François-Xavier Roth's Heroic Eroica

[jayne lee wilson]

I think there are fewer strings than traditionally used for Beethoven but like Currentzis chose to record from the middle of the orchestra accentuating the fizz on the strings - to my ears an unnatural and not very pleasant sound.

I hope to post on the Currentzis soon, perhaps alongside the Freiburg/Golz 7th (also thrilling!). These things take time.

But listening to the 24/96 Qobuz stream of the Currentzis, at fairly high levels in a large room on my usual monitoring system, neither that nor the Roth 3rd (24/44.1) present with any faulty positioning here: both are spacious, with good ambience and excellent detail, from a mid-hall or slightly more setback perspective. The Currentzis has more obvious acoustic depth and resonance; the Roth a little drier and more immediate. But both display fine depth and image height anyway, arcing back well above and to the rear of the speaker plane. I couldn't detect any anomalies in the string tone, or artificial highlighting of instrumental groups or solos.

On the model of the still-missed Gramophone Sounds in Retrospect column, I do take care over several hearings to assess the SQ as well as the interpretation (sometimes adjusting the system response for a further perspective), and try to report it as accurately as I can.

[Richard Barrett]

The first thing that struck me about the first movement was the way the violins spread the opening chords rather more luxuriously than is usual, and indeed rather more so than I think is implied by the fact that these chords are marked staccato. Now F-X Roth is a highly insightful artist who's committed to making the music he performs sound freshly-minted so to speak, but I found myself a bit disconcerted by the performance beginning what what seems to be so obviously not what's in the score. Christopher Adey in Orchestral Performance: A Guide for Conductors and Players says "Certainly in staccato chords any spreading is unnecessary and usually quite inappropriate" and goes on to make specific reference to the opening of the Eroica. How historically informed is Adey's attitude? JEG's recording of the Eroica has the first two chords staccato in the way they're most usually heard. Maybe this is a minor point. I listened to JEG (not having done so for a few years probably) immediately after Roth and preferred it. I have the impression that Roth is trying a bit too hard to make his interpretation different and original. Others clearly differ on this point!

[Nick Armstrong]

The first thing that struck me about the first movement was the way the violins spread the opening chords rather more luxuriously than is usual, and indeed rather more so than I think is implied by the fact that these chords are marked staccato. Now F-X Roth is a highly insightful artist who's committed to making the music he performs sound freshly-minted so to speak, but I found myself a bit disconcerted by the performance beginning what what seems to be so obviously not what's in the score.

Same here.

I must say that a first listen to the first movement didn’t draw me in (in contrast to my first listen to the Currentzis 7)... Have yet to put my finger on why. Something to do with the way accents are handled, maybe. Odd, because I’m usually a Roth fan...

[Bryn]

I found it on Spotify as Cloughie suggested.
Afraid I'm not attracted by the sound of this orchestra, in particular the thin violin tone nor the occasionally exaggerated dynamics. I don't find the Funeral March too fast but I miss the heft of a symphony orchestra at key moments. On the other hand the scherzo goes splendidly with the sparks flying.
Due respect to the conductor and orchestra but it's not a performance that I'll return to.
Such a pity that the wonderful Eroica website disappeared a few years ago. It was a real labour of love and the ideal place to compare this version with every other that had been recorded from the earliest to date.

[Richard Barrett]

Something to do with the way accents are handled, maybe. Odd, because I’m usually a Roth fan...

I'm glad it wasn't just me and my nitpicking! I found the accentuation often somewhat odd throughout the performance, and the aforementioned spreading of multiple stops in the violins wherever possible quite annoying by the end. As for Roth, his Ravel is the best I've ever heard, to name only this.

edit: thanks Bryn!

[Nick Armstrong]

I'm glad it wasn't just me and my nitpicking! I found the accentuation often somewhat odd throughout the performance, and the aforementioned spreading of multiple stops in the violins wherever possible quite annoying by the end. As for Roth, his Ravel is the best I've ever heard, to name only this.

Agreed.

[Ein Heldenleben]

The first thing that struck me about the first movement was the way the violins spread the opening chords rather more luxuriously than is usual, and indeed rather more so than I think is implied by the fact that these chords are marked staccato. Now F-X Roth is a highly insightful artist who's committed to making the music he performs sound freshly-minted so to speak, but I found myself a bit disconcerted by the performance beginning what what seems to be so obviously not what's in the score. Christopher Adey in Orchestral Performance: A Guide for Conductors and Players says "Certainly in staccato chords any spreading is unnecessary and usually quite inappropriate" and goes on to make specific reference to the opening of the Eroica. How historically informed is Adey's attitude? JEG's recording of the Eroica has the first two chords staccato in the way they're most usually heard. Maybe this is a minor point. I listened to JEG (not having done so for a few years probably) immediately after Roth and preferred it. I have the impression that Roth is trying a bit too hard to make his interpretation different and original. Others clearly differ on this point!

Yes I noticed this and thought it odd. I was going to post something along the lines of whether 18th century bows were more tense thus making the stopped chord difficult without arpeggiating? I then realised I knew next to nothing about 18th cent bows and bowing technique. The chord is as you say marked staccato and if you are going to make a big thing of the sforzandi throughout why ignore this explicit instruction? I was aware that Eflat is a tricky scale for violinists and wondered also whether that opening chord G/Eflat/Bflat/G in the firsts was a demanding start? Also why don’t the seconds get the Bflat as well - aren’t they up to it?
Such are the meanderings of lockdown...

[Petrushka]

Yes I noticed this and thought it odd. I was going to post something along the lines of whether 18th century bows were more tense thus making the stopped chord difficult without arpeggiating? I then realised I knew next to nothing about 18th cent bows and bowing technique. The chord is as you say marked staccato and if you are going to make a big thing of the sforzandi throughout why ignore this explicit instruction? I was aware that Eflat is a tricky scale for violinists and wondered also whether that opening chord G/Eflat/Bflat/G in the firsts was a demanding start? Also why don’t the seconds get the Bflat as well - aren’t they up to it?
Such are the meanderings of lockdown...

Not at all. Interesting stuff and just the sort of thing that an 'Interpretations on Record' programme would have given us back in the day. Come to think of it, I seem to recall Richard Osborne spending most of a programme on the first four notes of the Beethoven 5.

[Richard Barrett]

The chord is as you say marked staccato and if you are going to make a big thing of the sforzandi throughout why ignore this explicit instruction? I was aware that Eflat is a tricky scale for violinists and wondered also whether that opening chord G/Eflat/Bflat/G in the firsts was a demanding start? Also why don’t the seconds get the Bflat as well

I believe that 18th century bridges were actually flatter, making multiple stops easier. Whether this was the case in Beethoven's time I'm not so sure. On the other hand I believe that Tourte-style bows would have been in use by the time this work was written, and this design is basically the one still in use. I would say the difference in the chords between 1st and 2nd violins is intended to fill out the chord and give it a particular balance, so that between them the violins have G - E flat - B flat - E flat - G where the lowest two pitches occur in both firsts and seconds, and violas in fact - and what are the violas supposed to do with their double stop - play it early so as to be together with the violins, or play it on the beat in which case they won't be together with the violins but with the rest of the orchestra? The score seems to point clearly to not spreading the chord.

[Ein Heldenleben]

Not at all. Interesting stuff and just the sort of thing that an 'Interpretations on Record' programme would have given us back in the day. Come to think of it, I seem to recall Richard Osborne spending most of a programme on the first four notes of the Beethoven 5.

Yep you could write a thesis about that fermata alone and also why the two opening motto statements in some perfs never seem to have quite the same rhythm as their many many repetitions throughout movt 1 ...

[Ein Heldenleben]

I believe that 18th century bridges were actually flatter, making multiple stops easier. Whether this was the case in Beethoven's time I'm not so sure. On the other hand I believe that Tourte-style bows would have been in use by the time this work was written, and this design is basically the one still in use. I would say the difference in the chords between 1st and 2nd violins is intended to fill out the chord and give it a particular balance, so that between them the violins have G - E flat - B flat - E flat - G where the lowest two pitches occur in both firsts and seconds, and violas in fact - and what are the violas supposed to do with their double stop - play it early so as to be together with the violins, or play it on the beat in which case they won't be together with the violins but with the rest of the orchestra? The score seems to point clearly to not spreading the chord.

Thanks Richard - that’s what I love about this forum . Where else would you find an answer so quickly? For me that spread chord in the Roth just saps the energy a bit - just when you need it ...

[BBMmk2]

Well, if you say it’s very good, then, it must be!

[kernelbogey]

Thanks Richard - that’s what I love about this forum . Where else would you find an answer so quickly? For me that spread chord in the Roth just saps the energy a bit - just when you need it ...

As one not musically trained - but eternally fascinated by this masterpiece - I'd like to ask for a clarification of the term 'spread chord'. I infer from Richard's post that it means that the notes of a chord are not played simultaneously. Am I correct in so inferring, and how is a spread chord indicated in the score?

[LMcD]

I hope to post on the Currentzis soon, perhaps alongside the Freiburg/Golz 7th (also thrilling!). These things take time.

But listening to the 24/96 Qobuz stream of the Currentzis, at fairly high levels in a large room on my usual monitoring system, neither that nor the Roth 3rd (24/44.1) present with any faulty positioning here: both are spacious, with good ambience and excellent detail, from a mid-hall or slightly more setback perspective. The Currentzis has more obvious acoustic depth and resonance; the Roth a little drier and more immediate. But both display fine depth and image height anyway, arcing back well above and to the rear of the speaker plane. I couldn't detect any anomalies in the string tone, or artificial highlighting of instrumental groups or solos.

On the model of the still-missed Gramophone Sounds in Retrospect column, I do take care over several hearings to assess the SQ as well as the interpretation (sometimes adjusting the system response for a further perspective), and try to report it as accurately as I can.

I must confess to being puzzled at first by this reference to an abbreviation which I'd previously encountered only during my work on patent litigation in the medical field, until I realized that this is, of course, a most elegant way of assessing the way in which, and the extent to which, a recording of a musical item can (quite literally) get under one's skin.
Thanks to KB for eliciting the meaning of 'spread chord', by the way. That just leaves the Jam beat for me to puzzle over - or is the spread in question jam - a subtle reference to Strawberry Fields, perhaps?
(I shall now give my brain a rest by tackling the Times crossword ).

[vinteuil]

I must confess to being puzzled at first by this reference to an abbreviation which I'd previously encountered only during my work on patent litigation in the medical field, until I realized that this is, of course, a most elegant way of assessing the way in which, and the extent to which, a recording of a musical item can (quite literally) get under one's skin...

... aha! I read SQ as 'string quartet' and couldn't quite figure where one featured in the Eroica.

But your subcutaneous solution is more elegant...

.