Customer Reviews

Tchaikovsky: Symphony No. 4 / Romeo & Juliet overture

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

 

 

David Zinman (when he was conductor of the Baltimore Symphony - he now conducts the Zurich Tonhalle Orchestra) said he loved Tchaikovsky because "he will bear any interpretation." George Szell in this recording took interpretation of Tchaikovsky's fourth perhaps as far as it can go in the direction of driven intensity. Unremitting, hair-raising, furious, edge-of-your-seat - the list of apt descriptive adjectives is long. It is not the only interpretation one can put on the score, and there are certainly other fine recordings (a very good one: Tchaikovsky: Symphony no. 4 Antal Dorati leading also the LSO, a year earlier than Szell's recording). But if you like Tchaikovsky white-hot, this is the still the standard, even after nearly half a century.

The "filler" on this album, von Karajan's reading of Romeo and Juliet, with the Vienna Philharmonic, offers another interpretation of Tchaikovsky: Lush, opulent, and insistent. It isn't white-hot, but it is muscular. You may detect some tape hiss in these older recordings, but the engineering puts many much more recent efforts to shame, and the music in any event is likely to sweep you past such minor considerations.

I have to speak to the notion that this recording of Tchaikovsky's fourth is in some strange way illegitimate or invalid because George Szell didn't want it released, having been somehow misled into the way he conducted it by Producer John Culshaw's deliberately lowering the volume on first playback.

That lowering of the volume - notice, only on first playback - is less than half the whole story.

Szell had rehearsed the fourth for some days, and on the night before the recording had conducted it in concert. His fury was due to his discovery at the opening of the recording session that many of the players he had been working with for those days had decided for the recording to send their deputies instead, which the players' contract allowed at that time. The recording session was, not surprisingly, very trying, as Szell had to work at largely rebuilding in hours what he had with substantial effort put together over several days. The situation was not helped by the recalcitrance of the understudies, who did not respond well to Szell's - shall we say - pointed criticisms and demands. We can fault John Culshaw for throwing gasoline on this fire but, beyond question, it was already blazing high.

As against that, it is true that the result was not good enough for Szell who, provoked by a mild and off-hand statement when the session was over that the disc would be on the market by a certain date, responded coldly with the phrase "Over my dead body!" That was not, however, because he considered, as some have imagined, that he had been driven into some rash conducting.

So far as I know, Szell never said why he refused to allow the release (which appeared nine years later, in 1971, in the year after Szell died, not, as another reviewer has it, 15 years after his death). What is sure is that Szell, and apparently Culshaw, too, considered that the understudies to the end resisted playing as well as Szell thought they could have. It is said that there is a notable fault by the clarinet in the first movement which Szell just could not get corrected, and he was such a precisionist that one can understand how that fault, coming on top of everything else that day, might have caused him to turn his back on what he may have thought a disciplinary and organizational fiasco but not a musical failure. I noticed, too, a very obvious tape splice in the second movement that I find surprising in a John Culshaw production.

Szell was a perfectionist and it makes complete sense that these flaws would be unacceptable, but there is no evidence that Szell thought the overall interpretation was faulty or somehow illegitimate because not really his. In the end, the work itself counts for everything. Pace the Maestro himself, this interpretation overwhelms any flaws that remain.

This 1962 recording for Decca found Szell straying from the corral--he had always recorded exclusively for Columbia--and it was a lucky detour. The sonics here are the best he ever received. This Tchaikovsky Fourth shows Szell's prime virtues of precision and ensemble. In addition, he seems more warm-blooded (or hot-blooded: the producer John Culshaw remembers that Szell was in a glowering rage on the day of the recording). The LSO are more relaxed than the over-disciplined Cleveland Orch., which also helps.

I have to smile at the Gramophone's description of this performance as "white hot." Sosmeone must have put Tabasco in their kippers. The first two movements are not at all fervent, but Szell certainly takes the Scherzo very quickly and with unusual intensity. The fireworks don't really go off, though, until the last movement, which is no more fiery than Mravinsky, but that's saying a lot. Szell far exceeds Mravinsky's classic account on DG, however, in terms of sound--the finale blazes with dramatic force. Five stars, withoiut a doubt.

Not to be overlooked is the filler, Karajan's 1960 performance with the Vienna Phil. of the often abused Romeo and Juliet. You'd never suspect it had warhorse status here, though. This is a performance of supreme beauty and insight, one of the gems from Karajan's vast catalog (all his Vienna Phil. recordings for Decca are remarkable and worth seeking out). Excellent sound, softer than in the symphony.

It's performances like this that confirm the opinion of many of us that Szell was second only to Toscanini. This is exactly the type of powerful and dynamic interpretation that works so well for a dramatic piece of music like this. Not so sure that Szell's approach is quite as applicable for a more somber and melodious work, such as Tchaikovsky's 5th. But for the 4th, Szell's unemotional, precise, and brisk methodology is just right. Highest recommendation.

The Szell Tchaikovsky Symphony Nr.4 recording for Decca (1962) was never released on LP (SXL) during Szell life. He simply refused to sign the release documents for Decca to go ahead because he felt that the London Orchestra playing was below the mark.

The London Symphony orchestra at that time was undergoing organization changes and musicians would come and go and one replacing the other would not know what the previous rehearsal's was all about, so Szell got very frustrated at the London situation (rehearsing a passage and find out the day after that the replaced bunch of musicians don't know what their processors did).

And Szell's (much like Reiner's) hallmarks were impatience, non communicating with the individual members of the orchestra, drive and tension created in the rehearsals and in concerts; all were impeded here in this Tchaikovsky rehearsals for this eventful recording. (Actually, the fourth symphony was intended as a starter for Decca project to record Tchaikovsky's three last symphonies with the London/Szell...Imagine now what we would have got if that planned project would have been to materialize...)

It is only after his death that his widow agreed to sign the release paper (the LP appeared finely on the Decca budget label SPA series).

Never the less this is a marvelous account of the Tchaikovsky Fourth Symphony, surpassing any Karajan effort(s) for DGG, and many, many more modern reading which lack intensity, grandeur and breath when compared with this one.

The recording sonic wonders are the results of Decca's chief engineer at the time, Kenneth Wilkinson - and his sonic "signature" is audible as a very wide sound-stage, transparency, inner details, but with some weaknesses to the bass-drum attacks.

The CD transfer is almost perfect, it has a slight sizzling sound when comes to mass violins playing the higher string section of the score, but this momentarily (quite easy to ignore) sonic aberration can be attributed to the analogue master-tape being put for such a long time, uninterrupted in a storage - which makes the high frequencies and high-harmonics disappear with aging of the analogue master-tape, and the resulting slight equalization to the missing top that the transfer team to digital media thought appropriate to compensate for in the transfer.

The fill-in VPO /Karajan (1960) is amazing too on all accounts. It has a somewhat more "relaxed" sonic concoction, with lots of depth and width as well - it was recorded by another Decca team and engineers and is very satisfactory.

All in all this is a true gem. A must.

The great disciplinarian conductor George Szell made most of his classic recordings with the Cleveland Orchestra for Columbia Records. He did venture out to Europe on occasion to conduct some of their heavy duty ensembles. Here he is doing Tchaikovsky's hyper-romantic 4th symphony with the London Symphony Orchestra under the production supervision of Decca's John Culshaw. Sound quality is better than Szell usually received back in America. The Brits were a step ahead of the game back in the day as far as recorded sound went.

The arresting opening of this symphony unveils a new emotional world for Tchaikovsky. This was his biggest leap forward to date. symphonically speaking. The opening movement is huge, the emotions insanely over the top and this puts the symphony in an elite class for it's era prior to the arrival of the hyped up and extended Mahler symphonies. Tchaikovsky's aim for this work is clearly to model it on Beethoven's 5th. It has the same trajectory, the same journey from the darkness and emotional upheaval of the first movement to the light, fireworks and celebration of the finale. Tchaikovsky was quoted as saying, "If my intentions in this symphony are not as clear, it's because I'm no Beethoven and that's no news to me". In the same breath, one must admit that no composer had really been successful in taking up the Beethoven challenge until the century was beginning to draw to a close. Schubert died just a year after Ludwig van and Schubert's 9th, although ambitious, is not at that highest level. Mendelssohn and Schumann's symphonies are room temperature compared to the later romantics. As original as Berlioz and Liszt are, their symphonic odysseys flap around incoherently a lot of the time. Wagner forwent the symphony and jumped into music drama. So we have Bruckner, the long-winded Austrian symphonic mountaineer and Brahms, the keeper of the classical flame.

Into this camp comes a sensational rollercoaster like Tchaikovsky's 4th and of course it had to come from outside Germany or Austria, even though it was influenced by the Germans. Szell's performance is not at all Russian. It is a driven, Toscanini-esque international interpretation. I have no problem with that if it works and it does. The first movement is strong all the way to the finish. The biggest climaxes at the coda don't expand as gloriously as in the plushy Karajan version from the 1970s on DG. Szell's tempo for the slow movement is brisk but not hectic at all. The pizzicato scherzo has some serious vigor to it. The finale is an explosion that hurtles towards the finish line with any brass entrance more sinister than the last. Only the famous Mravinsky recording has this kind of energy. The coda is forceful enough to stop you dead in your tracks.

Some quick background information on what went on in the recording studio that day. The story behind this Szell Tchaikovsky 4th is a strange one. Decca producer John Culshaw manipulated the dials in the recording studio and kept turning down the volume which aggravated Szell who played louder and louder to get the sound to register. When Szell found out that Culshaw played a trick on him, Szell demanded that this record not be released during his lifetime. Not sure what Culshaw was thinking here! Perhaps he wanted to wrangle a Solti like performance out of the usually more temperate Szell. Anyhow, the finale of this Tchaikovsky 4th is amazing because of it. I would put Szell right next to my two favorites in this symphony, Mravinsky from the 60s on DG and Karajan from the 70s, also DG. Bernstein also has a very good 4th with the NYPO that comes from his tenure in the 1960s there.

This Szell CD also contains the Romeo and Juliet fantasy overture played by the Vienna Philharmonic, conducted by Karajan. It is a luminous account, with beautiful playing, just lacking a bit in that extra romantic heat one needs in this piece, what with the famous love theme and all. My favorite Romeo and Juliet is by Bernstein. Both on Sony Columbia and the later DG version which has really lush digital sound and the most overwhelming version of the love theme I've ever heard.

GEORGE SZELL WAS ONE OF THE GREATEST CONDUCTORS WHO COULD TACKLE JUST ABOUT ANY COMPOSER SUCCESSFULLY.
HE WAS A MAGICIAN OF INTERPRETATION WHO COULD TAKE A SCORE AND RESUSCITATE IT BRINGING FORTH ALL OF THE GLORIOUS DETAILS THAT EMBODY IT.
ALL OF THIS WAS DONE WITH A RAZOR SHARP PRECISION AND EXECUTION ALONG WITH A LUMINOUS ORCHESTRAL CLARITY AND BALANCE.
NOW GEORGE SZELL DID NOT WANT THIS RECORDING RELEASED BECAUSE HE WAS NOT SATISFIED WITH IT. MATTER OF FACT THIS RECORDING WAS NOT RELEASED UNTIL 15 YEARS AFTER HIS DEATH.
THE THING THAT INFURIATES ME IS THAT DURING PLAYBACK THE RECORDING ROOM OPERATOR HAD PURPOSELY SET THE CONTROLS TO MAKE THE PERFORMANCE SOUND LACKADAISICAL SO THAT SZELL WOULD GO OFF THE DEEP END.
AND SO HE DID AND HERE YOU HAVE IT.
NOW TO DEFINE THIS SITUATION YOU HAVE A PERFORMANCE THAT IS NOT WHAT SZELL HAD INTENDED BUT RATHER A RECORDING THAT WAS EXECUTED DUE TO DECEPTION.
IT CERTAINLY IS A FIRE BREATHING WHIRLWIND OF A PERFORMANCE BUT IT'S NOT AUTHENTIC OR WHAT SZELL HAD IN MIND.
YOU DECIDE BUT THE CONDUCTORS SINCERE INSIGHT INTO A PIECE IS WHAT MAKES AN INTERPRETATION SO REWARDING.
IF THIS WAS NOT THE CASE THEN THEY WOULD JUST TURN ON THE MICROPHONES AND LET THE ORCHESTRA PLAY ON ITS OWN.
WHATEVER THE CASE IS I WILL RESPECT DR.SZELLS WISHES AND PICK OUT AN INTERPRETATION MADE OUT OF AUTHENTICITY AND REALISM.
ORMANDY'S PHILADELPHIA SONY RECORDING BEING A PERFECT EXAMPLE.
HAPPY MUSIC HUNTING!
O.F.

GEORGE SZELL WAS ONE OF THE GREATEST CONDUCTORS WHO COULD TACKLE JUST ABOUT ANY COMPOSER SUCCESSFULLY.
HE WAS A MAGICIAN OF INTERPRETATION WHO COULD TAKE A SCORE AND RESUSCITATE IT BRINGING FORTH ALL OF THE GLORIOUS DETAILS THAT EMBODY IT.
ALL OF THIS WAS DONE WITH A RAZOR SHARP PRECISION AND EXECUTION ALONG WITH A LUMINOUS ORCHESTRAL CLARITY AND BALANCE.
NOW GEORGE SZELL DID NOT WANT THIS RECORDING RELEASED BECAUSE HE WAS NOT SATISFIED WITH IT. MATTER OF FACT THIS RECORDING WAS NOT RELEASED UNTIL 15 YEARS AFTER HIS DEATH.
THE THING THAT INFURIATES ME IS THAT DURING PLAYBACK THE RECORDING ROOM OPERATOR HAD PURPOSELY SET THE CONTROLS TO MAKE THE PERFORMANCE SOUND LACKADAISICAL SO THAT SZELL WOULD GO OFF THE DEEP END.
AND SO HE DID AND HERE YOU HAVE IT.
NOW TO DEFINE THIS SITUATION YOU HAVE A PERFORMANCE THAT IS NOT WHAT SZELL HAD INTENDED BUT RATHER A RECORDING THAT WAS EXECUTED DUE TO DECEPTION.
IT CERTAINLY IS A FIRE BREATHING WHIRLWIND OF A PERFORMANCE BUT IT'S NOT AUTHENTIC OR WHAT SZELL HAD IN MIND.
YOU DECIDE BUT THE CONDUCTORS SINCERE INSIGHT INTO A PIECE IS WHAT MAKES AN INTERPRETATION SO REWARDING.
IF THIS WAS NOT THE CASE THEN THEY WOULD JUST TURN ON THE MICROPHONES AND LET THE ORCHESTRA PLAY ON ITS OWN.
WHATEVER THE CASE IS I WILL RESPECT DR.SZELLS WISHES AND PICK OUT AN INTERPRETATION MADE OUT OF AUTHENTICITY AND REALISM.
ORMANDY'S PHILADELPHIA SONY RECORDING BEING A PERFECT EXAMPLE.
HAPPY MUSIC HUNTING!
O.F.