I really do struggle as to where I should begin with this one.
Anyway, here goes.
Any artistic value that these performances may have in their
favour is compromised by microphone placement decisions that
I personally find unacceptable. It's so closely recorded that
every little movement of each player is captured and there's
a loud sniff every few seconds along with heavy breathing. I
assume this to be from the conductor. Audience noises are captured
in the distance throughout but it’s the shuffling, clicking
and bumping on the stage that wears you down. Music needs to
emerge from silence to have its true impact. Concentration is
destroyed with background levels such as this. There’s
also clearly lots of knob-twiddling going on and every section
sounds mixed, artificial and overdubbed. It brings to mind the
worst excesses of Decca Phase Four. This is not what an orchestra
sounds like. The strings have a first desk quality about them
and the dynamic range is such that the climaxes sound compressed
and two dimensional. The brass section doesn’t impose
itself. Woodwind solos are brought forward unashamedly thus
removing any natural front-to-back perspective. What gets to
me is that Mercury were producing fabulous recordings (ditto
Everest) in the late 1950s with a 3 microphone set-up. Here
we are in 2012 faced with products such as this. I wonder if
some of the engineers involved in the project are pop music
trained? Maybe EMI should sit them down and play them some of
their Bishop/Parker sessions from the 1970s (Previn’s
recordings, maybe) to hear what an EMI recording should sound
like. They should then let them listen to the Rostropovich recording
of the Cello Concerto on DG (still the benchmark) and
the stunning Kertesz New World on Decca. Both of these
recordings are very long in the tooth now but they put this
latest effort to shame. The DG is smooth and elegant. The Decca
is full of detail and bite.
Having just about ruled this issue out of court because of its
technical shortcomings it’s only fair to mention the standard
of playing. It’s good enough for EMI to whisk the performers
away and re-record the whole session again under studio conditions
to capture the glorious sound of a symphony orchestra. Pappano
has done wonders with his orchestra and their New World
interpretation is very romantic and warm. Some may find the
playing a little too indulgent here and there but it’s
all done very tastefully and tremendous care has been taken
in its preparation. It would have been a joy to hear it live.
The final clanger comes at the end. There is virtually no silence
between the last fading chord of the symphony and the applause.
The moment is ruined. Has the applause been edited in afterwards?
It sounds fishy.
In the concerto, Mario Brunello’s cello is captured as
part of the orchestral fabric but the stereo image shifts around
all over the place. The great horn tune in the first movement
is milked to death but it exactly matches the way the theme
is presented by the soloist later on. It’s consistent
but a bit over the top. The engineering again undermines the
atmosphere of the slow movement which is a shame yet playing
of the soloist ismost beautifully crafted. The finale is delivered
with flair but those wonderful Dvořák orchestral
climaxes are not allowed to ring out properly, thus removing
all the excitement. The musicians deserved better. I would love
to hear more of Brunello in the future. Unless you can listen
through high levels of background noise and don’t mind
being stuck in the middle of an artificial sounding orchestra
this isn’t for you.
John Whitmore
Masterwork Index: Cello
concerto ~~ Symphony
9
Mario Brunello (cello)