BaL 28.03.15 - Elgar: Symphony no. 2 in E flat

[Alison]

At least we have our own online accompanying thread each week which broadens the discussion considerably.

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

The only information of real interest I gained from yesterday was the study that Mackerras made of Elgar's own recordings so that some of the stylistic detail could be incorporated into his own recording with the RPO, particularly the extensive use of portamento. The Mackerras recording does sound like a genuinely historically informed performance and, unlike the vast majority of HIPP recordings, informed by actual listening to recordings made by the composer. The reviewer seemed pretty dismissive about the composer's recordings as perhaps others have been, put off by the quality of recording and orchestra, but would we really be dismissive if for instance Mahler had lived long enough to put down a recording of one of his symphonies however bad the recording quality?

I don't think the use of portamento should necessarily be considered as part of the music. It was just the way they happened to play during some of Elgar's life. Listen to the composer's early acoustic recording of "Nimrod", and it sounds as though it's being played on one string/one finger violins. But on the later electrical reading, the style of playing had changed and the use of portamento was much reduced. Had the composer wanted the slippery, sliding style, he would have asked for it.

[aeolium]

I don't think the use of portamento should necessarily be considered as part of the music. It was just the way they happened to play during some of Elgar's life. Listen to the composer's early acoustic recording of "Nimrod", and it sounds as though it's being played on one string/one finger violins. But on the later electrical reading, the style of playing had changed and the use of portamento was much reduced. Had the composer wanted the slippery, sliding style, he would have asked for it.

I agree, and I wouldn't expect modern conductors to be restricted by the changing performance styles of that period, though obviously Mackerras thought it worth trying to replicate some of that period style to the extent of incorporating over 500 instances of portamento. And as for the Enigma Variations, Elgar's 1926 recording has 18 slides in the theme alone, even though he did not generally indicate portamento in the score. And there are also significant differences in the amount of vibrato between earlier and later recordings. I suppose it shows how exceptionally difficult it is to come to precise conclusions about period performance style even when we have the audible evidence of the composer's own recordings, let alone when we do not.

[Nick Armstrong]

If memory serves, and assuming I'm not mistaken, the Downes / BBC PO Naxos CD was top choice the last time Elgar 2 was surveyed on BAL. This time it didn't even get a mention! I am happy to be corrected however.

It may have been the last time but one, seabright... Last time (assuming 2005 was the last time) this was the 'result':

Saturday 15 October 2005 9:00-13:00 (Radio 3)

Building a Library:

Elgar: Symphony No.2 in E flat, Op.63
Reviewer - David Nice

First Choice:
BBC Symphony Orchestra, Sir Adrian Boult (conductor)
(Recorded 1944; c/w Prelude (The Dream of Gerontius); Sospiri, Op.70)
BEULAH 3PD15 (CD) (mono) (CD, mid-price)
Order Direct from BEULAH www.eavb.co.uk

Budget Price Choice:
London Symphony Orchestra, Sir Colin Davis (conductor)
(Recorded Live at the Barbican 2001)
LSO LIVE LSO0018 (CD, budget)
OR
c/w Symphonies Nos.1&3 elaborated by Anthony Payne
LSO LIVE LSO0072 (3-CD, budget)

[gradus]

I think it was the Naxos Elgar 1st that was a BAL recommendation - Hurst and the BBC Phil and very fine it is.

[Nick Armstrong]

I think it was the Naxos Elgar 1st that was a BAL recommendation - Hurst and the BBC Phil and very fine it is.

That's for definite. I bought it on the strength. One of about a dozen very fine Elgar 1s !!

[verismissimo]

I don't think the use of portamento should necessarily be considered as part of the music. It was just the way they happened to play during some of Elgar's life...

This is how I'd express that thought:

I think the use of portamento should necessarily be considered as part of the music. It was precisely the way they played during most of Elgar's life...

though for various reasons it became deeply unfashionable between his acoustic recordings and the arrival of the microphone. When I was young, portamento seemed to be treated quite usually with disdain, as though it was completely tasteless.

Even now, after half a century and more of HIPP research and performance, players and conductors seem reluctant to use it except sparingly.

Curious after RM's disclosure re the Mackerras research, I have just ordered the Mackerras recordings. I wonder if the playing was a bit scrappy (to paraphrase RM) because the players were unused to it and even reluctant. You don't get over a lifetime of brainwashing in a couple of days.

[cincinnatus]

If memory serves, and assuming I'm not mistaken, the Downes / BBC PO Naxos CD was top choice the last time Elgar 2 was surveyed on BAL. This time it didn't even get a mention! I am happy to be corrected however.

According to the BAL website David Nice chose Boult's 1944 recording with the BBCSO on Beulah when he did BAL in Oct 2005. His budget choice was Colin Davis and the LSO on LSO Live.

Whoops! My wife had me hanging some curtains between typing this post and sending it and I hadn't noticed your post, Caliban.

[Nick Armstrong]

According to the BAL website David Nice chose Boult's 1944 recording with the BBCSO on Beulah when he did BAL in Oct 2005. His budget choice was Colin Davis and the LSO on LSO Live.

Whoops! My wife had me hanging some curtains between typing this post and sending it and I hadn't noticed your post, Caliban.

I am delighted to learn you have gained some brownie points in Mrs cincinnatus's little book!

[BBMmk2]

At least we have our own online accompanying thread each week which broadens the discussion considerably.

Very true, Alison, although I think it has become overburdened sometimes.

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

This is how I'd express that thought:

I think the use of portamento should necessarily be considered as part of the music. It was precisely the way they played during most of Elgar's life...

though for various reasons it became deeply unfashionable between his acoustic recordings and the arrival of the microphone. When I was young, portamento seemed to be treated quite usually with disdain, as though it was completely tasteless.

Even now, after half a century and more of HIPP research and performance, players and conductors seem reluctant to use it except sparingly.

Curious after RM's disclosure re the Mackerras research, I have just ordered the Mackerras recordings. I wonder if the playing was a bit scrappy (to paraphrase RM) because the players were unused to it and even reluctant. You don't get over a lifetime of brainwashing in a couple of days.

There's an interesting article by Robert Philip in "Early Music (No. 84) relating to Elgar's performance style.

http://em.oxfordjournals.org/content/12/4/481.full.pdf

It appears you have to pay for it, but it accompanies The EMI Elgar Edition Volume 2, if you have that.
R.P. concludes:
"On the contrary, any attempt to reconstruct the style of the 1920s would not only be doomed to failure, for the reasons I have given, but would also be essentially phoney. The recordings themselves reinforce the point that there is more to true authenticity than the reproduction of a historical style. That point is brought into sharp focus by Elgar, whose recordings do not just teach us an authentic style, in the usual narrow sense, but also alert us to the fact that this style is inseparable from a much more important kind of authenticity: the experience of a composer working with orchestras whose virtues and limitations and habits were an integral part of his own musical world. That kind of authenticity cannot be reproduced, and mere imitation is no substitute for it."

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

Mr Philip's remarks seem a little severe as a guide to using portamento (and knowing the difference between portamento and glissando). Getting used to Baroque bowing in the 1950s might have seemed equally "doomed to failure [and] essentially phoney" - but performers are wonderful people: give them experience and encouragement and they'll find it!

[EdgeleyRob]

This is how I'd express that thought:

I think the use of portamento should necessarily be considered as part of the music. It was precisely the way they played during most of Elgar's life...

though for various reasons it became deeply unfashionable between his acoustic recordings and the arrival of the microphone. When I was young, portamento seemed to be treated quite usually with disdain, as though it was completely tasteless.

Even now, after half a century and more of HIPP research and performance, players and conductors seem reluctant to use it except sparingly.

Curious after RM's disclosure re the Mackerras research, I have just ordered the Mackerras recordings. I wonder if the playing was a bit scrappy (to paraphrase RM) because the players were unused to it and even reluctant. You don't get over a lifetime of brainwashing in a couple of days.

I'd love to know your thoughts when you get to hear it verismissimo.
I don't find the playing scrappy at all.
Re the portamento,ok not to everyone's taste so therefore if we're looking for a 'winner' CM could probably not be the one.
It's still a valid and important view of this great work IMVHO,but maybe not the only one to have.

[LeMartinPecheur]

There's an interesting article by Robert Philip in "Early Music (No. 84) relating to Elgar's performance style.

http://em.oxfordjournals.org/content/12/4/481.full.pdf

It appears you have to pay for it, but it accompanies The EMI Elgar Edition Volume 2, if you have that.
R.P. concludes:
"On the contrary, any attempt to reconstruct the style of the 1920s would not only be doomed to failure, for the reasons I have given, but would also be essentially phoney. The recordings themselves reinforce the point that there is more to true authenticity than the reproduction of a historical style. That point is brought into sharp focus by Elgar, whose recordings do not just teach us an authentic style, in the usual narrow sense, but also alert us to the fact that this style is inseparable from a much more important kind of authenticity: the experience of a composer working with orchestras whose virtues and limitations and habits were an integral part of his own musical world. That kind of authenticity cannot be reproduced, and mere imitation is no substitute for it."

Does anyone know if EE said anything about the changes in string style that happened in his own lifetime? He himself was a good enough violinist to have had hopes of a solo career, so surely he must have had personal views about it? Did he ever say anything like "The LSO is a damn fine orchestra but I do miss the old portamantos", or "Damn good job that we've at last got rid of all that sloppy slide-y stuff'?

OK, I guess if it was anything this bald we'd all know about it (and so would Sir RN!), but are there any hints?

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

Mr Philip's remarks seem a little severe as a guide to using portamento (and knowing the difference between portamento and glissando). Getting used to Baroque bowing in the 1950s might have seemed equally "doomed to failure [and] essentially phoney" - but performers are wonderful people: give them experience and encouragement and they'll find it!

I do agree that Philips was being unduly pessimistic, though the fact that Elgar appeared not to worry about it does suggest he didn't think it of great importance.