Paulo Braga ([log in to unmask]) wrote:

>I was hearing Tchaikovsky's 4th from the old DG box that contains also
>the 5th and the 6th and wondered what could be the reason why the Originals
>edition replaced that performance with Sanderling's.
>
>I did not hear this newer one but albeit Sanderling's work is characterized
>by high standards, is it that much better than Mravinsky's?  It should
>be pretty awesome to justify breaking the uniformity of a Mravinsky-only
>release that I regard as a firm standard in this often maligned repertoire.
>
>Or is there another reason?

I'm not certain I understand your question, but the situation is that
the 1956 mono recordings of 4-6 were by Sanderling (4) and Mravinsky
(5,6).

The 1961 stereo remakes were all by Mravinsky.

Deryk Barker
[log in to unmask]