Customer Reviews

Prokofiev: Violin Concertos Nos. 1 & 2 / Violin Sonata No. 2 ~ Oistrakh

5 star:		(6)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

This is a really great Cd, for many reasons. Firstly, the music itself is incredible. Prokofiev's First Violin Concerto is a great piece of music. In many ways, it is typical Prokofiev, exciting, quirky, abrasive. But at other times, it is so ethereal and beautiful. The orchestra part is very light and transparent, which allows each individual instrument to shine in its own way (particularly in the spectacular scherzo). The 2nd Violin Sonata was originally a flute sonata, but Oistrakh (who was a good friend of Prokofiev) helped him transcribe it for violin. A flautist friend of mine who was writing a college paper about Prokofiev told me that she read that the flautist who premiered the sonata was drunk at the time, which prompted Oistrakh to declare he could play the piece much better. I don't know if that's actually true, but if I've read enough Dostoevsky that it doesn't seem too far fetched for a Russian (just kidding!). It's very neo-classical in form, which provides a nice canvas for Prokofiev's often humorous writing (compared to the much more intense 1st Violin Sonata - also a wonderful piece). I don't like the 2nd Violin Concerto as much. It's not a bad piece, but I don't think its as memorable as either of the other two pieces.

Oistrakh's playing, as usual, is impeccable. His tone is full and beautiful in every register and he navigates the speedy Scherzo of the 1st concerto with more clarity than any other player I've heard. I don't think that Oistrakh's playing is too tame on this disc. I think we often attribute the craziness with which many violinist play these pieces to being intentional or purely for effect. On the other hand, I think in many cases it may simply be a product of how difficult the music is. It's much harder to play this music cleanly and controlled than it is to rip through it "crazily" (although I also enjoy that approach - check out Josefowicz's recording for a much crazier rendition). However, I don't think that Oistrakh's uncanny technical mastery is a hinderance to his expressive abilities. On the other hand, being such a technical good player allows him to phrase subtlely and tastefully at all times, even when playing passages that would have most other violinst simply hoping to get through it.

I don't like referring to any given recording as a benchmark or definitive this or that... I think all artists have something different to offer (which is how I justify buying so many different versions of the same pieces...). However, if I HAD to declare one recording the best, I think this would have to be it. Enjoy!

Oistrakh was only 15 when Prokofiev's 1st Violin Concerto was premiered in 1923 by Marcel Darrieux and Koussevitsky at the Paris Opera, but he presented it on his 1926 graduation concert at the Odessa Conservatory and became one of its most renowned champions. There is a famous anecdote, recounted in the liner notes, by which Oistrakh, playing the scherzo in front of the composer on the occasion of a post-concert reception in 1927, was chastised by Prokofiev who came up to the piano to show him the proper way to play it. That didn't prevent the two from becoming close friends, and Oistrakh premiered the composer's two Violin and Piano Sonatas (it was even his insistent prompting that initiated the second, a transcription of Prokofiev's Flute Sonata).

So there is a special authority of any Prokofiev interpretation by Oistrakh. He made two studio recordings of the 1st Concerto: this one from 1954 for HMV with Lovro von Matacic, and one for Melodiya, a year before, with Kondrachin conducting (I have it on a Monitor CD, David Oistrakh plays Shostakovich: Violin Concerto No. Op. 99 - Leningrad Philharmonic with Eugene Mravinsky and Prokofiev: Violin Concerto No. 1 Op. 19 - State Radio Orchestra with Kiril Kondrashin, but it has just been reissued on a cheap and convenient3-CD "Original Masters" DG set with more concerto recordings from that era, Cons & Encores); it is apparently that same recording, also published on 78rpms in the Soviet Union at the time, that is sometimes published falsely crediting the composer himself as conductor. There are also a handful of live recordings, including the earliest Oistrakh testimony in that composition, with Kubelik and the Prague Radio Symphony Orchestra in 1947, which comes unfortunately in dismal sound (see my review of Concertos - Liszt/Prokofiev/Khachaturian).

Interpretively there is not much to choose between both studio recordings. The reading with Matacic is slightly more spacious, in the context of an approach which is already (in the outer movements) very spacious and long-breathed. It is illuminating here to compare the way Oistrakh phrases the first section of the first movement ("sognando" is Prokofiev's expressive mark: dreamy) with Nathan Milstein, who recorded the Concerto with Vladimir Golschmann for Capitol a few months before (now on the Introuvables set, Les Introuvables Nathan Milstein). There is an undercurrent of urgency and unrest in Milstein's dream. Oistrakh is serene. The ample phrase (cantabile) at the beginning of the finale exudes a radiant lyrical beauty. And I would suggest that it is not only a matter of interpretive choice: no doubt, with his ample and juicy tone, Oistrakh CAN be more spacious and serene, where Milstein's leaner tone compels him to pace faster. But don't infer that Oistrakh conveys an impression of lacking animation. On the contrary, he can superbly roughen his tone in the scherzo passages, and his pizzicattis at 6:04 are explosive and raw (5:19 for Milstein). HMV's recording sounds less spacious than Monitor's reissue of the one from Melodiya, but affords more orchestral details to come through (not the important tuba theme at 4:22 in the finale, unfortunately), which is a reason to marginally prefer it. Either recording, or both even, are basic building blocks in a Prokofiev library.

If the number of available recordings (studio or live) is to serve as a pointer, Oistrakh surprisingly kept aloof of the 2nd Violin Concerto: this one, made in 1958 with Alceo Galliera, is the only recording there is, no live one has surfaced. I don't think it has anything to do with the piece itself, which I find remarkably similar to the first, despite the near twenty years that separate their composition. But it may have had with the fact that Heifetz made the premiere recording, with Koussevitsky leading the Boston Symphony Orchestra in 1937, a recording which to this day remains a reference (it was reissued by Biddulph, Heifetz Plays Strauss (Violin Sonata op. 18), Sibelius (Violin Concerto), Prokofiev (Violin Concerto 2), and by BMG, Heifetz Collection, Volume 4 - 1935-1939, both lamentably gone now). I can imagine that, even for Oistrakh, it would be intimidating to measure up to such a glowing achievement.

But Oistrakh does, and precisely, by NOT competing directly with Heifetz: rather, he takes a widely different view from the Lithuanian-born violinist, a (not surprisingly) much broader and lyrical one. Both approaches work, I find, and the two versions are complementary, giving alternative and equally valid views: both belong to any basic Prokofiev collection. What both have in common, in their own diverging way, is a very organic sense of the tempo changes in the first movement, which they attain by NOT (unlike about all subsequent virtuosos, including Stern and Perlman) exaggerating the contrasts of tempo - Heifetz by remaining always fast, Oistrakh by not taking every opportunity to slam the gas pedal. Oistrakh's slow movement has its moments of genuine passion, but it is also tender, evoking the song a mother would sing to her child rather than Heifetz' ardent amorous confession (truth is, compared to Heifetz there are passages in which Oistrakh comes dangerously close of sounding a bit too placid, especially at 4:10). Again he plays with radiant tone throughout, and the orchestral details come out clearly, in early stereo sound, affording in particular fine dialogues between violins and violas. There are two ugly tape splices at 8:47 in the first movement and 2:02 in the finale, the latter even cutting off a beat of orchestral music.

As with the 2nd Violin Concerto, and despite his role in the work's inception, Oistrakh left only this studio recording of the 2nd Violin Sonata; according to Paul Geffen's invaluable discography, available on the net, there are six, studio or live, of the first. Anyway, as dedicatee and first performer Oistrakh has unique authority here, and his ample lyricism suits the work's bitter-sweet mood well. The recording is mono from 1956, lacking a bit in presence.

This CD offers more logical couplings than Testament's earlier reissues (Lalo: Symphonie Espagnole, Etc. and David Oistrakh Plays Violin Sonatas By Prokofiev, K. Khachaturian & Szymanowski). Excellent notes by David Gutman, generous TT of near 73 minutes. These recordings are by all means historical and belong to any serious Prokofiev and/or Oistrakh collection.

...just as long as you're starting it. You may only want to read this if you're new to this music because the past reviewer has wisely mentioned it, this has been previously released, and sometimes if your collection grows, it's difficult to keep track of the CDs you own, so careful! Now, if you are new to REAL music, it's a great choice, even more so for a violinist, since it features a must-listen piece: Prokofiev's beautiful No2 concerto performed by the magnificent David Oistrakh, one of the most recognizable names among violinists. Concerto No1, though shorter than most other violin concertos, is also worth listening; plus, it has the violin sonata No2 as a bonus! So if you're a newbie to classical music then by all means buy it, and don't stop there! After that get Tchaikovsky's violin concerto and the Brandenburg Concerts and Mozart's operas and...

The affinity between Prokoviev and Oistrakh is only comparable to that between Bach and Casals, Chopin and Cortot, Beethoven and Furtwangler or Mozart and Grumiaux. By that I mean Oistrakh not only displays his powerful interpretive warmth, impeccable phrasing, subtle elegance and prodigious technique but built like no other violinist (with the exception of the prematurely disappeared Julian Sitkovetsky) a descriptive and evocative atmosphere contained in these works.

The Op 19 can not be played better. In the Op 63 Ruggiero Ricci is the only soloist who passes you in terms of the rough ferocity and steely lyricism. Regarding the Sonata Op 94, Oistrakh established an unsurpassed pinancle.

Kudos for Von Matacic, who conducted the Op. 19 with supreme mastery. Don't miss this album and go for it.

This is a welcome reissue of the monumental recordings of Prokofiev's violin concertos beautifully remastered with vivid sound. These awesome performances by David Oistrakh are in many ways a touchstone for all the violinists in the world, and very few of them can match the sheer beauty of his tone, his technical refinement and artistry. His mind never seems to falter or lose perspective, whether in the fiendishly difficult passages or in the most lyrical moment. One can always sense the music is coming from his innermost being, and that gives the noble beauty to the warm and deeply expressive tone he draws from the instrument. Violin sonata No.2 is played also with the same focus, poetic imagination and the rich tone.

Violin Concerto No.1 (1955 Mono)
Violin Concerto No.2 (1959 Stereo)
Violin Sonata No.2 (1956 Mono)

These mono recordings of Prokofiev's Violin Concertos are nothing short of brilliant, and despite their mono sound, are in the opinion of many the best accounts ever recorded. The problem is serious collectors most likely already own two-thirds of the contents of this disc. You see, in the past EMI has licensed out many of their more specialized performances to a British company called Testament. The very same performances featured here of the Concerto No.1 and Violin Sonata No. 2 were previously issued on Testament's SBT 1116 (see my review) & 1113 CDs respectively. While novice fans stumbling upon this CD in the bins at their local store could care less about this fact, it is a major problem for serious collectors like myself. It is often hard enough to avoid purchasing duplicate material on the same record label with the numerous reissues that have drifted in an out-of-print over the years, let alone encountering the same music on different labels. Though coming from a jazz background, I shouldn't be surprised with EMI's tactics. This is the same kind of thing they do all the time with Mosaic Records -- authorizing the production of limited edition boxed sets then when the Mosaic edition sells out, re-releasing the same music as single titles on their own brand. In fact, I know of at least one other upcoming release, the Guido Cantelli offering in EMI's "Great Artists of the Century" series, that will duplicate yet another Testament title -- "The Debussy Recordings" SBT 1011 (see my review). So in summary, EMI has produced some great reissues lately, just make sure you don't already own them.

This is an outstanding CD. Oistrakh new the composer well, and the sonata on this CD was arranged from the Flure Sonata for him.

These are serence performances - flawless technically, but with plenty of strength and tension behind the serenity. Listeners may want to own more volatile performances in addition - such as the terrific performances of the concertos by Boris Belkin on Decca Eloquence, with Kondrashin and Barshai conducting (not Belkin's later Denon versions, less sparkling) or of the sonata by Perlman and Ashkenazy - but these Oistrakh performances are staple recordings which give unrivalled pleasure.

They have previously been issued with different couplings - this coupling may seem obvious, but the performances date from different visits to London by Oistrakh, in 1954 (his first EMI recordings) and 1958, and in the meantime EMI had started recording in stereo, so EMI have previously been reluctant to couple the mono Concerto No 1 wit the stereo Concerto No 2. In truth, the orchestra is recorded rather backwardly in the Concerto No 1.

The orchestras both play well - this was before the LSO reached its highest level, but so far as can beheard Lovro Matacic is an attentive and volatile conductor and the orchestra responds well. Alceo Galliera was an interesting choice for the Second Concerto. He also conducted the Brahms Double with Oistrakh (and Fournier), a recording Oistrakh especially enjoyed himself. (After the Prokofiev was recorded, Alceo Galliera had to leave London for another engagement, leaving soloist and orchestra ithout a conductor for the Mozart Concerto they were due to record - Oistrakh was persuaded to step in himself, his first recording as a conductor. Another very good performance originally coupled with the Prokofiev on LP, and always available since.) Galliera's lyrical approach works very well in the Second Concerto and fits Oistrakh's own view of the work. The Philharmonia is at its peak.

If you like these works, these performances, in whichever edition, are a a 'must-have'.

A brilliant performance by possibly the best violinist of his generation and, since he was Russian, Oistrakh has a real feel for the elemental Russian-ness of the music

The Gramohone says that Oistrakh's playing was 'a calming influence in an agitated world,' which encapsulates how his admirers feel about an artist whose interpretations could be decidedly low-key and overly controlled. Rarely is Oistrakh willing to surrender his immaculate technique for the sake of spontaneity (of course, thre are exceptions--no one made as many recordings or as many multiple copies of a single work).

These concerto recordings from EMI's archive in the Fifties show his tone and technique off to excellent effect, although the orchestras are a bit too far back to have an impact. Oistrakh used the Prokofiev First, recorded in mono, as a specialty piece, and here he sounds completely at ease, spinning out lyric lines and fast passagework with effortlessness and exquisite tonal sheen. I'd like to hear more imaginaiton, not to mention passionate involvement, and Matacic's accompaniment is good without equaling what the soloist is doing. The Second Concerto, recorded in stereo, under Galliera is lackluster in the orchestral part, and Oistrakh doesn't seem as involved, either.

I think modern Russian virtuosos, particularly Maxim Vengerov in his acclaimed recordings with Rostropovich (Teldec), are nearly Oistrakh's equal in technique and surpass him in excitement, not to meniton recorded sound. But there is a unique finesse to his playing that no one has matched, and if that appeals to you, these are very worthwhile documents. The Second Sonata with Yampolsky, recorded in mono, is in good sound and is just as beautifully executed as the concertos.