Havergal Brian.

[cilgwyn]

Yes,the Antar is excellent,but the Miaskovsky is superb. I didn't think I'd find one to beat the Measham! If you look in the Rimsky Korsakov  and Miaskovsky threads you'll see posts by vandermolen (and,another member) praising the Gould recordings and expressing regret at their continued absence from the catalogue. The Antar is praised elsewhere. I'm a bit of a fan of that score. Svetlanove is excellent of course,but I like the underrated Abravanel recording as well. (He did a very good Goldmark Rustic Wedding Symphony too) Utah does seem somewhat appropriate for a storyline which takes in a desert!! The Miaskovsky is something special though because it's just so superbly realised and I don't think I've heard anything else as good! And as John would say,the download is as "cheap as chips!"

I hate to say this,but I wish they could do the long deleted RCA Tjeknavorian recording of Khatchaturian's First Symphony. In the opinion of vandermolen and yours truly,the finest ever. It has a sweep and grandeur (if you like that sort of thing,of course! ) which eludes all the other recordings!

The only downside! The excitement of the Gould Antar/ Miaskovsky download has led to a spending binge on cds of Russian nationalist composers!

[John Whitmore]

Yes,the Antar is excellent,but the Miaskovsky is superb. I didn't think I'd find one to beat the Measham! If you look in the Rimsky Korsakov  and Miaskovsky threads you'll see posts by vandermolen (and,another member) praising the Gould recordings and expressing regret at their continued absence from the catalogue. The Antar is praised elsewhere. I'm a bit of a fan of that score. Svetlanove is excellent of course,but I like the underrated Abravanel recording as well. (He did a very good Goldmark Rustic Wedding Symphony too) Utah does seem somewhat appropriate for a storyline which takes in a desert!! The Miaskovsky is something special though because it's just so superbly realised and I don't think I've heard anything else as good! And as John would say,the download is as "cheap as chips!"

I hate to say this,but I wish they could do the long deleted RCA Tjeknavorian recording of Khatchaturian's First Symphony. In the opinion of vandermolen and yours truly,the finest ever. It has a sweep and grandeur (if you like that sort of thing,of course! ) which eludes all the other recordings!

The only downside! The excitement of the Gould Antar/ Miaskovsky download has led to a spending binge on cds of Russian nationalist composers!

Why?

[cilgwyn]

I was just thinking of you,John! I'm not such a fan of Khatchaturian these days,but I agree with vandermolen that this is the best ever recording. Like I said,there is a grandeur and sweep about the performance which seems to make this problematic symphony work. It has that special magic about it. If memory serves me correctly,it's also a spectacular recording. Tjeknavorian's later recordings for ASV were pretty lousy. This one gets it right!

Looking at reviews of Jarvi's Chandos recording of Khatchaturian's Second Symphony the other day I was amused at the amount of customer reviews raving about how LOUD it was and urging people to buy it because it's SO LOUD!! Five stars for loudness?! Whatever next?!!   Naturally,being a discerning listener,I bought it!!

[J.Z. Herrenberg]

I love Khachaturian's Second Symphony in Järvi's performance. It's a fine piece. Is the First just as good (or even better)?

[cilgwyn]

I used to play my Decca Lp of Khatchaturian's famous recording of his Second Symphony over and over again as a youngster. The other regular visitor to my turntable was Tjeknavorian's RCA recording of his First. I loved it! I think it is one of Khatchaturian's most heartfelt works. It has an epic quality,full of exciting rhythms,but also tenderness and sadness,presumably a reflection of the tragic history of the country. Unlike,No2 it is not a war symphony. It is allot sunnier and has an almost technicolor brilliance about it in places,almost filmic. Having said that,like his Second Symphony I think it has a good deal more depth than the ballet scores. I tend to agree with someone on this forum who mentioned that he preferred the symphonies to his other scores (was it you?) Of course,No 3 is maybe an exception to this rule! I recall some massive chords,like hammer blows in one part of the score. I'm no musician and can't remember exactly what they were. The recording certainly gave my record player speakers a pounding. The symphony ends in what sounds like a sequence of fiery fashion that might have emerged from the pages of Gayaneh,only better! It's very spectacular!  Having said that,it's not all noise. I feel this symphony and it's successor get allot closer to the real Khatchaturian behind all the noise and spectacle.
If you want to hear it don't bother with the very disappointing ASV recording. The RCA Tjeknavorian is the one to hear! Unfortunately it's unavailable! I wonder why the Jarvi/Chandos team didn't record it?!! I think,along with No2,it's Khatchaturian at his best. I'm not sure if it's better,though. Just different! Although I preferred it to No 2 as a youngster. It's certainly allot better than No3,which if you're in the right mood could be described politely as,so bad it's good! (but only when played very LOUD!!)

As to what this post has to do with Havergal Brian,I don't know? Oh wait a minute! I've got it! It's in the Havergal Brian thread!!!

[J.Z. Herrenberg]

Tjeknavorian is here... Will 'tjek' it out later...


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=apjXRoeFNS8

[cilgwyn]

Good! However this is the recording I was referring to. I didn't like Tjeknavorian's later recording. This one has the sweep and grandeur I was referring to. The orchestra easily outclasses his recording with the Armenian band as did the spectacular RCA recording. I just feel there's no comparison. Have a look at vandermolen's comments in the Khatchaturian thread (Page 3). He's familiar with the recording!
It is,admittedly,a while since I heard this performance,but I can still 'play it back' it in my head!). The cover artwork is apt. The final pages do make you think of the fiery parts of Gayaneh. I have scoured the internet for a download. Sometimes you get one via those deleted Lp blogs. So far,no luck!

[cilgwyn]

Gone!

[cilgwyn]

And,hopefully,back to Brian,as they say!

[cilgwyn]

I must say I'm very impressed by John's perceptive reviewing on Musicweb. I enjoy listening to Dohnanyi's blockbuster symphony now and again,but I have certain reservations which mean that it doesn't make as many return visits to my cd player as some other blockbusters, that shall pass nameless! John's review nailed all the problems I have with this score; particularly the "bizarre" Allegro which could be fun on it's own,but always has me metaphorically,at least,scratching my head!  A great wallow when you're in the right mood,though! Maybe a job with IRR Magazine next?!

[Sergeant Rock]

I must say I'm very impressed by John's perceptive reviewing on Musicweb.

A link would be helpful.

Sarge

[cilgwyn]

Apologies Sarge! Hope this works!

http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2014/Aug14/Dohnanyi_sy2_8573008.htm

[Sergeant Rock]

Apologies Sarge! Hope this works!

http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2014/Aug14/Dohnanyi_sy2_8573008.htm

It does. Thanks.

Sarge

[Karl Henning]

I wonder to what extent John's dissatisfaction is a matter of the band.  I once heard the BBC Phil recording on Chandos . . . curious to go back and hear it again.

[Karl Henning]

The beautiful Adagio is followed by a most bizarre little Allegro that just doesn't seem to fit into the overall symphonic scheme of the work. This is a four minute burst of circus music. It's something that is more akin to the music you would encounter in the Jazz Suites of Shostakovich. Does it sound like the third movement of a romantic symphony? For me the answer is no.

Well, I'm going to differ with our John.  Not over its being a four-minute burst of circus music (which is fair, though I take it non-pejoratively);  nor over its second-cousin kinship to the spirit of Shostakovich's lighter music.

I guess that actually I agree with John's Q&A, there:  Does it sound like the third movement of a romantic symphony? For me, the answer is no, too;  only I suppose that I should not require of a symphony written in 1945, that the composer completely forget what has happened musically for 50 years, and write a scherzo that must keep in the spirit of the late 19^th century.

[John Whitmore]

I wonder to what extent John's dissatisfaction is a matter of the band.  I once heard the BBC Phil recording on Chandos . . . curious to go back and hear it again.

I hadn't heard the piece before and didn't know what to expect. I think the orchestra is well up to the mark but the work as a whole is very dissatisfying. As much as I love my local band the BBC Phil wouldn't change my mind. Thanks for the kind words and reviews about my reviews by the way! I just report what I hear.

[cilgwyn]

I like what I've seen of John's reviews,so far! While the 'newspaper' critics seem to react almost as if they are on autopilot in their dismissal of anything unfamiliar,neglected and usually of a tonal disposition (the Guardian critic,Andrew Clements,being a case in point);John actually comes over as actually having genuinely listened to the piece. While evaluating it with a healthy pinch of salt,he then proceeds,at great length (but not overlong,I might add!) to detail the pros and cons of the piece.
In contrast to the aforementioned Andrew Clement's & co,there does seem to be a growing tendency amongst Musicweb or IRR critic to get all mushy about a piece of music just because it's neglected and (usually) tonal. As if blinded by the sheer novelty of a neglected opus or an over whelming urge to be kind to a spurned child,they just can't bring themselves to the point of saying out loud that there are allot of jolly good reasons why it's been left to gather dust! Not that this means it isn't worth hearing? Brian's Second and third symphonies are a case in point! Particularly,the latter. A sprawling,explosion of undisciplined eccentricity if ever there was!! Unfortunately,Dohnanyi's Second,while it does have it's moments (I like the epic feel to the first movement) has more than it's fair share of chaff;and thank you to John for pointing it out! As to why Brian (almost) get's away with it,and poor old Dohnanyi doesn't? Well,with all his flaws,Brian's just Brian,isn't he? You can't really mistake him for anybody! Dohnanyi meanwhile,for all his apparent flair for colorful orchestration,is stuck in his late romantic strait jacket;struggling to get out! But who cares if you like that sort of thing! That's what cd players are for!!

Finally,I can't help wondering whether John will be reviewing any cds of Bruckner and Khatchaturian in the near,or more distant,future?!

[John Whitmore]

I like what I've seen of John's reviews,so far! While the 'newspaper' critics seem to react almost as if they are on autopilot in their dismissal of anything unfamiliar,neglected and usually of a tonal disposition (the Guardian critic,Andrew Clements,being a case in point);John actually comes over as actually having genuinely listened to the piece. While evaluating it with a healthy pinch of salt,he then proceeds,at great length (but not overlong,I might add!) to detail the pros and cons of the piece.
In contrast to the aforementioned Andrew Clement's & co,there does seem to be a growing tendency amongst Musicweb or IRR critic to get all mushy about a piece of music just because it's neglected and (usually) tonal. As if blinded by the sheer novelty of a neglected opus or an over whelming urge to be kind to a spurned child,they just can't bring themselves to the point of saying out loud that there are allot of jolly good reasons why it's been left to gather dust! Not that this means it isn't worth hearing? Brian's Second and third symphonies are a case in point! Particularly,the latter. A sprawling,explosion of undisciplined eccentricity if ever there was!! Unfortunately,Dohnanyi's Second,while it does have it's moments (I like the epic feel to the first movement) has more than it's fair share of chaff;and thank you to John for pointing it out! As to why Brian (almost) get's away with it,and poor old Dohnanyi doesn't? Well,with all his flaws,Brian's just Brian,isn't he? You can't really mistake him for anybody! Dohnanyi meanwhile,for all his apparent flair for colorful orchestration,is stuck in his late romantic strait jacket;struggling to get out! But who cares if you like that sort of thing! That's what cd players are for!!

Finally,I can't help wondering whether John will be reviewing any cds of Bruckner and Khatchaturian in the near,or more distant,future?!

Funnily enough:
http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2012/Oct12/Bruckner_sy7_2011408.htm
and also
http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2014/Aug14/Everest_survey.htm
I tried to be kind but failed miserably I'm afraid. 

[Sergeant Rock]

http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2012/Oct12/Bruckner_sy7_2011408.htm

A fair review...you didn't let your feelings about Bruckner's music get in the way.

Sarge

[calyptorhynchus]

As I life-long Brucknerian I heartily recommend Celibidache's EMI recordings (even if they were obtained with the conductor (who never wanted to have his performances recorded) being unaware), 6 & 7 are heavenly and 4 is the only recording to be recommended, because only Celibidache gets the tempo of the finale right.