pathos of tchaikovsky by mavrinsky on dgg...the ''carmen'' by callas....etc.of course as we often say the ''criticism'' is subjective, some like it, some don't. But when a dozen critics agree that a particular reference recording is the REFERENCE....no point looking elsewhere.

I totally agree. Good musicians and good taste don't have a nationality. However I always keep coming back to recordings made by the indigenous people, for example Smetana and the Czech Phil or Mravinsky with the Leningrad Phil playing Tchaikovsky especially when you had things like " the oncle of the third stand violinist played chamber music with Tchaikovsky" or " the grandfather of the flutist had tea regularly at Tchaikovsky's house" . That give is it a special flavour, I think.

Excellent history lesson.

Dear Dave, I (as a young person from Europe who doesn't know history about the reference consensus) do have a question for you: You said that in the 50s and 60s, the best orchestras were in the US. That's a point I can't explain for myself yet- there are many iconic recordings that European Orchestras made from that period that I have heard mentioned again and again, also in terms of reference: Karajan's 1960s Beethoven and Brahms cycles, Furtwängler's Schubert 9 (made in 1954, five years before Munch), Böhm's Mozart operas in Vienna, Karajan's and Solti's Ring cycles, Haitink's early Mahler in Amsterdam, all pre-1970. There is so much brilliant playing there. It feels to me like actually a great many recordings that European Orchestras are lauded for today, actually come from that period you describe, where (so you say) the Americans had the upper hand, were the better orchestras. Can you explain what you mean there? Also I am listening to the Munch Schubert 9 right now, which I hadn't heard of until you recommended it in the reference video, and I am enjoying it very much.

Couldn't agree more. I have never been able to tolerate overly nationalist attitudes in music. Music is the most universal language imaginable. National borders have the least significance when it comes to interpreting and enjoying it. For example, I have never been able to tolerate the idea that the best conductors interpreting the German-Austrian symphonic tradition must be from Germany or Austria, the best Tchaikovsky conductors from Russia, the best Sibelius conductors from Finland, or the best conductors of French orchestral music from France, and so on. They absolutely are not. Musicians either understand a composer's style and appreciate it, or they don't, but it has nothing to do with nationality. The emotional charge of music and the spiritual values (for lack of a better term) it represents can communicate to representatives of any nationality. The sooner we grow out of parochial attitudes in the world of classical music, the better for everyone.

I adore you and your knowledge. East or west or north or south - I only judge (hear) the music and try to understand. Not always successful, but trying. And if I fail, I have you and your channel. Not flattering you, just saying how it’s for me. 🎶❤👍🇩🇪

Maybe you could do a talk on British exceptionalism to the critical consensus when it comes to reference recordings. This was brought to mind when you did your talk on the reference Schubert Great C major symphony. Just last Saturday, a couple of days before you posted your video, BBC Radio 3 did their "Building a Library" on Schubert's 9th. I'm not surprised that neither Munch nor Szell were the pick (they're like that), but neither was even mentioned in passing. And it's not like they ignored older recordings, either (they even went on and on about a recently discovered Monteux tape from a performance in Moscow). Often it's British (English?) nationalism at play, but not always. Their pick happened to be a live Harnoncourt with the COE. However, even when their choice isn't apparently motivated by patriotism, they seem to buck the critical consensus routinely (and it doesn't seem to be just one or two of them, but British critics as a group). Szell, who is the consensus in so many recordings, is not just "not the pick," but even ignored as often as not. They explain this sometimes by saying that his Columbia recordings were not always readily available in the UK, but how does that matter? I remember when I was in University in the UK mentioning to some German student how all the critics seemed to love Brendel in the German repertoire, and he responded "... all the *British* critics" (partly because Brendel worked in the UK, I think, but is that all there is to it?)? So what is it? Sometimes I think they respond to music differently. They actually complain that certain things are "*too* exciting." In any case, when you're limited to music criticism in the English language, it seems you need to avoid the UK critics just to keep from being misled.

Would this be a good time to suggest "Blind" recording reviews, where the listener/critic hears the music, but has no idea which orchestra is performing or who is conducting? It works well for eliminating personal biases in wine and spirits tasting, as well as coffee, tea, and numerous other things, and would rule out any nationalist or other ethno-cultural bias.

The bottom line is about love of music. It makes no difference whether a recording is American, European or from wherever. The critics give us a guide to finding the best recording(s) out of those available. We then decide for ourselves to accept the reference recordings or not, depending on our own personal preferences. So critics of the critics, grow up and make your own personal choice, may it be the critic's choice or your own. Be thankful for the advice given by critics and for the time they spend giving us their views.

Point well made, well said, well done 👍 Give'em hell dave!!!!!

A great performance is a great performance. A great recording is a great recording. You're always balanced in your opinions and give credit where credit is due, no matter which side of the Atlantic the recording comes from.

Hear! Hear! The "Classical Music" of this channel may be art music of the European tradition, but it is music that is loved and studied and performed beautifully all over the world, making nationalism that much more foolish. Just this past weekend I was enjoying a superb disc of Lalo's music performed by the Malaysian Philharmonic and led by Kees Bakels. Of course, speaking of money, those PETRONAS (their capitalization) petro dollars certainly help attract talent. But we're living in a time when orchestras all over the world seem capable of producing great, great recordings.

Dave, Dave Dave. I hope you’re not including me in all of that because I’m not sure there’s a reference recording of Schubert 9 these days. There are reasons for why I think that but they are certainly not nationalist or Lord forbid anti- American. People live in different media markets with various intelligent people (certainly including you) discussing these matters. It’s interesting you mentioned the Krips recording. It certainly wasn’t remotely on my mind that there was a U.K. reference recording (whatever that is now) at all. But there is of course and quite rightly a broader discussion than on here, and we are not in the 1950s/ 60s anymore. So so many recordings now

Cultural bias - that is what it is about- and it is suprising, or shall I rather say enbarrasing how that can slip into one's way of thinking even if you think you have none of that nonsense in your view of music. If I take myself as an example: If 10 years ago an Englishman had told me that one day an English conductor will record one of the best Shostakovich symphony cycles with one of the BBC orchestras, I would said, "Only an Englishman can be stupid and arrogant enough to think that will ever happen". And then came Mark Wigglesworth with the BBC Northern Orchestra of Wales and The Netherland Radio Philharmonic and absolutely stunned me!

You are so right, on top of that when your name is evidently of Central European origin.

Dave rocks.

Apologies for my coming late to this interesting rant. You are absolutely right in saying that classical music belongs to the collective "West" (including Russia musically!), if not to the whole world, and that petty nationalisms are wholly inappropriate. However, within that, there are some clearly perceptible and valid national traditions, which should not however invalidate the contributions of "foreigners" to that repertoire, e.g. Thomas Beecham and Colin Davis were both recognised for their affinity with much French music. In so far as criticism is concerned, I don't see much objection to critics promoting the "home team" as long as it does not go to ridiculous lengths such as Gramophone's tireless advocacy on behalf of the local "historically informed" and of Norrington, in particular. We are all influenced to some extent by time and place of our lives and my own view of "references" is undoubtedly influenced by constantly reading Gramophone until about 15 years ago and Diapason more recently. Thanks for pointing me towards Szell's fine Eroica and I will try to take a look at his or Munch's Great C Major, though my allegiance to Wand NDR and Krips are pretty strong.

The funniest recent example of musical parochialism that came to my attention was a BBC Music Magazine poll where they asked 174 living composers who they considered the 5 greatest composers of all time, and a compiled a top 50 out of the results. This top 50 ended up including Oliver Knussen and Harrison Birtwistle with Benjamin Britten coming in at #11. With respect, I can't imagine a German or American music magazine coming up with a similar result!

I do think that there is very clear parochial tendencies in terms of music criticism and criticism of of recorded music. Not every critic falls into this trap, but certainly in the UK there is often a strong bias towards British recordings. I could never listen to them all, let alone all the greatest ones There also some snobbery that seems to favour the Berlin Phil in German music for one example. For myself, I tend to avoid this parochialism but no doubt will have fallen into the trap simply because of unconscious bias, or ignorance! On another tack, I would guess that the reason Furtwangler worked mostly in Germany after WW II may have had more to do with his free-loading in the Nazi era in Germany, and the fall out that made him far from welcome in many territories after 1945. To a lesser extent this applied to quite a few musicians still working in Germany in 1944/45. Best wishes from George

i would't necessarily talk about sharing "one culture" but i definitively agree about sharing one tradition we can first trace from around 15th century France/Belgium to 2024 anywhere in the world.

People, just let the world make beautiful music & let's sit back enjoy it 😊

I went to graduate school in England Dave in the 1970's, and a bias toward American music , acting, and art was pronounced! I would irritate my European pals by pointing out that the loss of empire and saving European life in WWII was the cause of their jealousy! Ah, those good old days...

Maybe the Boston Symphony should be called the New England Symphony.

To prove a point, I'm not a fan of Szell and Cleveland's Schubert 9th. Sounds a little choppy to me. I prefer the Solti and Wiener Phil. But I do like Szell and Cleveland for Sibelius,' 2nd.

You could have continued your litany: Friedrich Stock, Désiré Defauw, Rodziński, Artur Bodansky, Leinsdorf, Karl Muck, Gustav Mahler for C....'s sake (some of them ending up being naturalized Americans, some others spending long stretches of their carreer in the US; Mahler not quite so long a stretch, due to unfortunate, natural causes)

Point of etiquette: On your KZfaq channel, is it okay to post links to other KZfaq videos? I'm asking because you say that in the post-World-War-II years, the best European performances weren't up to snuff with their American competition and had to have their performance "restored", as you put it. I say you're wrong. And I don't know how to _ prove _ you wrong -- except by posting links to some of the (in my opinion) best European performances from the 1940s to, say, the early 1960s. I'm pretty sure I have a couple that are, at the very least, no worse than their best American competitors of that time. That's why I'm asking: would this be okay by you?

Sehr richtig! Danke!

But the national nonsens is not only linked to the 50s (and, e.g., Europe vs. the US). One still can read very biased stuff in the British music press. I say, let then adore the complete recordings of Anthony Collins. Nobody else would touch it with a stick.

Dave's right about some Brit reviewers not knowing the discography and the history of recording, but ref. Radio 3 Building a Library, it's become about inconsistency because BBC standards have dropped. Some of the reviewers clearly shouldn't be there at all, it is a strange club. Some are stronger and objective - eg Anna Lapwood the organist recently did Saint Saens 3 and while she loved the Munch, she showed why, objectively, she didn't like what he did with the score near the end, and chose San Francisco/deWaart. Lapwood has played the work (I've heard her). Equally any record collector knows you're missing something big if you don't have the Munch - reviewers aren't necessarily record collectors any more. Last week's Schubert 9 shootout on Radio 3 was from a parallel universe where Szell and especially Munch don't exist. It's laziness as much as chauvinism I think, anyone can get up-to-speed on Spotify if they are inclined.

Who cares where they are from? Beautiful music is beautiful, whether that’s Hilary Hahn or Yuja Wang. I don’t give a tinkers damn where it was played or who played it. These people need to grow up. It’s not a contest about Europe vs America. It’s about the beauty of what is played.

Nationalist bias is normal. People always think their own people are the best, their cuisine is the most delicious, their language is the most beautiful, etc. We just need to accept that it is human nature and simply don't care too much about other people's opinions

It wasn't just the war that cemented the superiority of American orchestras but the Nazi catastrophe in general. Germany, Austria, and occupied countries lost some of their very best players and orchestra leaders because they were Jewish. Or musicians like Fritz Busch or Erich Kleiber who could not tolerate the regime. It took decades to repair the damage. But even before that, the superiority was obvious. When Toscanini took the NY Philharmonic to Europe in 1930 it was a real ear opener everywhere. We hear a lot about how U.S. orchestras can never play Strauss waltzes with the proper lift and style of the Vienna Philharmonic but European conductors like Ormandy, Szell, Reiner, Walter, etc. were actually able to convey that to their ensembles with great success. Great orchestras can play just fine without a conductor or can carry a mediocre one. But even a Wiener Philharmoniker playing, say, Bruckner can learn a lot from a great one. There's a remarkable moment in the DVD included in the Kubelik box where he's rehearsing the Bruckner 4th with them. He says to the strings "how can you sit like that and (properly) play vibrato? This is such beautiful music, play with more vibrato!" And its much better afterwards. European orchestras don't necessarily have some special patent or copyright on even the music of their own culture and country. At least that's what I took from it.

The Chicago Symphony Orchestra under the direction of Sir Georg Solti was my choice for their recordings of the Mahler Symphonies. Clevenger on Frehch Horn, Bud Hersch on Trumpet and Donald Koss on Timpani were outstanding musicians !

Pay no attention to the carpers and moaners. Even if it were the case that your observations were nation-tainted, they are still useful, helpful and insightful for anyone prepared to have _their_ nation-tainted views challenged. And I didn't get the sense of it being nation-tainted in the first place.

As you point out, this musical chauvinism would be silly nationalist nonsense in any circumstance, but these orchestras weren’t American in any sense but geographical. Even to this day, most major American orchestras have European maestros, and every major professional orchestra includes citizens of the EU, UK, and/or Asian nations. For a truly American orchestra you’d have to look to a youth or perhaps semipro ensemble. Grow up, everybody!

I agree with you and wholeheartedly second the comment from @ianwilson4968 below. True appreciation of a performance should not be influenced by the geographic and/or cultural associations of the performers.