BaL 4.02.12 - Rachmaninov's Symphony no. 2 in E minor

[Panjandrum]

A rather enigmatic remark panjandrum ? Could you elaborate ?

I was pleased to hear the Rozhdestvensky get a good review- I am fond of the Rachmaninov and Tchaikovsky records he made for Pickwick in the 1980s.

I didn't think I was being gnomic but, well, the Previn is fine but it is all a bit too well behaved, IMHO.

[Peter Katin]

I also have a Mercury recording by the Detroit So and Paray, but it's heavily cut.

For me, any recording that makes cuts is discounted. My introduction to the work was Sanderling's 1956 version but it didn't take much listening to realise that Sanderling's was mutilated. He said that he knew Rachmaninov, who made the cuts on his advice. Other conductors followed suit until the original version "caught on"; certain conductors declared that they had seen the marks in the manuscript, but my loudly expressed demand that they should be made available was ignored. Anyway, there are some splendid recordings in which one can hear just what Rachmaninov wrote, and that's what matters.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

I'm not sure what echt Russians would make of the top choice.

Well, Previn recorded it immediately after he and the orchestra returned from a tour performing the work to ecstatic audiences in the former Soviet Union - the first time, I believe, they'd heard the complete score. Ashkenasy is/was a fan; whether he qualifies as "echt" or not?

[Suffolkcoastal]

For me, any recording that makes cuts is discounted. My introduction to the work was Sanderling's 1956 version but it didn't take much listening to realise that Sanderling's was mutilated. He said that he knew Rachmaninov, who made the cuts on his advice. Other conductors followed suit until the original version "caught on"; certain conductors declared that they had seen the marks in the manuscript, but my loudly expressed demand that they should be made available was ignored. Anyway, there are some splendid recordings in which one can hear just what Rachmaninov wrote, and that's what matters.

I entirely agree, here is one score that should always be performed in its entirety. I've heard the cut version on a few occasions and one notices that the overall balance feels wrong. This is a big symphony that breathes in long paragraphs and the cuts have the effect of interrupting the 'breathing' and taking unwanted breaths. I only have one version, the Previn, and so perfectly satisfying is the performance that I've never felt the need to invest in another.

[Roehre]

I entirely agree, here is one score that should always be performed in its entirety. I've heard the cut version on a few occasions and one notices that the overall balance feels wrong. This is a big symphony that breathes in long paragraphs and the cuts have the effect of interrupting the 'breathing' and taking unwanted breaths. I only have one version, the Previn, and so perfectly satisfying is the performance that I've never felt the need to invest in another.

The sleeve of the Previn/LSO LP in the German EMI pressing shows a sticker, proudly announcing (in German) this was an uncut version and as such a world premiere recording. Never seen this with the English HMV sleeves though.

[Chris Newman]

I first heard this marvellous symphony in Sir Adrian's famous recording, sadly somewhat abbreviated, but nevertheless it made an immensely powerful impression. Then I heard Andre Previn conduct it. Wow! I now have superb recordings from Boult, Previn, Ted Downes, Pappano and Ashkenazy. I think the best uncut live version I have ever heard was a few years back with Semyon Bychkov and the BBCSO at the Proms. Any thoughts on his recording with the WDR Sinfonieorchester? I am very tempted.

[BBMmk2]

What was the chosen version?

[cloughie]

What was the chosen version?

LSO Previn EMI

[cloughie]

For me, any recording that makes cuts is discounted. My introduction to the work was Sanderling's 1956 version but it didn't take much listening to realise that Sanderling's was mutilated. He said that he knew Rachmaninov, who made the cuts on his advice. Other conductors followed suit until the original version "caught on"; certain conductors declared that they had seen the marks in the manuscript, but my loudly expressed demand that they should be made available was ignored. Anyway, there are some splendid recordings in which one can hear just what Rachmaninov wrote, and that's what matters.

My preference is for uncut versions, but some are more cut/uncut than others - is it my memory or are there additional repeats in Rozhdestvensky's - Movt 1 is certainly longer than most, and Sanderling's cuts are less severe than some earlier versions, and I certainly would not like to be without that 1956 version.

[Mr Pee]

LSO Previn EMI

Somewhat predictably.....

[amateur51]

Somewhat predictably.....

William Mival gave his reasons very clearly and acknowledged that it was a very old recording but it still came out tops for him - BRAVO!

[BBMmk2]

Thats great news!!

[cloughie]

William Mival gave his reasons very clearly and acknowledged that it was a very old recording but it still came out tops for him - BRAVO!

Shows how time flies - even now to me a very old recording had its origins in 78s, whereas a recording from '78 appears to some as being very old!

[Ferretfancy]

William Mival gave his reasons very clearly and acknowledged that it was a very old recording but it still came out tops for him - BRAVO!

How important is the fact that a recording is old? In my book Previn's Rachmaninov is not old, especially as it still sounds fine. Naturally if there has been an enormous change in performing style newer versions might be preferred, in Bach for example, but even here there is a case for hearing how it was once done. I would not want to be without some significant performances dating back to the late 1920s and early 1030s, Beecham's performances with the then new LPO in particular, or Bruno Walter's Wagner.
One reason why I dislike the R3 morning schedules so much is that vintage performances are largely ignored, and thus historical contrast is lost.

[Nick Armstrong]

Surely a contender for one of the truly great recordings of all time.

The Previn has a magic all its own, I agree Petrushka. As such yes it was a predictable result in a way (though during the programme, I wondered of Mr Mival was going to end up going off piste...

The idea that it was a 'safe' choice, or one that 'echt Russians' would be unhappy with, I think is beside the point. As fhg said, a lot of 'echt Russians' heard the LSO/Previn performances and seem to have found them 'echt Rachmaninov' enough to go wild.

Not an enormously illuminating BaL but quite satisfactory. I was delighted to make an acquaintance with the recording by Weller/LPO in the early 70s - I saw/heard Weller conducting it at the Royal Festival Hall in London around the mid-80s I think and it was a much better performance than I was expecting (it was very good); and hearing this morning's programme made me want to hear his recording - a part of what BaL is all about, I think

I'd agree with that totally ammy. I want to hear the Weller too, and also the Sanderling mentioned above... But I'm a little confused - are both those performances of cut versions (or the cut version)?

Much looking forward to going to the RFH next week to hear the LPO under Neeme Järvi play the 2nd (as well as the 2nd Piano Concerto): will be great to get a live dose of this wonderful piece