This older message thread in the Raff Forum has been archived. Just click on the icon to email the writer direct. To see all the archived messages return to the Message archive.

Unfortunately it is not possible to add further messages to this archived threads. Instead, just start a new thread in the current Raff Forums.

Posted by	Message
Luis de Orueta   23/7/2003	Subject: Too slow or too fast? Message: If I had no other information (to help me in choosing between two versions of any piece of music) than the minutes of duration, I would pick slowest. Often in a concert I get the impression that the conductor (and may be the orchestra) is anxious to finish and have a drink at the nearest bar. In listening to a "well packed" CD, I feel the same horror as towards books with small typeset and three novels. To me excesive speed nearly always hides defects and obscures pasages. I know that it is actually more difficult to move the soul playing slow but for that reason much more effective.Mahler used to advice slowing down as a good trick when suspecting that an audience was getting bored. Plus, when running slow the contrast with fast sections is obviously enhanced and increases the expectations. All this is relevant when adding that to me at least 3/4 of Raff´s availble recorded music is played too fast. Am I the only one? Can all those players and conductors be wrong? Does it all depend on the caracther of each listener?
FERNANDO OLIVA   24/7/2003	RE: Too slow or too fast? IP: Logged Message: I agree with Luis about excesive speed. I prefer Bruckner or Mahler symphonies played with slow conductors (Klemperer, Walter) over fast versions (Haitink, Kubelik). Curiously, Baremboim (for me a very good conductor) plays Bruckner´s 8th. Adagio in 26 min. and Kubelik in 21 min. (without cuts!). Since Toscanini, I think conductors win speed. I read about Strauss, he was a very fast conductor ... specially if get money in advance. About our loved Raff, I only can compare between: Two 3rd. "In Walde" Symphony versions: Davan-Wetton and Schneider. I think Wetton is a superior and uncut version. Two 4th. Sympnony versions: Davan-Wetton and Schneider. Als Wetton version is superior except the Scherzo. I don´t know Schneider playing another composer, but I think is a fast conductor. About Chamber, I have Piano Trios 1 & 4 played by "Il Trittico" and "Trio Op. 8". For me, I like more Trio Op. 8 version., in special attention to my favourite: the fourth. I have my "Lenore" version played with Matthias Bamert, and recently found another version played with Nicholas Carthy. Is it better than Bamert´s? Is faster than it or slower. I appreciate your expert opinions about it. Best regards from Barcelona, Fernando.
Mark Thomas   24/7/2003	RE: Too slow or too fast? IP: Logged Message: The fast/slow thing is interesting and I can't say that I've ever given it much thought. My snap reaction is that I tolerate slower tempi than I'm used to hearing better than faster, but I wonder if that's because with faster tempi one often loses detail and gets scrappy ensemble? I'll have to think about it... As for the specific examples in Fernando's post the most glaring example is the "Lenore" of Carthy. Although the timings aren't dramaticly adrift from the norm I find it has such a rushed feel that it has no depth or sincerity. On the other hand, a critic friend whose views I respect finds it by far the most exciting of the available recordings. Of the two I'd still prefer the so-so Bamert to the overheated Carthy. The difference between Trio Op.8 and Il Trittico in the Piano Trios isn't so much one of tempi but more of committment...