BaL 8.06.19 - Janácek: Glagolitic Mass

[Bryn]

And IIRC that recording was the beginning of some tricky issues about editions. Wonder if they will be fully aired in the BaL. Or perhaps here?? . . .

I tuned in a little late but caught the end of the discussion of the 1984 Mackerras. I don't recall his restoration of a section of the Svet being mentioned.

[Pulcinella]

Waiting for mal's summary to appear.

Not quite as bad a twofer as feared, but certainly more information and background gleaned from this thread than we were given this morning.

Happy with the versions I've got (and can stream).
Looking forward to Proms opening night (in the company of a fellow forumite and his wife, who have invited us to visit them for the weekend).

[antongould]

“This morning's BAL has reached an all-time low. Reviewer seems to be a twelve-year-old with verbal diarrhoea.”
From our Facebook offshoot ......

[Mal]

Top considerations in the programme:

Ancerl - Czech Philharmonic Orchestra, Karel Ancerl, 1963
Belo - Czech Philharmonic Orchestra, Jirí Belohlávek, 2018
MackI - Czech Philharmonic Orchestra, Sir Charles Mackerras, 1984
MackII - Danish National Radio Symphony Orchestra, Sir Charles Mackerras, 1994

There were a few others considered, but I had trouble deciphering the Czech names, and as they didn't reach the "top four" I gave up...

Introduction: Ancerl "rugged, honest, brutal, death, raucous, wild...". Belo, 55 years later, "very different... sheen... in check[hah!]... beautiful love... respect... benefits of modern technology..."

MackI 1984 kiere [wow!] "beautiful, smooth, gets to the bones, good for first timers, innocent enthusiasm", MackII Danish 1994 "pacy, different feeling"

Kyrie: Belo "has best soprano in all the recordings,... aethereal... beautiful depth of sound" [she's right! wow! Sound of an angel.]

Credo: tenor - MackI "pacing, depth, colour...", but Ancerl offers "greater depth" [in inferior early 60s sound...] 'almost acidic, exciting, shows it's age, unlike Belohlávek released last year'.

Sanctus - Belo "best balance between singers". [Anyone betting against Bela winning this? Wow! Sorry Bela's strings just went deep, what a great sounding recording. Wow! That soprano.] "just listen how aetheral" Yes! Wow!

MackII "quite a different sound world, thrilling..." Ancerl "clarity and colour".

Agnus dei: "Who keeps the mysterious tension going?... Mack84...love of the music...naturalness of choir"

Organ solo: more clips needed! Belo sounding good

Intrada: Belo 'all the advantages of a modern recording'

Ancerl wins! 'not a perfect recording, not the finest performance'... AMcG likes all the advantages of a modern recording :). So do I to be honest, on this evidence, Belohlávek goes on my buy list.

[Master Jacques]

Interesting she still chose the Ancerl, despite clear signs of disgruntlement from AMcG.

The Belohlávek is too smooth, groomed and manicured - the composer wanted a sense of strain, of musicians playing at their limit or slightly beyond. And this was not mentioned: the fact that the organ movement in this 2018 issue was ported in from a different venue (as is obvious from the sudden change in sonic perspective) makes it sound a constructed rather than "real" performance.

I'm glad the reviewer had the courage to stick with the old favourite, which really hasn't been bettered, though Netopil (unmentioned?) runs it close, and is the best recent version in my experience.

[Bryn]

I will listen from start, later, but I don't think the matter of editions was particularly well covered. Just which edition did the Svarovsky use, for instance. Having tuned in a little late, I may have missed a reference to the Belohlavec being of the critical edition of the 1927 version. While Ancerl reigns supreme regarding the originally published 1928 edition (i.e. before the far more recent work on critical editions of both the 1927 and final 1928 versions) I do think clear pointers should have been given to recordings reflecting these recent tidying ups of the those 1927 and 1928 versions.

Oh, and the live Mackerras on Supraphon DVD of the Wingfield edition of the 1927 version seems not to have been mentioned at all (though there are some infelicities born of its 'live' aspect).

[teamsaint]

One particular gripe *. about BaL is choosing to highlight recordings without actually playing an excerpt.

Imagine the DON’s reaction.......


* I have others, but will refrain.........

[edashtav]

She's good. If only she hadn't been confined to a mere handful of recordings. She was obviously frustrated not to be allowed to play anything from the marvellous 1953 Bakala version - it sounded as if she'd been told not to, on grounds that the sound wasn't great.

With so few recordings being illustrated, there is no chance for listeners to make their own minds up, which used to be the point of BaL.

Yes, EMT was good. She exuded enthusiasm and conversed in a natural manner that minimised the structural issues. However, the concentration on a subset of recordings, did undermine the authority of the final recommendation.

[Mal]

Interesting she still chose the Ancerl, despite clear signs of disgruntlement from AMcG.

The Belohlávek is too smooth, groomed and manicured - the composer wanted a sense of strain, of musicians playing at their limit or slightly beyond. And this was not mentioned: the fact that the organ movement in this 2018 issue was ported in from a different venue (as is obvious from the sudden change in sonic perspective) makes it sound a constructed rather than "real" performance.

I'm glad the reviewer had the courage to stick with the old favourite, which really hasn't been bettered, though Netopil (unmentioned?) runs it close, and is the best recent version in my experience.

But I loved the soprano, the aethereal quality, and modern sound of the Belohlávek. That said wildness, also has its attractions. Ancerl is already on my "must buy" list as it's on the same disc as his Taras Bulba! So looks like I'll have to get both...

[Bryn]

But I loved the soprano, the aethereal quality, and modern sound of the Belohlávek. That said wildness, also has its attractions. Ancerl is already on my "must buy" list as it's on the same disc as his Taras Bulba! So looks like I'll have to get both...

I'm adding the Svarovsky, which appears to be of the Wingfield edition but with the Intrada at the end only.

[Pulcinella]

But I loved the soprano, the aethereal quality, and modern sound of the Belohlávek. That said wildness, also has its attractions. Ancerl is already on my "must buy" list as it's on the same disc as his Taras Bulba! So looks like I'll have to get both...

You won't regret it!
I wonder if the Ancerl Gold edition is any different (remastered?) from the Crystal Collection incarnation I have (11 0609 2, copyright 1988).

https://www.discogs.com/Janáček-Czech-Philharmonic-Chorus-Czech-Philharmonic-Orchestra-Karel-Ančerl-Glagolitic-Mass-Taras/release/7685478

[Bryn]

You won't regret it!
I wonder if the Ancerl Gold edition is any different (remastered?) from the Crystal Collection incarnation I have (11 0609 2, copyright 1988).

It is somewhat clearer in texture. I certainly do not regret 'upgrading'. That said, the Supraphon LP is one I will not be passing on to a charity shop. Purchased soon after its UK release, it was just such a revelation. Previously I had only heard the Sinfonietta and the Concertino, the latter only because it was coupled with a recording of Bartok's Sonata for 2 Pianos and Percussion. That too came as quite a shock (in a very good way).

[Mal]

It has fared well on CD - I like Ancerl and Kempe but will be interested in the Belohlavec - it must have been one of his last recordings with the CPO before his untimely death.

Untimely? 71 isn't a bad innings. If I make the classical three score and ten I'll be happy... if I'm anything... Gramophone on the CD:

"These recordings, made with his beloved Czech Philharmonic in Prague’s Rudolfinum, date from October 2013 to February 2017, just three months before he died."

Doesn't say exactly when the Glagolitic Mass was recorded.

"... Glagolitic Mass, given an expansive performance of great depth. Like Tomáš Netopil in his Prague RSO account on Supraphon, Bělohlávek uses the 1927 version of the score prepared by Jiří Zahrádka, which differs slightly from Paul Wingfield’s original version favoured by Charles Mackerras. Bělohlávek takes a weightier approach than Netopil, rounded brass satisfyingly rich. The Prague Philharmonic Choir (repeating their services for Supraphon) are terrific but the soloists are mixed. The bass lacks the necessary power but Hibla Gerzmava soars in the soprano lines and the robust tenor of Stuart Neill has its impressive moments. Aleš Bárta dashes off the eccentric organ solo before the closing Intrada with delicious relish..."

https://www.gramophone.co.uk/review/jan%C3%A1%C4%8Dek-glagolitic-mass-b%C4%9Blohl%C3%A1vek

[Master Jacques]

You won't regret it!
I wonder if the Ancerl Gold edition is any different (remastered?) from the Crystal Collection incarnation I have (11 0609 2, copyright 1988).
https://www.discogs.com/Janáček-Czec...elease/7685478

It is different, and to my ears the Ancerl Gold issue is over-processed, though smoother and less edgy than the Crystal Collection (and other, early Supraphon CD issues). The lower strings in particular sound muffled and strange on the newer transfer.

I don't think Supraphon's engineers did too well, either with the Ancerl Gold or Talich collections, both of which represent regressions from the earlier transfers in audibly important ways.

[Pulcinella]

Untimely? 71 isn't a bad innings. If I make the classical three score and ten I'll be happy... if I'm anything... Gramophone on the CD:

"These recordings, made with his beloved Czech Philharmonic in Prague’s Rudolfinum, date from October 2013 to February 2017, just three months before he died."

Doesn't say exactly when the Glagolitic Mass was recorded.

"... Glagolitic Mass, given an expansive performance of great depth. Like Tomáš Netopil in his Prague RSO account on Supraphon, Bělohlávek uses the 1927 version of the score prepared by Jiří Zahrádka, which differs slightly from Paul Wingfield’s original version favoured by Charles Mackerras. Bělohlávek takes a weightier approach than Netopil, rounded brass satisfyingly rich. The Prague Philharmonic Choir (repeating their services for Supraphon) are terrific but the soloists are mixed. The bass lacks the necessary power but Hibla Gerzmava soars in the soprano lines and the robust tenor of Stuart Neill has its impressive moments. Aleš Bárta dashes off the eccentric organ solo before the closing Intrada with delicious relish..."

https://www.gramophone.co.uk/review/...Blohl%C3%A1vek

The Presto site does:
03-10-2013

https://www.prestomusic.com/classical/products/8470817--jana-ek-glagolitic-mass

PS: Mentioned in my post #23, but that was a while back.