Customer Reviews

Stravinsky: Petrouchka / Le Sacre de printemps (The Rite of Spring) ~ Boulez

5 star:		(10)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(3)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

When George Szell was appointed Music Director of the Cleveland Orchestra in 1946, he sculpted an ensemble that even 35 years after his death remains the most technically proficient orchestra in the history of recorded classical music. Quite simply, this orchestra is so tight and precise that it is easy to forget that one is hearing 100-plus musicians!

However, much of the 20th century repertoire was beyond his intellectual purview. No greater evidence of this is the dreadful Szell/Cleveland Orchestra recording of Bartok's Concerto for Orchestra.

Enter Pierre Boulez, who seems to understand contemporary music at a cellular level.

Therefore, when a conductor like Boulez is leading an ensemble like the Cleveland Orchestra, the listener will experience such music in a way seemingly impossible with any other orchestra/conductor pairing. Clearly, these musicians love playing for Boulez.

As for this second recording with Boulez and the Cleveland Orchestra, it is as one might expect. That is to say, it is very good. Clean, well, conceived, with excellent balance, and for the most part, intelligently paced.

However, it can never be regarded as the definitive recording because of perhaps the most vivid and electrifying recording ever of this work, created in Severance Hall with the Cleveland Orchestra and Boulez in 1969.

The only criticism one might have is that the sound quality is obviously not up to the standards of this DGG digital recording. But the playing on the 1969 CBS recording so precise, so clean, so alive, that even the hardest of hardcore audiophiles, if he or she loves this work, will be taken completely beyond the sound, and into the music.

If I had only one recording of this 20th century masterpiece, it would be with this orchestra and this conductor. But not this recording.

Seek out the 1969 CBS recording, for which a five-star rating is inadequte. Once you hear THAT stunning performance, you will never be satisfied with anything less.

Both Petrushka and the Rite date from 1911, and these performances of them were recorded in 1991. By that date Boulez himself was not in the springtime of his youth, and it may well be, as some comment seems to suggest, that his readings are less incisive than in earlier days. Myself, I am not even fully convinced that this is the case, and even if it is the compensations seem to me more than to make up for it. These readings are less strident than some, and there is no sense of straining to obtain effects of contrast. Petrushka's cry, for one thing, is relatively euphonious here, and the Rite in general is probably not quite as dramatic as my wonderful performance, extraordinarily well recorded on a Mercury LP about 50 years ago, by Dorati with the Minneapolis orchestra. On the other hand, Boulez at this stage of his career seems concerned more than before with beauty of orchestral tone, and I say without hesitation that this is the most beautiful Petrushka that I have ever heard in my own lengthening life.

In any case, even if the new approach is less forceful than previously, I detect no loss whatsoever of underlying strength. Boulez has always seemed to me ideally suited as a conductor of Stravinsky. His dynamics may be less `terraced' here than he would once have made them, but the clarity of texture that he obtains is as absolute as ever, and his strength of line and rock-steady firmness of rhythm mark him out as they always did. Above all what is bound to strike you in this performance is the sheer quality of it all. Listening to sound as magnificent as this, I was astonished that it had been achieved so long ago as 1991. Szell had turned the Cleveland Orchestra into a mighty playing-machine, so bring on the right maestro to mould and direct the virtuosity of every section of the band, give them all world-beating engineering, and the end product is an outright orgy of acoustical perfection and beauty. What an amazing bunch of orchestrators the Russian masters were! Stravinsky was a pupil of Rimsky himself, and the master might have envied his pupil if he had heard what we can all, in the third millennium, hear on this disc.

Occasionally everything seems to go right, just as all too often nothing seems to, and here, on top of the outstanding performance and recording, we have a first class liner-essay by Professor Richard Taruskin. I personally wonder whether, even in 1911, the Rite of Spring was as much of a shock to its hearers as Taruskin lets on - he himself admits that what caused the misbehaviour during the Paris premiere was more Nijinsky's choreography than Stravinsky's harmonies. However he has been given adequate space to set out his erudition and his insights, and he has the appropriate material to fill the space with. These days I find it hard to suppose that Stravinsky in general, and these two works in particular, are capable of shocking any but the least experienced music-lovers. To them, and to those who have been around the matter longer, I say that if the word that you would have used to characterise Stravinsky was not `beautiful' it will be after you have got to know this disc. He is my own favourite Russian composer of them all, but I'm not sure I had quite understood what he amounts to in all ways until I had heard what I have heard on this occasion.

I always find it amazing that record companies, in this case Teldec, don't take the little extra effort to turn a good product into a great one. In this case their error was to not split The Rite of Spring into 11 tracks for each of the subparts like everyone has done (this recording has only two for each of the two main parts) and include liner notes that explain each of the sections. For collectors that already have other versions this may not be a problem, but for novices that are trying to study the music, the omission is unacceptable. Also, the liner notes stink--2 pages total for the 3 pieces and then 3 pages on Barenboim!

For those unfamiliar with Barenboim's conducting, he seems to have a reputation for leaving issues like entrances and accuracy of rhythm for the players to deal with. In short, ensemble precision typically is not a trademark of his, which makes the performances on this CD all the more shocking. Who would expect the Rite of Spring, of all things, to sound so rhythmic, clear, and powerful under Barenboim? He has the Chicago Symphony playing with incredible tightness and security in this remarkably difficult work. The various climaxes are full of fire, as well.

Both La Mer and Boulez's Notations VII get refined playing also, even though there's a certain heaviness about the La Mer that takes away slightly from some of the atmospheric and shimmering effects of the piece. Overall, a great (and surprising) disc, supported by Teldec's terrific sonics.

This is my favorite Stravinsky disc, along with Boulez' and Dorati's Firebird.

I never liked Stravinsky's own recordings that much, in Petrouchka he's very rude, he underplays the gentle passages very much and in Le Sacre he's too fast in some parts and therefore not powerfull enough.

I've listened to many records and I must say I quite like a lot of recordings of Le Sacre, but there aren't that many good Petrouchkas.
The only one I almost like as much as Boulez' is Dorati's and Boulez' earlier one for Sony

Boulez might seem a bit unexiting at first glance, but his version is very accurate, precise, sharp and constant moving...his natural phrasing makes his version much more fluid, forward moving, where others stop the music at times, wanting to add too much contrasts in tempi at certain parts.

As a whole Boulez' recording moves along a lot quicker than others, because of his seamless moulding of every single fragmented part...surprising because in some passages he's actually slower than many.

The recording is detailed, spacious and quite refined and maybe that's the reason why many people think it lacks excitement.
Considering only the old records people mention as their favorites, with more direct and louder sound, this doesn't come as a surprise to me.
Yes I would've liked a Mercury Living Presence sound with this Boulez recording, with that sound I'm almost certain many would adore Boulez' Petroushka!

I had fairly low expectations about Barenboim's interpretation of the Rite and La Mer, but I was very wrong. This is an outstanding Rite and, I believe, one of the very best La Mers. I have never heard such clarity to the woodwinds in the Rite particularly in the Glorification of the Ancestors and the Fertility Dance. Barenboim brings a kind of luxuriant radiance to the work that has only been subtly hinted at in other performances. This is a Rite with ecstasy. Like so many other performances, this one lags in the final section, because it lacks sufficient forward momentum and orchestral clarity. The only performance that pulls this off perfectly is that of Zander, which is a must buy.
This La Mer is powerfully romantic and it simply never disappoints or falters. It does have just a bit of schmaltz in the last section, but it expresses the great majesty of the sea as powerfully as any performance I am familiar with and I know many. I recommend this CD highly.

The partnership between Pierre Boulez and the Cleveland Orchestra truly is a match made in heaven. Virtuosity is indeed the obvious outcome when a leading conductor of 20th-century music meets an ensemble long renowned for its impeccable precision of execution. Nowhere is this more apparent than in this recording of Stravinsky's two ballets. Both of them are notoriously challenging and display not only an orchestra's instrumental virtuosity but also its level of musicianship. In this regard, Cleveland passes with flying colors, confirming that they are still the mighty, disciplined and impeccable band they are renowned to be.

The execution is indeed little short of miraculous; precise, assured and disarmingly clean. Woodwinds are given center stage and they don't disappoint. Their playing is intelligent and sensible in solos and in ensembles alike, with perfectly focused tones and flawless tuning. Strings are equally clean and display a most malleable blend and focus, while brass instruments are agile and powerful when needed, but never dominate the ensemble. All in all, this is among the most impressive display of virtuosity I've heard in a Stravinsky recording.

As could be expected, Boulez delivers disciplined ensemble playing, transparent balances and flawless tempi changes. It is indeed hard to believe that 100 musicians are playing here when such cohesion is achieved.

There are a few moments when this level of precision comes at a cost. Many listeners will probably feel that the performances are somewhat tame in comparison to others. No doubt that they are when compared to the likes of Bernstein's account in New York for example. The Rite of Spring is indeed especially tame in comparison. The "Spring Rounds" for example are a tad too nice and exhibit very little of the "pesante" indicated in the score. In that respect, some may understandably prefer a grittier and more tribal Rite or a wilder, more playful Petrushka; recordings with those qualities abound and should not be missed. But neither should the virtuosity displayed here!

DG's engineers have perfectly captured the orchestra. Crisp and well-defined, the sound has limited warmth and is even a tad dry at times, putting the orchestra under scrutiny. No problem there. Balances are mostly equalized, without any section overpowering the other. The result: an unbelievably transparent sound that lets the score's every single detail come forward. Get ready to hear things you hadn't heard before. Sure, there were moments when I wished for some more relief in balances (the piano is somewhat overpowered in Petrushka, for example) but all in all, this is a very exciting achievement.

Like many other fans of Le Sacre du pritemps, I have collected baised on the different styles of interpretation. I enjoy Tilson-Thomas's recent effort with San Fransisco for frenzied thrashing (over Bernstein), Dorati's version with Detroit for authentic character (over Stravninsky), and this one for hair-splitting precision. A reviewer of this disk has commented on the slow tempos - quite the contrary, the tempos, particularly from the Glorification of the Chosen One onward, are nearly recklessly fast. Boulez and Cleveland are the ideal team for this level of technicality at these speeds. Buy and savor when you want to think about the music.

It's a wonderful thing to hear these pieces performed with different interpretations. Stravinsky's recordings on Columbia with the NY Philharmonic present them to us in a way that pleased the composer at the time. Maestro Boulez used the Cleveland Orchestra to give us different 'views' of the music. I have a preference for what might be called Stravinsky's funkier approach to Petrouchka. On the other hand the clarity of Le Sacre on this recording allows us to hear aspects of the orchestration that had previously escaped me. Anyway, there would be no point in having every conductor with every orchestra perform the music in exactly the same manner. Vive la difference!

This 1992 pairing of Stravinsky's two masterpieces is so obviously no fun that even the slavish Gramophone, after spending a column of special pleading about how marvelous the details were, was forced to admit that Boulez's Petrushka lacked any festive air -- it takes place at a holiday fair, after all -- and that his Le sacre du printemps was short on drama and tension. The younger Boulez had made a huge impression with his first version of both works on Sony; critics marveled at their precision and orchestral color. Those qualities still pertain-- there are many stretches where you are transported to the world of Ravel with its delicacy and pinpoint timbres. Yet even then, one cadn't help but notice that the New York Phil. was much more committed and vital for the younger Boulez in the Seventies. (The two Boulez Le sacres, early and late, are with the Clevelanders.)

I could find myself making some special pleading of my own, though. If you have owned a dozen versions of these two ballets, hearing the unique things Boulez can do with a great orchestra is a pleasure in itself, regardless of how antiseptic the overall performance might be. Or you might busy your mind comparing his two readings. I'm not enthusiastic enough for either purpose. as time passes, Le sacre has become easier to play (I notice there's even a recording by the Pasadena Sym.), so many conductors have turned it into a virtuoso showpiece. Boulez the clinician isn't about to stoop to showmanship. But for really great performances one still has to look hard. If had to pick two desert island recordings, it would be the young Ozawa on RCA in spectacular sound (he conducts the Chicago Sym. in Le sacre and the BSO in Petrushka). As for Le sacre on its own, the first Bernstein recording from New York in 1958 wowed the composer and continues to wow me, fifty years later. So does his 1972 remake with the London Sym., which has been reissued in updated sound.