BaL 4.01.20 - Elgar: Enigma Variations

[LMcD]

Time not to listen to BaL?

I've sometimes wondered what proportion of those listening to BaL are actually not looking for a recommended first or additional recording but merely tune in to see how the versions they already possess fare at the hands of the reviewer(s). The criticism of the failure to consider or even mention recordings by some conductors closely associated with Elgar over the years in the latest review is justified. This omission offered proof - were it needed - that once you tinker with the format there is bound to be a reduction in the musical content and the scope of the review, depriving the latter of a degree of historical context.

[gurnemanz]

I've sometimes wondered what proportion of those listening to BaL are actually not looking for a recommended first or additional recording but merely tune in to see how the versions they already possess fare at the hands of the reviewer(s). The criticism of the failure to consider or even mention recordings by some conductors closely associated with Elgar over the years in the latest review is justified, and offers proof - were it needed - that once you tinker with the format there is bound to be a reduction in the musical content and the scope of the review, depriving the latter of a degree of historical context.

I usually get something out the BaLs, even the more irksome twofers. The limitations of the format are obvious but comparison of different interpretations will mostly be of some interest. The versions I have are often not even mentioned let alone chosen, so to hear a review of them would not be a good reason to listen - there are plenty of other places to find reviews of specific recordings. I subscribed to Gramophone for decades and their reviews were often the reason why I bought a recording in the first place. I almost never buy the recommended BaL version and it is useful nowadays to able to listen on Spotify without committing.

I can be perverse. I am not actually a huge fan of Enigma and bought the Bernstein partly because of the bad reviews. I quite like it.

[Nimrod]

I've sometimes wondered what proportion of those listening to BaL are actually not looking for a recommended first or additional recording but merely tune in to see how the versions they already possess fare at the hands of the reviewer(s). The criticism of the failure to consider or even mention recordings by some conductors closely associated with Elgar over the years in the latest review is justified. This omission offered proof - were it needed - that once you tinker with the format there is bound to be a reduction in the musical content and the scope of the review, depriving the latter of a degree of historical context.

Well said!

[Master Jacques]

I've sometimes wondered what proportion of those listening to BaL are actually not looking for a recommended first or additional recording but merely tune in to see how the versions they already possess fare at the hands of the reviewer(s). The criticism of the failure to consider or even mention recordings by some conductors closely associated with Elgar over the years in the latest review is justified. This omission offered proof - were it needed - that once you tinker with the format there is bound to be a reduction in the musical content and the scope of the review, depriving the latter of a degree of historical context.

Yes indeed, historical context was always one of the key reasons for tuning in to BaL. The original rationale was not to save lazy listeners the trouble of listening to different versions for themselves, but (a) to help guide newcomers towards knowing what to listen for, while (b) offering new perspectives to those who (thought they) knew the work well. For both those aims, historical context - the progress of the work's recorded history - was a key.

The Enigma BaL has touched raw nerves, partly because it completely failed intelligent newcomers as well as old hands. By eschewing detailed, meaningful comparisons between different approaches and different eras, and reducing the message (more or less) to "wow, this is a fantastic piece which you'll really love if you give it a chance", it pandered (perhaps) to the very few who don't have the tools to do any active listening for themselves.

In reducing a fascinating discography - and hugely revealing timeline - to a small stock of gushing adjectives and gossipy anecdotes, the Enigma BaL served the work as badly as it served any potential listeners, young or old.

[Maclintick]

Yes indeed, historical context was always one of the key reasons for tuning in to BaL. The original rationale was not to save lazy listeners the trouble of listening to different versions for themselves, but (a) to help guide newcomers towards knowing what to listen for, while (b) offering new perspectives to those who (thought they) knew the work well.

Having just caught up with the podcast of this much-vilified BAL, and being in your category (b) of listeners, MJ, I found that Kate Kennedy did offer some interesting new perspectives. For instance, I was completely ignorant of the fact that August Jaeger had virtually bullied a reluctant EE into bloating his originally-conceived finale with 100 superfluous bars, augmented with organ ad lib, & turning it into the grandiloquent monster we all know and love. It's obvious that Jaeger's interventions produced a far more bombastic conclusion than the original, and it was fascinating to hear EE's first stab in Mark Elder's Hallé recording.

I have no quibble with KK's final choices, and thought her observation on Menuhin's take on Var.5 and its juxtaposition of levity and Tchaikovskian darkness very well made.

Incidentally, the complaint has often been made on these boards that BAL prioritises modern recordings over some well-established favourites. That certainly wasn't the case here (& yes, the final chords are distorted in the chosen LSO/Monteux version).

[Master Jacques]

Having just caught up with the podcast of this much-vilified BAL, and being in your category (b) of listeners, MJ, I found that Kate Kennedy did offer some interesting new perspectives. For instance, I was completely ignorant of the fact that August Jaeger had virtually bullied a reluctant EE into bloating his originally-conceived finale with 100 superfluous bars, augmented with organ ad lib, & turning it into the grandiloquent monster we all know and love. It's obvious that Jaeger's interventions produced a far more bombastic conclusion than the original, and it was fascinating to hear EE's first stab in Mark Elder's Hallé recording.

Agreed. As per my own first post on this thread, I'm with you in acknowledging some revealing aspects of the anecdotal substance of this particular BaL. The problem which has exercised many contributors is the degradation in style it seems to crystallise. And along with Old Oscar, I'd have to say that in matters of grave importance, style not sincerity is the vital thing.

[silvestrione]

I have just watched/listened to the DVD/Blueray Rattle/LSO version (I put it on for the Knussen 3rd Symphony, but when it went straight on to the 'Enigma' I was soon transfixed). It was enthralling and, in the transition to 'Nimrod' and through 'Nimrod' , profoundly moving. What was also moving was the obvious joy in music making between the conductor and orchestra. Rattle had a marvellous freedom and confidence, he clearly knew that with these players he would get the response he asked for (not, alas, always the case with the BPO, except perhaps at the end). And he conducted without a score: where has he had the opportunity to learn that score in performance over the last fifteen years or so? Mind you, I did hear him conduct it in Bournemouth in....1974? Or 75?

[seabright]

I should imagine that most if not all Elgarians know that there was a 'short' original ending to the work and that EE extended it substantially to become the version always played now. However, when Frederick Ashton choreographed a ballet to the music in 1968, he used the original ending and, as Michael Kennedy's biography of Boult reveals, Sir Adrian "was thrilled to be asked by the Royal Ballet" to conduct several performances.

In addition, for a 1995 Proms concert, Leonard Slatkin introduced the work and by way of illustration played both endings. This televised performance has been on YouTube since 2016 and has so far been seen by nearly 17,000 viewers. If you want to hear the 'short' ending it comes in at 15 minutes into the transmission. In short, there was nothing new about the Mark Elder performance of the original ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zv3qg10j760

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

In short, there was nothing new about the Mark Elder performance of the original ...

It may have been of interest to hear the hear the original ending, but in a comparative review it was completely pointless, as there were no other versions to compare it with.

[seabright]

It turns out that there were two Monteux / LSO performances of the "Enigma Variations" ... Firstly, the RCA recording made in Kingsway Hall on 24-25 June 1958 and then later a mono BBC radio broadcast from 1962 which was issued on a BBC Legends CD. Evidently this was taken from a 'live' performance given in the Royal Festival Hall. The latter is 'no longer available' but still shows up on Amazon as per this link ...

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Elgar-Enigma-Variations-Pijper-Symphony/dp/B000B86550/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=BBC+Legends+Monteux+Elgar&qid=1578629099&sr=8-1

Curiously, there's an upload ostensibly of this RFH performance on You Tube where the date is shown as 4.III.1962. However, to my ears it is the 1958 RCA recording, simply because there are no audience noises (coughs etc.) and no applause at the end ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XyrkHUs5i0I

In fact, Monteux's 1958 commercial RCA studio recording is also on YouTube, so sharper ears than mine might like to confirm if the two uploads are identical! ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ts5PUO8z1F8

Here is a review of the BBC Legends CD ...

http://classicalsource.com/db_control/db_cd_review.php?id=3189

Finally, here is Monteux's Boston SO performance from 1963 ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fRWfLYJv8Pg

[Flay]

I listen to BaL not for purchases, but to learn about a piece of music.

There's nothing else on R3 now since Discovering Music was downgraded then axed altogether

[Lordgeous]

It turns out that there were two Monteux / LSO performances of the "Enigma Variations" ... Firstly, the RCA recording made in Kingsway Hall on 24-25 June 1958 and then later a mono BBC radio broadcast from 1962 which was issued on a BBC Legends CD. Evidently this was taken from a 'live' performance given in the Royal Festival Hall. The latter is 'no longer available' but still shows up on Amazon as per this link ...

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Elgar-Enigma-Variations-Pijper-Symphony/dp/B000B86550/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=BBC+Legends+Monteux+Elgar&qid=1578629099&sr=8-1

Curiously, there's an upload ostensibly of this RFH performance on You Tube where the date is shown as 4.III.1962. However, to my ears it is the 1958 RCA recording, simply because there are no audience noises (coughs etc.) and no applause at the end ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XyrkHUs5i0I

In fact, Monteux's 1958 commercial RCA studio recording is also on YouTube, so sharper ears than mine might like to confirm if the two uploads are identical! ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ts5PUO8z1F8

Here is a review of the BBC Legends CD ...

http://classicalsource.com/db_control/db_cd_review.php?id=3189

Finally, here is Monteux's Boston SO performance from 1963 ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fRWfLYJv8Pg

I too wondered about the end of the Monteux recording which closed the programme. I'm sure she said it was a live recording but there was not a hint of audience at the end, unless it was cleverly edited (hard to do). I also wanted to mention the addition of organ at the end. No mention made of this. I presume its optional. Would that sway anybody's choice?

[Nick Armstrong]

....the addition of organ at the end. No mention made of this. I presume its optional. Would that sway anybody's choice?

Likewise, I don’t think there was mention of the organ in the DG RPO/Del Mar, which I see is the only ‘runner-up’ mentioned on the BAL page.

Sounds as if the reviewer likes the organ addition, so it’s bizarre it wasn’t alluded to. Almost as if she wasn’t aware of it...

Mind you I was mentally tuning-out the vacuous chatter from pretty early on, so may have missed the reference.

I love the Del Mar, despite/(because of?) the Guildford Cathedral acoustic... The organ pedals are tremendous on the right equipment.

[Lordgeous]

Likewise, I don’t think there was mention of the organ in the DG RPO/Del Mar, which I see is the only ‘runner-up’ mentioned on the BAL page.

Sounds as if the reviewer likes the organ addition, so it’s bizarre it wasn’t alluded to. Almost as if she wasn’t aware of it...

Mind you I was aurally tuning-out the vacuous chatter from pretty early on, so may have missed the reference.

I love the Del Mar, despite/(because of?) the Guildford Cathedral acoustic... The organ pedals are tremendous on the right equipment.

Likewise!

[Cockney Sparrow]

......Likewise, I don’t think there was mention of the organ in the DG RPO/Del Mar, which I see is the only ‘runner-up’ mentioned on the BAL page.............. the Guildford Cathedral acoustic... The organ pedals are tremendous on the right equipment.

I realised I had the CBSO/Oramo recording** of DoG which you mentioned upthread, which I similarly had consigned to the "so-so" category. I'd forgotten it had the Enigma Var. on the recording and gave it a spin. Very acceptable and includes the organ at the end.

I also have the Del Mar RPO recording, which I agree is ideal, too.

** Produced and sold direct by CBSO. Purchased at Symphony Hall