120 CDs Later, a Conductor’s Legacy Is Still Uncertain

Your 'hot spot' for all classical music subjects. Non-classical music subjects are to be posted in the Corner Pub.

Moderators: Lance, Corlyss_D

Post Reply
lennygoran
Posts: 19347
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 9:28 pm
Location: new york city

120 CDs Later, a Conductor’s Legacy Is Still Uncertain

Post by lennygoran » Sat Jun 19, 2021 8:41 am

Eugene Ormandy led the Philadelphia Orchestra to heights of pure sound, not intriguing interpretations, a new box set shows.

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

By David Allen
June 18, 2021

Something odd happens when you reach the 28th disc in Sony’s enormous, enlightening, at times exasperating 120-CD box set of recordings by Eugene Ormandy and the Philadelphia Orchestra. The box covers the period when that ensemble was regarded as little short of a miracle — “America’s finest orchestra,” as The New York Times put it in 1954.

For the first four tracks, you’ve been hearing Ormandy and his “Fabulous Philadelphians” slather their familiar sound over Haydn’s Symphony No. 101, their energetic, brisk playing admirably agile in a recording from 1949, despite their signature lashings of full-fat cream in the strings.

Then comes something different. It’s still Haydn, his Symphony No. 92 this time, and it’s still 1949. But the sound is snappier, the proportions more formal, the atmosphere more careful, yet charming for it. Surely this can’t be Ormandy and Philadelphia, and it’s not: It’s George Szell and the Cleveland Orchestra, making a guest appearance on the disc, just as they did on the original LP.


Though both performances are convincing in their own ways, listening to them in succession, you might find yourself repeating the assessment with which history has judged Ormandy.

Ormandy, a stocky, gregarious Hungarian American might have presided in Philadelphia for an astonishing 44 years, from 1936 to 1980 — inheriting a fine ensemble and making it “probably the greatest virtuoso orchestra of all time,” as The Times confirmed in 1964. He might have been the first man to lead an orchestra on television, in 1948, and might have so dominated the record stores that it was claimed that more people had heard his band than any other.

But Ormandy’s undeniable achievements come with an asterisk. For some listeners, his successes were shallow, careless, commercial — whatever interpretive abilities he had dissolving in the same alluring sea of tones. The “Sears Roebuck of musical performance values,” as a critic put it (in admiration), he offered few of the insights of a Szell or Charles Munch — let alone of his idol, Arturo Toscanini.

“Ormandy lacks the ability to tell the difference between one piece and another,” Michael Steinberg of The Boston Globe wrote in 1964; five years later, Steinberg decried his “mindless orgy” of sound. Another critic sneered that Ormandy’s interpretations had “the intellectual consistency of oatmeal.”


Even his advocates exhausted the thesaurus entry for reliability, if not mediocrity. “His are a straightforward mind and a straightforward musical style,” Virgil Thomson wrote in 1942. “Honest,” “sensible,” “satisfactory”: Even at Ormandy’s death, in 1985, the adjectives for the defense did not suggest inspiration.

The public loved him; critics, some of them at least, despised him. If you liked him, some thought you unserious; if you hated him, some thought you a snob. Either way, the Times critic Harold Schonberg hoped that history would be kind, writing in 1967 that this “perfect workman” could trust that his “extraordinary craftsmanship and musical dedication” would grant him “an honored place in the pantheon.”

A place in the pantheon? Sure. Honored? Not for me.

Sony’s new set is one of the most compendious efforts at archival excavation that the major labels have yet offered. It speaks to Ormandy’s awkwardly uncertain posthumous stature that so few of these 120 CDs contain performances that have stayed available into the digital era: 152 recordings appear on disc for the first time, and 139 receive their first official release from the original sources. All are remastered, if not all well; each comes in an original jacket.

Yet this fulsome tribute, weighing in at 14 pounds, is far from a complete representation of Ormandy’s vast legacy. There is nothing of his time in the 1930s with the Minneapolis Symphony (today the Minnesota Orchestra), when he took advantage of a quirk in the players’ contract to make that ensemble the most productive in the land. There is nothing of his first six years in Philadelphia, when he made records for Victor that can be heard today on Pristine Classical. There is nothing from the stereo era, evidence of which comes on other, smaller sets.

Six score CDs would represent a lifetime’s work for most (Herbert von Karajan aside), but this box covers less than a third of Ormandy’s career, though arguably its peak, from 1944 to 1958.

Ormandy’s competitors didn’t have his numbers, nor his almost unfathomable range. Szell’s equivalent compendium with the Cleveland Orchestra sticks close to the Central European titans, while Munch’s with the Boston Symphony flourishes in the French repertoire. But with a cavernous memory and a zeal for efficiency that he had cultivated at the helm of radio shows like the “Jack Frost Melody Moments,” Ormandy could go from Albéniz to Yardumian, from his own, tellingly gaudy transcriptions of Bach and Handel to the works of American contemporaries, Philadelphians like Harl McDonald, Louis Gesensway and Vincent Persichetti among them.

If Ormandy was hard to pin down, his fundamental tastes were late Romantic and later. Rachmaninoff and Prokofiev were favorites, and done with aplomb; though there is no Mahler, Bruckner or Shostakovich here, despite his advocacy for all three composers, he made his way through Brahms and Tchaikovsky. Sensitive accompaniments for soloists of the caliber of Rudolf Serkin and Zino Francescatti aside, there is little here of Ormandy’s muscular Beethoven, and his Mozart is limited to one, brilliantly effervescent symphony. He took charge of the “pops” himself, spooning up some oddly sugar-free servings of Lehar and the Strausses, but having glorious fun in Victor Herbert.


Through it all, Ormandy’s interests are about luxuriant sound rather than intriguing interpretation — such a perfect match for the conservative, consumerist Cold War culture that Eisenhower and Nixon sent him and his orchestra to Europe, the Soviet Union and China to represent.

Listen for much of a structure, and you hear something more intuitive, a melodic approach to line. That could catch fire in the right piece and on the right day, as in a blistering, ferocious account of Tchaikovsky’s “Pathétique” Symphony from 1952, or in electrifying tapings of Sibelius, a real specialty. But that approach tended not to spark in works that demand a precise ratcheting of harmonic tensions, as in an earthbound Beethoven’s Ninth from 1945-46 and a guileless Brahms’s First from 1950.

What there is, is that lush, legato sound, its flowing phrases stretched over its rhythmic details, a singular approach to what all music should sound like. Indeed, that sound was the interpretation. “The Philadelphia sound, c’est moi,” Ormandy liked to say, taking credit for what was rightly his, but subsuming himself into it in the process.


He was often accused of polishing the Technicolor inheritance left to him by his predecessor Leopold Stokowski, with whom he shared the Philadelphia podium from 1936 to 1938 before emerging as music director in his own right. But Ormandy’s sound was distinct.

Born Jeno Blau in Budapest in 1899, he was named after Jeno Hubay, a violinist his dentist father beat him into emulating. Young Jeno was indeed a prodigy, entering the Royal Academy of Music at 5, joining Hubay’s classes at 9 and starting to teach at just 17.

It was as a soloist that he emigrated to New York in 1921, lured with a fraudulent promise of concerts. And it was as a violinist that he started a new life, becoming the practical musician he became while leading and eventually conducting the Capitol Theater Orchestra — four times a day, seven days a week — in light classics, symphonic movements and silent movie accompaniments. He drew the attention of the agent Arthur Judson, who threw him into a date no one would take, covering for Toscanini in Philadelphia in 1931. Ormandy was immediately appointed in Minneapolis.

“I had an idea of how the violin should sound,” Ormandy recalled in 1980. “When I began to conduct, I tried to get that same sound out of the orchestra.”

The results — achieved through huge arcs of bowing, the richest of vibratos and a taste for rewriting scores to emphasize melodic lines — can still stupefy in works like Strauss’s “Ein Heldenleben,” in a glittering 1954 rendition. But the accusation of vulgarity finds scarce support; Ormandy simply did not take those kinds of risks.

The sound he commanded was huge, but it doesn’t bully, like Karajan’s Berlin Philharmonic; his phrasing can be supple, but it rarely charms like John Barbirolli’s; he could whip up a storm, as in Berlioz’s “Symphonie Fantastique” in 1950, but he would never approach the derangement of accounts like those from Munch. Not for nothing did Virgil Thomson describe the ensemble in 1944 as having an “impersonal, almost botanical beauty.”

The problem, in Sony’s set, is that you can’t really hear it. Columbia, the original label for these albums, was slow to start recording in more than one channel; its technology was never that advanced; and until late in the box the sound is often murky, and sometimes distractingly fluttery. If the handful of remasterings that the exceptional restorers Mark Obert-Thorn and Andrew Rose have brought out on Pristine of some of the same recordings represented here suggest that Sony’s sources had more to give, there is, in truth, not all that much more to be done.


So intense was the Philadelphians’ sound in the flesh that they made other ensembles “sound like reproductions, like gramophone recordings of themselves,” Thomson once wrote. The same applies here. Even ears content with mono tapings member up going from the constraints of Ormandy’s 1954 “Heldenleben” to the similar one he made in stereo in 1960; the jump makes a crucial difference in a way that was not the case for conductors less obsessed with pure sound.

Even after 120 CDs, then, a full reckoning with Ormandy — and his complete devotion to his Philadelphians, enviable in an age of jet-setting conductors — will have to wait until Sony releases, dare I say, yet more.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/18/arts ... music.html

maestrob
Posts: 18925
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 11:30 am

Re: 120 CDs Later, a Conductor’s Legacy Is Still Uncertain

Post by maestrob » Sat Jun 19, 2021 11:28 am

The problem, in Sony’s set, is that you can’t really hear it. Columbia, the original label for these albums, was slow to start recording in more than one channel; its technology was never that advanced; and until late in the box the sound is often murky, and sometimes distractingly fluttery. If the handful of remasterings that the exceptional restorers Mark Obert-Thorn and Andrew Rose have brought out on Pristine of some of the same recordings represented here suggest that Sony’s sources had more to give, there is, in truth, not all that much more to be done.
Typical snarky Times review. Don't know what makes them do this, but I've noticed this attitude in their reviews of movies and TV series as well.

The above quote is nonsense, of course, especially the phrase I bolded. I grew up with many of these recordings, and have played the CDs in the new box, and they sound quite wonderful. The Tchaikovsky/Borodin/Barber LP of string music is powerful and effervescent all at once, as is the 1951 Rachmaninoff II, just for a couple of examples. No flutter anywhere. A ridiculous and totally inaccurate comment. :roll:

In fact, Columbia was recording with acetate masters while RCA had switched to magnetic tape in the late 1940's, so Columbia's sound was quite superior to RCA's cramped and claustrophobic sonics. Heifetz's Korngold Violin Concerto, or Rubinstein's Szymanowski IV (written for him) are prime examples. Listen to the difference in Bruno Walter's premiere recording of Mahler V (1947) from that era and you'll hear what I mean.

RCA did finally switch to its "New Orthophonic" process in 1950-1951 which improved their sound quite a bit as they launched their push into 7" 45RPM classical boxes (a failed marketing venture that lasted barely five years) as they also began producing microgroove LPs to compete with Columbia's 33 1/3 RPM 12" vinyl format.

Still, RCA didn't catch up to Columbia's sound quality until 1954 when full-range microphones and tape equipment was introduced around the Western hemisphere, allowing them to record in stereo, as did Mercury records, who then switched to 35mm magnetic film a few years later, along with Everest and Command Classics (both labels didn't last long.). RCA did sell audiophile reel tapes to a few connoisseurs, a money-losing venture, while Columbia wisely held back until a stereo technology could be developed for the LP, and they began recording in stereo about a year before that disk cutting format was standardized was marketed to studios in 1959.

It's also worth pointing out here that even the earliest 1/4' & 1/2" magnetic tape machines 30were designed to run at 30ips (inches per second), with massive flywheels under the capstans. There never was ANY audible flutter or wow in even the earliest of those machines, which were based on design factors that Germany has pioneered & perfected during the 1930's and 40's. The German sound engineers were even experimenting successfully with stereo tape technology by 1945 in Berlin, and some of those recordings survived the war, although they only were able to record up to about 11,000 Hz.

It would have helped if the writer had known this history before rushing to judgement and jumping to conclusions. I really wonder if he took the time to listen to this remarkable treasure-trove?

So the Times reviewer has it totally backwards, doesn't he? :roll:

'Nuff said.

Kids today.

slofstra
Posts: 9342
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2007 2:23 pm
Location: Waterloo, ON, Canada
Contact:

Re: 120 CDs Later, a Conductor’s Legacy Is Still Uncertain

Post by slofstra » Mon Jun 21, 2021 2:14 pm

Well my box arrived in the last few weeks. Can't wait to hear that fluttery, murky legato.
Unfortunately, it will all have to wait as I'm struggling with some health issues at the moment. Listening time is necessarily limited as the doctors try to work out the cause of my pulsatile tinnitus. I suppose my posting may be limited as well for a time.

THEHORN
Posts: 2825
Joined: Sat Jun 14, 2008 8:57 am

Re: 120 CDs Later, a Conductor’s Legacy Is Still Uncertain

Post by THEHORN » Mon Jun 21, 2021 2:59 pm

I agree somewhat with certain critic's opinions on Ormandy's interpretations . He did tend to apply that plush "Philadelphia sound " to a wide variety of orchestral repertoire by composers of different centuries, styles and nationalities in a sort of "one size fits all " way .
But in some repertoire, such as late romantic music, it was entirely appropriate .
Under Karajan, the Berlin Philharmonic sounded incredibly rich and sumptuous, but the Berlin woodwinds always seemed to me to play with more character and it more pungency of sound . And even with the Berliner's opulence, there was plenty of muscle and sinew in their sound . To me at least, the Philadelphia orchestra sounded rather bland by comparison under Ormandy .

maestrob
Posts: 18925
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 11:30 am

Re: 120 CDs Later, a Conductor’s Legacy Is Still Uncertain

Post by maestrob » Tue Jun 22, 2021 1:45 pm

slofstra wrote:
Mon Jun 21, 2021 2:14 pm
Well my box arrived in the last few weeks. Can't wait to hear that fluttery, murky legato.
Unfortunately, it will all have to wait as I'm struggling with some health issues at the moment. Listening time is necessarily limited as the doctors try to work out the cause of my pulsatile tinnitus. I suppose my posting may be limited as well for a time.
OMG! Henry!

Please take care of yourself and keep us posted on your progress. I will miss our very instructive conversations here until you can return full time.

And just as we're beginning to reopen.

You now have a special place in my prayers.

slofstra
Posts: 9342
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2007 2:23 pm
Location: Waterloo, ON, Canada
Contact:

Re: 120 CDs Later, a Conductor’s Legacy Is Still Uncertain

Post by slofstra » Tue Jun 22, 2021 2:09 pm

maestrob wrote:
Tue Jun 22, 2021 1:45 pm
slofstra wrote:
Mon Jun 21, 2021 2:14 pm
Well my box arrived in the last few weeks. Can't wait to hear that fluttery, murky legato.
Unfortunately, it will all have to wait as I'm struggling with some health issues at the moment. Listening time is necessarily limited as the doctors try to work out the cause of my pulsatile tinnitus. I suppose my posting may be limited as well for a time.
OMG! Henry!

Please take care of yourself and keep us posted on your progress. I will miss our very instructive conversations here until you can return full time.

And just as we're beginning to reopen.

You now have a special place in my prayers.
I'll let you know. Lots of reason to be optimistic. One thing about pulsatile tinnitus I should mention is that there is no hearing loss. Instead the ears are picking up sound from a vascular condition, which could be anything from a carotid artery dissection to a hum in a vein. Some of the worst possibilities have already been ruled out and I go for another MRI tomorrow, as it turns out.

maestrob
Posts: 18925
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 11:30 am

Re: 120 CDs Later, a Conductor’s Legacy Is Still Uncertain

Post by maestrob » Tue Jun 22, 2021 10:42 pm

slofstra wrote:
Tue Jun 22, 2021 2:09 pm
maestrob wrote:
Tue Jun 22, 2021 1:45 pm
slofstra wrote:
Mon Jun 21, 2021 2:14 pm
Well my box arrived in the last few weeks. Can't wait to hear that fluttery, murky legato.
Unfortunately, it will all have to wait as I'm struggling with some health issues at the moment. Listening time is necessarily limited as the doctors try to work out the cause of my pulsatile tinnitus. I suppose my posting may be limited as well for a time.
OMG! Henry!

Please take care of yourself and keep us posted on your progress. I will miss our very instructive conversations here until you can return full time.

And just as we're beginning to reopen.

You now have a special place in my prayers.
I'll let you know. Lots of reason to be optimistic. One thing about pulsatile tinnitus I should mention is that there is no hearing loss. Instead the ears are picking up sound from a vascular condition, which could be anything from a carotid artery dissection to a hum in a vein. Some of the worst possibilities have already been ruled out and I go for another MRI tomorrow, as it turns out.
I'll be keeping my fingers crossed. :wink:

Ricordanza
Posts: 2499
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2005 4:58 am
Location: Southern New Jersey, USA

Re: 120 CDs Later, a Conductor’s Legacy Is Still Uncertain

Post by Ricordanza » Wed Jun 23, 2021 6:26 am

slofstra wrote:
Tue Jun 22, 2021 2:09 pm

I'll let you know. Lots of reason to be optimistic. One thing about pulsatile tinnitus I should mention is that there is no hearing loss. Instead the ears are picking up sound from a vascular condition, which could be anything from a carotid artery dissection to a hum in a vein. Some of the worst possibilities have already been ruled out and I go for another MRI tomorrow, as it turns out.
I hope that all goes well and that you find effective treatment. One question, though: Is pulsatile tinnitus a distinct form of tinnitus? I ask that question since I've had tinnitus for years--at least 20.

slofstra
Posts: 9342
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2007 2:23 pm
Location: Waterloo, ON, Canada
Contact:

Re: 120 CDs Later, a Conductor’s Legacy Is Still Uncertain

Post by slofstra » Wed Jun 23, 2021 8:48 am

Ordinary tinnitus is a common condition in which the inner ear generates subjective tones, I.e. only you can hear them, and is usually co incident with hearing loss and often, aging.
Pulsatile tinnitus is a symptom of a malfunction in the vascular system and is generated by an external, objective sound somewhere in the vascular system. You'll know you have it if the buzzing or whining that you hear pulses or oscillates in exact synchronization with your pulse. In my case, I can feel my wrist pulse and it exactly matches what I'm hearing.
If you find this to be the case, then the next step is to have someone else silently count out your wrist pulse, while you silently count the oscillations that you hear during the same time interval. If the counts match, then you almost certainly have pulsatile tinnitus.
Pulsatile tinnitus is generally remediable, but diagnosing the underlying cause is difficult because there are many potential causes. . In many cases, general practitioners aren't aware of the distinction, so people suffer needlessly with a misdiagnosis.
It happens that I was diagnosed 2 years ago with a rare vascular hereditary condition and already deal with specialists on that. The irony is that I'm actually in fairly good shape and active for a man of 68. We'll see what this next MRI reveals.

THEHORN
Posts: 2825
Joined: Sat Jun 14, 2008 8:57 am

Re: 120 CDs Later, a Conductor’s Legacy Is Still Uncertain

Post by THEHORN » Sun Jun 27, 2021 2:57 pm

What should you do if you have tinnitus ? Get an unlisted ear !

lennygoran
Posts: 19347
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 9:28 pm
Location: new york city

Re: 120 CDs Later, a Conductor’s Legacy Is Still Uncertain

Post by lennygoran » Sun Jun 27, 2021 3:17 pm

THEHORN wrote:
Sun Jun 27, 2021 2:57 pm
What should you do if you have tinnitus ? Get an unlisted ear !
Or maybe an unlisteNed ear? Regards, Len [fleeing]

Heck148
Posts: 3664
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2003 11:53 pm
Location: New England

Re: 120 CDs Later, a Conductor’s Legacy Is Still Uncertain

Post by Heck148 » Wed Jun 30, 2021 11:50 am

I'm generally not too enthusiastic over Ormandy/Phila recordings...I think the engineers went overboard to produce this "Philadelphia Sound" idea....lush, rich, strings, with the woodwinds and brass recessed a bit...also - Ormandy's method of recording, imo, robs the music of the flow, the drama that can be achieved with live, or "bigger chunk" recording takes.

The orchestra did not sound that way live - I heard them live, many, many times during the 60s, in many different locations - Carnegie Hall, Eastman Theater [Rochester, NY], Lincoln Center, SPAC summer festival, etc...the orchestra sounded great...the strings were certainly full and vibrant, but the winds and brass had very strong presence...I heard many thrilling performances, which imo, eclipsed the recordings by a considerable margin...
Re Ormandy's approach to recording - one of the long-time clarinet players described it as "10 measures and stop, 10 measures and stop.....drove everybody nuts"....the engineers would take all of these small pieces and paste them together to make the finished product....I've always preferred those conductors who recorded long passages of music...there might be a small glitch along the way, but the big picture, the flow, the drama are produced...Toscanini, Reiner, Furtwangler are some that fell into this category

maestrob
Posts: 18925
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 11:30 am

Re: 120 CDs Later, a Conductor’s Legacy Is Still Uncertain

Post by maestrob » Wed Jun 30, 2021 2:13 pm

Heck148 wrote:
Wed Jun 30, 2021 11:50 am
I'm generally not too enthusiastic over Ormandy/Phila recordings...I think the engineers went overboard to produce this "Philadelphia Sound" idea....lush, rich, strings, with the woodwinds and brass recessed a bit...also - Ormandy's method of recording, imo, robs the music of the flow, the drama that can be achieved with live, or "bigger chunk" recording takes.

The orchestra did not sound that way live - I heard them live, many, many times during the 60s, in many different locations - Carnegie Hall, Eastman Theater [Rochester, NY], Lincoln Center, SPAC summer festival, etc...the orchestra sounded great...the strings were certainly full and vibrant, but the winds and brass had very strong presence...I heard many thrilling performances, which imo, eclipsed the recordings by a considerable margin...
Re Ormandy's approach to recording - one of the long-time clarinet players described it as "10 measures and stop, 10 measures and stop.....drove everybody nuts"....the engineers would take all of these small pieces and paste them together to make the finished product....I've always preferred those conductors who recorded long passages of music...there might be a small glitch along the way, but the big picture, the flow, the drama are produced...Toscanini, Reiner, Furtwangler are some that fell into this category
Hello, Heck148! :D

As usual, you have interesting input to the discussion. I know it may be difficult for you to participate as often as we'd like to hear from you, but your insights carry much weight here.

Thing is, I've always admired Ormandy's way with XXth century repertoire, especially during the mid to late 1960's & early 1970's when he was recording many works from Iron Curtain composers (Shostakovich, Prokofiev, Bartok (yes, I know he moved to NY!) Martinu) for the first time in the West. I really believe that he caught the drama of those works, especially with Oistrakh and Rostropovich when they were permitted to come to Philadelphia and work with him. I too attended most of the concerts associated with those recordings for Columbia & later RCA, including an unexpectedly powerful reading of Deryck Cooke's realization of Mahler's Tenth Symphony, and Hindemith's Mathis der Maler Suite, or Respighi's Church Windows, now available only on youtube at the moment.

To this day I treasure those often difficult to find CDs (I don't remember Shostakovich XIII & XIV being released here: my copies are from Japanese sources.).

I can also compare a rare 1977 DVD live concert of Ormandy leading Rachmaninoff II (Yes, I know, not your favorite composition! 😉) along with the Firebird Suite, and I find that his commercial recordings for Columbia (mono & stereo) of the Rachmaninoff stand up very well, as do his recordings of Prokofiev's symphonies compared to my experience of hearing them live.

Ormandy's Beethoven symphonies seemed to be his weak point when I heard them live, and the stereo recordings he made at that time sound quite lackluster and more than a bit turgid IMHO, it's true, but his Brahms, while not up to Solti/Chicago, is well-shaped but without the ultimate sense of commitment from Toscanini or Solti. Still good, though.

MHO is that Ormandy's recordings are consistently good to great, even though some individual recordings by other artists can sometimes outshine his. Can't beat those wonderful strings in Tchaikovsky's Serenade for Strings, though, even in 1950's mono sound.

In conclusion, just let me say that in that era, no other orchestra (except Chicago with either Reiner or Solti at the helm, of course, and Berlin under Von Karajan) could deliver such a full, rich wallop that suited the massive sound world of mid-twentieth century music. That was certainly my experience then, and it remains so today.

Heck148
Posts: 3664
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2003 11:53 pm
Location: New England

Re: 120 CDs Later, a Conductor’s Legacy Is Still Uncertain

Post by Heck148 » Wed Jun 30, 2021 4:57 pm

Yes, Ormandy did very well with 20th century repertoire...his 60s Prokofieff Sym #6 is superb, along with Mravinsky, my favorite rendition...his Mahler/Cooke #10 is terrific also...Philadelphia was truly a great orchestra for all of those Ormandy years....I believe he hired every single musician in the orchestra by the end of his tenure.....quite a difference from the present day scenario!!

In live performance, I remember a truly memorable concert presented at Eastman Theater -
Schuman - New England Triptych - amazing!! Garfield and DeLancie sounded so great in mvt II...
The concert concluded with a thrilling Brahms Sym #2 - a real rouser that had everyone jumping out of their seats...
I also remember a terrific Beethoven #7 given at SPAC - really exciting, caution thrown to the winds!!
Ormandy could get bogged down in the Romantics, however....I know this was tough on his musicians, but hey, nobody minded the royalty checks for all the recordings they sold!!

Wallingford
Posts: 4687
Joined: Tue Jul 22, 2003 3:31 pm
Location: Brush, Colorado

Re: 120 CDs Later, a Conductor’s Legacy Is Still Uncertain

Post by Wallingford » Thu Jul 01, 2021 5:36 pm

Heck148 wrote:
Wed Jun 30, 2021 11:50 am
I'm generally not too enthusiastic over Ormandy/Phila recordings...I think the engineers went overboard to produce this "Philadelphia Sound" idea....lush, rich, strings, with the woodwinds and brass recessed a bit...also - Ormandy's method of recording, imo, robs the music of the flow, the drama that can be achieved with live, or "bigger chunk" recording takes.

The orchestra did not sound that way live - I heard them live, many, many times during the 60s, in many different locations - Carnegie Hall, Eastman Theater [Rochester, NY], Lincoln Center, SPAC summer festival, etc...the orchestra sounded great...the strings were certainly full and vibrant, but the winds and brass had very strong presence...I heard many thrilling performances, which imo, eclipsed the recordings by a considerable margin...
Re Ormandy's approach to recording - one of the long-time clarinet players described it as "10 measures and stop, 10 measures and stop.....drove everybody nuts"....the engineers would take all of these small pieces and paste them together to make the finished product....I've always preferred those conductors who recorded long passages of music...there might be a small glitch along the way, but the big picture, the flow, the drama are produced...Toscanini, Reiner, Furtwangler are some that fell into this category
Heck, you took most of the words out of my mouth.

My own additions? For years I collected on open-reel tape--with the help of several friends' players--cassette dubs of old 60s Philly concerts. The anonymous original owner of these dubs used a top-notch Wollensak deck to record them. and this gent lived deep in the heart of NYC where FM drift was virtually non-existent (he possibly had the benefit of an equalizer as well). I collected over the years quite a few dupes of Philly guest conductors as well; also BSO & Cleveland concerts as well.

To my mind, the REAL hallmark of Ormandy's style--and legend--was his almost unmatchable sense of long line. Long, lyrical line. This naturally can't be captured on a studio recording with so many edits; I believe, among his commercial discs, that the 1951-1955 series originally marketed as "The World's Greatest Orchestra" series captures something of the essence of a (nearly) intact Ormandy performance. There''s a terrific flow to these recordings that just isn't there in many of his 60s-70s discs. Exceptions among the stereo discs include Mathis der Maler; Bartok's Concerto for Orchestra (apart from a sluggish last movement); the many pops items which made up his 'ace in the hole'; Debussy and Ravel; The Planets; and his countrymen Bartok, Kodaly and Liszt. And he had a natural feel for the big chorus-with-orchestra works.

Ormandy himself said of the 'Philadelphia Sound' that, "It's me," pointing out the fact that he really was playing the violin when he conducted; Toscanini the cello; and Koussevitzky the bass.
Last edited by Wallingford on Fri Jul 02, 2021 8:40 am, edited 1 time in total.
Good music is that which falls upon the ear with ease, and quits the memory with difficulty.
--Sir Thomas Beecham

maestrob
Posts: 18925
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 11:30 am

Re: 120 CDs Later, a Conductor’s Legacy Is Still Uncertain

Post by maestrob » Fri Jul 02, 2021 8:36 am

Such good taste here on CMG!

Looks like we who remember Ormandy's live performances share a list of favorite recordings.

I should just like to add one small detail: Ormandy's Bartok "Concerto for Orchestra" on RCA (Scottish Rite Cathedral 1979), the version released in the "Ormandy Conducts XXth Century Music" Box just a few years back, is far superior in the final movement to the Columbia CD issued as a single in the 1990's. (Dolby A had been in use for a full decade by then.) I've been told that the Columbia recording where a certain passage in the last movement drags quite a bit was due to some idiot inserting a section of tape from a read-through rather than the final take, and that the correct segment was discarded by mistake. Grrrr....

Ormandy's "Planets" for RCA, recorded in the Scottish Rite Cathedral, is, IMHO, right up there with Sir Adrian's first (analogue) recording for EMI, with the same punch, drive, and depth of sound. I have it coupled with his Vaughan-Williams "Fantasia on a Theme by Thomas Tallis," and NO ONE can beat the thrilling, rich, deep string sounds that Ormandy could generate in that.

I can still remember Ormandy energetically and passionately conducting the climax of the first movement of Deryck Cooke's Mahler X at the premiere in an energetic four as I sat dumbfounded at the magnificent roaring climax, Mahler's final fully-orchestrated and quite dissonant final completed symphonic statement to the world. When I later had the nerve to present the 2LP Columbia recording to him at an autographing session at Strawbridge & Clothier to celebrate his return to the RCA label, he grinned happily and scrawled his autograph in green marker for me.

Memories!

Let the Stereo Legacy Box be issued soon!

Wallingford
Posts: 4687
Joined: Tue Jul 22, 2003 3:31 pm
Location: Brush, Colorado

Re: 120 CDs Later, a Conductor’s Legacy Is Still Uncertain

Post by Wallingford » Mon Jul 12, 2021 8:16 pm

It just popped back into my mind--and hasn't yet been mentioned in this thread--that Ormandy has been called by numerous soloists "the prince of accompanists". It's a specialized skill, not bestowed upon every single major conductor. Ormandy was the one who gave instrumentalists all the room in the world for them to shine.
Good music is that which falls upon the ear with ease, and quits the memory with difficulty.
--Sir Thomas Beecham

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Ricordanza and 31 guests