Mein Mann liebt Brahms Deutsches Requiem. Es ist unglaublich schön und es war geschrieben für die, das Leid tragen. Wenn ich gehe möchte ich diese Musik hören.
This is the most wonderful recording of a great work of inspiration and sheer magnificence. It's interesting to note that it's 12 minutes shorter than the Davis performance. This is because Gardiner takes faster, flowing and exciting tempos. This work can be a bit laborious if taken too slowly. Bravo to Gardiner for avoiding that problem.
I believe a lot of music lovers reject historically informed performances because they have amassed a lot of recordings with modern instruments and are reluctant to start all over. I was such a person but I'm so glad I made the change. Period instruments sound so much better with their lighter touch, transparency and (especially for brass instruments) their characterful, even "pungent", sound.
Period brass is so much better sounding than modern brass. Although I'm a guy who enjoys the sound of the Renaissance Rackett (look it up), so what do I know...?
A lot of older music never really sounded right to me until I started listening to HIP recordings. As you say, the clarity and pungency of the sound are vital to these works. That said, I still don't really like historical instruments in chamber music (the recordings I've heard, anyway).
La versión de Gardiner me conmovió profundamente...está llena de sutilezas expresivas,las voces del coro y los solistas son frescas y no excesivamente impostadas y gracias a ello el relato gana en humanidad y sentimiento.Además me gusta mucho como aligera y juega con los aspectos rítmicos en las partes jubilosas.Lamento las imagenes elegidas para acompañar la música ya que no tienen que ver con el concepto de esta obra maestra.Alfons P i B
My favourite Requiem. Brahms owns lush harmonies and is master of the 'Interval'. I have sung this several times in large choirs, once under the direction of Helmet Reilling, which was broadcast on radio. I always leave the production of this work with tear-stained face. Not a classical Requiem, but Requiem for the living. Perfect.
Orchestre Révolutionnaire et Romantique Violins I Peter Hanson, leader Kati Debretzeni Sharon Jaari Sophie Barber Marcus Barcham-Stevens Madeleine Easton Matilda Kaul Fiona Stevens Roy Mowatt Declan Daly Martin Gwilym-Jones Miranda Playfair Violins II Matthew Truscott Jayne Spencer Iona Davies Matthew Ward Nicolette Moonen Anne Schumann Julia Hanson Hakan Wikstrom Hildburg Williams David Chivers Violas Judith Busbridge Tom Dunn Lisa Cochrane Ian Rathbone Oliver Wilson Stella Wilkinson Mark Braithwaite James Slater Cellos David Watkin Ruth Alford Catherine Rimer Robin Michael Olaf Reimers Penny Driver Gabriel Amherst Double basses Valerie Botwright Cecelia Bruggemeyer Markus Van Horn Elizabeth Bradley Andrew Durban Flutes Marten Root Neil McLaren Piccolo Judith Treggor Oboes Michael Niesemann Ina Stock Clarinets Timothy Lines Guy Cowley Bassoons Jane Gower Györgyi Farkas Contrabassoon Ian Cuthill Horns Anneke Scott Joseph Walters Gavin Edwards David Bentley Jorge Renteria Trumpets Neil Brough Robert Vanryne Trombones Adam Woolf Abigail Newman Stephen Saunders Tuba Jeffrey Miller Timpani Robert Kendell Organ Edmund Connolly Silas J Standage (Requiem) Harps Nuala Herbert Thelma Owen Monteverdi Choir Sopranos Miriam Allan Charmian Bedford Elenor Bowers-Jolley Katy Butler Amy Carson Donna Deam Katherine Fuge Juliet Fraser Pippa Goss Angharad Gruffydd-Jones Alison Hill Emilia Hughes Angela Kazimierczuk Charlotte Mobbs Lucy Page Katie Thomas Belinda Yates Altos David Bates Heather Cairncross Margaret Cameron Peter Crawford Joolz Gale Annie Gill Carol Hall Frances Jellard Charles Richardson Susanna Spicer Tenors Jeremy Budd Andrew Busher Peter Davoren Vernon Kirk Nicholas Mulroy Tom Raskin Nicolas Robertson Paul Tindall Basses Tom Appleton Richard Bannan James Birchall Matthew Brook Julian Clarkson Samuel Evans Gabriel Gottlieb Charles Pott David Stuart Will Townend Lawrence Wallington
Apart from this excellently clear and powerful interpretation (I feel like I had the score under my eyes), I especially enjoy reding your various comments. Thank you Fritz "Maisenbacher" and Alex Reik for rising the level of the debate to such depths!
GILLES: fritz masturbator, as always, has been only full of himself, a musical incompetent who is equally full of shit with his wasteful outpourings. Society would do well to force him to go back to his original callings as bear-trainer or swine-herd
Es increíble como se funden y amalgaman los sonidos de la orquesta con las voces humanas, y se continúan unos en otros. Extraordinarios los planos sonoros obtenidos. Una experiencia musical y vital única. Es un trabajo cumbre de Gardiner para la historia. Mario Carlos Ginzburg
quelles voix splendides...wouaouwww pour le son....impeccable ....dynamisme et contrastes de brillant a sombre ainsi que les nuances,les sforzando....oh la la ....tout a fait reussi........x
This is probably my favorite version of this piece. Only thing is I wish the basses were a little louder. Though this is such a touching, powerful interpretation. Movement 6's, "Denn es vird de Posaune schallen" gives me goosebumps every time. Especially, of course, when it is sung right, and with great power, like it is here. Bravo!!!
I do not know anything about what it is "supposed" to sound like, but I do know that I much prefer this interpretation for the simple reason that I do not have to keep turning up and down the volume to strain to hear tiny pianissimos and protect my ears from blasting fortissimos.
To be fair, that might not be interpretation, but audio compression, the double-edged sword that it is. One the one hand, what you said. On the other hand, you sometimes get a quiet section followed by a sudden fortissimo which gets quietened ridiculously and so sounds quieter.
Stunning recording!!!! Bravo Maestro!!!! Love Gardiner’s Beethoven especially Leonore and Missa Solemnus. Great sound, tempos and passion. Brahms sounds even better, truly inspired by the powerful and dynamic interpretation of this great masterpiece.
I also appreciate the lush, broad orchestration of Brahms, Beethoven, and many other classical composers. And I love some of the more recent recordings with technology that can better reproduce awesome dynamic range, depth and nuance. I find some of the Historically Informed Performance styles have become pretty thin and vapid. This performance seems to strike a good middle road-- it's not broad nor plush, but neither is it frail. I find it robust, immediate, and in your face. I love how this performance treats the libretto. Listening to movement 2 in this recording while reading the translation, I'm positively gobstruck.
It is a pleasure to have a conversation with gentlemen as Mr. James Martin who expresses his opinions in such an elegant and clear manner, with richness in argumentation. Thank you so much Mr. James Martin! To Mr. Mat Phi: apart from his conceited idea to enlighten people and to open their mind, I would like to remember him that I put forward an argument: conductors as Walter and Klemperer were directly linked to the late romantic tradition: they met directly composer as Mahler.
I think the choir here is a much higher caliber and better sounding choir then most choirs in this piece... The sopranos are never flat on high notes like many other choirs (ex. 2:04), every onset is perfectly in tune and together (no scooping or "easing into" the note, as often happens), and they blend incredibly beautifully. And the singers in the choir do still vibrate some; they just don't wobble and warble around.
The Monteverdi Choir The Revolutionary and Romantic Orchestra Ann Monoyios Soprano Rodney Gilfrey Bass Sir John Elliot Gardiner, musical direction. Great performance in period instruments with male alto choir.
@Zuma Zero, Rodney Gilfrey and Charlotte Margiono are the soloists of the older (1991) Gardiner performance. Here a link to Ihr habt nun Traurichkeit with Charlotte Margiono th-cam.com/video/0WqmSmS6i4c/w-d-xo.html
Johannes Brahms - Ein Deutsches Requiem Matthew Brook, Katharine Fuge John Eliot Gardiner Orchestra/Ensemble: Monteverdi Choir, Orchestre Révolutionnaire et Romantique
Thankyou for this video. I think this masterpiece is better almost without vibrato, like in this performance, expecially for an adults' choir, otherwise high notes are dirty and not clear.
I agree with you,the debate should remain cordial.In any case noone was there to check how people performed in the time of Brahms,but sorry to tell, there are many writings from that time helping us to understand a bit more how they would and as long as you don't want to read them,let me be conceited.According to me,mixing up tradition and historical sources is a mistake but that's the eternal debate between historical and modern performers.
Merci à celui ou celle qui me dira quel est le nom de la statue, et au passage merci pour Brahms et pour tous les amoureux et admirateurs de musique classique et d'oeuvre aussi transsandante que celle-ci.
La statue est L'ange de la douleur, et elle se trove à Rome, dans le cimitière acatholique (ou Des Anglais) de rue Cestio. Elle a été scuptée à la mort de sa femme par l'auteur, William Wetmore Story, mort lui aussi, peu de mois après, accablé par la douleur
I don't know about 'correct' or 'nice-sounding' against other 'modern' or 'non-HIP' performances, but what I can say about this against other recordings is that I can actually hear words. Like, the German language.
For another interpretation, listen to Giulini’s, Karajan’s, Solti’s recordings. Or Abbado’s interpretation which combines a romantic approach with a certain agility of proceeding and a with a remarkable differentiation of sound levels by using also a chamber choir. (This list does not purport at all to be complete)
und alles fleish starts gallantly with baroque bassoons.. lets call them bassoonets can't hear the orchestra... but lo a baroque contrabassoon.. the brass is playing in another room. good baritone
you hope? what is this book, the gospel? anyway.. we know how brahms can be performed. conductors as furwaengler, walter, toscanini, klemperer, karajan, etc. belonged to a generation that could be pupils of those who directly heard the first performance of brahms. walter was an assistent of mahler, and mahler met brahms. so.. there is a continuity within the tradition. how brahms, mahler,verdi, puccini, bruckner etc must sound is not a mistery..then it is a matter of rasonable choice or of taste
Ok, but to define precisely the "intentions" is the purpose of historical performance. Playing on historical instruments allows the performer to get a bit closer to these intentions. If you were a performer yourself you would know that it is completely different to play on a romantic wooden flute than a modern one in metal or to play on gut strings and not on steel ones.
mostly fine (love the vibratolessness), but the cheesiest ever final 'wo .......... ist ..................... dein ................................... Sieg" (I hate to imagine what he does with 'vor Gott vor Gott vor Gott' in the Ninth)
I’m a tenor. I have sang the Brahms requiem before. It may look easy but this choir music on STEROIDS. You need depth, a solid sound, a fabulous developed breath support and ease not only with high notes but with high tessitura, what it’s witten for the tenor is very high. My complain is that the sopranos overpower everybody else during this recordings and one can not hear anyone else. I hear the tenors but they are on the light side and that’s not what Brahms is about. Brahms = the Verdi and Wagner of choral music. Singers need so much BODY in their voice for this requiem. Both solos did not make the cut here. Too light! You don’t need to have a dramatic instrument in your throat BUT you do need depth in your voice - asked that Lucia Popp who has a lyric extremely natural yet rich instrument with a lot of body. She is perfect for this music. The tempo is too fast too!! Way too fast and Brahms is all about holding those long resonant spinning notes!
Don't forget the pitch. A 440 should be A 432. Then the sound would be what Brahms intended. It always sounds so screechy thanks to 20th century conductors who raised the pitch to A 440! Brahms didn't intend that screechy sound but the Karajans of this world messed it all up!
I have a recording of the German Requiem with John Eliot Gardiner / Monteverdi / Orchestre, but it's a different, older one with Rod Gilfrey as the baritone soloist. I absolutely LOVE that one, just like I LOVE Gardiner's Beethoven symphonies, but this particular recording is really not doing it for me. At all. Strange how the same conductor can produce two such different takes. Brahms orchestrates a big, plush ocean of sound, and this doesn't have it. Plus most of it seems way too fast. If you can find the Gilfrey version, buy it. Otherwise, listen to van Karajan instead of this.
I had bought the earlier Philips recording with Gilfry and the great Margiono back in the 90s and I was severly dissappointed with Gardiner and the recording team there. Weak playing, effete, precious phrasing and no backbone. The soloists were wonderful. I believe this later recording to be eons more direct, sensible and involving. The ritards in the 6th movement sounded then so artificial, applied. Here they are a lot more convincing. The sound itself is clearer and more realistic. No competition. The soloists here, however, are subpar. For the best Brahms Requiem there's Kempe. Not really Karajan's piece IMO. And he uses the WIener Singeverein on most of his recordings and they are a wobbly, under the pitch, screaming band. Oh no.
Gardiner is a good conductor, well known for his performances and recordings within renaissance and baroque repertoires. I appreciated his Mahler (lieder eines fahrenden Gesellen) too. Here.. his approach shows some limits. The sound is aleays clear and this allows to listen to the articulation of the polyphony. But.. it lacks 'vibrato' and so the sound does not have 'body', even in the Choir. Brahms is Brahms, not Palestrina. No charm.
if you look for recordings of singers of the 19th century (and there are some who recorded their voices when it became possible) you won't hear much vibrato. and a much clearer sound, not a big washed out ocean. Recordings of Brahms playing piano himself are also on the fast side. What they don't show is the steady tempo and strict synchronization we hear in modern recordings (including this one).
Healthy operatic singing should never have a "forced" vibrato. Healthy singing will often have a natural vibrato that is even and clear, but not forced. However, not all voices necessarily have a vibrato per se. Some, at their healthiest and most open, are as clean and smooth as crystal. As long as the person is singing healthily (and beautifully), that's all that matters (to me). :)
If you don't want to improve your knowledge or to open your mind reading very relevant writings on the way the music was performed in the XIXth century,let me remind you that the vibrato as an element of tone production appeared at the turn of the XIXth century with Ysaÿe. I won't copy here all the writings on the subject that we have from Joachim and other performers of the time of Brahms,youshould simply inform yourself a bit more before showing such a disrespect for the historical performance
Reproducing Brahms's intentions and reproducing how his music sounded in his own lifetime are not the same thing. One is only partially possible, and the other is totally impossible.
Es klingt für mich zu fest nach "Barocke Aufführungspraxis"....es wirkt steril und lebt zu wenig. Perfektion allein macht noch lange keine Musik. Lässt doch diese so wunderschöne und großartige Musik das Herz berühren.
Anna-Maria Locher Ich habe diese Aufnahme gerade erst entdeckt, und beim ersten Satz sind mir die Tränen gekommen, so gerührt war ich, so "getröstet" habe ich mich gefühlt. Spricht das für "steril"? Oder für "fest"? Oder nicht doch dafür, dass "diese so wunderschöne und großartige Musik das Herz berührt" - auch und gerade auf diese Weise! Ich habe das Requiem oft gehört, und in der Historischen Aufführungspraxis bin ich auch tätig. Dass Gardiner nach seiner alten Aufnahme des Requiems, für die ich eine solche Kritik akzeptiert hätte, jetzt noch so viel tiefer eintauchen kann, war nach seiner Interpretation der Brahms-Sinfonien vielleicht nicht unvorhersehbar, ist aber doch eine schöne Überraschung.
Mir persönlich berühren die Aufnahmen eines Klemperer, Sawallisch oder auch Karajan viel mehr. Ich muss auch zugeben das ich nicht so Fan von diesen Historischen Aufführungspraxis bin. Vielleicht würde wir uns sogar noch sehr wundern wenn wir wirklich hören könnten wie es z.B.in den Zeiten von Bach geklungen hat....auch da....ein Erbarme dich aus der Matthäuspassion höre ich viel lieber mit noch eine Julia Hamari oder Kathleen Ferrier als mit diesen heutige Altus- Besetzungen. Aber es ist doch schön das es so viele verschiedene Aufführungen gibt, irgendwie kommt doch jeder zur seine Rechnung.
Über Geschmack möchte ich hier nicht streiten, zumindest nicht in Stichworten. Und sicher würden wir uns wundern, wenn wir eine Interpretation unter Bachs Leitung hören könnten - es wäre sicher nichts, was wir kennen. Trotzdem gibt es Quellen zur Aufführungspraxis der Bachzeit, und die möchte ich schon zur Kenntnis nehmen, sie bringen uns der Sache zumindest näher. - Wenn man die uns zur Verfügung stehenden Aufnahmen von Brahms-Werken sichtet, dann gibt es ja nicht nur Klemperer, Sawallisch, Karajan oder andere auf der einen Seite und die "Historische Aufführungspraxis" auf der anderen Seite. (Schon innerhalb jedes dieser Felder gibt es eine große Vielfalt von Interpretation.) Ich möchte daran erinnern, dass es auch viele historische Brahms-Aufnahmen gibt, mit auch heute bekannten Orchestern und doch einem sehr anderen Ansatz von Interpretation. Im Fall der Sinfonien habe ich mich schon sehr damit beschäftigt und Aufnahmen gefunden, die mich sehr berühren, z. B. die vierte mit Amsterdam Concertgebouw Ortest/Mengelberg und die dritte mit den Wiener Philharmonikern/Clemens Krauss, beide, wenn ich mich recht erinnere, aus den Dreißigern. Bei allen neueren Studio-Aufnahmen ist das oft kleinteilige Schneiden der Feind einer lebendigen Interpretation, diesen Einfluss bemerkt man bei Aufnahmen etwa seit den 50er Jahren. Ich war ganz erstaunt, als ich hier auf You Tube ein recht neues Video mit der Interpretation der 3. Sinfonie von Brahms durch die Sächsische Staatskapelle Dresden unter Chr. Thielemann fand und Thielemann die Wiederholung der Exposition des ersten Satzes tatsächlich anders, geraffter, größer, gestaltete als den ersten Durchgang. Das gibt es in geschnittenen Studioaufnahmen kaum noch - und deren Ästhetik der Perfektion und Angleichung hat leider auf Spielpraxis und Hörgewohnheiten doch sehr abgefärbt. Insofern kann man sich freuen, dass auf You Tube noch reichlich Live-Aufnahmen dokumentiert sind.
Es ist sehr spannend...die noch ältere Aufnahmen faszinieren mir eigentlich am meisten und wenn sie live sind ist es noch besser, ich bin auch der Meinung das es bei den Studio-Aufnahmen von der lebendige Interpretation viel verloren geht. Für mich gibt's also auch nicht nur Karajan, Sawallisch etc. Und wie sie sagen, man findet zum Glück noch viele live Aufnehmen.
Being a pupil of Brahms's (or a pupil of a pupil) doesn't, in itself, guarantee anything. Some pupils perform in a style very close to their teachers'; others depart widely from it. Yes, Mahler met Brahms; but I doubt if even of his own performances of Brahms were very faithful to Brahms's intentions. If you want to get an idea of what Brahms's music sounded like in his own lifetime (only a partial idea, of course), there's no substitute for historical research.
what brought him to treat Brahms with baroque instruments? Brahms is not Haendel! Can hardly hear the bases.. a baroque english horn drones so englishly. Messi di voce all over the place, and hardly hear the orchestra..the baritones come in early... first 4 minutes, several injured on the battle field.. minute 5;40 the tenors trot in so englishly.mit freude! min 10 the sopranos so quaintly sing getrastet werdan.. the o umlaut is important.. it's the German requiem.. Brexit has not yet conceded Brahms to the Brits.
I feel very torn, but I must say, as a HUGE Gardiner/Monteverdi Choir fan of decades (literally), this is disappointing. Certainly, it is "pretty" enough, but it lacks the richness and depth of their previous recording (see end of post). I'm not being nostalgic for the heck of it. I have been listening to them long enough to have heard them redo quite a number of recordings. While the new interpretations were different, they were credible and beautiful in their own right. This, however, doesn't work. The voices here are a bit too light and thin ( especially the sopranos - almost boy-like in some approaches); the tempi are frequently syruppy in passages where it is unnecessary as the actual phrasing itself is mournful enough and some of the transitions are awkward - not seamless as Gardiner is known to do) and the soloists....*no comment*. The result is that It loses the two things one loves most about this work - the colour and the melodic lines (magically haunting when done perfectly, with one voice handing over to another so subtly that one can't tell where the tenors ended and the altos began) - as they did the first time around). If you love this, check out the previous one: www.amazon.com/Brahms-Deutsches-John-Eliot-Gardiner/dp/B00TG0BTO6. This recording proves that EVEN my beloved Sir John can make artistic mistakes. It makes him more human somehow. :)
Lets be clear in that these are not different "versions" of the same piece. They are extremely different from each other in nearly everyday. If you consider that Mozart was a classical composer and Brahms a Romantic, the differences are easily explained and understood. You may prefer Mozart's requiem to Brahm's, but please don't be ignorant to the fact that they are inextricably different. It's apples and oranges.
![แฟนแนวใด๋ - ยูริ โตเกียวมิวสิค [OFFICIAL MUSIC VIDEO ]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/4_XVMuhhbsU/mqdefault.jpg)
Mein Mann liebt Brahms Deutsches Requiem. Es ist unglaublich schön und es war geschrieben für die, das Leid tragen. Wenn ich gehe möchte ich diese Musik hören.
The best recording of the Requiem I've ever heard! Ausgezeichnet!
A very satisfying performance. The recording is remarkable for the quality and clarity of the sound. Perhaps the best recording in this respect.
This is the most wonderful recording of a great work of inspiration and sheer magnificence. It's interesting to note that it's 12 minutes shorter than the Davis performance. This is because Gardiner takes faster, flowing and exciting tempos. This work can be a bit laborious if taken too slowly. Bravo to Gardiner for avoiding that problem.
I believe a lot of music lovers reject historically informed performances because they have amassed a lot of recordings with modern instruments and are reluctant to start all over. I was such a person but I'm so glad I made the change. Period instruments sound so much better with their lighter touch, transparency and (especially for brass instruments) their characterful, even "pungent", sound.
Period brass is so much better sounding than modern brass.
Although I'm a guy who enjoys the sound of the Renaissance Rackett (look it up), so what do I know...?
A lot of older music never really sounded right to me until I started listening to HIP recordings. As you say, the clarity and pungency of the sound are vital to these works. That said, I still don't really like historical instruments in chamber music (the recordings I've heard, anyway).
People don't like hip because it is a scam and a fraud, an ideological abuse. This performance is ridiculous, unlistenable. Brahms is not a madrigale.
Absolutely love this recording. Didn't know JEG had done a period - instrument recording of Brahms' German Requiem. Very nice!
+Clayton Peak even two recordings ! This is the second one.
Gardiner est une conducteur extraordinaire!
La versión de Gardiner me conmovió profundamente...está llena de sutilezas expresivas,las voces del coro y los solistas son frescas y no excesivamente impostadas y gracias a ello el relato gana en humanidad y sentimiento.Además me gusta mucho como aligera y juega con los aspectos rítmicos en las partes jubilosas.Lamento las imagenes elegidas para acompañar la música ya que no tienen que ver con el concepto de esta obra maestra.Alfons P i B
great tempo, great dynamic, great sopranos in the choir, I really like the interpretation…
My favourite Requiem. Brahms owns lush harmonies and is master of the 'Interval'. I have sung this several times in large choirs, once under the direction of Helmet Reilling, which was broadcast on radio. I always leave the production of this work with tear-stained face. Not a classical Requiem, but Requiem for the living. Perfect.
Immer macht mich weinen, weil es spricht die Wahrheit von das :Leben und dem Tod.
R.K.B.
Grandisima interpretación! !
Orchestre Révolutionnaire et Romantique
Violins I
Peter Hanson, leader
Kati Debretzeni
Sharon Jaari
Sophie Barber
Marcus Barcham-Stevens
Madeleine Easton
Matilda Kaul
Fiona Stevens
Roy Mowatt
Declan Daly
Martin Gwilym-Jones
Miranda Playfair
Violins II
Matthew Truscott
Jayne Spencer
Iona Davies
Matthew Ward
Nicolette Moonen
Anne Schumann
Julia Hanson
Hakan Wikstrom
Hildburg Williams
David Chivers
Violas
Judith Busbridge
Tom Dunn
Lisa Cochrane
Ian Rathbone
Oliver Wilson
Stella Wilkinson
Mark Braithwaite
James Slater
Cellos
David Watkin
Ruth Alford
Catherine Rimer
Robin Michael
Olaf Reimers
Penny Driver
Gabriel Amherst
Double basses
Valerie Botwright
Cecelia Bruggemeyer
Markus Van Horn
Elizabeth Bradley
Andrew Durban
Flutes
Marten Root
Neil McLaren
Piccolo
Judith Treggor
Oboes
Michael Niesemann
Ina Stock
Clarinets
Timothy Lines
Guy Cowley
Bassoons
Jane Gower
Györgyi Farkas
Contrabassoon
Ian Cuthill
Horns
Anneke Scott
Joseph Walters
Gavin Edwards
David Bentley
Jorge Renteria
Trumpets
Neil Brough
Robert Vanryne
Trombones
Adam Woolf
Abigail Newman
Stephen Saunders
Tuba
Jeffrey Miller
Timpani
Robert Kendell
Organ
Edmund Connolly
Silas J Standage (Requiem)
Harps
Nuala Herbert
Thelma Owen
Monteverdi Choir
Sopranos
Miriam Allan
Charmian Bedford
Elenor Bowers-Jolley
Katy Butler
Amy Carson
Donna Deam
Katherine Fuge
Juliet Fraser
Pippa Goss
Angharad Gruffydd-Jones
Alison Hill
Emilia Hughes
Angela Kazimierczuk
Charlotte Mobbs
Lucy Page
Katie Thomas
Belinda Yates
Altos
David Bates
Heather Cairncross
Margaret Cameron
Peter Crawford
Joolz Gale
Annie Gill
Carol Hall
Frances Jellard
Charles Richardson
Susanna Spicer
Tenors
Jeremy Budd
Andrew Busher
Peter Davoren
Vernon Kirk
Nicholas Mulroy
Tom Raskin
Nicolas Robertson
Paul Tindall
Basses
Tom Appleton
Richard Bannan
James Birchall
Matthew Brook
Julian Clarkson
Samuel Evans
Gabriel Gottlieb
Charles Pott
David Stuart
Will Townend
Lawrence Wallington
Transparant en goed verstaanbaar. Prachtig
ich mag es immer noch.
A superb performance! Thank you for this posting of this exceptional work.
Apart from this excellently clear and powerful interpretation (I feel like I had the score under my eyes), I especially enjoy reding your various comments. Thank you Fritz "Maisenbacher" and Alex Reik for rising the level of the debate to such depths!
GILLES: fritz masturbator, as always, has been only full of himself, a musical incompetent who is equally full of shit with his wasteful outpourings. Society would do well to force him to go back to his original callings as bear-trainer or swine-herd
Es increíble como se funden y amalgaman los sonidos de la orquesta con las voces humanas, y se continúan unos en otros. Extraordinarios los planos sonoros obtenidos.
Una experiencia musical y vital única. Es un trabajo cumbre de Gardiner para la historia.
Mario Carlos Ginzburg
quelles voix splendides...wouaouwww pour le son....impeccable ....dynamisme et contrastes de brillant a sombre ainsi que les nuances,les sforzando....oh la la ....tout a fait reussi........x
All I know is this is how I want a choir to sound.
This is probably my favorite version of this piece. Only thing is I wish the basses were a little louder. Though this is such a touching, powerful interpretation. Movement 6's, "Denn es vird de Posaune schallen" gives me goosebumps every time. Especially, of course, when it is sung right, and with great power, like it is here. Bravo!!!
et voila les frissons que l'oeuvre merite
This is a bang-up performance, ably served by the full, clear sound. The whole thing sounds "fresh", as if just plucked from the vine.
Timings:
1 0:00
2 10:45
3 23:26
4 32:00
5 37:13
6 44:36
7 55:12
I do not know anything about what it is "supposed" to sound like, but I do know that I much prefer this interpretation for the simple reason that I do not have to keep turning up and down the volume to strain to hear tiny pianissimos and protect my ears from blasting fortissimos.
To be fair, that might not be interpretation, but audio compression, the double-edged sword that it is.
One the one hand, what you said.
On the other hand, you sometimes get a quiet section followed by a sudden fortissimo which gets quietened ridiculously and so sounds quieter.
Mooie uitvoering! Love this recording!
Beautiful, terrifying, frightening. Call it what you will, all I know is it scares me to death and that is why I love it so much
My new favorite version.
Stunning recording!!!! Bravo Maestro!!!! Love Gardiner’s Beethoven especially Leonore and Missa Solemnus. Great sound, tempos and passion. Brahms sounds even better, truly inspired by the powerful and dynamic interpretation of this great masterpiece.
I also appreciate the lush, broad orchestration of Brahms, Beethoven, and many other classical composers. And I love some of the more recent recordings with technology that can better reproduce awesome dynamic range, depth and nuance. I find some of the Historically Informed Performance styles have become pretty thin and vapid.
This performance seems to strike a good middle road-- it's not broad nor plush, but neither is it frail. I find it robust, immediate, and in your face.
I love how this performance treats the libretto. Listening to movement 2 in this recording while reading the translation, I'm positively gobstruck.
It is a pleasure to have a conversation with gentlemen as Mr. James Martin who expresses his opinions in such an elegant and clear manner, with richness in argumentation. Thank you so much Mr. James Martin! To Mr. Mat Phi: apart from his conceited idea to enlighten people and to open their mind, I would like to remember him that I put forward an argument: conductors as Walter and Klemperer were directly linked to the late romantic tradition: they met directly composer as Mahler.
I think the choir here is a much higher caliber and better sounding choir then most choirs in this piece... The sopranos are never flat on high notes like many other choirs (ex. 2:04), every onset is perfectly in tune and together (no scooping or "easing into" the note, as often happens), and they blend incredibly beautifully. And the singers in the choir do still vibrate some; they just don't wobble and warble around.
Yeah - this is awesome!!! Thank you for knowing "Brahms"
This is so beautiful in every way- Thank you.
The Monteverdi Choir
The Revolutionary and Romantic Orchestra
Ann Monoyios Soprano
Rodney Gilfrey Bass
Sir John Elliot Gardiner, musical direction.
Great performance in period instruments with male alto choir.
@Zuma Zero, Rodney Gilfrey and Charlotte Margiono are the soloists of the older (1991) Gardiner performance. Here a link to Ihr habt nun Traurichkeit with Charlotte Margiono th-cam.com/video/0WqmSmS6i4c/w-d-xo.html
wundervoll
Ich habe gern, zu hören.
great gardiner
I've heard lots of interpretations.
I LIKE this one.
:)
Quelle ferveur, quel souffle!
Pure Beauty. ❤️
Johannes Brahms - Ein Deutsches Requiem
Matthew Brook, Katharine Fuge
John Eliot Gardiner
Orchestra/Ensemble: Monteverdi Choir, Orchestre Révolutionnaire et Romantique
Thankyou for this video. I think this masterpiece is better almost without vibrato, like in this performance, expecially for an adults' choir, otherwise high notes are dirty and not clear.
Can't keep eyes open.... falling asleep.... help me...
Commozione ❤️👏❤️
Hier hat sich der Maestro im Klangbild verirrt!
Sehe ich überhaupt nicht so. Er sieht es eben eher als Motette mit Orchester, und wenn ich genauer drüber nachdenke - ist ist wohl einfach so.
I agree with you,the debate should remain cordial.In any case noone was there to check how people performed in the time of Brahms,but sorry to tell, there are many writings from that time helping us to understand a bit more how they would and as long as you don't want to read them,let me be conceited.According to me,mixing up tradition and historical sources is a mistake but that's the eternal debate between historical and modern performers.
Merci à celui ou celle qui me dira quel est le nom de la statue, et au passage merci pour Brahms et pour tous les amoureux et admirateurs de musique classique et d'oeuvre aussi transsandante que celle-ci.
La statue est L'ange de la douleur, et elle se trove à Rome, dans le cimitière acatholique (ou Des Anglais) de rue Cestio. Elle a été scuptée à la mort de sa femme par l'auteur, William Wetmore Story, mort lui aussi, peu de mois après, accablé par la douleur
wow!
Das beste Recording was ich weiss!
Hristo Dantchev okay and now in german again.
Excellent absolutely excellent.
I don't know about 'correct' or 'nice-sounding' against other 'modern' or 'non-HIP' performances, but what I can say about this against other recordings is that I can actually hear words. Like, the German language.
great!
For another interpretation, listen to Giulini’s, Karajan’s, Solti’s recordings. Or Abbado’s interpretation which combines a romantic approach with a certain agility of proceeding and a with a remarkable differentiation of sound levels by using also a chamber choir. (This list does not purport at all to be complete)
und alles fleish starts gallantly with baroque bassoons.. lets call them bassoonets can't hear the orchestra... but lo a baroque contrabassoon.. the brass is playing in another room. good baritone
you hope? what is this book, the gospel? anyway.. we know how brahms can be performed. conductors as furwaengler, walter, toscanini, klemperer, karajan, etc. belonged to a generation that could be pupils of those who directly heard the first performance of brahms. walter was an assistent of mahler, and mahler met brahms. so.. there is a continuity within the tradition. how brahms, mahler,verdi, puccini, bruckner etc must sound is not a mistery..then it is a matter of rasonable choice or of taste
Ok, but to define precisely the "intentions" is the purpose of historical performance. Playing on historical instruments allows the performer to get a bit closer to these intentions. If you were a performer yourself you would know that it is completely different to play on a romantic wooden flute than a modern one in metal or to play on gut strings and not on steel ones.
Wow, people really seem to take ostensibly trivial performance details very serious on this site...
John Eliot Gardiner
BraHMS and what German culture is and means!
I advise you to read "Classical and Romantic Performing Practice 1750-1900" Clive Brown. I hope you'll not talk about lack of vibrato afterwards...
What a pity, we don't know the name of solists', the orchestra and the choir.
Thanks, Jeremy
Eszter Tariska you don t need to know.
Death and Suffering
mostly fine (love the vibratolessness), but the cheesiest ever final 'wo .......... ist ..................... dein ................................... Sieg" (I hate to imagine what he does with 'vor Gott vor Gott vor Gott' in the Ninth)
Murray Bowles The first recording on Philips was cheesier. Here he is relatively restrained. I love this performance but the soloists are awful.
Who´s the Baritone??
I’m a tenor. I have sang the Brahms requiem before. It may look easy but this choir music on STEROIDS. You need depth, a solid sound, a fabulous developed breath support and ease not only with high notes but with high tessitura, what it’s witten for the tenor is very high. My complain is that the sopranos overpower everybody else during this recordings and one can not hear anyone else. I hear the tenors but they are on the light side and that’s not what Brahms is about. Brahms = the Verdi and Wagner of choral music. Singers need so much BODY in their voice for this requiem. Both solos did not make the cut here. Too light! You don’t need to have a dramatic instrument in your throat BUT you do need depth in your voice - asked that Lucia Popp who has a lyric extremely natural yet rich instrument with a lot of body. She is perfect for this music. The tempo is too fast too!! Way too fast and Brahms is all about holding those long resonant spinning notes!
let me guess: your'e American, right?
Don't forget the pitch. A 440 should be A 432. Then the sound would be what Brahms intended. It always sounds so screechy thanks to 20th century conductors who raised the pitch to A 440! Brahms didn't intend that screechy sound but the Karajans of this world messed it all up!
@@kedemberger8773 let me guess: you're a tool, right?
32:00
I have a recording of the German Requiem with John Eliot Gardiner / Monteverdi / Orchestre, but it's a different, older one with Rod Gilfrey as the baritone soloist. I absolutely LOVE that one, just like I LOVE Gardiner's Beethoven symphonies, but this particular recording is really not doing it for me. At all. Strange how the same conductor can produce two such different takes.
Brahms orchestrates a big, plush ocean of sound, and this doesn't have it. Plus most of it seems way too fast. If you can find the Gilfrey version, buy it. Otherwise, listen to van Karajan instead of this.
I had bought the earlier Philips recording with Gilfry and the great Margiono back in the 90s and I was severly dissappointed with Gardiner and the recording team there. Weak playing, effete, precious phrasing and no backbone. The soloists were wonderful. I believe this later recording to be eons more direct, sensible and involving. The ritards in the 6th movement sounded then so artificial, applied. Here they are a lot more convincing. The sound itself is clearer and more realistic. No competition. The soloists here, however, are subpar. For the best Brahms Requiem there's Kempe. Not really Karajan's piece IMO. And he uses the WIener Singeverein on most of his recordings and they are a wobbly, under the pitch, screaming band. Oh no.
Too fast? I've just heard the first two movements, and if anything Gardiner is too slow. The second movement in particular needs to be more muscular.
Gardiner is a good conductor, well known for his performances and recordings within renaissance and baroque repertoires. I appreciated his Mahler (lieder eines fahrenden Gesellen) too. Here.. his approach shows some limits. The sound is aleays clear and this allows to listen to the articulation of the polyphony. But.. it lacks 'vibrato' and so the sound does not have 'body', even in the Choir. Brahms is Brahms, not Palestrina. No charm.
if you look for recordings of singers of the 19th century (and there are some who recorded their voices when it became possible) you won't hear much vibrato. and a much clearer sound, not a big washed out ocean.
Recordings of Brahms playing piano himself are also on the fast side. What they don't show is the steady tempo and strict synchronization we hear in modern recordings (including this one).
11:48
There is a difference between the forced "opera-vibrato" and the natural vibrato which is always present in a human voice...
Healthy operatic singing should never have a "forced" vibrato. Healthy singing will often have a natural vibrato that is even and clear, but not forced. However, not all voices necessarily have a vibrato per se. Some, at their healthiest and most open, are as clean and smooth as crystal. As long as the person is singing healthily (and beautifully), that's all that matters (to me). :)
das ist unfassbar zu leise.
wann wird das demnächst live gespielt?
Wie laut soll es denn sein?
+David Linden
Hallo David
Live zu sehen am 02.04..16 Stadthalle Ettlingen.
Gruß Manfred
If you don't want to improve your knowledge or to open your mind reading very relevant writings on the way the music was performed in the XIXth century,let me remind you that the vibrato as an element of tone production appeared at the turn of the XIXth century with Ysaÿe. I won't copy here all the writings on the subject that we have from Joachim and other performers of the time of Brahms,youshould simply inform yourself a bit more before showing such a disrespect for the historical performance
Reproducing Brahms's intentions and reproducing how his music sounded in his own lifetime are not the same thing. One is only partially possible, and the other is totally impossible.
We may differ in considering which is which.
Es klingt für mich zu fest nach "Barocke Aufführungspraxis"....es wirkt steril und lebt zu wenig. Perfektion allein macht noch lange keine Musik. Lässt doch diese so wunderschöne und großartige Musik das Herz berühren.
Anna-Maria Locher Ich habe diese Aufnahme gerade erst entdeckt, und beim ersten Satz sind mir die Tränen gekommen, so gerührt war ich, so "getröstet" habe ich mich gefühlt. Spricht das für "steril"? Oder für "fest"? Oder nicht doch dafür, dass "diese so wunderschöne und großartige Musik das Herz berührt" - auch und gerade auf diese Weise! Ich habe das Requiem oft gehört, und in der Historischen Aufführungspraxis bin ich auch tätig. Dass Gardiner nach seiner alten Aufnahme des Requiems, für die ich eine solche Kritik akzeptiert hätte, jetzt noch so viel tiefer eintauchen kann, war nach seiner Interpretation der Brahms-Sinfonien vielleicht nicht unvorhersehbar, ist aber doch eine schöne Überraschung.
Anna-Maria Locher hä?
Mir persönlich berühren die Aufnahmen eines Klemperer, Sawallisch oder auch Karajan viel mehr. Ich muss auch zugeben das ich nicht so Fan von diesen Historischen Aufführungspraxis bin. Vielleicht würde wir uns sogar noch sehr wundern wenn wir wirklich hören könnten wie es z.B.in den Zeiten von Bach geklungen hat....auch da....ein Erbarme dich aus der Matthäuspassion höre ich viel lieber mit noch eine Julia Hamari oder Kathleen Ferrier als mit diesen heutige Altus- Besetzungen. Aber es ist doch schön das es so viele verschiedene Aufführungen gibt, irgendwie kommt doch jeder zur seine Rechnung.
Über Geschmack möchte ich hier nicht streiten, zumindest nicht in Stichworten. Und sicher würden wir uns wundern, wenn wir eine Interpretation unter Bachs Leitung hören könnten - es wäre sicher nichts, was wir kennen. Trotzdem gibt es Quellen zur Aufführungspraxis der Bachzeit, und die möchte ich schon zur Kenntnis nehmen, sie bringen uns der Sache zumindest näher. - Wenn man die uns zur Verfügung stehenden Aufnahmen von Brahms-Werken sichtet, dann gibt es ja nicht nur Klemperer, Sawallisch, Karajan oder andere auf der einen Seite und die "Historische Aufführungspraxis" auf der anderen Seite. (Schon innerhalb jedes dieser Felder gibt es eine große Vielfalt von Interpretation.) Ich möchte daran erinnern, dass es auch viele historische Brahms-Aufnahmen gibt, mit auch heute bekannten Orchestern und doch einem sehr anderen Ansatz von Interpretation. Im Fall der Sinfonien habe ich mich schon sehr damit beschäftigt und Aufnahmen gefunden, die mich sehr berühren, z. B. die vierte mit Amsterdam Concertgebouw Ortest/Mengelberg und die dritte mit den Wiener Philharmonikern/Clemens Krauss, beide, wenn ich mich recht erinnere, aus den Dreißigern. Bei allen neueren Studio-Aufnahmen ist das oft kleinteilige Schneiden der Feind einer lebendigen Interpretation, diesen Einfluss bemerkt man bei Aufnahmen etwa seit den 50er Jahren. Ich war ganz erstaunt, als ich hier auf You Tube ein recht neues Video mit der Interpretation der 3. Sinfonie von Brahms durch die Sächsische Staatskapelle Dresden unter Chr. Thielemann fand und Thielemann die Wiederholung der Exposition des ersten Satzes tatsächlich anders, geraffter, größer, gestaltete als den ersten Durchgang. Das gibt es in geschnittenen Studioaufnahmen kaum noch - und deren Ästhetik der Perfektion und Angleichung hat leider auf Spielpraxis und Hörgewohnheiten doch sehr abgefärbt. Insofern kann man sich freuen, dass auf You Tube noch reichlich Live-Aufnahmen dokumentiert sind.
Es ist sehr spannend...die noch ältere Aufnahmen faszinieren mir eigentlich am meisten und wenn sie live sind ist es noch besser, ich bin auch der Meinung das es bei den Studio-Aufnahmen von der lebendige Interpretation viel verloren geht. Für mich gibt's also auch nicht nur Karajan, Sawallisch etc. Und wie sie sagen, man findet zum Glück noch viele live Aufnehmen.
Vergogna
Being a pupil of Brahms's (or a pupil of a pupil) doesn't, in itself, guarantee anything. Some pupils perform in a style very close to their teachers'; others depart widely from it. Yes, Mahler met Brahms; but I doubt if even of his own performances of Brahms were very faithful to Brahms's intentions. If you want to get an idea of what Brahms's music sounded like in his own lifetime (only a partial idea, of course), there's no substitute for historical research.
what brought him to treat Brahms with baroque instruments? Brahms is not Haendel! Can hardly hear the bases.. a baroque english horn drones so englishly. Messi di voce all over the place, and hardly hear the orchestra..the baritones come in early... first 4 minutes, several injured on the battle field.. minute 5;40 the tenors trot in so englishly.mit freude! min 10 the sopranos so quaintly sing getrastet werdan.. the o umlaut is important.. it's the German requiem.. Brexit has not yet conceded Brahms to the Brits.
This interpretation is simply ridiculous. Not german at all. Painfully 'Monteverdian'. Awful!
I feel very torn, but I must say, as a HUGE Gardiner/Monteverdi Choir fan of decades (literally), this is disappointing. Certainly, it is "pretty" enough, but it lacks the richness and depth of their previous recording (see end of post). I'm not being nostalgic for the heck of it. I have been listening to them long enough to have heard them redo quite a number of recordings. While the new interpretations were different, they were credible and beautiful in their own right. This, however, doesn't work. The voices here are a bit too light and thin ( especially the sopranos - almost boy-like in some approaches); the tempi are frequently syruppy in passages where it is unnecessary as the actual phrasing itself is mournful enough and some of the transitions are awkward - not seamless as Gardiner is known to do) and the soloists....*no comment*. The result is that It loses the two things one loves most about this work - the colour and the melodic lines (magically haunting when done perfectly, with one voice handing over to another so subtly that one can't tell where the tenors ended and the altos began) - as they did the first time around). If you love this, check out the previous one: www.amazon.com/Brahms-Deutsches-John-Eliot-Gardiner/dp/B00TG0BTO6. This recording proves that EVEN my beloved Sir John can make artistic mistakes. It makes him more human somehow. :)
Interesting post, thanks.
Outregious.
Mozart version is better :3
it's different, I wouldn't say 'better'.
Get what you mean ;-)
Maybe I should say "I like Mozart version more than this"
Lets be clear in that these are not different "versions" of the same piece. They are extremely different from each other in nearly everyday. If you consider that Mozart was a classical composer and Brahms a Romantic, the differences are easily explained and understood. You may prefer Mozart's requiem to Brahm's, but please don't be ignorant to the fact that they are inextricably different. It's apples and oranges.
I prefer orange then :|
They're completely different and have no point of comparison
Kindergartengruppen Musikverein ? Klingt scheußlich...