Bernard Haitink (1929-2021)

[André]

CD 92



This has always been a 3 star recommendation in Haitink's discography. Here's a short summing up from MusicWeb's John Quinn: « these winning Bizet performances show Haitink at his best, displaying sensitivity, attention to detail and a willingness to let the music speak for itself« . Haitink at his best would do just that. But sometimes he would give credence to his own wry comment « Am I being too Dutch here? ». Fortunately in Bizet Haitink caught the spirit just right.

Add to that the splendid playing of the Amsterdam orchestra and wide-ranging, deluxe recorded sound and ... a thrilling filler ! Haitink's 1980 take on Chabrier's España has been around on various online music providers, but it's the first time it appears on disc. If you love the music it's likely you have a personal favourite version (like Argenta or Paray's). Add to those the ACO's elegant, saucy romp through Chabrier's infectious orchestral rhapsody. Once again John Quinn's comment applies to a T here. Strange that neither Munch nor Monteux never recorded it. They may have played it in concert (?) but alas, they didn't take it to the studio.

Not typical Haitink fare, but let's remember that French music was very dear to his heart. Robert Levine (from ClassicsToday) enjoyed his recording of Pelléas et Mélisande while cautioning that Haitink's interpretation was prone to sound « matte-finished and white-bread-with-mayo ». That's one way to conceive P&M of course (symbolism and all that). His Carmen was miscast and roundly trounced by most reviewers. I blame the casting but Haitink may have been 'too Dutch' as well.

This disc rates a 10 based on the fun (music), beauty (playing), elegance (conducting) on offer here.

[Herman]

I'm not privy to the Philips particulars, but I'm guessing Haitink was not thrilled with this unbuttoned sleeve picture and asked Philips to go back to more conventional images.

[André]

The 4 piano concerti and the Rhapsody on a Theme of Paganini.

As I'm listening to a disc of the first two concertos with Leif Ove Andsnes and Simon Rattle with the Berlin Phil, I can't help but notice the difference in the sound world emanating from the pianist, the orchestra and their respective engineering. The big outbursts when both the piano and the orchestra tumble forth from the speakers are fine with Andsnes and Rattle, but they are devastating with Ashkenazy and Haitink.

My first encounter with Ashkenazy's pianism was with his Decca recordings of the Chopin Scherzos and Barcarolle, and Beethoven's Hammerklavier sonata some 50 years ago. I was struck with how forceful, cutting and deep he made the piano sound - totally different from Rubinstein, who was my pianist of choice at the time. In 1987 the same qualities were still on display. Not much had changed then, except perhaps that he seemed to really lean into the romantic, nostalgic aspects of Rachmaninoff.

As for the work of Haitink and the orchestra, I could not fault anything. The soundstage may be a bit deeper, a tiny bit more recessed under the Decca engineers, but the sonic impact in the tutti is perhaps even more solid and brilliant than under the Philips crew.

There are probably many other superb versions of these works around - they have been played to death - but for a set of all these works this is peerless. Rating for pianism, orchestral execution and engineering: 9, 9 and 10/10.

In 1983-84 Ashkenazy had recorded the symphonies and other works for orchestra with the ACO and these recordings have claims for top position in the eyes (and ears) of many collectors. It's a pity Decca (or Philips) didn't ask Haitink to record them. These would probably have been just as good ! As things stand it would appear that Haitink never recorded any symphonic Rachmaninov - or Sibelius for that matter.

[André]

Coming soon : my assessment of Haitink's first (of many) traversals of the Brahms symphonies.

Okay, might as well get started. 😝




Context: Haitinks' first cycle of the Brahms symphonies was taped in Amsterdam in 1970-71. He re-recorded them in Boston in 1994 and in London (LSO) in 2004. Various concert tapes of individual symphonies are on disc as well. And our own Herman highly recommends his latest thought on the symphonies with the Chamber Orchestra of Europe.

I've scoured Discogs (the web site that lists every recording there ever was) to check timings. First, I notice that the 3rd is the only Brahms symphony in which Haitink consistently took the exposition repeat in the first movement (he took that repeat in symphony no 2 in Boston, but not in Amsterdam or London - and never took it in symphony no 1).

Also, in all 3 cycles, his tempi seem to be remarkably consistent: very little variation in any of the movements. Contrast that consistency with conductors who, whether because of age or influenced by a specific orchestral culture (Bernstein, Giulini) adopted different positions in the matter of tempi. That's called editorial policy. Obviously Haitink gave thought about structural matters - truly essential in Brahms, and not just in relation to the symphonies. The structure in Brahms is as important as the textures.

So, cutting to the chase: this is the only B3 by Haitink I've heard but considering the consistency in timings in all 3 cycles I imagine orchestral sound and engineering must be the only real audible differences between versions.

My benchmark for this symphony has always been Walter and the Columbia Symphony, recorded in superb sound by the Sony engineers. Next, Böhm and the WP (fiery, trenchant while at the same time retaining that unique WP salted caramel sound -  extra salt maybe ?). Haitink is just as good. Even better are the ACO horns in the first movement. I can't decide which I prefer.

Next, an absolute indulgence : Giulini with the WP straight from the opium den: the most indulgent orchestral fest I can think of (obviously Giulini takes his cue from the composer himself: I can see Johannes himself blush here). Peanut butter AND salted caramel (extra caramel ?) with the occasional cashew bite. 

The continuation, with symphony no 4, my first ever recording of the work.

[André]

Coming soon: reviews of Brahms symphonies 1,2,4, the two piano concertos (Arrau), the two Serenades, 2 versions each of the Violin Concerto (Szeryng, Krebbers), 2 each of the Double Concerto (Szeryng/Starker and Perlman/Rostropovich). The two Overtures and Haydn Variations.

All these are in the can already. If I have time, there's another version of the first PC with Ashkenazy, and the second PC with Brendel.

[André]

Brahms: symphonies 1 and 4.



The reason I pair these is that I bought them as LPs way back when - IIRC they had just been issued in the early Seventies and were my first acquaintance with these works (or second in the case of the first ? - Karajan 1964 would be the other). The 3rd under Walter may have been my first ever Brahms symphony recording. The 2nd under Abbado (BP, issued in 1970) followed shortly. I got acquainted with the works early on in my Classical Music journey, and Brahms was such a great love that I bought them (with my meagre monthly allowance) as soon as I could. Then it was the violin concerto (Oistrakh/Szell) and the two PCs (Gilels/Jochum) in short order.

IOW I was acquainted with Haitink's very distinctive vision of the Brahms sound quite early. At the time it struck me as very cool (not quite chilly, but definitely on the restrained side) but also unimpeacheably 'right' in terms of tempi and orchestral sound - I was still some way from learning about orchestral cultures, interpretative liberties and engineering philosophies.

With time I came to consider his readings of the 1st and 4th as 'perfect' in a slightly glacial, marmoreal way. Other conductors elicited more fire, more gravitas, more drama - they certainly caught my attention and rightly so: Brahms is possibly the most 'interpreted' composer from the 19th Century.

With time I came to value the views of conductors I thought brought the essence of the composer's ethos: emotional balance, passion allied to self-control, beauty of language (refusal of dissonance), heavily rubatoed rythms and accents that can only be read as 'second degree' by the interpreters. IOW, a show of grace and beauty that can only be glimpsed through a filter of strife and gloom.

These aspects of Brahms' art (grace,  beauty, strife, gloom) can be heard in their various combinations from interpretations of the symphonies or the concertos via recorded performances from Walter, Munch, Furtwängler, Backhaus, Curzon, Neveu, Magaloff, Gilels, Donohoe, etc. A more neutral stance can be heard when listening to the performances from younger generations. Curiously it works less well for the concertos (at least for me) than it does for the symphonies.

All that to say that I tend to prefer 'cool' Brahms symphonies and agitated, emotive concertos' performances.

So, back to the early seventies and Haitink's recordings of the 1st and 4th: in a nutshell: they are classically conceived (no untoward tempo variations), perfectly balanced and emotionally at the outer edge of being excitable (tempo) or impassioned (even the Dutch can be, while giving the outward appearance of remaining absolutely in control).

Verdict: 8/10 for the First and 9.5/10 for the 4th - one of the most solid, gracious, power-in-reserve (because: Brahms) performances.

Very lucid engineering (no weird balances and definitely no cheap bass highlighting).

Next: symphonies 2 and 3 (slightly different - not more of the same).

[André]

Symphony no 2, Overtures, Variations on a Theme of Haydn.

The symphony is given a very fresh, cool, lucid performance, with beautifully textured balances - strong strings (superb cellos and dbasses), mellifluous winds and warm, forthright brass. Tempi are unexceptionable - Haitink never dawdles, always keeps things going, but never rushes fences either. The finale  is exhilarating. Beautiful playing, as mentioned, abetted by excellent engineering.

Both overtures and Haydn Variations (2 performances of the latter) are splendidly done. I used to yawn at the Variations, didn't consider the work very interesting. Over time my appreciation has risen dramatically. It's now one of my favourite non-symphony orchestral works. A feast for the wind section. The never-released performance from 1984 is especially fine, with a truly glorious final variation - a true apotheosis.

9.5/10 for symphony 2,
8.5/10 for the Festival Overture,
10/10 for the Tragic Overture and for both performances of the Haydn Variations.

[André]

- The 2 Piano concertos (Arrau in both, Ashkenazy in 1 and Brendel in 2)
- The Violin concerto. 2 versions, by Szeryng and Krebbers respectively.
- The Double concerto. 2 versions, by Szeryng/Starker and Perlman/Rostropovich.

A survey of these performances should normally focus on the soloist(s), but in this particular case it so happens that 3 record labels with different engineering philosophies/equipment were at work, imparting vastly different perspectives to the sound stage. Philips is responsible for PC 1 and 2 with Arrau, PC 2 with Brendel, the 2 VC, the first Double concerto. From Decca we get Ashkenazy's 1st PC and from EMI the second Double concerto recording.

Decca's Concertgebouw sound is more compact, punchier, a bit bigger, harder and very slightly tubby in the bass. Excellent, but more upfront and with less front to back perspective than on Philips. It does suit Ashkenazy's brand of pianism though, with its flinty, hard-coiled sound. Almost exemplary, but a notch under my favourite versions (Gilels, Donohoe). 9/10

Double concerto:  Szeryng/Starker are positioned left/right and sound very meticulous, almost foursquare. Haitink follows suit. A slightly dull, stop and go feeling, with little sense of fun or passion. 7/10

I bought the EMI on LP when it came out. The Double concerto may be the one I most enjoy of all Brahms' concertante works. Not the finest, deepest, most poetic, just a magnificent vehicle for two complementary instruments. It's also Brahms' most compact concerto and we don't hear in it the musings and side conversations from the other works (in their first movement mostly). In this EMI version, despite identical timings vs the Starker/Szeryng we hear a hugely dynamic, effusive symphonic discourse, superbly propelled forward by the collaboration of soloists and conductor. Despite the sameness of timings the phrasing is entirely different: Perlman and Rostropovich wear their heart on their sleeve, producing huge, rich tones (big, intense vibrato), their phrases answering each other with a rich legato. The Concertgebouw sounds a bit as if it had been recorded in a air hangar by Melodiya engineers in the 1970s - I exaggerate, but there's no denying the EMI engineers wanted to achieve a big, resonant soundstage. Compared to Philips front to back depth is sacrificed somewhat for a richer, more immediate perspective. The orchestra sounds ENORMOUS. Rich, juicy, effusive, with Haitink adopting the same legato phrasing as the soloists. It's hugely exciting if a tad overemotive. Never mind, I love it and ever since I've heard this disc 4 decades ago it's been by far my favourite version of the work. 10/10

The 2 versions of the VC share the same bizarre history as their respective soloists' recordings of the Beethoven concerto: both the LvB and the Brahms were recorded within months of each other on the same label with Haitink and the Concertgebouw. Producers were different though. I suspect the Krebbers were released domestically while the Szeryngs were given the full Philips marketing treatment. Haitink himself complained the Krebbers recordings enjoyed a lot less rehearsal time than Szeryngs'. I detect a slight difference in the recorded sound: more refined, polished, gleaming for Szeryng. In any event all these details are just background noise when comparing the two performances.

I definitely preferred Szeryng in the Beethoven but in the Brahms the scales are more evenly weighted. Szeryng is more suave and 'gipsy' in I, poised and cool in II, exciting in III. As for Krebbers, positions are reversed: he is classical and direct in I, extraordinarily expressive and sweet in II (uniquely pure and sweet pianissimo high notes) and buff and hearty in III. Swings and roundabouts. Haitink and the orchestra are excellent in both recordings but they're not on autopilot: there are distinctive touches on either recording (not on the same phrases or accents). 9/10 for both but if pressed I'd keep the Krebbers on account of its magical Adagio (the mind sometimes drift in that movement, but not with Krebbers).

Finally, Brendel's take on the 2nd PC: excellent in all regards. This is a work where intellect must take charge and keep emotions in check. Brahms' structure is unique and for best results the pianist must be the guiding hand from first note to last. Brendel is both assured, confident and respectful, humble. Haitink follows him faithfully and ensures the harmony (winds and brass) is the beating heart of the ensemble. 9/10. My fave here are Gilels/Jochum/Concertgebouw (contemporaneous with the BPO disc on DG, but more animated) and Peter Rösel/Golo Berg. Outstanding too are Bishop/Davis, Magaloff/van Otterloo, Backhaus/Böhm. Rubinstein recorded it many times too. I especially like his live version under Dohnanyi.

[André]

Next composer in the Haitink-Amsterdam box is Robert Schumann. The symphonies and a couple overtures only (no concertos).



Listening to these performances led me to listen to the Kubelik BRSO ones. An instructive comparison. Haitink avails himself of the full might and coloristic resources of his great orchestra with much dynamism. Kubelik takes a slightly more classical view: a tad less turbulence or joyfully boasting brass, but also great care over string articulation - nowhere so obvious as in the phenomenally delicate, elfin but brilliant strings in the Second Symphony's scherzo.

In the end the sound is the deciding issue. The Kubelik Schumanns are in a box of 'Romantic symphonies', coupled with Mozart's last (35-41) and Bruckner 3-4. I listened to the 4 Schumanns as well as the B3 and the verdict is that the orchestra, while expert and very refined, lacked heft in the strings, as well as weight and brilliance in the brass -  all the while being recorded a bit distantly. Now, the BRSO-post 2010 is possibly the world's most brilliant, refined, cultured and confident orchestra I've heard. Back in the 1970s-early 1980s they were all of that, but at something like 80-85% potential.

Compare the big horn calls of the Rhenish in Amsterdam and Munich: going from back-of-the-hall f classical balances in the BRSO to full-blown ff, colourful bronzen tones under Haitink. More of the same goes pretty much throughout. Except in that exceptional scherzo movement in the 2nd. Haitink/Amsterdam are wonderful but Kubelik/BRSO are out-of-this-world mendelssohnian in their electric spring and elfin delicacy.

Haitink's 4th is fine (Kubelik's less so). This greatest of all Schumann symphonies has been recorded to death. I particularly like the performances from Szell, Böhm (WP), Furtwängler, Klemperer.

[André]

Update: started listening (anew) to the Bruckner symphonies series. Just starting with 0 and 1. Full update when I'm done in a couple of weeks.

Today:



Recorded in a single day on May 9, 1977.

Haitink has re-recorded the work with the BRSO in 2014 with a different (and very indifferent) soloist. Haitink's Amsterdam Don Quixote is the real thing, one of the very best performances ever issued (contenders: Szell Cleveland with Fournier and Karajan Rostropovich on EMI).

The RCOA's depth of tone, brilliance and ease of utterance is matched only by the Berliners (on EMI, not the DGG release from a decade earlier). The sultry yet finely etched sound of the Amsterdam players is a joy to the ear as well as a superb Schéhérazade-like tapestry to the cello soloist. Tibor de Machula had been first cellist in the BP under Furtwängler and Celibidache (1936-47) until he settled in Amsterdam where he led the orchestra's cello section for 30 more years.

This recording was made in the last year of his tenure with the COA (he was 65). His is a very different performing style and sound from most other cellists. His sound is very 'mobile', constantly changing colours from one phrase - even one note - to the other. Which doesn't mean his intonation was all over the place, far from it: his control of tone and vibrato means any given note would acquire a distinct colouring. His cello sings like a Callas, Olivero, Björling or Hotter instead of a Tebaldi, a Te Kanawa or Renée Fleming.

I've listened to this performance dozens of time in its LP incarnation and have never tired of hearing it tell the story of Don Quixote. MEsmerizing.

BUT WAIT : the disc contains an incredible bonus, a live (06-1968) performance of Strauss' 4 Last Songs with Gundula Janowitz. The legendary soprano was then at the height of her early career - before she undertook the heavier roles of Elisabetta and Leonora (Fidelio). The voice is at its creamiest and purest. Compared to her performance of the songs under Karajan she takes 4 minutes less (20% faster) - perhaps reflecting the respective conductors' views.

Under Haitink it sounds like Mahler's 4th Finale is taking place in Delius' Walk Into the Paradise Garden, a more intense but mostly more private kind of ecstasy than under Karajan.

[Karl Henning]

Disc 16



Recorded in December 1964. Amazing wind playing, especially the saturnine bassoon, ophicleide (contrabassoon ??) and horns. This is a really joyous romp (marvellously dreamy in the central Nocturne), with a truly festive, almost raucous Wedding March. The lovely ending to the Overture and final number of the incidental music are pure magic. Once again Haitink elucidates the string parts to splendid effect. The singers are fine. There's no reason to play just a suite of movements when the whole score is so beautifully balanced.

Mendelssohn seems to have been a particular favourite of Haitink. He recorded the violin concerto twice in Amsterdam (Grumiaux in 1960 and Szeryng in 1976) as well as the 5 symphonies in London (with the LPO). 9.5/10. A corker.

Yes, the ophicleide parts in Berlioz and Mendelssohn tend to be covered on contrabassoon.

[André]

Okay, I can no more. Too much to sort out.

Haitink' COA integral set (1963-1972) overlaps the post-War Bruckner upheaval that brought  'new' (Nowak) performances in the old style (like Jochum's SD set) and old (Haas) performances in a 'new' type of interpretive attempts (like Rosbaud, Andreae).

To make it short and sweet: Haitink follows Haas, Nowak, Oeser as it pleases him - and back to another one later on in some cases. One can only conclude that the conductor explored the scores in many (not all) of its incarnations and wanted to set the results down in concert or on disc - an interpretive work in progress. Which, fine. What counts is that the results can be termed as convincing and satisfying. Of course, having the COA with its deep, saturnine brass, agile, mellifluous winds and deeply etched strings at his disposal sets him at am advantage (even Karajan's BPO couldn't boast winds or low brass as fine and personable as their Amsterdam's counterparts).

- No 0: 9/10. One of the very best. Only Marriner in Stuttgart has more punch than this. Early Bruckner definitely was about punch: asserting its sound world vs Brahms' and Schumann's more 'middle' orientation was paramount.

- no 1: for 50 years at least I've considered this gutsy, punchy orchestral fest as the best Bruckner 1 performance ever: more differentiated than Karajan's, more tangy than Neumann's, with a wonderfully massive full orchestral sound in the. last movement.

- no 2: another excellent performance, maybe more 'didactic' or less neurotic than 0 and 1. Superb slow movement.

Karajan's BP 2nd is the Cinderella of his cycle. Digitally bright but also digging deeply into the basement of the work's sound fabric - without much result unfortunately, as this is one of DGG's more bright Bruckner engineering efforts (their 5th and 8th went into the opposite direction). Whatever: Karajan is more incisive and affirmative than Haitink here.


 

[André]

Bruckner 3 (rec. 1963), 4 (rec. 1965) and 5 (rec. 1972).

- Haitink's 3rd was one of the very first recordings of the 1878 Oeser version, marking a return to a more fleshed out text after many conductors had adopted Nowak's text of the shortened 1888 version, with its severely cut finale. It has always been one of my favourite recordings of the work. The 3rd is better balanced - less diffuse than the 1873 original and more massive, less 'militant' than the severely pruned last version. Haitink's pacing in all 4 movements is just perfect and the orchestra takes its time to deploy their collective might. It is actually more satisfying sonically than:

- The 4th symphony. Perfectly paced too, but the sound is unsatisfying: the wall of sound achieved by the strings and brass is undifferentiated and lacks positioning (depth as well as stereophonic separation). Also, the timpani are unassertive and sonically recessed. A fine performance marred by indifferent engineering.

- The 1972 recording of the 5th has never received critical acclaim despite some very strong assets: the orchestra plays very well (including the timpani) and the sound is top notch. Haitink differentiates the work's very contrasted moods splendidly. Indeed, his take on the Scherzo is one of the best I've heard. Quite fast by the clock, but beautifully articulated by the string section - Bruckner in a Mendelssohn mood. Haitink attacks the mighty finale with conviction and leads the orchestra in a very fine display of orchestral power and discipline. His 1988 Wiener Philharmoniker breathes a bit more freely. It is less purposeful than the Amsterdam version (4 and 1/2 minutes slower), but crushingly massive in the coda. The best is the truly transcendant Munich version from 2010 (BRSO, on BR Klassik). Slightly slimmer in sound than Vienna but with such a powerful band there is no lack of heft and incisiveness. So, back to 1972 Amsterdam: an underrated, splendidly conceived version that takes the work away from the church and back to the concert hall.

[Daverz]

- no 1: for 50 years at least I've considered this gutsy, punchy orchestral fest as the best Bruckner 1 performance ever: more differentiated than Karajan's, more tangy than Neumann's, with a wonderfully massive full orchestral sound in the. last movement.

Just catching up with this one in the box.  It's a very exciting performance with fabulous playing.

[LKB]

I personally rank Haitink's Bruckner as superior to most, and inferior to no-one's.