
Originally Posted by
jayne lee wilson
But ariosto, if the orchestra really do ignore them so much, why do the readings sound so different? Why do listeners want to hear many conductors' take on the standard repertoire? Why would Norrington be so controversial if his conducting is largely ignored?
I think you, EA and others have to at least accept that Norrington playing LVB in Japan, or Mahler in the RAH, is going to sound very different from Haydn or Beethoven in Stuttgart, where he and the orchestra have self-evidently worked on the sound itself, as well as the interpretative approach, for many months if not years. I have myself sometimes disliked the "dead" string sound, the stiff phrasing and metronomic beat in HIPP-styled performances from Norrington and others, but it isn't true of these particular Stuttgart cycles, which are consistently fresh and expressive.
Gardiner is my usual bete noire, but earlier this year his 2008 Edinburgh Festival Brahms German Requiem was released, and it's one of the greatest of all performances (I bought his earlier account and rather regretted doing so). So I think one can't always brand a conductor with a particular approach, just because it makes musical judgment easier. It remains a problem that we tend to identify ourselves with our opinions, and the longer we hold them the harder it gets to acknowledge change and error.