Tchaikovsky Manfred Symphony

[Doc Sarvis]

For a long time it was quite fashionable to trash Tchaikovsky - he represented everything that was tonal and romantic and accessible in music when serialism sought to useat all of that. In the 60's, my parents were big Tchaikovsky fans (similar to how we are with Mahler today) and remember the steady stream of critical abuses he took in those days. Like Shostakovich, Rachmaninoff, and Mahler, Tchaikovsky has now earned the respect of critics and academia - but the old biases still hang on in some quarters.

As for the Manfred, I have had the Abravanel for many years. Not a definitive version but it long ago became imprinted on my mind as what the Manfred was supposed to sound like.

 

[mbhaub]

Yes - and when you consider you get most of his orchestral music for some $15 or so, it's a steal. Abravanel was a superb Tchaikovsky conductor, sadly never given the reins of a first-rate orchestra.

 

[DarkAngel]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mbhaub /img/forum/go_quote.gif Well not exactly. It was the ancient RCA Toscanini that I first owned, and I wouldn't without it. I just can't recommend it to someone who wants a great sounding Manfred. The Toscanini is very riveting, at it also is one of the best demonstrations (if one is needed) that orchestral playing 50+ years ago was just as brilliant as it is today.

More damage to wallet caused by MB........Toscy/RCA Manfred is on the way
I have quite a bit of Tocanini/RCA work now, all the basics Beethoven, Brahms etc.

 

[JayG]

Slow down a step, DS. I'm not trashing Tchaikovsky in general. I don't have a problem with his bombastic, easily-accessible Romantic style. In fact, it's very refreshing from time to time. What I'm saying is that when compared to his other major works, the PC #1 is not his "strongest" piece. It has some of the most memorable melodies, and it sticks with you, but I think in terms of emotional impact and musical ingenuity, it falls slightly short of his other highly popular work, such as the final three symphonies and the ballets.

I don't agree with Szell that it's a piece of ****, but he's not crazy to hold it in lower esteem than some other Tchaikovsky compositions.

-Jay

 

[Doc Sarvis]

Quote:

Originally Posted by JayG /img/forum/go_quote.gif Slow down a step, DS. I'm not trashing Tchaikovsky in general. I don't have a problem with his bombastic, easily-accessible Romantic style. In fact, it's very refreshing from time to time. What I'm saying is that when compared to his other major works, the PC #1 is not his "strongest" piece. It has some of the most memorable melodies, and it sticks with you, but I think in terms of emotional impact and musical ingenuity, it falls slightly short of his other highly popular work, such as the final three symphonies and the ballets. I don't agree with Szell that it's a piece of ****, but he's not crazy to hold it in lower esteem than some other Tchaikovsky compositions. -Jay

My comment wasn't aimed at your post; rather it was an observation on the whole thread; i.e. Bernstein's comment, the Manfred's general obscurity, etc. Sorry that it came across as being otherwise.

I think your comments on PC#1 are a valid viewpoint. Not sure I'm in 100% agreement but I would agree that his last three symphonies are by far his best work.

 

[JayG]

No need to apologize. I just wanted to make sure my comments weren't taken for more than they were meant. And I'm sure many people would disagree about the PC, and I welcome that. This wouldn't be any fun if everyone felt the same way about everything.

-Jay

 

[Doc Sarvis]

Quote:

Originally Posted by JayG /img/forum/go_quote.gif No need to apologize. I just wanted to make sure my comments weren't taken for more than they were meant. And I'm sure many people would disagree about the PC, and I welcome that. This wouldn't be any fun if everyone felt the same way about everything. -Jay

Cool...

 

[BAwig05]

For holding it in such low esteem, though, Szell recorded it a lot. Gary Graffman, Clifford Curzon and others collaborated with Szell on the piece, Szell also recorded the Violin concerto various times, most notably (I think) with Bronslaw Hubermann.

As for the lack of subtley in the 1st PC, consider the 1812 overture and Marche Slave. Extremely acessible, not subtle bhy any means.

And finally, as for critical recognition, where would we be without Antal Dorati, Andre Previ, Igor Markevich, Evergy Svelov, and even Richard Boynage? While I'd be stupid (er than usual) to give them all the credit for the revival of interest in Tchaikovsky.

Even if they too, didn't make the Manfred a top priority.

 

[mbhaub]

Svetlanov sure made it a priority. He recorded it twice, both superb interpretations. He lets the composer speak and makes no cuts or orchestration changes. Unfortunately, his best, and most easily obtained version is on Melodiya and the sound is tubby, congested, distorted and unlistenable with headphones. A real shame. His complete Tchaikovsky set is currently available and the price is great, but sonically it can't compete with the likes of Muti, Litton and a few others.

 

[JayG]

Quote:

Originally Posted by BAwig05 /img/forum/go_quote.gif As for the lack of subtley in the 1st PC, consider the 1812 overture and Marche Slave. Extremely acessible, not subtle bhy any means.

True. And as such, those two compositions are also not on the same level of achievement as Tchaikovsky's best. But they sure are fun.

-Jay

 

[DarkAngel]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mbhaub /img/forum/go_quote.gif This is one of my absolute favorite works, and incredible as it seems, I have every cd version ever released. Good, bad and spectacular. For the best possible combination of sound and performance, the new Jurowski with the London Philharmonic is tops, no question. The Muti is one of the very best, and performance wise is sensational. The Chailly on London is great sounding and a great performance, too, but not quite as electrifying as the Muti. The Pletnev just isn't that great -- he rushes it. And any conductor who dares to tamper with and mess up the orchestration or make any cuts is automatically assigned to the bad category: Temirkanov tops this list. That's the problem with Jansons, too. The only other newer recording worth consideration is on Koss with Raymond Leppard and the Indianapolis SO. Very fine sound, but the orchestra sure isn't the London Phil. So go for Jurowski: you won't be disappointed.

Gentlemen back to the subject at hand.........Manfred Symphony


Jurowski/LPO
I will have to concur with MB that overall the Jurowski is the best version available especially if sound quality is main priority. Very powerful and dramatic version that moves along without seeming to drag or be overly rushed, very colorful and animated, if you have only one Manfred this is it.

Tocanini/RCA
Was disappointed with this 1946 mono studio version, the sound is not bad at all but performance left me flat......just not animated or flexible enough, has energy and momentum but seems too mechanical without an inner spirit or emotion.......the stiff Romeo & Juliet that follows is even more deviod of spirit/emotion than the Manfred.

Silvestri/BBC Legends
Will have to part ways with MB here, I love this version for a different take on Manfred! This a very sunny Italianate falvor to it, very lively and playful with great inner woodwind detail, reminds me of Tchaikovsky's Capricio Italian in style vs the heavier tone other versions invoke. Does not have the huge church grand cathedral style organ effect at end (more like side chapel organ) but lighter organ used makes sense in context of the light sunny overall impression of performance, a real winner for me

As a bonus you get a staggering version of Respighi Pines of Rome that will really impress even jaded Respighi fans, from the carefree frolicing opening scence to the jaggernaut closing march with Ceasar leading the Roman legions onward, a fantastic musical journey that every Respighi fan should own.

 

[mbhaub]

I must plead a mea culpa here. DarkAngel is too good of a critic and listener to be wrong -- I was. I had my Silvestri's mixed up. The BBC is the GOOD one, the Testment is the awful one.
I went back and listened to it. Yes, it's ok, especially given its vintage and the relative obscurity of the orchestra at that time. Still, it's not for everyone. Silvestri pulls tempos all over the place, messes with phrasing like crazy, there are many spots of questionable intonation, many places where conductor and orchestra fight for the tempo, and some real sloppiness in execution (the final page of the scherzo makes this clear). Still, it's a powerful performance, cheapo electronic organ and all. But why, oh why, did the conductor doubt Tchaikovsky and add horns to the first tune in the finale like Gennady Rozsdestvensky and others do? If you have good bassoons, bass clarinet and english horn players it's not needed. Tchaikovsky knew exactly what he was doing and wanted that grubby, dark sound. Not the Hollywoodized version.

BTW: the accompanying Pines is superbly thrilling, and boy did the quality of the orchestra improve in the four years between.

 

[DarkAngel]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mbhaub /img/forum/go_quote.gif I must plead a mea culpa here. DarkAngel is too good of a critic and listener to be wrong -- I was. I had my Silvestri's mixed up. The BBC is the GOOD one, the Testment is the awful one. I went back and listened to it. Yes, it's ok, especially given its vintage and the relative obscurity of the orchestra at that time. Still, it's not for everyone. Silvestri pulls tempos all over the place, messes with phrasing like crazy, there are many spots of questionable intonation, many places where conductor and orchestra fight for the tempo, and some real sloppiness in execution (the final page of the scherzo makes this clear). Still, it's a powerful performance, cheapo electronic organ and all. But why, oh why, did the conductor doubt Tchaikovsky and add horns to the first tune in the finale like Gennady Rozsdestvensky and others do? If you have good bassoons, bass clarinet and english horn players it's not needed. Tchaikovsky knew exactly what he was doing and wanted that grubby, dark sound. Not the Hollywoodized version. BTW: the accompanying Pines is superbly thrilling, and boy did the quality of the orchestra improve in the four years between.

The Silvestri version is unique sounding, doesn't have that heavy serious/somber undertone other versions have. Instead it has a lighter sunny almost playful feel to it which reminds me of capricio italian. Perhaps fortunately for me I am not musician like MB so the sloppy execution will not be noticed unless some gross errors are made.......anyway I think I have more Manfreds now than I will ever need thanks to this thread, I actually like the piece a bit more than before this thread started so some good has come of it.

 

[s m @]

I just wanted to say that b/c of this thread I picked up the Jurowski version of Manfred. I listened to it for the first time today and enjoyed it greatly, so thanks everyone. I wasn't even aware of this piece before.

I don't listen to a whole lot of classical, but since attending a string quartet performance about ten years ago that included a few of Tchaikovsky's works, I've had a soft spot for his stuff.