Re: Re: Re: Re: Vienna Bruckner 8


[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ TubeNet BBS ] [ FAQ ]

Posted by Barry Guerrero on March 21, 2002 at 13:37:17:

In Reply to: Re: Re: Re: Vienna Bruckner 8 posted by Jarrod Robertson on March 21, 2002 at 12:21:08:

Neither am I trying to run down the VPO. But the point is this, they do make a type of sound that works best in composers that they play on a very frequent basis. You mentioned, "a blend of sound". In "La Mer" (Debussy), one of the last things that you would want is a homogenized blend of sound. If you doubt what I'm saying, then make your own comparison survey of that work, or the Shostakovich 5th, and see for yourself. That's how we learn. In the Shostakovich 5th, their results don't hold a candle to those recorded by Philly; N.Y.; or Chicago. In the posting above yours, the person said that they wouldn't go anywhere to hear the "Turangalila Symphony". Well, that's their loss, I think. I've heard both the SFSO, and the Berkely Symphony give outstanding performances of that very demanding work. Good tuba part too.

I'm not trying to be condescending here. Fact is, I've been to good number of VPO performances myself: Mahler 5 with Bernstein; Mahler 6 with Bernstein; Mahler 3 with Levine; Bruckner 9 with Bernstein; Bruckner 5 with Karajan (1981); Brahms First with Levine; Berg "Three Pieces" with Levine. All of these were very good, if not outstanding performances. But when the VPO come to the U.S., they nearly always play the same basic Austro/German rep. Great as those concerts were, I would still prefere to have the far more varied repertoire that one gets here in San Fracisco, at least. Frankly, I think that the SFSO does Mahler every bit as well, if not better.

Barry Guerrero


Follow Ups: