James Zehm ([log in to unmask]) wrote:


Deryk Barker <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>>I thought the Saraste was really awful, in the sense of dull and *this*
>>was live? ...
>
>There are many Saraste-bashers in the world...

Hmmm, first I'm a Karajan basher, now I'm a Saraste basher.

>The Saraste isn't so bad people used to say.

But it's nothing like as good as some people say either.

>To me it is a good example on a conductor who routineally does what he has
>practised on in his conductors school.  I would like to say; "A LITTLE GOOD
>- A LOTS OF OK".

And the Routine is the Enemy of the Good.  I think routine is a very good
description of these performances.

>>However: I'd start collecting the new Naxos cycle, the 1/3 coupling is
>>outstanding.  (Not the old Leaper set bu a new one with the Iceland SO and
>>a conductor whose name escapes me).
>
>The conductor in 1 & 3 may be the finn Petri Sakari, all the other by
>Adrian Leaper.

No, Leaper recorded a complete cycle for Naxos, this is AFAIK a completely
new one.

>The 3 is good indeed, but surely this symphony is also a very beautiful
>one.  It should bear the title "pastoral".

Why?

Deryk Barker
[log in to unmask]