Witold Lutoslawski (1913-1994)

[Mirror Image]

I still have yet to hear better than Salonen for that symphony. I don't think that recording will be bettered.

Agreed. A fine performance that won't likely be bettered anytime soon.

[Archaic Torso of Apollo]

I'm assuming MI has ALL Lutoslawski recordings?!?!?!haha

Is Salonen still Tops in Symphony No.3?

Salonen's good, but I still favor the composer's own performance, which I have on the original Philips LP release. One of my formative contemporary music experiences.

[Mirror Image]

I'm assuming MI has ALL Lutoslawski recordings?!?!?!haha

Nope, I wish.

[kyjo]

I like a lot of Lutoslawski's music (it is at the outer fringes of my comfort zone), but there is nothing in his output as special as Symphony no. 4. Such an elegiac, haunting work. I also really enjoy his Concerto for Orchestra, a fun and exciting work.

[Mirror Image]

I like a lot of Lutoslawski's music (it is at the outer fringes of my comfort zone), but there is nothing in his output as special as Symphony no. 4. Such an elegiac, haunting work. I also really enjoy his Concerto for Orchestra, a fun and exciting work.

Will have to revisit Lutoslawski's Symphony No. 4 at some juncture, but I do remember enjoying it. Not to change the subject, but what do you think about the Second Viennese School?

[kyjo]

Will have to revisit Lutoslawski's Symphony No. 4 at some juncture, but I do remember enjoying it. Not to change the subject, but what do you think about the Second Viennese School?

Like you (I believe), my favorite composer of the group is Berg and my least favorite is Webern. I enjoy most all of Berg's music, even though Wozzeck still scares the crap out of me! My appreciation for Schoenberg's music has been increasing lately, and, solely on the basis of my immense liking of his early works, he may very well surpass Berg as my favorite of the group! I still have problems with works such as Pierrot Lunaire, Variations for Orchestra and the SQs 3 and 4, but I've come to understand his 12-tone works more, especially the Piano and Violin Concertos. But my love for his early works is incomparable to my growing admiration of his later works. Verklarte Nacht, Pelleas et Melisande, Gurrelieder, Chamber Symphony no. 1 and String Quartet no. 2 (especially in its expansion for string orchestra-magical!) are just magnificent works! It is a continual source of puzzlement for me that these works are so neglected in the concert hall while R. Strauss' vastly overrated orchestral works (with the exception of Metamorphosen, the only work of his that doesn't leave me cold) get so much attention. Webern? As I've mentioned before, I love Passacaglia, Im sommerwind and Langsamer satz, but I fail to understand the logic behind his later works. I find no emotion whatsoever in these works. Schoenberg and Berg, at least, continued the Romantic tradition in their music to varying degrees. But Webern has no connection to the Romantic tradition, at least to my ears. Back to Berg, do you own this two-disc set?



The main selling point of this set is the inclusion of a sumptuous orchestration of the Piano Sonata and a completion of an orchestral Passacaglia that Berg left unfinished at his death. You might question the Gothenburg SO under the direction of an Italian conductor in such repertoire, but they are much more than just competent.

[Mirror Image]

Like you (I believe), my favorite composer of the group is Berg and my least favorite is Webern. I enjoy most all of Berg's music, even though Wozzeck still scares the crap out of me! My appreciation for Schoenberg's music has been increasing lately, and, solely on the basis of my immense liking of his early works, he may very well surpass Berg as my favorite of the group! I still have problems with works such as Pierrot Lunaire, Variations for Orchestra and the SQs 3 and 4, but I've come to understand his 12-tone works more, especially the Piano and Violin Concertos. But my love for his early works is incomparable to my growing admiration of his later works. Verklarte Nacht, Pelleas et Melisande, Gurrelieder, Chamber Symphony no. 1 and String Quartet no. 2 (especially in its expansion for string orchestra-magical!) are just magnificent works! It is a continual source of puzzlement for me that these works are so neglected in the concert hall while R. Strauss' vastly overrated orchestral works (with the exception of Metamorphosen, the only work of his that doesn't leave me cold) get so much attention. Webern? As I've mentioned before, I love Passacaglia, Im sommerwind and Langsamer satz, but I fail to understand the logic behind his later works. I find no emotion whatsoever in these works. Schoenberg and Berg, at least, continued the Romantic tradition in their music to varying degrees. But Webern has no connection to the Romantic tradition, at least to my ears. Back to Berg, do you own this two-disc set?



The main selling point of this set is the inclusion of a sumptuous orchestration of the Piano Sonata and a completion of an orchestral Passacaglia that Berg left unfinished at his death. You might question the Gothenburg SO under the direction of an Italian conductor in such repertoire, but they are much more than just competent.

Thanks for your feedback here, Kyle. I've seen that Berg set, but do not own it. But I already own so much Berg, but I will investigate that set, so thanks for your recommendation here. For me, The Second Viennese School continue to captivate me. I really admire all three composers even though I don't (yet) understand Webern's later works, but Schoenberg and Berg are two of my favorite composers. Their music still frightens most audiences even today and that, to me, is real Modernism right there. When a work breaks the rules, shocks people, but continues to leave people in wonderment. These composers had substance in their music and this is one reason I continue to come back time and time again.

Back to Lutoslawski...

[snyprrr]

So who's Tops in No.4? Wit?

Sony
Naxos
CPO
Dux
Chandos

Wow, that's 5 recordings. WL's doin' pretty well for himself.

[Mirror Image]

So who's Tops in No.4? Wit?

Sony
Naxos
CPO
Dux
Chandos

Wow, that's 5 recordings. WL's doin' pretty well for himself.

I have yet to hear the CPO (Kofman) or Dux (Blaszczyk), but, for right now, Sony (Salonen) really stands at the top of the heap, although I remember enjoying Gardner's performance quite a bit.

[kyjo]

So who's Tops in No.4? Wit?

Sony
Naxos
CPO
Dux
Chandos

Wow, that's 5 recordings. WL's doin' pretty well for himself.

There's little to choose between Salonen (Sony) and Wit (Naxos) IMO. Both are excellent performances.

[snyprrr]

There's little to choose between Salonen (Sony) and Wit (Naxos) IMO. Both are excellent performances.

I have yet to hear the CPO (Kofman) or Dux (Blaszczyk), but, for right now, Sony (Salonen) really stands at the top of the heap, although I remember enjoying Gardner's performance quite a bit.

I thought Salonen's was originally criticized, not for being a rush-job, but, I mean, it waaas a brand new piece,... I would have thought the others, with more time to get acquainted, would be able to add the special zing to the proceedings? huh

Well, either way you slice it, that original Sony 3-4 IS a classic issue. Still, I'd love to hear from the basement dweller with all five recordings, haha!!

Totally forgot about the CPO.


Symphony No.2

Along with the 'Livre', I find this Lutoslawski's 'Xenakis moment'. I just love all the activity. Again, I've only heard the EMI, and the rawness is very appealing. I'm curious about Salonen here: must be some awesome sonics, and I wonder how he deals with all the 'ad libitum'.


YOU KNOW WHAT? LUTO REALLY IS A GREAT ALL AROUND MODERN,... at least three 'styles', lots of variation, lots of technique, huge statements, totally abstract,... yet... all at the same time very gut level... yaaay!!!

[Mirror Image]

Yeah, snyprrr, Lutoslawski is just amazing in the sheer amount of orchestral textures he's able to conjure up.

[not edward]

Salonen's good, but I still favor the composer's own performance, which I have on the original Philips LP release.

Seconded. I know Lutoslawski said that Salonen's performance was far better, but I don't agree; there's something more impactful about the way the Berliners build tension (the recording ambience may contribute, too).

So who's Tops in No.4? Wit?

Sony
Naxos
CPO
Dux
Chandos

I've heard Salonen, Wit, Kofman and Gardner, and have quite a strong preference for Salonen here. Of the others I've heard, Wit is to my ear a more broad-brush-stroke reading than Salonen; acceptable but not really a first choice, while Kofman's a very different view, with broad tempi that do threaten to leave the momentum sagging even as they illuminate details I missed in other recordings. In the context of the preceding three, Gardner is largely superfluous.

(I'd still regard the Kofman as an essential Lutoslawski purchase, as his is the only recording of the 2nd that has ever managed to convince me of the work's stature.)

[snyprrr]

Seconded. I know Lutoslawski said that Salonen's performance was far better, but I don't agree; there's something more impactful about the way the Berliners build tension (the recording ambience may contribute, too).
I've heard Salonen, Wit, Kofman and Gardner, and have quite a strong preference for Salonen here. Of the others I've heard, Wit is to my ear a more broad-brush-stroke reading than Salonen; acceptable but not really a first choice, while Kofman's a very different view, with broad tempi that do threaten to leave the momentum sagging even as they illuminate details I missed in other recordings. In the context of the preceding three, Gardner is largely superfluous.

(I'd still regard the Kofman as an essential Lutoslawski purchase, as his is the only recording of the 2nd that has ever managed to convince me of the work's stature.)

edward saves the day... except now you're piquing my interest in that Kofman, arrgh!!

Still, one MUST consider the LUXURY of having FIIIVE recordings of something like the Fourth. Not every Composer is afforded such a luxury, as we all well know.

[Mirror Image]

Lutoslawski's masterful Piano Concerto:

Although Lutoslawski was a concert pianist for five years of his career, he did not get around to writing a piano concerto until his last decade, a time when his music was mellowing. The work is in four continuous movements and features greater emphasis on melody and less on aleatoric counterpoint, an element found in many of his previous large compositions.

Cast in four sections, the opening panel serves as a sort of introduction, presenting the materials from which the succeeding movements spring. It begins in a haze of trills and swirls, an air of mystery and playfulness immediately evident. The piano enters delicately in the upper register, maintaining the ethereal mood. Tension gradually accrues, and the piano erupts, provoking the orchestra to violently spring to life just in time for the start of the second movement.

The driving second movement begins menacingly in the bass register, swirling upwards, taking on a Bartókian sort of rhythmic spring, both on the keyboard and then in the orchestra. The music mixes playfulness with a queasy sense of risk, of danger lurking around the corner. The latter moments are eerie as the music slowly fades. The composer's aleatoric contrapuntal procedures are in evidence more so in the second movement than in any other.

The third movement also begins on the piano, the music slowly taking shape, initially seeming to struggle to find its lyrical way in the long piano solo that dominates the first half. The orchestra finally enters, imparting a sense of tension with its softly trilling strings. The piano erupts in the latter half, drawing out hazy brass proclamations and anxious string activity. The music turns calm until the start of the finale.

The theme for this final movement is delivered throughout by the orchestra and is made up of short phrases filled out by rests. The music, then, has a sort of stop-and-start character in its creepy opening. The piano's material is derived from the main theme and is imaginatively integrated with the orchestra's music. The finale has a somewhat episodic character as tension builds and variants come and go. The piano writing is dazzling throughout and the presto ending is thrilling.

[Taken from All Music Guide]

What does everyone think of this work? I have recently fallen for this concerto thanks to a Lortie/Gardner performance, which I'm sure someone probably don't like here. Everyone has their favorites, right? Anyway, the last movement contains some pretty impressive harmonies, but the whole work sounds amazing and like it would be quite taxing on the soloist. Looking forward to hearing the Zimerman performance I have on the way.

[lescamil]

One of my favorite piano concertos of the last 50 years. One composer I am reminded of quite a bit in this concerto is... wait for it... Chopin. Those of you who know it well might agree. There are some passages in the piano part that have the same sort of freedom and lyricism, even in the non-aleatoric parts that are conducted and sync up normally. The second and fourth movements are real barn-burners that should attract more pianists than the piece currently does. It is a really tough piece, though, which perhaps is one reason why it doesn't get played often (it still gets performances, though).

[Mirror Image]

A great documentary with Steven Stucky and Esa-Pekka Salonen detailing the life of Lutoslawski:

http://www.youtube.com/v/lJ9EeRvYRTY

[lescamil]

Steven Stucky: there's a man who could back up his great compositions with an equal gift for talking about music. Believe it or not, John Adams's preconcert talks at the LA Phil are a step down from Stucky's preconcert talks when he was still here as artistic director. He wrote a book on Lutoslawski that I would like to read someday.

[Mirror Image]

Steven Stucky: there's a man who could back up his great compositions with an equal gift for talking about music. Believe it or not, John Adams's preconcert talks at the LA Phil are a step down from Stucky's preconcert talks when he was still here as artistic director. He wrote a book on Lutoslawski that I would like to read someday.

Yeah, Stucky seems to be considered an authority on Lutoslawski. I'm sure that book would be good.

[snyprrr]

Who do we like in Symphony No.4? (I'm assuming you will say Wit- Chandos?)