Elgar's Hillside

[jlaurson]

Compelling evidence indeed. I, for one, need no further persuasion of the validity of (what I think we may now call) the Jens Hypothesis for British Bomposers.

Byrd, Bull, Blow, Bunstable, Bhite, Bompkins,  Bades, MacBenzie.....
Actually, there's three real ones in there!

I think you mean Bhomson, Brian.

Oh God, I've created a Bonster!

[Karl Henning]

How do you mean, Bens?

[eyeresist]

Surely not Aarenboim?

[TheGSMoeller]

Anyone know the US release date for Elder's Apostle disc?

[Vesteralen]

I've had this boxed set for months now and am finally getting around to listening to it:



I know others here have commented on these recordings already, but I'm not going to read those comments yet because I want to set down my reactions without anyone's influence.  Later on, I'll go back and read some of the other comments to see how much (or little) we're alike on it.

Anyway, this is my initial reaction to Elgar conducting his own First Symphony.  I listened to half of it on my way home from work in the car yesterday, and the other half on the way to work this morning, so this is car-listening, not sitting-in-a-dark-room-with-headphones listening.

Overall, I was surprised by two things - 1) the sound was a little better than I had anticipated;  2) Elgar wasn't a bit stodgy in his conducting of this piece.

Two drawbacks:  1) I could not get a good audio balance.  In order to really hear the softer parts well, I had to set the volume control at a point where the louder parts were sometimes very unpleasant to the ears.  In an older recording like this, it seems that the more forceful passages lose all their bottom and depth and become shrill, treble-rich and even tinny.  2)  Either Elgar's conducting or the techincal competency of the orchestra came into question in some of the faster parts of the opening and closing movements.  I found that in certain places I had to go on sheer memory to fill in passages that seemed to be glossed over.  The trombone playing in the final couple minutes of the finale seemed especially flaccid.

Good points -  1)This was a very dynamic reading of the score.   As I said, nothing stodgy about it.  (I only wish the recording, the conducting, or the execution in the more flexible-tempoed parts of the first movement were up to modern standards.  I liked the choices, but not always the sound.)  2) THe middle movements - particularly the slow movement.  This was fantastic!  The most heartfelt reading I've heard.  I wouldn't want to be without it. 

I'm planning on listening to this several more times in the coming weeks.  Any second thoughts of significance I'll try to post.

I know you'll all be waiting with baited breath. 

[Vesteralen]

Wow.  No posts in this thread since July 25 and then two within seven seconds of each other.  Go figure. 

[TheGSMoeller]

Wow.  No posts in this thread since July 25 and then two within seven seconds of each other.  Go figure. 

Haha, Must have been hit by the same Elgar bug 

[TheGSMoeller]

Anyone know the US release date for Elder's Apostle disc?

http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2012/Aug12/Elgar_Apostles_HLD7534.htm

Musicweb review.

[cilgwyn]

I've had this boxed set for months now and am finally getting around to listening to it:



I know others here have commented on these recordings already, but I'm not going to read those comments yet because I want to set down my reactions without anyone's influence.  Later on, I'll go back and read some of the other comments to see how much (or little) we're alike on it.

Anyway, this is my initial reaction to Elgar conducting his own First Symphony.  I listened to half of it on my way home from work in the car yesterday, and the other half on the way to work this morning, so this is car-listening, not sitting-in-a-dark-room-with-headphones listening.

Overall, I was surprised by two things - 1) the sound was a little better than I had anticipated;  2) Elgar wasn't a bit stodgy in his conducting of this piece.

Two drawbacks:  1) I could not get a good audio balance.  In order to really hear the softer parts well, I had to set the volume control at a point where the louder parts were sometimes very unpleasant to the ears.  In an older recording like this, it seems that the more forceful passages lose all their bottom and depth and become shrill, treble-rich and even tinny.  2)  Either Elgar's conducting or the techincal competency of the orchestra came into question in some of the faster parts of the opening and closing movements.  I found that in certain places I had to go on sheer memory to fill in passages that seemed to be glossed over.  The trombone playing in the final couple minutes of the finale seemed especially flaccid.

Good points -  1)This was a very dynamic reading of the score.   As I said, nothing stodgy about it.  (I only wish the recording, the conducting, or the execution in the more flexible-tempoed parts of the first movement were up to modern standards.  I liked the choices, but not always the sound.)  2) THe middle movements - particularly the slow movement.  This was fantastic!  The most heartfelt reading I've heard.  I wouldn't want to be without it. 

I'm planning on listening to this several more times in the coming weeks.  Any second thoughts of significance I'll try to post.

I know you'll all be waiting with baited breath. 

Marvellous! I've got the original release,myself! I'm not a fan of 'Gerontius',I'm afraid,but the excerpts conducted by Elgar are very moving! I wish he could have recorded it 'complete'! A useless,pointless wish I know (like wishing Holst had recorded 'The Hymn of Jesus!),but.....................we're lucky to have what we've got! His pre-electrical recordings are amazingly enjoyable,too. I bought the Pearl set recently s/h,from a very nice seller & have been making copies,for my own use. The Pearl set was affected by the dreaded bronzing syndrome! So you've got to back 'em up! They have been reissued (in a 'new' edition) by Music & Arts recently,of course!

[cilgwyn]

Oh God, I've created a Bonster!

I bink you bav,Dr Bekyll!
A backet of Bunes bight belp! Bey bay,Bunes belp bu breabe bore beasily!

Ahem! Back to E for Elgar,I think!



                                       
                                   
           

[mc ukrneal]

So I finally got around to listening to Kennedy/Rattle on the Violion Concerto (a different cover, but this version):
[asin]B000002RYN[/asin]

I got it, because I had Shaham and I didn't really like the piece. Liking Elgar, I knew I was missing somethng, but couldn't quite figure out what. Well, this version is certainly much better. I think Rattle has the style of Elgar pretty down too, because I got the experience I was expecting from the very beginning. Maybe I will listen to the Shaham differently after this, but a real joy to listen to Kennedy (my first and only disc with him performing).

[DavidRoss]

So I finally got around to listening to Kennedy/Rattle on the Violion Concerto (a different cover, but this version):
[asin]B000002RYN[/asin]

I got it, because I had Shaham and I didn't really like the piece. Liking Elgar, I knew I was missing somethng, but couldn't quite figure out what. Well, this version is certainly much better. I think Rattle has the style of Elgar pretty down too, because I got the experience I was expecting from the very beginning. Maybe I will listen to the Shaham differently after this, but a real joy to listen to Kennedy (my first and only disc with him performing).

I like this one, too, Neal--at least as much as the famed Handley disc--and many other Kennedy recordings as well, such as his Brahms VC and Bach VCs with the BP.

[madaboutmahler]

Made a nice discovery today:

http://www.youtube.com/v/5BKyxKWHkFw&feature=related

A 2004 Proms performance of Elgar 3, with some introduction from Anthony Payne. Listening now, this is a really great performance, very beautiful indeed. The orchestral balances are absolutely excellent. And what a romantic performance of the lyrical theme in the first movement! This performance is certainly worth a listen if you have the time.

[Elgarian]

The Enigma Variations revisited.

Starting at the beginning: my first Enigma Variations (very nearly, but not quite, the first piece of classical music that meant anything to me), was Malcolm Sargent's with the Philharmonia Orch. For years and years it was all I knew and I was happy with it. And when, later, CDs came along it was easy enough to pick up a few copies of Enigma, and they were all pretty good, and Sargent was dumped as a worn-out LP. And until recently I'd have been hard-pressed to say what my favourite Enigma is. I really didn't have a favourite. If anyone asked me, I'd recommend Barbirolli or (more recently) Andrew Davis, but I didn't think it mattered much. And so I went along perfectly well. I suppose I've listened to the work maybe 200 times in the nearly 50 years I've known it.



A few weeks ago I stumbled across Pierre Monteux's 1959 recording with the LSO and bought it, on a whim. Yikes. Talk about thunderbolts. It was such a revelation that I listened to it three times over, one after the other. Since then I've been trying to explain to myself what the difference is, and the best I've been able to come up with is this. You know how in Variation 8 there's a little passage that's supposed to represent Winifred Norbury's laugh? Different conductors approach it differently, but in every case that's pretty much what you get: a 'representation' of laughter.

Now Monteux's version doesn't seem like that at all. It feels like a musical equivalent so complete that one might imagine W.N. actually in the room. It generates the same sorts of feelings that I imagine her actual presence might evoke (apparently she had a very distinctive and delightful laugh and Elgar used to tease her specifically to provoke it). And this happens again and again throughout Monteux's reading of the other variations. There's a kind of clarity to his interpretation - I might be tempted nonsensically to say that it feels like a chamber version of the Variations, played by an orchestra. All these attempts at descriptions are not adequate, I know. But the outcome is that this Enigma goes straight to the top, top, top of my heap; for the first time in 50 years I have a favourite Enigma; and absurd though it is, I feel that here, after fifty years of loving the music, I'm experiencing it properly for the first time.

[madaboutmahler]

Sounds like a very very interesting recording, Alan! And one I would be very keen to hear! Thanks for posting your thoughts on this recording.

[Elgarian]

Sounds like a very very interesting recording, Alan! And one I would be very keen to hear! Thanks for posting your thoughts on this recording.

What still has me scratching my head is this: how have I managed to miss hearing about it for so long??!! I mean, if it had been made a few years ago I could understand how I might; but the thing has been around, and well-known, and admired, for more than 50 years! What planet have I been on during that time?

[DavidRoss]

... this Enigma goes straight to the top, top, top of my heap; for the first time in 50 years I have a favourite Enigma; and absurd though it is, I feel that here, after fifty years of loving the music, I'm experiencing it properly for the first time.

Gosh, Alan, I thought I was all set with Bernstein's BBCSO recording. Now I have to seek out Monteux's, too.

[madaboutmahler]

Gosh, Alan, I thought I was all set with Bernstein's BBCSO recording. Now I have to seek out Monteux's, too.

Yes, the Bernstein is my favourite at the moment too, Dave! Really eager to check out the Monteux now though....

[Mirror Image]

For Elgar's Enigma Variations, it's hard to beat Boult or Barbirolli, but I seldom listen to Elgar at all these days.

[Brian]

That Monteux was my first Enigma!! Haven't played it in years. Guess now's as good a time as any. Thanks for the as usual excellent post, Alan