Prokofiev - Symphony no. 1 'Classical' (1)

[oglaroonian]

I see what you did there, keyboard cat.

[rafaelb1026]

Sounds kinda Haydn or Mozart , guess that's why its called classical , I'm such a dumbass lol but this is a very memorable piece , listening to it a couple of times now , trying to get into Prokofiev

[Mattlikestheyankees]

SWAG

[EmilyyFritschh]

@Mattlikestheyankees LOOOOOOOL.

[warhols25]

this is played too fast for my taste, Prokofiev's is fast music, but let's not cross over the point, where caricature begins...

[MattBoy16]

Am I the only one here who thanks that Prokofiev bears an uncanny resemblance to the "turtle, turtle." fellow that Dana Carvey played in master of disguise?

[valdengo1]

....any slower and the public falls asleep...the Toscanini version remains my favorite, and the Bernstein is vigorous too....

[jblacktree]

I've heard Symphony 1 hundreds of times, more! and I have no problem with the speed here. It's unique but all of a piece, sweet and searing where it needs to be and busily charming otherwise. It does not "feel" pushed, but concise.

[KingoftheWeedland]

WOW... they played it REALLY fast ^^

[clairannette]

God... what a speed demon. This is awful. I wonder what he would have done with the 4th movement.

[quintron3]

@clairannette I absolutely agree. I was also thinking the same about Mvt. 4

[rtega]

I don't understand what's the problem with a faster tempo. Every interpretation is different. Imagine a piece having only one possible interpretation. It would be very poor music...

[Mjollnir93]

way too fast

[poupee58]

Too fast

[jfcraft]

This piece IS post-romantic and Very PROKOFIEV! The very essence indeed !!

[evoandy]

tempo is keeping them from adhering to some of the indicated dynamics.... Especially in the arpeggio at the beginning. should start almost inaudibly. Its one of the hardest things i've encountered in the entire canon at the indicated tempo. Should be practically impossible at this tempo, and apparently this FABULOUS orchestra is even incapable of it. This tempo prohibits this orchestra from playing this piece as expressively as it could.

[evoandy]

this is definitely faster than the indicated tempo....

[jaywyn]

The tempo is just right... after all, it's ALLEGRO

[ClassicalRecords]

There's plenty of energy and confidence there. The performance is surely excellent. I've posted Rozhdestvensky's original version on my channel.... The fast tempo suits that version just as well.

[Orpehus458]

It is fast but I don't mind it. It is just normally played considerably slower.

[somebodyrocks2345]

its actually not that fast guys....sorry to burst your bubble. Click thumbs up if you agree :)

[werq34ac]

a bit too fast...

[vos360]

entirely too fast

[Cramnella]

Amazing performance! I want the rest!!!

[BernardProfitendieu]

where's the fire?

[ziapengyfence]

WOW -- this is really fast. A little too fast for my liking.

[LEITER2007]

It is difficult for me listening to the second movement Larghetto. In my opinion there are notes that you can not hear them. If you do not get traslating to the hipotetical auditorium the whole notes and marks I think the version in not satisfactory. If I listen to this symphony with the orchestal partiture in my right hand, I cannot hear a lot of notes. Sure, this is my apreciation. My teacher in conducting says to me about the FIDELITY to the partiture

[suemariel]

The recording is from 1947 - that probably has something to do with it.

[j72050]

...this is faster than Toscanini...but I like the undying spirit....fast but not too fast for me......this to me is "the undefeated"

[MagicLuver23]

But the dynamics are amazing

[elycopter71]

Yah I think as Leiter...better Celibidache version..this is too fast and without "breathe"...ReSPIRO!

[Mimameior]

As I keep saying, this is an arbitrary matter, and the only authority we have is Prokofiev himself. Look at the first page of the score - 'Allegro Con Brio', meaning 'fast, with brilliance/spirit/fire'. Can you honestly say that Celibidache plays it like this? Brilliance? Fire? This is a piece designed to be fast, flashy, and showy, not laden with deep meaning. Celibidache's version positively plods. I like plenty of his work, but you do him no favours by making him the expert on Prokofiev.

[elycopter71]

Dear Mimameior simply I say that this version I don't like..this is no brilliance but for me but anxious..I like Celibidache's version,I think is better than this!But I prefer absolutely the Orpheus Chamber's version,do you know?..brilliance, spirit, fire..all do you want..but BREATH!All the Music should to breathe..Prokofiev or Mozart,It's no a "style" disagreement.Sorry, but this version don't Breath for me.

best regards

[timbetan]

@Mimameior habe you played it ???? :-) i did and this is way to fast to play it with fire and spirit and brilliance. You can also play with fire and spirit a loooottt slower !!!!

[timbetan]

@Mimameior habe you played it ???? :-) i did and this is way to fast to play it with fire and spirit and brilliance. You can also play with fire and spirit a loooottt slower !!!! And in the End the sound is what counts!!!

[otterhouse]

Great, thanks! Does it come from a cd transfer, or did you do the 78's yourself?

-----------------------------

Rolf, Netherlands.

I am a collector of classical 78's and lp's

Click "otterhouse" above to see (and hear!)

some of my collection.

[Mimameior]

This comes from an old LP, but I got the mp3 file from someone else - I don't have the tools for proper transfer and restoration, unfortunately! You have a nice collection of old recordings, as I've said before. Keep up the good work!

[LEITER2007]

I think that the tempo is a bit of fast. If you hear the Celibidache version you will understand what I mean. It is only my opinion.

The whole of this peace only can be heart with the small elements that becomes wonderful in a normal, not speed, performance. The art of conducting must be show the complete matizes of a piece. If you play it too fast, these matices can not be understood.

[PhilosopherEight]

I agree that this performance is too fast. A slower tempo keeps the levity but also adds a profundity needed in any introduction. Also, I think that the full impact of melody cannot suvive a tempo that is too fast. It just sounds like notes rushing by instead of melody.

[Mimameior]

Well, I'm ambivalent toward the tempo used here. LEITER2007, we already discussed the speed, and I told you Koussevitsky was a good friend of Prokofiev. I thought you were satisfied. Do NOT take Celibidache as a model for this piece - he was a great conductor, and his Bruckner is marvellous, but I can confidently say his interpretation would have surprised Prokofiev. That doesn't discount it, but it does raise question marks.

Do these comments help? You're welcome to carry on the discussion.

[jankoraseta]

Thats great. I've been looking for a faster performance and here it is. I like it.

[puncheex]

IMHO, this is about average tempo for this piece, in the twenty of so recordings of it I've heard. You want fast, try out Gergiev's interpretation here on youtube. This is meant to be a show-off piece, Prokofief wrote it expressly to show complainers who said he couldn't do a classicly structured piece that he certainly could. It's meant to be played fast by a small orchestra, in the style of Hayden.

[powellpicc1985]

You mean Haydn?

[LEITER2007]

Too speed¡¡¡¡

[Mimameior]

Well, that's open to debate; it's fast, yes, but I think Koussevitsky knew what he wanted. Remember that he was a friend of Prokofiev, publishing several of his works and commissioning his Symphony No.4 - while his interpretation is not what we are accustomed to today, I think it's a refreshing change.

[LEITER2007]

Ok. you are right. As you say, perhaps we are not accustomed to this way of interpretation. I did not know what you have commented about the friendship among them. Then, Koussevitzky knew better how to conduct this piece.

Thank you for your comment and apologize my english (I am from Spain)

[ThaSchwab]

Koussevitsky liked to push his orchestras to the edge, correct? The full score puts the tempo at "quarter note = 100," which I believe is slower than the normal Allegro. He put the tempo at at least "quarter note = 155" or higher.

[klavier777]

that's a misprint. It should be half note = 100. Still a bit too fast IMO.

[smzmusic]

@ThaSchwab is "quarter note = 100" an addition of the editor or was it in the manuscript ?

[tintagel74]

sure is a fast interpretation, but a terrific orchestra and a great recording esp. considering the vintage. one of my all time fave pieces from my fave composer. thanks for posting :>

[Danc3r0f2m0rr0w]

Man, this is an excellent piece performed by a superb orchestra. Its outstanding. I adore the energy. Its great.

[peineton]

Excelent performance... However, I think that the tempo is too fast. Anyway, is an outstanding performance!

[aaronfledge]

The orchestra puts a lot of energy and vivacity into the recording, and it's a fine, dramatic piece to begin with! I'd be interested to know where you got the pictures....

[Mimameior]

You're absolutely right about the 'energy and vivacity' - this is one of Koussevitsky's strongest points; interestingly, he didn't even read music all that well, but once he'd learned it he could give performances of true sincerity: a quality which earned the admiration of Leonard Bernstein.

[aaronfledge]

Nice to get praise from the top...