More Blind Comparisons! - Symphonie fantastique

[MishaK]

Don't have much time right now, but where is this indicated? I don't recall seeing this direction before.

The indication regarding pianos in octaves is at the very beginning of the movement in a footnote. The "derrière la scène" is right at the first bell entry in bar 19 after rehearsal number 65 just before the beginning of the Dies irae.

[PerfectWagnerite]

Perfectly fair question! I guess it's a matter of how you interpret that slide. Should it be a full octave glissando with distinct pitches, or a portamento a few degrees down from the upper C with indistinct pitches? And here I admit I'm out of my depth on woodwind technique. We need Jochanaan! (A clarinet, at least, seems capable of an extended portamento, as in the opening of Rhapsody in Blue.)

I used to be a flute player (not too good, not too bad either) and I can say that if I see a slide as in three to two bars before rehearsal number 61 (incidentally scored for piccolo flute, regular flute, and oboe) I would just play a decreasing chromatic scale. I am sure there are better flautists on this board who can elaborate on what other techniques there are on the flute that I am not aware of.

[jochanaan]

Perfectly fair question! I guess it's a matter of how you interpret that slide. Should it be a full octave glissando with distinct pitches, or a portamento a few degrees down from the upper C with indistinct pitches? And here I admit I'm out of my depth on woodwind technique. We need Jochanaan! (A clarinet, at least, seems capable of an extended portamento, as in the opening of Rhapsody in Blue.)

Don't have time to download the recordings because of my glacial 56k connection, but a true glissando is very difficult for most woodwinds, so most players simply do as others have said, a fast chromatic scale down or up.  Clarinets are unique because for the first three fingers on each hand, they have fingerholes, not keys; the portamento in Rhapsody in Blue is produced by sliding these fingers slowly off the holes, rather than lifting them all at once.  In theory, you can do this on an open-hole flute, or between certain notes on oboe or bassoon; but in practice it's far easier simply to let the notes fly.  (I've experimented with true glissandi on my closed-hole flute; it's possible--barely.  And pitch-bending is very difficult on flute, although not on the reed instruments.)

Something just occurred to me, though.  Berlioz wrote the Symphonie Fantastique in or before 1830; but the modern key systems for woodwinds didn't appear until the 1840s.  It's just possible that our Hector intended his woodwind players to slide their fingers à la Rhapsody in Blue! Despite the benefits of all the technical advances in instruments over the last couple of centuries, some things are easier on the old ones.

[MishaK]

Something just occurred to me, though.  Berlioz wrote the Symphonie Fantastique in or before 1830; but the modern key systems for woodwinds didn't appear until the 1840s.  It's just possible that our Hector intended his woodwind players to slide their fingers à la Rhapsody in Blue! Despite the benefits of all the technical advances in instruments over the last couple of centuries, some things are easier on the old ones.

Thanks for this very illuminating post, jochanaan. Maybe I will post some short excerpts of the Gardiner recording for reference.

[Larry Rinkel]

The indication regarding pianos in octaves is at the very beginning of the movement in a footnote. The "derrière la scène" is right at the first bell entry in bar 19 after rehearsal number 65 just before the beginning of the Dies irae.

I knew about the pianos thing. Berlioz says that if bells can't be found that are low enough, substitute several pianos in octaves at the apron of the stage (not behind the scenes). It was the "derrière" thing I didn't recognize, and that indication is not found in the New Critical Edition score.

[Larry Rinkel]

Something just occurred to me, though.  Berlioz wrote the Symphonie Fantastique in or before 1830; but the modern key systems for woodwinds didn't appear until the 1840s.  It's just possible that our Hector intended his woodwind players to slide their fingers à la Rhapsody in Blue! Despite the benefits of all the technical advances in instruments over the last couple of centuries, some things are easier on the old ones.

Curiously enough, the same is true of glissandos on the piano. The older, lighter piano action made glissandos relatively easy, and the classic examples are in the Beethoven Waldstein Sonata and one notorious Brahms Paganini Variation (it is variation 13 from book 1):
http://imslp.ca/images/imslp.ca/0/0a/Brahms_-_Variations_on_a_Theme_by_Pagannini_Book_I,.pdf

Today the pianist either has to adjust the texture to distribute the glissandi between the hands, or risk getting bloody fingers.

[PerfectWagnerite]

FWIW I think the Gardiner recording is terrible, along with Colin Davis Amsterdam recording they have to be two of the most overrated versions of this work. I couldn't stand either one and sold them about a year ago.

[MishaK]

I knew about the pianos thing. Berlioz says that if bells can't be found that are low enough, substitute several pianos in octaves at the apron of the stage (not behind the scenes). It was the "derrière" thing I didn't recognize, and that indication is not found in the New Critical Edition score.

Interesting. It's in every other edition I have seen, including the two download links at the beginning of this thread as well as my Dover Edition. It would be interesting to know when Berlioz added or deleted this.

FWIW I think the Gardiner recording is terrible, along with Colin Davis Amsterdam recording they have to be two of the most overrated versions of this work. I couldn't stand either one and sold them about a year ago.

Interpretively, Gardiner is certainly not particularly hot, but I do think it is instructive with respect to the timbres of the band.

[M forever]

D has some nice features but is somehow less interesting overall than A or B, or maybe I was just getting weary of the thing. As one to consider buying, it's ruled out for me by the bells, which are these high-pitched, overly bright puny things that don't at all match Berlioz's notated bass registers. You want bells, hear A. But he's very attentive to the dynamics, especially the soft ppp, and one striking sound occurs midway through the Dies Irae, where he seems to direct the tubas to play cuivré, a hard-blowing effect that causes the metal of the instrument to vibrate.

I thought cuivré simply means "brassy, metallic" in the sense of forced, bright. What do you mean by "causes the metal to vibrate"? I have a hard time imagining how that could be done...The snarling effect here appears to me to be reached by some kind of loose lips technique.

I realize that after the raw energy of Clip C everything else after must seem like a letdown which is unfortunate because I think the conductors in Clips D and E have something valid to say.

Not necessarily. C simply bored me. The witch sabbath effect for me does not really happen by just playing the piece fast and wild. I think it's more interesting, and otherworldy eerie to hear the unusual colors and effects Berlioz cretaed here. I think one of the reasons I am tired of this piece is because few actually do that, just play through this piece like a brilliant orchestral showpiece or simply "wildly".

We discussed already a bit the original orchestration of the Dies irae with ophicleides and serpent. What do you think this should sound like and whose handling of colors and balances do you find most interesting or convincing here? Would you like me to post an excerpt of the Gardiner Dies irae as reference?

I don't even remember what the ophicleides exactly sounded like. I think they should just play these parts on ophicleides and serpents. It should be no problem to find players who can handle these. I think the idea to replace them with bass tubas is really not so good. Maybe a more apt effect could be produced on tenor horns or wagnertubes. Or maybe not. Another "problem" is that the bassoons of the era sounded rather different. The French Buffet bassons still come quite close to the original sound, but the German Heckel bassoons really don't sound a whole lot like that. It might even be more true to the original idea to play these fagotti irae passages on baritone saxophones.

[Larry Rinkel]

I thought cuivré simply means "brassy, metallic" in the sense of forced, bright. What do you mean by "causes the metal to vibrate"? I have a hard time imagining how that could be done...The snarling effect here appears to me to be reached by some kind of loose lips technique.

I'm not a brass player; I learned what I wrote only from orchestration manuals. If I'm wrong, I'll stand corrected.

[M forever]

I don't know what they mean by "making the metal vibrate". That sounds as if the whole instrument is supposed to vibrate. I don't know much about the theory here either, but there is indeed a correlation between sound quality and the thickness (and therefore elasticity) of the metal, how much it interacts with the vibrations of the air inside the tube. But I don't think this is what is generally meant by that term. I know that "schmettern" indicates a loud, metallic, kind of military, signal trumpet quality. Something extrovert and bright with some bravura, rather than grace and nobility of sound. In the direction of blaring, but not with the negative connotation as being simply distasteful. Rather somehow "dashing".

[Larry Rinkel]

I don't know what they mean by "making the metal vibrate". That sounds as if the whole instrument is supposed to vibrate. I don't know much about the theory here either, but there is indeed a correlation between sound quality and the thickness (and therefore elasticity) of the metal, how much it interacts with the vibrations of the air inside the tube. But I don't think this is what is generally meant by that term. I know that "schmettern" indicates a loud, metallic, kind of military, signal trumpet quality. Something extrovert and bright with some bravura, rather than grace and nobility of sound. In the direction of blaring, but not with the negative connotation as being simply distasteful. Rather somehow "dashing".

Quite possibly I characterized what you call that "snarling sound" incorrectly in terms of production. But how then do the brass produce that effect?

[M forever]

Dunno exactly how the tuba did it here, it sounds somehow like a "loose lip attack" effect. In order to excite the air column inside the instrument, an impulse needs to be given which overcomes the resistance of the air column to the stream of air coming from the player. This is usually achieved by controlling the release of air with the tongue. Here, I think the tuba player "attacks" the notes simply by blowing air through the lips without giving a tongue attack. The effect is that the instrument starts to make these sounds as the air column gets repeatedly exited, but not enough to sustain the tone, which collapses immediately and then the air starts to vibrate again because of the continuous stream of air through the lips. Kind of like when you make brrrr sounds by blowing through your relaxed lips.

I also heard a tuba player once produce a pretty mean effect by making a rrrrrrrr gargling sound in his throat while playing. But that was different from here.

[MishaK]

Keep in mind that the orchestration with the tuba and bassons is as much from Berlioz's hand as the earlier serpent/ophicleide orchestration. One isn't less original than the other. Indeed, Berlioz's impetus for changing the orchestration was hearing the newly invented tuba. The question is just what the sonority and coloring should be. Each instrument can be played in different ways.

Edit: in his Treatise on Instrumentation, Berlioz waxes lyrical on the invention of the bass tuba:

[The bass tuba] is a kind of bombardon, whose mechanism has been improved by Herr Wieprecht, director of all music bands of the Royal Prussian guard regiments. The bass tuba, which is now widely used in northern Germany, especially in Berlin, possesses important advantages over all other low wind instruments. Its tone, incomparably more noble than that of the ophicleides, bombardons and serpent, has something of the vibrant timbre of the trombones. [...] The effect of a large number of bass tubas in a large military band is beyond imagination. They sound like a combination of trombones and the organ.

Larry already quoted a bit from Berlioz's treatise regarding the serpent, but I think this bit is also interesting:

Moreover, [the serpent's] tone blends poorly with the other timbres of the orchestra and of voices. As the bass of a great mass of wind instruments it cannot match the bass tuba or even the ophicleide.

[MishaK]

Dunno exactly how the tuba did it here, it sounds somehow like a "loose lip attack" effect.

That would seem to be the opposite of what the textbook excerpt above says, namely high lip tension and hard blowing.

[M forever]

That's why I don't think the effect heard here can be described as a cuivré effect. Cuivré or schmettern is really a brilliant, hard, brassy way of playing. I don't think it has that much to do with lip tension either - lip tension should not vary the color so much, more the pitch. I think the most important element of cuivré is the hard, metallic attack, as opposed to the soft round attack. The notes can be attacked hard even at a moderately soft dynamic level, yielding a more metallic tone while at the same time, at a louder dynamic the notes can also stil have a round attack (like in the Alpensinfonie where at Eintritt in den Wald, Strauss writes "weich" (=soft) next to the ff brass, to achieve a more "majestic" sound. I think cuivré commonly means more a forced, sharply articulated way of playing, so the effect in D is most likely not achieved that way. I think the snarling effect is produced by not tonguing, or tonguing in a special way because the rolling attack sounds just like a note that doesn't speak properly - except that here this is very clearly intended, not an accident.

[Larry Rinkel]

Someone at RMCR has posted a link to this 1941 version under Rodzinski with the Cleveland:

Berlioz Symphonie Fantastique

The Cleveland Orchestra
Artur Rodzinski

----------------

I am told this recording never hit CD - not included in the
Lys Rodzinski edition.


transferred from Columbia Entré Lp RL 3059
originally on 78 set M-488
recorded 4-12-1941, Severance Hall, Cleveland


joeS

---

224k w cover

-------------------

http://www.mediafire.com/?1mzmhmzwtxl

[MishaK]

OK, clearly we've hit what people in Germany would call the Sommerloch. I know Greta is off on vacation and forum participation generally seems to have slowed. I am of for a month startiing Wednesday. So tomorrow evening I will reveal the performers of our five clips. Hopefully by them a few more lurkers will have posted a few more thoughts on the subject.

[Greta]

I'm back now.

Okay, the clips all have different names in the tags, and there is still album info for a couple, which doesn't give anything away to me, but anyway...

I have the score to this, the Dover edition, so I dug it out and gave it a go.

Compositionally this is an amazing piece, the wild effects Berlioz creates are fascinating. This work, this part in particular always made me think of Mussorgsky. And Dukas of course. Going backwards this time, last first.

E - This is a really good performance. Gosh, all this boisterous stuff going on makes it tough to examine the sound. Seems like an older recording, something about the winds makes me think this. The balance is generally nice, maybe the brass come out a little much in the last half as there are some wonderful woodwind flourishes going on. Very solid playing. Who I have no idea.

D - Oh, I like the tone of the orchestra, it has a nice inner vibrancy and resonance, more expansive. Very clear and pretty, kind of transparent but focused. The bells sound unusual, they have a timbre that rather matches the orchestra, it almost sound like a clock bell, a grandfather clock. The brass have a tone I love, very homogenous and straight, and unforced, the Dies Irae, the legato playing is nice. These notes feel rather buoyant. At 4:30, that is a seriously nice effect there and seriously not in the score, it sounds like the tuba is fluttertonguing? Growling? (Done in the throat, I guess that is possible on tuba.) Makes it more menacing. I love that last fugue leading to those repeated A's, isn't that brilliant. The high col legnos in the upper strings come through so clearly, especially with this recording. There is a ton of energy throughout here, but it's controlled. That last note just rings into the air. I love this one. No clue who. (Edit: Because I wonder if this might be Dutoit/Montreal. I've looked at that recording before and meant to get it sometime.)

C - Okay, live. A more weighty orchestra. Really wild playing, brass overblowing. Oh wow, kind of all over the place. That lower bell, sounds off-pitch? Those brass are insane. My god, the tuning is everywhere in the Dies Irae. And they sound like they're not taking large enough breaths when they should, and snatching them at inopportune places. The sections don't hang together in the fugues, I'm sure this is going to run off the rails any minute. I don't know who this could be. I mean, I hate to pin this performance to anyone! It's not recent by any means, I think. The end is shocking. And the audience even cheers.

B - This recording seems distant. But man, the brass don't! Clarinet has a distinctive tone. Clear and round and shrill. Strings kind of scratchy. Nice deep church-like bells. This is more what I think the bells should sound like. Also very extroverted brass. Is the tuning in the Dies Irae difficult for the brass? It seems that way here. I don't feel we're on solid ground with the intonation. I can hear the hall here, it sounds very big. This is a more relaxed performance, that has some nice things going on in the strings, and the winds, but I like the latter ones far better. (E and D) I guess I'll pull the Chicago trigger here. Think this an older one too.

A - Slower, actually another really good performance. Very well-prepared and charismatic playing. Now that's a different bell. It sounds almost like it has electronic help, a vibraphone type effect. Nice low brass. Just all around good solid playing. I like this better than E, about as much as D. Orchestra is full-bodied in all sections. Heroic, swashbuckling playing, still very much in control. British, American, don't know.

[MishaK]

Hey Greta, welcome back! Finally someone who likes D and E! I thought I erased the names. I know one kept coming up with a picture of supposedly the album which I couldn't erase, but since it's the wrong album I thought it wouldn't matter.  What do people think about Greta's comments on D and E, also B?