Vaughan Williams's Veranda

[Biffo]

I'll be interested to hear what you think. I don't especially like the Serenade to Music, much to the horror of some others here but the PC is a great favourite, although I tend to prefer the double piano version, which was the one I grew up with (Boult/Vronsky and Babin). I've pre-ordered the CD.

I am duly horrified; it is rather like a H M Bateman cartoon - The Man who didn't like the Serenade to Music. The first ever LP I bought was Sargent conducting Vaughan Williams and the Serenade was one of the pieces, in the version for four soloists and chorus.

I will post my thoughts on the Toronto album in due course.

[vandermolen]

I am duly horrified; it is rather like a H M Bateman cartoon - The Man who didn't like the Serenade to Music. The first ever LP I bought was Sargent conducting Vaughan Williams and the Serenade was one of the pieces, in the version for four soloists and chorus.

I will post my thoughts on the Toronto album in due course.

I prefer the orchestral version without the voices  .

Yes, I'll be interested to hear your views of the Toronto performances.

[Biffo]

I prefer the orchestral version without the voices  .

Yes, I'll be interested to hear your views of the Toronto performances.

The orchestral version is annoying, like the 'bleeding chunks' of Wagner, I keep expecting the voices to enter. In fact, I can't listen to the orchestral version without hearing the voices (from the Boult recording) in my head.

[vandermolen]

The orchestral version is annoying, like the 'bleeding chunks' of Wagner, I keep expecting the voices to enter. In fact, I can't listen to the orchestral version without hearing the voices (from the Boult recording) in my head.

I can't listen to the 1936 version of A London Symphony without being acutely aware of the missing poetic and moving section before the Epilogue.

[Mirror Image]

I can't listen to the 1936 version of A London Symphony without being acutely aware of the missing poetic and moving section before the Epilogue.

The best performance of A London Symphony I've heard lately was that Brabbins' performance of the 1920 version on Hyperion. I think he really got under the skin of this symphony.

[vandermolen]

The best performance of A London Symphony I've heard lately was that Brabbins' performance of the 1920 version on Hyperion. I think he really got under the skin of this symphony.

That is a wonderful CD - the best version of the 1920 London Symphony and with some interesting shorter works. I suspect that I will rarely listen to the 1936 version again. I wish that VW had stopped tinkering with the work after 1920. IMHO he excised one of the best, certainly most moving things that he wrote just before the end of the symphony, not to mention that briefly dark and turbulent section in the scherzo. My own view is that in 1936 he was too in thrall to Sibelius, who would have been at the height of his fame in Britain. Nothing wrong with that of course but I think that the more discursive nature on the 1920 version suited the rambling nature of the city itself.

[Biffo]

That is a wonderful CD - the best version of the 1920 London Symphony and with some interesting shorter works. I suspect that I will rarely listen to the 1936 version again. I wish that VW had stopped tinkering with the work after 1920. IMHO he excised one of the best, certainly most moving things that he wrote just before the end of the symphony, not to mention that briefly dark and turbulent section in the scherzo. My own view is that in 1936 he was too in thrall to Sibelius, who would have been at the height of his fame in Britain. Nothing wrong with that of course but I think that the more discursive nature on the 1920 version suited the rambling nature of the city itself.

I suppose I am the exact opposite. I bought my first London Symphony (Boult/LPO) over 40 years ago and by the time the Hickox recording appeared (2001) the 1936 version, after countless listenings, was embedded in my brain. The Hickox is a fine performance but I probably haven't listened to it very often over the years, interesting as it is to hear RVW's first thoughts.

[aukhawk]

I prefer the orchestral version without the voices  .
Yes, I'll be interested to hear your views of the Toronto performances.

It's not obvious, from that Toronto album cover, which version is included there.

[Biffo]

It's not obvious, from that Toronto album cover, which version is included there.

It is the version for orchestra, chorus and four soloists. This is the version I first got to know from a Sargent recording back in the 1960s. It is very effective but, as I later discovered, not on a par with the original version for sixteen soloists.

[Mirror Image]

That is a wonderful CD - the best version of the 1920 London Symphony and with some interesting shorter works. I suspect that I will rarely listen to the 1936 version again. I wish that VW had stopped tinkering with the work after 1920. IMHO he excised one of the best, certainly most moving things that he wrote just before the end of the symphony, not to mention that briefly dark and turbulent section in the scherzo. My own view is that in 1936 he was too in thrall to Sibelius, who would have been at the height of his fame in Britain. Nothing wrong with that of course but I think that the more discursive nature on the 1920 version suited the rambling nature of the city itself.

I can only nod my head in agreement, my friend. It is a fantastic recording.

[vandermolen]

I suppose I am the exact opposite. I bought my first London Symphony (Boult/LPO) over 40 years ago and by the time the Hickox recording appeared (2001) the 1936 version, after countless listenings, was embedded in my brain. The Hickox is a fine performance but I probably haven't listened to it very often over the years, interesting as it is to hear RVW's first thoughts.

I grew up on Boult's later recording on EMI which is also a very fine version. It was part of the symphonic boxed set of LPs with the LPO and New Philharmonia Orchestra. One of the best recordings on the 1936 version I think.

[vandermolen]

Ok, so what's the verdict here on Bernstein's Sony recording of Vaughan Williams's 4th Symphony with the NYPO ? I think it's excellent, maybe not my favourite version but searching and visionary all the same.

[Baron Scarpia]

I should listen to an earlier version of the London Symphony. (I have the Hickox and the new recording of the 1920 version.) I was going to, and I started by listening to the 1936 version for comparison, which turned into several recordings of the 1936 version (Andrew Davis, Haitink, Barbirolli), and by then I was burned out on the work and never got to the early version. Bad planning.

(Ironically, I did listen to the first movement of the 1920 version, recently released by Hyperion, I forget the conductor, but that's the movement that wasn't changed.)

[Sergeant Rock]

Ok, so what's the verdict here on Bernstein's Sony recording of Vaughan Williams's 4th Symphony with the NYPO ? I think it's excellent, maybe not my favourite version but searching and visionary all the same.

Bernstein is my favorite version although I also love the very different Boult (Decca) and Rozhdestvensky (slower Finales) and Slatkin.

Sarge

[Karl Henning]

Curiously . . . I am not certain that I have yet listened to Lenny here . . . .

[Archaic Torso of Apollo]

Ok, so what's the verdict here on Bernstein's Sony recording of Vaughan Williams's 4th Symphony with the NYPO ? I think it's excellent, maybe not my favourite version but searching and visionary all the same.

I like it a lot. It starts off a bit slower than I am used to, but it develops a great sense of power (like some natural disaster) as it goes on. The interpretation has an epic feeling, rather different from the neo-classical style of Berglund, for example.

[vandermolen]

Thanks for the Lennie feedback guys. I agree that it is a very strong version. In fact the whole CD is good with a rather expressive and eloquent Tallis Fantasia, which I found more moving than usual. Otherwise I like the Boult EMI version and Berglund. I'm not that keen on the composer's own version and prefer his performance of Symphony 5.

[relm1]

Listening to Bernstein's RVW No. 4 now.  The yanks really did nail searching and visionary all the same during this period, didn't they?  You have Bernstein's RVW No. 4 in 1965, Previn's Walton No. 1 in 1967 (the best interpretation IMO), then Previn's great LSO RVW cycle in the 70's.  But I do think Boult edges out Bernstein slightly in No. 4.  It is just electrifying with the Philharmonia. 

[vandermolen]

Listening to Bernstein's RVW No. 4 now.  The yanks really did nail searching and visionary all the same during this period, didn't they?  You have Bernstein's RVW No. 4 in 1965, Previn's Walton No. 1 in 1967 (the best interpretation IMO), then Previn's great LSO RVW cycle in the 70's.  But I do think Boult edges out Bernstein slightly in No. 4.  It is just electrifying with the Philharmonia.

That Boult EMI version was the first one I knew. I even got our receptive Musical Appreciation teacher to play it to our class, on LP, when I was in the Sixth Form at school. I must have come across as a bit precocious, although my dismal performance in my academic studies would have made up for that.

[Mirror Image]

Ok, so what's the verdict here on Bernstein's Sony recording of Vaughan Williams's 4th Symphony with the NYPO ? I think it's excellent, maybe not my favourite version but searching and visionary all the same.

A powerful performance and certainly one of my favorites. I think Bernstein really understood this symphony --- a shame he never tackled the sixth.