PROM 40 PART 2. SCHUMANN SYMPHONY NO.3. SCO/TICCIATI. R3 CONCERT SOUND.
I wasn’t completely at one with Ticciati’s Schumann 3rd tonight. As a great admirer of his SCO Schumann cycle, perhaps inevitably I missed some of the subtleties of pace, phrase and dynamics from that. Tonight’s reading, enjoyable - to some extent - on its own brisk and punchy terms, felt more of an end-of-concert showpiece. This Proms Rhenish began with legato phrasing and quite a big sound for a chamber orchestra, with a muscular attack as the 1st movement built to its climax. In the middle movements I kept finding colours and textures just a little unvarying; levels seemed rather uniform too, the dynamics lacking light and shade between soft, louder and VERY LOUD. The Cologne Cathedral movement sounded a little heavy and rushed (the Linn recording has great textural sensitivity and is noticeably slower).
It may seem unfair to compare live vs recorded, and no-one wants orchestra/conductor partnerships to trot out the same reading year in, year out - but reduced forces only get you so far in themselves, and unlike the Brahms, this performance seemed to go for out-and-out excitement rather than expressive nuance, and, I felt, sold the piece short. Not something I would ever say of this partnership’s outstandingly-played-and-recorded Schumann cycle.
***
I must admit though, to having my perceptions somewhat coloured by the Mahler arrangements of the Schumann Symphonies, which I’ve listened to over the last few days, alongside the Ticciati/SCO on Linn.
Mahler extensively adjusts and refines orchestration and contrapuntal lines, introducing far more dynamic subtlety - with the aim of clarifying, and enlivening, both argument and texture - I think his arrangements work beautifully. (Both the Ceccato/Bergen and Chailly/Leipzig sets are excellent, though very different interpretatively - both are for full symphony orchestra).
Mahler’s early orchestra (Klagende Lied, Wunderhorn etc.) has in any case a neo-Mendelssohnian lightness and transparency about it that, contextually adapted, makes a lovely match for Schumann (as it did for Weber’s Die Drei Pintos - just listen to the entr'acte after Act 1).
So what we need now is - a chamber orchestral recording of “Schumann arr. Mahler: The Four Symphonies”.
I wasn’t completely at one with Ticciati’s Schumann 3rd tonight. As a great admirer of his SCO Schumann cycle, perhaps inevitably I missed some of the subtleties of pace, phrase and dynamics from that. Tonight’s reading, enjoyable - to some extent - on its own brisk and punchy terms, felt more of an end-of-concert showpiece. This Proms Rhenish began with legato phrasing and quite a big sound for a chamber orchestra, with a muscular attack as the 1st movement built to its climax. In the middle movements I kept finding colours and textures just a little unvarying; levels seemed rather uniform too, the dynamics lacking light and shade between soft, louder and VERY LOUD. The Cologne Cathedral movement sounded a little heavy and rushed (the Linn recording has great textural sensitivity and is noticeably slower).
It may seem unfair to compare live vs recorded, and no-one wants orchestra/conductor partnerships to trot out the same reading year in, year out - but reduced forces only get you so far in themselves, and unlike the Brahms, this performance seemed to go for out-and-out excitement rather than expressive nuance, and, I felt, sold the piece short. Not something I would ever say of this partnership’s outstandingly-played-and-recorded Schumann cycle.
***
I must admit though, to having my perceptions somewhat coloured by the Mahler arrangements of the Schumann Symphonies, which I’ve listened to over the last few days, alongside the Ticciati/SCO on Linn.
Mahler extensively adjusts and refines orchestration and contrapuntal lines, introducing far more dynamic subtlety - with the aim of clarifying, and enlivening, both argument and texture - I think his arrangements work beautifully. (Both the Ceccato/Bergen and Chailly/Leipzig sets are excellent, though very different interpretatively - both are for full symphony orchestra).
Mahler’s early orchestra (Klagende Lied, Wunderhorn etc.) has in any case a neo-Mendelssohnian lightness and transparency about it that, contextually adapted, makes a lovely match for Schumann (as it did for Weber’s Die Drei Pintos - just listen to the entr'acte after Act 1).
So what we need now is - a chamber orchestral recording of “Schumann arr. Mahler: The Four Symphonies”.
Comment