Tippett, Michael Kemp (1905 - 98)

[Beef Oven!]

That's because there is! I have the impression that Colin Davis somewhat downplayed the more unorthodox aspects of Tippett's orchestration (and Berlioz's too while I'm at it) and swept some of the details under the carpet, so to speak, in the interest of getting a "leaner" sound as you put it. I'm looking forward to hearing what Martyn Brabbins makes of these works, being more familiar with modern music than either Davis or Hickox.

I see. There is something to be said for Davis' approach, but I did enjoy listening to the Hickox. I'd forgotten about he Brabbins. I'll give him a whirl, too.

[Beef Oven!]

Has anyone got any views on the Brabbins Tippett symphonies? Has he done more than 1 & 2?

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

Has anyone got any views on the Brabbins Tippett symphonies? Has he done more than 1 & 2?

Hyperion are doing the five symphonies, but so far only 1 & 2 have been released. (The others, including the early "No 0", were broadcast last week in the afternoons:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m000114s

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m0001179

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m000126d

[Beef Oven!]

Many thanks ferney.

Plenty of time left, over three weeks on all of them. I shall organise some dedicated listening.

I'm downloading the Hickox as I type because my copy of #4 slips in the first movement and I have #3 somewhere I know not (hasn't been seen for years as my go-to is Davis/Solti on Decca).

# '0' is a new one on me!

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

# '0' is a new one on me!

Written in the 1930s, before he "became" Tippett. He withdrew it and forbade performances, but didn't destroy the work - and let selected scholars (like Ian Kemp, and, I presume, Meirion Bowen) see the score, but requested that they didn't discuss it in any detail in their published studies. It's only been made public in the past few years, and this is its first recording.

[jayne lee wilson]

Has anyone got any views on the Brabbins Tippett symphonies? Has he done more than 1 & 2?

I compared the three recordings earlier this year, but I only seem to have saved this stub...

In the first movement of No.2 Brabbins goes for weight and truculence rather than out-and-out energy; but this is marvellously contrasted with delicately drawn coloristic and contrapuntal subtlety (strings especially touching). I felt I was hearing things I’d not heard in this piece before, or not as clearly, or as enjoyably.

In any case, what would be the point of repeating the interpretative shaping and shadings of his predecessors?

The more the movement progresses the more you are irresistibly pulled into the momentum, the schwung, a moderato rather than Vigoroso, which yet comes to seem just right - tempo giusto in the here and now of this recording. So infectious - I found it impossible to keep still!

In No.1, Brabbins has a more immediate, closer-set sound than Davis or Hickox; it lacks some spaciousness and sweetness and feels a little shut-in a higher levels, but the upside is a very appealing warmth and colour, engaging you quickly with the individual players and sections. I also find his phrasing shapelier and more persuasive, the emotional ebb and flow caught more vividly.

***
But I found the differences largely held true throughout - the Davis seems to have the greater cogency, attack and rhythmic energy at first (and very persuasively - it is the LSO after all..), but once you've listened closely to Brabbins you feel that those pioneering discs miss some colour, detail and expressive subtlety. I found too, that the more I heard of Hickox, the better they always sounded, for similar reasons. Wonderful Chandos sound too.

***
Among the somewhat overlooked, what about Byzantium? I recall recording this from a Proms relay (IIRC the first UK performance) and being utterly stunned by its uncompromising brilliance; the orchestral setting seems to reflect the brazen, clangorous imagery, the extremes of human/mechanical/immortal, of Yeats' great poem itself.
The vocal line is extraordinary - such obsessive, intense melismatics!

Sadly, there's just the one recording..(Robinson/CSO/Solti). but it still sounded wonderful just now....classic late Tippett, something of the grand summation about it.
According to Schott, it's only had 5 performances since the 1991 Chicago premiere, and just a single one this century, in 2004....maybe Barbara Hannigan would be brave enough to tackle that vocal line ...if she knows it exists.
...if you seek it out, make sure you have the text at hand...

[Boilk]

Just heard Brabbins doing No.3 on iPlayer. On the whole the first movement lacks Colin Davis's cogent rhythmic propulsion in the first movement, and throughout some of the solo commentaries (violin/viola, harp, cello, tubular bells) get somewhat lost in the distance when there's other stuff going on. Perhaps the 1973 Philips recording spoiled us with all that close-miking, not so in evidence here? Also soparano Rachel Nicholls, IMHO, doesn't ascend to the heights of Heather Harper in this work, but I much prefer her to Faye Robinson on the Hickox.

This Brabbins performance is not the live concert I thought but, it seems from the commentary, the recording made for the Hyperion release next year.

Looking forward to hearing No.4 next.

[Richard Barrett]

There is something to be said for Davis' approach

... although not if you really want to hear everything that Tippett wrote in his scores. In the light of Boilk's comments on the recording by Brabbins of no.3, it seems the field is still open. I agree that Heather Harper is a more powerful soloist than Faye Robinson. It's a very difficult part for a singer to get her head (and voice) around though. I don't think either Harper or Robinson really took its blues-derived inflections as far as they could be taken - I think it would be a beautiful idea to give the solo to a singer more specialised in jazz, with a microphone if necessary.

[Beef Oven!]

I compared the three recordings earlier this year, but I only seem to have saved this stub...

In the first movement of No.2 Brabbins goes for weight and truculence rather than out-and-out energy; but this is marvellously contrasted with delicately drawn coloristic and contrapuntal subtlety (strings especially touching). I felt I was hearing things I’d not heard in this piece before, or not as clearly, or as enjoyably.

In any case, what would be the point of repeating the interpretative shaping and shadings of his predecessors?

The more the movement progresses the more you are irresistibly pulled into the momentum, the schwung, a moderato rather than Vigoroso, which yet comes to seem just right - tempo giusto in the here and now of this recording. So infectious - I found it impossible to keep still!

In No.1, Brabbins has a more immediate, closer-set sound than Davis or Hickox; it lacks some spaciousness and sweetness and feels a little shut-in a higher levels, but the upside is a very appealing warmth and colour, engaging you quickly with the individual players and sections. I also find his phrasing shapelier and more persuasive, the emotional ebb and flow caught more vividly.

***
But I found the differences largely held true throughout - the Davis seems to have the greater cogency, attack and rhythmic energy at first (and very persuasively - it is the LSO after all..), but once you've listened closely to Brabbins you feel that those pioneering discs miss some colour, detail and expressive subtlety. I found too, that the more I heard of Hickox, the better they always sounded, for similar reasons. Wonderful Chandos sound too.

***
Among the somewhat overlooked, what about Byzantium? I recall recording this from a Proms relay (IIRC the first UK performance) and being utterly stunned by its uncompromising brilliance; the orchestral setting seems to reflect the brazen, clangorous imagery, the extremes of human/mechanical/immortal, of Yeats' great poem itself.
The vocal line is extraordinary - such obsessive, intense melismatics!

Sadly, there's just the one recording..(Robinson/CSO/Solti). but it still sounded wonderful just now....classic late Tippett, something of the grand summation about it.
According to Schott, it's only had 5 performances since the 1991 Chicago premiere, and just a single one this century, in 2004....maybe Barbara Hannigan would be brave enough to tackle that vocal line ...if she knows it exists.
...if you seek it out, make sure you have the text at hand...

Thanks Jayne.

I am having the same experience regarding Hickox. I only got the downloads of symphs 1-4 last night, but I've played each of them 3/4 times through and the gulf between them and the Colin Davis performances just gets wider. I guess for the reasons Richard has already given upthread.

Byzantium? I love it. I first heard it from that Proms relay you mentioned (early 1990s?) and acquired the Faye Robinson/Solti Chicago SO as soon as I could. It's a favourite of mine. I'm very happy with Faye's singing, so beautiful and soulful, but I agree that Barbara Hannigan would be interesting.

[Beef Oven!]

... although not if you really want to hear everything that Tippett wrote in his scores.

Yes, on listening to the Hickox 3 times today/last night I am experiencing what you mean.

In the light of Boilk's comments on the recording by Brabbins of no.3, it seems the field is still open.

I haven't listened to the Brabbins recordings yet, but I suspect the field will always be open, given the challenge.

I agree that Heather Harper is a more powerful soloist than Faye Robinson.

Yes, more powerful both vocally and emotionally, but I find Faye's voice so utterly beautiful and soulful.

It's a very difficult part for a singer to get her head (and voice) around though. I don't think either Harper or Robinson really took its blues-derived inflections as far as they could be taken - I think it would be a beautiful idea to give the solo to a singer more specialised in jazz, with a microphone if necessary.

Steady on.

[Pulcinella]

Byzantium? I love it. I first heard it from that Proms relay you mentioned (early 1990s?) and acquired the Faye Robinson/Solti Chicago SO as soon as I could. It's a favourite of mine. I'm very happy with Faye's singing, so beautiful and soulful, but I agree that Barbara Hannigan would be interesting.

Intended (though whether that quite means written specifically with her voice in mind I'm not sure) for Jessye Norman, who (in)famously withdrew shortly before the premiere:

https://www.nytimes.com/1991/04/17/arts/review-music-tippett-s-byzantium-by-solti-and-chicago.html

(I found this link by Googling, so assume that it is OK to cite here without any copyright issues!)

PS: I do find the American style of referring to people (Miss Robinson, Miss Norman, Mr Tippett, Mr Solti) very quaint.

[Serial_Apologist]

... although not if you really want to hear everything that Tippett wrote in his scores. In the light of Boilk's comments on the recording by Brabbins of no.3, it seems the field is still open. I agree that Heather Harper is a more powerful soloist than Faye Robinson. It's a very difficult part for a singer to get her head (and voice) around though. I don't think either Harper or Robinson really took its blues-derived inflections as far as they could be taken - I think it would be a beautiful idea to give the solo to a singer more specialised in jazz, with a microphone if necessary.

And I'm trying to think of who might be best suited.

[Serial_Apologist]

PS: I do find the American style of referring to people (Miss Robinson, Miss Norman, Mr Tippett, Mr Solti) very quaint.

It's sometimes nice to do it in a piece where the person's name in question is constantly being re-stated though, and one doesn't wish either to often to repeat their Christian and surnames (which can appear tedious), or just give the first name (possibly presumptuous), or the surname (eg Solti - too stiffly cold and formal).

[silvestrione]

Finally got round (via a charity shop bargain) to Symphony 3, first time for many years. Still can't get on with the Scena at the end at all, but what struck me and amazed me was the fact that so much of the brass writing in the 1st movement is reproduced, sometimes slightly adapted, in the 4th Symphony! (And not only the brass, there were hints of the rising string passage that, by the time of the 4th, Tippett was signalling as inspired by a Gibbons Fantasia). For me, the material is much more successful in the later work.

The first song, with the 'horn', I still find marvellous, but I'm not able to relate it to what has gone before.

[Richard Barrett]

Listening at last to Brabbins' recording of no.3 which I downloaded this morning (without any help from the "Hyperion Download Manager" software, which needs a bit of a rethink IMO). It's very refreshing to hear the orchestra in a more realistic balance and with a deeper perspective than in the older recordings (so that for example the third movement doesn't turn into a piano concerto), though it would have been nice if the engineers had applied the same principle to the voice, which is much too upfront - and much too vibrato-laden and expressively unsubtle. Notwithstanding all that, I think it will be my recording of choice from now on, until something better comes along, which it may not do in my lifetime I suppose. I'm not as concerned as Boilk is by the slower tempi in comparison with Davis - it does mean that everything is a lot more rhythmically secure. I don't think it would be impossible to achieve razor-sharp precision at faster tempi, but that would require more rehearsal and more recording takes than were available no doubt!

The first song, with the 'horn', I still find marvellous, but I'm not able to relate it to what has gone before.

Well, that is kind of the whole point I think. The whole piece is to a great extent a challenge to listeners to make sense of why all of these confrontations and oppositions belong together, and why their lack of resolution, is in both structural and expressive terms, a more powerful and truthful artistic statement than would have been provided by a work where everything fits together in a readily consumable way. That may sound pretentious and/or contrived but it's actually an attempt to articulate something deeply and intuitively felt. What many people since its premiere have seen as the "problematic" quality of the 3rd is precisely what I find so valuable and inspiring in it.