Elgar's Hillside

[André]

What about the Andrew Davis Gerontius on Chandos? I' MUCH interested in hearing what you guys think... 

[Mirror Image]

What about the Andrew Davis Gerontius on Chandos? I' MUCH interested in hearing what you guys think... 

I asked this question earlier to no avail.

[Mirror Image]

But, as I also mentioned earlier, the Andrew Davis Gerontius is up against some stiff competition. I mean Barbirolli and Elder alone make wonder why I even bought other performances, but I suppose there's a part of me that hopes to find some kind of nuance not touched on before and Andrew Davis being a dedicated Elgarian certainly makes his case an even stronger one.

[Leo K.]

The Cahill 'Spirit of England' is very fine indeed! it was recently first hearing of the work. It's not easy to listen to because the music sounds sad, the orchestra and Cahill bring an intensity I can't deny.

[Mirror Image]

The Cahill 'Spirit of England' is very fine indeed! it was recently first hearing of the work. It's not easy to listen to because the music sounds sad, the orchestra and Cahill bring an intensity I can't deny.

+1

[Leo K.]

My Elgar listening today before my second shift job.

I like Solti's driven style with Elgar. The Scherzo of the 2nd Symphony is a great example.

By the way, I really like the Cocknaigne  Overture now, it's perfect for an Elgar fix at work.

[Mirror Image]

My Elgar listening today before my second shift job.

I like Solti's driven style with Elgar. The Scherzo of the 2nd Symphony is a great example.

By the way, I really like the Cocknaigne  Overture now, it's perfect for an Elgar fix at work.

Excellent! I've come to appreciate Solti in Elgar now much more than I have in the past. He does have a spitfire approach to Elgar which can be refreshing to hear. I do not own that recording of Symphony No. 1 and Sea Pictures with Baker/Handley/LPO. How is it, Leo?

[Mirror Image]

What does everyone think of Elgar's Violin Concerto in B minor, Op. 61? For me, it's one of the finest violin concerti in the concert repertoire. It's a longer concerto at about 47 minutes give or take, but I think it contains some of the most marvelous violin and orchestral music I've ever heard. This is one of those concerti that is symphonic in scope like say Shostakovich's Violin Concerto No. 1 for example. The orchestra has as much importance as the solo violin. This isn't a work that is easy to pull off as I have heard two performances that have achieved this feat and they are Kennedy/Handley and Little/A. Davis. Both of these performances take into account that this work is much more than a pyrotechnic display for the violin. There is a story or narrative happening here as Elgar weaves in and out of tender, reflective passages to rousing climaxes. It's certainly a concerto that took some time for me to appreciate, but, when I finally understood it, it seemed like another door had opened for me into Elgar's emotional and spiritual world.

How do you guys feel about it? Am I just talking rubbish as usual?

[Leo K.]

Excellent! I've come to appreciate Solti in Elgar now much more than I have in the past. He does have a spitfire approach to Elgar which can be refreshing to hear. I do not own that recording of Symphony No. 1 and Sea Pictures with Baker/Handley/LPO. How is it, Leo?

The Sea Pictures is gorgeous, it sounds bittersweet and all involved sound inspired. I haven't heard the 1st on this recording but will soon

[Mirror Image]

The Sea Pictures is gorgeous, it sounds bittersweet and all involved sound inspired. I haven't heard the 1st on this recording but will soon

Cool, I'll check it out. I'm not completely onboard with Handley as an Elgarian, I think he's a bit better attuned to other Brits like RVW or Bax. But, I'm willing to give him another shot as I own his earlier performances of Elgar on EMI.

Edit: Leo, I just read a review on Amazon that stated that Baker was recorded a bit of a distance, is this true?

[Moonfish]

Elgar: The Dream of Gerontius       Pears/Minton/Shirley-Quirk/The Choir of King's College, Cambridge/London SO/Britten

My first visit with Britten's rendition of TDOG. Great music making and very inspired. Somehow I enjoyed the orchestra and chorus more than the soloists. Did anybody else have that experience while listening to this specific performance? I am not sure if I like Pears' performance as Gerontius as I have become quite attuned to Nicolai Gedda's voice in that role.  Pears felt a bit overpowering and not as humble as Gedda's voice. I somehow expect Gerontius to combine inspiration with grace in unison with the tidal waves of the chorus and the orchestra. Regardless, it definitely deserves further listening sessions!   

[asin] B0000042DD[/asin]

[Mirror Image]

Elgar: The Dream of Gerontius       Pears/Minton/Shirley-Quirk/The Choir of King's College, Cambridge/London SO/Britten

My first visit with Britten's rendition of TDOG. Great music making and very inspired. Somehow I enjoyed the orchestra and chorus more than the soloists. Did anybody else have that experience while listening to this specific performance? I am not sure if I like Pears performance as Gerontius as I have become quite attuned to Nicolai Gedda's voice in that role.  Pears felt a bit overpowering and not as humble as Gedda's voice. I somehow expect Gerontius to combine inspiration with grace in unison with the tidal waves of the chorus and the orchestra. Regardless, it definitely deserves further listening sessions!   

[asin] B0000042DD[/asin]

Very nice, I'm not sure how I feel about Pears singing any of Elgar's music however but I realize that I'm clearly associating Pears with Britten and not wanting to accept the notion that Pears actually sung other composers' works as well. This said, wait until you hear Barbirolli and Elder.

[71 dB]

What does everyone think of Elgar's Violin Concerto in B minor, Op. 61? For me, it's one of the finest violin concerti in the concert repertoire. It's a longer concerto at about 47 minutes give or take, but I think it contains some of the most marvelous violin and orchestral music I've ever heard. This is one of those concerti that is symphonic in scope like say Shostakovich's Violin Concerto No. 1 for example. The orchestra has as much importance as the solo violin. This isn't a work that is easy to pull off as I have heard two performances that have achieved this feat and they are Kennedy/Handley and Little/A. Davis. Both of these performances take into account that this work is much more than a pyrotechnic display for the violin. There is a story or narrative happening here as Elgar weaves in and out of tender, reflective passages to rousing climaxes. It's certainly a concerto that took some time for me to appreciate, but, when I finally understood it, it seemed like another door had opened for me into Elgar's emotional and spiritual world.

Pretty much agree. Elgar's Violin Concerto is more important work for me than Elgar's Cello Concerto.

[71 dB]

As for your preference for Lott/Hickox in The Spirit of England that's certainly okay with me, I simply can't find much in that performance by the way of emotional depth.

Emotional depth perhaps means different things to us? I don't say I prefer Lott/Hickox. These two performances are about on the same level for me. After hearing Cahill/Gibson Lott/Hickox still sounds good.

Cahill may have such and such imperfections or the recording quality may not be as good as it could have been, but this remains an emotional listening experience for me for the simple reason that I feel that all involved with the work believed in the music and put their absolute heart into it. I'm not looking for a polished performance when I listen to Elgar or really any composer whose music means a lot to me, I'm looking for a commitment from the musicians. That's enough to make to take notice and, in turn, feel hopefully what they felt when performing the work.

I understand your point. As an audio engineer it's hard for me not to pay attention to such things as recording quality. The noise floor of Cahill/Gidson is unusually high for a 1976 recording. The noise of course doesn't make Cahill's commitment any less.

I haven't heard the Piano Concerto yet, but I honestly don't have much interest in it since it was realized by someone else other than Elgar.

Mozart's Piano Concertos are not realized by Elgar either.    Thanks to Walker's efforts I can listen to Elgar's drafts/ideas for his Piano Concerto in the form of an enjoyable concerto.

[71 dB]

As for people not realizing how brilliant Elgar was, I think it's really just a matter of, like you said, 71 dB, people not wanting to understand the complexity of the musical language and not really digging enough into his oeuvre to find anything out for themselves.

We have a classical music culture that over-emphasizes certain composers and works while understating other composers and works. The history writing is skewed.

Elgar in my opinion is strongly understated composer outside UK, but his Cello Concerto is over-emphasized while his Violin Concerto is understated. Elgar's chamber works and oratorios (except maybe TDOG) are criminally understated.

Haydn is somewhat over-emphasized while Dittersdorf is understated. Tchaikovsky and Rachmaninov are over-emphasized while S.I.Taneyev is understated. Schütz is over-emphasized compared to Weckmann. The list goes on...

...so people have preconceptions. In case of Elgar, these preconceptions are pretty misleading.

I always knew there was something more to this composer than what his 'ceremonial' works otherwise tell us.

Ceremonial works don't tell much because they are very formal. Comparing Elgar's ceremonial works to similar works by other composers gives a hint of what the composer can do within certain frame of expression. Hearing Enigma Variations for the first time made me convinced that Elgar could do almost anything.

When I first heard a work like the Cello Concerto or Sea Pictures, I was completely taken aback by how sophisticated of a composer he actually was and how his music contains so many musical avenues to explore. Just when you think you have a certain work figured out, he hits you from a completely different direction altogether that you weren't expecting at all.

I think Elgar's secret is the fact he was self-taught. He absorbed the best parts of many great composers and built his own style using these different "blocks". In Elgar's music we hear Mozartian melodies played with Handelian counterpoint, Berliozian orchestration and Lisztian poetism. Is it really a wonder the result sounds damn good? Naturally it takes an intelligent and very talented person to pull of such amalgam of styles.

Elgar's music has this quality that you can listen to it form different angles as you say. Maybe it's an implication of the amalgam-nature of the music?

[cilgwyn]

My Elgar listening today before my second shift job.

I like Solti's driven style with Elgar. The Scherzo of the 2nd Symphony is a great example.

By the way, I really like the Cocknaigne  Overture now, it's perfect for an Elgar fix at work.

I like his Elgar too. I got the Decca set recently. The Solti/Elgar symphonies were my introduction to this music via the local library (Lp's) all those years ago!

[Klaatu]

I think Elgar's secret is the fact he was self-taught. He absorbed the best parts of many great composers and built his own style using these different "blocks".

It's interesting that another self-taught English composer, Havergal Brian, was bowled over by a performance of Elgar's King Olaf at the North Staffordshire Triennial Festival, and wrote to E.E. to ask for advice on music tuition. Elgar replied:

"As regards tuition, I have had to get on without it, but I am afraid this will be cold comfort to you."

Brian, far from being disappointed with this reply, was absolutely electrified by it, because he hadn't realised that Elgar had had no formal musical education - and yet he had composed King Olaf!  Brian realised that he, too, could 'do his own thing' without formal tuition, and he too 'built his own style from different blocks'.

And there are so many passages in his works that bring Elgar to mind in their 'stately sorrow': undoubtedly the experience of hearing King Olaf never left him. The Elgar influence is perhaps heard most readily in the early tone poem In Memoriam (available on YouTube), but can still be heard in his 32nd (and last) symphony - the sorrowful Adagio movement always brings a lump to my throat; for me it's the swansong of the Elgarian Age from a composer who knew Elgar personally.

[Mirror Image]

Pretty much agree. Elgar's Violin Concerto is more important work for me than Elgar's Cello Concerto.

I wouldn't say that it's more important than the Cello Concerto on the account that this work deserves its status in the concert repertoire and it's a fine work whether you or anyone else agrees or not. It's true that the outpouring of emotion in this concerto is pretty much straightforward but this doesn't make any less of work because of this fact.

Emotional depth perhaps means different things to us? I don't say I prefer Lott/Hickox. These two performances are about on the same level for me. After hearing Cahill/Gibson Lott/Hickox still sounds good.

I understand your point. As an audio engineer it's hard for me not to pay attention to such things as recording quality. The noise floor of Cahill/Gidson is unusually high for a 1976 recording. The noise of course doesn't make Cahill's commitment any less.

Mozart's Piano Concertos are not realized by Elgar either.    Thanks to Walker's efforts I can listen to Elgar's drafts/ideas for his Piano Concerto in the form of an enjoyable concerto.

Sure, emotion or the emotion that feel from work to work, composer to composer is different, but I completely disagree that the Lott/Hickox is on the same level as Cahill/Gibson. But, as with anything, it's about preferences and what we hear in the music.

I'm a bit of a stickler about recording quality as well but I can make exceptions if the audio isn't too bad and the performance is an outstanding one.

We have a classical music culture that over-emphasizes certain composers and works while understating other composers and works. The history writing is skewed.

Elgar in my opinion is strongly understated composer outside UK, but his Cello Concerto is over-emphasized while his Violin Concerto is understated. Elgar's chamber works and oratorios (except maybe TDOG) are criminally understated.

Haydn is somewhat over-emphasized while Dittersdorf is understated. Tchaikovsky and Rachmaninov are over-emphasized while S.I.Taneyev is understated. Schütz is over-emphasized compared to Weckmann. The list goes on...

...so people have preconceptions. In case of Elgar, these preconceptions are pretty misleading.
Ceremonial works don't tell much because they are very formal. Comparing Elgar's ceremonial works to similar works by other composers gives a hint of what the composer can do within certain frame of expression. Hearing Enigma Variations for the first time made me convinced that Elgar could do almost anything.

I think Elgar's secret is the fact he was self-taught. He absorbed the best parts of many great composers and built his own style using these different "blocks". In Elgar's music we hear Mozartian melodies played with Handelian counterpoint, Berliozian orchestration and Lisztian poetism. Is it really a wonder the result sounds damn good? Naturally it takes an intelligent and very talented person to pull of such amalgam of styles.

Elgar's music has this quality that you can listen to it form different angles as you say. Maybe it's an implication of the amalgam-nature of the music?

Elgar's sound-world is a unique one no question about it. There's so much to discover, that is, if a listener wants to dig deep enough. Ultimately, no one could convince me how great Elgar was as this was something I had to discover for myself and, needless to say, I did and I'm certainly thrilled each time I listen to his music.

[Moonfish]

Elgar:
String Quartet op 83
In Moonlight
Piano Quintet op 84
Piers Lane/Vellinger String Quartet

A first exposure to these works. Lovely! The quartet caught my attention. It was strange as I kept listening to the first movement over and over (4 or 5 times). Somehow it shaped a question and a trigger sequence at about 5 minutes made me want to hear it over again. It (op 83) seemed warm, tranquil and sad while occasionally shaping disharmony.  I was less fond of the piano quintet although it grew on me as it progressed (in its melancholy). The Vellinger quartet (which I never heard of) were vibrant in their performance. I have to revisit the string quartet very soon. 
I have another version of these works with John Ogdon, Allegri Quartet, Music Group of London from the EMI set that I should visit for comparison. Anybody familiar with that rendition?
Still, it is the music that counts and Elgar surprised me again with these chamber works. Somehow I didn't expect to like them at all. Is this some type of Elgar stigma that prevails within the classical music realm?

[asin] B000089HB3[/asin]

[Mirror Image]

Both the SQ and the Piano Quintet are great works, Moonfish. I also really enjoy the Violin Sonata.