Raff symphonies from Chandos

[semloh]

semioh- it was probably painted for a release of Sibelius 6 that was then delayed (all conjecture, all conjecture, but that would be such an appropriate cover!)

Totally agree, Eric!

It set me thinking - what if I was given the task of choosing/designing a cover for the Raff release? I wonder what would be most appropriate. I think it would be a painting, but something warm and human, with a hint of metaphysical reflection. Maybe a family gathering in a cottage garden, surrounded by apple blossom and spring flowers, but with a distant view toward a church and a sinking sun.... Gosh, what a soppy old romantic I am! 

Apologies for getting away from the music.

[Alan Howe]

The CD is now at MDT:
http://www.mdt.co.uk/raff-joachim-symphony-no-2-romande-neeme-jarvi-chandos-sacd.html

[alharris]

The Raff, as well as other Chandos new releases, are available for download NOW.

Al H.

[Alan Howe]

...and can be sampled as well before buying:
http://www.theclassicalshop.net/Details.aspx?CatalogueNumber=CHAN%205117

[Alan Howe]

Järvi's Raff 2 sounds really magnificent. I guess the controversial part of his interpretation is his fast speed for the slow movement but, as Mark T. has reminded me, this simply mirrors Raff's metronome indications in the score which are undoubtedly too fast for our our modern tastes. So, for me there's some re-assessment to do in listening to Järvi's take on the work.

Meanwhile, let's acknowledge a true masterpiece that is slowly regaining its rightful place...

Oh, and by the way, the recording and playing have all the glamour that, for my taste at least, was missing from Stadlmair/Tudor.

[Gareth Vaughan]

I must say I was pleasantly surprised by Jarvi's tempo in the 2nd movt. Much more a real "andante". Tempi in the 19th century were generally faster, it seems, than we have become used to. Perhaps Klemperer has much to answer for here with his sometimes leaden and lugubrious interpretations. Bernstein too, occasionally, for all that they were both great conductors. Josef Holbrooke used always to encourage those conducting his music to "get a move on" - people like Clarence Raybould needed no such encouragement!

[eschiss1]

Tempi in the 19th century being generally faster...

I am not -that- sure this is the case. At least there was some debate on the subject (at the time, with Mendelssohn e.g. encouraging a tradition of faster movement in e.g. Beethoven conducting and Liszt later encouraging more flexibility in a broader basic tempo, I gather.)

[Mark Thomas]

I'm both hugely heartened by Alan's and Gareth's very positive reports and frustrated that, as I'm not at home at present, I can't hear the recording for a few days! I can hardly wait.

As regards faster tempi in the 19th century, it's very instructive to get hold of a copy of Theodore Müller-Reuter's Lexikon der deutschen Konzertliterarur of 1909. He gives timings for many of the major symphonic, choral and chamber works which remain in the concert repertoire today (but he also includes both Raff and Gernsheim). His timings aren't uniformly faster then has become the norm, but they are frequently so, and especially for the slow movements.

[petershott@btinternet.com]

Interesting that both Eric and Mark put a damper on the often held belief that tempi in the 19th century were frequently faster than that of present day performances. It makes perfect sense to me (and seems to cohere with what one reads in contemporary letters, notes and other writings).

Off-thread, I know, but I wonder if I may squeeze one small question into this Raff thread. Would it be reasonable to think that what holds true for orchestral music also holds true for chamber and piano works? (I recently heard the Takacs Quartet recording of Schubert's 'Death and the Maiden' quartet on Hyperion, and was so horrified by the fast speeds it went straight to the charity shop without further ado. I can't think the Takacs were following contemporary performance practice. The whole thing quite disturbed me!)

Apologies for interrupting the thread!

[Alan Howe]

On listening to Järvi in the slow movement one thing is clear: he has the orchestra to pull it off and a much surer sense of where the music is going than Stadlmair (who for once sounds almost somnolent by comparison). And everything else is just fabulous - more light and shade than with Stadlmair and much more oomph than with Schneider.

I'm sure that slow tempi in the romantic repertoire has been a legacy of certain conductors. Klemperer certainly comes to mind (in his EMI period), as does Giulini. And as for Celibidache (much as I love his Bruckner 7 with the BPO), well...

I think we have a lot to be grateful to Neeme Järvi for.

[mbhaub]

I don't think there's any question about the slowing down in the last 100 years. Go back just 50-70 years and listen to recordings by the likes of Paray, Monteux, Koussevitsky, Beecham, Barbirolli and many more and then compare to more recent recordings from 1960 on. It wasn't just Klemperer. Listening to Bruckner by him, Celibidache, Maazel, Barenboim and some others is torture. But swifter tempi taken by Walter(!), Wand, Sieghardt and others just bring the music to life. Same with Wagner - it benefits greatly with a quicker pulse. The finale of the Mahler 7th has long been troubled, but I think Kondrashin got closer to the truth that anyone: by bringing it in near 15 minutes that movement just blazes along and becomes a joyous ride that completely eluded Klemperer and many other more famous conductors. You can go overboard - I think Stadlmair ruined the first movement of Raff's Lenore by going too fast.

And it's not just music that this happens in, either. Lately I've been watching a lot of old, classic movies. Especially in British films the actors speak so quickly compared to current films. The Lady Killers, Now, Voyager, The Man Who Knew Too Much (original) -- they also make great use of classical music without condescension or ridicule, unlike today's movies.

[Alan Howe]

Some comparisons of timings might shed some further light on Raff 2:

     Schneider                      Stadlmair                   Järvi
1.      11:43                         11:33                       12:38
2.        9:54                         10:29                         7:26
3.        5:33                           5:39                         5:31
4.        8:50                           8:55                         8:13

As you can see, Stadlmair and Schneider are pretty much of a muchness. It's Järvi who is the most relaxed in the first movement, quickest (by far) in the second movement Andante con moto and swiftest in the finale. The scherzo is pretty similar in all three performances.

So, I think what it comes down to is: what does Andante con moto mean in a Raff symphony?

[Mark Thomas]

both Eric and Mark put a damper on the often held belief that tempi in the 19th century were frequently faster

Sorry if I worded things badly, Peter, but I actually support the contention that slow movements have got slower over the 20th century. I don't have Müller-Reuter with me of course, but it would be interesting to see what his suggested timings for the Symphony are. As for Alan's question, I can only quote something said by the great conductor and lifelong friend of Raff, Hans von Bülow: "With Raff, everything goes rather quickly."

[Mark Thomas]

I'll admit to feeling a bit "out of it" on the Raff front just now, comfortably marooned here in Austria! So, I have managed to download the mp3s and have listened to the Andante con moto which, to my ears, flows on very convincingly from Järvi's luminously expansive opening movement, in which he still has a proper regard for the need to maintain momentum. The slow movement itself is certainly very much faster than we are used to, but it still contrasts sufficiently with the movements either side of it. Although some of its usual gravitas is inevitably lost, who is to say that Raff intended it to be so weighty? The upside is that the climaxes in particular are quite thrilling and it now serves to emphasise the vibrancy and joyousness of the whole work, rather than acting as a counterweight to the other three movements. My old laptop is the lowest of low-fi, so I can't really pass judgement of the quality of the recording or playing, but at first hearing I am as convinced as I can be that Järvi has given us a splendid addition to the Raff catalogue.

[Alan Howe]

It's good that your experienced ears find Järvi convincing, Mark. For me Raff 2 will certainly never be the same again after hearing him in it.