Sergey Ivanovich Taneyev (1856-1915)

[Revilod]

Those are very well written reviews, Jamie.  As Alan, says, it's important to write positively.  How that reviewer of the DG Taneyev disc could describe the music as "bland", "completely uninteresting" and "pretty boring" and give the disc just one star is beyond me.  He's entitled to his opinion of course but thank goodness for you and the other reviewers who stepped in with what is, surely, a more considered view.

[khorovod]

I very much enjoyed and appreciated your review, Revilod, as I am unfamiliar with this music. I find Amazon reviews can be very useful and my favourite reviewer is Scott Morrison who is very much a friend to "unsung composers". As Alan Howe says though, empty reviews can do more harm than good, I have read too many now to be swayed by "this is a masterpiece", which is a word used much too often and usually means a devoted but not very objective fan of that composer. Or in some reviewers, apparently, any unsung composer's music!!

[Kriton]

There's been several recordings of his wonderful piano quintet 'over the years', including a fine one in my opinion (by itself) on an Arabesque CD some years back... haven't heard others yet but not surprised if some are better still (for all that I esteem that one and I do.)

This is very true. I first got to know the work through the "fairly recent" DG recording with Pletnev which is, I agree with Alan, really good. My favourite, though, would have to be the one on EMI - a Lugano chamber music festival recording. The fiercest possible playing this music could receive, without losing its lyricism. Other recordings I have on Melodya and Brilliant aren't bad either (although the Melodya sound is as usual horrible, in my humble opinion), and I think I've only missed this Arabesque CD you've just brought up.

It must be hard, in this niche-section of the repertoire, to find "bad" recordings; usually musicians willing to tackle the quintet by Taneyev (and this goes for a lot of other unknown piano quintets as well, I think) have something interesting to "say" about this music, and play it accordingly convincingly.

By the way, I really like the piano quartet and trio as well, but the quintet to me is an absolute masterwork, to be placed next to the Schumann and Brahms quintets.

[eschiss1]

There's been several recordings of his wonderful piano quintet 'over the years', including a fine one in my opinion (by itself) on an Arabesque CD some years back... haven't heard others yet but not surprised if some are better still (for all that I esteem that one and I do.)

This is very true. I first got to know the work through the "fairly recent" DG recording with Pletnev which is, I agree with Alan, really good. My favourite, though, would have to be the one on EMI - a Lugano chamber music festival recording. The fiercest possible playing this music could receive, without losing its lyricism. Other recordings I have on Melodya and Brilliant aren't bad either (although the Melodya sound is as usual horrible, in my humble opinion), and I think I've only missed this Arabesque CD you've just brought up.

It must be hard, in this niche-section of the repertoire, to find "bad" recordings; usually musicians willing to tackle the quintet by Taneyev (and this goes for a lot of other unknown piano quintets as well, I think) have something interesting to "say" about this music, and play it accordingly convincingly.

By the way, I really like the piano quartet and trio as well, but the quintet to me is an absolute masterwork, to be placed next to the Schumann and Brahms quintets.

Tangentially, to (Very very loosely) paraphrase John Wiser and some others re bad recordings of lesser-known music- don't I wish er, anyway, carry on, carry on...

[Kriton]

Tangentially, to (Very very loosely) paraphrase John Wiser and some others re bad recordings of lesser-known music- don't I wish er, anyway, carry on, carry on...

You're really funny!

[Revilod]

Apparently there was also a recording by the Odeon Trio of Taneyev's piano trio (to distinguish it from his numerous string trios, I will write that out in full ) with one by Alexander Tcherpenin. Has anyone heard that recording?...
Eric

Yes. I've got that LP. It was made by RCA in 1977 and has never, I think, been transferred to CD.  Unlike in the DG recording, the exposition in the first movement is not repeated ...a  mistake given the scale of the scherzo. The performace is a fine one, though, as you might expect, the players play with less character than do the "Allstars". The first thing I noticed, however, was that it is recorded in a totally different acoustic. The sound is, perhaps, a little more detailed because the strings produce a far thinner tone as recorded and so do not overwhelm the piano as happens a little with the "Allstars". It's a good disc but the DG disc makes far more of an impact.

The Tcherepnin coupling is a miniature (its three movements together last a little over 7 minutes.) It's a not unattractive folky neo-Romantic piece.

[eschiss1]

Apparently there was also a recording by the Odeon Trio of Taneyev's piano trio (to distinguish it from his numerous string trios, I will write that out in full ) with one by Alexander Tcherpenin. Has anyone heard that recording?...
Eric

Yes. I've got that LP. It was made by RCA in 1977 and has never, I think, been transferred to CD.  Unlike in the DG recording, the exposition in the first movement is not repeated ...a  mistake given the scale of the scherzo. The performace is a fine one, though, as you might expect, the players play with less character than do the "Allstars". The first thing I noticed, however, was that it is recorded in a totally different acoustic. The sound is, perhaps, a little more detailed because the strings produce a far thinner tone as recorded and so do not overwhelm the piano as happens a little with the "Allstars". It's a good disc but the DG disc makes far more of an impact.

The Tcherepnin coupling is a miniature (its three movements together last a little over 7 minutes.) It's a not unattractive folky neo-Romantic piece.

Thanks. I think I had a recording they made of some Brahms trios (lost or broke the cassette, I think. Or drenched it. There's a story.) but wondered how they fared with the Taneyev...
Eric

[Peter1953]

How lucky we are that the first 3 symphonies exist and are released (Taneyev allowed only the 4th to be published). Symphony 1 (never performed in Taneyev's lifetime) has some themes, especially in both inner movements, which after listening keep stuck in my head for quite a long time.  All 4 symphonies are wonderful, to my ears typically Russian works.

The Piano Trio op. 22 (1908) and the Piano Quintet op. 30 (1911) belong to the most complicated chamber music in my collection.  I've listened to them four times, but cannot remember any theme. These works are not meant to be background music. I think to fully appreciate both modern (or very late Romantic) tonal, complex, rather academic but well-crafted works, you need to sit down, don't get disturbed, and just listen concentrated. Pletnev and his 'Allstar Ensemble' are good advocates for these works, coupled on the DG disc (TT 82:34, a record?).

[Hovite]

Peter, both Chandos and Naxos now have CDs coupling the First and Third Symphonies

I have acquired both those discs, though so far I have only played the Naxos. I had not previously heard the 1st. Its most memorable feature is its almost Brucknerian coda, which doesn't quiet work, it just sounds over blown. For me, the 3rd, with its Scherzo and Intermezzo inner movements, sounds more like a suite than a symphony.  In the past I had been puzzled by the description of Taneyev as a Russian Brahms, but these symphonies did indeed strongly remind me of Brahms (though his chamber works rather than his symphonies). Although I am very pleased that these works have been recorded, they lack the greatness of the 4th, so perhaps Taneyev was right to leave them unpublished.

[chill319]

... the 1st. Its most memorable feature is its almost Brucknerian coda, which doesn't quiet work, it just sounds over blown.

Bluster-wise, how would compare The Taneyev 1 coda to that of Tchaikovsky's 1, Hovite?

[eschiss1]

I'm a little suspicious of Taneyev sym. 1 since the only score I was able to interloan was a piano reduction, and that was probably already edited - the full score even moreso of course. I suspect of the two symphonies on the Chandos and Naxos syms. 1 and 3 CDs only sym. 3 has arrived in a reasonably complete form (and I am making an assumption there!...) - I don't know how much intervention was required - and what was actually done (beyond what was required...) - to bring symphony no. 1 to playability.  For all I know a coda may have had to been added even before the piano score was created - I have really no clue at all. (Well, obviously... (hush!))
Eric

[Gareth Vaughan]

My understanding was that the MS of No. 1 was in a Russian library in a complete state. So any editing would have been minimal.

[eschiss1]

ah, my mistake, then... (so long as complete means readable but that's another story)

[Ilja]

I have a Russian recording of Symphonies 1 & 3, which must have been made prior to 1956, if the conductor's name is correct - so the complete ms should've been available for some time.

[eschiss1]

I have a Russian recording of Symphonies 1 & 3, which must have been made prior to 1956, if the conductor's name is correct - so the complete ms should've been available for some time.

That's interesting indeed as I was almost positive they were completely unrecorded until the two recent ones. But then I thought the Naxos recording of Creston's first symphony was its premiere too until I learned of an LP of that work from the 1950s.  By now I should know better than to say "first", I even try to write "by" (by date x rather than date x, I mean) on IMSLP "first publication" and "first performance" fields unless I am pretty sure I know what i'm talking about ... but the temptation is strong...