A Stokowski Retrospective (2)

Here are some remarkable historical recordings from Stokowski's tenure in Philadelphia, featuring three major composers: Brahms, Bach and Shostakovich.

[@steveschwartz8944]

Stokowski and Mitropoulos were for me *the* champions of Modern music among the old-time class A conductors, and as you say, Stokowski was a musical omnivore. I must say that I never was turned on by the Bach transcriptions for the same reason you like them - they sound too close to organ registrations. My favorite Bach orchestration is Webern's version of the Ricercare. Its sounds an organ can't make and yet they sound both right and beautiful.

[@robertkunath1854]

Fascinating. I'm afraid that I inherited a touch of the disdain for Stokowski that was current in the 70s, and I have too few if his recordings. But I wanted to mention another historic recording of his that I do have, and which might interest some viewers. It was issued back in 1992 on the dell'Arte label (DA 9023) and included the first recordings of both the Sibelius 4th (22 April 1932) and the Shostakovich 6th (date not given--apparently in 1940). Both are with the Philadelphia Orchestra, and the transfers are by Ward Marston. Robert Layton's Gramophone review mentions that the Depression reduced the size of the string section in the Philadelphia Orchestra, but he nevertheless says that the Stoki 6th communicates the work thrillingly (and he recalls hearing it on a late night BBC Home Service program during World War II). It's a pleasure to hear Dave enthuse about some historic recordings: for all their flaws, they make wonderful listening if you want to hear the genealogy of a work or an artist.

[@waynesmith3767]

Thanks for your words on the Bach transcriptions; I have always admired them and never understood why they are (well,thankfully,were) they have been looked down on.

[@markovelikonja5399]

Absolutely; I love his Bach orchestrations (mostly done by Lucien Caillet, according to legend). Especially the Passacaglia and Fugue in c.

[@BriGuy1974]

There is a small realization in all this: not only was Stokowski performing all this new music, he had enough pull and conviction to get it recorded when recording was not commonplace. During the Great Depression, he championed new composers and performed with ensembles of women, minorities, and unemployed musicians. While Stoki cultivated that omnipotent maestro act, he never seemed to drop the persona when he wasn't "on." He is a true enigma. I cannot figure him out. Some of his interpretations were objectively complete misses (you famously went on about a particular, unnamed Brahms recording, and accurately so), but I love this man warts and all.

[@edwinbaumgartner5045]

What fascinates me with Stokowski conducting new music: He made not only first performances, but second and third performances also. Most conductors today make (at least in Central Europe) just a first performance. That's the cause, why newer works don't get a place in the repertoire.

[@richardegarr1441]

Thanks for this Dave … I own Stoki’s copy of Parry’s 1910 Bach Bio … with lots of annotations by Stoki💗💗💗

[@DavesClassicalGuide]

Oh wow!

[@heatherharrison264]

I have always been interested in the history of recording technology. Stokowski got his start with acoustic recordings, and he finished well into the stereo era, so his recordings are essential for anyone who is interested in this history. I have recordings of the Brahms cycle, albeit not properly remastered - nothing more than digitizations of original 78s. Maybe I should acquire the recordings that Dave features in this video. Notwithstanding the third, which is quite often a bit of a mess even from the best of conductors, it is a great Brahms cycle. From the beginning, Stokowski was always conscious of recording technology, and he pushed it to its limits. Pre-1925 acoustic recordings have dreadful sound, but he got the best possible results out of that technology. As recording technology improved, he made the most out of it. It is interesting to hear him at the transitions. One of my favorites out of his recordings is the 1925 recording of Saint-Saëns - Danse Macabre. It isn't the best recording or the best performance, but it sits right at the beginning of electrical recordings. Stokowski was still uncertain of the capabilities of the new technology, so he kept the modified instrumentation that was required for acoustic recordings. It's fun to hear this recording with the saxophone honking away in the background. I wish I had an original record so that I could play it on my Victrola - maybe I should look for one. He recorded it later with the orchestration as it should be, but no recording of this piece can recapture the unique charm of this 1925 recording that took place at the cusp of a major technological transition.

[@bbailey7818]

So far, I have all of these discs I have a separate Stoky shelf with multi-composer collections and boxes. Stokowski c. 1927-32 78rpm symphony sets all had those bonus sides of mini-lectures by Stoky. The piano illustrations are played by--get ready--Artur Rodzinski.

[@DavesClassicalGuide]

Those were the days...

[@kylejohnson8877]

If only today’s prominent conductors had half as wide a range of repertoire as Stokowski did! Here’s a potential topic for an Ask Dave video: Are conductors/artists who have/had a wide range of repertoire given less respect than those who only perform(ed) the same few warhorse works over and over again in search of “perfection”? Generally, I think this is true, sadly. I’m thinking of conductors like Stokowski and N. Järvi, who’ve recorded such a vast amount of repertoire equally convincingly but are often accused of being “shallow/vulgar”, versus conductors like Carlos Kleiber who only recorded a few warhorse Germanic symphonies but is practically worshipped by much of the classical music community. Just a thought…

[@DavesClassicalGuide]

There's value in scarcity...