The 1950s Japanese concerts

[K620]

In the top 12 video thread, Mahalo recommended Karajan's 1957 filmed Tokyo Beethoven/Strauss/Wagner concert. That has encouraged me to ask a more general question.

I've always looked at Karajan's filmed 1950s Japanese concerts with great interest. I've never yet ventured to buy any of them, but I'm well aware that Karajan's approach to some works (Mozart's Figaro is a striking example) changed considerably between the 1950s and the 1970s.

How do forum members who have bought the 1950s Japanese releases feel about them?

And in particular, what differences are there between those performances and Karajan's later films of the same works? (I'm thinking here, not only of the 1957 Beethoven/Strauss/Wagner concert, but also of the 1959 Tokyo Brahms symphonies.)

[darkehmen]

I'm basing my remarks on these two releases:



As a general point, I would say that the sound is astonishingly good, since the concerts were simulcast over stereo FM, and the producers of the videos have wisely mated the stereo sound (good quality, considering the vintage) with the b&w pictures. The dispararity between the the quality of picture and sound is remarkable; one would almost think that a modern soundtrack had been dubbed over the original sound, but no, it's the real thing.

The filming, however, I find rather terrible. First, the picture does indeed look like video television from the 1950s, so it's grainy and at times distorted. Second, the camera-work itself is unimpressive, indeed quite dull. These are definitely not Karajan films -- it's the sort of vague, middle-distance, overhead filming that one sees in most concert broadcasts, even today. You don't realize how disconnected an approach like this makes you feel, as a viewer, until you've immersed yourself in Karajan's own films. If anything, these old videos make you appreciate Karajan's midst-of-the-orchestra camera placement that much more. Third, more than once, the films have video segments missing (which the producers have gotten around by splicing in still photos, while the soundtrack continues playing) -- as reasonble a solution as any. Fouth, they don't show all that much of Karajan himself -- only two brief glimpses in the Schubert film, for example.

I have both of the NHK videos, just to own the only film record of a Karajan Die Meistersinger overture yet released, and the only Schubert 8th (which is actually just an incomplete clip of the first movement, and nothing at all of the second -- just still images throughout). They're interesting and important historical curiosities, but the filmmaking leaves a lot to be desired.

[K620]

Thanks very much, Darkehmen... exactly what I wanted to know.

On the whole I'm still interested. I can live with 1950s kinescope picture quality and even missing video sections (as long as the audio survives). The 1959 Tokyo telecasts of La Scala's L'Elisir d'amore and Otello suffer from both of those problems, and in both cases, I'm more than happy to trade that for the privilege of watching irreplaceable performances that no-one in Europe bothered to preserve. I'm not quite so tolerant of uninspired camerawork, but as you say, we often still have to accept that today.

Where later Karajan films of the same works exist (Beethoven 5, Don Juan, Brahms 1 & 4), do you feel that there are any significant interpretative differences? I'm not asking about minor points that could be discerned only on direct comparison ("in 1957 the tempo of the finale is slightly faster until bar 23..."), but simply about general "gut feeling" impressions.

[mahalo]

k620 said:

Where later Karajan films of the same works exist (Beethoven 5, Don Juan, Brahms 1 & 4), do you feel that there are any significant interpretative differences? I'm not asking about minor points that could be discerned only on direct comparison ("in 1957 the tempo of the finale is slightly faster until bar 23..."), but simply about general "gut feeling" impressions.

Hello K620,

As the originator who nominated the 1957 DVD, I would like to
respond to your question.

As to "feeling", it is a very personal one. Thus, you may feel another impression when you will watch it.
This is what I myself felt.

Generally speaking, the 1957 & 1959 live performances are
"on the way" to mature Karajan himself.

As a genius conductor, his representative character was
established firmly while in early 70's, I think.
That might be given by not only him but Berliner Philhamoniker
where the remarkable roaster resided. Talking about even BPO,
the 1957 performances show us a slight confusion between
young "Wunder Karajan" and the old regime - maybe Furtwangler.

I can confirm that some phrasing was effected by his "former" romantic baton technique. We could hear similar interpretation
in his early 50's.

I can recall his monaural recording with Philharmonia Orchestra.
However, they may be more "animated" and technically not
perfect because they are in the live concert halls.

Please note that the above was felt ONLY by myself.
Therefore, you may exchange another feeling on the DVD.

Thanks,

[K620]

Thanks again, Mahalo. That's what I expected.

As you say, these things are personal. There are a few areas where Karajan's interpretations changed in objective, and sometimes quite extreme, ways. In my first post here, I cited his Marriage of Figaro as an example. The 1940s-50s Karajan Figaros are markedly faster, lighter, more transparent than his final recording of the opera. The difference is so striking that they hardly seem the work of the same conductor!

But in most areas of his work, I'm struck mainly by the consistency of Karajan's interpretations. When we listen to his 1943 Concertgebouw audio Brahms Symphony 1, we instantly realize "This is Karajan". Already, his interpretation is fully fledged and instantly recognizable. No doubt he changed and developed his view of the work as he grew older, but those differences are extremely slight and subjective, compared with the overall consistency.