Raff symphonies from Chandos

[Alan Howe]

Chandos have confirmed that they are planning to record Raff's symphonies with Neeme Järvi:

"We are talking to Neeme Järvi about Raff symphonies right now!" writes Ralph Couzens on the Chandos Forum.

I understand that the orchestra will be the Suisse Romande in Geneva which Järvi is due to take over in the New Year.

[petershott@btinternet.com]

I won't be at all offended if folk want to call me a curmudgeonly old git! Will be the world be a better place if Chandos devote attention to Raff? Probably sheer heresy to say so on this site - but we're fortunate to have the Stadlmier set of symphonies on Tudor, and that to my mind is just about the last word on Raff (with the possible exception of Raff 6).

If Ralph Couzens (and bless the man for all he's given us) took a quick glance through this site he would very quickly assemble a list of things to record that would probably lead him to selling more records than a set of Raff symphonies to compete with an easily available glorious one. Just an opinion, and I've no wish to start a dog-fight.

Peter

[Alan Howe]

I won't be at all offended if folk want to call me a curmudgeonly old git! Will be the world be a better place if Chandos devote attention to Raff? Probably sheer heresy to say so on this site - but we're fortunate to have the Stadlmier set of symphonies on Tudor, and that to my mind is just about the last word on Raff (with the possible exception of Raff 6).

Well, I'm sure nobody is going to malign you, but I will disagree with you! In my view, Stadlmair's set could be improved upon thus:
1. There are a few ruinously fast tempi, particularly in certain slow movements.
2. The playing and recording are good, but not outstanding. The orchestra is efficient, but hardly glamorous, and the sound, to my ears at least, doesn't really have enough space round it. Comparison with, say, d'Avalos on ASV in No.3 reveals what a world-class orchestra and recording can sound like in this music.
3. Major works need multiple recordings in order to raise their profile. As Tudor improved upon the Marco Polo set (although I retain much affection for those recordings), so Chandos should improve upon the Tudor set. And Järvi senior has a very special way with unsung music, as we know.

So that's my take on the news. And I haven't called anyone curmudgeonly!

[petershott@btinternet.com]

OK, Alan, I concede all your points 1-3, admit defeat and withdraw my remarks. And the last sentence reveals a gentleman!

When I read your initial posting, my first reaction was slight dismay thinking of all the other things that Jarvi and Chandos could offer - but knowing in the back of my mind that the bank balance will suffer given the certain acquistion of more Raff. Yes, the Tudor set isn't perfect - but weren't we all so grateful when those recordings emerged? They constituted a terrific improvement on what Raff we had at the time.

And every time I see an announcement of what Jarvi might be recording, I recall a real whoop of joy with which I let rip in the good old days (must have been about 10 years ago) when I read an announcement by DG that Jarvi was to put on disc a complete set of the Myaskovsky symphonies - nothing happened of course apart from an issue of Myaskovsky 6. Would not that have been a thing! Thus every time I see a new Jarvi project (whether it is that eccentric Bruckner recording or his ill-fated Tchaikovsky) I always feel dismayed that it is not Myaskovsky! Just can't help it!

Peter

[Alan Howe]

I take all your points, Peter. I was as grateful as anyone when the Tudor series started coming out and duly collected the lot. But with familiarity has come a certain frustration that, good as they undoubtedly are, the Tudor recordings could have been even better.

Of course, when it comes to recording projects, one might wish for a 'both... and' situation, rather than 'either...or'. And, I agree, a Myaskovsky series under Järvi would have been great - and a lot more expensive than the Svetlanov box!

[Mark Thomas]

What wonderful news to read after a long and not particularly successful day! I completely understand your misgivings Peter, but I think that Alan has made the case for another cycle with Chandos and Järvi more eloquently than I could. Personally, I rate the Stadlmair performances more highly than he does on the whole, but there is no denying that there is always room for more high quality interpretations, especially when they would come form such a high profile combination of label and conductor.

The only point I'd add to Alan's is maybe a little controversial: of all the unsung composers we discuss here, over the years Raff has become the nearest to making the breakthrough into the mainstream. There are well over 40 CDs of his music available now and over the last few years his compositions have even started to get programmed - not at the Gewandhaus or Concetgebuow maybe, but at least the music can be heard live from time to time. Raff therefore acts to some degree as a standard bearer for other unsungs. In that respect, the prospect of Raff on Chandos is a major milestone for all unsungs.

[Alan Howe]

The only point I'd add to Alan's is maybe a little controversial: of all the unsung composers we discuss here, over the years Raff has become the nearest to making the breakthrough into the mainstream.

And quite rightly so. Raff is one of the truly great composers among the unsungs.

[Gareth Vaughan]

I must agree with Mark and Alan. Raff's fortunes have come a long way since the thrilling emergence of Bernard Herrmann's 5th Symphony on Unicorn, back in LP days - and deservedly so. Consequently, it's no bad thing to have a few different cycles of his symphonies (look how many there are of Mahler's and he was relatively unsung at one time). The standards of production which we have come to expect from Chandos suggest there may be revelations in store if Jarvi really gets to grips with Raff's music.

[mbhaub]

I would welcome another set of Raff. The Tudors are generally good, exciting readings, the sound is perfectly good, and so is the playing. But for me the conductor ruined 5. Too fast, especially the first movement.

I would hope one thing Chandos will do is make SACD versions at the very least. My biggest worry is Jarvi. Has he ever done any Raff? Has he ever looked at a score? When he's on, he's great. Doing the Russian repertoire (Balakirev, Rimsky-Korsakov, Rachmaninoff, Borodin) I find his music making compelling and thrilling. Not always: his Tchaikovsky symphonies for Bis turned out as dreadful as Abbado with Chicago. His Glazunov set on Orfeo sounded like a rush job. More troubling is his German repertoire. His Mahler is pretty weird and can be dismissed at once. His 8th is awful, the 6th not far behind. His new 7th, on Chandos, is one of the worst. It even made Masur's reading look pretty good. His Brahms set (Chandos again) is pretty poor, too. One of the worst ever, probably. His Schmidt cycle, well played as it is, shows a lack of empathy with the composer: fast, rushed readings that are easily outclassed by others who found more profound meaning in the scores. (Ok, the 2nd with Chicago is stupendous and not likely to ever be outdone.) It may be rather superficial to judge his entire output from a small part of his recorded legacy, but he doesn't seem to have the right temperment for the German repertoire. So why would anyone think his Raff would be any better? I can only hope it is. In the meanwhile, Chandos should get him to lay down the Gliere 3rd. He gave a blistering account in Philadelphia several years ago. But if Chandos wants to commit, who am I to suggest otherwise. They have a great label with a huge number of succesful disks and few duds. So bring it on, more Raff is always a good thing.

[Alan Howe]

My biggest worry is Jarvi. Has he ever done any Raff?

I doubt it. However, in the modern era at least, who has? Toscanini did, Herrmann did (he was performing Raff 60 years ago), but there is simply no modern performing tradition. So, as far as Järvi recording Raff is concerned, I say: bring it on! Yes, Järvi can be inconsistent, but he may be brilliant in Raff. Let's hope so!

[Syrelius]

My biggest worry is Jarvi. 

Järvi may be a bit uneven, but I don't think one can dismiss his recordings of non-nationalist music. For instance, I think that Järvis recordings of Berwald and Stenhammar are more successful than his Alfvén, though the last one is the most obvious "nationalist" among those three. And when he is at his best, he is in my opinion absolutely brilliant! So, let us all hope that he will be brilliant when dealing with mr Raff! 

[eschiss1]

Didn't know Toscanini conducted Raff. (Martucci yes, lots of Martucci, but not Raff.)

[Jonathan]

I also think multiple recordings are helpful in distributing unsung music to others - especially with a conductor as well known as Järvi and labels as well known as Chandos.

[Alan Howe]

Good point, Jonathan. The combination of Järvi and Chandos may well do wonders for Raff's profile.

[Mark Thomas]

I'd be prepared for some disparaging "establishment" reviews, though. Old prejuduces, even when inherited and founded in ignorance, die hard.