Brian's Gothic under Boult

[Gareth Vaughan]

Why not? You don't have to listen to it - the interview, that is.

[Pengelli]

The interview is very short,about 6 mins.You hardly notice it!

[Pengelli]

Thanks for the help.Good news about the Brian recordings.
I must admit,after initial excitement,I could never bring
myself to like the Naxos recording.

[Gareth Vaughan]

I have not heard the other 30+ symphonies. Are the rest pretty much all poor followups to the first? If they are reasonably good, why has no British conductor/orchestra/label ever put out a complete cycle box set of his symphonies? Why did none of them record the First? Is there some history there that got in the way?

Why is anyone ever surprised at the neglect of British composers by British conductors and orchestras? It's been going on for decades. Only comparatively recently have Vaughan Williams' symphonies (apart from the "London") been given an airing in our concert halls. A few record companies (like Lyrita) bravely flew a flag for the 20th century British musial legacy, but again, until the sudden and wholly commendable upsurge of interest generated by labels like Dutton (in particular) the British composer has been largely ignored in his native land - unless his name happened to be Elgar.

Brian's symphonies after No. 5 are terse, tightly organised utterances and unlikely to appeal to those wanting a Romantic wallow - but they are a superb body of work, and repay careful study.

Of course, it is hardly surprising that no British record label was prepared to go to the vast expense of recording Brian's "Gothic". The Naxos (originally Marco Polo) was done with "cheap" (in the financial sense) Eastern European forces - that's partly why you can barely distinguish a word of what is being sung! Even so, that was a brave venture which cost Klaus Heymann (and the Havergal Brian Society) quite a lot of money at the time. Marco Polo had planned to record all the symphonies, but sales of those disks that were released were so poor that they abandoned the project.

[TerraEpon]

The interview is very short,about 6 mins.You hardly notice it!

That's not really it. It's just....one of my peeves and it's big enough that I purposefully avoid it. If I buy a CD, I want to listen to the whole CD, not just a part of it. I even went so far as to buy seperate CDs of the Indiana Jones CDs released last year because the box set (with extra tracks) had an interview.
Hey, it's my money and I'll spend it as I will, and I figure mentioning over and over I can at least say to any record producer out there who may have a gander at it for some reason that, hey, there's people who DOn'T like it done that way.

[Pengelli]

To be honest the Gothic is so vast I hardly noticed,and to hear
Brian speaking immeadiately afterwards is inspiring.

[Pengelli]

I would say that the 6th symphony is the best one to listen to
after the Gothic.

[TerraEpon]

Hurwitz gave a complete thumbs down to this one;
http://www.classicstoday.com/review.asp?ReviewNum=12608

Interesting that he comments not only that the sound prevents the color to shine through, but that part of the fault was Boult himself (yet, most people seem to think this is the best preformed version of the various boots floating around as well as compared to the Marco Polo, which some HATE)

[petershott@btinternet.com]

I've learnt from experience that there are few compelling reasons to take Mr Hurwitz with the seriousness that I'm sure he thinks he commands. I don't intend to insult him, but by gosh, I do relish annoying him. On occasions I've been maddened by his unthinking dismissal of much that is good. Once wrote him a very polite and considerate mail telling him, in effect, to shut up.

I don't think anyone should be swayed by his comments on Brian, Boult, or the quality of the Testament recording. Sapere aude, and trust your own judgements.

[Alan Howe]

Quite, Peter. Hurwitz can be penetrating and I agree with a lot of what he says about the ugliness of much period-instrument music-making (try Norrington in Bruckner - yuck!) However, he has enormous blind spots and when he doesn't get something he really doesn't get it at all. But hey, he's just one reviewer. That's why it's important to read a range of opinions and then come to your own conclusion.

To return to the subject of this thread: Boult's Gothic is an important historical document of a great occasion in which a great piece of music was performed in the presence of the composer. Fot these reasons it is hors concours and thus unmissable. But it's no use pretending that it's a modern digital recording; it's a good-ish radio recording made well over forty years ago and is perfectly adequate to gauge both the work and the performance.

My advice? Buy Boult and Lenard on Naxos!

[mbhaub]

I received my copy of the Boult a week ago, and I have to mostly concur with Hurwitz. I was very disappointed with the sound, and the Naxos which may not be ideal, is a far superior listening experience. I don't know if Naxos' performance is bad or good since there isn't a reference that I know of. I guess the Boult is better, but it's hard to tell. The Testament is only an interesting historical document to me, and the ridiculously high price of Testament disks makes the purchase painful. Sometimes I wish Testamant would be more selective. Releasing too much junk ruins their reputation.

[JimL]

Hurwitz gave a complete thumbs down to this one;
http://www.classicstoday.com/review.asp?ReviewNum=12608

Interesting that he comments not only that the sound prevents the color to shine through, but that part of the fault was Boult himself (yet, most people seem to think this is the best preformed version of the various boots floating around as well as compared to the Marco Polo, which some HATE)

Wasn't it Hurwitz who completely trashed the Thuille PC on cpo a while back?

[Alan Howe]

Well, the Thuille PC isn't a strong piece...

[Marcus]

I have many of the Brian Symphonies , (Marco Polo, EMI & Helios),but believe it or not, I am no ardent fan, just an undying curiosity for something different. I admire what he has done with his music, but the harsh idiom soon causes me to lose interest. But considering his circumstances & non acceptance by most of the mainstream musicians in his time ,he was definately an Unsung 20th century composer, and his day will come.( as someone else said.)
Any person who can write Symphonies after the age of 85, and his last at 92, deserves to be heard. There is some genius there. Thankfully, we all have different tastes, and good music will always win out. So Havergal Brian's flame will probably burn strongly. I hope so, after all, I am only a grain of sand on the beach , and I'll keep collecting his symphonies anyway, and after 14, I am still hopeful.
Marcus.

[eschiss1]

Hurwitz gave a complete thumbs down to this one;
http://www.classicstoday.com/review.asp?ReviewNum=12608

Interesting that he comments not only that the sound prevents the color to shine through, but that part of the fault was Boult himself (yet, most people seem to think this is the best preformed version of the various boots floating around as well as compared to the Marco Polo, which some HATE)

Wasn't it Hurwitz who completely trashed the Thuille PC on cpo a while back?

I wouldn't be surprised, regardless of the quality of the Thuille. He's trashed any number of composers and recordings thereof I know I enjoy, and as his columns are opinions only without supporting facts (unlike some happily-remembered Fanfare magazine reviews that enlightened about past recordings and about facets of the scores, and spoke of real attention to detail in writing...), well, those who agree with his biases are likely to continue to agree with them, I suppose.