Tchaikovsky's Symphony No. 5: reviews and thoughts

[mc ukrneal]

Next up: Manfred Honeck and the Pittsburgh Symphony Orchestra. 2006. Live.

Available in these editions:


First movement: Much quieter start than any of the others so far. This is a very seductive start, with clarinet sounding great. There is lots of dynamic nuance already evident here (phrasing is great). The clarinet really emotes, with much bigger shifts in dynamics than the other versions so far. Because this start is so seductive and effective, the climaxes are that much more exciting, because the contrast is even bigger. The shift in tempos is a bit different than most. There are sudden changes in speeds, which add excitement I suppose, but are not strictly called for in the score. So in some places the tempo is quite fast and in others it slows down quite a bit. Whether this will cause you whiplash or a desire for more is hard to predict. I imagine if I had been at these concerts, I would have been riveted either way. The orchestra plays so precisely.

Second Movement: What a gorgeous opening to the movement. The strings have a beautiful tone. The horn solo is recorded a bit back (would have preferred a hair more forward) and sometimes I had to strain to hear it, but for all that it is beautifully played (though occassionally seems out of tune or close to it). Vibrato is not as pronounced as in the previous version (Dmitriev), and I preferred it that way, though it doesn't flow along as well as some others (though in keeping with the overall approach). Trumpets sound a bit blatty (some overplaying I think), but have great presence and low brass have a nice round sound (though not quite as full sounding as some already heard). Again, the precision is remarkable, but it is mixed with intensity too. Tempos are more organic in this section.

Third movement: Another fairly fleet waltz, but this time with more rubato and feeling to add some needed details and interest. This is very light in character, which creates a nice contrast with what we've already heard and what it to come.

Fourth Movement: A standard start and well played. Going into the allegro vivace, they play after the timpini hit and then are off at a moderate speed. After all this time, the orchestra is still playing precisely and tempos are consistent across the different departments, but there is a return of some sudden change in tempos here (couple times). Still, the general impact is quite strong and moving. Small details abound. SOmetimes, certain instruments sound like they were recorded more distantly. The ending is an absolute race to the end. A bit fast for my taste (and much faster than marked), but it is remarkable how they execute it!

Overall: Good. Honeck clearly had a clear vision when he conducted this and it shines through. The sound of the orchestra is incredible too.  A precise and disciplined recording only adds to my delight, though some may prefer less sudden tempo shifts (I found them too sudden and seemingly random, though often quite exciting). The length of notes, tempos, dynamics, etc. are all well-coordinated across the orchestra. The sound is also excellent and though it is live, I forgot about that until they started clapping at the end.

One comment on the expense of this one, I admittedly had to wait for MDT to have a sale on this label to afford it. It is otherwise $20-30, so not a cheap one. But ultimately well worth hearing if you get the chance.

Alternative reviews available on the net:
http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2012/Jan12/Tchaikovsky5_OVCL00443.htm
http://www.allmusic.com/album/tchaikovsky-symphony-no-5-mw0002189598

[MishaK]

Nice. I've been loving everything I've heard from Honeck and the Pitts recently. Too bad those Exton discs are so damn expensive.

[mc ukrneal]

Nice. I've been loving everything I've heard from Honeck and the Pitts recently. Too bad those Exton discs are so damn expensive.

I really liked it. There were some days I bumped it up to the highest level, but then others where I felt there were just too many little things going on for me. Still, it has made me interested in more of his performances, especially if they are all so well considered as this one. But I will wait for the sale!

[MishaK]

I really liked it. There were some days I bumped it up to the highest level, but then others where I felt there were just too many little things going on for me. Still, it has made me interested in more of his performances, especially if they are all so well considered as this one. But I will wait for the sale!

They have a marvellous Mahler 5 recording. My new favorite. There was a video of their live performance of Mahler 5 on tour in the Philharmonie in Berlin available for free streaming on the web for a while. Not sure if it's still around.

Edit: found it: http://vimeo.com/30021669

PS: that Stoki ASO Tchaik 5 is indeed OOP. M&A wrote back to me to tell me that it's out of stock and my order has been canceled. 

[mc ukrneal]

PS: that Stoki ASO Tchaik 5 is indeed OOP. M&A wrote back to me to tell me that it's out of stock and my order has been canceled. 

Bummer. Arkiv is out of stock too. Amazon has used prices at rediculous prices. Maybe just keep an eye on that and hope someone sells a copy at a normal price.

Thanks for the link!!

EDIT: Maybe call them and explain. They may be able to help.

[MishaK]

EDIT: Maybe call them and explain. They may be able to help.

I emailed them back but haven't received a response yet.

[mc ukrneal]

Next up: Antoni Wit and the Polish National Radio Symphony Orchestra. 1992.

Available in these editions:


First movement: Nice start, and very attractive clarinet playing. Wit changes tempo and gives some tempo freedom within the segment, which seems to me a bit different, but doesn't take away from the performance. This is a weightier, darker start than some. Rousing climaxes here! The brass doesn't quite have that extra sweetness of tone/sound that some have, but very well played nonetheless. Some freedom of tempo is also noticeable (reminds me of Honeck in this respect, though a bit more subtle in execution) throughout the movement. This movement is more lyrical than some of the previous versions I listened to so far. Phrasing details are not quite as noticeable as some.

Second Movement: Beautifully executed start by the orchestra. The horn solo is well played, though the tone is not as sweet as it could be (and sometimes it seems like the horn player is fighting to keep the tone stable at the top). No real vibrato here.  This solo performance also strikes me as more monotone in execution. Still, the overall impact is there (such a sweet melody). The orchestra is just marvelous here. I am so enraptured that I am forgetting to write my impressions – very fine second movement after the solo, which I didn't like as much as I normally do.

Third movement: Straight-forward performance. It is light (perhaps even overly so), but it creates the right atmosphere (and break), so no harm, no foul.

Fourth Movement: Strong start to this movement, and a bit broader than some of the earlier versions heard here. And then we are off into the allegro vivace (during the timpini roll). This one is reined in to start and has a bit of a course feeling with some instruments going slower and others a little faster. Tempos then slow. And the reverb is muffling the precision as well here (something I didn't notice as much earlier). This is very much a laid back fourth movement compared to the aggressiveness of some until about 6.50 or so, when they speed up. Oh, but there are some unison issues toward the middle-end of the movement. I also feel like they play too loud too early, which doesn't give them anywhere to go in terms of dynamics (or moving the music forward). Ends in a stately manner and slows through those last bars, becoming slower than the tempo (96) in the score, and feeling a bit ponderous.

Overall: Good. This has a wonderful orchestral performance of the second movement and I enjoyed the opening movement a lot too. But there are issues in the horn solo and the last movement that don't quite put this in the top ranks for me. Still, it was a good performance overall.

Alternative reviews available on the net:
Surprisingly none that I could find.

[Sean]

This symphony is one of the works the classic academic idiot Adorno put the boot in for, information I never needed to know by the way pushed on me in my dreadfully misguided student days. Needless to say he wasn't much of a listener yet felt he could pronounce on music, with little if any more of an amoeba's aesthetic sensibility.

He drew naive attention to the disjunction in much of Tchaikovsky between form and content leading to the slight sense of insincerity throughout his music. Big deal. Every serious listener understands and sees this as peanuts in the richness of Tchaikovsky's achievement but arch-modernist Adorno weaves it into his grand sociological sky-castles.

He says the slow movement theme in the Fifth is unspeakable but it's very difficult to imagine it being written more speakably without that genuine Tchaikovsky spirit being lost- it's one of the curious but mature paradoxes in music, lost on meaningless academia...

[MishaK]

He drew naive attention to the disjunction in much of Tchaikovsky between form and content leading to the slight sense of insincerity throughout his music.

As if he of all people could actually specify what that "content" was.

[Sean]

As if he of all people could actually specify what that "content" was.

Indeed. He was probably thinking how nice a tone row would have worked, instead of the famous theme.

[Gurn Blanston]

This symphony is one of the works the classic academic idiot Adorno put the boot in for, information I never needed to know by the way pushed on me in my dreadfully misguided student days. Needless to say he wasn't much of a listener yet felt he could pronounce on music, with little if any more of an amoeba's aesthetic sensibility.

He drew naive attention to the disjunction in much of Tchaikovsky between form and content leading to the slight sense of insincerity throughout his music. Big deal. Every serious listener understands and sees this as peanuts in the richness of Tchaikovsky's achievement but arch-modernist Adorno weaves it into his grand sociological sky-castles.

He says the slow movement theme in the Fifth is unspeakable but it's very difficult to imagine it being written more speakably without that genuine Tchaikovsky spirit being lost- it's one of the curious but mature paradoxes in music, lost on meaningless academia...

You know, Sean, over the years you have written much that I really thought was... not up to your potential. However, every word in this post is completely congruent with my own feelings, and so, naturally, you have suddenly gained immense stature in my personal universe. Brilliant!

[MishaK]

Speaking of the devil... the liner notes to the original Teldec issue of the Barenboim/CSO recording of this symphony contain a brilliant interview with Barenboim in which he rebuts all this Adorno nonsense about lack of content and incoherent form without ever mentioning him by name.

[Sean]

Gurn, hi

You know, Sean, over the years you have written much that I really thought was... not up to your potential.

I'm not about to disagree with that.

[Sean]

Speaking of the devil... the liner notes to the original Teldec issue of the Barenboim/CSO recording of this symphony contain a brilliant interview with Barenboim in which he rebuts all this Adorno nonsense about lack of content and incoherent form without ever mentioning him by name.

Sure thing MishaK, Barenboim is a committed musician.

By the way on CD I bought the Jansons survey, beautifully done and in Karajan's shadow with a lot of sectional working and thorough preparation, though I rather thought lacked something in overall character. The Penguiners if I remember gave it a rosette but it doesn't really deserve it.

[MishaK]

Try Sokhiev. Unique, passionate, completely idiomatic.

[mc ukrneal]

Next up: Igor Markevitch and the London Symphony Orchestra. 1966.

Available in these editions:


First movement: Bit of a speedier start (second fastest on record), but suitably hushed and atmospheric. Love the dynamics in the opening of this one. And then it takes off even faster (into the allegro con anima). The playing is a bit more staccato and thus it stays light on its feet, while also giving it a full, round explosiveness in the climaxes. This is a tremendously exciting start, well controlled. Quite thrilling! On the other hand, it really isn't given a chance to breathe – it is so fast. If you like this first movement to be a bit more romantic (if you want the conductor to milk it more), you won't find it here.

Second Movement: Nice start, with a very good sounding horn solo. The speed here is not as pressed in the first movement, but the differentiation between the two movements does not sound as big as in others because the speeds are so similar. Still, this is very nicely played. Again, if it is important to you, there is not much lingering on the romantic side of things (the horn solo has more, but even here he speeds up in some moments, which does not allow the wallowing that some do). This creates some amazingly powerful moments, but certainly does not focus on the beauty of it (as some do). The instruments are nicely balanced. 

Third movement: Still speedy, but very well done. This waltz is not quite as light on its feet as the first movement or compared to some other performances of the movement. Still, the flow is maintained. 

Fourth Movement: Stately start to the movement. Speeds are a tick faster to start and then we are into the allegro vivace, which is so much slower than others and not what you might expect after the earlier movements. His entrance is during the timpini roll (not after downbeat). From the allegro vivace to the end, Markevitch is noticeably slower than most others, coming in at more than 10 minutes (the only one in double digits so far, and well below the metronome marking of 120). If you are looking for the speediness of Mravinsky, you won't find it here. The phrasing seems a bit monotone as well, with the brass feeling a bit on the back of the beat. The moderato assai e molto maestoso is about as slow as I can remember hearing it – very slow here (and seems to slow toward the end if that is possible). And then the presto is faster (finally), but not as fast as some and the molto meno mosso is about at speed (as opposed to how some push or pull this). What this means is that it doesn't quite have the excitement that some do, nor does it (in my opinion) help the structure of the piece as the different tempos don't seem to be differentiated as much. Still, this version certainly does not suffer from issues of unison. And the playing is clearly at a high level throughout.  The last notes are given a nice weight (as opposed to clipped/staccato playing of them).

Overall: Good. Those who dislike how some conductors milk it might even rate it excellent. The first movement, in particular, was great. The last movement is certainly different than most take it, and certainly more deliberate. The other drawback for some may be the sound. It's fine, but there is a slight bit of hiss (that you can easily ignore, but it's there) on the Philips issue. I don't know if the Newton issue has improved the situation or not.

Alternative reviews available on the net:
http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2012/Jan12/Tchaikovsky_Symphonies_8802036.htm
https://www.arkivmusic.com/classical/album.jsp?album_id=4742

[RJR]

There is a spirited 1927 recording of the Tchaikovsky 5th available on CD that you might like, conducted by Frederick Stock and the Chicago Symphony Orchestra.

[mc ukrneal]

Next up: Daniel Barenboim and the Chicago Symphony Orchestra. 1995.

Available in these editions:


First movement: Good start. The clarinet is a bit forceful, but nicely played. The bassoon/clarinet entrance is good, but why do the flutes slow it down (and just then the coughs are audible – it's a live one). And then they speed up a bit. I wouldn't mind the tempo changes if they seemed a bit more natural. Still, enjoyable playing, though does not reach the climaxes as hard. Playing is generally excellent, though the inconsistent use of legato and staccato causes a bit of internal tension from the different styles. Tempo speed up at about 6:10, an example where the orchestra is not quite together as much as it could be. And then slows again. It feels like Barenboim is forcing the speed changes in order to create excitement, rather than letting the music create the excitement. He also does not create as much excitement around the climaxes – compared to some of the others already listened. It's almost like they are muted.

Second Movement: The orchestra has a beautiful, mournful/subdued start. Horn solo is beautiful, but he does sound like he is straining to keep it in tune at times. Stylistically, he is right on. And some of the tempos are a bit inexact between the different departments. Once past the introduction, it never feels as if Barenboim is using dynamics enough. The highs could be higher and the lows lower, while there could be more differentiation in the middles. With a tempo change at about 9:30, which seems sudden, he does add a bit more excitement. Considering the 'fire power' at his disposal, he doesn't do enough.  Though, he ends it similarly to how he started off.

Third movement: Waltz seems a bit heavy handed, but is ok. Sometimes, there seem to be slight tempo discrepancies, which just don't let the movement settle as it should. Barenboim doesn't help things with some of the tempo changes. I think he's just too dynamic with the waltz – trying to make it more exciting, when he needs to let it flow more. 
   
Fourth Movement: Dynamic start, and a tempo that moves along a bit. Very nice. But then he slows down quite a bit before the allegro vivace, seemingly to make a statement, but then returns to faster speed. At allegro vivace, the orchestra enters on the timpini roll. Orchestra is very focused here, though they seem to slow a hair.  I think he lets the players end their notes too early sometimes. That is, they are playing more legato, but then they stop playing the phrase and there is too big of a pause to the next entrance. When they play faster, this goes away (though they don't do this all the time either – I only noticed it in a couple of the slower moments). But for some of the slower bits, it causes a bit of a dip in the forward movement and excitement. Then he's changing tempos again. In the endings here, he also allows some of the brass parts to be subsumed into the orchestra, which makes their entrances and details hard to hear sometimes. And while the tempo increases at the presto, it's like nothing else happened – same at the molto meno mosso at the end. As he goes from one part to another, there is no feeling of transition. Rather, it feels like one large grouping, which is kind of odd. One doesn't really feel he has a grasp of how to play the ending.   [I just flipped to the ending of Honeck – and I have goosebumps already. There is so much more detail and passion, and the tempo changes (even if the end is crazy fast in comparison to the previous) make more sense.]

Overall: So So. This is the first of Barenboim's recording (another followed roughly 10 years later). I never really connected with this performance. It has a few nice moments, but overall, it felt lacking in passion and a bit inexact (a shame considering the quality of the orchestra). It's strange to say that for a live performance (lacking passion), but I never really felt I was losing myself in the music. Barenboim seems to really blow it at the end, like he has blinders on and just needs to get to the end.  Oh well. Maybe this was just a practice run for his next recording (which I'll listen to next).

Alternative reviews available on the net:
http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2005/Apr05/tchaikovsky5_barenboim_2564617772.htm
http://www.arkivmusic.com/classical/album.jsp?album_id=722694
http://www.classical-music.com/review/tchaikovsky-79

[mc ukrneal]

Next up: Daniel Barenboim and the West-Eastern Divan Orchestra. 2004.

Available in these editions:


First movement: Ah, much better start compared to the CSO, though is clarinet a hair back in space? No matter, very legato and beautiful. But into the allegro, there are some small unison issues. Already, it is apparent that Barenboim is more focused on details (like crescendos, attacks, etc.) than the earlier recording. He perhaps takes it a bit slower here too, which allows that details to be heard (and executed), but also allows the climax to be well executed. Tempo changes are not quite as sudden and the music is not whipped forwards and backwards so arbitrarily, allowing us to enjoy the flow of the movement more.  A definite plus! Some of the articulation can be a bit sloppy though – hope it's just a few isolated moments. Unison is not always as crisp as it should be. Woodwind 'solos' are nicely done (around 9:45). Sometimes legato really stretches things, and I began to wonder if it was too much. 

Second Movement: Good opening, but sound not as blended as some other versions. Horn soloist plays it very straight, with no vibrato, which I felt had the effect of de-romanticizing it. Whether this is good or not will depend on your preference, but I feel that it puts him a bit at odds with the more romantic view that is subscribed to by the rest of the orchestra. The soloist is a bit sharp as he plays (mostly at the top). In other words, it sounds a bit out of place. The rest of the movement is fairly moving, if a bit not to my liking in terms of the balance of the orchestra at times (and what instruments you hear when).

Third movement: This is fine. Textures are sometimes quite thick, but it is had a nice bounce to it. A little leanness/lightness would probably make it work better though.
   
Fourth Movement: Opening attack is diffuse and too spread in sound. But the opening then progresses at a normal pace. Entry into allegro vivace is during the timpini roll. Sound is legato and a bit heavy. This makes the pace appear to slow down, and also creates issues of unison. While playing legato, the players sometimes hold the notes to the very last possible moment, which is part of why the momentum seems lagging and the texture stays heavy (and thus negatively affecting unison). Tempo choices seem more willful here as well.  And then as we get towards the end, and the tempo increases, I find the orchestra is really quite stretched. They don't snap, but it is a near thing more than once: brass playing starts to fray, unison starts to go out the door, details missed, etc. But they do get it together, ending with a clipped last four notes (at odds with the approach they took). Again, Barenboim has fused the structure of these last sections together somewhat in the speeds he chose. I can't say it is my favored approach, but it does work much better than with the CSO.

Overall: So So. Perhaps I am being harsh, and it should be in the 'good' category, but I find there are some basic issues with this that make it hard for me to recommend: 1) Horn playing doesn't gel like it should (and I think I disliked the vibrato-less playing more than I realized, making me wonder if I will like Norrington), 2) Enough unison and intonation issues to be noticeable, 3) Too often bloated and heavy, in the last movement in particular.

Alternative reviews available on the net:
http://www.classicstoday.com/review/review-11906/?search=1
http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2012/Aug12/Tchaikovsky_sy5_2564621905.htm
http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/tchaikovsky-symphony-no-5-etc-daniel-barenboim/10236833?ean=825646219056
http://www.allmusic.com/album/barenboim-conducts-tchaikovsky-verdi-sibelius-cd-dvd-mw0001851477

[Sean]

Great reviews mc...