Vaughan Williams's Veranda

[vandermolen]

And the hor-eye-zon.

*Bad-um, tish*

Another clever play on words, for those quick enough to spot it! 

[Spotted Horses]

I listened to A London Symphony, Finale, in two versions, Haitink 1933/6 and Brabbins 1920, this time Brabbins first then Haitink. A bad idea, harder to perceive the differences that way, listening to what is missing in Haitink. I'll have to repeat the exercise. I was impressed with the quality of Brabbins' performance of the finale. Aside from passages removed in the revision, the Wikipedia page refers to "changes in scoring." The Brabbins recording struck me as a bit more opulent and impressionistic. I couldn't say whether that reflects difference in the score, or Brabbins' handling of orchestral balances, compared with Haitink.

[vandermolen]

I listened to A London Symphony, Finale, in two versions, Haitink 1933/6 and Brabbins 1920, this time Brabbins first then Haitink. A bad idea, harder to perceive the differences that way, listening to what is missing in Haitink. I'll have to repeat the exercise. I was impressed with the quality of Brabbins' performance of the finale. Aside from passages removed in the revision, the Wikipedia page refers to "changes in scoring." The Brabbins recording struck me as a bit more opulent and impressionistic. I couldn't say whether that reflects difference in the score, or Brabbins' handling of orchestral balances, compared with Haitink.

The Brabbins recording of the 1920 version is my favourite recording. Yes, try listening the other way round and the differences should be clearer.

[Spotted Horses]

Listened again to the Finale of A London Symphony, first Haitink 1933/6 then Brabbins 1920. I confirm that I enjoy Brabbins' performance of the main section more than Haitink, because of a more opulent presentation (due to performance or rescoring, I don't know). I can't say I can put my finger on the restored passage in the epilog. Part of the problem is once I get to the Westminster chimes played on harp, which I can never quite hear, my mind starts wandering. I checked the time of various landmarks and found that Haitink takes about 3:30 to get from the beginning of the epilog (alternative note figure) to the solo violin entrance and Brabbins takes 5:07, so there is an extra minute and a half of music there. At this point it is an obsession and I won't rest until identify it. I will have to set up two players and listen to both in 10 second increments until I nail down the exact moment the extra bit is inserted.

[vandermolen]

Listened again to the Finale of A London Symphony, first Haitink 1933/6 then Brabbins 1920. I confirm that I enjoy Brabbins' performance of the main section more than Haitink, because of a more opulent presentation (due to performance or rescoring, I don't know). I can't say I can put my finger on the restored passage in the epilog. Part of the problem is once I get to the Westminster chimes played on harp, which I can never quite hear, my mind starts wandering. I checked the time of various landmarks and found that Haitink takes about 3:30 to get from the beginning of the epilog (alternative note figure) to the solo violin entrance and Brabbins takes 5:07, so there is an extra minute and a half of music there. At this point it is an obsession and I won't rest until identify it. I will have to set up two players and listen to both in 10 second increments until I nail down the exact moment the extra bit is inserted.

I've had both relevant recording playing just now.
I reckon that the extended extra section starts at around 11.48 into the last movement of the Brabbins recording and the cut is from about 12.31 in the last movement of the Haitink recording. I am acutely aware of that 'missing section' from the 1936 version. Hope this helps!

[Spotted Horses]

I've had both relevant recording playing just now.
I reckon that the extended extra section starts at around 11.48 into the last movement of the Brabbins recording and the cut is from about 12.31 in the last movement of the Haitink recording. I am acutely aware of that 'missing section' from the 1936 version. Hope this helps!

Thanks so much for taking the time and effort! The missing sections from the second and third movements stood out for me, but the finale has been elusive.

(I hope I never find out that Vaughan Williams revised any of his other symphonies.)

[Roasted Swan]

Thanks so much for taking the time and effort! The missing sections from the second and third movements stood out for me, but the finale has been elusive.

(I hope I never find out that Vaughan Williams revised any of his other symphonies.)

He did replace the scherzo of the 6th Symphony.... but not until after it had been published and  Boult recorded it here.....

[vandermolen]

He did replace the scherzo of the 6th Symphony.... but not until after it had been published and  Boult recorded it here.....

Yes indeed and I think that the Dutton CD allows you to hear both versions.

[Biffo]

Thanks so much for taking the time and effort! The missing sections from the second and third movements stood out for me, but the finale has been elusive.

(I hope I never find out that Vaughan Williams revised any of his other symphonies.)

In 1951 RVW revised all of the existing six symphonies. In his biography of Sir John Barbirolli, Michael Kennedy says the revisions were 'fairly extensive' without saying what they were. It was possibly around this time he admitted that the London symphony was 'beyond mending'. He sent copies of the scores to Barbirolli asking him to make any changes he thought fit: JB confined himself to technical matters.

[vandermolen]

In 1951 RVW revised all of the existing six symphonies. In his biography of Sir John Barbirolli, Michael Kennedy says the revisions were 'fairly extensive' without saying what they were. It was possibly around this time he admitted that the London symphony was 'beyond mending'. He sent copies of the scores to Barbirolli asking him to make any changes he thought fit: JB confined himself to technical matters.

A pity that Barbirolli didn't suggest restoring the 1920 version of A London Symphony!

[Biffo]

A pity that Barbirolli didn't suggest restoring the 1920 version of A London Symphony!

I doubt if JB ever saw the 1920 score.

[vandermolen]

I doubt if JB ever saw the 1920 score.

I bet you are right, but he could have heard it as Bernard Herrmann and Boult did.

[Irons]

Yes indeed and I think that the Dutton CD allows you to hear both versions.

EMI released the 1949 Boult 6th along with the original Scherzo on the HMV Treasury series, Jeffrey. The revised Scherzo is dated 15th February 1950 in the notes.

[Spotted Horses]

A pity that Barbirolli didn't suggest restoring the 1920 version of A London Symphony!

I think Vaughan Williams would have changed Barbirolli's nickname from "Glorious John" to "Vainglorious John."

[Karl Henning]

I think Vaughan Williams would have changed Barbirolli's nickname from "Glorious John" to "Vainglorious John."

(* chortle *)

[vandermolen]

EMI released the 1949 Boult 6th along with the original Scherzo on the HMV Treasury series, Jeffrey. The revised Scherzo is dated 15th February 1950 in the notes.

Thanks Lol. Yes, I recall collecting that fine LP.

[Irons]

Thanks Lol. Yes, I recall collecting that fine LP.

I was pleasantly surprised to find from the same LP in my view the finest "The Lark Ascending" with Jean Pougnet from 1953 on a recently purchased RVW twofer CD.

[vandermolen]

I was pleasantly surprised to find from the same LP in my view the finest "The Lark Ascending" with Jean Pougnet from 1953 on a recently purchased RVW twofer CD.

Totally agree about Lark Ascending Lol. That's a fabulous 2 CD set, not least for including Boult's 'Dona Nobis Pacem' and one of my rare favourite, the 'Fantasia on the Old 104th' . I once wrote to the pianist Peter Katin about it and he told me that the piano part was difficult to play.

[Irons]

Totally agree about Lark Ascending Lol. That's a fabulous 2 CD set, not least for including Boult's 'Dona Nobis Pacem' and one of my rare favourite, the 'Fantasia on the Old 104th' . I once wrote to the pianist Peter Katin about it and he told me that the piano part was difficult to play.

Blimey Jeffrey, I wrote to Peter Katin too! Through his website which included his email address. I thanked him for a Liszt recording which I enjoyed very much. He wrote a very nice note back and funnily enough said exactly the same "difficult to play". Lovely fellow, who did not get recognition due. Sorry to hear of his passing although he did reach a good age. 

[vandermolen]

Blimey Jeffrey, I wrote to Peter Katin too! Through his website which included his email address. I thanked him for a Liszt recording which I enjoyed very much. He wrote a very nice note back and funnily enough said exactly the same "difficult to play". Lovely fellow, who did not get recognition due. Sorry to hear of his passing although he did reach a good age.

Interesting! Yes, I was sad to hear of his passing as well.