 
 
        
 
        
 
        
 I hope that any readers who recall this conductors 
          appearance a few years ago in a truly dreadful documentary on UK television 
          about this symphony will not be deterred from adding this very fine 
          disc to their collections. Naively, the documentary rehashed the tired 
          old cliché (now discredited) that the work was written mainly 
          as a reaction to Hitlers invasion of the USSR, and Mark Wigglesworth, 
          the central figure in the programme, gave viewers little confidence 
          in his potential as a recording artist by declaring, with gross generalisation, 
          that music-making in a live concert is always preferable 
          to that achieved in a studio without an audience present. 
        
 Ironically, Wigglesworths account of the Leningrad 
          conveys a greater sense of concentration than I have experienced in 
          any live performance; the conductors attention to 
          detail results in the listeners attention being commanded throughout: 
          there are moments where the performance diverges significantly from 
          others, yet when one consults the score, often one finds that the effect 
          is achieved not by altering the composers markings but rather 
          by taking them more literally than one hears normally, such as the crescendo 
          in the first movement at 540", more threatening here than in other 
          recordings, or the gruff explosion on horns at 1123", toned down 
          elsewhere but played sf on this recording, as marked. Much of 
          the individuality of this reading derives from the care taken over string 
          articulation, such as the crescendi through the duration of the note 
          which Wigglesworth asks for at 1502" in the finale: Shostakovich 
          has written tenuto at this point, and the crescendi are a valid 
          (although unusual) way to realise this instruction. The strings employ 
          a variety of different degrees of legato or detached bowing and sometimes 
          the articulation is legato when normally one hears the notes separated, 
          or vice versa; although many of the changes in phrasing are not marked 
          in the score, it is known that often Shostakovich allowed performers 
          considerable licence in the freedom with which they approached his music, 
          and since Wigglesworth took the trouble to consult Ilya Musin (1904-1999), 
          the Russian conductor who gave the second-ever performance of this symphony, 
          it may be that some of these variants are as authentic as they are striking: 
          note the piercing use of the violins open string at 614" 
          in the second movement and from 807" in the third movement, an 
          effect which Shostakovich himself did not stipulate specifically here, 
          but which he implied elsewhere (for instance, in the first movement 
          of the Fourth Quartet and the third movement of the Eighth Quartet). 
        
 One mannerism which I find irritating in Wigglesworths 
          recording is his occasional use of string portamenti, perhaps introduced 
          here in order to emphasise Shostakovichs debt to Mahler: the slide 
          down of a semitone by the violins in the third movement at 233" 
          (repeated at 1131") serves no expresive purpose, whilst the glissando 
          at 1117" (where all the violins drift up at different speeds, 
          out of synchronisation) is simply grotesque. For me, this recording 
          is disfigured by such slides, not least in the finale at 1430" 
          & 1441", which remind me of the tasteless, outdated style 
          of orchestral playing which one hears on recordings from the 1920s. 
          It is also a pity that there are too many passing dissonances caused 
          by disagreements within the violins over notes (the worst being at 123" 
          in the third movement - and why was the confusion in the woodwind at 
          1830" not corrected?) and that standard misprints in the published 
          orchestral parts are retained (such as the middle voice of the divided 
          second violins at 2732" in the first movement, also wrong on Leonard 
          Bernsteins live 1988 DG recording with the Chicago 
          Symphony Orchestra. 
        
 The DG performance, too long at 85 minutes to fit onto 
          a single CD, is coupled with the First Symphony on a two-disc set, (427632-2); 
          do not mistake this version for Bernsteins much-inferior 1962 
          recording with the New York Philharmonic, which cuts forty bars from 
          the first movement. The 1988 performance is immensely compelling; no 
          other version has presented the climax of the first movement with such 
          intimidating force, and DGs dynamic range here is amazing, from 
          an insane fortissimo down to a barely-audible whisper from the unaccompanied 
          clarinet at bar 561 (compare the sound levels at 2054" & 2341" 
          on the DG recording!) Characteristics of the sound quality can make 
          a substantial contribution to the perceived effect of any performance, 
          and as the first movement crescendo progresses, the difference between 
          the engineering of the two versions becomes apparent: the dynamic range 
          of the BIS recording proves to be extreme too, but although the sound 
          is good and naturally balanced, it is more recessed, compromising clarity 
          in the heavily-scored passages, whereas the engineering from DG has 
          greater focus, closer miking, and conveys a colossal sense of weight. 
        
 It would be an unfair exaggeration to claim that Bernstein 
          makes his impact primarily through bold gestures, but nevertheless when 
          one compares his reading with Wigglesworth, one finds that it is the 
          latter who characterises every detail of the score with more subtlety. 
          Compare their accounts of the long G major second subject in the first 
          movement: Bernstein relies on the creation of a mere generalised mood, 
          but when Wigglesworth arrives at the Das Lied von der Erde chord 
          (550"), it has the same air of unease as when Shostakovich reuses 
          it at the end of the third movement of his Tenth Symphony, thanks to 
          the care this conductor has taken over gradations of balance during 
          the preceding four minutes of quiet music. In the central repetitive 
          section, Bernstein portrays the belligerent, thuggish arrogance represented 
          by this passage, but Wigglesworths approach is contrasting: he 
          begins at a genuine ppp and his build-up is more refined. The 
          muted brass are so distant at 1036" that I suspect they were playing 
          offstage; this eerie effect is reminiscent of the moment in Act 3 of 
          Shostakovichs Lady Macbeth of Mtsensk where the brass instruments, 
          playing quietly with (as in the Leningrad) repeated notes at 
          the end of each phrase, depict the arrival of the police. 
        
 It would take too much space to discuss every interesting 
          facet of the BIS version, but I hope that I have said enough to persuade 
          Shostakovich enthusiasts to hear this remarkable disc for themselves. 
          Wigglesworth provides his own sensitive booklet notes, their revisionist 
          post-Soviet tone complemented by the character of his performance, but 
          I was puzzled as to why these notes imply that there is genuine optimism 
          at the conclusion of the work, when my impression was that his performance 
          of the finale sought consciously to emphasise the parallel with the 
          last movement of the Fifth Symphony: once the initial fast tempo of 
          the Seventh Symphonys finale ceases, a grim procession takes over, 
          handled superbly here, sleepwalking impersonally to the dazed forced 
          optimism of the conclusion (significantly avoiding any rit, even 
          before the last chord, so as to avoid suggesting grandeur). Apart from 
          the pitchless bass drum, the lowest note in this final chord is the 
          octave below middle C: isnt Shostakovich hinting symbolically 
          at forced optimism here, stripping away any element of genuine 
          triumph by (literally) letting the bottom fall out of the texture? Such 
          was my impression of Wigglesworths reading. 
        
 The BBC National Orchestra of Wales is a strong contender 
          in a field where one might have expected recordings by the St Petersburg 
          (Leningrad) Philharmonic to show particular commitment. The reality 
          is that Yuri Temirkanovs BMG version with the St Petersburg orchestra 
          is no match for Wigglesworths, whilst Vladimir Ashkenazys 
          Decca version with the same orchestra is less rewarding than previous 
          releases in his fine Shostakovich series (having recorded all of the 
          symphonies except Nos.13 & 14, Decca tell me that they do not plan 
          to complete the cycle; worse still, apart from Nos.7 & 11, all of 
          Ashkenazys previous recordings of the symphonies are deleted). 
          Ashkenazys Leningrad is marred by a blunder at bars 531/2 
          in the first movement where a trumpeter goes bizarrely wrong; this extended 
          climax seems to be an accident-prone area, as Maxim Shostakovichs 
          version is marred by the timpanist entering early at bar 516 and staying 
          out of time. Both errors may sound trivial when you read about them, 
          but in performance, played fortissimo, they make one wince. 
        
 For me, Bernsteins two-disc DG set and Wigglesworths 
          new CD are the two most impressive recordings of the symphony; these 
          interpretations are so different that it would not be an extravagance 
          if you bought both versions for your collection. Bernsteins performance 
          is so imposing that it is difficult to evaluate objectively, as its 
          monumental weight alone can bowl one over to such an extent as to prevent 
          one from making balanced relative judgements about other recordings: 
          if one can put such bias aside, one is likely to conclude that the unique 
          insights of Mark Wigglesworth make his performance the greater 
          artistic achievement: the work emerges here as the epic which it is 
          whilst the spontaneity and sense of new discovery in this reading make 
          it special.