|
|
alternatively
CD: MDT |
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
|
|