BaL 13.12.14 - Bruckner: Symphony no. 7

[Beef Oven!]

The reviewer, in this case the excellent John Deathridge, has spent many hours preparing a detailed and reasoned argument for his choice but it gets diverted and derailed by unnecessary chat.

More preparation required?

Obviously with a new format, the excellent John Deathridge will need to adapt. He will know that things inevitably move on, even though we don't.

[Bryn]

But is the Haas edition so dodgy? Haas was replaced by Nowak for (understandable) political reasons. Here, the difference between Haas & Nowak is small in any case. Do I find myself sticking up for Sir Roger for the first time ever?

Yes, it is so dodgy, especially regarding the tempo changes, or rather the lack of them, in the first movement of Haas's edition. It is Norrington's dogged adherence to the basic tempo in that movement which came in for particular criticism, and rightly so, to my ears. That is down to Haas. The addition of percussion at the climax in the Adagio, which Bruckner appears happily to have taken on board, is also given a miss by Norrington, otherwise, his would be rather higher on my list of favourites than it is. A rather late convert to the Haitink 1966 recording (I was very much in the Jochum camp when it came out), I found myself concurring with the final choice.

[By the way, I find the final paragraph of Benjamin Gunnar Cohrs's programme notes for the Norrington recording attracts 'reading between the lines'. It does not come over as an unqualified endorsement of Norrington's decisions.]

[Beef Oven!]

Regarding Ferney's post #174

The discussion format faces three problems:

The present one (AMcG adding nothing and taking much away from the discussion)

That's an AMcG problem, not a format problem.

Two presenters who agree with each other (in which case, why not just have a single presenter devoting more time to their choices?)

If they get to an agreement, they can do so by interesting discussion and exchange of ideas - this does happen in some walks of life!!

Two presenters who disagree with each other (in which case more time and attention might be focussed on their discussion, and the purpose of BaL - to help listeners decide which CDs they're going to add to their collection - gets obscured. If "expert" x recommends this recording, but "expert" Y rejects it as rubbish and prefers a recording that X thinks is a travesty, then we reach the black hole that is at the heart of BaL - no matter which version you buy, there will be many people who would call it the best ever, and many, many others who'll tell you you've bought a dud.)

Critique, discussion and an ensuing recommendation. They should be able to manage this service to the listener with 'disagreements' and fist-fights kept off-air.

Me? Neophobe that I am, on the Radio I prefer lectures to chatter, and AMcG's contributions are as welcome as a girlfriend bring her husband to the intimate candlelit dinner you invited her to. More like this, and CDR will become (yet) another R3 programme that I won't bother listening to.

That would be an unwanted outcome of any change in format, but programmes must be living breathing things that can develop over time and get new listeners, rather than focusing on us lot - age-demography is not on our side.

The 'lecture' approach won't do in this day and age. The days are gone, where the BBC can come on and say "now sit up and pay attention, over the next 45 minutes we're going to educate you and make you a better person".

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

Obviously with a new format, the excellent John Deathridge will need to adapt. He will know that things inevitably move on, even though we don't.

You're being unusually passé this weekend, BeefO - look to the future, say twenty years from now, when some bright young spark has the brilliant idea of replacing all those worn-out discussion panels with reviews given by individuals expressing their own opinions uninterrupted by anyone else.

[Beef Oven!]

You're being unusually passé this weekend, BeefO - look to the future, say twenty years from now, when some bright young spark has the brilliant idea of replacing all those worn-out discussion panels with reviews given by individuals expressing their own opinions uninterrupted by anyone else.

That's called nostalgia. It has little to do with looking to the future.

[ardcarp]

Many dislike the format whether or not AMcG is being a help or a hindrance. I certainly do not wish to join in any AMcG bashing; most of us surely recognise his terrific experience in a wide sphere of music recorded and otherwise. I can understand how, maybe, a new and slightly nervous reviewer might be helped along for his/her first outing on BAL. But this should IMO be the exception, and for this reason. It's a long programme and if all we hear is AMcG's voice and presentation style it becomes too much of a good thing. Having a 45 minute break with someone else's voice really is [structurally] a Good Thing. BTW I did think that Deathridge was getting a bit testy with AMcG yesterday, and I am certain that his review would have swung along better as a solo venture.

But, whatever, Happy Christmas Andrew. We love you really.

[Roehre]

Yes, it is so dodgy, especially regarding the tempo changes, or rather the lack of them, in the first movement of Haas's edition. It is Norrington's dogged adherence to the basic tempo in that movement ....

It's exactly this what Jochum according to his essay on the symphonies is doing in his DGG/BPO acount, though he is using the Nowak edition, as is documented e.g. in the Jochum-essay and an essay by Nowak which are included in the quite extensive booklet included in the DGG 1973 Bruckner 9 symphonies set (12LPs 2720.047) and also in the 1975 11LP-set DGG 2740.136.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

That's called nostalgia.

Oh no it isn't.

It has little to do with looking to the future.

Oh yes it has.

[Beef Oven!]

Something I wanted to ask yesterday, but I didn't - what have the audience numbers been for Bal?CDR over the last 5 or 10 years?

Can anyone provide that information?

[amateur51]

Something I wanted to ask yesterday, but I didn't - what have the audience numbers been for Bal?CDR over the last 5 or 10 years?

Can anyone provide that information?

I doubt that anyone can

[gurnemanz]

The 'lecture' approach won't do in this day and age. The days are gone, where the BBC can come on and say "now sit up and pay attention, over the next 45 minutes we're going to educate you and make you a better person".

For me the BaL review is not really a lecture, just because it is one person talking for 45 minutes, and because it is probably advisable to pay attention if you wish to get anything out of it and some of it might be educational. (Neither is the BaL review ever, as strictly defined, an "essay".) I have not ever been greatly aware of a reviewer aiming to make me a better person (my wife's tried that and failed over the last 42 years). John Deathridge simply stated at the the beginning that he had listened to over 50 recordings (something which his superfluous partner had presumably not done) and that his aim was to report back for our benefit on those which that had interested him.

[verismissimo]

... Me? Neophobe that I am....

Neophobe? Not our ferney...

[mathias broucek]

Interesting that I like the performances that "switch off" for the last two movements. Because I myself tend to mentally switch off after the Adagio.

One thing that wasn't mentioned (IIRC) was seating. I was listening to Haitink's 8th and there are huge advantages to having left-right fiddles which many otherwise good Brucknerians don't.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

Neophobe? Not our ferney...

[Nick Armstrong]

Fascinating to go through at one sitting the "hoo ha" above (I always delay reading the thread after Friday night until after listening to the BAL in question which I did earlier). A lot to read this time!

The flaw in the format is that if you have a generalist presenter talking with the 'specialist' who's done all the listening, that is always going to erode the time the latter has for conveying the fruits of his or her work and the extracts selected as examples. The generalist is highly unlikely to add anything of much use save a personal opinion or two. It's a waste of already limited time. That's not a comment about these two individuals' performance.

But the format flaw was highlighted in this BAL (I regret to say as I like AMcG) by

AMcG's inane and largely pointless interjections

They were really almost comically pointless - however the programme was saved by Deathridge's doughty ploughing on and as far as possible ignoring or - quite rightly - talking across AMcG's comments which indeed

added precisely nothing - they largely consisted of repetition or stating the bleedin' obvious - indeed given his egregious error (so much for "live") they detracted.

- yes! That nonsense about the BPO / Karajan from AMcG showed up the pointless fakery of the whole 'chat' thing. AMcG obviously hadn't taken on board what JD was talking about; and Deathridge wasn't actually listening to what AMcG was saying - the latter mentioned the 'bird's wing in snow' cover which quite obviously wasn't the recording JD had introduced but JD didn't engage with it and went on talking about the VPO

BUT! Like LMP and others towards the latter part of this thread, and despite all the silly chat aspect, I got a lot out of this BAL thanks solely to JD (bar the odd dodgy sweeping statement). As the whole thing was 59 minutes, ignoring AMcG gave one probably 45 minutes of BAL 'proper'...

I much enjoyed what Deathridge had to say; McGregor added nothing and got in the way.

This work, and Deathridge, wd have been so much better served by an "Interpretations on Record" approach.

Good to be reminded how interesting the Eisler chamber version is - I must listen to it again.

Yes! And I'm listening to the chamber version on MDG as I type - it was the real revelation to me and I've downloaded it instantly! Absolutely fascinating and beautiful. The climax of the slow movement doesn't work though, for me... you just need the big band ! But the last two movements are dazzling http://www.amazon.co.uk/Bruckner-Sym...emble+bruckner

The first 15 minutes proved to be a freakshow, devoted as it was to the contributions of Norrington and Celibidache, only to alight on Von Karajan.

The Todger Norrington version sounded as if it was played on kazoos after the Celibidache, I thought!!

But the Celi version held me spellbound... not sure I could take all 90 minutes, but I'm tempted to try!

And I thought the Schuricht extract sounded WONDERFUL... seductive, echt... - another temptation, on Testament!

I have the '78 Haitink but do fancy getting the recommended '60s one.

And at last, I find some vindication for the feeling I've had since first hearing Bruckner 30 years ago - that the massive, marmoreal style of performance is not 'right' for this music. I've always leant towards the Böhm/Haitink/Tennstedt approach - and enjoyed hearing it argued for.