BARGAIN OF THE MONTH
Franz SCHUBERT (1797-1828)
The Symphonies
Symphony No. 1 in D major, D 82 (1813) [27:23]
Symphony No. 2 in B flat major, D 125 (1814-15) [30:57]
Symphony No. 3 in D major D 200 (1815) [20:29]
Symphony No. 4 in C minor, D 417 “Tragic” (1816) [34:07]
Symphony No. 5 in B flat major, D 485 (1816) [28:43]
Symphony No. 6 in C major, D 589 (1817-18) [31:39]
Symphony No. 8 in B minor, D 759 “Unfinished” (1822) [26:28]
Grand Duo in C major, D 812 (“Symphony” after Sonata in C major
for piano duet, op. post. 140, orchestrated by Joseph Joachim) (1824, orch.1855)
[43:57]
Symphony No. 9 in C major, D 944 “Great” (1825-26) [61:47]
Rosamunde: Overture, D 644 “The Magic Harp” (1823) [10:12]
The Chamber Orchestra of Europe/Claudio Abbado
rec. Schubertsaal, Konzerthaus, Vienna, August 1986 (No. 2); Großer
Saal, Konzerthaus, Vienna, December 1986 (No. 5), June 1987 (No. 6), December
1987 (Nos. 8 and 9, Rosamunde); Watford Town Hall, London, August 1987 (Nos.
1 and 3, Grand Duo); Palacio de la musica y congresos, December 1987 (No.
4).
DEUTSCHE GRAMMOPHON 477 8687 [5 CDs: 58:40 + 57:54 + 60:43 + 70:42
+ 72:05]
The appearance of these CDs welcomes back to the catalogue this highly regarded
set of Schubert symphonies. The performances purportedly utilized Schubert’s
autograph scores for the first time. Actually, only Symphonies Nos. 4, 8,
and 9 are listed in the booklet as being first performances of the autograph
manuscripts. The editions here initially raised some controversy over whether
they were really as Schubert left them. There was some suggestion that the
scores might have been edited by the musicologist and Chamber Orchestra of
Europe (COE) member Stefano Mollo, who researched the autograph manuscripts.
Nikolaus Harnoncourt recorded the complete symphonies with the Concertgebouw
for Warner on Teldec
some five years later than Abbado. He also based his performances on the manuscripts,
but there are differences between his versions and those of Abbado, primarily
in the Ninth Symphony.
The Harnoncourt set was reissued on Warner
Classics and enthusiastically reviewed here by Michael Cookson in October
2005. I refer you to his review for some real insights into these works. As
a basis of comparison here, I am also using the Harnoncourt set - one of my
favorites in this music - as well as some individual accounts of a few of
the symphonies. Before delving into individual works, I can state right off
that the Abbado accounts remain formidable among the competition and now at
a reduced price could easily be recommended as ones first choice for a complete
set of the symphonies. Now to comments on individual works:
Both Abbado and Harnoncourt have the measure of the first three symphonies.
To generalize, Abbado’s tempos tend to be slightly slower than those
of Harnoncourt. This is most noticeable in the third movements. Where Harnoncourt
treats them more like scherzos and brings out their Beethovenian elements,
Abbado sticks more closely to the models of Haydn and Mozart and retains the
quality of minuets. The main advantage here is that he does not have to slow
down for the trio sections, whereas Harnoncourt definitely does and this can
be jarring at times. I like the warmth of Abbado’s recordings, but the
clarity of inner parts as well. Harnoncourt, by comparison, can seem a little
austere in his avoidance of vibrato and other period performance traits. I
don’t want to make too much of this, however, for both conductors are
convincing in their own ways. They are more evenly matched in the delightful
Symphony No. 3 and do not slight the dance elements in this work. Whereas
I have a slight preference for Abbado in the first two symphonies I have difficulty
in deciding which to go for in the case of the Third; though Abbado’s
tempos in all four movements seem ideal to me. I have no hesitation as concerns
the Symphony No. 4, the so-called “Tragic”. Here Harnoncourt’s
faster tempos pay off, as he brings out the Beethovenian influences. This
work seems modeled more on Beethoven than the earlier ones, and Harnoncourt
captures the dramatic elements very well, as he also does for the delicious
dance in the finale’s second theme. Abbado on his own is also good,
but his more deliberate tempos, especially the third movement minuet/scherzo,
sound rather heavy-handed.
The Symphony No. 5 is the only one before the “Unfinished” to
have achieved a significant degree of popularity, although the Third is also
gaining in this area. The Fifth is one of Schubert’s most perfectly
formed works, even if it harks back to its Haydn and Mozart models. With its
light scoring, without trumpets, clarinets or timpani, it is the perfect vehicle
for a chamber orchestra, and Abbado does it full justice. One could argue
that his first movement is too fast, though I have quickly acclimatized to
it. Harnoncourt’s slower tempo may see more apt, but his frequent diminuendos
on phrase endings become a little tiresome. These are minor cavils and in
honesty neither effaces memories of the greatest versions of the past, for
example, those of Bruno Walter and Fritz Reiner. Likewise, in the Rossinian
“Little C major” Symphony No.6, it is hard to avoid the memory
of Sir Thomas Beecham’s wonderful performance, even if the “corrupt”
edition he used did not contain significant material particularly in the finale.
Of the two modern recordings discussed here, I prefer Abbado’s by a
wide margin largely due to the ludicrously slow tempo Harnoncourt takes for
the finale.
With the “Unfinished” (No. 8) and the “Great C major”
(No. 9), the field of competition is much greater, since these symphonies
are some of the most popular in the repertoire. While listeners have their
favorites - mine include Carlos Kleiber and Bruno Walter for the Eighth and
Karajan and Szell for the Ninth - Abbado can rival the best and Harnoncourt
has his admirers, too. Abbado’s account of the Eighth is dramatic and
ardently romantic, bringing out the warmth in the symphony. His approach is
weightier than those of Harnoncourt or Kleiber, but not to the same degree
as Karajan’s which is too heavy and deliberate. Kleiber’s is arguably
the most subtle of these and perhaps more classical than romantic. Abbado
is even more romantic in the Ninth, employing a good deal of rubato in many
places. For example, he slows down for the reprise of the opening theme when
it returns at the end of the first movement - not to the degree that Bernstein
did in his recording with the Concertgebouw, but appreciably more than one
is accustomed to now. However, Abbado’s is a powerful account that works
despite - or because of? - the liberties he takes. Neither Harnoncourt nor
my favorite, Karajan - I prefer his later EMI account to the earlier one on
DG - slows here. In fact, it seems to me that Harnoncourt actually speeds
up. Overall, Abbado, like Karajan, is more rugged and incisive in this symphony
than Harnoncourt. Harnoncourt’s approach is smoother, less articulated,
and more classical. Where Abbado raises questions, however, concerns the changes
he makes in the score itself. These occur in the second movement where the
oboe phrase later in the first subject has added eighth notes (0:52-1:02 and
repeated later) and in the scherzo an additional four bars with the brass
prominent (2:13-2:15 and again later in the movement). Supposedly these additions
were in the original manuscript and later removed by Brahms for an edition
of the works. Likewise Brahms was thought to have misinterpreted Schubert’s
accent marks as diminuendo signs. Harnoncourt omits the extra notes and bars
from his account, though he also based it on the autograph score. The first
time one hears them they can seem a little jarring, for those very familiar
with the symphony. On repetition, though, they do not detract all that much
from Abbado’s performance. The orchestra’s playing is so beautiful
here, as it is elsewhere in the set, that one can easily forgive any perceived
aberrations in the edition used. Note that Harnoncourt, and as I recall, Solti
with the Vienna Philharmonic before him, ends the symphony with a diminuendo
on the final chord. I have always found this a bit strange and underwhelming.
Neither Karajan nor Abbado follow this practice and hold the final chord forte
to the end.
The five-disc set comes with two bonuses. The first is Joachim’s orchestration
of Schubert’s Grand Duo which at one time was referred to as the “Gastein
Symphony”. It was thought to be Schubert’s “lost”
Seventh Symphony and makes for a substantial addition. While it is well orchestrated
and sounds like mature Schubert, it does go on a bit and can seem repetitious.
Still it contains some memorable material. The second subject in the first
movement has one of those inimitable Schubert melodies which switches from
major to minor and back again. It is rather similar to its equivalent in the
first movement of Luciano Berio’s Rendering that is based on
sketches of Schubert unfinished Tenth Symphony. The finale reminds me of both
the Ninth Symphony and Rosamunde. Speaking of the latter, as the second
bonus, the set concludes with the popular Overture to Rosamunde, the “Magic
Harp”, which is one of Schubert’s most inspired creations. This
would appear to be the same recording as that in Abbado’s superb account
of the complete incidental music to Rosamunde, also on DG.
In conclusion, though one may criticize this or that detail, I can recommend
this DG set highly. Even if you have Harnoncourt’s, Böhm’s,
Marriner’s, Wand’s or one of Colin Davis’s versions, or
are collecting Jonathan Nott’s ongoing cycle, Abbado’s will still
provide you with hours of truly wonderful music-making and a fresh perspective
on these masterpieces.
Leslie Wright
Abbado’s winning set of Schubert symphonies returns at low cost.