Customer Reviews

Glass: Einstein On The Beach

5 star:		(4)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(4)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

The original recording, this is shorter, less 'smooth', and punkier than the subsequent re-recording. The cut-down length isn't really noticeable, although you'll be annoyed that it comes on four CDs when it could easily have fitted onto two.

Musically there's no real difference between this and the follow-up - the performers here are the original cast, and the organs and so forth are a lot more artificial-sounding, but that adds to the atmosphere. Apart from the truncated ending, it's hard to notice the different lengths, and the performances seem more 'real' and less rehearsed here, although the players have obviously been trained to within inches of their lives.

Which one to buy? The sleeve-notes are copious and useful in both cases, the packaging is equally solid (although this is in a hard plastic case, whereas the follow-up is in card), the weights and chemical compositions are roughly equivalent, so it's best to go by price and availability, really.

The consensus seems to be in and that is to go with the Nonesuch recording. This Sony recording was the origninal one, performed when Einstein on the Beach was still "hot from the oven." I agree and disagree with the reviewers below. While the title and concept are the same on these two recordings, they are, virtually speaking, two different operas!

If you are a first timer, new to Glass and Wilsons mammoth opera, get the other recording. The musicians are more "fluent in the language," the tempo and feel is smoother throughout and the mix is superior. One problem, the Nonesuch recording, in all its technical ease, is just less exciting. This Sony recording was recorded in the late seventies, when Einstein was new, fresh, and revolutionary. The tempos are generally faster (most noticably in "knee play 3 and and "Building/Train").

Also, I fear that Ashley Pomeroy's review below is misleading. The music IS NOT the same. Quite a bit of reorchestration and rewriting occured between these two recordings. "Building/Train" was originally scored with organ as the main insturment, not violin. Much of the spoken text is different as is Richard Peck's solo in the "Building/Train" scene. The experienced listener will also be able to detect NUMEROUS rewrites (most conspicuous to me was the 9ths and 7ths played by the flute in the "Train" scene giving an otherwise mechanized (and frankly, rather dull) scene a dreamy, cushioned feel.

All in all though, the sudden drop-outs of insturments, the lack of a click-track and the annoying four disc (with no track breaks for the "Trial", Trial/Prison" and "Bed" scenes forces me to give this three stars. Still, if you love Einstein like I do, you will want both recordings.

The 3 stars here do not reflect my feelings about Einstein on the Beach, an incredible work of art which forever changed the face of Western music. My rating reflects only the quality of this CD. Presumably, if you're reading this, you're shopping for one of the two Einstein on the Beach recordings and trying to pick between the two. This is the vastly INFERIOR disc. The improvement in synthesizer capabilities in the decades between this recording and the later one are notable from the beginning of Disc 1, Track 1. The early organs here have a sort of nasal, anemic sound, as opposed to the warm full sound of the other performance. Recording technology also improved, and the overall result on the other disc is better tone, better clarity. Fulkerson's violin playing is more soulful than Zukovsky's, and his huge sound is far more appropriate in much of the passagework. The other recording provides far greater accuracy and superior tone and clarity throughout in the other instruments as well, in particular the piccolos, and the choir there is simply better. In addition, apparently for time issues, there are disturbing cuts in the piece, particularly the second half of Knee Play 5, the final coda. Finally, the price tag here is substantially more discouraging.

If you like Einstein on the Beach, absolutely get a recording. If you are curious about Philip Glass and want a representative sample of his best music, absolutely get a recording. Just get the other one.

I own this version as well as the Nonesuch version. I respect both of them. I owned it on vinyl in the seventies and found it to be an exciting discovery. On CD, I bought the Nonesuch version first. It was nice to be reunited with an old friend. A middle aged old friend. The Nonesuch version version has much richer tonality than the original recording. Do I go to Einstein on the Beach for rich tonality? No, I go to it for edgy relentlessness. Although the Nonesuch version is longer, it is much less relentless. It's pacing is more leisurely. It seems to be striving for stateliness, to be seen as a classic, which it now is. I later bought the original recording on CD and was reunited with a friend who hasn't changed, It is still an exciting discovery. I prefer the flat tone of the vocals on the original as well. The later version sounds more practiced to be sure, but with that practice came a desire to emote and vary tone. To "act". It's guilding the lily. Nevertheless, I like both versions and play both from time to time. This opera is a true classic. and much better than it's schmaltzy followups in the trilogy. (Relatedly, I prefer the shortened ending without the kissing scene. Guess I am not a romantic!).

First of all, let me say that I have fallen in love with this Opera and though it is Glass' 1st, it is my favorite. This review will be most helpful if you are trying to decide whether or not to purchase this particular version, whether or not you have the other version. The below discussion contrasts the two existing versions.

I am astounded to have read in a review that there is no musical difference between this 2.7 hr. version and the later 3.3 hr. version. Also, I am astounded that a reviewer is claiming to find unbecoming roughness in this version allegedly due to less experience. The language of an artist is very ephemeral, and the power of a work, when 're-done,' cannot be recreated, but at best, respectfully re-approached with the artist's current proclivities. There is much distance from the Philip Glass Ensemble of the more recent recording and the original "Einstein," although I am not suggesting a work cannot be revisited with as much or even more vigor than in previous performances.

I first wrote that 'the first recording is 'It' for now.' I have changed my opinion slightly. The tricky thing with the 3.3 hr. "Einstein" is getting it to play so that all of the frequencies are emphasized properly, and I believe it all has to do with sound design, whether what I perceive to be flaws were intentional or not. At first, I all but dismissed the newer recording. What changed my mind was listening to the 3.3 hr. version on my car system. I had my ipod connected to it (pioneer dash, 4 3-way 6x8 pioneer's receiving 50 watts each) and turned on "Einstein," not knowing which version I had selected. I said to myself, 'this counting is not from the original.' I also said, 'the poetry is too clear and audible for it to be the 3.3 hr. version.' Finally, I realized that it was indeed the newer version, and my experience of the music was, at least in the setting of my car, wonderful. What can I say? At home I have to attach a spoken-word equalizer preset to the 'complete' version and the poetry readings are still all but inaudible.

The Trial sections in both versions are good and humorous; however, the first is exceptional in the absurdly slow enunciation of the monologue (done just about as well in the 3.3 hr. version) and the pseudo-Austrian accent. The aforementioned style is of course an appropriate match with absurdity of the written speech.
The simultaneous readings are absolutely brilliant and so I value them very much, which is why I prefer overall, though not categorically, the version being reviewed. Also, the Philip Glass Ensemble preformed brilliantly here and I find this version more intense & defined & also I do not mind the early obsessive ultra-staccato. The instrumentalists of the more seasoned Ensemble approached the music differently, and with me, it is not a matter of better or worse. The instrumentalists are and were wonderful.

While you may end up loving the longer version, I can't imagine a big fan of the opera would regret downloading this. I can just as easily imagine also the later version not getting played much. DO NOT LET THE LEFT-OUT SECTIONS TURN YOU AWAY! And I have a simple explanation regarding the process of mastering recordings given to me by an amateur sound-man that I believe relevant in terms of the problem I have experienced with the other available version: WHEN MAKING A RECORDING, CONSIDER THE VARIOUS WAYS PEOPLE WILL LISTEN TO THE RECORDING. TEST A HOME SYSTEM, THEN A CAR, THEN A SET OF HEADPHONES. (I know this is very simplified) A RECORDING MUST BE CONSISTENTLY GOOD IN ADEQUATE STEREO EQUIPMENT. A good recording should be good all-around. The version being reviewed is definitely that, as well as being finely performed music. This is great stuff!!!

I am so glad that Reisman, etc. have played the music for so long. I have heard the argument that Glass should let more of his music be preformed, but he has managed to control the quality of the recordings of his compositions very well. He has been faulted for 'deigning' to write scores for many films. I do think he is above such childish films as Neverwas, and that in the case of Candyman, not only was his score very scarcely used, but the merit of his score far exceeds the emotive and overall artistic power of the film. However, as a result of what can hardly be called collaborations, there are many scores that take on a wonderful life independent of the films. I believe he is smart for manipulating the contemporary means of ensuring legacy. Composers are not being commissioned by Kings or Churches (at least not often). So why not write a long overdue score for the low-budget Depression Era 1931 Dracula? On top of adding to a film with an already huge legacy, Glass worked in a score to play through the entirety of the film. I mean, when you can take a classic like that and come that close to putting your score on the level as the film itself, you've done something huge.

Glass was a brilliant student and needed to go to the best teachers in the world to become the composer he wanted to be. People have a tendency to see his music as very simple or boring, but I cannot think of a more transformational figure in music, dare I say, since the beginning of the 20th Century? However, I believe that much of the previous century's music was about one transformation and upheaval after another. It is absurd and ridiculous to start ranking people. Yet, I do not understand why listeners of Shostakovitch, Webern, or even Stockhausen leave Glass out of this powerful transformative process. Perhaps he went too far? And yes, he did do away with that precious notion of serialism.

Incidentally, another great opera by Glass: Les Enfants Terribles. The instrumentation consists of one piano; traditional operatic vocals in French and spoken parts in English) MAN. I REALLY APPRECIATE GLASS RETHINKING OPERA. I NORMALLY HATE THEM.

My first exposure to Philip Glass and Robert wilson's work was in a "History of Modern Theatre" class. Little did I realize their opera would change my way of viewing classical music, opera and the function of the arts. Glass laces his work with cyclic analyses of the effect of time on sensibilities. As Einstein proclaimed relativity as a fresh way to look at time, space, the universe and our inner existence, so Glass presents melodies and text which change glacially through pieces which sound like masturbatory repetition. The subtle shifts and changes are apparently matched with powerful and unforgettable images sculpted by Wilson on stage. Knee Play 5 demonstrates Glass's concern over time and rhythmic cycles which would become the focus of his music for the remainder of his career.

As a theatre educator, I instruct sessions with students on performance art. "Einstein on the Beach" was a groundbreaking work in the genre when it premiered in the late 1970s. Collaborators Glass and Robert Wilson created an aural-visual landscape of riveting images on stage with such power that the opera changed the way theatre and performance artists approach their work. To appreciate "Einstein on the Beach," the listener should have knowledge or a flavor of the images that accompanied Glass' music. This places his composition in context and offers the listener a better opportunity to appreciate the work. Excerpts from the opera can be seen in a video, "Einstein on the Beach: The Changing Face of Opera." "Minimalist" is an overused and inaccurate way to describe this opera (and Glass' music in general). There is a complexity of rhythms, tempos, and variations to his work that keep me engaged as a listener. "Einstein on the Beach" is a 20th century masterpiece.

Glass' opera is a monument to minimalism and is worth a listen-if you can stand it. Endless arpeggios-almost four hours worth! While it was an interesting experiment when it came out, and the use of minimalism to tell the story of Einstein, physics, etc, appropriate, this does not hold up well over the years. There is nothing here even remotely resembling a human emotion. What was once novel now sounds very cold and pointless. I have an electronic keyboard that can play arpeggio sequences for hours and this is just as mind numbing. Very much a dead end, but a clever one for its time.

I came to this recording having heard a few snippets of "Einstein on the Beach" but still unfamiliar with the work as a whole. I came away with a deep appreciation, but also a lingering dissatisfaction that there is still apparently no DVD available.

Opera is a performance work, and I felt that I was missing out on a lot particularly with this opera, which was a real collaboration between the music of Philip Glass and the staging of Robert Wilson. Since the libretto includes no narrative, the listener is left to guess at the context and therefore the underlying meaning of the music -- as well as its relation to Albert Einstein, which is apparently very real but which left me as a listener fairly well flummoxed. I thought of it like listening to the music to "Koyaanisqatsi" without seeing the film -- great music, but much better in context.

The music itself has moments incredibly sublime. However, I did feel certain tracks had a fierce edge to them, exacerbated by the relatively raw sounds of early electronic instruments, that made them a bit more of a challenge to listen to. I did love the work as a whole despite the feeling of having been mildly pummeled about the face and neck by a few of the tracks.

The four-star rating reflects my overall enjoyment and satisfaction level, which was in part brought down by the lack of a visual. I think it's time to bring a DVD to market so the music can be appreciated in its full context, which is sorely lacking in the music alone. I felt I was getting about half the experience I really should be getting.

Unlike other commenters, I think it is a meaningless gesture to compare this work to that of other composers with both different styles and different artistic goals. That's a matter of taste, not criticism. Taken on it's own merits, this work is not only Glass' masterpiece, but one of the most important operas of the century. "Einstein" and Meredith Monk's "Atlas" completely rewrote the rules of operatic narrative, to the advantage of composers and audiences worldwide. The music is beautiful, fascinating, powerful, surprisingly dramatic. On this Sony recording, the monologues are mixed up a little higher, a bit easier to separate from the music, but that's not necessarily Glass' intention. This recording is also longer, with more contents, but is less of a value than the Nonesuch version, so one less star. But the music itself? If opera is important to you, if contemporary music is important to you, if great music is important to you, you must have this.