Karajan in 70's

Many thanks for the opinions, 都志見 San, おかだ San.

Looks like the situation is similar here in Korea and in Japan ! Without any exception, I gather, Anti-Karajan sector severely attack Karajan's 70s recorings saying that they sound too much artificial, calculated, glossy, skin-deep beauty, lack "musicality" and thus commercial and superficial. I found that they tend to have high regards for the "Legendaries" like Knappertsbusch or Mravinsky, or Celibidache, claiming that they're much more "Profound" (Well, I left Furtwangler out here, because I also think he's a REAL legend, as Karajan himself thought.) In the LP era, when it was difficult to get hold of these legendaries' recordings, and when their available recordings were so rare, unlike Karajan's which you can get whenever/wherever you want, I really couldn't rebut their claims because I knew so little about the so-called legendaries, and some of their recordings were indeed outstanding, though very small in numbers. But now, when we have access to the recordings of the legendaries as easy as Karajan's, I think people know better and hope they realize what they're missing.

I personally think that what makes Karajan's recordings in 70's so special is the striking balance between the architectual firmness and the beauty of the musical line (probably also owing to the best possible assembly of orchestra members in that era) during those period. By this, I mean earlier Karajan sounds stressing more of the beauty of the musical line, and the later Karajan sounds stressing more of the architectural structure, though I now know that many won't agree on this point of view ! But this is my two pennies anyway.

Best Regards,