Elgar's Hillside

[madaboutmahler]

and hearing Szell live doing the Sixth.

That must have been amazing....

I have it...haven't heard it. Will remedy that soon. After the Maazel DLvdE, I started Horenstein....and couldn't stop 

Thread duty: Elgar 2 Slatkin will begin somewhat later than originally scheduled.

Sarge

DLvdE is certainly a work that is hard to stop listening to.... did you listen to the Slatkin eventually, Sarge? If so, what did you think?

Much thanks for your thoughts!

I am going to seek out another recording of the 2nd to get a different take, but I was deeply moved by my first listen to Elgar's 2nd, and can't wait to hear it a second time to get a better handle on it. There is so much beauty and the structure of this work is all so new all I can do is get taken by the current!

It certainly is such a beautiful piece, one of my favourites. For other recordings of Elgar 2, I really do recommend Solti, Elder or Slatkin. In the Slatkin, the organ really does shine through in the finale!

[Sergeant Rock]

That must have been amazing....

It was...and worth the effort to get there. I was away at university but skipped Friday classes to hitchhike home (a distance of about 115 miles). I'd never heard the symphony before, not even a recording, and didn't know what to expect. I just knew I loved the Mahler I had heard (recordings, radio) and didn't want to miss, what was then, a rare opportunity to hear Mahler live. The music blew me away...almost literally.  The end left me completely shattered. I remember thinking, Why are these people clapping? How can anyone applaud tragedy? I've heard it live several more times since and I still feel that way. We should applaud at the end of the first movement but observe silence after the finale.

.... did you listen to the Slatkin eventually, Sarge? If so, what did you think?

I did listen to it. It is a great, middle-of-road (tempo-wise) performance. I was especially impressed by the Larghetto. Very moving in Slatkin's hands.

Sarge

[Elgarian]

Overall, it's not the greatest set. In all of the performances, apart from some of the miniatures, there is the lack of the magic that Elgar's music so obviously displays through other performances, which is a shame.

There's a cottage that we sometimes rent, tucked away in the side of the Malvern Hills, with a spectacular view northwards across some of Elgar's favourite woodland. A few years ago I'd bought the Andrew Davis box at the Birthplace Museum, and spent the week in that cottage listening to it almost exclusively. I found no shortage of magic in those performances, either then, or later (I think his Enigma is tremendous): they supplemented the landscape, the location, and the mood, perfectly. The recording quality is a little warm and imprecise, but I don't find it troublesome in any way. As ever, it's each to his own, but the upshot is that since then, whenever I go away on holiday, it tends to be the Andrew Davis box that goes into the suitcase (when it isn't Boult or Barbirolli).

[Karl Henning]

Most interesting, Alan. (I hadn't noticed any shortage of magie, either.)

[Elgarian]

Of course I'm not trying to persuade anybody, Karl - just telling a story. I've also listened to most of the Slatkin Elgar box sitting on a warm evening in a camping car at the foot of the Malvern Hills, and thoroughly enjoyed the experience, though I never became particularly fond of the Slatkin afterwards. My musical listening is hopelessly influenced by associations of this sort, though. If I wanted to justify it, I might think to question a performance that doesn't seem in harmony with the spirit of the place that inspired it, but even I think that would be going too far. Of course these are all non-musical listening issues; but then Elgar's composing was often driven by non-musical issues, so we go round and round....

[Karl Henning]

I dig your stories, lad.

[Elgarian]

This arrived this morning:



Available from Amazon, released yesterday:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Elgar-Conducts-Complete-recordings-1914-25/dp/B005SQ3AU8/ref=sr_1_2?s=music&ie=UTF8&qid=1323794487&sr=1-2

I listened to part of the second disc while eating my lunch: Cockaigne, In The South, and Marie Hall playing the violin concerto (cut to fit onto 4 sides). I expected crackle and pop; I expected to have to make a lot of allowances. I did not expect to have Marie Hall standing in the room, playing the VC, but that's what it seemed like.

The vividness of the recordings (bearing in mind that these are acoustic recordings, made around 1914/16) is gob-smacking. The guy responsible for the processing deserves a medal. I would never have believed this degree of restoration possible. The source was, unbelievably, Elgar's personal collection of 78s, and while he would have been playing them on HMV's state of the art players (they supplied him with gramophones, as one of their star recording artists), they must surely have taken a fair bit of wear, so it's hard to understand how they could yield something this good. It's very strange hearing Marie Hall's playing - so very different in style to Menuhin some years later, and what's more, in a stripped down version of the VC to squeeze it onto four 78 sides - but I found it deeply moving. There are personal reasons why I might shed a few tears right now, but this provides the best, not the worst of reasons for doing so.

The balance of the orchestra in all these works is obviously affected enormously by the need to group the players in front of the large acoustic horn, but in a peculiar way this gives them a greater sense of presence. It's easy to 'hear' the visual equivalent of the well-known photos taken of the making of recordings like these, and it all adds to the splendid atmosphere of this unique period of music-making and recording, with Elgar at the helm.

There's a nice booklet with photos; my only quibble is that there's no information about the digital processing - about the decisions that needed to be taken, when transferring and transforming the 78s to CD. Perhaps we don't need to know, but I'd have been interested.

Essential stuff for any Elgarian, this - preferably taken together with Jerrold Northrop Moore's comprehensive and fascinating (but sadly out of print) book: Elgar on Record:

[madaboutmahler]

It was...and worth the effort to get there. I was away at university but skipped Friday classes to hitchhike home (a distance of about 115 miles). I'd never heard the symphony before, not even a recording, and didn't know what to expect. I just knew I loved the Mahler I had heard (recordings, radio) and didn't want to miss, what was then, a rare opportunity to hear Mahler live. The music blew me away...almost literally.  The end left me completely shattered. I remember thinking, Why are these people clapping? How can anyone applaud tragedy? I've heard it live several more times since and I still feel that way. We should applaud at the end of the first movement but observe silence after the finale.

I did listen to it. It is a great, middle-of-road (tempo-wise) performance. I was especially impressed by the Larghetto. Very moving in Slatkin's hands.

Sarge

Wow.... certainly must have been quite an experience! I am interested in your ideas concerning applause, I can completely understand what you mean. I suppose it may be how the conductor handles it.... when I saw Semyon Bychkov conduct it last Summer, at the end, he kept the audience silent for at least 30 seconds after the last blow, then while the audience clapped, just stood on the podium, his eyes closed. When he did eventually turn for his applause, he kept a very serious face.
The same with Mahler 9 really.... when I saw Mahler 9 live for the first time, I couldn't bring myself to do anything after the music had ended. I needed silence as I really was in an emotional state of despair at the extreme, painful beauty of the piece... applause, however wonderful it can be, did not help me then....
Glad you enjoyed the Slatkin.

There's a cottage that we sometimes rent, tucked away in the side of the Malvern Hills, with a spectacular view northwards across some of Elgar's favourite woodland. A few years ago I'd bought the Andrew Davis box at the Birthplace Museum, and spent the week in that cottage listening to it almost exclusively. I found no shortage of magic in those performances, either then, or later (I think his Enigma is tremendous): they supplemented the landscape, the location, and the mood, perfectly. The recording quality is a little warm and imprecise, but I don't find it troublesome in any way. As ever, it's each to his own, but the upshot is that since then, whenever I go away on holiday, it tends to be the Andrew Davis box that goes into the suitcase (when it isn't Boult or Barbirolli).

That sounds wonderful. Well, concerning the Andrew Davis set, maybe it's just me. As you agree, the sound quality is not always the best, so the performance doesn't exactly benefit. Sometimes I think the orchestra could just give it that little bit more...
Elgar recordings I return to most are those of Solti, Elder, Barbirolli, Boult, and Bernstein's amazing Enigma Variations recording.

This arrived this morning:



Available from Amazon, released yesterday:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Elgar-Conducts-Complete-recordings-1914-25/dp/B005SQ3AU8/ref=sr_1_2?s=music&ie=UTF8&qid=1323794487&sr=1-2

Sounds great, thank you for telling us about this. Straight to the wishlist!

[Elgarian]

Well, concerning the Andrew Davis set, maybe it's just me.

Or equally, it's 'just me', or rather, I think it's just 'us'. We all have our own ideas about what's important in Elgar, and I grew up with certain expectations from his music that I'm sure have moulded the way I listen, even though I wouldn't be able to define what it is. (The proof is that I remember being quite shocked when I first heard one of Elgar's own recordings because I thought it didn't quite sound like Elgar should!)

[Karl Henning]

(The proof is that I remember being quite shocked when I first heard one of Elgar's own recordings because I thought it didn't quite sound like Elgar!)

Man, I just had a sudden Dostoyevskian-"Grand-Inquisitor" flash!

[Elgarian]

Straight to the wishlist!

Just a thought - you do have the box of Elgar's electrical recordings, do you? If you don't, then that would be absolutely the first thing to buy - no question about the superiority of the recording quality, there. This acoustic box is for all those who, already owning all the electrical recordings, were hoping there could be more. Well, now there is.

[madaboutmahler]

(The proof is that I remember being quite shocked when I first heard one of Elgar's own recordings because I thought it didn't quite sound like Elgar should!)

I had the same thoughts when I heard Elgar's own performance, I think it was with the RAH Orchestra, of symphony no.2! Have come to love these performances much more now though.

Just a thought - you do have the box of Elgar's electrical recordings, do you? If you don't, then that would be absolutely the first thing to buy - no question about the superiority of the recording quality, there. This acoustic box is for all those who, already owning all the electrical recordings, were hoping there could be more. Well, now there is.

Yes, I do own that set, but I am still yet to listen to it. I brought it a while ago during a wonderful trip to the Elgar birthplace museum. I'll give the electrical recordings a listen first, then will hopefully pick up the acoustic box. Thanks again.

[eyeresist]

Baker is...I have to be careful here, the definition police are lurking....incomparable.

The great thing is, this is not necessarily a compliment.

[Mirror Image]

The great thing is, this is not necessarily a compliment.

Great to see you back, eyeresist.

[eyeresist]

Great to see you back, eyeresist.

*waves* Thank you! I had to duck out for a while, what with one thing and another, and am hoping this time to not get quite so personally committed

[Mirror Image]

*waves* Thank you! I had to duck out for a while, what with one thing and another, and am hoping this time to not get quite so personally committed

You're welcome. Yeah, I know what you mean. There have been some changes, but mostly for the good. Hope you decide to stick around a little longer this time around.

[Elgarian]

Just a brief update as I dip into this box. I listened to Starlight Express yesterday. Now this is not my favourite Elgar - indeed, I can take it or leave it, really - and as far as these acoustic recordings of it are concerned, I think I might prefer to leave it. This may be a mere personal foible, but I found it harder to accommodate the voice, acoustically recorded, than the near-miraculous orchestral recordings I'd been listening to previously. The soprano in particular seemed to be squealing like a tortured cat.

So the arbitrary ratings record of my personal journey  through the box, so far:
Cockaigne, In The South, Violin Concerto: *****
Starlight Express: *

[Karl Henning]

What's your back-of-the-envelope comparison-&-contrast of the Op.61 in the two boxes, Alan?

[Karl Henning]

I've been a severely truant resident of the hillside . . . I've not made any more progress on the A. Davis box (it's one of those Warner reissues which runs afoul of Media Player, so I need either to listen on an actual CD player, or rip it to the mp3 player, which will happen at some point), nor on the Elgar's Own, Plugged In box.

[Elgarian]

What's your back-of-the-envelope comparison-&-contrast of the Op.61 in the two boxes, Alan?

That sounds like a straightforward question to answer, Karl, but it isn't. A number of immediate responses come to mind, but essentially the playing field isn't level. First, the acoustic recording has been drastically cut to fit four 78 sides. The cadenza isn't integrated with the final movement, but tagged on as a kind of bonus extra, as the fourth side, which dramatically changes the impact of it on the whole. The cuts and the restructuring mean that I doubt if any meaningful comparison could be made.

Except ... in the style of playing - which is radically different. Marie Hall (a one-time pupil of Elgar's I gather) is presumably playing in the style of her day (c1914) and it comes over as curiously sparse and understated. Menuhin's approach 17/18 years later is more obviously expressive and 'romantic'. I haven't compared them directly - I'm just working with my memory of the Menuhin.

I have heard Marie Hall's version before, but in a far inferior transcript of the recording, so I couldn't make much of it then. This is far more approachable - but I need to listen more times. I expect my impression will change.