Richard Strauss Recordings

Thanks for your observations as well, I agree with most of what you say. It also  reminded me of a book written by Dutch composer Louis Andriessen about Stravinsky. He explains why he believes that in Stravinsky, the most important note is always the ’wrong’ note. This was Stravinsky’s way of escaping the straight jacket of the diatonic rulebook. Thelonious Monk of course did the same in jazz and there are many other examples, including Zappa.

Come to think of it this device goes back at least as far as Bach. How about that one ’wrong’ chord in the closing chorale of the St. Matthew Passion? It is as if the weight of the whole drama crushes in on that single chord. Something similar happens in the closing bars of Stravinsky’s Requiem Canticles. The emotional impact of such notes or chords is devastating and worlds apart from the kind of sonic effects Strauss used in his tone poems. I can’t think of a better way to illustrate the ’problem’ that I have with much of his music. I’m afraid Klemperer was right.....

Great post and i appreciate your posts a lot...

It is less the "wrong note" as a stylizing systematic posture of supreme mastery which is not so easily decipherable as a set of "wrong notes" at all but i get the point....

The reason why Stravinski dont moved the heart but amaze the musical grammar master brain in us...If it was always the "wrong notes" he will not be the giant he is...

And Klemperer was a so great Maestro that even when it seems wrong his interpretation are indispensable and never surpassed being only alternative stupendous interpretation of their own...I love Klemperer... But his direction is supremely aimed to a truth OVER any chosen composer real intention ( save in Bach where Klemperer meet his fellow soul )...It remind me of Celibidache direction who also direct anything aiming at a higher truth over any composer intention ... The two are masters of timing quiet contrasted orchestral mass hold in some mysterious equilibrium ... The Klemperer interpretation of Bach great mass rival in slow timing, with nothing falling apart, even Celibidache irrational or supra rational timing mastery... 

Then K. could not love Strauss with the highest love...He was too "serious" deep man suffering from disease all his life to be moved only by seductive beauty without truth...He directed modern composers Schonberg too as you already know...

Thanks for your observations as well, I agree with most of what you say. It also reminded me of a book written by Dutch composer Louis Andriessen about Stravinsky. He explains why he believes that in Stravinsky, the most important note is always the ’wrong’ note. This was Stravinsky’s way of escaping the straight jacket of the diatonic rulebook. Thelonious Monk of course did the same in jazz and there are many other examples, including Zappa.

Come to think of it this device goes back at least as far as Bach. How about that one ’wrong’ chord in the closing chorale of the St. Matthew Passion? It is as if the weight of the whole drama crushes in on that single chord. Something similar happens in the closing bars of Stravinsky’s Requiem Canticles. The emotional impact of such notes or chords is devastating and worlds apart from the kind of sonic effects Strauss used in his tone poems. I can’t think of a better way to illustrate the ’problem’ that I have with much of his music. I’m afraid Klemperer was right..

There’s been much discussion about his choice of tempi, which was considered too slow even back in the early 60’s when most of these recordings were made. But to my ears he’s more often right than wrong. This includes his St. Matthew Passion, which is just sublime. The only recording I don’t ’get’ is his Mahler 7. Here the tempi are so ridiculously slow that the piece falls apart completely. I’m pretty much convinced it’s intentional, but completely at a loss to understand what that intention might have been.

I feel the same as you...

There's been much discussion about his choice of tempi, which was considered too slow even back in the early 60's when most of these recordings were made. But to my ears he's more often right than wrong. This includes his St. Matthew Passion, which is just sublime. The only recording I don't 'get' is his Mahler 7. Here the tempi are so ridiculously slow that the piece falls apart completely. I'm prerty much convinced it's intentional, but am completely at a loss to understand what that intention might have been.

First of all, I really appreciate the discussion here.

I think that there is too much of a tendency to criticize Strauss for a certain slickness and commercialism.  Strauss never wanted to be a starving composer eking out an existence and be feted decades after his demise.  He certainly engaged in self promotion.  I find none of this objectionable.  He became a more self conscious “Great Artist “ as he aged, and that is one of the problems with having created an incredible body of work in his younger years.  Stravinsky had a similar trajectory.

  in Don Quixote I feel that Strauss has a real empathy for the Knight Errant, after the closing music is simply magical.  Heldenleben ends with great sincerity.  And Zarathustra reflects beliefs that Strauss held dear, the same beliefs that inspired Mahler Three.

  I am listening to the Reiner Zarathustra now, from 1954.  Unbelievable record for that age