OT - Prokofiev 5th Sym. - Gong in 1st Mvmt.

[waderice]

Sorry for the off-topic post, but this is something that has intrigued me, for all of the recorded and live performances I've heard of the Prokofiev 5th Symphony, and I'm directing this to Barry Guerrero, who is a percussionist.  I need to say at the start that I don't have a score of the Prokofiev 5th to examine and arrive at my own conclusions.  Toward the end of the 1st movement, there are a few gong crashes that start out loud, and gradually grow fainter in dynamic level.  Some conductors are quite loud initially, some at a medium dynamic level, and some fairly quiet.  Barry, if you have played the Prokofiev 5th Symphony, can you enlighten me on what the score says the dynamic level of the gong crashes should be?  Thanks.

Wade

[John Kim]

Wade,

I can't answer your question, but I like Karajan's recording for the heck of lots of tam tam in that passage. IMO, nobody does it better as far as the gong goes.

John,

[barry guerrero]

That's a bad habit to permit the tam-tam smashes to get softer. All of them are marked fortissimo. Keep in mind that while more layers of noise get added while approaching the ending, the percussionist should compensate just slightly. That rarely happens.

[techniquest]

I can't answer your question, but I like Karajan's recording for the heck of lots of tam tam in that passage. IMO, nobody does it better as far as the gong goes.

Sorry, I have to disagree. The tam-tam in this recording is mic'ed so closely that it initially sounds like someone has dropped a metal tray onto the mic! I am a great fan of the tam-tam, but I like it to be recorded properly, not ridiculously close like Karajan's Prokofiev 5 nor - as is usually the case, especially during the closing pages of Mahler 2 for example - almost non-existant.

[techniquest]

Sorry - meant to say that the tam-tam in the EMI Royal Philharmonic / Vernon Handley recording is pretty fine and does not diminish in intensity. It's really spectacular in the 3rd movement!

[barry guerrero]

Yes, but "Royal Phil." automatically means that they used a Paiste which, IMHO, sound like garbage. Paiste puts stainless steel into the alloy of their tam-tams which lends a sort of metallic "whang" to the tone. I prefer the Wuhans that can be heard on the Slatkin/SLSO, Masur/NYPO, Levine/CSO, Previn/LAPO (Philips), and some other P5 recordings that I can't think of at the moment. For my taste, the LSO work the Paiste tam-tam better than the other British orchestras. Hence, they work it pretty good on the Previn/LSO P5. The tam-tam might be over-miked on the Karajan, but at least it's not a Paiste.

[techniquest]

Well, you're the expert; I just go on what I hear and to me the RPO tam-tam, Paiste or not, sounds a great deal better than the disproportionate clash on the HvK recording.

[barry guerrero]

I have to admit that I don't know the Handley recording, so I shouldn't pre-judge. But in general, I don't care for the tone quality of Paistes. Still, I'll try to hear it sometime, as it might be good in every other aspect as well. There's certainly more to P5 than just the tam-tam.

I know that the tam-tam is exaggerated on the Karajan, but it's a pretty nice sounding gong that they have in Berlin (not sure what it is).