@@davidantiguedadclassicalgu4259 May I suggest you read some of Celi's interviews and written pieces about music? That should be all you need. I heard him a few times live, twice in London with the LSO and once in NYC with the Curtis Orchestra. With 11 rehearsals of 3 hours each he was getting extraordinary playing and gave VERY interesting (and at least one GREAT - Tippett) performances. However ultimately I found him a conductor who was really just making effects rather than conveying an exciting conviction about the pieces he conducted. The "effects" included almost inaudible pianissimi and exquisite shadings in pieces by Ravel and Debussy. I found his Bruckner ponderous and almost static at times. 80 minutes for the 4th Symphony (usually 60) a good example. However he was never boring and was definitely "different." An acquired taste for sure, but give me his music making over his pontifications about the meaning of music (phenomenology) any day. Better still, give me Karajan or Kleiber or Tennstedt..............
@@gerontius3 I have read and listened and explored plenty. I did, however, not have the precious luck of experiencing him live! As a professional musician, his way of making music speaks to me louder than anything else (maybe next to Furtwängler, but very few others). No great conductor is without ego and not overzealous of their paradigm (certainly not Karajan😅). I always thought his music went hand in hand with his explanations, but I guess you don’t share the opinion. I thank you for your detailed explanation and I envy for having experienced him in concert :) P.S. amazing he conducted Tippet!
Celibidache =GENIU.
Favoloso Celibidache
An amazing talk - can apply t0 n0t just music-making but als0 leadership in general
Utter nonsense as is typical of his interviews.
As this comment of yours.
Can you at least develop your opinion? I’m very interested to know what you find nonsensical about this😅
@@davidantiguedadclassicalgu4259 May I suggest you read some of Celi's interviews and written pieces about music? That should be all you need. I heard him a few times live, twice in London with the LSO and once in NYC with the Curtis Orchestra. With 11 rehearsals of 3 hours each he was getting extraordinary playing and gave VERY interesting (and at least one GREAT - Tippett) performances. However ultimately I found him a conductor who was really just making effects rather than conveying an exciting conviction about the pieces he conducted. The "effects" included almost inaudible pianissimi and exquisite shadings in pieces by Ravel and Debussy. I found his Bruckner ponderous and almost static at times. 80 minutes for the 4th Symphony (usually 60) a good example. However he was never boring and was definitely "different." An acquired taste for sure, but give me his music making over his pontifications about the meaning of music (phenomenology) any day. Better still, give me Karajan or Kleiber or Tennstedt..............
@@gerontius3 I have read and listened and explored plenty. I did, however, not have the precious luck of experiencing him live! As a professional musician, his way of making music speaks to me louder than anything else (maybe next to Furtwängler, but very few others). No great conductor is without ego and not overzealous of their paradigm (certainly not Karajan😅). I always thought his music went hand in hand with his explanations, but I guess you don’t share the opinion. I thank you for your detailed explanation and I envy for having experienced him in concert :)
P.S. amazing he conducted Tippet!