BaL 27.01.24 - Mozart: String Quintet no. 3 in C (K.515)

[Master Jacques]

As an independent reader I think MJ’s final comments were not directed at you but at other unnamed BAL reviewers.

Just to confirm, that was precisely what I intended to convey. There was no thought of any ad hominem sideswipe at Barbirollians, in expressing my contrary opinion over Roger Parker's qualifications for the Mozart BaL job. I am sorry if it read differently to him, as I value his posts.

[silvestrione]

I hope you don’t . As an independent reader I think MJ’s final comments were not directed at you but at other unnamed BAL reviewers, As it happens I find your opinions just as valuable as most of those on BAL , if not more so , but that could just be because I usually agree with them. On the wider question I find the whole question of changing performance styles so well worn it’s become boring. What matters is the musical integrity of the performance not whether it’s faster than a sixties performance or played with less vibrato.

Gosh, really? I thought the wide divergence of styles fascinating...
And I think your last sentence restates something like what was Roger Parker's conclusion?

I agree with Barbirollians that the 'baroque knitting' was a false note (in, for me, an otherwise intriguing BAL.)

[Master Jacques]

Gosh, really? I thought the wide divergence of styles fascinating...
And I think your last sentence restates something like what was Roger Parker's conclusion?

I agree that - despite BaL's inevitable bias towards shiny, fluffy new releases (when if ever was this not the case?) - Roger Parker took care not to judge one epoch over another, and stuck to matters of whether it worked or not, and if so, how. Refreshingly, I didn't get any sense of presentism.

Yet I sympathise with what I think Ein Heldenleben is getting at. Poorer reviewers too easily slip into puerile lectures about how different musical manners were in the 1950s, and how far we've "progressed" since.

[Ein Heldenleben]

Gosh, really? I thought the wide divergence of styles fascinating...
And I think your last sentence restates something like what was Roger Parker's conclusion?

I agree with Barbirollians that the 'baroque knitting' was a false note (in, for me, an otherwise intriguing BAL.)

Actually I didn’t find RP’s analysis boring at all. But he’s a very engaging reviewer all round really and refreshingly undogmatic.

[Master Jacques]

But he’s a very engaging reviewer all round really and refreshingly undogmatic.

"Undogmatic" is right. For me, Roger Parker has a some of J. B. Steane's peerless ability to describe what a performer is trying to do, rather than launching straight into what's right or wrong about it. He evaluates the range of interpretations by whether they work or not, on their own terms.

[HighlandDougie]

despite BaL's inevitable bias towards shiny, fluffy new releases (when if ever was this not the case?) - .

Hmm, I'd be interested to see what evidence there is for such a bold statement. In the case of the Mozart, the Quatuor Ébène may be, "shiny (and) fluffy" - whatever that means - a view with which I rather disagree - but it's a pretty fine performance.

[pastoralguy]

Hmm, I'd be interested to see what evidence there is for such a bold statement. In the case of the Mozart, the Quatuor Ébène may be, "shiny (and) fluffy" - whatever that means - a view with which I rather disagree - but it's a pretty fine performance.

Probably my most played cd from last year. I gave three copies as Christmas presents.

[Master Jacques]

Hmm, I'd be interested to see what evidence there is for such a bold statement. In the case of the Mozart, the Quatuor Ébène may be, "shiny (and) fluffy" - whatever that means - a view with which I rather disagree - but it's a pretty fine performance.

We don't need to go back further than the BaL on the Tchaikovsky Violin Concerto (Professor Mival) for an overt statement of presentism. "Recent recordings only". At least he was out in the open: but in "the good old days" the same tendency to valorise "fine, new recordings" at the expense of older ones was around. It's human nature, or at least critic's nature (if that's the same thing!)

[Master Jacques]

I’m not sure that one example - the Tchaikovsky VC - constitutes a weight of evidence but, hey, à chacon son goût, prejudice-wise. And, “valorise”, is, alas, a word new to me.

I can't let the word "prejudice" pass, HighlandDougie. The tendency has been a constant trait in media reviewing for a century, since Gramophone started up. It's rare for someone to be as honest about it as Mival; but that was by no means a one-off, as so many Forum posts in the BaL thread along the lines of "why on earth didn't they at least mention the 1952 Reiner" (or whatever) testifies. They didn't mention Reiner (or whatever), because they were using the space - in some cases, encouraged to use the space, c.f. Edward Seckerson's brief inclusion of Lise Davidsen's Four Last Songs, which he clearly didn't think very much of - to include last year's recording from Herr X or Ms Y.

Since my early teens, when I first heard Ted Greenfield hyping many new releases as "definitive", "finest recording", "new benchmark" et al. I've been wary of the way reviewers have a (human) propensity to valorise (or 'big up', if you prefer!) newer releases over older ones. Even then, I'd take his encomiums with a good pinch of salt. We soon learn to trust some critics better than others.

Presentism - forgivably, when new product is continually flooding an old market - is why so many excellent performances end up forgotten. To be fair, without it, who would bother to record the standard classics, when there are already so very many marvellous versions to choose from? That's one reason why there are hardly any studio recordings of opera these days: in nearly all cases, they'd be hard put to compete with the classic versions, so the expense would be suicidal. (Media releases of "live", or "as live" productions are of course a different proposition).

[akiralx]

There's nothing wrong with a fondness for old recordings but it's not wise to close off one's mind to new recordings ('I've never felt the need to look beyond the Reiner...')

Presumably the Grumiaux was shiny and fluffy when it first came out, but were listeners wrong to admire (or even hail) it at that point, and since?

[smittims]

No.

[smittims]

Well, Mandryka, I did listen to the Ensemble Fratres' performance of K515. The interpretation of 18th-century music in the 21st century is a huge subject and I don't want to start a polemic war, so I'll just say these are my own opinions:

I'm always willing to listen to a fresh, considered interpretation;

I didn't like it;

I don't think that's how Mozart would have wanted it to sound;

I understand that in a keenly competitive world where they're competing with umpteen much-loved , digitally-remastered old recordings they feel the need to say 'listen to us; we do it differently.' (I think this is what Il Giardino Armonico really meant with their Oiseau-Lyre recording of Handel's op. 6 concertos ); and finally,

I really do honestly believe that the Pro Arte Quartet with Alfred Hobday at Abbey Road in 1934 (It's on YouTube) were closer to what Mozart would have expected to hear than any more recent recordings .

If Bryn were here I'm sure he'd say that's 'laughable' , but then , it's only my opinion!

[Barbirollians]

Sorry to have misunderstood MJ . That's what comes of looking at the Forum when you can't sleep . I stand by my criticism of the reviewer and Mr McGregor . I am a fan of the Ebene Quartet by the way . That Mendessohn record of theirs is outstanding and I liked what I heard of their recording on Saturday.

[Master Jacques]

Sorry to have misunderstood MJ . That's what comes of looking at the Forum when you can't sleep . I stand by my criticism of the reviewer and Mr McGregor . I am a fan of the Ebene Quartet by the way . That Mendessohn record of theirs is outstanding and I liked what I heard of their recording on Saturday.

Please don't worry about it, Barbirollians. Disagreement is the salt of life, and what would the Forum be without it? The Ébène's Debussy/Fauré/Ravel CD is my "go-to" disc for the Debussy and Fauré quartets, and it's quite a shock to see how long they've been around (founded 1999).

[smittims]

Time flies. I didn't realise until recently that the Emerson Quartet had been going forty years. So their interpretations must be at least as mature as those of time-honoured quartets of the past.