Recommended Classical Recordings

And as long as I'm thinking about Munch, I have to highly recommend his recording, again with Boston, of Berlioz overtures. These are just cracking brilliant. Fantastic playing and breathtaking tempos.

I know you'll love these when you get a chance.

Yes, it's the RCA recording. I have the 200 gram reissue. I have the Saint-Saens 3rd too, and I agree it's terrific. Munch and French were something. There was just some magic he had. Wonderful tempo concepts. That's what's the most fascinating to me. It's like Toscanini said, when asked the three most important tasks for a conductor, he answered. "Oh that's easy-1. tempo, 2. tempo, 3. tempo. That's what set's Munch's french legacy apart in my opinion, his tempi are so brilliant. Well, and like the Reiner recordings, a brilliant orchestra to realize all their ideas.

You have asked the ultimate question. It's a complicated answer, but I'll give it a go. 

First of all, we must separate out a couple of terms. Tempo is mainly indicated by general terms, most often in Italian, for categories of speed. Allegro (fast), Andante (slow), etc, with lots of other terms that indicate other tempos, like Presto(very fast), or modifiers like Molto Allegro(very fast). All well and good, but how fast is fast? Therein lies the rub. Starting with Beethoven, composers have sometimes indicated a metronome marking that gives a standard speed in addition to the Italian tempos marking. 

You'd think metronome markings would help, and they do sometimes, but not always. Here's an example. For the finale of his fourth symphony Beethoven wrote a tempo marking of Allegro ma non troppo (fast but not too much), but then added a metronome marking marking that is so fast it is totally unplayable as the notes are written. So what now? Everyone plays it slower, of course, and it's not the only example, either for Beethoven or other composers that followed. Even if it had been playable, it underscores that when it comes to interpretation, the composer is not the final word on his or her own compositional interpretations. Once the music is written, compositions are transferred to the realm of the interpreter, and great interpreters have their own valid insights. Two good example are the Stravinsky ballets conducted by Stravinsky, and Copland's music that he conducted. Nether were very good conductors, and so their recordings are wonderfully insightful, but not the best performances. It turns out other conductors have done better. 

SO without belaboring this too much further, I think the answer to your question is that there is sufficient wiggle room within a general tempo classification for many variations of tempo. "Fast" is too vague, though everyone will know if it starts feeling slow instead. It's not ego that is being displayed when a conductor sets a tempo, it's rather a personal conviction the conductor has arrived at that is saying, "this is how the music feels right to me." Or, "this is the speed I feel best represents what the composer intended." 

I think it's fair to say that different conductors simply have different convictions about what it is to be faithful to the composer's intent, but most all pick solutions within the boundaries of the composer's original tempo categories. I think of it similarly as when you hear different actors recite the same lines of Shakespeare. 

There's simply lots of room for individual nuance within these masterpieces, and the great fun of listening is to hear the different choices the artists are making. And then to realize that the music is so great that it survives all our feeble attempts to get it right. 

I hope this helps, and sorry to be so long winded about it. You've lifted the lid on a very, very big kettle of fish. But I'm always happy to keep talking. I've got lots of examples of controversies, etc. 

Thanks for asking.

Kory