BaL 27.09.14 - Holst: The Planets

[Barbirollians]

As for the George Hurst someone has kindly uploaded it to Youtube and judging by the Jupiter it is a terrific performance . With notable triangle playing !

[Pabmusic]

As for the George Hurst someone has kindly uploaded it to Youtube and judging by the Jupiter it is a terrific performance . With notable triangle playing !

I've got to be honest. I can't for the life of me recall what I played. I was always roped in as the 18th percussionist (or thereabouts) so the repertoire was limited , but usually had a few triangle, tambourine, tam-tam and similar moments. Good times though.

[PJPJ]

Anyone know if the Bournemouth SO, version conducted by George Hurst, produced by Brian Culverhouse on the Contour label is available?

Further to my previous reply, I have discovered the Bournemouth-Hurst recording is available from itunes (which I do not use), and is on spotify:

https://play.spotify.com/album/5KpKbTbB4Ao36QHQUYufY0

[MickyD]

Now THAT's how you do BAL!
Revelatory, acutely observed, wittily presented, dismissive without being cruel, but so, so observant. What a treat. Made a listener thinking he knew the work listen to this 'war horse' in an entirely new way. Restoration of an old master.

I enjoyed it myself, but to me, DON's voice and delivery sounds curiously like that of political commentator Quentin Letts.

[Beef Oven!]

Further to my previous reply, I have discovered the Bournemouth-Hurst recording is available from itunes (which I do not use), and is on spotify:

https://play.spotify.com/album/5KpKbTbB4Ao36QHQUYufY0

Many thanks!

I must track it down, if only because Pabs is playing drums on it!

[Nick Armstrong]

Now THAT's how you do BAL!
Revelatory, acutely observed, wittily presented, dismissive without being cruel, but so, so observant. What a treat. Made a listener thinking he knew the work listen to this 'war horse' in an entirely new way. Restoration of an old master.

Yes another brilliant, illuminating and entertaining BaL from DON. Whenever I hear DON doing a BaL, I could listen for hours! I liked the extracts of "the winner", but I am not sure I would acquire it.

Hmm. I prefer Anna Picard's approach to DON's preening self-congratulatory "witticisms".

For once, and this very rarely happens, I must wholeheartedly disagree with ferney!

I loved this BAL and am firmly in the Draco/visualnick corner on this one. I could listen to DON all day long, learning, giggling, hearing anew.... I thought he balanced succinct analysis of his decision making, with illumination of the piece (the horses in 'Mars', the GvHolst 'signature', the gallumphing gaffers ) and close focus on the performances (I had to listen very hard to hear the 'lazy wrong note' in Karajan's version) plus the odd anecdote (Holst and Hardy knowing one another, and Hardy having Lawrence of Arabia's gramophone... "You couldn't make it up!" ). No prejudices from DON, but an unashamedly subjective yet explained & justified approach... I love the idea of all the recordings where the organ is inaudible going straight in the bin ("dozens of them" ).

He stretched my ears and brain, made me laugh, and made me hear The Planets afresh and differently, and with a curiosity to hear a new version - possibly not Jarvi... I'm tempted by the Dutoit, presciently praised I think by visualnick earlier in this thread.

[mercia]

rather off topic but can anyone shed light on this Planets/Hardy/Lawrence story? I assumed that DON meant Lawrence played The Planets to Hardy on his (Lawrence's) gramophone at Clouds Hill (the gramophone is still there for all to see). Lawrence certainly entertained literary figures at Clouds Hill but he didn't buy the cottage until 1925 and Hardy died in 1928, I just wonder if it adds up - or do you think this event happened somewhere else ?

[PJPJ]

rather off topic but can anyone shed light on this Planets/Hardy/Lawrence story? I assumed that DON meant Lawrence played The Planets to Hardy on his (Lawrence's) gramophone at Clouds Hill (the gramophone is still there for all to see). Lawrence certainly entertained literary figures at Clouds Hill but he didn't buy the cottage until 1925 and Hardy died in 1928, I just wonder if it adds up - or do you think this event happened somewhere else ?

It's mentioned in Imogen's biography:

Hardy Lawrence Holst

[mercia]

It's mentioned in Imogen's biography:

Hardy Lawrence Holst

ah, thank you very much. That looks a good gossipy book.

[Barbirollians]

I enjoyed it myself, but to me, DON's voice and delivery sounds curiously like that of political commentator Quentin Letts.

I knew there was something immensely annoying in there somewhere !

The failure to trace the performance history and Boult's part in making them shine was central .

[Nick Armstrong]

ah, thank you very much. That looks a good gossipy book.

Fascinating! Great knowledge PJ² and thanks for winkling that out, mercs. It does look a good read!

[PJPJ]

Fascinating! Great knowledge PJ² and thanks for winkling that out, mercs. It does look a good read!

My dear fellow, it was entirely down to Obadiah Google and Sons Ltd, though I may have my own copy on the shelves. Incidentally, when I visited Clouds Hill years ago, there was an album of Elgar's recording of his Second on the gramophone; I wonder if it's still there.

[mercia]

I've got to be honest. I can't for the life of me recall what I played. I was always roped in as the 18th percussionist (or thereabouts) so the repertoire was limited , but usually had a few triangle, tambourine, tam-tam and similar moments. Good times though.

I'm a bit stupid. Is pabmusic telling us he was a percussionist with the Bournemouth Symphony Orchestra ? Respect.

[ardcarp]

I must join the band of those swept along joyfully by DON's inimitable style . OK we wouldn't want all BALs to be like this, but here was a war-horse [sic] of a piece with manifold versions (Bernard Hermann was a surprise to me) and I think DON got through it stonkingly well.

Somewhere upthread he was criticised for dwelling more on musical structures than on comparison of recordings. I think most reviewers say technical things about the piece in question in order to show how their favoured recordings do justice to them. Surely this is what DON was doing?

As far as his humour is concerned, I love it. He is something of an entertainer and knows how to 'hold' an audience, but so what? I don't think it is self-congratulatory at all. For instance, before the halfway point in the programme he said "I can tell you here and now that this is my DVD recommendation" [i.e. I'm breaking the BAL rules] only to slip in later that it was the only available DVD version.

I differed with him on two counts:

1. DON was quite keen on Norrington's version with the SWDRO. Crystal clear it may have been, but from the admittedly small extract we heard, it seemed strangely aseptic. Give me any of Boult's any time, even the old scratchy ones.

2. DON seemed obsessed with the key of the pieces as exemplified by final chords. For instance he made much of the ambivalence of a final E flat major/C minor chord, because the C disappeared just before the end. Well actually, DON, Holst probably hoped we would hear E flat major with added sixth.

I have a pet theory (which probably no-one wants to hear about anyway) but it goes something like this. Holst wanted to write a highly original and daring piece, and one which would evoke the mystical nature of his obsession, astrology He chose both rhythmic, harmonic and melodic ostinati as the building blocks. But he had to find a harmonic 'language' that was outside convention but which would not be as chromatically jarring as used by the continental avant garde. He chose a lot of added sixths, major sevenths and a lot of tritones arising from whole tone scale clusters and fragments. That's his harmony of the spheres. I don't think he was as worried about what key a particular piece ended in as DON makes out.

[Nick Armstrong]

My dear fellow, it was entirely down to Obadiah Google and Sons Ltd.