Accardo, Dutoit, LPO - Paganini violin concertos

[Scion7]

    click to embiggen:


     from Gramophone  1987

PAGANINI. Violin Concertos—No. 1 in D major; * No 2 in B minor, "La campanella". Salvatore Accardo (vn); London Philharmonic Orchestra / Charles Dutoit. DG (1) C) 415 378-2GH (69 minutes). From 2740 121 (11/75).

Accardo brings to these performances all his formidable virtuosity and artistry, displaying superb technique, pure intonation and an ever present sense of style and good taste. In this he is well matched by the LPO under Charles Dutoit. I can't help feeling, though, that Perlman offers just that little bit extra in terms of confidence of attack and clarity of instrumental line. Moreover, his EMI disc has a decidedly cleaner orchestral sound, the tutu i sounding just a little muffled in this DG digital remastering. So for the First Concerto alone one might well be advised to go for Perlman (his coupling is the Sarasate Carmen Fantasy), though anyone seeking Paganini's most popular two concertos will doubtless be well satisfied with this well-filled DG Compact Disc.    ~A.M.L.

     from Gramophone November 1975

PAGANINI. Violin Concertos: No. 1 in D major, Op. 6; No. 2 in B minor, Op. 7, "La Campanella"; No. 3 in E major; No. 4 in D minor; No. 6 in A minor; .No. 6 in E minor, Op. posth. Salvatore Accardo (violin), London Philharmonic Orchestra conducted by Charles Dutoit. DG 2740 121 (five records, Das, £11.50). Booklet included. Item marked available on 2530 487 (11/74), remainder appear for the first time.

News of this box was given by Roger Wimbush in "Here and There" last May (p. 1955), and Accardo's performance of Concerto No. 6, the first to be made of it, had then already been issued separately. The above set also provides the sole current version of Concerto No. 5, and is, in fact, the only complete recording of Paganini's concertos. It is complete in two senses, firstly that each piece is without cuts, and secondly that all extant known works in the series are present. Both the composer and his first biographer, Gian Carlo Conestabile, spoke of eight concertos however, so additions may one day be necessary. If this seems unlikely, it should be remembered that No. 5, whose slow movement is one of the finest things Paganini ever wrote, was first heard in modern times only during 1959, and that No. 6 was re-discovered as recently as 1972. In both these cases the orchestral score was reconstructed with great skill by Federico Mompiello.
Among the most impressive aspects of this set is its consistency. Accardo was a pupil of Nathan Milstein, Yvonne Astruc (herself an Enescu student) and Luigi d'Ambrosio, and he combines a very high level of virtuosity with a sweetly singing tone that is always maintained despite the torrent of executive problems. This particular balance of qualities, essential for Paganini, has been met before of course, but what is unusual is that it is matched by the accompanimental playing. The orchestra is, no doubt, larger than the composer had in mind, yet Dutoit gets the LPO to play with the verve and fire this very Italian music needs. I have never heard the tuttis played better, rarely so well, and as one example among many would cite the tremolo opening to No. 2, of which Dutoit makes so much more than Heribert Esser on Shmuel Ashkenasi's recording (DG 139 424, 11/69). Accardo is particularly sympathetic in this work, also, being well aware that it is music, not just a "brilliant firework display on a summer's eve" as Moscheles (and many others since) complained. But, really, each performance is vigorously alive, without a single bar that sags.
The various recordings shown in the Gramophone Classical Catalogue by Ricci, Grumiaux, Szeryng, Ashkenasi and others all embody slightly different viewpoints on these works, but detailed comparisons are not called for at present because of this new issue's double claim to completeness. This is particularly important with the earlier concertos, as is confirmed by the fact that hitherto the sole uncut version of, for instance, No. I was Leonid Kogan's (Columbia mono 33CX 1562, 9/58)—which has long been deleted. Nobody except a reviewer would listen to six works of this sort—or most other sorts—in a row, but this box should attract all Paganini enthusiasts, all lovers of fine violin playing, and ought to have the especial attention of libraries.
My sole adverse comment relates to the accompanying booklet. This contains, for example, a piece by Tibor Knief called "Zur Sozialgeschichte des Virtuosentums" which is translated into French but not into English or Italian. Similarly, Pietro Bern's "Nicold Paganini e i suoi sei Concerti" appears also in English, yet not in German or French. Only the brief material on the soloist and conductor is given in all four languages, and it might be added that the various illustrations are in no way identified. Something less incoherent was required for an issue that will serve in effect as a work of reference.      ~M.H.

[Scion7]

No one will ever confuse these works with the Brahms, the Tchaikovsky, the Beethoven, or those by Bartok, but they are interesting and a nice way for a virtuoso to show his chops!

[Josquin des Prez]

The problem is that Accardo has no chops to show. Or maybe he did when he was younger, but the only thing he demonstrates here is a sort of beige technical evenness. Its clean and fluid, but pretty apathetic.

I have the Capricci by Rabin and that's how i think Paganini should be played. Raw and on the edge, but without dumb histrionics (Heifetz, i'm looking at you). 

Either way, i've been exploring the music of Paganini lately, just to see if there was anything else of interest in there, and i must say i haven't found much. The concertos are good enough, and some of the variation sets are interesting. Much of his output consists of small chamber pieces, generally for violin and guitar, the grand majority of which are of very little value. It doesn't seem Paganini was all that interested in composition and whatever music he wrote it merely served as a vehicle to dazzle his audiences with his usual bag of tricks, all of which he developed in the Capricci in the first place, so there really isn't any point to go beyond what can be considered his one hit wonder.

[Scion7]

Totally disagree.

By the way, Accardo is a recognized international virtuoso ... musical critical opinion is against you.

[Josquin des Prez]

Totally disagree.

Which part?

By the way, Accardo is a recognized international virtuoso ... musical critical opinion is against you.

That's the worst appeal to authority i've seen in a long time. First of all, i can be the judge on who is and who is not a virtuoso. I don't need an outside entity with a self appointed authority to make that kind of evaluation for me. This is why God gave us our intelligence. The problem is that there isn't a whole lot of music in the standard classical repertory that isn't extremely difficult to play, on a technical level. When virtuosity is the rule, rather then the exception, it takes a bit more then merely being able to play all the notes correctly to sound "dazzling".

[Scion7]

But in the end, this is only a statement of your own personal taste ..... if the majority of the musicologists of the world - in this case, a very large majority - are claiming Accardo is one of the best violinists in the past 30 yrs or so, that has more than a small weight to it.

Anyway, this is an extremely fine box set of more than worthwhile 2nd-tier compositions.

[Josquin des Prez]

But in the end, this is only a statement of your own personal taste

You don't seem to understand what an appeal to authority is. God himself could come down on earth and state that Accardo was the greatest violin virtuoso in existence. It wouldn't make the slightest amount of difference for me, since i would have to verify the claim on my own one way or another, and if i still found his playing wanting, that'd be that.

[mc ukrneal]

The problem is that Accardo has no chops to show. Or maybe he did when he was younger, but the only thing he demonstrates here is a sort of beige technical evenness. Its clean and fluid, but pretty apathetic.

I have the Capricci by Rabin and that's how i think Paganini should be played. Raw and on the edge, but without dumb histrionics (Heifetz, i'm looking at you). 

Either way, i've been exploring the music of Paganini lately, just to see if there was anything else of interest in there, and i must say i haven't found much. The concertos are good enough, and some of the variation sets are interesting. Much of his output consists of small chamber pieces, generally for violin and guitar, the grand majority of which are of very little value. It doesn't seem Paganini was all that interested in composition and whatever music he wrote it merely served as a vehicle to dazzle his audiences with his usual bag of tricks, all of which he developed in the Capricci in the first place, so there really isn't any point to go beyond what can be considered his one hit wonder.

You want it raw and don't like the music. That's fine. I'd prefer someone like Accardo who has great technique, gives a dynamite performance and controls the piece. He also doesn't create an ugly sound, as I feel many do in this piece.