Anton BRUCKNER (1824-1896)
Symphony No. 3 in D minor (1889 version, ed. Nowak) [54:35]
Symphony No. 6 in A major (1881) [50:34]
Berne Symphony Orchestra/Mario Venzago
rec. Kultur-Casino Bern, Grosser Saal, 30 April - 1 May 2012 (No. 3), 5-8
February 2011 (No. 6). DDD
CPO 777 690 2 [54:35 + 50:34]
Mario Venzago continues his interesting Bruckner cycle for CPO with a set
coupling the Third and Sixth Symphonies. Various orchestras have been involved
in this project and this time both performances feature the Berne Symphony
Orchestra, who give a thoroughly creditable account of themselves.
The discs are nicely presented in a slimline box, and there are full programme
notes, albeit in tiny print. In an interview the conductor shares his ideas
about Bruckner’s music.
In whichever version (1873, 1877 or 1889) Bruckner’s Third is a marvellous
symphony, which proclaims the full range and power of his genius. Mario Venzago
is an experienced and committed Bruckner conductor, as previous issues in
the series have proved. He has also shown great concern for choosing the most
appropriate edition of each symphony. This makes it something of a surprise
that he has opted for the third (1889) version of the Third, with its shortened
finale. The recorded sound brings great clarity and a suitable atmosphere;
nowhere more than in the first movement’s opening phase, when Bruckner
so skilfully articulates the evolution of the first subject through scoring
of the utmost imagination. Each section of the Berne orchestra acquits itself
admirably here.
In the slow movement there is a good balance between lyrical flow and profound
expressiveness, and when the strings are required to glow, they certainly
do. The rustic scherzo is also well characterised, with strong rhythms as
in a dance of the earth at one extreme, and pastoral innocence at the other.
As so often in 19th century symphonies, the finale is the most
problematic part of the score. There are those who will contend that only
the original 1873 version will do. The 1889 version is more drastically cut
than that from 1877, in which the musical structure holds up more strongly.
To be fair, Venzago makes a strong case for the shorter span of the 1889 version,
with dramatic incident all the more important therefore. He and his players
generate suitable energy and even vehemence in the first subject, which overall
provides probably the most important aspect of the movement. However, it is
the second theme that warrants the most exact description, since it is a subtle
combination of polka and chorale which Bruckner described with a telling anecdote:
‘In the tavern there is dancing, while next door the master lies in
his coffin.’ The performance articulates these aspects very successfully
and this adds considerably to the whole experience. Towards the end of the
work the principal theme from the first movement comes back to make its emphatic
point. It confirms the essential unity of the conception, which it most certainly
does in this fine performance.
Bruckner’s Third Symphony is well served on CD in all three versions.
Among those who have recorded the 1889 version, Günter Wand and the North
German Radio Symphony Orchestra (RCA 09026613742)
and Sylvain Cambreling and the SWR Symphony Orchestra (Glor Classics GC10391)
are also highly recommendable.
However, this new CPO issue is a 2 CD set, and comment on the Third Symphony
must therefore be linked with comment on the performance of the Sixth. Alas,
this seems to me to be much less successful. This work is often regarded as
being difficult to bring off. If that is indeed the case Venzago adds further
fuel to that particular flame. Again the recording is good, and so too is
the orchestral playing. Unfortunately there is rhythmic unsteadiness in the
first movement, which begins quickly but later on starts to drag. The phrasing
can misfire too, with some of Bruckner’s most poetic ideas becoming
somehow matter-of-fact;, take, for example, the horns’ pp rocking
figure which swells so majestically towards the final climax.
The Adagio gains from some refined dynamic shadings, while the music
moves fluently at a mobile tempo. This can work well in this movement, as
Otto Klemperer’s celebrated performance proved (EMI 4 04296 2). Again
too much of the phrasing feels wrong, not least in the wonderful third theme
in funeral march rhythm. This quite misses the mark here.
The Scherzo is altogether more successful, with abundant detail in the texture
thanks to the splendid recording. The finale succeeds in generating plenty
of drive and energy. Overall, this performance of the Sixth fails to achieve
the vision and eloquence of the conductor’s other Bruckner performances.
Quite why CPO chose to issue these two symphonies together rather than individually
is hard to fathom. There is no obvious musical reason for doing so, other
than that the same conductor and orchestra are featured. That is hardly sufficient
reason, and even without the mismatch between the relative merits of the two
performances the logic seems flawed.
Terry Barfoot
Quite why these two symphonies have been issued together rather than individually
is hard to fathom.
Masterwork Index: Symphony 3 ~~ Symphony 6
Support
us financially by purchasing this disc from |
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|