BaL 6.06.15 - Nielsen: Symphony no. 3

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

As for that SFSO/Blomstedt... see my post #21! ("Ahead of your time", anyone? )...

Indeed - and by over a week:

I've always had a problem with Blomstedt's SFSO readings. Earlier this year I lived for a few weeks with the DRSO set, on the Japanese EMI Forte edition (no obvious evidence of remastering, but great sound anyway...).
Every time I compared the Espansiva I had a strong preference for the DRSO one - more spacious and atmospheric, greater warmth and affection in performance and sound (very obvious at the start of the slow movement).

I don't have Blomstedt's EMI recording of the Expansiva, but the coupling of 4 & 5 from that set I find much better performances than the SFSO "equivalents".

Plenty of excellent alternatives revealed today, too, I thought.

[verismissimo]

... And if I had one quibble, it was that I thought the "farmer with his plough" image for the last movement was overdone...

Agricultural metaphor by the siloful...

[Tony Halstead]

Agricultural metaphor by the siloful...

Yes. agreed, and furthermore I was a bit miffed that AM was so sniffy about the wonderfully 'agricultural' DRSO oboe player's tone in the haunting oboe tune near the start of the 3rd movement.
'Kazoo-like' it may be, but, what wonderful 'outdoor' character!

[gradus]

I rather liked the image of the danish farmer strolling his land but imagery aside, what astonishing and original music. Tom Service's programme on Nielsen which followed CDR was first rate too, absolutely fascinating and one to catch up with if you missed it.

[seabright]

The BAL reviewer mentioned Bernstein's vivid televised performance from 1965 with the Royal Danish Orchestra on You Tube. The conductor's entrance took place down quite a high flight of steps from the back of the platform ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d5sbcF7p0Pk

And two years later, Stokowski negotiated the same steps for his performance of Nielsen's 2nd Symphony with a different orchestra, the Danish Radio Symphony, in what seems to have been an equally electrifying performance ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jHC530IV4oI

[Barbirollians]

A wearisome BAL not only due to Mr Mellor's dogmatic approach but his presenting style - the end of every sentence heavily emphasised.

At least in his Gramophone piece he admits they the Danish critics were baffled by his attack on the SFSO/Blomstedt account . I remain of the view that it is outstanding - its fluency appears to be to some its most objectionable feature . The revisionism with which it now is received is unsurprising as is the sheep like approach of some on this forum to the views of some of its most august members

[jayne lee wilson]

I've just now hit the buy button for the concertos (24/88.2 downloads from Dacapo, where it's – slightly – cheaper than Qobuz or eClassical). I'm looking forward to a good old listen very shortly.

Gilbert and the NYPO began their recent European tour here in Dublin and were very impressive (though a bit ragged in places in Ravel's Valses nobles et sentimentales). Salonen's Nyx, the concert opener, was the surprise star of the evening. I haven't heard any word of where Alan Gilbert will go when his tenure ends. Have you?

No, no idea... sorry Jimbo, I said the "concertos disc", but I got the 24/192 download from Qobuz (for 84 pence more than the da capo 88.2!)...

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

The revisionism with which it now is received is unsurprising as is the sheep like approach of some on this forum to the views of some of its most august members

Oi! I'm "ahead of my time", remember?


I'm a september member.


And for somebody who slavishly follows the opinions of the "Penguin Guide" to describe others as "sheep-like" (even without a hyphen) is skating on rather thin ice.


Baaaa, to you, sir - baaaa!

[LeMartinPecheur]

A wearisome BAL not only due to Mr Mellor's dogmatic approach but his presenting style - the end of every sentence heavily emphasised.

At least in his Gramophone piece he admits they the Danish critics were baffled by his attack on the SFSO/Blomstedt account . I remain of the view that it is outstanding - its fluency appears to be to some its most objectionable feature . The revisionism with which it now is received is unsurprising as is the sheep like approach of some on this forum to the views of some of its most august members

I disagree with you barbs! I got to know Nielsen 3 from the Schmidt recording (back before CD!) which is certainly tatty in places but very alive and exciting. Then I got the Decca Blomstedt set. It is certainly better played. It is also I would say more integrated and therefore less differentiated. To put it another way B seems to be trying to make it all join fairly smoothly into one big picture, which is very arguably what symphonic form at root is about - "only connect" etc etc.


But as Mellor stressed, there are pressures in Nielsen, C20 music and I'd say people in general that go against too much tidy integration (N's peasant roots against city waltzers, the obvious signs that tonality now needed special pleading or at least recognition in the music that it was now under severe threat/strain). So there's a strong case for stressing the discontinuities, the disconnections and disruptions, as well as the connections. I side with Mellor in thinking Blomstedt to be at one end of a spectrum. Maybe Schmidt is at the other(?) though of course the circ's of his recording sessions probably added to the rough-edged, 'This is exciting stuff, let's just do it' feel of those sessions (IMHO of course).

You call this 'revisionism', others might call it a justified search for other, maybe deeper possibilities. But at least, valid alternatives. Nobody has to like them - if you like Blomstedt then you do, end of. (Maybe your use of the word 'fluency' to characterise B's approach and your reasons for liking it suggests I'm on the right track) But aren't you steering just a teeny bit too close to saying 'SFSO/Blomstedt is the best because everybody says so. If you disagree you're just wrong"?

De gustibus non est disputandum etc etc but maybe the quasi-mathematical integration/differentiation polarity is a fruitful one to explore further, maybe on another thread?

[Barbirollians]

I disagree with you barbs! I got to know Nielsen 3 from the Schmidt recording (back before CD!) which is certainly tatty in places but very alive and exciting. Then I got the Decca Blomstedt set. It is certainly better played. It is also I would say more integrated and therefore less differentiated. To put it another way B seems to be trying to make it all join fairly smoothly into one big picture, which is very arguably what symphonic form at root is about - "only connect" etc etc.


But as Mellor stressed, there are pressures in Nielsen, C20 music and I'd say people in general that go against too much tidy integration (N's peasant roots against city waltzers, the obvious signs that tonality now needed special pleading or at least recognition in the music that it was now under severe threat/strain). So there's a strong case for stressing the discontinuities, the disconnections and disruptions, as well as the connections. I side with Mellor in thinking Blomstedt to be at one end of a spectrum. Maybe Schmidt is at the other(?) though of course the circ's of his recording sessions probably added to the rough-edged, 'This is exciting stuff, let's just do it' feel of those sessions (IMHO of course).

You call this 'revisionism', others might call it a justified search for other, maybe deeper possibilities. But at least, valid alternatives. Nobody has to like them - if you like Blomstedt then you do, end of. (Maybe your use of the word 'fluency' to characterise B's approach and your reasons for liking it suggests I'm on the right track) But aren't you steering just a teeny bit too close to saying 'SFSO/Blomstedt is the best because everybody says so. If you disagree you're just wrong"?

De gustibus non est disputandum etc etc but maybe the quasi-mathematical integration/differentiation polarity is a fruitful one to explore further, maybe on another thread?

Possibly but there often seems to be a great deal of bandwagon jumping on this forum when one person with a musical background on here attacks a renowned recording lots of others jump on the bandwagon.

Fhgl i do not have a penguin guide ! I do have my own ears though .

[teamsaint]

I got to know Nielsen 3 from the Schmidt recording (back before CD!) which is certainly tatty in places but very alive and exciting. Then I got the Decca Blomstedt set. It is certainly better played. It is also I would say more integrated and therefore less differentiated. To put it another way B seems to be trying to make it all join fairly smoothly into one big picture, which is very arguably what symphonic form at root is about - "only connect" etc etc.


But as Mellor stressed, there are pressures in Nielsen, C20 music and I'd say people in general that go against too much tidy integration (N's peasant roots against city waltzers, the obvious signs that tonality now needed special pleading or at least recognition in the music that it was now under severe threat/strain). So there's a strong case for stressing the discontinuities, the disconnections and disruptions, as well as the connections. I side with Mellor in thinking Blomstedt to be at one end of a spectrum. Maybe Schmidt is at the other(?) though of course the circ's of his recording sessions probably added to the rough-edged, 'This is exciting stuff, let's just do it' feel of those sessions (IMHO of course).

You call this 'revisionism', others might call it a justified search for other, maybe deeper possibilities. But at least, valid alternatives. Nobody has to like them - if you like Blomstedt then you do, end of. (Maybe your use of the word 'fluency' to characterise B's approach and your reasons for liking it suggests I'm on the right track) But aren't you steering just a teeny bit too close to saying 'SFSO/Blomstedt is the best because everybody says so. If you disagree you're just wrong"?

De gustibus non est disputandum etc etc but maybe the quasi-mathematical integration/differentiation polarity is a fruitful one to explore further, maybe on another thread?

I find this kind of approach, which stresses the value of various critical approaches rather than trying to place one kind of approach over another, very helpful, and one that resonates with me.

Interesting thoughts about about discontinuities, which feels very post structuralist, seeing the conductor as critic rather than interpreter, and which I hope to use when listening to a couple of versions, including the Blomstedt.
Great post, LMP.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

Possibly but there often seems to be a great deal of bandwagon jumping on this forum when one person with a musical background on here attacks a renowned recording lots of others jump on the bandwagon.

I don't think the facts support this. Jayne first mentioned her reservations about the Blomstedt/SFSO recordings over a week ago (and, IIRC - and sincere apologies if I've got this wrong - she does not have "a Musical background", at least of the sort I think you mean here). Nobody rushed to agree with that. Visnick mentioned that AM had criticized the Blomstedt/SFSO performance, so I mentioned (in what I'd intended to be a mildly humorous tone - hence the "devil:") my relief that somebody else shared my reservations about that set - going against the prevailing trend of everybody I know (I had overlooked jlw's comment; my apologies) who seemed to think that they were the bee's knees and the dog's b one.

And I think that's it. Three posts - not so much a "bandwagon", and I'm way past the age when I could "jump" on one even if it stopped for me and put down a ladder. You and rfg have spoken in Blomstedt/SFSO's defence. Is that also a bandwagon?

I don't get much from the later Blomstedt set; I never have - that's not "revisionism". Three people don't make a bandwagon, nor can they be described as "lots". Saying I don't like something is hardly an "attack" - and certainly not one that will disturb Mr Blomstedt's sheep ... errr, "sleep" (and he can always count his royalties cheques if it does).

Fhgl i do not have a penguin guide ! I do have my own ears though .

Woolly comment, shorn of relevance - do these ears always lead you to describe everybody whose opinions disagree with yours as "sheep". Baaaa!

[Beef Oven!]

I thought it was a very good Bal, especially in terms of helping me get my ears around the music. It may not have hit the spot with those types that are obsessed with cd recordings rather than music.

I see no evidence of band wagon jumping. I had a good steer a few months ago from members, towards Schmidt, because I had never really enjoyed the SFSO Blomstedt recordings that I bought around the time of attending Rattle's performance of the Nielsen symphonies with the CBSO around 24 years ago (?). Never understood why. Rattle's concerts burned into my brain and the Decca CDs did not support my experience (even though I never realised).

I recently bought Blomstedt's DRSO EMI cycle, which I enjoy more than the SFSO. Also picked up Berglund's RDO set because at £7.99 it would have been churlish not to (only listened to 2 & 3 and it hasn't ignited).

With a smattering of Horenstein, Rattle, Karajan and Dudamel in various symphonies, the fire kept burning. Looking forward to the Chung that I ordered.

I have come to the conclusion that the SFSO set that I bought years ago has inhibited my Nielsen experience. Can't cry over spilled milk!

[rauschwerk]

If I'd been doing yesterday's BaL and noticed that my predecessors had awarded Blomstedt the palm for symphonies 4 and 6, I might well have bent over backwards to find reasons not to choose him for No.3!

[LeMartinPecheur]

If I'd been doing yesterday's BaL and noticed that my predecessors had awarded Blomstedt the palm for symphonies 4 and 6, I might well have bent over backwards to find reasons not to choose him for No.3!

Rauschwerk: do you mean that Blomstedt hasn't done it for you in 4 & 6, or that you'd be feeling that you as reviewer and we as audience needed a change?

[Nearly put a winkeye there, but no, it's a serious question. For many years I never went much for complete cycles, preferring variety and the thrill of the chase for THE definite best version of each symph, sonata, 4tet individually (definite winkeye here ) Also I do prefer variety over sameness in most things in life... We're all different, Gawd bless us!]