BaL 1.10.22 - Brahms: Double Concerto in A minor

[richardfinegold]

The work gets short shrift in Jan Stafford biography. J.S. seemed to dismiss it as a popular piece of fluff

[Barbirollians]

Isn't this one of the works mentioned when we were berating BAL for revisiting works only done a few years ago ?-perhaps they are reading us after all.

Still find it hard to top Oistrakh/Fournier though I have lots of others I enjoy .

[smittims]

Ah yes, Alpensinfonie, I suppose it depends what one means by 'middle age'. Brahms was only 43 when his first symphony appeared, and only 64 whe he died.

I meant as he got on he wrote less. I think that he felt he ought to write for orchestra; it was the thing to do, as it was for Elgar to write choral works in the 1890s -1906, but ideally he'd have preferred not to. That said, his symphonies are among the finest and his orchestration is ideal for the music.

[duncan]

The Szeryng/Starker/RCO/Haitink looked attractive, so I thought I'd have a quick look on amazon.co.uk. The only customer review gave it but 1 star! However, on checking out the content of that review, it turned out to comprise nothing but a moan about the non-delivery of the CD. No consideration of the performance or recording at all.

Hard to review the performance or recording if the CD doesn't turn up!

Looking forward to this, a great favourite for personal reasons.

[edashtav]

Good plan! Please tell us which wins the vote, I'll do the same with my two.

1.Christian Ferras, Paul Tortelier, Philharmonia Orchestra, Paul Kletzki
2. David Oistrakh, Mstislav Rostropovich, Cleveland Orchestra, George Szell
3. Henryk Szeryng, János Starker, Royal Concertgebouw Orchestra, Bernard Haitink

Why Haitink is last: the opening movement drags at times and is rather reserved in character.
Why is Szell 2nd : efficient & effective with marvellous playing from the two Russians.
Kletzki wins because of great playing from orchestra and soli and the clear characterisation of each movement - I love the finale’s joyful bounciness.

[pastoralguy]

I’ve always had problems with the Oistrakh/Rostropovich/Szell version. The first Lp I had of that recording sounded dreadful! Very fierce and distorted on climaxes. Years later, I bought the cd. Alas, just as bad as the vinyl. I then bought the SACD version that EMI brought out only to find the distortion was as bad if spatially better!

Anyone find that?

[Parry1912]

Yes, although I think that the remastering for the Rostropovich box toned it down a tad. Great performance, mind.

Incidentally, I strongly recommend the Antje Weithaas, Maximilian Hornung, NDR Radiophilharmonie, Andrew Manze disc.

[Mal]

1.Christian Ferras, Paul Tortelier, Philharmonia Orchestra, Paul Kletzki
2. David Oistrakh, Mstislav Rostropovich, Cleveland Orchestra, George Szell
3. Henryk Szeryng, János Starker, Royal Concertgebouw Orchestra, Bernard Haitink

Why Haitink is last: the opening movement drags at times and is rather reserved in character.
Why is Szell 2nd : efficient & effective with marvellous playing from the two Russians.
Kletzki wins because of great playing from orchestra and soli and the clear characterisation of each movement - I love the finale’s joyful bounciness.

Thanks I'm not going to recommend either of my two! I need this BAL.

[HighlandDougie]

I’ve always had problems with the Oistrakh/Rostropovich/Szell version. The first Lp I had of that recording sounded dreadful! Very fierce and distorted on climaxes. Years later, I bought the cd. Alas, just as bad as the vinyl. I then bought the SACD version that EMI brought out only to find the distortion was as bad if spatially better!

Anyone find that?

Definitely not one of the great recordings of our time. However, the SACD played through the recently acquired SACD player which upsamples to DSD (rather than PCM) is an improvement - no distortion, for instance. The balance is very much in favour of the two soloists. They sound absolutely fine, especially Rostropovitch. But the orchestra, relegated to the background, is a different matter. A great shame, especially as it is a lovely performance.

[Bryn]

Definitely not one of the great recordings of our time. However, the SACD played through the recently acquired SACD player which upsamples to DSD (rather than PCM) is an improvement - no distortion, for instance. The balance is very much in favour of the two soloists. They sound absolutely fine, especially Rostropovitch. But the orchestra, relegated to the background, is a different matter. A great shame, especially as it is a lovely performance.

I will have to check out the version in the EMI David Oistrakh box. Ah, I see it's the 1997 digital transfer.

[mikealdren]

Just re-listening to the Oistrakh/Oloffson live Swedish radio performance, it's very good and much better recorded than the Szell version (EMI box version). Of my many versions, for a modern recording, I like the Repin/Mørk version

[edashtav]

Definitely not one of the great recordings of our time. However, the SACD played through the recently acquired SACD player which upsamples to DSD (rather than PCM) is an improvement - no distortion, for instance. The balance is very much in favour of the two soloists. They sound absolutely fine, especially Rostropovitch. But the orchestra, relegated to the background, is a different matter. A great shame, especially as it is a lovely performance.

I quote Andrew Clements writing in the Guardian in 2000:

“But the finest performance in decent sound dates from 1969, with David Oistrakh and Mstislav Rostropovich both on exceptional form, generous in their phrasing and providing superb foils for each other, with George Szell obtaining full-blooded acompaniment from the Cleveland Orchestra.”

I shall not defend the balance between the soli and orchesta which favours the two Russians to a ridiculous extent and the orchestra, although playing with marvellous unanimity, power and commitment, do sound too shrill for comfort, it must be rembered that EMI spent a reputed $40,000 on an extra rehearsal so it could test its microphone positions as the firm was fighting to retain its (Angel label) position in the States and wanted to capture the Cleveland sound in all its glory! I believe the initial pressing won an International Award for the best recording of soloists with orchestra.

Despite all of the failings, the performance captures the essence of a great interpretation and playing of the finest calibre. Every time I play it, its deficiencies soon evaporate as I’m captivated, once again, by a wonderful performance of a work that I value beyond measure.

[Barbirollians]

Campoli/Navarro /Barbirolli is an underrrated gem.

[mikealdren]

Campoli/Navarro /Barbirolli is an underrrated gem.

I agree, it was the first performance I bought on LP and the CD is still very good. (Navarra not Navarro)

[smittims]

In an article in 'Gramophone' at the time of the Cleveland recordings , which included the violin concerto, the two recordings being released, oddly I thought, as a boxed set, Peter Andry admitted they had had problems with the recording balance, partly, I suspect to avoid external noise.