Though
they are relative rarities in the concert hall the symphonies
of Albéric Magnard have been represented quite reasonably
in the recording studio. I seem to recall a complete cycle
for EMI by Michel Plasson and the Toulouse Capitole Orchestra
a good few years ago. More recently Thomas Sanderling set
down the symphonies for BIS, coupling the Second and Fourth,
in performances that attracted a mixed reception on MusicWeb
International: see review by
Peter Graham Woolf and a second appraisal by
Reg Williamson. Sanderling’s BIS pairing of the First and
Fourth Symphonies (50097) does not appear to have been
reviewed here. The complete cycle has recently been reissued
by Brilliant Classics, which was noted by
Patrick Waller.
Rob
Barnett reviewed the
present recordings on their original appearance as a pair
of separate discs and he was impressed. I haven’t had the
time yet to listen in any detail to my own recently-acquired
copy of the Sanderling cycle on Brilliant Classics, though
I have done a very limited amount of dip testing. I would
in no way claim to have made a detailed comparison between
the Sanderling and Ossonce versions. However, it’s interesting
to note the overall timings of each of their performances,
which are as follows.
| |
Ossonce |
Sanderling |
| Symphony 1 |
31:07 |
33:20 |
| Symphony 2 |
36:04 |
41:55 |
| Symphony 3 |
37:33 |
44:00 |
| Symphony 4 |
35:40 |
40:02 |
Issues
of interpretation aside, one can point to three overall
presentational differences between the respective cycles.
The generally longer durations of Sanderling’s recordings
mean that his cycle spills over onto three CDs, with Symphonies
2 and 4 each occupying a single disc. However, at the Brilliant
Classics price there’s probably little to choose between
the rival versions in terms of cost. The recorded sound
for each set is very pleasing though I’d say that the Sanderling
versions are a bit more closely recorded and Ossonce’s
recordings give a bit more space around the orchestra.
One thing that’s definitely in favour of this Hyperion
reissue is the excellent notes by composer Francis Pott,
whose own music I’ve come to admire greatly. The note accompanying
the Sanderling set, which may be an edited version of the
original BIS notes, is a perfectly serviceable general
introduction to the composer and to the works but Pott’s
essay is on a very different plane, offering depth of knowledge
and analysis and much perceptive comment.
Magnard,
who began his formal musical studies only in his twenties,
became a close associate of Guy-Ropartz, who introduced
him to d’Indy, whose pupil he became, and to Franck. Magnard’s
own music is clearly influenced by that school of composition,
as you’d expect, and his four symphonies are firmly in
the late nineteenth-century French romantic tradition.
Writing
of the first movement of the First Symphony, Francis Pott
comments that it “arguably suffers from an excess both
of alternatives to follow up and of orchestral colours
in which to dress them.” One cannot but agree though I’d
suggest that the comment could fairly apply to the whole
work. It seems to me that much of Ossonce’s success in
this symphony lies in keeping the music moving forward
and in achieving clarity of balance within the rich orchestration. He
brings excellent drive to the first movement and the second,
marked “Religioso” is deeply felt. The BBC Scottish players,
who acquit themselves admirably throughout the work, play
the vivacious scherzo with panache. The finale has energetic
passages though Magnard is frequently unable to resist
the temptation to dawdle in pleasant by-ways. On the evidence
of the limited comparisons I’ve been able to make I’d say
there’s little to choose between Ossonce and Sanderling
in this symphony.
The
Second, Francis Pott avers, “marks a considerable advance
(on its predecessor)”. He describes the first movement
as “mercurially restless” and though there’s still a tendency
to discursiveness it seems to me that Magnard is now writing
with greater assurance – and he certainly handles the orchestra
with increased discernment and confidence. I find Ossonce
brings a bit more life to the music of I - Sanderling’s
tempo is steadier though it’s convincing in isolation.
The third movement is a rich, warm creation, which rises
to an opulent, ardent climax. Ossonce is very convincing.
This is one of the movements where the differences between
him and Sanderling are most marked. Sanderling takes 15:11,
compared with Ossonce’s 12:11. That’s quite a difference.
Sanderling invests the music with an almost Brucknerian
breadth, especially at the start. Ossonce certainly doesn’t
short change the listener but his reading has more forward
movement, I feel. The finale lives up to its marking, ‘Vif
et gai’, in Ossonce’s often bustling and sparkling reading
and he ensures that the symphony ends in a mood of joyous
affirmation.
The
Third was recorded a good many years ago by Ernest Ansermet
and his version has recently been reissued (see review). I’d
agree with Ian Lace’s assessment that the symphony is “very approachable and has memorable, melodious material.” In fact,
while the Fourth may outrank it
in terms of ambition, there are good grounds for regarding
the Third as the best of the canon. The solemn, mysterious
opening to I is very ear-catching and it’s very well rendered
by Ossonce and his team. Sanderling shapes the introduction
very atmospherically but I wonder if he draws it out too
much – he takes 3:19 over the passage while Ossonce requires
2:08. The main allegro arrives abruptly – Sanderling just
a fraction steadier than Ossonce – and as Pott puts it “there
is a consistent sense that the more unbridled passions
of the second symphony are here under the iron control
of formal academicism”. By this I’m sure he doesn’t mean
that the music is academic – it certainly is not – but
that it has more rigour and discipline than one has encountered
previously. There’s plenty of vitality in this movement
and the prevailing character is positive. There’s a lovely,
pensive second subject, which exhibits Magnard’s lyric
gifts. All in all this is a fine movement. The scherzo
is exhilaratingly nimble with the playing being quite delightful
and with a gentler, more reflective central episode. The
third movement opens with a ruminative cor anglais solo
but the strings are generally to the fore in this rather
intense movement. The BBC Scottish players acquit themselves
extremely well once again. This is another movement where
there is a substantial difference between the two rival
versions. Where Ossonce takes 8:21 Sanderling draws the
music out to 11:44. The opening cor anglais theme is a
case in point. It’s lovely and highly expressive in the
Sanderling version but one senses that the more flowing
tempo adopted by Ossonce may be the better course, though
I need to get to grips more with Sanderling’s version to
be sure. The finale has much good humour and the music
is often bustling though, characteristically, Magnard can’t
resist lyrical dalliances along the way. Ossonce leads
a performance full of life and character.
To
judge from his comments Francis Pott sees the Fourth as
Magnard’s most important symphony. It’s certainly his most
ambitious. Pott describes it as being on a “formidably
expansive scale - Mahlerian in breadth if not in actual
length.” The first movement, in which Magnard seems to
me to reach out to new horizons, begins most unusually
with an upward swirling figure on the woodwind choir. To
quote Pott once more: “This is turbulent music of a splendid
orchestral virtuosity.” As so often in the earlier symphonies,
the playing of the BBC Scottish orchestra is first class;
it’s ardent and sonorous but also agile when required.
This is the biggest music we’ve yet encountered in the
cycle and it also seems to me to be some of the tightest.
The brief scherzo is lighter on its feet but even here
the music still has purpose. The extended slow movement
is a soulful utterance, rising to a passionate climax where
the orchestration is particularly richly hued, before quite
quickly subsiding to a peaceful close. I admire the way
in which Ossonce and the orchestra maintain the tension
throughout this movement. To round off the symphony there’s
a finale, which is often urgent and animated. At its heart
there’s a massive chorale-like climax. In his notes Francis
Pott draws several points of comparison with Mahler. I
have to say that I don’t really get the connection yet,
though I may well do so with repeated listening. However,
at this juncture I do feel a kinship with Mahler’s Fifth.
The work ends with a surprisingly brief, pacific coda.
In
the early months of World War I Albéric Magnard met a tragic
and untimely end at the hands of German soldiers. Who knows
what he might have achieved had he lived longer? On the
evidence of these performances I’d hesitate to call him
a major symphonist but his four symphonies are far from
inconsiderable achievements and show him to have been evolving
his symphonic language and his use of the orchestra very
impressively. He certainly had something original to say
and his symphonies are well worth hearing. Sadly, it’s
unlikely that they’ll ever achieve much more than the most
tenuous of toeholds in the symphonic repertoire, even in
his native France. That’s the value of recordings.
Jean-Yves
Ossonce and the BBC Scottish prove to be committed, persuasive
and skilful advocates for these works. Particular credit
must go to the orchestra for these works will have been
unfamiliar to them. They sound to include many technical
difficulties yet the orchestral playing is first class
throughout. I should repeat that such comparisons as I’ve
been able to make with the Sanderling set have been limited
and I wouldn’t have the temerity to express a preference
at this stage. However, the two conductors seem to have
quite differing views of the music at times and it’s great
to have the opportunity to hear this unfamiliar repertoire
in contrasting versions. From what I’ve heard of them Sanderling’s
performances are well recorded and very well played and
I look forward to appreciating them properly in due course.
For
now, however, these Ossonce performances will do very nicely
indeed as an introduction to this neglected composer and
his symphonies. The performances are consistently excellent
and persuasive. Hyperion have provided rich, detailed recorded
sound and Francis Pott’s notes are out of the top drawer.
Now reissued at a most attractive price, this set is a
compelling proposition.
John Quinn
see also review by Rob Barnett
BBC Scottish
Symphony Orchestra/Jean-Yves Ossonce 
