Finest readers?

Martin Jarvis is a great reader. His many readings of the Just William stories are unimpeachable.
However his Wodehouse, although very good, lacks something that Jonathan Cecil brings. His Jeeves and Bertie are so well-imagined. His voice evokes the era.
What do you think?

Couldn't agree more! I'll on listen to Wodehouse on audio if Jonathan Cecil is the narrator :)

I've Blandings stories read by Jeremy Sinden, Jonathan Cecil, Martin Jarvis, Nigel Lambert and James Saxon.
It must be said that Martin Jarvis does a marvellous job of reading the early Blandings stories; his "Scottish noises" of Angus McAllister, are wonderful.
Jeremy Sinden charges into the stories and maintains something of a falsetto.
Nigel Lambert's characterisation is not to my taste. His Lord Emsworth really overdoes the vagueness.
James Saxon's reading is very credible and I would recommend his.
1. Jonathan Cecil & Martin Jarvis
3. James Saxon
4. Nigel Lambert
5. Jeremy Sinden

It could be that different readers manage some series better than others. I've given the palm to Cecil for his rendering of the Jeeves stories but feel that Martin Jarvis has at least matched him with Blandings.
I'll try some other audio books when I have the time.
Pip! Pip!

Just listened to a little of Ian Carmichael reading Jeeves in the Offing. As Lord Peter Wimsey in the BBC radio serialisations Ian Carmichael is excellent. As a reader of Dorothy L. Sayers' books his range is limited. This is true too for the Jeeves series. He has a great distinctive and characterful voice but it is not always convincing in roles that depart from the upper-class.
I have also discovered some books read by Dinsdale Lansden and Frederick Davidson. They will have to wait for listening until I return from my Easter break

My 11 year old is reading Blandings Castle now and may become a Wodehouse devotee. Kids love pigs and humor.

>5 Hagelstein:
Be careful - early adopters of Wodehouse tend to become fanatics. I started even younger than that...

Jonathan Cecil is my favorite. Alexander Spencer isn't bad, and I like Dinsdale Landen too. But Cecil has that indefinable something extra that really puts him over the top.

>6 thorold:
It might be too late. He just picked out two more - Full Moon and Leave it to Psmith.

>6 thorold:,8
Whatever you do, don't get talked into playing Persian Monarchs with him :-)

Do you know the rules of Persian Monarchs, thorold? Maybe it's like Mornington Crescent.

Google is unhelpful but did come up with this -
http://www.hindustantimes.com/News-Feed/ColumnsOthers/Breaking-the-code-of-codes...
- a suggestion to the USA from a Pakistani journalist to use the term as a code-name for a future military adventure in Iran - "... just the right blend of high-minded power and low-down deceit"!

>10 abbottthomas:
No, but I'm embarrassed that I got LITP mixed up with UFITS...

I did wonder when I first saw it if the name was a little joke at the expense of chess fanatics. I should think the rules must be a lot simpler than those of Mornington Crescent, if Lord Bosham can play it.

If only Nebuchadnezzar had shown a preference for the food of pigs rather than that of cattle then Babylonian Monarchs would have made for an evocative game at Blandings. The winner of the game could escape from the nightmare of social engagement into the rolling parkland and enjoy the solitude so prized by Lord Emsworth.