Testament are to bring out the famous 1966 performance from the Royal Albert Hall, London, of Havergal Brian's Gothic Symphony, conducted by Sir Adrian Boult...
http://www.mdt.co.uk/MDTSite/product/NR_December09/SBT21454.htm (http://www.mdt.co.uk/MDTSite/product/NR_December09/SBT21454.htm)
For lovers of unsung music, this is about as near the holy grail of legendary performances as it gets! If friends are interested, I suggest getting your order in quickly as I understand from MDT that there have already been a number of phone enquiries this morning - and the page advertising the CDs only went up today!
Yes - this is the one to have. I still have my reel-to-reel recording of the radio broadcast of this. Mono, of course, but a superb performance. Apparently, there's going to be a performance in Australia in either December or January, which will be recorded commercially (don't know the performers or label). I wonder what that will be like.
That's what I call news! Have to say I preferred the Schmidt; but
the Boult is THE famous one.
I've placed my order! Hopefully,(jumping the gun a bit,I know),
this means we might get the 'The Tiger's', eventually.
I've received this cd set,now. The remastering is excellent,sound quality actually better than the Naxos. As to Boult's conducting, there is simply no comparison. After putting up with the sloppy Naxos recording for years these cd's have reaffirmed my opinion that the Gothic is a masterpiece.Wonderful! The BBC recordings of Das Siegeslied & The Tigers next,please!
Sometimes I actually wish that Marco Polo hadn't done the Gothic,as I believe that it put off other cd companies who would have done a better job. I had the Schmidt & Boult performances on cassette for years and I honestly thought the Naxos performance was shoddy. Thank goodness they didn't get to do Omar Khayyam or the World Requiem.......
By the way,anyone know why my postings are coming out like that? I love music,but I'm no computer geek!!
Are you hitting return when you get close to the end of the box?
Duly tidied up, Pengelli. Don't hit the return key when typing in the box and your posts will come as you want them to.
BTW, the Boult set is simply wonderful. An absolute must-buy, and very well remastered in case you're wondering...
Quote from: Pengelli on Friday 27 November 2009, 16:03
The remastering is excellent,sound quality actually better than the Naxos.
Really now? Hmmm....
No, the sound quality is nothing like as good as the Naxos - no comparison at all. The Testament set is hissy and rather washy in sound, although with plenty of impact. But it's no use pretending it's a modern digital studio recording.
Gareth's observation that The Gothic is up for performance in Australia in a month or two would have been correct until this summer: it was indeed scheduled for late December 2009 but has now been put back until more or less the same time next year -- you can imagine the practical difficulties involved in putting a performance together.
Adrian Boult's performance on the new set is thoroughly idiomatic -- much more so than the Schmidt or Lenard accounts, in my view -- and the sound has come up fresh. One of the highlights of the new release is the brief interview with Brian afterwards, which presents him in a mood of relaxed defiance!
BTW, you have quite a few more Brian releases to look forward to over the next year or so: I have two orchestral CDs up my sleeve from Toccata Classics (I: early and late works; II. orchestral music from the operas -- Garry Walker conducting the BBC Scottish SO), and Dutton are re-releasing some Harry Newstone recordings of HB symphonies, with a new CD of orchestral stuff in preparation.
Cheers
Martin
I've got both the Schmidt and the Boult. An interesting symphony.
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?
If a cycle is what Naxos has in mind, thanks but I'd rather not have more like their recording of the first.
I doubt whether the super-concentrated, terse style of the later Brian is going to please too many listeners, to be honest. I find those of them I have heard resolutely earthbound most of the time, but I'm no expert.
There is really no follow-up to the Gothic, although Nos.2-4 are all pretty big pieces. My favourite of these is the choral/orchestral No.4, although this is a dense, battleship of a piece which is itself very hard to come to grips with.
Quote from: Martin Anderson on Saturday 28 November 2009, 12:35. One of the highlights of the new release is the brief interview with Brian afterwards
Oh then screw that CD then. I will never buy a CD with an interview on it. <.<
Why not? You don't have to listen to it - the interview, that is.
The interview is very short,about 6 mins.You hardly notice it!
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.
Quote from: Amphissa on Saturday 28 November 2009, 20:10
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.
Quote from: Pengelli on Thursday 10 December 2009, 19:29
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.
To be honest the Gothic is so vast I hardly noticed,and to hear
Brian speaking immeadiately afterwards is inspiring.
I would say that the 6th symphony is the best one to listen to
after the Gothic.
Hurwitz gave a complete thumbs down to this one;
http://www.classicstoday.com/review.asp?ReviewNum=12608 (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)
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.
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!
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.
Quote from: TerraEpon on Tuesday 09 February 2010, 20:03
Hurwitz gave a complete thumbs down to this one;
http://www.classicstoday.com/review.asp?ReviewNum=12608 (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?
Well, the Thuille PC isn't a strong piece...
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.
Quote from: JimL on Wednesday 10 February 2010, 05:32
Quote from: TerraEpon on Tuesday 09 February 2010, 20:03
Hurwitz gave a complete thumbs down to this one;
http://www.classicstoday.com/review.asp?ReviewNum=12608 (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.
Hurwitz really hates Spohr...
David
I think he's just an attention seeker,really. His comments about Jacqueline du Pre,a while back now,might have been laughable,if they weren't also downright nasty. On a more positive note,he does at least have something different to say at times,and his reviews can be incisive. Actually,the critic I hate the most is Andrew Clements. If I were to use an appropriate word to describe his contributions my post would have to be removed!(Anyone remember that film,'Theatre of Blood'?!!!!)
Quote from: edurban on Wednesday 10 February 2010, 14:47
Hurwitz really hates Spohr...
A man after my own heart (just kidding. I only dislike Spohr ^_^)
I find I'm often quite in agreement with him, but other times I just have to go WTF (like his opinion of the K Jarvi recording of Bernstein's Mass vs. Alsop's). Sometimes I think he tries to...I dunno....write what he thinks people will want to hear. I dunno. He also seems to have bizzare taste in audio quality at times.
By the way,anyone got a favourite critic here? I used to like Michael Oliver,who seemed to have an open mind to some less well known corners of the repertory,before that sort of thing 'caught on'. I remember buying cd's of Holbrooke after reading his reviews,and he always seemed to praise cds of Havergal Brian. Incidentally,someone really needs to do a good cd recording of his 5th symphony (Wine of Summer),which is,in my opinion, anyway,one of the best things he ever did. NB Love this new style message board!!!
Malcolm (Calum) MacDonald.
Seconded - with the addition of our own Martin Anderson and Steve Haller (American Record Guide).
Quote from: TerraEpon on Wednesday 10 February 2010, 20:55
Quote from: edurban on Wednesday 10 February 2010, 14:47
Hurwitz really hates Spohr...
A man after my own heart (just kidding. I only dislike Spohr ^_^)
I find I'm often quite in agreement with him, but other times I just have to go WTF (like his opinion of the K Jarvi recording of Bernstein's Mass vs. Alsop's). Sometimes I think he tries to...I dunno....write what he thinks people will want to hear. I dunno. He also seems to have bizzare taste in audio quality at times.
What really gets my goat is that I can never quite escape the impression that Hurwitz has decided what to say about a work way before he even saw the CD. If you happen to agree with him, that can be quite satisfying even if a little self-indulgent. But if you happen to know one of two things about the music, some of his ill-considered judgments can be immensely irritating. Worse still, he appears to suffer from the thing we always moan about in the Penguin guide and their ilk: prejudice. On the other hand, one has to grant him that he usually knows his stuff. How he applies it is another thing.
Yes, quite, Mark. Martin Anderson definitely knows what he's talking about. After all, he's founded Toccata for the likes of us...!
Correction, Malcolm (Calum) MacDonald & Michael Oliver,mainly because he gave lot's of good reviews to neglected composers back in the dark old days when Bantock,Scott,Bowen,and all those other neglected composers were still just names in musty old books or battered old off air cassettes. I remember he was very kind to the Marco Polo & Symposium cds of Holbrooke,for example,which were,at the time,with all their shortcomings,(legion!),valuable releases. (Hopefully,it won't be too long before I'm putting CPO's Holbrooke Vol 2 on my cd player.)
Macdonald,of course is in another category,a campaigner!
'Theatre of Blood',is,of course,the movie where Vincent Price treats his critics to gruesome Shakespearean deaths.Not that I was suggesting that Andrew Clements should be forced to consume his own pet dog, or, cat (even if he has one)...............