Parry and Stanford
no more go together than Bruckner and
Mahler, but at least Regent have had
the bright idea of beginning the Stanford
group with the Magnificat which the
composer had hoped to dedicate to Parry
as a peace offering after years of tiffing
publicly and privately, and instead
had to dedicate to his memory.
Even in the dark ages
when it was hard to find anybody with
a good word to say for these two composers,
Parry’s "Songs of Farewell" were generally
acknowledged to be masterpieces, worthy
to stand in the company of the great
choral motets from Tallis and Palestrina
to Brahms and Bruckner. Stanford, too
is well represented here. Possibly the
two organ pieces belong to Stanford
the fluent craftsman – though they are
nonetheless welcome as part of a well-contrasted
sequence – but all the choral pieces
find the composer at his most inspired.
Anyone who has ever
regretted that Klemperer never conducted
a note of Stanford might feel honour
satisfied by the performances here.
I give the timings (including those
of the organ works since Rowland and
Jacobs seem of one mind in this), followed
by those of some other recordings in
or out of the catalogue.
| Magnificat: |
13:29 |
(Hill/Hyperion 10:09, Marlow/Conifer
11:34) |
| Op.101/2 |
2:14 |
(Dyke/Lamm 2:08) |
| For Lo! |
8:20 |
(Hill 7:51, Hunt/Hyperion
8:29, Robinson/Naxos 7:24) |
| Op.101/1 |
4:02 |
(Dyke 3:28) |
| O for a closer |
3:35 |
(Hill 3:31, Rutter/Collegium 3:18,
Thurlow/Priory 3:14) |
| Ye choirs |
5:26 |
(Hill 4:49, Hunt 5:08, Marlow
4:53) |
Obviously, the most
dramatic difference regards the Magnificat.
Hill adopts a "baroque" approach to
the opening pages. Fair enough when
the music is plainly inspired by Bach’s
unaccompanied Magnificat, but this is
the "baroque" approach as we understand
it today, not as Stanford himself is
likely to have conducted the Bach piece
(which he did on several occasions).
Rowland’s more majestic (but not stodgy)
performance more convincingly suggests
Bach as filtered through the ears of
a late-romantic composer. But the real
difference comes in the slower sections.
Here Rowland really takes his time,
not just with slower tempi in themselves,
but in the breathing space and the moulding
he allows himself within these tempi.
He also gives his singers space really
to sing in an almost Italianate
manner. Frankly, Hill sounds brisk and
uncaring and for myself, I have now
learnt, through this performance, to
love a Stanford work which I had previously
admired but not quite taken to my heart,
and I can’t say fairer than that.
This big-boned, generous
and majestic approach suits all the
other Stanford pieces as well, without
necessarily being the only valid one
in every case (I still have a great
affection for the Hunt record and hope
Hyperion have not confined it to the
vaults as superseded by the three-disc
project under Hill) so Stanford can
consider himself done proud. Only in
the G minor organ piece did I feel the
music spelt out a little too deliberately,
though the registrations are more imaginative
than Dyke’s, and as for the F major
Jacobs has my sympathy. I have never
felt happy playing the piece at the
Allegretto Stanford asked for and this
performance would seem to prove definitely
that it sounds better at something like
an Andante.
Oddly enough, when
it comes to Parry Rowlands is faster
than most others. Here are his timings
together with three others:
| |
I |
II |
III |
IV |
V |
VI |
| Rowlands: |
3:26 |
2:21 |
2:54 |
4:09 |
7:05 |
10:29 |
| Halsey: |
3:43 |
2:37 |
3:02 |
4:07 |
7:55 |
10:43 |
| Marlow: |
3:50 |
2:31 |
3:18 |
4:13 |
7:08 |
9:41 |
| Robinson: |
3:44 |
2:18 |
3:30 |
4:02 |
7:17 |
10:25 |
I have not reheard
Halsey and Marlow on this occasion since
the former’s Argo LP (with his Louis
Halsey Singers) has never been transferred
to CD (but it should be, and it also
contains some Stanford partsongs which
have never been recorded otherwise)
and while Richard Marlow’s Conifer disc
(with the Trinity College Choir, Cambridge)
did make it to CD I understand the entire
Conifer catalogue is in abeyance at
present. So readers will mostly want
to know how Rowland compares with Christopher
Robinson’s Hyperion disc with the Choir
of St. George’s Chapel, Windsor, which
is dedicated entirely to Parry.
Robinson is in one
sense hors concours since he
uses an all-male choir instead of a
mixed one as do the others. As far as
the sopranos go, when the females are
young and trained to sing without a
trace of vibrato the difference is not
all that noticeable, but the difference
between young girls in their lower register
and Robinson’s maturer men in their
upper register obviously gives quite
another colouring to their line, especially
when a fugal point is led by the altos.
As regards the "authenticity" of one
or the other, these were conceived as
religious partsongs rather than church
music as such, so possibly the mixed
choir is what Parry had in mind.
However, having admired
the Christ’s College choir in Stanford,
I must say that over half an hour of
unaccompanied writing I became rather
conscious that, however well Rowland
has worked with them, the actual vocal
material at hand seems a bit more rough
and ready than Robinson’s choir. Though
intonation is good there are rather
more slips in ensemble than one would
like on a record. All this matters because,
while Stanford’s writing has a lustrous
sheen on it even in a second rate performance,
Parry, like Brahms, is only beautiful
when you make him so, which Robinson
does, quite exquisitely. As the pieces
become progressively more complicated
I find in his version a distinction
of phrasing, blend and voice-leading
which leaves Rowland’s well-intentioned
effort at the starting post. I was critical
of Robinson’s recent Stanford CD (on
Naxos) so it is nice to say that here
he produces a really fine performance,
indeed, from no.3 onwards I should say
an inspired one which should be heard
by all who care about great choral music
and its performance.
So where does this
leave the present disc? Personally,
I am delighted to have it for the Magnificat,
but that is the view of a "compleat
Stanfordian". If only it had contained
something new to the recorded repertoire
(there is still plenty of Stanford unrecorded,
some of it very fine indeed). For example,
having sighted on the Parry connection
with the Magnificat, the organist might
have given us, in place of these two
fairly well-known pieces, the late Fantasia
which Stanford wrote on Parry’s "Intercessor"
theme (and maybe preceded by the hymn
itself). It is a fine and noble work
and would, I should say, suit this organist
well, and I am not aware of a previous
recording of it.
Christopher Howell
Choir of Christ’s College, Cambridge/David
Rowland, with Simon Jacobs (organ)