Karl Miller ([log in to unmask]) wrote:

>Robert Stumpf wrote:
>
>>...  While they did not cite him in the article, Stokowski once
>>maintained that someday we would make recordings that sounded better than
>>live.  Has the stereo system changed our perception of what music "should"
>>sound like? {Peace, bob stumpf
>
>I wonder if the ability to make such excellent recordings, the editing and
>engineering, make performers feel like they need to get every note right in
>concert.  More than likely, a person will not be willing to take chances in
>performance, will give a less spontaneous reading of a work.

There may be a handful of orchestras in the world actually *capable* of
giving a note-perfect reading of a major work, but I'd venture to suggest
this isn't something most bands would worry about...:-)

OTOH, I think audiences can easily be misled by heavily edited recordings
into expecting note perfect readings live.

>Some suggestions I had for the last NY Phil set (American Music) were
>rejected as one could hear a few wrong notes.  On the other hand, I found
>some of those performances to be so full of life.

What a ludicrous reason for rejecting a performance!  the recent(ish)
Horenstein Mahler 8 on BBC Legends has rightly been acclaimed as perhaps
(no perhaps for some of us) the finest, most penettrating account yet to
appear on disc, yet there are definite shortcomings in the performance on
technical grounds - but you can't have an editing session 40 years after
the fact (not when many of the performers, certainly the conductor, have
passed on).

Should they have withheld the recording so many of us have been clamouring
for them to release for so long?

I should cocoa.

>By the way, the next NY Phil set will be ten discs of Bernstein.

Any idea of the repertoire?

Deryk Barker
[log in to unmask]