Ludwig van BEETHOVEN (1770-1827)
Piano Concerto no.1 in C major op.15 (1795) [39:37]
Piano Concerto no.2 in B flat major op.19 (1786-98) [28:44]
Felicja Blumental (piano)
Vienna Symphony Orchestra/Robert Wagner
rec. dates and locations not given
BRANA BR0034 [68:48]
Brana Records is run by the soprano Annette Celine and is dedicated primarily
to remembering the art of the singer’s mother, the Polish pianist Felicja
Blumental (1908-1991). Given this premise, I find their presentation policy
quite strange. No recording dates or venues are given. We get some rather
good notes on the music by M. Ross, but would the sort of classical music
neophyte who needs this information be likely to buy in the semi-historical
bracket? While the seasoned collector exploring the byways of the early stereo
catalogue will probably skip the notes in the hope of finding something about
the recordings themselves, memories of the sessions, Blumental’s rapport
with the conductor and so on. We just get a skimpy biography of the pianist,
apparently written when she was still alive, a photo of her and - not quite
relevantly for this particular disc - the reproduction of an autographed handbill
of a concert by the Pasdeloup Orchestra of Paris at which Blumental played
the Third Concerto under the direction of Heinrich Hollreiser.
Surfing around, in MusicWeb International and elsewhere, I find that these
are part of a complete cycle of the Beethoven concertos set down in Innsbruck
between 1962 and 1967. The orchestra was originally named as the Innsbruck
Symphony Orchestra.
Readers who cut their musical teeth in the 1960s and early 1970s will remember
quite a number of Vox/Turnabout issues by the Innsbruck Symphony Orchestra
under Robert Wagner. A Google search gives no results for this band except
for reissues of those recordings. You’d have expected to find details
of their current season, maybe an official site with a history and a list
of past conductors. It crosses my mind that Innsbruck may never have had a
symphony orchestra at all, the whole series having been set down by the VSO
out of contract and the name suggested by a conveniently-available recording
venue in Innsbruck.
Come to think of it, evidence for a Robert Wagner outside these recordings
is scarce too. Two present-day conductors state in their curricula that they
studied choral conducting with Robert Wagner and a “Robert Wagner, choral
conductor (1914-1992)” received some kind of Papal award in 1966. However,
these same dates also fit the legendary French-American choral conductor Roger
Wagner, a vital force on the American scene for many years. The suspicion
is that the posters muddled his forename with that of the equally legendary
American choral conductor Robert Shaw. So “Robert Wagner” is a
doubtful figure. Maybe the Hollreiser handbill hints at something that still
cannot be told.
Still, the main thing is the performances.
My first reflection is that they come from an age when the language of Beethoven
interpretation had not yet been held up to question, whether by originals,
by the historically informed or by the plain perverse. Without especial point-making,
pianist and conductor show an easy familiarity with music that has not lost
its freshness by repetition. In the Second Concerto in particular, tempi sound
spontaneously right, the phrasing natural and musical. The performers’
apparent conviction that this is how the music has to go communicates itself
to the listener. After it has finished you may wonder if you have heard the
whole story, but the story as far it goes is entirely satisfying.
My second reflection is that this sort of naturalness isn’t so easy
to achieve as it sounds. Still in the semi-historical bracket, I turned to
the classic Serkin/Ormandy version of no. 2 and in the ritornello of the first
movement I found Ormandy “Toscaninifying” the music excessively.
He actually manages some beautiful phrasing within the brisk tempo, but I
was nevertheless left a bit breathless. The expression is there, but strait-jacketed.
I also tried the equally classic Kempff/Van Kempen - again in no.2 - and here
I found the orchestral introduction plodding in several places. Wagner’s
middle way seemed absolutely spot-on.
So far I’m talking about the conductors and it’s less simple when
the pianists enter. The brisk tempo sounds perfectly natural under Serkin’s
fingers because he breathes in the tempo while Ormandy just presses on. Conversely
Kempff, with his characteristically luminous tone, uses his slower tempo to
phrase the music subtly, so it doesn’t hang fire. Both pianists provide
a lesson in the fact that the tempo will sound right if it’s a natural
consequence of the phrasing. While their conductors show that a tempo will
sound wrong if the phrasing is squeezed into it or not made to flower within
the space provided. This still leaves Blumental/Wagner as the most integrated
experience of the three because for everybody concerned tempo and expression
seem at one.
In the slow movement of no.2 both Kempff and - especially - Serkin seem concerned
to provide a religioso experience. Since they are very great artists
they can bring it off, but I wonder if this early concerto should really be
made to bear so much. Blumental/Wagner let it flow more - again, “natural”
is the inescapable word. On the other hand, you might feel that, compared
with the other pianists’ inwardness, Blumental, at least as recorded,
is a little too full-toned and extrovert.
The finale evokes similar comparisons to the first movement so altogether
this is a very successful, and highly enjoyable, version of the second concerto.
No.1 seems to me a notch less successful. However, I made the initial mistake
of listening to it on headphones. I found the sound overpowering and boomy
and the performance sometimes over-emphatic. After hearing no.2 on loudspeakers
and reacting as above, I listened to no.1 again on loudspeakers too. The sound,
as absorbed into my room acoustic, was much more pleasing and the performance
impressed me more favourably. However, the grander character of this music
- which was actually written after no.2 - perhaps encourages an excessively
maestoso approach.
I compared with Serkin and Kempff here, too, not with their commercial recordings,
but with live performances which both of them gave during the 1960s in Naples
with the local RAI orchestra. The former was once on a Cetra LP so some readers
may know it. They both sound freer live and this time the comparisons seemed
to go in their favour. But Blumental and Wagner are again impressively unified
in their view and if you like a majestic reading of this concerto - finale
included - this may be the one for you.
It’s difficult to know what sort of recommendation to give, given that
the sound is full and pleasant but dimensionally and tonally limited. Readers
finding their way into classical music will presumably relate better to a
modern icon like Argerich/Abbado in no.2 on DG, or else to something more
philologically informed. The historically curious may be assured that the
recording quality does not inhibit enjoyment. The performance of no.2, in
particular, may cause us to wonder whether the gap between the “acknowledged
greats” - such as Kempff and Serkin - and those such as Blumental who,
according to received opinion, didn’t quite make it and so are now barely
remembered at all, is as yawning as we imagine. For this, at least, the disc
has much to teach us.
Christopher Howell
Tempi sound spontaneously right, the phrasing natural and musical.
Masterwork Index: Concerto 1 • Concerto 2