Author Topic: I think I like the Payare/Montreal M5 more than Bychkov/CPO (both Pentatone!)  (Read 6700 times)

Offline barryguerrero

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1421
Soooo, folks, doesn't it seem it a bit weird that Pentatone would immediately follow-up their Bychkov/Czech Phil. M5, with yet another M5?    .    .    .    this time with Rafael Payare and the Montreal Symphony? Well, I guess they wanted to rush this out, because they're performing it on tour and that's including Carnegie Hall.

I'd be very curious to hear anyone's reaction, IF you actually listened to both Pentatone recordings. I think I actually like the Payare one a tad more.
« Last Edit: March 05, 2023, 05:33:44 PM by barryguerrero »

Offline ChrisH

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 345
Here is Payere doing the 5th with Detroit:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ztalwhqBUw

Offline barryguerrero

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1421
There you go - THAT'S the real deal. There's no stupid stand in front of him to partially block everyone's view - no burying his head in the score to make the page turns. He even looks like a cross between Mahler and Sinopoli.

In this day and age, orchestras rarely - IF EVER - get lost to the point of having to restart. There really is no reason conductors should have to have a score out in front of them - not by concert time. These guys and gals are getting paid TONS of money, so the least they can do is learn to memorize their scores. 
« Last Edit: March 05, 2023, 05:34:32 PM by barryguerrero »

Offline ChrisH

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 345
This Payare recordings sounds the exact opposite of the Bychkov, at least to me. Payare conducts this on the edge. He and the OSM REALLY are going after this piece. It's always moving forward, never slack, never dwells. Loved it. Wish more ensembles and conductors put this much in to their recorded work and concerts. This is not auto-pilot. I feel like we hear so much auto-pilot, that sometimes we forget the amount of excitement that can be developed from these works.
Recorded sound is excellent, but again very different than the Bychkov. Payare really focus' on the low strings, allowing the rest of the players to ride this amazing cushion of sound. Bychkov is balanced to the nth degree, and the low brass are potted down way too much.

Like both recordings quite a bit.

Offline barryguerrero

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1421
Yes, they're both quite likable.

Offline pgmdir

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 11
Gotta agree--- Both are downloadable DSD and more at nativedsd.com The three Bychkov Mahlers, including 5, are a bit relaxed.  Payare has more of the life I like.

Offline barryguerrero

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1421
Bychkov is more relaxed, but it's still quite good. I love his 3rd movement (Scherzo). We're spoiled!      .    .    .  Oh, and thanks for chiming in, PGMDIR!
« Last Edit: April 09, 2023, 03:26:22 AM by barryguerrero »

Offline pgmdir

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 11
Bychkov is more relaxed, but it's still quite good. I love his 3rd movement (Scherzo). We're spoiled!      .    .    .  Oh, and thanks for chiming in, PGMDIR!

Glad to...   By the way, Bychkov's M5 is the best of his 3 on Pentatone.

Offline erikwilson7

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 708
You’re right, it’s relaxed. It has the detail and clarity of Boulez though, and with a bit more excitement in my opinion.

Offline barryguerrero

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1421
I really like Bychkov's M4 quite a bit. The soprano is very good also. I do like the new M2 as well - particularly good is the big climax to the Scherzo, with its vision of even bigger things to come in the finale. Also, I like just how audible the deep bells and the high/low pitched tam-tams (orchestral gongs) are at the very end. I hate it when you're just sitting there, hearing nothing more than the brass, slowly going back and forth on the dominant and tonic notes. Also, Bychkov gets his second timpanist to make an adequate crescendo on the very final note (oddly, the second timpani part is the ONLY part in the orchestra that has a crescendo at the end). I just wish Pentatone were giving them a tad better sound quality. So far, Exton's recordings of the Czech Phil. sound much 'richer'.

Offline John Kim

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2612
Barry,

> Also, I like just how audible the deep bells and the high/low pitched tam-tams (orchestral gongs) are at the very end.

---> Ummm, I had difficulty catching the low & high tam tam strokes? Bells were quite audible however.

> I just wish Pentatone were giving them a tad better sound quality. So far, Exton's recordings of the Czech Phil. sound much 'richer'.

--> Agreed. I don't get why Pentatone chose to release Bychkov's Mahler recordings only standard CDs. Why not SACD for which they are well known? Kobayashi's Czech Phil. M2 & M3 SACD sound far richer and finer.

John
« Last Edit: April 09, 2023, 05:58:24 PM by John Kim »

Offline ChrisH

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 345
Going against the grain here, but I truly feel that these Bychkov recordings are astonishing! The way that the Pentatone engineers have been able to capture all the inner voices, especially in the 5th, is almost scary. These recordings are total x-rays of the score. And, they do this with an entirely natural feel. I do think that the brass has been potted down in certain spots, climax of M5-2, places throughout the 2nd symphony, too. But, this seems to be a choice made by Bychkov and the engineers to attain the balances they were looking for. The brass choral in M2-5 sounds better than any other recording of it I own;so organ like, with very dark core sound.
 Exton/Canyon do and have done a great job, and this isn't a knock on their work at all. I feel that Pentatone has taken it to another level in detail and truly natural sound. Many Exton recordings feel as if they have augmented the low end, and they sound like they are recorded at a higher level then these Pentatone, or even Channel Classics. This would lead to a 'richer' sound. The Payare Mahler 5 from Pentatone has a very different recording ideology and is richer in sound, while keeping the detail.

This is what I hear, in my room, with my speakers. A recording will sound different in each of our listening environments. Too many factors to control to get any sort of baseline for real discussion on things like sound quality.

As an aside, the recent Cleveland recording of Prokofiev 5 with FWM on their own, house label, is another spectacular recording. I've never heard low strings captured with this much power and precision. Not a big Prokofiev nut, but I really enjoyed this one.

Offline barryguerrero

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1421
Truth be told, Chris, I actually agree with your assessment. In fact, I ordered a hard copy (CD) of Bychkov's M2 just today from Europadisc. With shipping, it came out just above $18 - not bad at all.  I miss a bit of that extra 'richness' that the Exton recordings have. But these Pentatone ones seem to succeed at the type of sound that Deutsche Grammophon had been TRYING to get at for years.
« Last Edit: April 12, 2023, 03:08:52 PM by barryguerrero »

Offline akiralx

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 313
What about Payare v Sado in M5?  I bought the latter but haven't listened yet...

Offline barryguerrero

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1421
Hmmm   .     .    .  I'd have to go back and revisit the Sado you give an opinion. I remember liking it just fine. It was recorded at the Elbphilharmonie in Hamburg, while the Tonkunstler was on tour.

 

SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk