Customer Reviews

Prokofiev: Symphony No. 5; Bartók: Concerto for Orchestra

5 star:		(4)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

This edition of the Sony/CBS Masterworks Heritage contains one of the finest Prokofiev Symphony no. 5 that we have on record. The work as such seems to fit like hand in glove for Szell: his electrifying conducting and the tensions within this symphony is a fruitful combination. Add the Cleveland Orchestra at its very peak, and a very fine recording and remastering, and the result is of course nothing but outstanding. If you only want one Prokofiev 5, this is the one to grab.

The Bartók Concerto, by contrast, is a disappointment. Why is that? Well, Szell's interpretation is of course, as in the Prokofiev, second to none for this work... at least in the four first movements. In the fifth and final movement, however, Szell omits bars 426 to 555 - this is quite a big and also, in my view, devastating cut. The cut contains the shadowy "night music" in end of the finale, from which the final brass coda emerges with such a striking effect. Szell thought that this cut would improve the finale. I cannot see how. In general, I think that conductors have no right to make cuts in a composer's works: they should be performed according to the score, at least as close to the score as possible. Cuts of substantial material are always bad: it is an amputation of parts of the work, not an interpretation of it. And in the present Bartók case, Szell's cut is a complete mistake. The final glowing brass chords are much better off when gradually emerging from the night music section. In the mutilated Szell finale, we hear just an abrupt and blunt jump from bar 418, which Szell repeats four times, to the final chords. So, for the Concerto, Fritz Reiner's classic Chicago recording is the one to have.

In sum, 5 stars and beyond for the Prokofiev, 3 stars for Bartók (but for movements one to four, 5 stars).

Sony has finally reissued Szell's matchless 1959 study of Prokofiev's best-structured symphonic essay. No other conductor in my mind has ever equalled his ability to illumine the full architectural splendor of this masterpiece. Szell was fond of demonstrating Kodaly's edict that what is "written underneath" in a score does not necessarily "sound underneath." Is there a better proof of such claim than this reading? Some may find the document too pedantic, opting for the more emotional Jimmy Levine (a protege of Szell)on DG. Though today's Chicago Symphony comes perhaps closest to the level of playing preserved here, the breathtaking urgency, the astoundingly punctillious rhythms, and the vivid inciciveness and unity of attack under Szell are incomparable. The vertical beams of Prokofiev's delicious harmonies have never been more seductively (though unsentimentally) disrobed before the ears. A tremendous achievement in the history of recording! The disc also contains Bartok's Concerto for Orchestra, a work I never considered to be among the composer's best efforts; presumably, Szell was similarly-minded, as evinced by his unorthodox (and surely controversial) cut before the coda of the finale, an "improvement" which never seemed entirely convincing to me. I can easily imagine the original LP fooling scores of listeners into believing their stylus had just skipped a groove. The handsome booklet includes another hilarious "Szell anecdote," courtesy of Cloyd Duff, the famous retired tympanist, a fitting testament to the conductor's unabashed fastidiousness and his sometimes---I would even say childish---irrationality under duress. Terry Whipple

These two performances display the famous Cleveland hallmark of flawless execution and power. Szell's players show the utmost care in intonation, balance, and shaping of phrases. In the opening of the Prokofiev, Szell's brisk, lighter opening gives little indication of the drama that is to come. It starts the musical line building tension that becomes more propulsive as the symphony unfolds.

In the Bartok, Szell gives his players the liberty to shape their solos but with the same control of the musical line as in the Prokofiev. Szell to a certain extent was a literalist. But he never took his literalism to the point of dogma and here, uncharacteristically, he makes a cut in the final movement that sours this performance that otherwise rivals Reiner.

I had heard about the notorious cut in the Concerto for Orchestra's finale years before I actually heard the recording. Knowing the piece well, my feeling was that it would certainly trash the performance and upon finally hearing it my presentiment was confirmed. What made it tragic was that, up until that cut, the performance was one for the ages... wonderfully wrought and full of spontaneity not always associated with Szell. I now play this recording to enjoy the rest of the piece and go to the refrigerator during the finale! It's the only way I can stand it.
The five stars are for what is there in the Bartok and for the amazing performance of the Prokofiev Fifth. There have been three recordings of this piece that I have cherished over the years. The long unavailable Decca recording with Ernest Ansermet and the Orchestre de la Suisse Romande, the wonderfully idiosyncratic Bernstein recording with the New York Philharmonic and this one which is probably the most satisfying of the three. The tempi are just right and there is a transparency that allows the listener to hear all the various strands of music as they weave their way through the piece. The crux of the piece, the highly dramatic third movement, develops inexorably to a crushing climax and the wild and wicked finale is played with appropriate tongue in cheek roguishness. It is indeed a keeper.

Sony/CBS had coupled the Prokofiev with the Walton Partita recording that dates from about the same time -- and was both uncut and very well-played -- or the adagio of the Mahler 10 that partnered the Walton on the old lp.

It just pains me to hear the Bartok concerto so well played, before being tossed like a salad at the end.

5 Stars for Prokofiev. For Bartok, see Reiner/RCA or Dorati on Mercury.

Of all the American orchestras from the Fifties through the Sixties, the Cleveland Orchestra led the pack, just in terms of sheer playing, rhythmic acuteness, and impeccable texture. In the Central European repertory,from Haydn to Mahler, they were unsurpassed. George Szell transformed a good, second-tier orchestra into one that kept company with the Berlin Philharmonic, the Vienna Philharmonic, the London Symphony Orchestra, and the Concertgebouw. I regard him as *the* great conductor after the war. Compared to him, Karajan is a conductor soi-disant.

His reputation rests primarily on Austro-German-Czech music, the cornerstone of the symphonic repertoire. Because of this, many do not realize how much Modern music he did: Stravinsky, Bartók, Ravel, Janacek, Hindemith, Walton, Prokofiev, Tadeusz Baird, Benjamin Lees, George Rochberg, Samuel Barber, and so on.

Szell's Prokofiev credentials are superb. He issued a fantastic recording of the Lt. Kije Suite (coupled with Kodaly's Hary Janos Suite). This performance of the Symphony #5 is one of the best. All of Szell's usual virtues are here: sharp, electrifying rhythm, textures of unearthly clarity, and an amazing ability to clarify architecture, important in Prokofiev, who tended to hide his main arguments in piquant digressions. Szell keeps all of this in proper relationship.

The Bartók is frustrating. On the one hand, you will not find an orchestra who plays the Concerto for Orchestra any better than or even as well as this. The first-movement fugue unfolds in one powerful line -- every entrance, including the stretti, absolutely clear. The "Game of Couples" features the impeccable Cleveland wind section, doing the Mozartean ensemble work they are known for. Nothing is overdone, not even the Lament or the clowning in the "Interrupted Serenade." The Serenade sings beautifully, while the interruption comes across as wit, for once, rather than as jokey. On the other hand, Szell takes a humongous cut in the final movement, eliminating the "night music" section. I don't know whether he always did it this way. At any rate, it keeps this from a recommendation as a top pick. Had that section remained, this account would have blown every other out of the water, including Reiner and the Chicago.

Szell's performances of these works demonstrates just how well the Cleveland Orchestra played back in the 1950's and 1960's; its level of playing easily rivalled the Berlin and Vienna philharmonics. Szell opts for a slow opening in the Prokofiev's 1st movement, gradually escalating dramatic tension as the score unfolds. His performance of the Bartok Concerto for Orchestra is almost unto a class of its own, far better than any I have heard from the likes of Haitink and Boulez. However, I have yet to hear the classic Reiner recording with the Chicago Symphony Orchestra, so I don't know whether Szell's interpretation is inferior. Yet as a mesmerizing work for the orchestra it soars. In both works, Szell does a great job emphasizing their rich orchestral textures, having each section play with much elegance and warmth. The sound quality is quite superb, inspite of the age of the original stereo analogue recordings.