[78-L] columbia classica: Europe & Americal

[Mike Harkin]

Checked card index and found that of first 200 classical alba, 20 are US:


32  Sonata 3 (Chopin)  Gringer
36  Brahms Son 2, Seidel & Loesser
37  Brahms  Piano son 3  Grainger
38  Beethoven  Cello son op.69  Salmond & Rumshisky
69  Haydn Qt op.54/2  Musical Art Qt
74  Ravel  Ma mere  Damrosch
78  Grieg Cello son  Saslmond/Rumshisky
82  Brahms Sym 2  Damrosch
86  Schubert Qt op.29  Musical Art  Qt
96  Schubert  Qt.op125/2
102 Schumann  works  Grainger
107 Smetana Trio  Malkin
127 Grieg Violin son 3  Seidel & Loesser
140 Brahms  Violin son 2  Zimbalist & Kauffmann
155 Brahms  Violin son 1  Seidel & Loesser
166 something perf by Grainger-can't read my notes
191 Harris  Sym 1933  Koussevitzky
198 Brahms Pno Qnt,op.60  Cumpson etal
200 Bach by Cumpson

Possibly there are also US recordings in the Modern Music series [quincy Porter comes to mind], also some of the 2disc rec's that later became X
sets.  Idid not search these, so they might affect to percentage summat.

All these I've had or heard sound fine; it's only with the war and postwar rec's of Stoky, Mitropoulos, Rodzinsky and Reiner that DH goes on about the
wretched sound.

Mike in Plovdiv    



--- On Thu, 1/28/10, David Lennick <dlennick at sympatico.ca> wrote:



> Dances" before sending out a master, and it sound
> fabulous. And> From: David Lennick <dlennick at sympatico.ca>
> Subject: Re: [78-L] columbia classical
> To: "78-L Mail List" <78-l at klickitat.78online.com>
> Date: Thursday, January 28, 2010, 12:18 PM
> Just listening to Arthur Fiedler's the disc used 
> was the one my parents owned and played on the CBC many
> times in the early 50s. 
> Victor COULD make a good record once in a while..no sign of
> the compression or 
> brassy sound typical of other recordings from this period.
> 
> Either Hall or Irving Kolodin also predicted the LP but
> thought it would be on 
> 16-inch discs (can't find the reference right now).
> 
> dl
> 
> DAVID BURNHAM wrote:
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > 
> > I do not have the resources to find out what
> recordings all of these reviews refer to.  But don't
> forget, the vast majority Columbia's classical recordings in
> the 20s and 30s were from British and European sources and
> there's a world of difference between the sounds on these
> recordings and the American recordings.  Also, as David
> Lennick has pointed out many times, wartime and postwar
> classical recordings from both Victor and Columbia were
> harsh and wooden sounding.  Perhaps the engineers had
> lost their touch during the long Petrillo strike or maybe
> the old engineers had moved on to other vocations and there
> was a new batch of engineers after the strike who weren't
> really up to speed yet.  Also, as dl pointed out, the
> recording characteristics from each company were kept a
> secret and one company's records didn't sound their best on
> the other company's playback equipment.  I mentioned
> earlier that an American recording from the 40s or the late
> >  30s would sound stridently brilliant on a
> British gramophone, well I don't know how aware David Hall
> was of the different recording characteristics, he often
> comments that British and European recordings sound muddy
> compared to their American counterparts, which, of course,
> they would if one isn't taking the recording curves into
> consideration, (and this is no disrespect for David Hall, I
> have a profound admiration for DH and as I read his 1947
> record book - the most recent one I have - I'm always amazed
> at how ahead of his time he was.  He already forsaw the
> arrival of stereo and he constantly shows an appreciation
> for period performance 10 to 15 years before anyone else
> did.).
> > 
> > Another observation about David Hall and his feelings
> towards domestic Columbia recordings.  When he was
> commenting on recordings by Stokowski's All-American Youth
> Orchestra, he is always, commendably, very gentle if he has
> any criticism about the performance, (and usually blames the
> conductor if there's a problem).  This was obviously a
> brilliant assembly of young musicians and I'm sure if I
> could see a list of players, I would recognize many names
> who went on to very successful careers.  But when it
> came to the recordings themselves, he dropped his restraint
> and roundly criticized  the poor quality with which
> they were recorded.  When I was a child, the only
> recording I knew of the Pathetique Symphony was by this
> group.  David Hall's comments about this recording,
> comparing it to the same conductor's recording with the
> Hollywood Bowl, (Victor): 
> > 
> > "Both Stokowski readings are individualistic, to say
> the least, but the Hollywood Bowl Symphony is at least
> richly recorded as compared with the muffled and
> ill-balanced sounds that emerge from the All-American
> Orchestra discs."
> > 
> > Once again, when I heard another recording of this
> work in the 50s, (this time it was Hermann Abendroth with
> the  Music Treasures of the World orchestra, whoever
> they were), I was overwhelmed by the improvement in sound.
> > 
> > db
> _______________________________________________
> 78-L mailing list
> 78-L at klickitat.78online.com
> http://klickitat.78online.com/mailman/listinfo/78-l
>