Beethoven Symphony no 5 and 7 (again)

Beethoven; Symphonies no 5 & 7
Berliner Philharmoniker
Wilhelm Furtwängler

also available on Music and Arts and Tahra labels.







Deusche Grammophon became the first recording company to release Wilhelm Furtwangler's wartime recordings after acquiring it from a (then) Soviet radio archives back in 1989. The linear notes has it that Soviet troops who occupied Berlin took the broadcast tapes back to their country. Since the release, Furtwangler's name has been immortalised to some, as the greatest Beethoven interpreter. These two recordings made in 1943, were one of the most fiery and intense Beethoven interpretations of all time. Of the cliché "Fate Knocking on the Door" motif which shaped (and probably misrepresented) the whole symphony,Furtwangler's direction is synonamous with it. Each time the Fate motif is introduced, Furtwangler would exaggerate and propel it with additional weight. Such is the force and weight that permeates the whole movement when the motif implodes one last time before the coda, you can feel as if the battering ram has almost sucessfully shaken every foundation of a heavily barricaded door. The solemn Andante reminds listeners of the funeral march of Eroica and despite what seemed to be a grim time (at the period of recording) for the Berliners and Furtwangler, there is still an air of nobility and dignity.

The Allegro movement later on can be served as a metaphor of Hitler's reign and what comes on in the Finale as a prophecy of Allied liberation of Europe. In between, the Trio which Benjamin Zander exults it as some sort of dance of life becomes a grim parody of marching SS and Gestapo troops. Listen to how the basses dig their strings hard in here. The quiet passage before the "liberation" - the transition to Finale is disturbingly nervous and jittery and beyond it is a true climax where Furtwangler holds the crescendo longer than most conductors and pushing it to a breaking point of volcanic eruption. He gave slight pause and launches the violent, battle-laden Finale. Here is trademark unbuttoned Furtwangler and the "Liberation" we have here is contrary to optimistic direction of Carlos Kleiber/VPO - it is all gunfire, bombs and heavy casualty. At one passage, the orchestra hits a climax before the violins play a series of descending arpeggios and dies down to reprisal of the quiet passage of third movement. It doesn't happen before Furtwangler adds a sforzando (sudden piano before catching up with crescendo in dynamics) to a stunning effect. The movement ends with the coda guaranteed to grip you by the seat.

Furtwangler's authority on Beethoven is much lesser known in this Seventh Symphony. The opening chords strucks on us like a battering ram in the face. In a sense, one can already sense the whole interpretation of the Seventh symphony is almost equal to Shostakovich's Fifth symphony where one is forced to be happy, amidst beatings, torture and interrogation. So, the "apotheosis of dance" first movement is almost a grumpy, joyless exercise and the third movement even moreso with the trio being one of the slowest on record.

This CD (if you can find it) is worth purchasing for the Fifth Symphony alone. You'd better be off with more joyful renditions of the Seventh by Carlos Kleiber, for example although the Seventh is an intriguing document solely just to hear Furtwangler's view. Generally the symphony is sold as part of "Furtwangler conducts Beethoven" box set issued by Music and Arts label (available at Amazon.com) which also includes other wartime Beethoven readings, symphonies 3, 4, 6, and 9th. I hear Tahra also offers the recording, but you'll have to figure out more yourself. If you want to collect great recordings of the Fifth, you should not miss 1943 Furtwangler. Of course there is general complaint about the sound, but you'll get used to it.

Technical: 10
Interpretation: 10
Recording: 6 (pretty fine for a 1943 recording. Please note this rating applies only for THIS DG recording)

Historical recordings and their myth.

Recently I've read an article lambasting one of great interpreters of Mahler. One nice guy pointed to me the latest "Jascha Horenstein-mania going extinct?" article. For those who're not familiar with the name, Horenstein was the figure behind the great Mahler revival in Britain and his recordings were consistenly featured as benchmark when it comes to Mahler. He was an opposite of what I call "MTV" conductors - Bernstein and Karajan. For Horenstein did not hold a regular post during his conducting life and his best came with recordings with London Symphony Orchestra. He is one of the few "wanderer" conductors who established his niche with lesser known ensembles - just think of Georg Tintner.

I do not have any personal vendetta against Mr Hurwitz. In another article "Historical recordings and business of selling garbage", he states; "The answer is simple: we are for great recordings -- period. This means no excuses or apologies when it comes to pointing out that some “historical” emperor is actually naked, however much his courtiers may protest or deny the obvious." He is the musical James Randi, an Eduard Hanslick putting on the skeptic hat. We've probably heard before "this Beethoven Fifth by Karajan is good, but I don't think it will surpass the xxx recording made by xxx artist". In a typical Hurwitz fashion he would reply, "xxx recording is bollocks. The strings are sloppy, the winds imbalanced and the brasses are out of tune. This artists disposes rubato like candy, it makes me want to puke. You're saying this Fifth is better than Karajan?" Well Karajan was a Nazi and this recording was made in a Jewish concentration camp, replied the fanboy. Typical Hurwitz response? LOFL, revered names and special historical circumstances does not a great recording maketh.

This is the problem with some classical music reviews these days. I remember the superlative remark Gramophone made "Aye, the only account worth doing justice to Bruckner's Sixth". They refer that to the Klemperer recording. What I hear was different, the rest of the movement was fine, but the Majestoso was ridden with interpretative fault to the structure. If you read my review, I remarked brass calls and the cross rhythms before the coda was sloppy. Fine interpretation, but doesn't deserve such stupendous superlatives. Some listeners were even disappointed with the hype and pointed out the Horst Stein account with VPO. I was also disappponted with another Klemperer recording, the Das Lied von der Erde on EMI. Never mind the recording took a few years with two different orchestras, the tempo was agonisingly stiff and numb and if not for outstanding two soloists (Fritz Wunderlich and Christa Ludwig) I would've dismissed the recording entirely. This same Das Lied got five stars from Amazon with not a dissenting review and David Hurwitz named it one of benchmark recordings. Whom are we kidding?

Let us be frank with bare facts about historical recordings. First, yes, they're recorded in really bad sound. Stereo wasn't invented until the 50s and digital era and introduction of Dolby noise-reduction methods didn't came until the 80s. Second, yes, the level of playing wasn't "perfect" compared with today's ensambles. Recording method was still at infancy and the performances we hear today comes from either direct, live and broadcast performances or studio sessions. Recordings at studios were alien to conductors. Take into account 78 RPM mediums could only store three to five minutes per side compared with compact discs and DVD medium which can store a continuous feed of a Beethoven Ninth without interuption. Now imagine the torture of Karl Muck's Parsifal recordings (circa 1928)! Nobody would've the sanity to stay back after the session to check for minor flubs and such and no surprise, conductors such as Furtwangler detested such conditions (despite one of greatest studio records he made, the Tristan und Isolde). In contrary, despite the length of today's CD medium, producers temper "live" performances with editings (using snippets from rehearsals or other performances). You would think musicianship of today is more superior than in the past, hogwash! You also have the post World War II aftermath where most ensembles like Vienna Philharmonic started off from scratch due to conditions after war. Economic difficulties made it hard for musicians to earn living, attract audiences, rebuilding concert halls whatmore finding budget to fund high-quality recordings. Third, perfection does not equal good music. You'll only need to hear Christoph von Donanyi Cleveland recordings to figure out "perfection" more of a sense it's too perfect, it's boring. I am not saying it's ok to ignore rehearsals and practice, but at the end of the day we play music, not simply reading scores or follow composer's instructions and make sure everything's picture perfect. Music is much more than that.

Hearing that, please bear in mind SUBJECTIVE musical tastes of classical music. You do not depend on a critic or rave reviews of a recording to make up your mind what is good and bad, you depend on your EARS and ears alone. Bearing that in mind, you also have to respect other people's preferences. Hurwitz' remark that historical collectors have nostalgia for dead things is an insult to all discerning classical music fans. It is as if to imply that these collectors are no different than brainwashed celebrities following Kabbalah cult.

There are few kinds of listeners in classical music. One are the sentimentalists or celebrity worshippers. This apply to misguided fan-cults to names such as Bernstein, Callas, Toscanini, Karajan who regard them as God Almighty and all others are judged before them. Two, the perfectionists who will not tolerate any minor flaws and flubs in playing and in Darwinian terms, if you suck you'd be better off cleaning windows elsewhere. Third are the spiritualists who overlook ensemble lapses for great musicality and original interpretations. The last ones are people appreciate music of all kinds, perfect or imperfect and do not need any reason or pre-requisites and bias to do so.

There is general misconception that people who listen to historical recordings are seniors or "experienced" folks. I am 22 years old and my idols are Furtwangler, Horenstein, Celibidache and Mitropoulos. I have listened to many great digital recordings from my own purchase of CDs, piracy to exchanges from friends, colleagues and relatives. At GAMEFAQS Classical and Jazz music board, there's two Furtwangler fan who is aged between 16 to 18. Now, do these people appreciate Furtwangler as if he's cool? Are they young sentimentalists brainwashed by British reviewers? I think both are Americans. Now there's also the "polar opposite" factor whereas if you like Furtwangler, you hate Karajan and so forth. Perhaps it's the elitist factor which Mr Hurwitz hate where we idolise so-called incompetent conductors as rebellion against well established, but overhyped names (the Radiohead-against-MTV factor). I love Horenstein Mahler and yet I do not hate Bernstein's Mahler though in my humble view, Horenstein is a more superior Mahler interpreter. I cherish Bernstein's VPO recordings of Mahler 5th and 6th, especially the latter which I take it as benchmark. If others think Lenny is more superior than Horenstein I can live with that. But Hurwitz' agenda to purge "incompetent" conductors like Horenstein is akin to a Nazi agenda of purging out all Jews from earth.

Mr Hurwitz, no need to cry wolf that Horenstein "cult" is dying just like Lebrecht crying wolf that the classical music industry is already heading to extinction. The sales of Mahler 3rd by Horenstein is 133,849 at Amazon.com, surpassing another benchmark of Bernstein's M3rds - DG 35,348 and Sony 113,931. Not to mention the Horenstein 3rd is out of stock and sold at ridiculously obscene price at US$30. The BBC releases of broadcast Horenstein recording only sparked further revival and establishment of Horenstein's authority on Mahler and also Bruckner.

Perhaps it is David Hurwitz's worry that must concern all of us; "Furthermore, an ongoing glut of “new” recordings by old, dead artists can only stifle the incentive to release new performances by living artists active today." The "new artists" could only strive harder. Eiji Oue's Das Lied von der Erde is a benchmark recording today, competing other established names in market - Bernstein, Klemperer, Horenstein, Walter etcs. David Zinman's new Beethoven cycle competes with other contenders like Karajan, Furtwangler, Bernstein, Szell, etcs. Who said who's stiffling who now?

Bruch Violin Concerto and Mahler 5th

Bruch: Violin Concerto
Mahler: Symphony no 5 in C-sharp minor
Marie Elisabeth-Lott, solo violin
Malaysian Philharmonic Orchestra
Matthias Bamert, conductor.

The 2005/2006 season marks the debut of Matthias Bamert as music director for MPO after the departure of Kees Bakels. Previously James Judd was scheduled to replace Bakels but resources said he pulled out at last minute, probably due to his schedule with New Zealand Symphony Orchestra. Naturally, with Bakels reputation as a taskmaster who have shaped the orchestra throughout seven seasons the burden is all of maestro Bamert who had been apprentice to George Szell and Leopold Stokowski. Somebody from Good Music Forums said there are hundreds of such students out there so it doesn't mean he's all of a big deal. After the performance, I think the burden is really such on the Swiss born conductor. The Mahler Fifth paled with the stunning farewell Sixth maestro Bakels had given last season. Bamert seems to know Mahler, but so does tons of other conductors these days. But, to the Bruch concerto first and foremost.

Marie Elisabeth-Lott made her debut recording for EMI at the age of 12 and she was the winner for a contest which the musician had the chance to play on Mozart's childhood violin. At the concert, she presented the first impression of charm of a schoolgirl. Wearing a red dress and glasses to probably assist her eyesight, she looked different from the stunning young lady in the picture that set to boil adolescent bloods in that hall =P Probably nervousness had gotten into her, as she looked a bit naive and every time she made eye-contact with the conductor, she would give an approving smile. For the Bruch concerto demands maturity and insight that is different from the Mozart repertoire she was used to. She has no problems whatsoever with the most difficult passages at the concerto and seldom her playing squeled out of tune. However, at times the orchestra tried to catch up with her a little. At the end, I can only say she needs to be given a few more years before trying to tackle the concerto again. Maturity - one word lacked from the Bruch concerto that night.

I had a pleasant surprise! Marie Elisabeth-Lott stayed back after the interval to listen to Mahler Fifth. I am no stranger to young people these days embracing the Mahler fever, but her enthusiasm is remarkable. She sat at the most behind seat, just at my back few seats to my left and she took some autographs. I wished the MPO had given her a great impression of a Mahler performance here.

The funeral march at start didn't give a promising impression. The trumpet solo was played with little sensivity and care to dynamics and at a apathetic mf. When the orchestra entered, the cymbal was too intrusive and the brasses didn't gel the opening chords at all. The funereal weight present with Barbirolli, Karajan and even Anton Nanut recordings were missing throughout the movement, despite some fine string playing. It was the most indifferent funeral march I have ever heard and it cast shadow on the remaining performance, even though things started to pick up later on.

At the second movement, I get a little shaken by the entry of the strings. Some good start and the winds greet us with some characterful playing after the vehement entry. The "monody of lamenting cellos" passage was done with great care, without too much detachment. Later on, the mood starts to get unrelenting and at a quiet passage where the violins sing with melancholy and the lower strings swoop by like shadows, I was impressed by the use of sforzandos and impressive diminuendos(wish I could use a score and point out that part). At the great chorale outburst, I was struglling to hear the famed harp part (ffff). Nearly inaudible, despite the instrument position at the double basses. The great tam-tam clash could be better, again I was spoiled by the Bakels Mahler 6th.

The horn soloist didn't rush down to the conductor's podium like the Simon Rattle performance with the Berliners. It was rather strange I had to strain my eye to see who was the soloist, but that's a minor rant (Sabina Pade was playing that night as well). I like the horns with their voluptuous, Wagnerian sound. Tempo feels just right and I think that was the highlight for the evening. The pizzicato trio sounded rather clumsy though, as if the players have trouble suppressing the volume for their instrument. Maestro Bamert brought some fine playing for the Adagietto, not too slow and not too swift either. The Scherzo brought about a glorious end, but I'm one of the few people who thinks conductors can do little mistake with the movement (except for Barbirolli, whose "Englishness" needs some patience and time to adjust to). At one point the brasses blared out some ear-piercing fortissisimos and I hope they can focus more on sectional blending instead. At the end, I think...for the luxury of great Mahler recordings these days, players can learn so much from just listening and at the end that's where I get this gut feeling. Maybe with Mahler as a warhorse in concerthalls these days, the "Mahler" experience seems to get more numb.

Bruckner: Symphony no 8 by Pierre Boulez

Bruckner: Symphony no 8 in C minor (Nowak edition)
Wiener Philharmoniker
Conductor: Pierre Boulez
Label: Deutche Grammophon/ TDK (DVD)
Recommendations: Horenstein/LSO (BBC), Guilini/VPO (DG), Maazel/BPO (EMI)

This recording was from live International Bruckner Festival at 1996, commemorating the birth of Austrian symphonist Anton Bruckner. A modernist and contemporary conductor handling one of the greatest symphonies in Late Romantic Austro-German repertoire is as queer as Toscanini attempting HIP Beethoven. Maestro Boulez was no stranger to controversy. You need to look back his debut at Bayreuth Festival performing under Chéreau s direction Wagner's Ring cycle at 1980. The reception was very hostile and reports were heard from the whole show performing without audiences, booes almost closed the opening night premiere and even death threats. At 1996, thankfully there was only skepticism but after the performance and eventual release of the CD, superlative acclaims were plenty. Many claimed the recording the finest alongside other VPO recordings by Karajan and Guilini. In fact, I don't think I have yet to find a critic who didn't like the recording.

I have to admit not listening to the CD and watched the DVD instead. Interestingly in an exclusive bonus interview, Boulez wasn't particularly interested in historical significance of the work and the background especially concerning rural Austria where Bruckner grew up and the biographical meaning of work to the composer. However he did share his views which was commonly perceived with the Scherzo that the continuous heaving rhythm is synonymous with daily labour of farmers in Austrian countryside. As usual with Boulez, he seeks to dispel the work's sentimentality and it's kisch. In fact this is an analytical, thinking man's Bruckner more to the brain than the heart.

Compared with mainstream interpretations, Boulez' tempo choices are swift as to stress the momentum and fluidity of the work. He is complete opposite of "Celibidache" school of Bruckner where the slower the tempo, the better. Only Inbal as I know approaches Bruckner like the way Boulez does (and he studied conducting under Celibidache). So you hear the first subject in Allegro Moderato flowing like reciting of lines from lied. The scherzo is employed with such licking pace that the momentum flows like clockwork. At one point when the tubas boomed, the sonority is almost unmatched. Tintner's approach, using a vastly different 1887 original score works the best.

The adagio isn't too much to my liking, but that's my personal opinion. I can appreciate Boulez' observation toward dynamics, the brilliant use of ritartandos and such but certainly the spirituality and humanity of Horenstein and Guilini gives them some slight edge. As with the Finale, Boulez handles the tempo transitions well without making big episodic statements in each transition. After the reprisal of the opening theme to the coda, Boulez is flawless here. The tense and nervous string passages here are weakpoints for conductors here who could rush and spoil the equilibrium of the movement but even at licking pace, Boulez and his Viennese counterparts handled it like cakewalk. The blazing final pages is sustained with strength and though light- years away from Horenstein's Valhalla storming direction, it is one the best accounts here. Let us not kid ourselves which medium is better. Screw the CD and experience not only sonic delight of VPO, but also visual feast of St Florian itself by getting the DVD. (Ignore my remarks if you're getting a SACD).

Technical: 10
Interpretation: 8
Recording: 10

My reviews from Amazon

Few nitty, itty years ago, I write reviews for Amazon.com under pseudonym Ken Yong. Nowadays, unless I get a credit card to register a "real name", I am not permitted to access my accounts and write reviews.

Some reviews (maybe most or 100% or them) lacked substance, or just plain rant or lacked musical arguments. So, I will be posting some updates to my writings. Hopefully when I have sharpened my musical knowledge and journalism, the writings will improve vastly from the current crop here.

Ken Yong's Amazon Profile.