Tchaikovsky's Symphony No. 5: reviews and thoughts

[mc ukrneal]

Next up: Andrei Anikhanov and the St. Petersburg State Symphony Orchestra. 1993.

Available in these editions:


First movement: Slow start, with clarinet tending a bit flat (not a very nice sounding instrument here). Then it speeds up a bit in the next section. Brass/Horns also sound a bit out of tune. The sound of the recording is bit dry and this may be hurting it (deadens the sound). One thing I am hearing is that they don't always seem to hold the notes to the end of the phrase, which creates some choppiness / unevenness.  I wish there was more low brass in the tuttis (they are surprisingly soft). They are barely audible sometimes and this changes the sound structure. Unison playing is sometimes a bit sloppy as well (though overall this is not an issue).  The brass is definitely reminiscent of the Soviet sound.

Second Movement: Something of a faster start to this one. I like the effect. Horn is ok, though sound is sometimes veering towards out of tune. The soloist doesn't really seem to change dynamics that often, which made it a bit static for me. But there are moments as the movement progresses (usually quiet ones) when the orchestra seem to let their concentration lapse, and the piece suffers for it (moments when out of tune, not in unison, sloppy, etc.). Transitions are generally weak.

Third movement: Waltz is in character. You can hear the flutters sometimes when they are not in tune though.
   
Fourth Movement: Barely audible timpini roll into the allegro vivace. And there is a lot of sloppy paying here. But I am fearful. The movement is 8 minutes, which either means they fly like the wind (they don't) or there are cuts coming. I can understand cuts from conductors of earlier generations, but not today. This immediately takes it out of the running. But the sloppy playing, and lack of balance (no nuance) kill this one anyway. Ends on a more or less uplifting note at least, though the last four notes drag (slow down). 

Overall: Poor. This is not one I recommend. The orchestra is the weakest link and they really let it down sometimes. They have a harsh sound (and I am not referring to the old Soviet sound, though there is an element of that too), mostly when they let a note here or there get out of tune. And then the cuts ruin it even more. There is real potential here, but it never seems to go anywhere near the levels that the other versions do. You are not missing anything if you skip this one.

Alternative reviews available on the net:
None.

[Sean]

mc ukrneal

For all the garbage Adorno wrote don't you think he had a point about this symphony?- it's a touch thin on material. Melodically beautiful with climactic moments in the finale surpassed by few other symphonies but you have an enthusiasm I can't quite place. Still, Karajan for instance recorded it at least three times and I never understood that either...

[mc ukrneal]

mc ukrneal

For all the garbage Adorno wrote don't you think he had a point about this symphony?- it's a touch thin on material. Melodically beautiful with climactic moments in the finale surpassed by few other symphonies but you have an enthusiasm I can't quite place. Still, Karajan for instance recorded it at least three times and I never understood that either...

Karajan actually recorded 6+ times (6 cd and at least once on DVD). Mravinsky recorded it 10 times (And performed it a whole lot more).

I've never read Adorno, so I have no idea what he said. But this symphony does seem to evoke strong reactions in that vein sometimes. I've never really felt it lacking in material, but I do believe that the handling of the transitions to be critical (because there are just so many of them). If they are done in an episodic way, it creates the impression of lots of little pieces that have been forced together (or the same pieces repeated over and over). This is one element that can make it seem thin on material.  But the content does have an element of repitition to a much greater degree than many other symphonies and some people take that as being thin on material.

Personally, it reminds me in certain ways to Op 109 of Beethoven (sonata no 30). The reason I say this is not because they sound alike (they don't at all) or that they have a similar structure (they don't). Rather, I am reminded of the way the third movement of op 109 starts and ends. It is exactly the same thematic material - the same theme, same notes, etc. BUT, to make the piece effective, they need to be played differently (if they sound exactly the same, the piece is  something of a failure). And this is how I see the 5th symphony here. If the repeated themes are not differentiated enough, it can make the piece sound repetetive, because they are too similar to each other. But if they are performed in a differentiatied manor that also integrates well with the material around it, the impact should be different (it should not sound identical). And this is where the tempo choices, phrasing, etc. is critical.

So though I have not specifically commented on this repition or the fate idea (as it just takes a lot of time to track down each one and somehow compare across the piece), I think this is part of what makes a performance successful or unsuccessful. It is why I try to highlight when a conductor has a clear vision of the piece, because some of these more unusual performances allow you to hear these things more clearly.

There is perhaps an unexplainable element too, raised a day or two ago in a new thread about why Tchaikovsky is great. Maybe some people just connect with the music in a way that is hard to quantify. For me, there is a certain sound that Tchaikovsky achieves that few come close to (which has to do with the instrumentation, balance across the orchestra, structure of the piece, etc.). I have always connected with this piece. It puts me at peace. It brings me joy. I feel centered when I listen to it. It is hard to explain why. I've listened to this piece about 10 times in the past 2-3 weeks and I am not in any way close to being bored by it.

[Karl Henning]

The Tchaikovsky e minor Symphony, "a touch thin on material"? No, such a thought never occurred to me, in much the same way that no such thought ever occurred to me viz. the Beethoven Op.67.

[Sean]

Beethoven's Fifth maybe not; I'll have to give mc's post some thought tomorrow...

[Pat B]

So though I have not specifically commented on this repition or the fate idea (as it just takes a lot of time to track down each one and somehow compare across the piece), I think this is part of what makes a performance successful or unsuccessful. It is why I try to highlight when a conductor has a clear vision of the piece, because some of these more unusual performances allow you to hear these things more clearly.

Very interesting. I tend to be skeptical when somebody asserts that a musician has "overall vision" of a piece, without describing what that vision is. What you are saying here, though, makes perfect sense. Thank you.

BTW kudos for undertaking this project.

[Sean]

Hi mc

Yes, I can't say why Karajan favoured the late Tchaik symphonies as much as he did- the First symphony has claims to be the strongest of the set...

But this symphony does seem to evoke strong reactions in that vein sometimes.

It's a great work that seems to know where its going and with its own quiet intensity, building perfectly in the closing movement. However it's the kind of sprawling somewhat indulgent romanticism that the early 20th century so understandably moved away from.

Tchaikovsky's greatest work is Swan Lake where he didn't have to worry himself over symphonic architectonics and could let his amazing creativity flourish step by step across a long still timespan, and to even greater concluding and perhaps unsurpassed statements of passion and humanity.

I've never really felt it lacking in material, but I do believe that the handling of the transitions to be critical (because there are just so many of them). If they are done in an episodic way, it creates the impression of lots of little pieces that have been forced together (or the same pieces repeated over and over). This is one element that can make it seem thin on material.

Interesting point; Karajan prepared many works in sections but also provided this glue and assurance across the whole canvass that eludes lesser hands...

I'll think about the Beethoven Sonata 30 next time I hear it, however repetition isn't a problem when themes have inherent aesthetic richness and quality...

It is why I try to highlight when a conductor has a clear vision of the piece, because some of these more unusual performances allow you to hear these things more clearly.

Sure thing- I like your reviews.

It is hard to explain why. I've listened to this piece about 10 times in the past 2-3 weeks and I am not in any way close to being bored by it.

As I say it does have a strong unity of proportions...

[Karl Henning]

Yes, I can't say why Karajan favoured the late Tchaik symphonies as much as he did

Oh, here, I can: they're great music.

Calling the First the "strongest" of the set smacks of paulb-like eccentricity . . . the whole Sibelius really went downhill after Kullervo rannygazoo.

[Karl Henning]

Interesting point; Karajan prepared many works in sections but also provided this glue and assurance across the whole canvass
As I say it does have a strong unity of proportions...

Everyone makes typos, but I must point out to a teacher of English abroad: you mean canvas, of course.

[Karl Henning]

In fact, I have long been inclined to consider the Fifth the best of the six, though I have had the nagging feeling now and again that I may be doing the Pathétique a disservice.

[Sean]

Everyone makes typos, but I must point out to a teacher of English abroad: you mean canvas, of course.

Oh sugar, I didn't know I admit it, I meant canvass soliciting of course, as perhaps Karajan does; English never ends...

[Sean]

Oh, here, I can: they're great music.

Calling the First the "strongest" of the set smacks of paulb-like eccentricity . . . the whole Sibelius really went downhill after Kullervo rannygazoo.

On yer bike Karl, as they say in Britain, as far as I remember- I can't disagree with Taverner that music's gone downhill since the end of plainchant.

[mc ukrneal]

In fact, I have long been inclined to consider the Fifth the best of the six, though I have had the nagging feeling now and again that I may be doing the Pathétique a disservice.

I have so much overlap with the 6th (because many of the 5ths came in sets), I was thinking of doing a similar comparison if the interest is still there on my side. That one has always been a more cerebral love for me, strange as that might sound. I think the differences will be greater across performances too. Or perhaps it is a good candidate for a blind listening.

[Karl Henning]

I can't disagree with Taverner that music's gone downhill since the end of plainchant.

Well, I am apt to consider that a lack of imagination, of course ; )

I have so much overlap with the 6th (because many of the 5ths came in sets), I was thinking of doing a similar comparison if the interest is still there on my side. That one has always been a more cerebral love for me, strange as that might sound. I think the differences will be greater across performances too. Or perhaps it is a good candidate for a blind listening.

An excellent thought!

[Sean]

Guys sorry and so forth but I've had too much national drink bai jiu for one night and will get back to you before I dig deeper holes.

[Karl Henning]

Briefly to pursue that tangent, though . . . there is certainly a challenge to writing a good monody.  Which is probably why I have been repeatedly drawn to writing for unaccompanied wind instrument.  (Apart from the practical consideration that a performance is easier to lock down.)

[Sean]

Melody is the essence of music.

[Herman]

Tchaikovsky's greatest work is Swan Lake where he didn't have to worry himself over symphonic architectonics and could let his amazing creativity flourish step by step across a long still timespan, and to even greater concluding and perhaps unsurpassed statements of passion and humanity.

So if you're thinking along those lines I don't understand where Sleeping Beauty goes, which is a much more sophisticated work than Swan Lake IMO.

[mc ukrneal]

So if you're thinking along those lines I don't understand where Sleeping Beauty goes, which is a much more sophisticated work than Swan Lake IMO.

I love both. Thankfully, we can have our cake and eat it too! It's like chocolate souffle vs flourless chocolate cake. When done well, both are to die for!

[mc ukrneal]

Next up: Tugan Sokhiev and Orchestre Nationale du Capitole de Toulouse. 2011.

Available in these editions:


First movement: Slower, more exaggerated opening. Seems a little heavy to me, and I think the clarinet sometimes sticks out too much from the orchestra. Then the quicker start into the next section has to pull back a hair when the woodwinds enter. But then it settles in nicely. Orchestra creates a very nice sound too. It sounds good – the brass have a very nice sheen, though strangely sound further away which means they sometimes get lost (hard to hear). Tempo is quite varied, sometimes slower and sometimes pacing ahead, but a little more subtlety would have been nice in this respect. Sometimes the slow tempos are just too slow considering the speed at other times. This is not an overly staccato version, with phrasing more on the legato side and phrases held for longer (some choose the other route). However, this approach requires precision in the playing at all times, and here we have just the occasional lapse (minor, admittedly, but noticeable).  There are also a couple times when it threatens to get heavy, but they pull away from that just in time. Trumpets are a hair blatty. Climaxes are still pretty exciting though.

Second Movement: Slow start, but a very attractively phrased solo. Not my favorite in sound, but very well played – just oozes out. Perhaps a touch of a strain at the top, but really gets under your skin. This has been well thought out – meticulous approach to the phrasing and such. The sound is gorgeous in its lushness, and it accomplishes it at a measured pace. You can really luxuriate in this one. All the woodwinds are again very noticeable in their small 'solos' throughout. Brass entrance is slightly off tempo, and I would have liked a bit more prominence to the low brass. But whatever little niggles I might have in this movement are generally swept away by some fantastic playing in this movement. Climaxes are handled organically and are played in total fullness, and by the end I am in bliss.

Third movement: Nicely done. I might have liked the strings to be a little lighter at times, but overall fine. Bit of a speed up in the middle is on the abrupt side.   
   
Fourth Movement: Opening at a slightly faster than stately speed. You can really hear all the instruments here. And then into the allegro vivace, they play after the timpini crescendos – there is a downbeat, but it is not so prominent). And they are not so speedy as some, but the sound impact is great! In some transitions the speed fluctuates, but is for the most part followed quite well by the entire orchestra. As mentioned before, the lower brass seem to be recorded a bit distantly, so they don't have the opportunity to shine as they do in some other recordings when I would have liked to have felt that a bit more strongly. On the other hand, perhaps others will prefer this balance. Slowdown in speed is gorgeously done around 8:30. And then we are into the homestretch at faster, but not hectic speeds. And then the molto meno mosso is taken at a stately pace. And the last four notes are nicely in time.

Overall: Good. I really enjoyed this recording. There is nothing extreme – not too slow, not too fast, not too over the top, etc. I think someone who finds fault with all the extremes that some others do with this piece might find this to be a nice middle ground. It's well played too, with a beautifully phrased horn solo in the second movement.

Alternative reviews available on the net:
http://www.arkivmusic.com/classical/album.jsp?album_id=687909
http://www.allmusic.com/album/tchaikovsky-symphony-no-5-shostakovich-festive-overture-mw0002251674
http://www.limelightmagazine.com.au/Review/307381,tchaikovsky-symphony-no-5-shostakovich-festival-overture-orchestre-national-du-capitole-de-toulousesokhiev.aspx
http://www.gramophone.co.uk/review/tchaikovsky-shostakovich-symphony-no-5-festive-overture

Interview:
http://www.classicfm.com/artists/tugan-sokhiev/news/tugan-sokhiev/