Bartok: Music for Strings, Percussion and Celesta

Finally after some long time, I have ample time to spend time on internet. I have three recordings to compare here, two by Chicago Symphony under direction of two different maestros and one by Berlin Philharmonics led by Herbert von Karajan. By all means my review would not glorify one recording and lambast another for one certainly cannot own just one recording of this work. All three are certainly fascinating in their own way although at the end, I cannot deny which recording is my favorite and least although the most inferior one is not to be entirely dismissed. By all means, all three certainly has it's own hits and misses.

Fritz Reiner's "landmark" recording needs no mention when it comes to it's popularity among other contenders in the market. Technically, it sounds unsurpassed when it comes to sheer brutality and rhythmic bite by the Chicago folks. Some critics also mentioned Reiner's affinity with Bartok and Hungary's cultural background thus the folk influence of the work is more apparent. The numerous gear changes in time signature seems like a cakewalk to them since it's easy for lesser-skilled conductors and their orchestras to slam brakes and slowing down just to prevent things from falling apart. Numerous praises heaped on this recording failed to mention some cons, notably the technical superiority of the Chicagoans and interpretation of Fritz Reiner. Their playing is so perfect that the tempo employed allow little for the music to breathe, and I have to mention this is most apparent in their recording of Beethoven's Coriolan Overture. As technically brilliant as the CSO strings, they lacked the muscle of Karajan's Berliners which is richer, intense, fuller and highlights Bartok's magnificent string writing like no other. Last but not least hile this record is much praised for recording technique that surpasses it's time, the sound is admittedly too dry and a little shallow in the acoustics. Boulez' DG recording with the same orchestra is on the contrary.

Pierre Boulez' recording with the same orchestra some forty plus years later sacrifices rhythmic tautness and a little momentum for clarity in details. The notion that Boulez is clinical to a point of being devoid of emotion is nonsense, of course. Thus, the melancholic gloom of the "Apollo" fugue of the first movement and the surreal, spooky night music of the third movement can be clearly felt. A little bit lost momentum in the fast movements robs the tautness and vigority one gets used in, say Reiner's recording. I particularly like the timpani better than the other recordings since's it has a little more punch but that doesn't save these movements from being a bit dull. Boulez approach works best for the spooky terrain of third movement's Nachtmusik. The climax centres around the combined arpeggio-like buildup of celesta, piano and harp and the textures presented are the best I've heard of all the recordings.

Lastly is the Karajan's Berlin Philharmonic recording on DG. This recording was recorded in 1969, so I am not sure if it's the 2nd or 3rd account here (other than the EMI version). This Karajan recording are for those who prefers emotion over the intellectual aspect of the work. If you think Fritz Reiner's account is overhyped because of it's coldness, this CD will probably appeal to you. Technically, rhythm is just perfect and not too overdriven. There are huge dynamic difference in the first movement for example, from the pianissimis rarely observed at the opening of the fugue until the mutes are removed where Berliner strings emerges uncloaked like ghouls crawling out from a grave. The last movement alone is worth the price of the disc with the opening bars executed with conviction, the dance interlude has best snap attacks ever and the agressive acceleration at the second subject will leave you breathless. Cons? The playing of celesta and piano seems a little bit weak and underperformed, but that doesn't mar the whole performance. Other "fillers" or "courses" like Reiner's Concerto for Orchestra, Boulez' Miraculous Mandarin and Karajan's Apollon Musegate are worth listening as well.

Reiner/CSO:

Technical: 10
Interpretation: 8
Recording: 8

Boulez/CSO:

Technical: 8
Interrpretation: 8
Recording: 9

Karajan/BPO:

Technical: 10
Interpretation: 10
Recording: 8

Hannu Lintu conducts Malaysian Philharmonic Orchestra

Hannu Lintu, a Finnish conductor and a student of Jorma Panula at Sibelius acedemy conducts two weekend concerts here with MPO. The review here is the first week consisting of Stravinsky, Bartok and Sibelius. Somehow after listening to Karajan's BPO recording of Bartok's Music for Strings, Percussion and Celesta I've became a freak of that particular piece. Acclaimed as probably the finest piece he ever composed (apart from overplayed Concerto for Orchestra), I believe this masterpiece is best listened (and viewed) live, especially with particularly the innovative orchestral arrangements of two seperate string orchestra for antiphonal effect and central placements of percussion instruments.

The "appetiser" of Stravinsky's Symphonies for Wind Instruments starts off quite deliciously and the MPO stringless ensemble shows off myriad of various tone colours despite some weak attacks from the brasses. Particularly the lower brasses and basses are superb, the wind playing had fine phrasing. I'd definitely enjoyed this piece better than the boring London Philharmonic/Franz Welser-Most recording. When it comes to the highlight of the evening, I was ecstatic. The effect of muted strings in the first movement are good although the contrast are not as deliberate as the Karajan recording when the mutes are removed. When one first hear the celesta in a live concert, it can send spine-chilling goosebumps and the instrument responsed brilliantly to the fine accoustics of Dewan Filharmonik Petronas.

For the fast movements, Maestro Lintu and the MPO responded to the difficult rhythmic writings of Bartok and the antiphonal exchanges between two string orchestras are executed well with few minor lapses, or what I rather call "lags" but not too unsteady. The tempos employed are not volatile and hard driven, but thankfully not as cool as Boulez with his CSO in the DG recording. When it comes to the evocative and surreal third movement, timpanist Paul Thilbert's pedal-timp control almost cracked laughter throughout the whole hall when someone actually farted *whoops*, or rather creaked the seat. What followed made that up when the spooky violin solo episode came along. The background violin slides is highlighted instead of buried in the background as I heard in recordings and as it passes to the nightmare passage of harp, celesta and piano arpeggios to the central climax, it was truly terrifying.

I think it's rather difficult to get correct tempo for the opening of the last movement and along with Karajan, maestro Lintu managed to get that right. There was massive brakes when it comes to the dance interlude where it slowed down quite sluggishly and that was the only disappointing moment for the whole piece. Maestro Lintu ends the whole movement with massive ritartando, unwritten in the score but perhaps he didn't want the whole work to end so abruptly especially to n00bs (if you know what I mean). Overall, the Bartok was a great success.

The experience was dulled by some rather bombastic Sibelius, and maybe it would've been better to just walk home at the interval. I admire maestro Lintu's ability to draw wave after wave of pounding climaxes in crucial moments, but as much as exhilirating the accelerated race at the coda of first movement, it was vulgar. The winds didn't show the same commitment in Stravinsky as the slow movement with detached and sloppy wind phrasings. It shows MPO lacked ability in long-breath works like Bruckner, whatmore this symphony. At the third movement, the brasses dominated the whole movement to such extent the opening oboe passages was almost drowned by the horns. Not a particularly impressive Sibelius by a Finnish conductor if you ask me.