Hans Zender - anyone know it?

[french frank]

Just been doing some investigation on Hans Zender's version of Winterreise because the Aurora Orchestra is coming to St George's with Allan Clayton. Last time I heard it there, it was with Paul Lewis and Mark Padmore. Quite intrigued by the YouTube upload:

Does it work? :-)

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

Does it work? :-)

In its own terms, yes. It isn't (cannot be) nor is it intended to be an "improvement" on the original - more an extended reflection by a composer on a work that has fascinated - possessed him, almost - for years. (Not all composers have the luxury of Britten of being both able to play the piano part to the highest standard and having a tenor on spec to match such playing!) Whenever I've heard it, I always wish that he'd left out the vocal line and made an extended "orchestral paraphrase" on the lines of the opening - as it is, there are so many "nearly-but-not-quite-exactly" passages that I can neither put the original out of the forefront of my memory, nor concentrate on what Zender offers.

[Roehre]

Just been doing some investigation on Hans Zender's version of Winterreise because the Aurora Orchestra is coming to St George's with Allan Clayton. Last time I heard it there, it was with Paul Lewis and Mark Padmore. Quite intrigued by the YouTube upload:....
Does it work? :-)

It does.
I actually would prefer Zender's re-compositioned interpretation if I were to choose gun to my head between the schubertian original (how much I really like it) and Zender's re-composition.
FHG's remark that he would have preferred to have less of the original vocal lines incorporated does make sense, though I personally prefer the present composition to a more (or completely) instrumental one - as I am quite often missing the vocals/words in e.g. Schubert or Brahms songs set for a stringed instrument in stead of a voice, or in Liszt's paraphrases.
What it definitely is not: a reworking a la Caine.
It is longer than the original, and the extensions (if you like) are proper Zender.
It needs some repeated listening to discover the cross references between Schubert (-sec) and Schubert and Zender, but in my experience it is rewarding.

[Bryn]

It does.
I actually would prefer Zender's re-compositioned interpretation if I were to choose gun to my head between the schubertian original (how much I really like it) and Zender's re-composition.
FHG's remark that he would have preferred to have less of the original vocal lines incorporated does make sense, though I personally prefer the present composition to a more (or completely) instrumental one - as I am quite often missing the vocals/words in e.g. Schubert or Brahms songs set for a stringed instrument in stead of a voice, or in Liszt's paraphrases.
What it definitely is not: a reworking a la Caine.
It is longer than the original, and the extensions (if you like) are proper Zender.
It needs some repeated listening to discover the cross references between Schubert (-sec) and Schubert and Zender, but in my experience it is rewarding.

O.k., you, fg and YouTube have convinced me. I found a "D'occasion - Très bon" copy at amazon.fr for £15.11 including p&p to the U.K.

[Serial_Apologist]

Evidently not a case of "return to Zender" then.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

Evidently not a case of "return to Zender" then.

A listener could get hooked; then they'd become a prisoner of

Oh! Is that the time?

[french frank]

(Not all composers have the luxury of Britten of being both able to play the piano part to the highest standard and having a tenor on spec to match such playing!)

Have to agree that the opening instrumental section also made me feel that a version without the vocal part would have been very worthwhile - and why not? That reminds me of such works as Stoppard's Rosenkrantz and Guildenstern, which just leave the original as an inspiration and take flight in their own directions.

[Serial_Apologist]

A listener could get hooked; then they'd become a prisoner of

Oh! Is that the time?

It is Prez-cisely that time!