Customer Reviews

Sibelius, Prokofiev, Glazunov: Violin Concertos [Hybrid SACD]

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

 

 

These performances by Heifetz are amazing. Heifetz owned the Sibelius concerto all his life (and was the first to really standardize it as one of the great concertos beside Beethoven's Mendelssohn's Brahms's and Tchaikovsky's). The disc is worth the price simply for the Sibelius, yet you also get two outstanding performances of the Prokofiev and Glazunov as well. The sonics are spectacular; it sounds as if these masterpieces were recorded yesterday. Heifetz was the undisputed master of the bow, and this disc proves it; it is a must for all lovers of music.

This is my first foray into the reissued RCA Living Stereo hybrid SACD disks that have gotten a lot of publicity in recent months. Others in the batch of releases include some Rubinstein piano concertos, French music by Charles Munch and some of Fritz Reiner's orchestral specialties in Chicago.

This CD features legendary fiddler Jascha Heifitz mated to three different conductors and orchestras doing the Sibelius, Prokofiev No. 2 and Glazunov concertos. Heifitz was closely linked with the first two, less so with the third one. He does them all quite well here in sound that is as good as advertised, at least based on what my equipment tells me.

I bought this both before and after I converted to 5.1 SACD. The recording is wonderful in SACD and almost as good in traditional stereo. In particular, the timpani underpinning of the Prokofiev accompaniment by Munch and the Boston Symphony is quite thrilling. So to is the backup by Hendl and the Chicago Orchestra in the Sibelius.

However, a better recording can also show flaws that perhaps weren't as obvious before. In the waning moments of the Sibelius opening movement, there is a time -- maybe 5-6 bars in duration -- where Heifitz, Hendl, the symphony and one of its principal woodwind players seem to be missing connections by a half-beat or so. This is a minor quibble and will do little to discourage enjoyment of this otherwise fine issue.

As to the performances, the Sibelius is an example of Heifitz's searing tone and remarkable bowing. The accompaniment by Hendl and the CSO is a bit more severe than some of the more romanticized accounts but fully in sync with Heifitz direction.

I've heard accounts of the Prokofiev that concentrated more fully on the music's dreamy legato. In this version Heifitz and Munch seem more attuned the the spiky nature of Prokofiev's creation while maintaining a marginal aloofness, as if they are old juveniles having fun with the 20th century creation. It works fine both ways and this is a good one.

Heifitz and Hendl, this time with the RCA Symphony Orchestra, seem more romantically engaged in the slight 18-minute concerto by Glazunov. This romantic trip through lightweight Russian music is a fitting end to a wonderful CD brought up to 21st century speed by the new technology of SACD.

This issue is handsomely packaged in a durable CD case and includes the original LP notes plus other notes by Joseph Wechsberg from 1959. There are also notes on the history of Living Stereo and some chatter on technical details, plus a separate set of notes on SACD and how it works.

Wechsberg's notes begin: "There can be no doubt today (1959) that Jascha Heifitz is the greatest violinist of our generation. When all is listened to and said and done, Heifitz' supremacy as fiddler and musician emerges as one of the few unchallenged facts of our clouded musical age."

There is still little debate today (2005) about the first half of Wechsberg's thesis -- that Heifitz is the greatest fiddler. His tone, technique, bowing and sound continue today to blow away most competitors and this splendid sounding CD reinforces his greatness as a player.

But as an artist? Well, there's the rub. The performances on this CD are very good but I have heard more artistic renderings of the Sibelius and can imagine more committed versions of the Prokofiev. The legend of Heifitz was, generally speaking, of his stature as a player, where he continues to be without parallel.

But his artistic approach to the music he played has been questioned for many years. Lots of listeners -- especially those that more fully appreciate the Oistrakh-Vengerov approach -- will prefer other fiddlers in these works.

I don't belong to either camp and appreciate players with all viewpoints. I found this CD to be well worth the $12 list price. The sound puts it into direct competition with today's best new DDD recordings, something you couldn't say about past issues. For collectors that have yet to sample the legend of Heifitz, this would be a good starting point.

Puzzling thing with Prokofiev's two Violin Concertos, some fiddlers remain strongly associated with only one: Szigeti recorded only the 1st (twice), including I believe the premiere recording in 1937 with Beecham (it's been reissued by Naxos in their historical series with the fine coupling of Bloch's Violin Concerto, Prokofiev: Violin Concerto Number 1), and Oistrakh, despite being so closely associated with Prokofiev, made only one recording of the 2nd (and no live recording has surfaced), whereas, besides his two studio recordings, a number of live recordings of the 1st have been published (Prokofiev: Violin Concertos Nos. 1 & 2; Violin Sonata No. 2). The same applies to Milstein, who made two studio recordings of the 1st but recorded the 2nd only once, and relatively late, in 1965 (Profofiev: Violin Concertos 1 & 2; Violin Sonata No. 2). So far Mutter has recorded only the 1st - but with her that may not be the last word (Prokofiev: Violin Concerto No. 1; Sinfonia Concertante).

On the other hand Heifetz, who made a historical premiere recording of the 2nd with Koussevitzky in 1937 and this stereo remake with Munch in 1959, never recorded (and, so far as I know, played) the first. Szeryng, Francescatti recorded only the 2nd, I think. Perlman also seems to favor the second (along with Sibelius' it was his first published recording, with Leinsdorf, in 1966, Sergei Prokofiev:Sonatas for Violin/Concerto No. 2), although he did record the first, with Rojdestvenski (Prokofiev Violin Concertos & Sonata for Two Violins).

I don't hear anything in the compositions themselves that would justify this preference for one or the other. In fact, despite the near 20 years that separate their composition, I find them remarkably similar. But in the case of the 2nd, the wariness of some to tackle it no doubt had to do with the fact that Heifetz was there first.

All amends made for the 78rmp sound, the 1937 version remains the classic (it comes on two CD reissues, on Biddulph and BMG, Heifetz Plays Strauss (Violin Sonata op. 18), Sibelius (Violin Concerto), Prokofiev (Violin Concerto 2) and Heifetz Collection, Volume 4 - 1935-1939, alas both gone now). True, Heifetz' extra bite and lightness of bowing in 1959 with Munch scores in the sardonic finale. But in the firstmovement he is also more high-strung and plays with less abandon, and some of the nonchalant lyricism so endearing in 1937 is gone. In the slow movement, while his tone still has the crystal-like purity that has been so praised, I find that it is also less radiant and ample than in 1937 (something I remarked with his make and remake of Strauss' Violin and Piano Sonata as well, see my review of the above-mentioned Biddulph CD). Something else is also all but gone, in keeping with the tastes of the days: all those miniscule portamentos which in 1937 gave Heifetz' tone a unique vocal quality, especially in the second movement. He played as a soprano in those days would have sung - but in 1959, sopranos didn't sing the same. I personnaly love (and regret) the discreet sentimentality of it - given that Heifetz' is overall an unsentimental approach. Don't get me wrong, though: the 1959 version remains a glorious one with very little peers, and on this SACD reissue, the sonics are stupendous; the Boston Symphony is a pleasure to hear, with silky strings and every orchestral detail coming through - too much so at times even, with the woodwinds and even triangle (try 1st movement at 2:43) given an artificially close presence. Munch leads them with great dynamism and bite.

The same comments can apply to Sibelius' Violin Concerto. Heifetz' conception in 1959 with the Chicago Symphony and Walter Hendl is remarkably similar to what it was in 1935 with Beecham (another recording premiere, and the same Biddulph CD as above), but as in Prokofiev, Heifetz in 1959 has become even more radical, and in this case I find that it is the later recording that has the edge. Heifetz' crystal-sharp purity of tone is even more luminous now than in 1935. Again in all three movements the tempos are unrelentingly forward moving, with now an added forward dash: just compare Heifetz' first movement, 14:08 in 1935, 13:32 in 1959, to Hilary Hahn's 17:10 (Schoenberg Violin Concerto Op.36/Sibelius Violin Concerto Op.47). His technique sounds also even more assured, in particular in the double stops of the first movement cadenza (there are passages though which, in 1959 as in 1935, he plays very awkwardly, such as the arpeggios in the short solo in the first movement at 1:40). Witness also the finale, in which so many fiddlers' bows sound sticky: here in 1959 one feels that, even more than in 1935, Heifetz has made a point of pride to countenance no hindrance (although truth is that compared to Hahn there are spots where you hear that he's dangerously walking on the edge). But for all that unrelenting forward drive, there is no loss of lyricism that I can perceive. On the contrary, I find it all the more intense and searing that it doesn't linger and fuss over the phrases (which is something Hahn, with many others, does in spots). Walter Hendl may not have left a name among the great conductors of the last century, yet I find the CSO under his baton no less admirable than the London Phil under Beecham's - and I hear much, much more of it. Heifetz' way with Sibelius certainly doesn't exclude other, broader approaches (especially in the middle movement, which can take a greater sense of space), but it remains a classic of its own.

Glazunov's lush and sentimental romantic concerto - to my ears it even sounds in many spots like salon-music over-inflated to concert size - was particularly suited to a fiddler whose notion of modern music seemed to stop at the concertos of Korngold, Rosza, Walton and Gruenberg (I'm being unfair of course: other than Prokofiev's Concerto, Heifetz championed the sonatas of Ernest Bloch also, and those are as tough works as Bartok's Sonatas). As with Sibelius and Prokofiev, Heifetz had made, I believe, the premiere recording of Glazunov's, with Barbirolli and the London Philharmonic in 1934 (Sibelius/Glazunov/Tchaikovsky: Violin Concertos - Jascha Heifetz, Sir John Barbirolli, Sir Thomas Beecham, London Philharmonic Orchestra). Dating from 1963, this stereo remake is, for him, a late recording, and in fact it is, if I am not mistaken, his last recording of a concerto, so it nicely completes the circle of his recording career. I haven't heard the earlier recording to know if, as with Sibelius and Prokofiev, Heifetz, far from mellowing with age, now played it with even more urgency. There have been indeed, from Oistrakh to Vengerov, more expansive, not to say sentimental approaches to the opening section, but in fact Heifetz is spot on Glazunov's metronome tempo, and likewise in the ensuing, more animato passage at 0:45. His tone in 1963 is typically pinched and slightly wiry on the low strings, without the lush blossoming sound of an Oistrakh, but very luminous in the higher reaches. Not even Heifetz can turn Glazunov's concerto into great music of the stature of Sibelius', but in fact I think the very urgency and leanness of his approach, the refusal to linger (and the observance of Glazunov's metronome marks), does the piece good: one doesn't need to pour out the sentimentality, there is already enough of it in the music as it is. And mind you, Heifetz isn't just all urgency, he is quite expansive - as expansive as Vengerov in fact - in the quasi slow movement of track 8, and his reading is also graced by his unique, inimitable and never emulated singing inflextions. Walter Hendl again and the RCA sonics offer great support, with every detail of whatever there is in Glazunov's orchestration coming out clearly, but not glaringly spotlighted either, and making this a true dialogue of two equal partners, not just an indistinct carpet of mushy sound for a vain virtuoso display. Why isn't Hendl more renowned?

This disc is indispensable for containing two essential recordings of 20th Century Violin Concertos, and one masterful reading of a very minor one.

I will keep this short, and start by saying that I am a classical violinist who learned Sibelius and Glazunov while listening to these recordings, among others. The recording quality is outstanding on all 3 concertos, and I have no problem with the voicing of anything. I feel that the recordings are somewhat idealized for the orchestra, and for these concertos that means dark and smooth. That might just be the instruments used, but I doubt it. Regardless, it gives an amazing backdrop that I have yet to find an equal of for Heifetz.

Heifetz of course is Heifetz, and as the other reviewers said, these recordings do nothing if not showcase his bow technique. If the orchestra is smooth and dark, he is harsh and dark. He has easily one of the most messy bow techniques of anyone ever, but he finds a way to make it work beyond belief. In any case, he rarely misses anything, and neither does the orchestra. One reviewer pointed out 1 time where the orchestra was not together, and I laughed a little inside. There are many times when the orchestra is not perfect, and when Heifetz leads them by a mile. But that is what makes these so special. This is not some mix of 15 different takes, this is the real thing. We are shown as close to a live performance as you can get to I think, considering the outstanding quality. There are mistakes, but they are turned into marvelous musical interpretation.

My teacher, who received 3 degrees from Juliard back in its day, was talking to me about the Glazunov recording. He said he loved to slow it down and listen to all the places where Heifetz messes up, and as he says this he's glowing with excitement. I think this sums up these recordings well. No matter if you choose to appreciate them or not, you cannot deny what Heifetz does for people.

I just made the jump to SACD with the Heifetz recordings in the Living Stereo series that I've been listening since the original LP versions. I had been hesitant because I'm not into multichannel for music. I've auditioned several setups, and the effect seems artificial at best, chaotic at worst. in the CD format, even though the dynamic range and the clarity had been greatly improved, its brightness had me reaching for the treble control. This was pleasantly resolved with the SACD edition. The SACD also adds depth which makes the performance more lifelike even with "only" two speakers. The Sibelius is among the top three violin concertos right up there with Beethoven's and Tchaikovsky's. I recommed this gem, in particular, to my fellow stereo enthusiasts with a SACD player.