haggis posted:winetarelli posted:
I already replied above as to my very favorite.
However, while not technically classical, I recently got the collection of Offenbach overtures by Bruno Weil & the Wiener Symphoniker and it is fantastic.
Are you defining "classical" as a period, rather than as a genre?
Well... kinda. I'm defining it as different from Romantic or Baroque (or Modern).
I would be more likely to call my wonderful (Deutsche Gramophone) Claudio Abbado & London Symphony Orchestra recording of Mendelssohn's Overtures "symphonic" or "Romantic" rather than "Classical". Offenbach creates a different wrinkle because Mendelssohn's overtures were largely stand-alone pieces, whereas Offenbach's were generally originally intended to precede opera bouffe / operetta. To be honest, I've never really thought of opera as being bound by the same terminology as symphonic music. I cannot, for example, recall referring to Fidelio or The Marriage of Figaro as anything but "opera" -- though, surely, there is tremendous distinction between them and the operas more often associated with Romantic times. (Puccini, Rossini, Offenbach, etc.)
But that aside... aside: I am drawing a distinction between (for example) Mozart / Haydn / Beethoven* on the one hand and Offenbach / Mendelssohn / Rossini / Puccini / etc on another. So, while I do hear a difference in genre, it is also a difference in era. That asterisk is because I think Beethoven broke "Classical" music, as I am using it. I think something else had to come next.
It might, at this time, behoove me to point out that I grew up with a father who was once offered the job of pianist for the Met. (The opera, not the museum.) (He followed a different professional path, but) there is no escaping a Steinway B being practiced no matter how big your old colonial house is. It was the bane of my existence as I grew up. But he's also from where my love and knowledge of music stem.
(Also the reason I just edited that last sentence so it wouldn't end with a preposition. )