 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Apr 24, 2014 - 9:58 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Graham Watt
(Member)
|
Hi all - I'm posting on this thread because my initial intention was to try to get some feelers about whether or not the Tadlows pleased the Intrada enthusiasts. So I'll address that issue quickly first...
Right, after all your comments, I went ahead and ordered both EL CID and THE PRIVATE LIFE OF SHERLOCK HOLMES. I knew I shouldn't have listened to you (joke)! They are indeed excellent. I must admit, they don't quite tingle my spine the way the Broughton re-recordings do, but they are pretty damn great for the most part. Just occasionally I'd be thinking "Hmmm, not quite sure if Rózsa would have accented that note in that way", but they are generally minor quibbles. I could mention that the organ in EL CID does sound a bit odd, but that's half a minute out of two and a half hours of a splendid set (I got the cheap 2-disc Silva reissue). As an extremely demanding old git, I'm giving them both 9 out of 10. But that is not the point of this post...
The real point of all this is to make a few observations, and ask a few concrete questions about THE PRIVATE LIFE OF SHERLOCK HOLMES. According to James Fitz's informative liner notes, the entire score was reconstructed and orchestrated by Nic Raine, due to the fact that the original sketches they had received were not too clear. He also mentions that Mr Raine was able to work out all the original tempi intended by the composer, just from the sketches. Then the interesting part: "This was invaluable as often when recreating a film score any original audio source material can be misleading because of time frame differentials, actual speeding up of tracks or editing and re-jigging cues to try to fit a different edit of the movie." Now, for the most part I get that, but it does lead me to believe, probably wrongly, that the Tadlow team were conscious of not being influenced by the music as heard in the film in any way. Can that be possible? Here's an old complaint which will annoy everyone - the Main Title as heard in Track 1 seems to start out fine, then races away with itself far too quickly. It doesn't sound at all right to my ears. I'm TRYING not to be influenced by the original soundtrack (or even the "Rózsa Conducts Rózsa" suite - which is quite different from the film tracks, but doesn't sound strange). Is it possible for something to sound "too fast" without a frame of reference? I'm attempting to imagine if I'd think it was too fast if I'd never heard the other versions, or the original Violin Concerto...
But here's the real REAL point of this post. I'm hearing a "wrong note" throughout. I was going to say "a different note", but I'm going for "wrong", not to be uncharitable and mean-spirited, but because it's not played like that on ANY of the other interpretations I've heard, and I'm truly interested to know why this should be the case...
I am not going to bore you all (too late, they cried) with exactly WHAT the wrong note is, because you all must know, and besides, I have no musical grounding which would help me say "it's a flat instead of a sharp" or something like that. So I'm just guessing that you know already (if not, I'll have to dig up some clips - don't make me do that)! In the violin part for Gabrielle heard throughout, in the original Concerto it's played by Jascha Heifetz hitting the same note as the subsequent recordings I've heard. Anastasia Khitruk played it that way with the Russian Philharmonic. When adapted for the film, Erich Gruenberg played it that way on the "Rózsa Conducts Rózsa" suite. And in the original soundtrack it's of course played that way too. But lovely Lucie Svehlová (is it OK to call her lovely?) plays it about "one-and-a-half notes off" (that's my personal jargon) consistently. And it's not just the lovely Lucie (whose interpretation is wonderfully warm in general). On the few occasions that it's played by the full orchestra, it's STILL... different... from everything else I've ever heard. So, what's up?
I wanted to end this thread in an interesting way, but I can't, so I'll just stress that I'm not criticising the hugely laudable efforts of the Tadlow team, I'm just really interested to know the story behind this - or if I'm the only one hearing it and thus going mad.
Any more comments on this? Am I mad?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Apr 24, 2014 - 10:01 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Graham Watt
(Member)
|
For those interested, further to my lengthy rabbit of February 6 - well, THIS is what I was on about... The violin part, after the initial gorgeously longing introduction, begins a series of climbing statements, and on the third ascent in the mounting rapture, we get it like this -
From the Violin Concerto, the original Heifitz - crucial starting point at 0:40; note in question at 0:48
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ypvA0fzTHC4
Violin Concerto, Russian Philharmonic - crucial starting point at 0:45; note in question around 0:58
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KSYzo0UR6vs
Main Titles from Film - crucial starting point around 1:26; note in question about the 1:35 mark
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aw-84aza4Ag
Rózsa Conducts Rózsa Film Suite - crucial climb at 3:31; note in question at 3:40
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5G2eEdznS2L
Tadlow Recording - crucial starting point at around 0:47; note in question about 0:56
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QGFgt7l2eGg
Now, first off, I KNOW that the Tadlow link is a rehearsal - James Fitz himself spoke about it on another thread. It's remarkable to think that in that clip nobody had seen or heard the music before... that's why Lucie Svehlová gets a bit shaky later on and they re-did it to perfection. But I couldn't find a direct link to Tadlow's album, or even if they have sound clips up. But "the note in question" is not affected in the rehearsal, so the YouTube link will do as illustration...
ANYWAY, you tell me, is the Tadlow note a DIFFERENT ONE from all the other interpretations? I'm hearing it a few notes off throughout the Tadlow. If you've got the CD, the note in question is heard in the following tracks -
Track 1, at 2:27 on the violin.
Track 5, at 1:57 and with a larger string section.
Track 7, the "perfected" piece heard on the link, at 0:50.
Track 17, twice: at 0:41 on violin and at 2:44 with the fuller orchestra.
Track 18, at 1:35 played by the larger string section.
Track 19, twice, at 0:50 on violin, and at 3:59 with a heavier orchestration.
Track 23, at 2:30, on the violin.
I missed out on the Quartet release, and there isn't much of the film on YouTube, but on the Quartet site there are sound clips, and I THINK that what we hear there as "The End" corresponds exactly to one moment in Track 19 of the Tadlow - except for the note I'm hearing differently.
I'll leave it at that for now. This isn't a lunatic crusade or anything, it's just something that caught my attention and I'm genuinely interested in knowing the story behind it, or even if anyone else hears what I'm hearing. Or if I'm just simply mad, Over to you.
Or even any observations about this? Madness?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
May 5, 2014 - 10:14 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Graham Watt
(Member)
|
Right, two more weeks have gone by. After initially encouraging responses -James Fitz himself started to reply but had to go off midway through, and Mr W. (Mc)Crum asked me to be more specific in order to know what I was on about - this seems to have gone dead.
Don't forget, people, my main point in the latter part of this thread is to draw people's attention to what I hear as some kind of "difference" in notes - always in the same phrase, whether on solo violin or not - between the Tadlow re-recording of THE PRIVATE LIFE OF SHERLOCK HOLMES and the original soundtrack. I won't go into detail again (I've said it all before, and anyone who wants to look at the previous posts just has to have a gander above), but I'd just like to add I'm sort of surprised that more people haven't commented on this. It's not an obscure score, it's not from an obscure composer, and for those who may be thinking "for crying out loud, it's ONE note!", it's so noticeable that it almost colours the tone of the whole recording (which I'm still giving an 8 or a 9 out of 10 for).
Here's the latest little anecdote. My brother - a lifelong lover of soundtracks, though not as nutty about it as me - was visiting at Easter, and on seeing the Tadlow HOLMES in my collection, said "Oh, I didn't know you had that. Let's hear some of it". And without my having primed him in any way beforehand, he visibly winced every time that "wrong note" was played.
So, is it really just two nutcases from the same family perceiving something in a different way from the rest of the world?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Jul 13, 2014 - 9:50 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Graham Watt
(Member)
|
Having recently purchased the Quartet release of the original recording of HOLMES, I feel the urge to say - not with triumph or pride in any way - that I was right about the "wrong note." I'll repeat that I am rather surprised about the lack of reaction to this, especially from the many erudite Rózsa scholars who post frequently - and even did on this thread, but asking for more specifics, which I gave, before it all went dead.
I addressed the principal issues in my post of February 6. I expanded on it on February 8, and bumped it subsequently in April. An additional little anecdote was posted on May 5. If anyone's interested, please have a look at what I said in those posts, before firing off a tirade... as if erudite Rózsa scholars would!
It's a shame, because I listened once more to the Tadlow this afternoon, and was more impressed than ever. The sound is full, the playing is gloriously warm when need be, the music for the scenes cut from the final film a revelation (I didn't realise before how much of the original score came from the Violin Concerto, and in this case the music is from one of my favourite parts of the Concerto - a part which is not heard at all in the final movie cut, and is hence not on the Quartet), and we can hear "Castles of Scotland" without those bloody bagpipes!
But every time that wrong note appears, it's like getting slapped on the face.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Having recently purchased the Quartet release of the original recording of HOLMES, I feel the urge to say - not with triumph or pride in any way - that I was right about the "wrong note." I'll repeat that I am rather surprised about the lack of reaction to this, especially from the many erudite Rózsa scholars who post frequently - and even did on this thread, but asking for more specifics, which I gave, before it all went dead.
BTW, have you reviewed Rozsa's written score to confirm that the "so-called Wrong Note" isn't Exactly what's on the written page?
Because if they played what Rozsa WROTE DOWN IN HIS OWN HAND,then it hardly can be called called a "Wrong Note"...
That would seem logical now wouldn't it?
As far as Mr. Fitzpatrick is concerned, it's quite possible you haven't heard back from him because he doesn't wish to get into a pointless debate with yet another anorak.
Just my opinion.
Ford A. Thaxton
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cheers Ford. Now could we please hear from someone else who took the time to read my previous posts?
Then answer my question: What you compared their recording to the WRITTEN SCORE, not what's in the movie, but the WRITTEN SCORE BY ROZSA.
It's a simple Yes or No question.
Ford A. Thaxton
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I actually wanted to change the subject heading to make the focus on HOLMES, but I can't do that now since having to re-register under a (very slightly) different name... Maybe I should extract all the HOLMES material for a different thread. If only I knew how.
Copy and paste.....
Ford A. Thaxton
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well no, not really. Composers make mistakes just like all other humans. It's certainly possible that he wrote it down wrong and fixed it at the recording sessions but didn't correct the score.
And countless times I've read about a piece of music where an editor had to "fix the many wrong notes in the source" (or whatever).
The score is based on a concert work Rozsa knew backwards. The claim is that this note is wrong 'thoughout', each time the oft-repeated 2nd movement 'Gabrielle' motif is played. That's a LOT of wrong notes, sometimes on more than one line. What is the statistical possibility of that?
Even if a sharp or flat was wrongly placed on a stave-line without a natural to reverse it, it'd mean then that this note was ALWAYS played wrongly thoughout the line, not just on that theme, a real cacophony.
Could James Fitz, Nic Raine, 100 odd players in the Prague Phil, Lucie Svehlova, the recording mixers, all the CD owners, the people who peep at YouTube .... it goes on .... all fail to hear it?
And if the violin was off, then it'd be off every time that note was scraped.
I can't hear it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well no, not really. Composers make mistakes just like all other humans. It's certainly possible that he wrote it down wrong and fixed it at the recording sessions but didn't correct the score.
And countless times I've read about a piece of music where an editor had to "fix the many wrong notes in the source" (or whatever).
The score is based on a concert work Rozsa knew backwards. The claim is that this note is wrong 'thoughout', each time the oft-repeated 2nd movement 'Gabrielle' motif is played. That's a LOT of wrong notes, sometimes on more than one line. What is the statistical possibility of that?
Even if a sharp or flat was wrongly placed on a stave-line without a natural to reverse it, it'd mean then that this note was ALWAYS played wrongly thoughout the line, not just on that theme, a real cacophony.
Could James Fitz, Nic Raine, 100 odd players in the Prague Phil, Lucie Svehlova, the recording mixers, all the CD owners, the people who peep at YouTube .... it goes on .... all fail to hear it?
And if the violin was off, then it'd be off every time that note was scraped.
I can't hear it.
Just remember all of those folks matter nothing when compared to the wisdom of FANBOYS!!!
That's, it doesn't matter that you recorded the score the way the composer wrote, ONLY FANBOYS such as Graham S. Watt know what to do correctly, only FANBOYS know what is right.....
Everyone else is WRONG!!!!!
:-)
Ford A. Thaxton
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Graham is a dedicated devotee of Rozsa's music and if he finds that a certain note is misplayed in the recording whether its the original sketch or the new performance- He knows the music enough to say so.
Thank you for proving my point...
ONLY FANBOYS KKOW WHAT IS RIGHT...
The folks who reviewed the written score, produced the album,Conducted it, performed it,mixed it,etc...
Are fools who can't be trusted, ONLY FANBOYS know what to do.
Shakes head in disgust.......
Ford A. Thaxton
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Jul 14, 2014 - 12:10 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Amer Zahid
(Member)
|
Graham is a dedicated devotee of Rozsa's music and if he finds that a certain note is misplayed in the recording whether its the original sketch or the new performance- He knows the music enough to say so.
Thank you for proving my point...
ONLY FANBOYS KKOW WHAT IS RIGHT...
The folks who reviewed the written score, produced the album,Conducted it, performed it,mixed it,etc...
Are fools who can't be trusted, ONLY FANBOYS know what to do.
Shakes head in disgust.......
Ford A. Thaxton
Its beyond you. You missed our point. Nobody is perfect Even the folks who copied the written score, produced the album,Conducted it, performed it,mixed it,etc... Why cant you accept that? Perhaps you are not programmed to accept the truth as always and have to hide behind childish whinings and over protective WASPy circle you claim to be part of. You dont understand what Respect is in the first place. Such a pity. What a pity.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Graham is a dedicated devotee of Rozsa's music and if he finds that a certain note is misplayed in the recording whether its the original sketch or the new performance- He knows the music enough to say so.
Thank you for proving my point...
ONLY FANBOYS KKOW WHAT IS RIGHT...
The folks who reviewed the written score, produced the album,Conducted it, performed it,mixed it,etc...
Are fools who can't be trusted, ONLY FANBOYS know what to do.
Shakes head in disgust.......
Ford A. Thaxton
Its beyond you. You missed our point. Nobody is perfect Even the folks who copied the written score, produced the album,Conducted it, performed it,mixed it,etc... Why cant you accept that? Perhaps you are not programmed to accept the truth as always and have to hide behind childish whinings and over protective WASPy circle you claim to be part of. You dont understand what Respect is in the first place. Such a pity. What a pity.
Or the folks like you who are buying into this are just Nuts...
That is highly likely IMHO.
Ford A. Thaxton
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for trying, Amer, but it really is pointless trying to have a civil conversation when Mr Thaxton butts in.
William "DMC" Crum has pointed out, in his usual erudite way, that the odds are against me being right, and that he "can't hear it." That's fine. He has obviouly taken the time to at least read through my string of earlier posts in order to see where I'm coming from.
But I'm just going to ask a simple question now. Does ANYONE hear what I'm talking about? It's fine if 100 people say "no", but before anyone decides to hurl Thaxton-style insults in my direction (highly unlikely - Ford's in a class of his own there), I do urge you to first please take the time to look at how my thoughts have developed throughout this thread.
Thanks!
OK Fanboy..
All you have to do is answer is SINGLE QUESTION HONESTLY
Have you looked at the WRITTEN SCORE AND COMPARED IT TO WHAT THEY RECORDED?
If the answer is YES, then you might have a case.
If the answer is NO...
STFU already.
Because the people who produced and performed the score have and you haven't.
What's the answer, don't dodge it, just answer it.
I somehow suspect it's not something you wish to do.
Ford A. Thaxton
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
