New Recording of Korngold's Symphony in F# and other works

[Gareth Vaughan]

Funnily enough, I don't care what Hurvitz thinks! And I never have cared.

[Kevin]

What on earth is up with the video reviews? is that a new trend now?

[Alan Howe]

Funnily enough, I don't care what Hurvitz thinks! And I never have.

Nor me. For myself, I think both points of view have merit, though. Clearly there is support for Wilson's swifter view in Korngold's playing of the entire work as a guide to tempi for conductor Vladimir Golschsmann; however, the opposing view might be that there is a difference between how an orchestral work might be played on the piano and how it might turn out when played by a full orchestra.

Much as I appreciate Wilson's 'cleaning up' of the work, I would probably take another performance to my desert island. In the end, though, I don't think one has to trash Wilson in order to prefer an alternative. I like Klemperer in the Eroica, but Norrington is wonderful too...

[Gareth Vaughan]

I don't think one has to trash Wilson in order to prefer an alternative.

Quite. Very succinctly put.

[Gareth Vaughan]

What on earth is up with the video reviews?

I think it is lazy.

[Alan Howe]

Agreed. A written review is much to be preferred. The video is a thorough waste of time.

[hyperdanny]

in the channel's presentation, Hurwitz says it's just a supplement to the written reviews.
I have always been ambivalent towards him..sometimes I get the impression the he's so excoriating just because he wants to "épater le bourgeois" at all costs.
That said, he's a voice to be reckoned with..and then one makes his own opinion.
In the case in point, I won't buy the Wilson because what I read here (corroborated by the short samples) convinced me that his treament of the symphony is the opposite of what I like..my favorite is the Previn, which is dark and very deliberate.
The Welser-Most is not bad, I like it too as a slightly lighter , more cinematic view...but I just cannot see this symphony as fleet and lean.

[regriba]

Yes, I agree that sometimes he seems to trash a recording just because he thinks the site needs another "CD from hell" review. The premise of these reviews seems to be that there is only one correct way to play a piece of music, and since the reviewer knows what that is, he/she is free to trash away. In other words, raising your own preferences to absolute standards. It seems to me that this is a kind of "old-school" way of reviewing (at least to judge from the writings of critics from the past like, say, Hanslick, Peterson-Berger and Virgil Thomson), whereas the approach of quite a few critics today is that there is room for more than one view on the performance of a work.

That also seems to me to be the case here. I knew and liked the Korngold symphony from the Downes recording on Chandos, but I have to say I was immediately gripped by the excitement of the new Wilson version. I'll probably choose Wilson more often from now on, but that doesn't mean I will never listen to Downes again. I find it a fine, coherent, purposeful performance. As stated earlier in this thread, it shouldn't be necessary to trash one performance just because you prefer another.

[Alan Howe]

I think that's got to be the approach to take here.

For myself the only occasion when I genuinely feel like trashing a recording is when some form of technical shortcoming is evident, e.g. a violinist's intonation or a singer's wobble. In the case of the latter problem, unfortunately, trashing is more tempting than ever these days, especially in Wagner, Richard Strauss and later composers in that tradition.

[TerraEpon]

Slightly off topic but what bothers me more is the scoring system -- it's built to assume that everyone automatically would enjoy the music and thus a low 'performance' quality is just that....but in the cases where he doesn't like the music it still gets that. So a CD that's has a fantastic performance will get a low score just because it dares to be music he thinks isn't worthy (and the general underlying attitude that anything that doesn't fall into that is clearly good so there's rarely actual mention of the music itself, especially if it's something more well known).

[raffite33]

I guess the one thing I used to like about Hurwitz was that he was often very specific about what he liked or disliked.  That said, I always found it a little hard to deal with his overemphasis on percussion and his eagerness to trash whatever the British critics liked, and, lately, he's pummeling recordings that everybody else praises, including some I'd say were beyond reproach. 

The video reviews are less specific and a bit repetitive and rambling.  I thought it was telling that, in reviewing the Korngold, he didn't even mention the Albrecht on Pentatone, which he gave a 10/10.  Seemed like a very careless omission.

[Bruckner1896]

I like Mr. Hurwitz's video commentaries and reviews.  I challenge anyone else to do a superior job with such an approach.  And yes, I noticed that he does not mention the March Albrecht recording on the Pentatone label, but I do not think that these video presentations are designed to be all-encompassing.  He is testing the waters for this sort of review and commentary, and I think his speaking and presentation skills more or less match his writing skills -- for most commentators, this is a difficult little feat to achieve directly facing a camera, let alone just in an audio format.  His overall breezy and relaxed approach on camera is balanced with pointed little barbs of slash-and-burn critiques.

While I personally prefer reviews in writing, Mr. Hurwitz has more than enough experience with that to fully justify his forays into this new approach -- and I believe he will continue presenting them because, if nothing else, they generate a reasonable number of views on YouTube given the niche subject matter, as well as written responses beneath every video he has posted -- and he even responds to many of the comments.  He obviously enjoys the repartee, and I must admit, I enjoy reading the comments.  Whatever his oversights, Mr. Hurwitz's knowledge is extensive and impressive, even though he thoroughly disliked my local orchestra's performance of Prokofiev's Alexander Nevsky cantata on the Reference Recordings label.  He gave that performance a 6/9, with which I disagree, but I understand his overall perspective on the performance and interpretation under our music director Thierry Fischer. 

And I do love Mr. Hurwitz's contrarian takes on many laudatory reviews in Gramophone, BBC Music Magazine, and MusicWeb International; he supports his critiques with relevant information in the vast majority of cases.  As I always say, if you read enough reviews, most often someone will thoroughly dislike the performances and interpretations under review, and someone will argue that the release in question is the best recording of that particular composition ever released.  While one can legitimately say that there is some sort of positive critical consensus around the John Wilson recording of Korngold's Symphony with the Sinfonia of London, I find Mr. Hurwitz's comment that that ensemble is a thoroughly professional "pick up ensemble" that is "sight-reading" and can sight-read anything to be most interesting and provocative.

[Alan Howe]

I find Mr. Hurwitz's comment that that ensemble is a thoroughly professional "pick up ensemble" that is "sight-reading" and can sight-read anything to be most interesting and provocative.

Indeed. But what on earth does it mean? And is it even true? John Wilson is, after all, a brilliant orchestra-builder, as his Prom concerts over the years have proved. I thought the orchestral response was absolutely fabulous on the disc in question. Hurwitz may not like the interpretation, which is his right, but to question the orchestra in that way seems to me to be a cheap shot.

[hyperdanny]

I have to say that at least 2 videos in DH's new channel are proof that, when he's on his best behaviour, he can be tremendously interesting and erudite.
The 2 videos "why there are so many bad Bruckner performances around" and "repertoire analysis Bruckner 5" are just a delight.
I also happen to agree with everything, but that's not the point.
Back to the Korngold: in the newest issue of Fanfare , Arthur Lintgen reviews the Korngold/Wilson.
I would sum it up as "qualified praise": he finds the fast tempi generally refreshing and interesting, but thinks that Wilson went too far with the first movement, robbing it of gravitas and muscle. He has no issue with the orchestral performance, but all in all he will continue to prefer his current favorite version (Albrecht)

[Ilja]

What on earth is up with the video reviews?

I think it is lazy.

It is a foray into a very different medium, and it caters to a different crowd. That makes it the opposite of lazy. Personally, I think it suits Hurwitz's style better than his traditional forms, to be honest (and I never minded those as much as others here, apparently).