Elgar's Hillside

[Moonfish]

Unless you know something I don't (very possible!), I don't think you'll find the Hugh Bean violin concerto in the Boult box, sadly. There IS a wonderful recording of the VC by Bean, but it was with Charles Groves and the RLPO. I believe Bean did perform it with Boult on at least one occasion, but I know of no recording of that performance.

The Bean recording that stimulated so much discussion a few years ago in this thread (and which I suspect is the one you're referring to) is this one:


http://www.amazon.co.uk/Violin-Sonata-Concerto-Quintet-Quartet/dp/B0001ZM8VI/ref=sr_1_sc_1?s=music&ie=UTF8&qid=1420885929&sr=1-1-spell&keywords=elgar+vioin+concerto+groves

It's more expensive than it used to be, but it's a double CD which includes the 'Big Three' chamber pieces. And whatever the cost, the performance is priceless.

I've said so much about the violin concerto already over the years that whatever I say now is likely to be a repeat ... but I have a thought or two about that 'elusiveness'. We know for sure that a particular person - Alice Stuart Wortley - was associated with its 'windflowerisms', but I think there's a strong element of 'mythicising the feminine' that goes beyond any particular literal association. As with all myths, it won't be pinned down: it niggles at us with alternate suggestions of meaning when we start thinking about it in different ways. So no matter how we try to unravel it, that 'elusiveness' will remain.

There's also of course Elgar's fondness of 'japes' to be taken into account. He loved to tease his friends with tantalising puzzles, and I fancy that dedication of the VC - 'Herein is enshrined the soul of ....' - will remain as elusive as the 'enigma' theme of the variations.

Found in the EMI set in case the cost for the double cd is prohibitive...

[asin] B000UNBQW8[/asin]

[Moonfish]

Of course (after finding my EMI set) I went ahead and listened to the concerto...   How could I resist?

Elgar: Violin Concerto      Bean/Royal Liverpool PO/Groves

This is my first time hearing Bean's performance with RLPO/Groves and as the concerto progressed I quickly realized that this is a performance I want to listen to again very soon. It felt immensely satisfying in numerous aspects reaching from Bean's emotional investment in his playing, an engaging ensemble as well as a very high SQ (in my ears). Like many of Elgar's works the VC literally weaves a spell that will make one return to it. Every time I hear it the music appears richer and more enjoyable in my mind's eye.  Elgar's VC clearly has a lot to offer as a composition (we are in consensus in the thread) and Bean certainly does not disappoint. The third movement is fantastic! Bravo! Bravo!

I have been a little bit distracted by reality lately as my wife is having surgery so I have not had much leisure time to post or listen to music. However, I try to read your impressions of Elgar whenever I get the chance.  Life takes us in so many unexpected directions. Perhaps this is something I personally sense (and resonate with) in Elgar's works as I encounter and revisit them?

[asin] B0001ZM8VI[/asin]

[André]

You're right of course - the Boult box has two recordings of the VC: Haendel (1978) and Menuhin (1965). I yet have to get acquainted with the Bean interpretation.

I also have the Haendel-Boult version of the VC on Testament - presumably licensed form EMI?.  Should that be so, I will not part with the Testament issue, as it contains a marvellous interp of the Bach Chaconne. I heard Haendel play it in 2013 and was bowled over by its boldness, depth and sheer virtuosity - from an artist well into her eighties !!

[Moonfish]

Keeping my sails up on the Elgar Sea. I have retrieved the Elgar EMI box as well as the Electrical recordings from my dusty archives. My cds are competing with books in a limited space. Compromises, compromises..!  Ahh - I have to reorganize soon! So, I could not resist listening to the VC once again today even though Bean's performance still was lingering in the crevices of my mind.

Elgar: Violin Concerto     Menuhin/London SO/Elgar       (1932)

The sound quality is obviously not comparable to later recordings, but it is still fantastic for 1932.  I think that Menuhin plays very well here with a virtuosic passion that virtually oozes from the speakers. I cannot quite figure out if it is Menuhin's actual performance or the amazing fact that this is Elgar himself conducting the concerto that makes this recording magical? Still, magical it is! It would not be my first pick, but it is fascinating and a must. Looking forward to additional gems from Elgar's efforts in recording his compositions. I have to listen to the Cello Concerto w/ Beatrice Harrison that you recommended, Elgarian!

[asin] B004MSRDK6[/asin]

[Leo K.]

Tonight's Elgar quota:

Elgar: The Dream of Gerontius     Nash/Ripley/Noble/Walker/Huddersfield Choral Society/Liverpool PO/Sargent

The very first recording of TDoG from April 1945.  I am getting a bit addicted to this work by now....   
It is my second listen to this specific Sargent recording and I definitely prefer it to his later one. Nash's voice is wonderful as Gerontius and the performance moves forward with urgency and passion. The war was not yet over in Europe and perhaps some of the spirit of the sorrow and pain of the war effort moved into the performance?  Not in the top tier, but definitely worthwhile. The sound has a little bit lack of resolution, but it is fantastic for being a 1945 recording (really!).

[asin] B000003XKH[/asin]

Walter Essex wrote a great comparative review of TDoG...

Thank you for that interesting link Moonfish!

[Leo K.]

Keeping my sails up on the Elgar Sea. I have retrieved the Elgar EMI box as well as the Electrical recordings from my dusty archives. My cds are competing with books in a limited space. Compromises, compromises..!  Ahh - I have to reorganize soon! So, I could not resist listening to the VC once again today even though Bean's performance still was lingering in the crevices of my mind.

Elgar: Violin Concerto     Menuhin/London SO/Elgar       (1932)

The sound quality is obviously not comparable to later recordings, but it is still fantastic for 1932.  I think that Menuhin plays very well here with a virtuosic passion that virtually oozes from the speakers. I cannot quite figure out if it is Menuhin's actual performance or the amazing fact that this is Elgar himself conducting the concerto that makes this recording magical? Still, magical it is! It would not be my first pick, but it is fascinating and a must. Looking forward to additional gems from Elgar's efforts in recording his compositions. I have to listen to the Cello Concerto w/ Beatrice Harrison that you recommended, Elgarian!

[asin] B004MSRDK6[/asin]

I just heard the Elgar/Menuhin for the first time today and was completely and utterly blown away by it. I've not yet heard such a moving and direct performance of the violin concerto. As a lover of historical recordings this exactly my cup of tea! I can't wait to hear it again after listening to more new Elgar recordings in my queue

[Leo K.]

The Cello Concerto is immediately a new favorite work. I'm listening to the historical recording of W.H. Squire (cello) and Hamilton Harty, which I downloaded from the Music Parlor blog:

http://musicparlourhistorical.blogspot.com/2011/02/hamilton-harty-conducts-elgar-cello.html?m=1

An excellent transfer!

I've only heard two other recordings of this work, the du Pre/Babirolli and  Weilerstein/Barenboim, both very great, but the Squire was immediately stunning.

[Mirror Image]

Found in the EMI set in case the cost for the double cd is prohibitive...

[asin] B000UNBQW8[/asin]

You had to post this box set didn't you? (wipes drool from mouth)

[Elgarian]

This is my first time hearing Bean's performance with RLPO/Groves and as the concerto progressed I quickly realized that this is a performance I want to listen to again very soon. It felt immensely satisfying in numerous aspects reaching from Bean's emotional investment in his playing, an engaging ensemble as well as a very high SQ (in my ears). Like many of Elgar's works the VC literally weaves a spell that will make one return to it. Every time I hear it the music appears richer and more enjoyable in my mind's eye.  Elgar's VC clearly has a lot to offer as a composition (we are in consensus in the thread) and Bean certainly does not disappoint. The third movement is fantastic! Bravo! Bravo!

The archaeologist Jacquetta Hawkes famously said of Stonehenge that every age gets the Stonehenge is deserves - or desires. I suspect a similar thing might be said about great musical works. It's never possible to come to a piece of music with the mind a completely blank slate - and I'm quite sure that my fondness for Bean's VC recording owes a lot to the fact that it was the first I owned. That means of course that much of my thinking about the VC over the years has been coloured by Bean's approach to it, so I expect there's an element of self-fulfilling prophecy about the whole business. But there is something about his restraint - his resistance to producing a mere display of virtuoso fireworks - that just feels right to me; and while I've very much enjoyed, for example, Tasmin Little's recent mature and thoughtful interpretation, I keep on coming back to HB and CG.

I have been a little bit distracted by reality lately as my wife is having surgery so I have not had much leisure time to post or listen to music.

Difficult times. Hope all is going well.

[Mirror Image]

I have been a little bit distracted by reality lately as my wife is having surgery so I have not had much leisure time to post or listen to music. However, I try to read your impressions of Elgar whenever I get the chance.  Life takes us in so many unexpected directions.

Speaking to you as someone who is a friend, I'm sorry to hear about this, Moonfish. I hope she is okay and makes a speedy recovery. Cherish the moments you have with loved ones.

[Moonfish]

Thanks! We are back home again and things are looking good. 

[Moonfish]

I've been away for quite a while, but wondered if this new recording of The Spirit of England might have generated a bit of discussion, so thought I'd pop in to see.

I've loved this piece for many years and have written about it a lot on this forum (see my earlier posts in this Elgar thread). The Spirit of England has for a long time been terribly overlooked and under-rated, but because of the WW1 remembrances there have actually been some live performances of it during 2014, and now comes this new recording. As one of my most-loved Elgar works, it was an obvious and immediate purchase for me.

Of the previously available recordings, one stands head and shoulders above the rest, and I've banged on about it for years - the Alexander Gibson recording with Teresa Cahill as soloist. (Mirror Image mentions it in his post.) It's the kind of recording that is capable of significantly changing one's musical perceptions, and when I first listened to it many years ago, it did just that.

Now there are horses for courses, and there are all kinds of recordings that suit all kinds of people, and vive la difference, and all that.  But I must say that this new recording just doesn't do it for me. I can't comment on the technical aspects of the performance, but the whole feeling is somehow lightweight - surely, surely, not the approach one would expect for a work of this stature. To my ears there is a universe of difference between the soul-felt richness and nuanced power that Cahill brings to the soloist part, and the curiously light and airy performance of this new recording.

I'm not saying don't try it. It may suit other temperaments. But I suspect that the one listening I've already given my copy is all that it's likely to get. The Cahill/Gibson recording changed me in important ways when I first heard it. If I'd heard this recording instead, I think it would have made little impact on me. If you're going to try The Spirit of England, not having heard it before, then my suggestion is that this is not the place to start.

Happy new year to all my old chums, by the way!

Spirit of England

I came across this recent article (August 2014) about The Spirit of England. The reviewer was not exactly very positive about the Cahill/Gibson performance. 
It is interesting how we as individuals appreciate music so differently.  Now I really want to hear the Cahill/Gibson recording!!!

[Moonfish]

What do you think about these two recordings? Worthwhile?

[asin] B009IF123W[/asin]

[asin] B009MOIQ6U[/asin]

[Elgarian]

Spirit of England

I came across this recent article (August 2014) about The Spirit of England. The reviewer was not exactly very positive about the Cahill/Gibson performance. 
It is interesting how we as individuals appreciate music so differently.  Now I really want to hear the Cahill/Gibson recording!!!

Sometimes one reads a review ... and the only response one is capable of is  ... 'WHAT?'

I can only suppose that the reviewer and I are listening to the work with completely different expectations - completely different notions about what The Spirit of England is, and is about.

The fellow is talking about one of the finest, most moving performances of any work that I know, after a lifetime of listening. What can I say, except ... well, OK? And move on.

[Karl Henning]

Great to "see" you again, Alan!

[Moonfish]

Sometimes one reads a review ... and the only response one is capable of is  ... 'WHAT?'

I can only suppose that the reviewer and I are listening to the work with completely different expectations - completely different notions about what The Spirit of England is, and is about.

The fellow is talking about one of the finest, most moving performances of any work that I know, after a lifetime of listening. What can I say, except ... well, OK? And move on.

Maybe he put on the wrong recording..??   

[Elgarian]

Maybe he put on the wrong recording..??   

Well I'm sure he didn't. But it seems to me that we are faced here once again with a problem that is endemic in all art, and in all art criticism. It doesn't matter what work of art we are discussing (or the kind of art), it will always be possible to find a critical framework against which the work can be shown to fail. And it is often the greatest works - those which are most idiosyncratic, most emphatically themselves - which can suffer most.

Think for example of the finest landscape painting you know by Cezanne - one perhaps that almost amounts to the reinvention of painting - and it would be a simple matter to construct a series of critical requirements with which it fails to comply: its lack of decisiveness (in the leaving of bits of canvas blank), the supposed clumsiness of delineation, the heightened unrealistic colouring, and so on. All those things on which its greatness rests can be argued to be its weaknesses; and indeed were so argued, historically. And really, there isn't much middle ground. Cezanne is either one of the greatest of all painters, or an abject bungler, according to the critical framework one superimposes on his work.

I think something of this sort is what's happening with this review of the Gibson/Cahill Spirit of England. The reviewer regards the 'slowness' of Gibson's pace as indicative of 'pompousness'; I regard it as an entirely appropriate deep seriousness. He finds Cahill's singing in 'To Women' 'histrionic'; I find it intense, deeply felt, and sincere. He sees the music as being 'pulled out of shape again and again'; I see it as being given a heartfelt interpretation on the edge of genius.

There's no meeting ground here, and there's no right answer. There is no 'best recording'. When all's done, there are only listeners attending to the music: in one case finding disappointment, and in another, an epiphany.

[Elgarian]

Great to "see" you again, Alan!

My dear chap, how the hell are you? Happy new year to you. May all your frolics be outrageous and fun.

[Mirror Image]

Spirit of England

I came across this recent article (August 2014) about The Spirit of England. The reviewer was not exactly very positive about the Cahill/Gibson performance. 
It is interesting how we as individuals appreciate music so differently.  Now I really want to hear the Cahill/Gibson recording!!!

There's always going to be some kind of disagreement or argument made in art, but if I really feel something from a performance, it doesn't really matter what others think. The most important part is I walk away from a piece of music with a greater appreciation for it and, while I vehemently disagree with this reviewer, it's just an opinion. We all have them.

[Karl Henning]

My dear chap, how the hell are you? Happy new year to you. May all your frolics be outrageous and fun.

There will be more swivelling & bopping, for one thing!