Ravel's Bolero

[Master Jacques]

The survey that Bryn linked to in his post #78 says this about the Martinon:

Orchestra de Paris /Jean Martinon

A version paying fulsome homage to the Spanish roots of Boléro. Martinon cracks into the score like a bloodthirsty ritual. No room for slackening in the orchestral ranks.

Hmm. Not sure I see it that way at all, and as for the "Spanish roots" ... well, suffice it to say that a bolero (in Spanish as opposed to Cuban dance) was a light, aristocratic, demure business for 18th c. court ladies, accompanied by castanets and guitars, but not remotely suggestive, hypnotic or ritualistic. The song form of the 19th c. added courtly romantic elements, but the bolero was not "of the people" or visceral at all - until it migrated back to Cuba, whence it had partly come. Ravel took the rhythm, but in no other way does his piece take on the character of the original Spanish dance.

Nor do I hear "bloodthirsty rituals" in Martinon: if you want that, go to the Liebowitz version I heard yesterday! Martinon retains his dance-like musicality throughout, though the Paris brass (frankly) let him down rather towards the climax and beyond -"slack" is how I would describe some of their work, in tuning and rhythm.

[Alain Maréchal]

the Paris brass (frankly) let him down rather towards the climax and beyond -"slack" is how I would describe some of their work, in tuning and rhythm.

Please bear in mind, Cher Maître, that they were merely defending their personal Liberté!

[Master Jacques]

Please bear in mind, Cher Maître, that they were merely defending their personal Liberté!

Touché, Alain!

[Mal]

The two Boulez versions are quite different in effect, both superb, and "dignity" is not what either of them are about, in my opinion. I start to feel uneasy about this Third Ear reviewer. I am interested in Pulcinella's thoughts on what he hears in Boulez and the BPO, though!

One must always be uneasy about critics :) The critic is David Raymond, MA in musicology, 40 years writing for Rochester (NY) weekly City newspaper. He deserves a long service medal at least!

https://www.rochestercitynewspaper.com/author/david-raymond

I thought his review of Karajan was spot on, but a one word review of both Boulez performances is hardly comprehensive, so I'm uneasy about him on Boulez. Which Boulez do you prefer? How does Boulez compare to Monteaux? After Karajan, Raymond gives most praise to Monteaux calling his performance "beautiful ... and ... coupled with lots of equally beautiful Ravel".

I don't trust Philip Clark in that long Gramophone review ... he doesn't like Karajan. The professional critics seem to either love it or hate it... nothing in between. Then again, the public, Amazon reviewers, seem to just love it. Maybe the nay saying "professionals" are suffering from trendy Karajan hatred?"

[Master Jacques]

The critic is David Raymond, MA in musicology, 40 years writing for Rochester (NY) weekly City newspaper. He deserves a long service medal at least!

I thought his review of Karajan was spot on, but a one word review of both Boulez performances is hardly comprehensive, so I'm uneasy about him on Boulez. Which Boulez do you prefer? How does Boulez compare to Monteaux? After Karajan, Raymond gives most praise to Monteaux calling his performance "beautiful ... and ... coupled with lots of equally beautiful Ravel".

An American MA is roughly the equivalent of one of our A levels, so no need to bow down in obeisance to that. I wish him a long and happy retirement, and soon.

On Boulez, I don't prefer one to the other. I'd say the NYP version is less scrupulously sculpted as to incremental, dynamic build, but the less opulent recording gives it a "lean and mean" vitality and the intense focus on the goal is powerful. The BPO allows more room for soloistic personality, without losing Boulez's sense of gradual dynamic build: there's perhaps a sense here of living more happily in Ravel's moment. You could say the NYP is a "wood" performance, while the BPO is "trees", but both are compelling, and I would need them both.

[Pulcinella]

...
On Boulez, I don't prefer one to the other. I'd say the NYP version is less scrupulously sculpted as to incremental, dynamic build, but the less opulent recording gives it a "lean and mean" vitality and the intense focus on the goal is powerful. The BPO allows more room for soloistic personality, without losing Boulez's sense of gradual dynamic build: there's perhaps a sense here of living more happily in Ravel's moment. You could say the NYP is a "wood" performance, while the BPO is "trees", but both are compelling, and I would need them both.

By having both, does that mean that you CAN see the wood for the trees?

[Master Jacques]

By having both, does that mean that you CAN see the wood for the trees?

Being perfect, Pulcinella, of course I always see the wood for the trees! And having both Boulez recordings keeps me perfect.

[richardfinegold]

This thread is a significant amount of verbiage for a fun party piece. When do we start discussing HIPP vs modern instruments?
My favorite version is by the Jefferson Airplane, who freely admitted that they borrowed the bass line for “White Rabbit “.

[Bryn]

This thread is a significant amount of verbiage for a fun party piece. When do we start discussing HIPP vs modern instruments?
My favorite version is by the Jefferson Airplane, who freely admitted that they borrowed the bass line for “White Rabbit “.

Having already mentioned Zappa's named performance of Bolero, I would add Treacherous Cretins from Shut Up and Play Your Guitar.

As to HIPP, indeed, no one has yet mentioned Immerseel. So:

Any comments? The slow tempo matches, within 3 seconds, that cited by Ravel in a Daily Telegraph interview.

[Mal]

An American MA is roughly the equivalent of one of our A levels, so no need to bow down in obeisance to that...

:) Not overwhelming academic qualifications I agree, but he has the most important qualification, his listening experience coincides with mine. At least so far... in one party piece...

[Master Jacques]

This thread is a significant amount of verbiage for a fun party piece. When do we start discussing HIPP vs modern instruments?

I think the thread has demonstrated that many listeners find it much more than a "fun party piece": that seems a superior put-down, Richard, rather than a fair comment. And it looks as if the HIP element has made an entry!

[BBMmk2]

This thread is a significant amount of verbiage for a fun party piece. When do we start discussing HIPP vs modern instruments?
My favorite version is by the Jefferson Airplane, who freely admitted that they borrowed the bass line for “White Rabbit “.

Have Les Siècles recorded this?

[Master Jacques]

Have Les Siècles recorded this?

Not as yet, I think, BBMmk2. But doubtless they'll be doing so in due course, as part of their ongoing Ravel cycle of concerts and recordings. Meanwhile, Roth conducted it a couple of months ago with the LSO, so perhaps he's getting into gear for it.

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

I'm a little surprised that no-one has mentioned Andrew Lloyd-Webber's version, renamed Memory, with words added.

[pastoralguy]

I'm a little surprised that no-one has mentioned Andrew Lloyd-Webber's version, renamed Memory, with words added.

OMG! . So it is!