| Site review by Geohominid May 29, 2010
|
Performance: Sonics (S/MC): / |
Tchaikovsky's “Manfred Symphony in Four Scenes after Byron’s Dramatic Poem, Op. 58 in B minor”, to give its proper name, had a complex gestation. Byron's overwrought Romantic hero Manfred appeared in a drama published in 1817. Schumann took it up first in 1848, setting some incidental music. Twenty years later, Russian critic Vladimir Stasov drew the attention of dilettante composer Balakirev to the drama, handing him a suggested plan for a four movement symphony. Aroused, yet not willing to do the work himself, Balakirev passed on the sketches to Hector Berlioz who also declined, being old and embittered (he died only a year later). Balakirev next canvassed his newly found protégé Tchaikovsky, to whom he had successfully delegated his idea for a Romeo & Juliet tone poem. Admiring of Schumann's Manfred music, Tchaikovsky accepted the challenge, and although still innately unconvinced of the value of programme music as opposed to a properly symphonic style, the composer set to work in April 1885 and completed the sketch by September. At the time he called it "the best of my symphonic compositions", although he did write write to his patron Nadezhda von Meck that he had himself become a Manfred.
After a rather unsuccessful première in Moscow, the work lay fallow, and three years later Tchaikovsky referred to it as "atrocious". Despite the brilliance of its orchestration and undoubted emotional power (portraying a self-loathing character was for him self-expression), he was probably aware that in symphonic terms, the two central movements (which are really picaresque diversions) effectively stopped the narrative flow dead. His own developmental path in the symphony was along a more abstract, cerebral form of creativity; Manfred notably comes between the Fourth and Fifth symphonies. However, many of Tchaikovsky's compositional fingerprints remain in the work's often startlingly original construction and dazzling orchestral colouration. Schumann, Liszt and Berlioz are obvious influences, and the originality of the Manfred Symphony in its turn inspired composers like Sibelius, who seemingly borrowed and further developed a number of its novelties in orchestration.
In terms of number of recordings, Manfred has fallen well short of those in Tchaikovsky's main-stream symphony cycle. However, it has thankfully mostly broken free of the temptation, initiated by Toscanini, to suffer large cuts, particularly from the final movement. Excellent complete versions on RBCD include those by Muti, Janssons, Pletnev, Jurowski and Petrenko amongst others (the latter's disc won the 2009 Gramophone Orchestral Award). On SA-CD, at the time of writing, the only version is by Kobayashi and the Czech Philharmonic, well-recorded and splendidly played but fatally flawed by the conductor's all too audible buzzy singing and growling in concertante style.
Kitaenko succeeded Günter Wand as honorary conductor of the Cologne Gürzenich Orchestra in March 2009, and this recording of Manfred marks the beginning of this team setting down a full Tchaikovsky Symphony Edition with OEHMS. Still not very well-known world-wide, this orchestra can trace its roots back in Cologne to the C15th; Mahler, Berlioz, Wagner, Verdi, Brahms and Stravinsky all wrote for and conducted them, and a virtuoso spectacular such as the Manfred Symphony allows them to truly display their pedigree. OEHMS have given them a wonderfully natural concert sound (as I can attest from hearing them live), best in multichannel where even the slight dying reverberations from the Cologne Philharmonic hall are easily discerned. The listener's view is from the best seat in the house, with a deep and wide perspective, precise instrumental localisation and a huge dynamic range. There are no signs of congestion even at the quadruple forte climaxes, which have as much transparent detail as the quintuple pianissimo sections. Overall, an impression is gained that the main balancing is that of the conductor rather than that of engineers, with gloriously dense string tone, pungent lower winds, sparkling top (piccolo not laceratingly shrill), powerful basses and earth-shaking tam-tam and bass drum. Interestingly, although this is not a live audience recording, the engineers leave an inter-track segment in which one can quietly hear the players re-settling and preparing themselves, which gives an illusion of being present at a performance.
From the first moments, Kitajenko's carefully thought out and deeply felt reading makes its mark; the opening portrayal of the benighted Manfred (marked "Lento lugubre") is certainly the most desolate portrait of him I have ever heard; the woodwinds low pathetically, trudging strings plod despairingly with shoulders down. Others at this point make more resplendent sounds, as though portraying Manfred's surroundings rather than his spirits.Throughout this movement, and indeed in the whole work, Kitaenko manages better than most to solve the problem of the work's necessarily complex sectional nature by steering the orchestra masterfully through transitions, so the flow of the work is hardly compromised. In the final bars, the huge orchestral climax is just breath-taking, such is the precision of ensemble, power of the tam-tam strokes and rhythmic driving from the whole brass section.
Kitajenko's second movement (where an alpine fairy appears to Manfred in a waterfall's misty rainbow to remind him of his lost lover, Astarte) is a little more relaxed than Petrenko's dazzling fleetness, but this tempo allows the players more subtle nuancing, and the movement is like a magical scene from a Tchaikovsky ballet, so we can relish all the fleeting solos from various instruments, gossamer-light. Equally suffused with light is the Trio, a Big Tune, which avoids being saccharine by itself flowing balletically. The Third movement (or Tableau as the score calls the movements) finds the orchestra in Berlioz territory, with an Alpine idyll, more languid than most, which emphasises Tchaikovsky's direction of the simple yet poor life of the peasants. The playing here is wonderfully serene and idyllic, until Manfred's motto intrudes in baleful form.
According to Tchaikovsky's superscriptions, the Finale represents "Underground demons. Hellish Orgy". None of this appears in Byron's original drama, and is clearly a confection based on the brigands' orgy from Berlioz's Harold in Italy. It is a fairly standard orchestral orgy (as musical orgies go), with much bluster and superficial brilliance, but Kitajenko's firm grip and the passionate commitment of his orchestra carry it off even more convincingly than Petrenko's fine effort, again by virtue of seamless transitions between sections, and his maintaining electric tension throughout.
In the last few pages of the finale, Tchaikovsky halts proceedings for a moment to begin the final scene of Manfred's death after his forgiveness by Astarte. The score indicates that a harmonium in 'Grand jeu' (i.e. all its stops pulled out) now solemnly plays fortissimo a theme said by Tchaikovsky to represent Manfred's soul, accompanied by all the woodwind and horns. In the composer's day, the harmonium was a common domestic instrument, implying a personal and religious character, which is presumably why he chose it over a large concert organ (this was not for lack of resources, all his symphonies were played in the best concert halls).
These days, the harmonium seems wheezy and archaic, and so is usually replaced by an organ - sometimes with a volume and grandeur similar to that required by Saint-Saens in the finale of his organ symphony (listen to Kobayashi for an example). Such a massively impressive "soul" is clearly not what Tchaikovsky wants; he would have reverted to the quadruple fortes of the previous section if he envisaged such a huge sound. Kitajenko sensitively uses not the full power of the Philharmonie's three manual organ, but a registration which blends with and augments the accompanying woodwinds and horns at a fortissimo level. It works well for me, but full organ enthusiasts might be tempted to avoid this disc for the sake of a few final bars. They would be missing a ripely warm and affectionate denouement for the Gürzenich's Manfred.
I have no hesitation in recommending this fine disc, played with passionate commitment, directed with understanding and intelligence and bestowed with a recording which many will find to be demonstration-worthy. An auspicious launch of Kitajenko's Tchaikovsky Symphony Edition.
|
Copyright © 2010 John Miller and SA-CD.net
|
|
|
| Site review by Polly Nomial October 25, 2010
|
Performance: Sonics (MC): |
A great symphony at last accorded an excellent performance on SACD!
If one were to judge a recording purely based on the timings indicated, then one would conclude here that either many omit some repeat markings in the outer movements (they do not) or that this was so slow as to be un-recommendable (it is not) and serves to highlight the follies of relying purely on numeric information for how the performance might affect a listener.
Despite the provenance of the concert hall for this disc, the playing is astonishingly well coordinated within and between sections of the orchestra. This is thrilling in its own right but at times one feels the admirable restraint shown by Dmitrij Kitajenko robs the impact of some otherwise terrifying passages of the first movement; a little more unbuttoned playing would elevated proceedings into the thrilling arena. Some though will clearly relish the restraint that is reserved for the coda (and the finale) so that these areas have an even bigger impact; it doesn't trouble this listener in the slightest and it has to be said that the sound at the conclusion of this movement is overwhelming in its intensity - it sweeps all before it most majestically (and menacingly).
The second movement shows precisely how articulation and lightness of touch can dispose of the need for a quicksilver tempo choice (oh, that the recent issue of Mendelssohn's Midsummer Nights Dream had the same qualities as here); still, there will some who would rightly demand a little more Vivace from this team, even though the spirito is fully in evidence. The central section is judged to perfection and no-one can have any serious complaints about this part at all. The third movement is most beautifully played and the quality of this orchestra makes one yearn for it to undertake tours more frequently (not that I wish to deprive their home town of their orchestra!)
The fourth movement is normally problematic, for it starts most energetically and - in the wrong hands - a lot of bombast; this is never the case here. Shortly before the fugal section, many performances seem to come to a halt but Kitajenko keeps the tension mounting throughout and the listener gripping on to the edge of their seat. The other crucial moment in the finale is the entrance of the harmonium (here given to the organ) which often seems incongruous but is melded into a convincing part of the orchestra and its argument.
The sound is as wide-ranging dynamically, deep in both timbre and impact and as life-like as one could wish. The sense of "being there" is complete in MCH and this disc would make an easy choice for being a superb demonstration disc due to the many qualities listed above.
Very highly recommended.
|
Copyright © 2010 John Broggio and SA-CD.net
|
|
|
| Review by tream July 21, 2010 (12 of 12 found this review helpful)
|
Performance: Sonics (S): |
FWIW, I indicated in the Forum that I would post my reactions to this recording after I had a chance to listen to it. The earlier review on this site as well as comments made by Kal Rubison and a few others were encouraging enough for me to purchase this SACD, despite some negative reactions elsewhere.
While I have heard my share of Tchaikovsky, both live and on record, I have never heard the Manfred Symphony live and prior to acquiring this disc, counted one version in my music collection, the LP led by Haitink, a reading highly recommended by some. (Once upon a time I owned the Maazel, but it failed to make an impression upon me, and it went into a discard pile during a cross country move. Shouldn't have done that.) Frankly, I could hardly listen to the symphony as conducted by Haitink - it felt like a labored failure.
Despite a reading that is several minutes slower than Haitink's, Kitajenko almost convinces me that this is a great piece - certainly he makes more sense of the structure and drama than Haitink realized in his recording. There are some slow tempos, but these are taken for great overall effect - in fact, what strikes me most about this reading is the sense of long line Kitajenko brings to this work. For example, his tempo for the first section of the 2nd movement (marked Vivace con spirito) seemed initially to me to be just a bit slow, and then he stopped and adopted what at first hearing seems to be a very slow tempo for the Trio section. But, as the movement proceeds, the whole exceeds the sum of the parts and I felt completely convinced by his interpretation after listening to the entire movement.
The orchestra, on the whole, plays extremely well and expressively. The recording (I am only able to listen in stereo these days) is excellent for its type - the perspective is from the balcony, rather than from closer in, and so has a blended sound, yet details are clear and orchestral colors natural. While I prefer to sit closer to the orchestra, as it were, many prefer this perspective.
The site review is excellent, and I concur completely from a performance standpoint. I prefer a different sonic perspective, so have knocked off a star, but in this case it is personal taste. I would love to hear this recording in multichannel.
|
Was this review helpful to you?
|
|
|
| Review by Oakland August 2, 2012 (12 of 12 found this review helpful)
|
Performance: Sonics (S/MC): / |
I have listened to the Kitajenko conducted Tschaikowsky Manfred Symphony numerous times over the past two years. My opinions have evolved but not by that much. Out of the gate I found this recording to have far and away superior sound than other Manfred's I own but thought that the performance came up a bit short in passion, particularly the second movement. But recently I listened a couple of more times and I honestly can't tell you what my apprehension was about. Perhaps I have become acclimated to Kitajenko's interpretation or whatever but this Manfred is flat out my favorite performance of the half a dozen+ recordings I own.
I made some comparisons between three of several Manfred's I have on hand, Muti/Philharmonia/EMI (Lp), Kobayashi/Exton and Kitajenko/Oehms. Regarding recording quality, it is the sun lit clarity that separates Kitajenko recording from the rest.......especially given the complexity and the complex passages that are played at fortissimo. The transparency rivals what one might expect from a well-done chamber recording. And here's the possible rub, the clarity seems to exceed (on some levels) what one might find at a live performance?....depending on where you are seated. Of course, what some consider "clarity" others may find "etched". But I believe you may draw that conclusion only if you are using "recordings" as your reference and not a live experience in a good seat. As an experienced concert attendee I find there is nothing "etched" about this recording.
The transparency is most appreciated at the explosive fortissimo(s) that I understand are among the loudest ever written in classical music and certainly the loudest written by the Tschaikowsky. Whereas Kobayashi loud passages sound like a "glob" (by comparison) with Kitajenko you can make out the "molecular" components of the musical explosion. Its kind of like in the old days when we saw photos of Saturn's almost solid looking rings compared to present day photos that show the tens of thousands of matter, large and small, that comprise those rings.
But, and this is key, it is the strikingly black *quiet* passages that are utterly indispensable to transparency that make those loudest ever Tschaikowsky passages so *musically* effective and not just noisy music. For example, in the first movement there are three distinct stages. In between the stages there is utter quiet. The other side of that quiet is where the full orchestra forces come to bear. This is where Muti simply comes up short. The vinyl noise that is not bad at all, but it is still audible and cannot be excused after listening to the Kitajenko. Many have noted the incessant noises of Kobayashi on the Exton recording. But they have been understated. The man not only mutters but he snorts, hums, grunts, snores, blows wind (hopefully not flatulence), etc. But he also bangs the podium and induces near subterranean noises with what I think are stomps. The first times I heard this recording I did not realize what was going on. I initially thought someone was walking around the house before I realized what was being heard/felt were random and unintended thumps at probably below 30 Hz emanating from the system. I still managed to enjoy the performance and the sound. But I could never recommend it.
All three recordings, Muti, Kobayashi, and Kitajenko, have the same or similar "loudness" levels. But the Kitajenko recording has formidable "quiet" and is far more "aux naturalle" because it's more transparent. And this attribute is priceless in allowing intense appreciation of the extensive colors and contrasts that flow throughout this one hour symphony.
I now find that Kitajenko/Oehms completely outclasses the Muti/Philly and the Kobayashi/Exton SACD.
Some of the highlights:
There is detail for days on end. In the first movement the diamond like clarity of the juxtaposition of the violins and violas is as clear as I can recall in recent memory. The two harps are strikingly clear with sound quality to die for. The woodwinds are well placed on the sound stage and are never masked by the orchestra even at fortissimo. The gongs are as clear, well.... as gongs. The violins are oh so sweet, even when playing with unmitigated fury (as in a Francesca Da Rimini kind of way), without sounding stressed or over the top. The low end is as quintessentially captured as any recording that I have. The bass drum on many recordings though extended come across as being overly taut. For example, the bass drum in the Exton "Church Windows" is as extended as it needs to be, but it comes across as "high strung" or overly defined (like timpani on steroids). You can hear it but not really "feel" it, at least not enough for me. No problem here with the Kitajenko Manfred. The bass drum is "thuddy", I dare say a little "muddy", for lack of a better description. And you *feel* it in a most visceral way. That's what I'm used to in the concert hall. (I do understand that the bass drum can come off differently in different halls and/or with different percussionists or with different scores). The brass sound and execution is marked by flawless craftsmanship as in the start of the fourth movement. I don't believe I have heard better.
But to single out individual instruments or sections of the orchestra for praise does not do justice to this recording. Indeed, such praise might do injustice because from what I can hear or "see" no instrument or section is compromised in favor of another. You don't going away saying the timpani really sound exceptional but feeling that the brass was a bit over heated. The entire orchestra is as beautifully and comprehensive recorded as any I have heard, especially factoring in some passages, are as "noisy" and "frantic" and "loud" (all as intended) as you will find in classical music. (Important distinction given that I attended a great rock band face off a couple of nights ago).
This recording is at the same time explosive, thunderous, spectacular and *full range*. And the scale is massive as one can imagine in a recording while maintaining perfect sound stage aspect ratio. The finale of the first movement states the case emphatically all the while never sounding congested even at top speed. And while there are oodles of dynamic range, the micro dynamics may be even more impressive.
And make no mistake this is beautiful music. Why some have relegated the Manfred Symphony to second tier status is beyond me. (Indeed, some Tschaikowsky "haters" (for lack of a better description), consider him less than a top rank composer, even though often when you examine their collection they have more helpings of Tschaikowsky than any other. The pastoral third movement (andante con moto) is pure Tschaikowsky at among his lyrical best and the Gurzenich-Orchester Koln plays it as beautifully as I have heard. To Manfred critics I say keep you eye on the prize. Focus on the "music" and don't try to tie it to a "program" or "structure". This is especially true of the fourth movement.
The Gurzenich-Orchester Koln is clearly a top tier orchestra. For sure, no "junior circuit" or regional orchestra need apply when it comes to pulling off the very complex Manfred Symphony. I don't recall performances here in the Bay Area. And no wonder as the orchestra must be especially well-endowed both in numbers and musicianship.There are any number of orchestras here, and decent ones, too. But only the San Francisco Symphony is fully qualified to tackle this work in my opinion.
During initial listens I thought that there was a smidgen too much hall ambiance as if the orchestra was playing in an empty hall. Although in between movements there are clearly stirring going on as if this was a live recording. I think at least portions of this were recorded live. It was recorded over three days. In any event, chalk up my perception of too much ambiance to *me* having to "break in" to a new hall because that perception disappeared after just a couple of listens.
Right when you believe that your system has reached it maximum potential with respect to sound quality a recording like this comes along and makes you staunchly believe you have purchased not just a disc but an astonishing upgrade. A most impressive sound quality virtue about this recording is that speaker position is *never* given up or betrayed by the music or engineering. I mean, at some point, even in the best of recordings of large scale music, at a momentary lack of transparency, the music will expose the speaker, disrupting the illusion, if only for a few seconds for being what it is, just a speaker. But not with this recording. Some audiophiles find that suspension of disbelief is aided by closing their eyes. I am not among those. I find that even in the light of day this is a recording of exceptional transparency.
I think it would be an unlikely stretch for most listeners to prefer the Muti or Kobayashi for sound quality over the Kitajenko. However, some may find that they win for performance on points (no knockout). But not me. The alternatives may display more "fire" compared to Kitajenko in select passages. For example, when the organ enters in the last movement Kitajenko does not let all the ponies out of the barn, unlike Muti and Kobayashi who both pull all stops. Kitajenko's restraint done with intent and sensitivity, is still intensely powerful and I believe implemented to superior effect. Manfred itself is flush with passages of raging fire. The last thing that is needed, I now believe, is for the conductor to fan the flames with uproarious bombast.
Include the Kitajenko/Oehms/Manfred along with, as examples, the Pentatone "Music for a Time of War"/Oregon Symphony and Channel Classics Mahler 4/Fischer as arguably among the highest quality orchestral SACD releases I have heard or read about. And given the massive scale and frequency extremes of Manfred and performed before a live audience (at least in part I think) I view it a significantly more challenging orchestral recording project than those worthy Pentatone and Channel Classics releases.
Robert C. Lang
|
Was this review helpful to you?
|
|
|
