Tchaikovsky's Symphony No. 5: reviews and thoughts

[Carnivorous Sheep]

I'm enjoying these reviews, keep 'em up 

[mc ukrneal]

Next up: Otto Klemperer and the Philharmonia Orchestra. 1963.

Available in these editions:


First movement: Nice opening, on the softer side (not harsh) and yet dark and somber, as well as quite lyrical. You can really hear the clarinets at the start in terms of balance. Some minor issues on entrances. And then we are off. Klemperer really moves along and such sounds! And glorious sounds they are – with the brass having a wonderful presence (they don't have quite the modern sound that some have, but you can really feel them). I am hearing the woodwinds a bit more than I usually do. The tempo is pushed and pulled in a few parts, but for the most part really charges ahead. Wow, this is exciting! The line is shaped brilliantly, and there is a lot of detail packed in. He is definitely among the faster versions in this movement, but it sounds so right nevertheless.

Second Movement: Fast start – creates a totally different atmosphere, but brilliantly done. Solo sounds excellent and very assured (effortless). Some may prefer a slower tempo, but the playing is just as it should be. And you again hear a lot of the woodwinds, with a balance that favors them. The strings don't have quite that weightiness that some have here (and you may miss that), but it still fine.  This is not your overblown, sentimental Tchaikovsky and yet it is still very much Tchaikovsky.  Those brass again – still fantastic presence.

Third movement: And here much slower, very much among the slower versions. And yet, as you listen, it doesn't sound slow (maybe because it makes a nice contrast with earlier movements). Dynamics are perhaps a bit static here.

Fourth Movement: Stately start. And into the allegro vivace, during the timpani roll, we are off at a quite slow pace. This is very much a laid back approach. But the orchestra is supporting it 100%. And again the woodwinds stand out in terms of balance. I find it starts to get a bit wearying, but I think others may enjoy it more (and it still sounds good). Though played slower, we are getting the full sound – this is an orchestra that can play it slow without losing the line. Some may miss the excitement that some conductors find here, but the discipline to maintain the slow tempo is also impressive in its way (and the energy is really maintained too).  The tempo remains quite restrained all the way to the end. If you are waiting for some speed (any speed), you may be disappointed, as it generally gets slower as it goes along! It ends slowly too, never having achieved a truly quick tempo in the movement, which will certainly drive away some listeners.

Overall: Excellent. This would never be a first choice recommendation for me, and yet there is something incredibly interesting about this version. And I say this preferring a much faster fourth movement – I was still mesmerized with Klemperer. The first two movements are exciting in their execution, with a great horn solo. If you are tired of how quickly Mravinsky takes it and are tired with how slow (and sappily) some play the early movements, this may be a version for you. It is quite similar to Markevitch's timings (and both share similar tempos, though execution is different). Finally, I am surpirsed at how much I enjoyed the fourth movement, which is slow, slower and even slower than that for the most part. Remarkable.

Alternative reviews available on the net:

http://www.classicstoday.com/review/review-3232/?search=1
http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2013/May13/Klemperer_Romantic_Symphonies_4043092.htm
http://musicweb-international.com/classrev/2013/Apr13/Klemperer_romantic_4043092.htm

[mc ukrneal]

Next up: Valery Gergiev and the Vienna Philharmonic Orchestra. 1998.

Available in these editions:


First movement: Slower to start. Nice balance, but a bit sluggish, though lots of detail. While next section does pick up speed, it is still on the slower side. Very responsive orchestra – just fantastic sounding, though horns/low brass are perhaps a tad back in the sound spectrum at times. Some tempo changes seem very much forced (and sudden). Just before 7 minutes, there is a tremendous speed increase (out of nowhere). I get the impression that the tempo changes are made purely for excitement rather than for musical reasons. And then we are slow again (much slower). If you like to be whipped back and forth, this may be more interesting for you. I think there is a style issue as well. When they go really slow, they have to have a much more legato approach in order that the music not have gaps. But when they speed ahead, they have to play more staccato in order that the music not feel heavy and that the listener hear the details (otherwise, it would be mushy).

Second Movement: Suitably dark entrance. And here's another beautiful horn solo – just gorgeous tone. This version has more rubato, observed by the soloist and orchestra together. Transition of the low strings is very messy before the strings themselves come in to play the theme.  Gergiev is really pulling out all the hard-rending he can here. But again, the changes in speed are so abrupt. And though I find this a bit off-putting, the VPO are amazing in how lithely they adapt. And then we are slow again (even slower than before). When the climax comes, it is as impressive as you'd like, though he could have gained so much by being more nuanced on the tempo changes. The problem at the end is that the ending of the movement does not flow back into a more subdued atmosphere. Rather, it just downshifts into it.

Third movement: Speedy waltz, though Gergiev again cannot resist abrupt tempo shifts (or probably better to call it very strong rubato). I wish he would just get out of the way and let the orchestra play it, because they play the hell out of it when he does.

Fourth Movement: Good start. He continues his strong use of accents everywhere (which sometimes adds and sometimes takes away), and this dovetails with all the detail he brings out (a good thing). And into the allegro vivace, they come in as the timpani plays a heavy roll at the top (so not downbeat, but a clear top). It's a somewhat speedy version, though again there are numerous speed manipulations. While the orchestral sound is magnificent, the performance seems too focused on making big sounds and impressive climaxes. There is the occasional moment where the piece is given the opportunity to shine, like at 8:45, there is a more organic climax. But Gergiev does this so rarely and is soon back to his old tricks. I also find towards the end that it is just played too loudly for too long. The last section slows to very stately speed, though the timpini sure whacks away too loudly (though it does hide some unison issues, and he doesn't hit with the orchestra in the first of the last four notes, which slows as they play them). 

Overall: So So. If you are less bothered by the tempo changes, you will bump this up to good for sure. The orchestra is very fine. The horn solo is among the best I've heard so far. Gergiev certainly is a bit different, and he has brought a more brim and firestone approach to the whole work. I find it doesn't work entirely, because is misses out in other areas, but others may enjoy it more than I did. While there are lots of details in phrasing, I think he lets the loudness, particularly in the final movement, get away from him. Those looking for a more lyrical approach should look elsewhere.

Alternative reviews available on the net:

http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2005/Apr05/Tchaikovsky5_Gergiev_4756718.htm
http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2005/Dec05/Tchaikovsky_Gergiev_4756315.htm
http://music-programnotes.blogspot.com/2010/04/tchaikovsky-symphony-no5-opus-64.html
http://www.allmusic.com/album/tchaikovsky-symphonies-45-6-mw0001847995
http://www.myclassicalnotes.com/2009/10/valery-gergiev-conducts-tchaikovsky/
http://www.classicalsource.com/db_control/db_cd_review.php?id=1257

[Herman]

Next up: Valery Gergiev and the Vienna Philharmonic Orchestra. 1998.

On youtube the last three symphonies are presented in pretty good sound en video, with a different orchestra, i.e. with Gergiev's Mariinsky Orchestra. I think these performances work better than the Philips recordings with the VP

[mc ukrneal]

Next up: Wilhelm Furtwangler and the Orchestra Sinfonico di Torino della Rai. 1952.

Available in these editions:

Last two are mp3 only.

This is a 1952 recording, with some clear hiss at the start. Sometimes it gets louder though and really affects the listening (for example, middle of second movement for about 30-45 seconds). Occasionally, there are some really bad scratchy sounds that do make this a trial to listen through. There is a fair amount of congestion all the way through on the louder passages. These comments relate to the Andromeda release and I cannot comment on any of the other releases.

First movement: Slow start. Clarinet sounds fine and the start is very somber and sober. Good mood set at start. But then the thing stays at a ponderous tempo. And the orchestra is a bit inconsistent on the beat. And then there is this one phrase from the strings (it repeats, three notes), that is just so mannered. And then finally the speed kicks up a notch, and the climax is pretty awesome, though he keeps speeding up, which makes it seem rushed. Tempos are really stretched around here, from really fast to ponderously slow. It seems forced. Orchestra has some unison problems in the middle and later sections (as well as some intonation issues, though this could be the recording). In general, softer bits are slower, while louder bits are faster.  Despite the sound the balance is actually pretty good. Sometimes the tempo is actually changing from phrase to phrase, which makes it very difficult to feel the overall structure.

Second Movement: Nicely phrased opening. Horn solo sounds harsh and out of tune at times, with some vibrato (mostly at the start, though could also be recording). This movement is also on the slower side. But this movement has a much better conception. The speeds are more organic and the orchestra does not seem quite as stretched as they did in the previous movement (though some entrances are mushy). This is the best movement in terms of a complete performance. 

Third movement: This is a slow one. It's a bit like listening in slow motion. But it works overall as the phrasing keeps the piece moving forward. Though, there is some sloppy playing and some lack of unison at times as well.

Fourth Movement: Stately start. Some out of tune playing in the brass. Into the allegro vivace, a clear entrance on the end of the timpini roll (but here the timpini is played in crescendo, then decrescendo, and the entrance is in the decrescendo, so yet another approach), and played quite slow, though it picks up speed. Woodwinds occasionally disappear (just sounds like they were not picked up in the recording or too far back to be heard). Tempos are once again all over the place. And as was typical of some earlier periods, there are cuts. As they get further into the movement, unison and intonation worsen. There is some clapping in the middle (the false ending), so must be live (though I cannot find any other evidence about that). End is slower, with some clear mistakes. And last four notes are sloppy (mushy and not in unison).

Overall: Poor. Bad sound certainly doesn't help, but that wouldn't save this performance. And this has cuts on top of it. You can feel the essence of the piece, but the poor execution (and sometimes just plain poor playing) really let it down, as do some rather funky tempo choices. I'd much rather listen to the van Kempen version from the same period.

Alternative reviews available on the net:
http://www.classicalnotes.net/features/furtwangler.html#greatesthits

[mc ukrneal]

On youtube the last three symphonies are presented in pretty good sound en video, with a different orchestra, i.e. with Gergiev's Mariinsky Orchestra. I think these performances work better than the Philips recordings with the VP

I think I might have seen those, but I can't really remember. They are a bit pricey, so I am hoping I can come across them in a library or something like that. In any case, they are on my wishlist.

[Marc]

Thans for the Klemperer review.
Ordered.
(Maybe I can find some spare room in da house, somewhere among the Bach discs and books .)

[mc ukrneal]

Thans for the Klemperer review.
Ordered.
(Maybe I can find some spare room in da house, somewhere among the Bach discs and books .)

Please let us know what you think. It is different.

[Que]

Saw your comments on Furtwängler. If you're looking for a great historical recording, Willem Mengelberg is your man.

I have a transfer on Pearl, but Japanese Opus Kura must be to the latest standards:



(click picture)

Q

[mc ukrneal]

Saw your comments on Furtwängler. If you're looking for a great historical recording, Willem Mengelberg is your man.

I have a transfer on Pearl, but Japanese Opus Kura must be to the latest standards:



(click picture)

Q

It looks like I need to add that one to the list. THanks! It is confusing though. It seems Mengelberg did two recordings that are available - one from 1938-39 (not 1940 as I have on the list) and this one from 1928. I will need to update my list.

EDIT: According to this site(http://web.kyoto-inet.or.jp/people/thase29/Willem2/Willem2.html), he did three (1928, 1939, and 1940; the latter with Berlin). Really appreciate the heads up!

[Herman]

I think I might have seen those, but I can't really remember. They are a bit pricey,

watching youtube is for free.

[mc ukrneal]

watching youtube is for free.

True, but to give them a fair shake against the lossless disc, I feel I would need to at least hear better quality than is available on youtube. Otherwise, someone could claim (and fairly) that the quality skewed the result. Still, I appreciate your pointing it out (and if nothing else reminding us that there is an alternative versions of his).

[Que]

It looks like I need to add that one to the list. THanks! It is confusing though. It seems Mengelberg did two recordings that are available - one from 1938-39 (not 1940 as I have on the list) and this one from 1928. I will need to update my list.

EDIT: According to this site(http://web.kyoto-inet.or.jp/people/thase29/Willem2/Willem2.html), he did three (1928, 1939, and 1940; the latter with Berlin). Really appreciate the heads up!

Here is another listing: http://401dutchdivas.nl/nl/dirigenten/420-willem-mengelberg-4.html

I am only familiar with the 1928 Columbia recording in its issue on Pearl, which is also the one issued on Opus Kura.

The 1939 recording is reportedly a live radio recording in not so good sound, and many issues seem to have a part missing. M&A and Q-disc are to have issued to complete thing.

The 1940 Telefunken recording - "studio"/without audience - is reportedly a more expansive reading in good sound quality but with major cuts to limit the nr of 78rpms... (Pristine Classical and M&A)

Q

[mc ukrneal]

Next up: Mikhail Pletnev and the Russian National Orchestra. 1995.

Available in these editions:


First movement: Very nice (somber) start. Clarinet has a nice tone and holds the notes to their fullest, but still lots of dynamic and phrasing details. Brilliant start, though slow in terms of tempo, and perhaps pauses too long at the end of that first section, but tastes may vary. And then we are off at a nice pace in the next section. Tempos are much more consistent here, and any changes are handled in a much more nuanced way than the past couple of versions (Furtwangler and Gergiev). Here is a version that is both fleet, but also maximizes the climaxes. There is great precision playing in these opening minutes too. The orchestra sounds fantastic.  Horns are much more subtle in their phrasing – really gorgeous, lush and luscious playing (with such a warm tone). I love how notes are not being cut short, which gives it this rich, warm lyrical sound. At the same time, they are not overly weighty and are light as a feather when they need to be. 

Second Movement: Another great start, perhaps not differentiated enough from the first movement, but wonderfully done. Horn solo is beautiful, though with plenty of vibrato. Still, it's played extremely well, nicely balanced with the orchestra. This movement can be played very romantic and I think that is dialed back here (though still present of course). Beautiful bassoon solos too. In fact, the beauty of the movement just shines through. Climaxes are achingly beautiful rather than awing in their impact.

Third movement: Very ballet-like in sound. I like the phrasing, which really emphasizes the rise and fall of a waltz.

Fourth Movement: Stately start, though a bit reserved perhaps (and on the slower side), until the brass really pound away at last. And then we come to the allegro vivace, entered in this case on the timpani roll that is nearly non-existent! Oh no, that is something of a bust. They take it at a fair speed though and the excitement comes through (though it lacks the intensity that some bring to it). This version has, unexpectedly, some of the strongest brass I have yet heard.  The tempo changes after this make total sense compared to some and flow very naturally. Lower brass doesn't have quite as much presence in some moments, but they sound great when they do. Ending is something of a mixed bag, with some overly staccato playing, uneven changes in tempo and perhaps too much pull back on climaxes. By the end, however, it has rallied itself and finishes on a total high. Very stately end, with tempo virtually unchanged. Last four notes are slowed down and emphasized.

Overall: Good. Bummer really, because the first three movements are simply excellent. Outstanding even. But the near lack of ANY timpani roll into the fourth movement is a pretty major issue for me. If that doesn't matter to you, then this may be an excellent recording (despite some other niggles I had in the fourth movement). Overall, it is simply beautifully played and allowed to flow naturally.

Alternative reviews available on the net:
http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2011/Jan11/Tchaikovsky_pletnev_4778699.htm
http://www.classical-music.com/review/tchaikovsky-23
http://www.allmusic.com/album/tchaikovsky-the-symphonies-mw0002056790

[Marc]

Please let us know what you think. It is different.

It might sound odd, but it reminded me of my 'Klemperer - Midsummer Night's Dream' experience loads of years ago. Klemperer's Mendelssohn sounded different than I was used to, but was still very good.

Klemperer is always breathing, also when he's on the slower side, like in Tchaikovsky 5-III and 5-IV. Not much Slavonic pathos, but there sure is intensity and .... it always sounds CLEAR, with detailed attention to all instrumental parts. A classical approach to Tchaikovsky and I like it.

[mc ukrneal]

It might sound odd, but it reminded me of my 'Klemperer - Midsummer Night's Dream' experience loads of years ago. Klemperer's Mendelssohn sounded different than I was used to, but was still very good.

Klemperer is always breathing, also when he's on the slower side, like in Tchaikovsky 5-III and 5-IV. Not much Slavonic pathos, but there sure is intensity and .... it always sounds CLEAR, with detailed attention to all instrumental parts. A classical approach to Tchaikovsky and I like it.

I agree with everything you wrote. It's still the biggest surprise for me too.

[mc ukrneal]

Next up: Mikhail Pletnev and the Russian National Orchestra. 2010.

Available in these editions:


First movement: Decent start, though pauses perhaps too long as the momentum is lost and feels episodic. Clarinet is ok, though slightly out of synch at moments. Opening is restrained to say the least. And then we speed up nicely into the allegro. Tempo is consistently fast. Climaxes are unexpectedly not as 'fire and brimstone' as they can be (and seem a bit restrained). The changes in tempo that follow seem mostly quite natural (though later on, they do rush a bit, around the 10 minute mark). Horns clearly vibrato, which I expect we'll hear again in the solo of the next movement. He is really making use of pauses more than most, but I think it causes too much loss of momentum, but perhaps others will feel differently. Trumpets sound farther back in the sound spectrum / sound stage – would have liked them a little closer. Though, overall, this does not strike me as an overly bright recording, which may also account for that as well. And then a pause around 11:35 – why? This just breaks the flow of the music. Overall, the pauses just seem like another way to push and pull the music, which I did not really enjoy all that much. In the last climax (or two), I realized that the balance is not to my liking either. Some instruments are hard to hear at times (aforementioned trumpets) and others stand out too much. And last note – someone holds just a hair too long.

Second Movement: Dark start, though beautifully played. Horn, as mentioned, plays with quite strong vibrato. This time, the phrasing is much less nuanced and more direct. Still played beautifully, but somewhat cold / distant as a result (result is a somewhat bland solo, though tone is sometimes beautiful). This reflects the movement as a whole, which has lyrical beauty, but is played in a more 'straight' fashion. You won't find 'gooey' or 'syrupy' here for the most part. The woodwind 'solos' are nicely handled.  Though the rubato that sometimes appears makes it seem as if there are some unison issues. It does end fairly well, though capriciousness on speeds seems to be increasing as the movement goes on.

Third movement: Subdued. The strings don't really seem to have much of a presence. I think it's the violas in particular. As a result, the balance is off, which reduces the effectiveness of the movement.

Fourth Movement: Decent start, though phrasing is drowned out and not much detail. Into the allegro vivace (after a longer than usual timpini roll), they enter during the roll. And they are off at a rather moderate pace to start, followed by sudden speed increase, which would have been exciting if they could have played it together. Despite a quick speed, it is strangely dull. I didn't think this was really possible. Unison issues abound at this speed, though at least lightly played (brass just do not seem to have presence here, which is part of the problem). And then around 6:35 it sounds like the players got stuck and just held the note for no reason, after which there is a (too) long pause and we are off again at a slower speed (I am reminded here of the Emperor's New Groove, when Kronk is taking the Llama away and he has to hide in the shadows and the music stays on the same musical phrase for a moment – this is not a good thing, 0.48 to 0.55 from this snippet: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vrUy1yBuDPU).  In sum, very laid back and lacking in animation. The various ending sections are ok, though brass sound very tentative in some moments.

Overall: So So. This one never engaged me the way the DG version did. I found that version much more exciting and much more organic in its overall evolution. The solo is ok, but is done better elsewhere. But the fourth movement again seems to be his achilles heel. In sum, you can do better, starting with his earlier performance.

Alternative reviews available on the net:
http://www.classicstoday.com/review/a-tepid-tchaikovsky-fifth/?search=1
http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2011/Sept11/Tchaikovsky_PTC5186385.htm
http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2011/Nov11/Tchaikovsky5_PTC5186385.htm
http://classicalcandor.blogspot.com/2011/06/tchaikovsky-symphony-no-5-sacd-review.html
http://www.sa-cd.net/showreviews/7177
http://audaud.com/2011/07/tchaikovsky-symphony-no-5-in-e-minor-op-64-francesca-da-rimini-op-32-%e2%80%93-russian-national-orchestra-mikhail-pletnev-pentatone-classics/
http://www.classical-music.com/review/tchaikovsky-symphony-no-5-e-minor
http://www.allmusic.com/album/tchaikovsky-symphony-no-5-francesca-da-rimini-mw0002141440

[Oldnslow]

I enjoyed listening to Constantin Silvestri's 1957 Tchaikovsky Symphonies 4-6 with the Philharmonia on the recent EMI Silvestri box set. Very fiery performances, kinda like the classic Mrvrinsky,  set but with a western orchestra. From what I have heard so far of this box set, I would say Maestro  Silvestri was a very fine conductor, particularly in Russian and eastern  block composers

[mc ukrneal]

Next up: Antal Dorati and the London Symphony Orchestra. 1961.

Available in these editions:


First movement: Very slow start. Every note has weight, taking over 3 minutes to go those 37 bars (this is very slow; compared to Dmitriev (less than 2 minutes) and even Barenboim and WEDO, who take the movement 25 seconds faster overall, but still take the opening at less than 2min 30sec). The allegro con anima is faster, and the rubato is fairly modest, though actual tempo changes are not. As a result, the tempos feel forced some of the time. Strings feel very much forefront in the soundstage (not just here, but everywhere) and are a bit bright. Climaxes are very precise – quite thrilling because of this. Interestingly, this is the first orchestra who plays thrillingly and yet you always feel they could kick it up yet another notch if they wanted to. I think this is happening for a few reasons: brass have great presence and you feel they are playing effortlessly (no straining at all, at least in this movement), the orchestra play so precisely in terms of rhythm, and there is never once a feeling they can't keep up or can't play in unison at speed. The overall impact is one of grandeur and bombast and less on the lyrical (or even romantic) side. All of this is aided by a more staccato approach to phrasing.

Second Movement: Foreboding start to the movement, but quite beautiful (interesting phrasing here too, with good use of crescendos and decrescendos). Horn solo is straight forward, perhaps a hair back in the soundstage. I can't quite put my finger on it, but is seems somehow like the soloist is holding back. Tempos again feel a bit manipulated and don't flow as they could. Yet, because the phrasing is so effective, it is still quite moving.  And when the climaxes come, they do not disappoint (with great weight from the trumpets and low brass).

Third movement: Moves along nicely, with only modest rubato. They certainly play this lightly, but definitely feels more energetic than some as well.

Fourth Movement: Stately start, a bit on the slower side. Nice use of dynamics. Into the allegro vivace (played at the top of the roll, but no hit), they are not particularly fast. But the phrasing is impactful and full of intent (meaning they hit the accents pretty good). It does speed up a bit a minute later. Again, brass are really a strength, hitting the notes and giving them a nice weight (they really give you that nice sure feeling they will hit it every time). But some may miss a faster approach or one that has more fire. This performance does not really fit that style, focusing more on the impact of the notes and the phrasing. I'm surprised how much I am enjoying it. They have a quite slow moderato that really speeds up suddenly and then really takes off into the presto. The last section is handled differently too, with a molto meno mosso that speeds up as it goes along (until the very, very end), to quite good effect.

Overall: Good. Dorati does a fine job, taking a way less traveled. This version is neither strongly lyrical nor romantic in approach (almost cold at times), but the phrasing is well thought out (and quite detailed) and when the climaxes come, you can't help but be impressed. This really is a fresh and invigorating version, one I have enjoyed thoroughly. The brass and timpani are so good here too – you never feel the brass are straining. I don't think the approach would work so well if the brass were not so sure in their playing (because the speed exposes them so much in the fourth movement, for example). Strings are too prominent at times, but the piece still comes off well.
Sound: There is some hiss throughout, which is definitely audible in the quieter moments. There also seem to be some occasional sounds, perhaps a recording or editing issue.

Alternative reviews available on the net:
http://www.classical.net/music/recs/reviews/m/mrc756261a.php
https://www.arkivmusic.com/classical/album.jsp?album_id=14237
http://www.allmusic.com/album/tchaikovsky-symphonies-nos-1-6-mw0001419470

[Brian]

Neal, I wonder if you noticed that one of the alternative reviews available for Pletnev/PentaTone was written by me.  I liked the recording a lot less than you did, but our gripes were very similar. Wish I'd thought of the hilarious Disney analogy in the last paragraph!