Elgar's Hillside

[karlhenning]

Unlike with the First and Second, which both wanted time to board my favor, I am taking to the Third Symphony straight off. Of course, it may well be that the Third now benefits from my having now hove into empathy with the first two.

Blimey.

Sounds like you need a cup of tea. And a bun.

Tea, always. I'll just put the kettle on now.

[Archaic Torso of Apollo]

I find Elgar's symphonies on Naxos to be much more precise. Maybe newer performancies try to correct the mistakes made in these "legendary" recordings. 

I got the Hurst performance of the 1st Symphony (Naxos) because it was first choice in the "Building a Library" program. It was a disappointment, rather bland and ordinary. I always like it when a no-name conductor steals the show, but in this case there are any number of big names (Boult, Solti, Previn, Barbirolli) that take preference.

[Archaic Torso of Apollo]

This thread must be influencing me. In addition to much Elgar listening over the last week, I downloaded EE's own piano arrangement of "Nimrod" and have been playing it in my usual halting and insecure fashion.

Everyone loves "Nimrod," as shown by its use for all kinds of commemorative events, ripped from its much more interesting original context as part of a larger piece. I wonder how the subjects of Enigma Variations felt about being immortalized in music - these brief sound-portraits are probably all the rest of the world remembers about them.

[Sergeant Rock]

The Rondo: Presto from the Second Symphony is . . . I don't want to say my favorite movement from the symphonies, but it's certainly the one which I dug the most rapidly.  The first movement is still striking me (a little) as summut too long; but if the composer himself takes it at a snappier pace, to even a slightly tightened-up effect, I could easily see myself revising that impression.

Wasn't Tate your first taste of Elgar 2, Karl? If you find yourself thinking you'd respond more to a "snappier pace" Tate was definitely wrong for you. I like him but then I like Sinopoli's even slower Second even more. Yeah, you need Elgar himself (14:33) or Solti (15:30)...or Svetlanov (14:01!)

I feel that I'm being visited with an Elgar epiphany.[/font]

For those of us who think the Second one of Elgar's greatest creations, it's very satisfying you've had this breakthrough. I don't own A. Davis but I see Penguin thinks very highly of it, listing it only behind Handley in the 1996 edition.

Sarge

[karlhenning]

Wasn't Tate your first taste of Elgar 2, Karl?

Probably, Sarge . . . that is, I once owned the A. Davis in a symphonies two-fer, but I don't know that I actually listened to the Second during the brief (seemingly) time this jewel case was on my shelf.  Pretty sure that the first time I listened to the piece attentively (and may well have been following the score), it was Tate.  I should revisit that recording . . . often happens with me that, first, I hear a recording but am not crazy about the piece, second, later I hear a different recording and the piece comes to make sense for me, and then, third, I go back to the first recording with fresh perspective, and hear it entirely differently.

[Elgarian]

often happens with me that, first, I hear a recording but am not crazy about the piece, second, later I hear a different recording and the piece comes to make sense for me, and then, third, I go back to the first recording with fresh perspective, and hear it entirely differently.

Calls to mind Ruskin's response to those who accused him of changing his mind too much. Yes, he said - but the changes are those of a tree, not of a cloud.

[Archaic Torso of Apollo]

Элгар в Москве / Elgar in Moscow

Had a look at the Moscow concert schedule for the 2011-12 season. Again, Elgar is pretty well represented: Enigma with my man Rozhdestvensky (on an all-Elgar program!), the 1st Symphony, Cello Concerto (with Natalia Gutman), some smaller works like the Introduction and Allegro, and what I find intriguing given how much it's been discussed here, The Spirit of England, a work I didn't even know existed until recently.

And I haven't even looked at the chamber music listings yet...

[J.Z. Herrenberg]

That's quite extraordinary, Velimir!

[Elgarian]

and what I find intriguing given how much it's been discussed here, The Spirit of England, a work I didn't even know existed until recently.

It's hardly ever performed. That it should be performed in Moscow is astounding!

[Archaic Torso of Apollo]

It's hardly ever performed. That it should be performed in Moscow is astounding!

In case you were wondering, the conductor for that is Mark Gorenshtein; and the Elgar is paired with Cherubini's Requiem and something by Delius having to do with a "drifting sea."

BTW, it appears Rozhdestvensky is focusing on English music this season. In addition to the all-Elgar concert, he's also conducting all-Walton and all-Britten concerts. (I like to bring this stuff up because so many people complain that English music "never gets played outside the UK")

[J.Z. Herrenberg]

In case you were wondering, the conductor for that is Mark Gorenshtein; and the Elgar is paired with Cherubini's Requiem and something by Delius having to do with a "drifting sea."

BTW, it appears Rozhdestvensky is focusing on English music this season. In addition to the all-Elgar concert, he's also conducting all-Walton and all-Britten concerts. (I like to bring this stuff up because so many people complain that English music "never gets played outside the UK")

That's Sea-Drift, for baritone and orchestra, one of Delius's masterpieces (on a poem by Walt Whitman).

[eyeresist]

All I can say is "God bless the Russians!"

[madaboutmahler]

Элгар в Москве / Elgar in Moscow

Had a look at the Moscow concert schedule for the 2011-12 season. Again, Elgar is pretty well represented: Enigma with my man Rozhdestvensky (on an all-Elgar program!), the 1st Symphony, Cello Concerto (with Natalia Gutman), some smaller works like the Introduction and Allegro, and what I find intriguing given how much it's been discussed here, The Spirit of England, a work I didn't even know existed until recently.

And I haven't even looked at the chamber music listings yet...

Wow! That is a surprise I have to admit! Obviously there is plenty of live Elgar here in England, but I am so happy to see foreign orchestras taking up his music. Wonderful that there is a lot in Moscow. I am also happy to see the Berlin Phil doing the Enigma Variations, 1st symphony, Dream of Gerontius.

Daniel

[karlhenning]

On my commute this morning (as noted here), I listened to the concerti . . . and I was thinking how these must probably remain my favorite Elgar works to employ the orchestra.

And then, on arriving at the office (as noted here), I found to my delight that the "Elgar's own" box has arrived, a good deal earlier than I had permitted myself to hope.

Oh . . . what to listen to, first . . . .

[karlhenning]

Actually, I'm re-listening to the third movement of the Nigel Kennedy/Rattle/CBSO account of the Op.61

On the lines of composers not lingering over their own music, I was curious to check the timings of the Menuhin/LSO/Elgar recording:

1^st mvt – Ye Nige: 18:11 | Menuhin: 17:25
2^nd mvt – Ye Nige: 14:29 | Menuhin: 13:00
3^rd mvt – Ye Nige: 21:31 | Menuhin: 19:22

[eyeresist]

Kennedy also recorded it with Handley, of course (timings from Amazon). I'm surprised Handley is broader than Rattle in I.

I.  - Handley: 19:04 | Rattle: 18:11 | Composer: 17:25
II. - Handley: 13:26 | Rattle: 14:29 | Composer: 13:00
III.- Handley: 21:27 | Rattle: 21:31 | Composer: 19:22

[eyeresist]

I've received EMI's Elgar Edition, and just want to point out some problems in the argument of Jerrold Northrop Moore's essay, specifically on whether the tempos of Elgar's recorded performances would have been affected by the limited capacity of each "side". Note, I'm not arguing that Elgar's performance WAS affected, I'm arguing against Moore's argument that it WASN'T.

Here are Moore's main arguments:

... there is not the smallest hint of any side or session for a major work having been rushed. In fact the later discovery of Elgar's test pressing of the 'Serenade mauresque' in his own recording on 1929 suggests the opposite. The slow performance actually overran the record's maximum time and the turntable switched off during the final chord.

I don't see how this helps Moore's argument. Surely the fact that the work, at the tempos Elgar chose, did not fit on the side indicates the opposite of what he is trying to say. In this instance, the recording was posthumously rescued thanks to digital pitch-shifting, but surely there were other takes running over-time which did not survive because they were immediately discarded as NG.

... the score of a shorter work such as Pomp and Circumstance No.1 would be cut by Collingwood in respect of some repeats to allow Elgar's performance to fit the single side comfortably. Such trouble would hardly have been taken if it was intended to hurry the old man along.

Surely this indicates that the performance WAS compromised - they either had to rush the work or cut it, and either way this represents a serious artistic compromise.

... a considerable number of the longer works Elgar recorded came out to odd numbers of sides ... If the company [HMV] had wished to compromise the authenticity of what they expended such effort upon, here is where they would have tried to push things into one side less. They did not.

Here Moore is confusing two separate issues: (1) the possible economy of avoiding "extra" sides, and (2) the practical time restrictions applying to side length. The musical chunks distributed across the sides could not be arbitrarily shifted without interrupting the coherence of sections and phrases. The afore-named Collingwood was tasked with the tasteful division of larger works into sections from 4 to 5 minutes in length. The number of sides a work would take up would have been known well before the recording session began. The timings were worked out according to Collingwood's idea of what an Elgar performance would be like (from the same piece: "... he would take the score and, with a watch at his side, 'conduct' an 'Elgar' performance in his mind's ear to determine the least damaging places to make the necessary side-breaks"), but once all the parts had been marked up there would not have been much room to move as far as tempos were concerned. Elgar could take each side as fast as he felt like, but there was a practical limit on how broad he could go.

(I don't suppose the timings for the individual sides have been posted online anywhere?)

Moore's "clincher" is that after making a speech on this matter, he publicly put Menuhin on the spot as to whether he recalled the sessions of his famous recording of the violin concerto being rushed, to which Menuhin had answered "no". I don't want to put Menuhin in any sort of "Alma" position, but really, the 60 year old memories of an exciting event from his mid-adolescence will not be complete or accurate.

[karlhenning]

Good objections.

[Elgarian]

Moore says: "... the score of a shorter work such as Pomp and Circumstance No.1 would be cut by Collingwood in respect of some repeats to allow Elgar's performance to fit the single side comfortably. Such trouble would hardly have been taken if it was intended to hurry the old man along."

Surely this indicates that the performance WAS compromised - they either had to rush the work or cut it, and either way this represents a serious artistic compromise.

Compromised, yes. But Moore's argument concerns whether compromise was achieved by speeding things along, or by cutting. His point is that we have clear evidence of cutting where length was a problem, but no clear evidence of Elgar deliberately pushing the tempo along to achieve a fit to the sides. That doesn't make a watertight case of course, but in the absence of other information, I'd vote for it myself (if I had to vote).

[eyeresist]

Well, that's really my point - there's no conclusive evidence either way, so really all assertions in this area are void. We just don't know, and will have to carry on as best we can!