Customer Reviews

Bach: Mass in B minor

5 star:		(2)
4 star:		(4)
3 star:		(3)
2 star:		(2)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

Let's observe things with serenety. I quite agree with Emile Swanepoel, but I do not agree with Aaron Mayer and Epauld Olivier. These two reviews are comanded by emotion and are nor scrupolous in using depreciative languange. Karl Richter was the first conductor to avoid romantic exagerations in the perfomance of Bach music; later, the swiss conductor Michel Corboz followed the style of Richter in an interesting equilibrium of baroque style and spirituality. Presently we have the the use of period perfomances, most of them sounds beatifully but, with the small numbers os players and singers we feel the absence of spirituality, meditation or religious joy.(I admire Gardiner reading for his vitality in the joyous parts of the B minor Mass).But Herbert von Karajan condudet this Mass in 1974! In that time, there was not in use the period instruments, neither the new scholl of baroque singing, nor the musicology had discovered what we know today. So, Karajan with his typical effort of touching the deep interiorization of the musical works, does the some in this recording of Bach Mass in B minor. The result is a reading that banishs the romantic reading of Klemperer, the perhaps superficial baroque style of the pioneer Richert, but a very concise performance, specially in the faster and extrovert parts of the mass, where Karajan tempos are not slow. However, in the solo singing, I must admit, the tempi could be a little faster, more lighter. The excelent solo singing are not similar to the recent especialzed baroque singing, but in its context, they are beautifull and in acordance with the time of the recording: 26 years ago! I recomend this recordance for colleters wo like to compare the evolution of perfomance styles. More,I find spirituality in this perfomance, without any exagerated affection. At mid-price its a good achievement. Buy it,witout any fear, however conscious that is not a perios perfomance and its an analogue recording from 1974.

The chorus may not be faultless but the solo singing is really incredibly beautiful, they make a fine team. Try the "credo"-duet for soprano and alto to see just how beautiful they match. The orchestra is faultless and accompany well. In a sense the chorus give the reading a ruggedness that isn't always inappropriate. Sometimes it makes for very dramatic moments such as the "Donna nobis pacem" which is almost overwhelming in it's intensity and religious feeling. The sound in this new transfer (20 bit reprocessed) is such an improvement over the previous it sounds as if a thick layer of varnish was removed. This helps the solos and duets and also gives the chorus much greater presence. This is a wonderful recording and a wonderful way to get to know this incredible music. Don't be fooled by bad reviews, hear for yourself!

Perhaps slow in pace compared to some versions, but reveals the inner detail and beauty of the Mass superbly. Worth owning just for the Benedictus

Well, if you hate Karajan this is one of his recordings that should bring out the most venom. I don't hate Karajan, actually the man is my favorite conductor. Looking at this performance of Bach's Mass in B minor, you get all the problems that can creep in on a traditional reading of a major Bach piece. The tempos might be slow by today's standards, but that's not the end of the world, Klemperer gets away with that all the time. What hampers Karajan's reading the most is his unique sound. By this time in the 1970's when this was recorded, Karajan had fully realized his cultivation of smoothness and hemogeny from the Berlin Philharmonic. We have to remember that Karajan in the 1950's and 1960's sounded a lot less smooth. He was more rugged, masculine and powerful. But moving into the 1970's and 1980's he was accused more often of his penchant for the smooth line.

The choir in this recording is not always immaculate, actually the Vienna Singverein lets Karajan down on many occassions. The soloists generally do a nice job. I was reading a biography of Karajan by Richard Osbourne and Osbourne wrote a passage in the book where he mentioned that Karajan himself was dissatisfied with this recording of the Bach Mass in B minor and that he wanted to do it over again later but ultimately never got the chance. I can understand his point as this is not one of Karajan's most illuminating records. Karajan also recorded Bach's St. Matthew Passion in the 1970's and that recording is much better than this one, Karajan himself was very proud of it as mentioned in the book.

Regardless of the fact that Karajan's Mass in B minor isn't one of the best, it's still pretty decent. The performance is remastered using DG's Original-Image Bit-Processing and it sounds better than before. For alternatives to Karajan, check out George Solti with the Chicago Symphony and Chorus in the 1990's if you want a large scale reading that has more passion and fire. Of course the period instrument fans will gravitate to Gardiner's famous record on DG Archiv, while I personally prefer Philipe Herreweghe's more spiritually involving recording on the label Harmonia Mundi in place of Gardiner.

Dr. Armando speaks wisely. We have here some of the most spiritually profound music ever created. To impose dogmatic attitudes upon great conductors, their respective musical eras & their interpretations is tantamount to asking if they are Roman Catholic, Lutheran, or Jewish (Bach was Lutheran). Great recordings co-exist; they do not supercede or negate each other. In this kind of music, I want conductors to express what is in their hearts.

Karajan's recording of the Mass in B Minor may not be the most historically accurate, but it is certainly among the most fervently devotional ever made. The orchestra and especially the chorus and soloists sing with a spine-tingling intensity, the orchestra plays with verve, and above all is Karajan, conducting as though his very life depended on it.

The music of the Mass is, of course, an endlessly inventive riot of counterpoint, but in the drive to showcase the magnificence of Bach's writing, many conductors gloss by the religious fervor the composer must have felt when composing and later compiling the Mass.

Karajan's reading is much, much slower than contemporary recordings (such as the much-famed Gardiner reading), and ocassionally the recording gets a bit muddy and imprecise, especially in the opening Kyrie. However, while this may irk purists and 'historically-informed' listeners, there is no doubt that the entire ambience of the performance is one of great devotion and intensity. It is a very authentically human recording...there is none of the sterile studio polishing that other readings--Perlman, Gardiner, Radu--seem stuffed with.

Definitely not a definitive recording of the Mass in B Minor, but up there among the very best.

Predictably, Karajan calls forth a wide spectrum of responses--from adoration to reprobation. I am by no means allergic to HvK's interpretive priorities, even in Bach--a composer who hardly features as a Karajan specialty. Moreover, his rendition of this apex of Western sacred music is better than one might have expected. The overall approach is not all that different from Jochum, Klemperer or Richter--except that Karajan is consistently more introspective than Jochum, livlier than Klemperer, and more flexible than Richter. His tempos are mostly plausible (except for the dogged trudge through "Credo in unum Deum"), and there are few interpretive eccentricities (only the hyper-reverential account of the fugue subject in Kyrie I and the over-dramatized rendition of the "Crucifixus" failed to convince me). Most of the time, Karajan manages to convey the work's majesty without sacrificing either its intimacy or its exuberance. His pointing of orchestral detail is frequently illuminating. Add to these virtues a fine quintet of soloists (Janowitz and Ludwig are outstanding) and a freshly remastered recording that has greatly enhanced the choral focus, and this would seem to be a strong contender for listeners who want a more traditional version of this inexhaustible work.

The main problem with this performance--and it detracts considerably from Karajan's achievement--is the choral singing. In the first place, the Wiener Singverein is too large a group to negotiate Bach's treacherous roulades with the requisite nimbleness. Moreover, the choir's diction is frequently mushy, and the sopranos tend to sing with an obtrusive vibrato. Most damagingly, the entire group has persistent problems with intonation. At times I found it difficult to determine what pitches, in fact, were being sung--but that, I suppose, could be chalked up to the vibrato. Elsewhere, however--particularly in sustained passages--the choir tends to sit noticeably on the flat side of the note. This is a very significant problem indeed for a work dominated by lengthy choral movements.

So, in the end, I cannot endorse this set as an unqualified recommendation, even as a supplementary version. Fans of Karajan and/or the soloists might want to hear it, though the conductor's earlier monaural recording of the work for EMI is superior (both as interpretation and as performance--despite some shaky trumpet playing. If you are in the market for a "basic library version" of the B-minor Mass employing modern instruments and a "traditional" approach, I would recommend Jochum/EMI, Klemperer or Richter (preferably the studio recording from 1961). Shaw/RCA has some eccentricities, but is frequently both insightful and inspiring. If you are looking for a PPP version, there are many options--Gardiner's 1982 recording for DG/Archiv still chief among them.

It is exceedingly difficult to write a truly impartial review of this recording. First of all, I should say that, much as I would like to say otherwise, I think Karajan's rendition here over-emphaises the majesty and sheer gargantuan scale of this work, at the expense of the personal, heart-wrenching feeling of this music. With most of his recordings, especially from his earlier years, I feel that he has the right balance, but it seems to me that the music here is just not involved enough, if my meaning can be understood. That aside, I simply do not see what many other reviewers are complaining about here. To be sure, the sound quality is not perfect, but what do you expect from 1974? On the other hand, though there are blemishes, the sound is enormously rich and magnificent, fully befitting the rendition that Karajan adopts here. Also, despite some complaints in other reviews, I do not see anything terrible about either the chorus or the soloists: of course, Janowitz is well above any critique, but the other soloists are perfectly fine as well, and, though I am a better critic of instrumental work, I do not see where the chorus is so terribly out of balance, as others have repeatedly claimed. Although in some places the horns tend to rush ahead of the orchestra, this is not a major problem, as I see it. On the positive side, the middle of the Credo and all of the Sanctus are incredibly inspiring, in spite of the generally somewhat bland, monolithic character of the rest of the recording. Though in hindsight, I might have chosen a different recording of Bach's greatest work, this one is certainly worth the money. Right now I am filled with ambition to buy Karajan's 1952 recording, with Gedda and Ferrier: despite the fact that the sound is obviosly going to be of poorer quality, I think that the performance will be more intense, most likely.

Karajan's characteristic beauty comes through well. However, the intonation of the choir is sometimes not good. The opening of the Kyrie will give you a good example. You may be better served elsewhere.

Overly pompous and majestic, this recording of the B minor mass doesn't come anywhere close to the other two I've listened a lot to recently: Marriner on Philips and Gardiner on Archiv. (Both highly recommended.) Karajan's reindition lacks clarity and pace, and -- which is worse -- a true understanding of the work's religious nature. It just becomes another showpiece for a prolific conductor with his all-star soloists, and the end result is bland, uninteresting and, above all, fails to stir up any deeper emotions whatsoever.