Prokofiev's symphonies

[eyeresist]

Sadly, the Weller set seems to have vanished from the face of the earth!

Are you mistaken about Ormandy on Prok symphony 4? I can't find reference to it.

[Daverz]

Are you mistaken about Ormandy on Prok symphony 4? I can't find reference to it.

Because neither CBS or Sony ever issued it on CD.

http://www.geocities.com/Tokyo/1471/symphony.html

I have it on both Odyssey and Columbia Masterworks Lps (I think the original issue was a 2-eye), and also a private CD-R transfer from Locked In The Vault reissues.  Try searching ebay or gemm for the Lp.

[Sergeant Rock]

1 - Ozawa/Berlin Phil (I completely agree with Karl...I'm absolutely captivated by this recording)

2 - Martinon/ORTF Paris

3 -Rozhzdestvensky/Moscow RSO

4 (original version) - Rozhdestvensky/Moscow RSO

4 (revised versioin) - Ozawa/Berlin Phil

5 - Celibidache/Stuttgart

6 - Järvi/Scottish National

7 - Tennstedt/SOBR (original downer ending)

Sarge

[Daverz]

So nobody likes Rostropovich?  There's a budget box coming out soon:

http://www.hmv.co.jp/product/detail/2701341

[MDL]

So nobody likes Rostropovich?  There's a budget box coming out soon:

http://www.hmv.co.jp/product/detail/2701341

The so-so orchestra and the bathroom acoustics let Rostropovich down. If only he'd recorded the symphonies in Washington or London.

[vandermolen]

So nobody likes Rostropovich?  There's a budget box coming out soon:

http://www.hmv.co.jp/product/detail/2701341

I have the boxed set. It is ok but not my favourite in any of the symphonies. I much prefer the Martinon ORTF Voxbox set.

[FredT]

This is hard, REAL hard to answer. I've never heard any Prokofiev symphonies which have satisfied me. Maybe Koussevitsky and the BSO in 5. The problem is that Prokofiev was not a natural symphonist. His strength was in opera, ballet and piano works. His symphonies do not "play themselves." I do have the complete Martinon ORTF series on Vox but I never listen to them. They don't grab me. The Prokofiev symphonies are so hard to come to terms with, really. Maybe the most difficult cycle o ANY composer

[vandermolen]

This is hard, REAL hard to answer. I've never heard any Prokofiev symphonies which have satisfied me. Maybe Koussevitsky and the BSO in 5. The problem is that Prokofiev was not a natural symphonist. His strength was in opera, ballet and piano works. His symphonies do not "play themselves." I do have the complete Martinon ORTF series on Vox but I never listen to them. They don't grab me. The Prokofiev symphonies are so hard to come to terms with, really. Maybe the most difficult cycle o ANY composer

There was a v good Rohestvensky LP set on EMI/Melodiya which must be in the Melodiya vaults somewhere. Certainly it is the best version of Sympony 5 that I know. Jarvi's No 6 was v highy rated as was Mravinsky's Praga No 6.

[Pierre]

This is hard, REAL hard to answer. I've never heard any Prokofiev symphonies which have satisfied me. Maybe Koussevitsky and the BSO in 5. The problem is that Prokofiev was not a natural symphonist. His strength was in opera, ballet and piano works. His symphonies do not "play themselves."

I don't think that's a strike point against them, any more than would the fact Shakespeare's King Lear "plays itself" less readily than Terence Rattigan's "The Browning Version". It's worth bearing in mind that, in the main, Russian composers were drawn to the musical dramas of Berlioz, Schumann and Liszt, which clearly mix what might be called literary sensibilities (e.g. poetry and its rhetorical devices) into their music.

Like so many Russian symphonists, Prokofiev's symphonies are about drama and don't play as well automatically as do a Mozart or a Beethoven symphony (to take two symphonists often cited as "natural" - certainly there is a sense that their music can be played automatically, almost in a clockwork fashion without losing too much of its ability to function. But performing even Mozart and Beethoven in a straight-forward fashion like this, disregarding its emotional content, loses an essential dimension.). Prokofiev's Fifth and Sixth Symphonies in particular clearly have an ancestry in Tchaikovsky's Sixth (also Shostakovich's Fifth, of course, but let me pursue the Tchaikovsky analogy) - setting up certain expectations, then brutally or violently undercutting or contradicting them. A conductor and his musicians need to understand the emotional burden of what the music is about - just as a good performance of King Lear needs to make emotional sense of the opening scene in order for the rest of the drama to "work" - otherwise the music is to a degree compromised.

btw I seem to recall reading that Prokofiev was angered by Koussevitzky's recording of the Fifth - certainly the way he makes the closing section of the scherzo charge in rather than stalk in totally negates the character of the music.

Of course not all Prokofiev's symphonies are "about" something. Perhaps one of the problems people encountering his seven symphonies have is that they're a real mix and not a 'cycle' in any meaningful sense. No. 1 is an affectionate, at times prankish tribute to Haydn; No. 2 is perhaps his closest attempt at writing an "abstract" symphony, but almost totally divorced from the standard symphonic tradition (for all Prokofiev's claim that he modelled it after a Beethoven sonata) and more an attempt to write a "modernist" work inspired by the example of Honegger's Pacific 231. No. 3 is salvaging material from his opera The Fiery Angel - and some wonderful material it is, too (ironically the development section is one of the most conventional symphonic structures he ever wrote). No. 4 again salvages material from The Prodigal Son - I would say it plays more like a symphonic suite than a true symphony, though Roussel was clearly strongly influenced by it. Then the Soviet symphonies, which I would say represent the peak of Prokofiev's achievement in that genre - and to which most of my comments in the earlier paragraphs apply.

Sorry for these slightly scattergun thoughts, but I do think Prokofiev's symphonies worthwhile. FWIW, here's a list of those recordings I tend to reach for:

No. 1 - COE/Abbado (Deutsche Grammophon)
No. 2 - Kuchar (Naxos)
No. 3 - Jarvi (Chandos)
No. 4 (original) Gergiev (Philips)
No. 4 (revised) Gergiev (Philips)
No. 5 Tennstedt Bavarian Radio Symphony Orchestra (Profil Hanssler)
No. 6 Cleveland/Ashkenazy (Decca)
No. 7 Cleveland/Ashkenazy (Decca)

[eyeresist]

This is hard, REAL hard to answer. I've never heard any Prokofiev symphonies which have satisfied me. Maybe Koussevitsky and the BSO in 5. The problem is that Prokofiev was not a natural symphonist. His strength was in opera, ballet and piano works. His symphonies do not "play themselves." I do have the complete Martinon ORTF series on Vox but I never listen to them. They don't grab me. The Prokofiev symphonies are so hard to come to terms with, really. Maybe the most difficult cycle o ANY composer

I have heard very few performances of Prok's symphonies that satisfied me - that's why I keep buying sets! Thanks to Sgt Rock and Pierre, BTW, for reminding me of the Tennstedt disc, definitely an imminent purchase.

I think the problem is that Prok's symphonies are always ambiguous in what they're doing and how they're doing it (which I believe inspired one academic to invent a "wrong-note" theory to describe Prok's approach). Interpreters seem particularly confused by the mix of Classical, Romantic and Modern elements. He's the only composer I can think of who melds these elements without being glib or cheaply ironic.

I wish conductors would take him as seriously as they do Mahler. I think there's a lot of stuff going on in these works that just gets overlooked, due to the prominent tunes and orchestral flashiness.


Edit: Get the CfP/EMI disc of Malko conducting symphonies 1 and 7, plus the Three Oranges extracts. I think this disc is the easiest entry to Prok's orchestral music. It's cheap too!

[Daverz]

This is hard, REAL hard to answer. I've never heard any Prokofiev symphonies which have satisfied me. Maybe Koussevitsky and the BSO in 5. The problem is that Prokofiev was not a natural symphonist. His strength was in opera, ballet and piano works. His symphonies do not "play themselves." I do have the complete Martinon ORTF series on Vox but I never listen to them. They don't grab me. The Prokofiev symphonies are so hard to come to terms with, really. Maybe the most difficult cycle o ANY composer

That Martinon set seems indiffierently recorded and played to me.  Maybe that's why they don't grab you.  These symphonies need great sound and playing because of their complex scoring.

[Daverz]

In 6, I haven't yet heard Mravinsky. I understand there are two recordings, and would be interested to know their differences.

There were 5 Mravinsky recordings of the 6th according to:

http://www.prokofiev.org/prokofievans/prkfartist.cfm?atype=Conductors&aid=7

The one recommended is the 1967 Smetana Hall performance.  I don't think there's a difference between the different Praga issues as far as sound goes.

MDT has Praga on sale, by the way:

http://www.mdt.co.uk/MDTSite/product/Special%20Offers/PR256004.htm

I also just ordered the Ashkenazy set from them.

http://www.mdt.co.uk/MDTSite/product//4705282.htm

(The dollar seems to be holding fairly stead against the pound, maybe because the U.S. is taking the U.K. economy down with it   ).

[dirkronk]

I probably listen most often to...
1 under Koussevitzky, Kurtz, Bernstein or Marriner (yes, Marriner);
5 under Szell (my fave), Dorati, or Koussevitzky ;
6 under Mravinsky (yes, the Praga 1967, though I have a Russian Disc 1959, too--the Praga's better IMO).

I have most of the other symphonies under Rozhdestvensky on vinyl, and they suit me just fine when I want to hear those pieces. I used to have Weller for several of the symphonies on vinyl, as well; the sound impressed but the interps didn't--though I think I still have his sym.7, so it must have pleased me at last listen, a l-o-o-n-g time ago I fear.

I have other folks doing 1, 5 and 7 on CD, but I'd just be listing names. The ones above are the ones I'd recommend.

FWIW,

Dirk

[Martin Lind]

Grab the Weller set if you can find it.

The Weller is now published by Brilliant. I have some Naxos recordings but think about the Weller.

[Daverz]

The Weller is now published by Brilliant. I have some Naxos recordings but think about the Weller.

Though I'm not giving up the Weller set, I now feel that the Kitaenko is first choice for a set.  Kitaenko also includes both versions of the Symphony No. 4.

[Dancing Divertimentian]

These symphonies need great sound and playing because of their complex scoring.

Yes, interesting point. And to me nowhere is this more important than in the seventh symphony, with its more inward and moody character.

Good sound - and a sympathetic performance - does wonders to open up the music, letting all the complexities and subtleties ring out. Color, too.

That's why I like Smetacek's Czech PO performance on Praga so much: X-ray sound (vintage Czech, straight out of Supraphon's playbook) with plenty of body and nuance. Add to that Smetacek's fondness for keeping the music wound up veeery tight and what emerges is a performance as rich and exciting as you could ask for - despite the music's subdued nature.

[not edward]

That does sound interesting...the CzPO winds of that era ought to be perfect for the 7th, too.

[Dancing Divertimentian]

That does sound interesting...the CzPO winds of that era ought to be perfect for the 7th, too.

Yes, the winds are in fine form and definitely add to the color, here.

[vandermolen]

I like the Leinsdorf recording of Nos 2 and 6 on Testament and just bought the excellent Jarvi box (newly reissues at budget price). His recordings of 3 and 6 are now favourites.

[Superhorn]

  I don't agree at all about the notion wasn't a "natural" symphonist(whatever that is). I've always been very fond of them,and I feel they work very well and make perfectly good musical and structural sense on their own terms.
  I've always been annoyed by musicologists and critics who judge symphonies by rigid procrustean bed standards, using those of Mozart,Haydn and Beethoven as the standards,and always finding fault with symphonies which don't conform to the structural molds of these works. They're certainly wonderful symphonies, but there's more than one way to skin a cat.
  I like the Jarvi and Ozawa sets, and have heard some excellent individual performances of the 7,and have the Karajan,which whatever one says about the Tam-tam,is one of the best recordings of any Prokofiev symphony. I remember an old Melodiya recording of the 2nd ,the first version of this very underrated symphony I heard, and it was brilliant; the roughness of the Russian orchestra was entirely appropriate and the performance has a savage thrust which is absolutely hair-raising.  I haven't heard the other complete sets,but would very much like to hear Gergiev,since he's is such a great Prokofiev conductor.
  I love the 6th,which is perhaps the most profound of the seven,and really powerful.
  I don't know if the Abbado/LSO 3rd is available,but it's excellent,and would recommend it if it shows up anywhere.It was on Decca, coupled with the Classical.