Customer Reviews

Tchaikovsky, Korngold: Violin Concertos

5 star:		(7)
4 star:		(6)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(4)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

Mutter's Tchaikovsky on this disc leaves me very torn. There are moments of pure brilliance (in particular, I think she plays the section before the cadenza in the first movement beautifully). There are almost moments that are very sloppy, largely because of her speed. They don't so much sound bad, but to me, they are played so fast that I can't really tell if all the notes are there... It just goes by in a blur...

I think generally Mutter has a very engaging style, sound, and sense of phrase, and despite some flaws in this CD, her unique skills still shine through.

The Tchaikovsky is a beautiful piece and works well at slower tempos (for example, Midori's recording is quite slow compared to most, but the piece can handle it). There are so many wonderful turns of phrase and little moments that can be savored, it almost seems a shame to rush through them. On the contrary, Heifetz plays the piece incredibly fast, but with such technical clarity that it is astounding to listen to him. Mutter falls in the middle... She doesn't milk it as much as Midori, and while she plays at speeds which rival Heifetz, she doesn't have his laser beam precision (there are many other recordings which could be used for comparison, but here I choose Midori and Heifetz because they fall on opposite ends of the tempo spectrum).

Using Midori and Heifetz as benchmark (for the sake of argument), the real question is does Mutter add anything uniquely her own in this recording, or is it just a less beautiful version of Midori's playing and a less clean version of Heifetz's playing? You could certainly argue that her sense of "controlled chaos" adds something to the piece. All musicians know that toying with rhythms is an important expressive tool (as a music teacher, I often have a hard time explaining to my students how you can play "out of time/rhythm", but still be correct...). The way rhythms can be manipulated for expressive purposes is difficult to explain and understand, but it certainly has an effect on the piece. Just like Heifetz's strict adherence to the written rhythms adds to the effect of his performance, Mutter's rhythmic "inconsistencies" on some of the faster passages certainly adds something to the feel of her performance (like it or not). However, you also have to be careful not to rationalize bad playing (which is particularly tempting with such an accomplished artist... I almost feel like if I don't like their rendition of a piece it's because "I don't get it"...). Sometimes things are just bad. Period. Which side of this line Mutter's playing falls is the question.

Ultimately, I don't know the answer to that question... However, enjoying art isn't about finding the answers to things, but rather contemplating the questions. Despite my complaints, I find Mutter's recording intriguing, if for no other reason than because I'm not 100% sure of what to make of it...

I have never understood the widespread revulsion among violinists to the Korngold concerto. Those who snort dismissively at his music and call it "more corn than gold" -- a phrase that has unjustly dogged a gifted and oft overlooked composer -- are merely demonstrating how prodigiously they can judge a book by its cover.

I like Korngold's music, and I like Previn, who conducts on this CD, for unabashedly championing it. Most of Korngold's detractors savor the criticism that his music merely consists of glorified film soundtracks. Previn rightly counters, "It is not that Korngold sounds like film music; film music sounds like Korngold." In this sense, Korngold is a genuine innovator; more often than not, modern film composers are standing upon his shoulders. But his work and his genius as a composer go beyond the film score, as attested by his masterful string quartets and the Violin Concerto in D.

It's the strength of the concerto -- both as a composition and as it is rendered by Anne-Sophie Mutter -- that carries this CD. The aching nostalgia, heroism, and melodic opulence of Korngold's themes are undeniable, but Mutter's lyricism makes them sing and soar in ways that no other recording I'm aware of can approach. Heifetz may have the definitive recording, but as far as I'm concerned it's only definitive in matters of technique. Heifetz can't be beat for tone and execution, but his interpretive sensitivity lags well behind his technical prowess. This rendition by Mutter may be the new lyrical gold standard for the Korngold concerto.

I know there are hordes of violinists out there ready to shout me down, but I find the Tchaikovsky to be an inferior composition to the Korngold -- it is just as (if not more) repetitive as any part of the Korngold, and the themes in the 1st and 3rd movements are sterile by comparison. Compared to her performance of the Korngold, Mutter's Tchaikovsky is rendered with far less verve and craft. For much of the piece (especially in the cadenzas), she vacillates between uncouth, temporally incoherent sawing and high lyricism that squeezes melodies for all their nectar. To my ear, her rendition of the Tchaikovsky struggles to remain cogent. The exception is the 2nd movement. Mutter's tone and vibrato are sublime, and the slower tempo allows her to be more expansive with her phrasing, bringing her apparent strengths to the fore.

I bought this CD because of the Korngold, and I wasn't disappointed. I've heard all the great violin concertos rendered by many of the great performers of our time. I won't dare to go so far as to say that the Korngold is the greatest of the violin concertos, but I think it's one of the most enjoyable and immediately accessible. Mutter's rendition makes it doubly so, which is why I think this is also one of the best violin virtuoso recordings I've heard.

Sure she commands the biggest fee of any soloist in classical music. This must make violinists like the criminally-underrated Viktoria Mullova shake her head in wonderment. This is another very bad, very egotistical, very vulgar interpretation from a fiddler who's become too full of herself. She has commented that her interpretations today have little in common with what she was doing early in her career. Indeed! And that's a shame. She made some great recordings back then.

The Tchaikovsky, which has one of the stiffest, most uninspired accompaniments I've ever heard from hubby Andre, is crass--perhaps she's trying to achieve Eduard Hanslick's assessment that the music stinks to the ear. She certainly tries to accomplish that, with an overbearing, thick sound, a moany (not throaty, moany) tone, supersized phrasing even in intimate passages, all sorts of unscripted glissandi, notes held beyond their notation, and theatrical vibrato. This is just bad taste. Her technical prowess is never in doubt (though she seems to doubt it; she seems to be shouting "LISTEN TO WHAT I CAN DO!" every few seconds), but part of what makes a musician great is the ability to divine the composition, so to speak. While to a degree this can be subjective, there are stylistic guidelines that can be gleaned from the score, performance practice, etc., and there comes a point beyond which I am willing to forgive. Just listen to her opening phrasing...the streeeeetching of every third note, the excessively fussy micro-diminuendos and micro-crescendos at every third bar, the distortion of phrases into nonsense, the outright schmaltzy approach that honestly seems to disrespect the composer. The Amazon review states that she incorporates the first movement's cadenza as though it were an integral part of the work. I seriously have to question if the reviewer listened to the disc (sober, at least). This cadenza has about six thousand separate gearshifts when it comes to tempo, dynamics, color, and vibrato, all of which call attention to her technique and nothing more. I cannot escape the feeling lately that she is just using music--*any* music--as a springboard to show off her admittedly amazing but perhaps too self-conscious technical prowess. And I used to be one of her biggest fans.

The Korngold, a wonderful and neglected work, is here schmaltzed to such an extent that it sounds like not just film music (as Korngold was a great film composer) but a parody of film music. Over the opening bars I can practically hear the narration, "I remember the last time I kissed her, on that bridge in Paris, before we said goodbye forever. I can still smell her perfume on my collar, feel her hair against my face. Now she's just a memory, a dame in a distant land..." Again Previn turns in a routine performance, though at least it's not quite as rhythmically stiff. (As Mutter has become more showboaty, he's become blander and blander, until he must be The Dullest Conductor on Earth, even duller than Wolfgang Sawallisch or Kurt Masur [there should be a special award for that; it's not easy].) At least the cadenza here isn't an embarrassment. The sound is muffled for the orchestra, upfront and larger-than-life for our egomaniacal fiddler. For the Tchaikovsky, you want a great recording in modern sound, get Mullova/Ozawa (don't worry, Seiji is in good form here) on Philips. It's coupled with a stunning Sibelius concerto. Another fine modern performance I used to enjoy was Stern/Rostropovich (mostly for Stern), but this has never made it to CD except briefly in Japan. For Korngold, give Heifetz a try. As for this CD, DG should sever her expensive contract and use the dough to hire some fresh talent less burdened with ego. Try Christian Tetzlaff for starters.

What happened to Mutter? This is just egregiously overdone violin playing featuring a horribly throbbing vibrato that makes her play sharp through the entire disc, tempos fast enough to smother the music and a pliant conductor who lets her get away with it all. She routinely holds the final note of a run far longer than notated, ostensibly for drama, but the effect smears the surrounding harmony. She tries to play the final movement of the Korngold so fast that she either has to slow down some places or completely fakes a passage. There is so much wrong with this that there's no room for me to recount each example of her descent into complete self-indulgence. These are two great violin concertos, and you can find better traversals of them just about anywhere.

What was Previn thinking during all this? Well I suppose he has to live with her, so one star for marital harmony. Still, her playing is completely tasteless and clearly so willful that one can tell she's sounding exactly the way she wants. However, it begs the question, who wants to hear it?

UPDATE 2006:
If you wonder why she didn't win a Grammy for this, please re-read the above. It ain't just me, folks.

Clealry this CD is a divider, not a uniter. Mutter steps out front with swoony romanticism and self-indulgence so over the top it comes back around and sounds like a reincarnation of Kreisler, Elman, Zimbalist, and their bygone ilk. She is possessed of gorgeous tone and unstinting technical resources, but Mutter doesn't put them at the service of anything but her own whims. That can be maddening or it can fill you with stardust, depending on your mood.

No doubt her earlier live Tchaikovsky concerto with Karajan was a stunner. Now that her mannerisms have grown unchecked, she's become a love-her-or-hate-her musician like Salerno-Sonnenberg, albeit with much more refinement and quality in the playing per se. When it comes to the Korngold, Mutter becomes so sugary that it makes the Tchaikovsky seem like Bach's Art of the Fugue for sobriety. Previn amiably goes along with loose, wayward accompaniments.

i'm going to ignore the Korngold here, as i don't particularly care for him, but mostly just a short note on the Tchaikovsky VC..

why does it have to be so hasty? i know it's a bit of a crude statement, but i've always appreciated the slower, more luxurious feel of her earlier recording of this and was hoping to hear something similar, as i lost that cd a while ago, but this is just.. rushed.. as everything these days seems to be.. from beethoven symphonies to working..
Everything must be done quickly, and this recording seems to follow suit.
Is this because the age of the 'romantic' conductors has come to a close, and the new generation has to do something else to be "original"?

No, i can't say this recording did it for me at all..
oh well, there's always her von Karajan recording

This is the worst performance of the Tchaikovsky that I have heard by a major violinist. Other negative reviews here are correct, and I will only repeat a few thoughts for the benefit of those who might happen upon this review first.

Before I mention the several areas in which this performance caused me to cringe, I'll give Ms. Mutter some credit: (1) she does deliver excitement, and (2) she brings out the various colors of the instrument. On this latter point I have to say that it is a mixed blessing: on the one hand, I am happy to hear a violinist who plays with variety of tone, unlike many others who make every note equally beautiful, but unfortunately also all the same. On the other hand, the price that Ms. Mutter pays for this variety is that some of the tones are downright ugly. A third point, which can be either a plus or a minus depending upon one's taste, is either (1) her refreshing originality, to put it in its most favorable light, or (2) her self-indulgent over-interpretation, to look at it the other way. There have been times when I have enjoyed her pushing and pulling of tempi for expressive effect; oddly enough, I must confess, I have enjoyed some of her Beethoven and Mozart performances (although from the standpoint of correct style, messing with Classicists and especially the elegant Mozart, should have elicited even greater outrage from me).

Given my ambivalence about some of Ms. Mutter's idiosyncrasies, I could have almost enjoyed this performance; but one thing was unforgivable: dropping or burying notes: she destroyed the rhythm of various short phrases simply by making inaudible the notes that supported the rhythm--most noticeable to me at the beginning of the last movement. For this she deserves the term "sloppy," which we see elsewhere in these reviews.

I also found her vibrato to be just plain weird. It called attention to itself rather than enhancing the tone. And "calling attention to itself" is the pervading fault of her performance.

On the audio side, I found the engineers had added too much artificial reverb, and had miked the violin too closely.

I have not heard the Tchaikovsky. This Korngold performance was part of a lovely 6 CD box set called
"Andre Previn - A Celebration". Now, I am a hopeless romantic but even i felt thrillingly embarrassed by Mutter here... one wants to avert ones eyes and leave her and Previn alone in a dark room (pace the 90 plus members of the London Symphony.) If there can be such a thing as an OVERLY romantic performance of this utterly romantic score Mutter provides it here. If that sort of thing is your cup of tea, put the kettle on, you'll be in heaven!

Finally, an energetic, well executed and especially exciting disc by Mutter and Previn!

There are sparks flying here, Mutter leads the way, but Previn and the VPO and LSO are putting on a good fight: Seldomly has the Tchaikovsky sounded better and more refreshing! This disc shows what an exceptional virtuoso Mutter really can be: Fast, exhilarating, without sacrificing her very own characteristic ever-lyrical tone and musicality. Good enough though, she is not over-interpreting like she has done so many times before.

The Korngold is a perfect match, much much much better than Previn's own Korngold on DG. Even though not live, it remains a splendid addition on this CD.

In summary, this CD is second none, with maybe the only exception of Mutter's '97 Brahms with Kurt Masur and the NYP.

After hearing another earlier record of hers, I then said in a review that Mutter was undergoing a metamorphosis. So indeed, she had transformed herself here. After all these years of exposure to modern music etc, she said her last reading collaborated with Karajan was not her final word as a virtuoso.

It might be of interest to note that Michelangeli deliberately made his piano sound like the combination of a violin and an organ-- even though such self-imposed condition had deprived the audience of a second Lizst; and, Richter heard, instead of the inner voice, something that didn't come from his fingers-- abd then some say he is out of his mind. Nevertheless, they remain fairly and squarely two of the greatest musicians of our time.

Is Mutter's case much the same or not? And what is her new reading? Obviously she has outgrown her earlier opinion that there is nothing particular about Kriesler's playing... For her readings do remind us very much of Thibaud, if not Kreisler or Menuhin... Is this her attempt to establish herself as the legitimate successor of the Golden Age of violinists after Menuhin?

But great artists play from their heart and from their soul instead of immitating any other artist. So, it takes great courage, even for someone of Mutter's stature, to even contemplate such a step. Despite her superb technique and wonderful tone, her new readings might very well present a big surprise to the audience perhaps rather unpleasantly. So, be prepared, or you might feel utterly surprised.