Musical politics can be about as nasty as the other 
          sort. Willi Boskovsky was born in 1909, joined the violin section of 
          the Vienna Philharmonic in 1932, became a co-leader in 1939 and took 
          over the traditional New Year’s Day Concerts after the death of Clemens 
          Krauss in 1954. With his natural style and elegance (conducting from 
          the violin) he seemed the ideal person to take the New Year’s Day Concerts 
          out of the confines of Austria and into the world of Eurovision, and 
          by the late seventies it looked as if he would be conducting them for 
          all eternity. But he committed the unpardonable sin of falling ill before 
          the 1980 concert and was replaced by Lorin Maazel. In other walks of 
          life a person who falls ill and then gets better goes back to work afterwards, 
          but when there is a Vienna New Year’s Day Concert at stake the sin is 
          evidently too great. For the rest of his life (he died in 1991) he remained 
          active as a recording artist (it would be interesting to know how many 
          names the Vienna Johann Strauss Orchestra and the Vienna Philharmonic 
          had in common) and conducted his New Year’s Day Concerts where and when 
          he could. Unfêted, unheralded, he turned up in Milan to conduct 
          one New Year’s Eve during this last decade, while in Vienna Maazel continued 
          for a few years, until the traditional event became a catwalk for great 
          contemporary names, some of them singularly unsuited to the repertoire 
          (I don’t refer to the two legendary concerts conducted by Carlos Kleiber). 
          I don’t know who or why, but there was skulduggery here, mark my words. 
        
Still, at least Boskovsky got to conduct the Vienna 
          Philharmonic. I don’t know if Robert Stolz, whose Lanner CD I reviewed 
          a few months ago (BMG 74321 84145 2), ever conducted it in his long 
          life (1880-1975), but in Viennese eyes he was a conductor for the Symphoniker, 
          not the Philharmoniker. And, while Boskovsky recorded for Decca and 
          EMI, Stolz (even if the disc is now on BMG) recorded for smaller organisations. 
          Politics again? 
        
Six items out of twelve are common to both discs, so 
          how do the two men compare? 
        
Boskovsky was a violinist and the violins of the orchestra 
          always love it when one of their own turns to conducting so that the 
          bowing instructions issued from the rostrum make sense for once. Other 
          parts of the orchestra call them "top-liners". A Pavlov-dog 
          reaction on my part, maybe, but the cap does seem to fit here. All the 
          melodies are turned with elegance and style, while the accompaniments 
          are neatly dosed but always in the background. It’s pleasant, "schön" 
          in the best Viennese chocolate-box way, but a shade bland. Perhaps the 
          Vienna Philharmonic had a point in thinking it was time a conductor 
          with a bigger personality took over. 
        
Stolz was a composer and he shows much more interest 
          and awareness in how the music is made. Let me give a few examples of 
          what this means in practice. When the waltz proper starts in Hofball-Tänze 
          you scarcely notice the counter-melody in the lower strings in Boskovsky’s 
          performance. Stolz has the two melodies dialoguing with each other like 
          real counterpoint, and how much more characterful it sounds. Yes, he 
          is a little slower, but he uses this to bring out details Boskovsky 
          brushes over. His waltz rhythms are chunkier (this is particularly noticeable 
          also in Die Werber) but always alive, never heavyhanded. Listen, too, 
          to the introduction of Der Romantiker. The violins dig into their melody 
          with real passion and Stolz uses the chugging strings (kept well in 
          the background by Boskovsky) to give a sense almost of symphonic movement. 
          The wind chords in this introduction are not just played but Stolz seems 
          to be probing into them, bringing out chromatic lines or harmony changes. 
          What this all amounts to is that the music itself seems to have greater 
          stature under Stolz. 
        
One curious feature is that in Die Romantiker and in 
          Pesther-Walzer Stolz includes a harp part, and enjoys its colouristic 
          effect to the full. There is no harp at all in the Boskovsky performances, 
          but I am not able to say whether it is an optional extra sanctioned 
          by Lanner himself. I am sure he would have appreciated it anyway. 
        
I gave considerable praise to the Stolz disc. In retrospect, 
          perhaps I should have praised it more highly still. I don’t want to 
          suggest that Boskovsky is actually bad, and I certainly enjoyed the 
          six pieces where I didn’t have Stolz performances for comparison, but 
          since the non-specialist listener will presumably want only one of the 
          discs then the Stolz is the one to get, even if it is more fiercely 
          recorded. Honours are about even for the booklet notes. 
        
 
        
        
Christopher Howell