Search - Schubert, Vpo, Kertesz :: Symphonies (Complete)

The Best Schubert Cycle

Michael B. Richman | Portland, Maine USA | 11/09/2003

(5 out of 5 stars)

"I currently own three Schubert Symphony Cycles and this one by Istvan Kertesz and the Vienna Philharmonic is the best so far. The stereo performances, beginning in 1963 with the 8th and 9th Symphonies and the Overtures, with the remainder done in 1970 and '71, are first rate and the value is unbeatable. Compared to the other two Cycles I own, you get more music with the Kertesz than the Bohm in the form of three Overtures, and the performances are every bit its equal. It is also a better overall value (and better performances!) than the Karajan (currently available as four mid-line single discs in EMI's "Karajan Edition" series, though the label would be wise to reissue those performances as a competing slim, paper-sleeved box set). With that being said, my dad and I have yet to swap Schubert Symphony Cycles, so I cannot comment on accounts by Sawallisch, Menuhin or the new budget reissue by Sir Neville Marriner, which finishes the "Unfinished" and even completes a 10th Symphony. Despite that, I can't imagine a more successful Schubert Symphony Cycle from start to finish than this one by Kertesz."

THE BEST IS SAVED FOR LAST

Mark E. Farrington | East Syracuse, NY | 03/06/2008

(4 out of 5 stars)

"Interpretatively, Kertesz seems to get better with each successive symphony. (By that I mean "in order of composition," not "in order of recording." The 1st through 3rd and the 6th were recorded in October 1971, the 4th and 5th in April 1970, and the Overtures, the UNFINISHED and GREAT are from November 1963.)



The earlier Schubert symphonies are "new wine in old bottles," and pose a challenge for even the greatest conductors. Since they are (mostly) constructed on a Haydn/Mozart time-scale, it is tempting to "classicize" these works by playing them as if they WERE Haydn or Mozart - ignoring the new, more rustic, more expansive nature of their melodic and harmonic content. On the other hand, one can fall into the trap of savoring some of those movements too romantically, thereby pulling them out of shape.That being said, I happen to disagree MORE with the "classicizing" approach to Schubert's 1st through 6th. That is to say, if I must choose between an imbalance favoring the "bottles" or the "wine," I'll take the wine, thank you. Eric Fenby put it this way : "The formative works of an original mind are always interesting when played in the spirit of that mind's increase." (FENBY ON DELIUS, 1996 ed., pp. 144-45)



The authenticist Bruno Weil takes the 'classicizing' approach to its outer limit : he plays even the UNFINSIHED as if it were by Stamitz, Quantz, or at any rate as a Rococco work. But the fine line between classical poise and romantic expansiveness runs almost (but not exactly) evenly through these six symphonies, fluctuating nearly imperceptably from work to work. For this reason, each of these works (no less than the UNFINISHED and GREAT) must be approached as its own sound-world, in terms of structure, harmony and melodic content. Otherwise, you get something sounding like either "second-drawer Mozart" or "weak Beethoven."



Sir Thomas Beecham was a master of these earlier works (except for the 4th, which he never recorded). I believe that what enabled him to be so was

1) his consummate mastery of the polished Mozartean turn-of-phrase

2) his vast experience with Delius (the ULTIMATE Nature Poet of music), which rendered him "in sync" with the rustic, nature-poetry of Schubert. But occasionally, even Sir Tommy could fall down in this territory.



In going through each performance in this set, my subjective standard has been this: whether or not it possesses enough energy, focus, beauty of playing, and "feel" for that symphony's unique "DNA"- such that it can "make me forget" my other favorite versions. Overall, Kertesz's 1st, 2nd and 3rd fall short of this: they strike me as "boxed set performances." (That is, "The Company wants to put out a complete boxed set, and we have X number of allotted sessions, so let's get through them shall we.") But starting with the 4th, things get progressively better. In any case:



SYMPHONY NO. 1: This dates from 1813, when Schubert was only 16, and one year away from composing his first songs of genius. And yet, this symphony's second movement is generally regarded as Schubert's first, truly characteristic lyrical outpouring. Kertesz takes it at a disappointingly brisk tempo, which is partially alleviated by the Vienna Philharmonic's magnificent tone. But overall, this version cannot hold a candle to the 1953 Beecham / RPO (available on SONY), where the innate personality of this early work is magisterially coaxed forth, via Beecham's rapport with his players and his painstaking, detailed turns of phrase.



SYMPHONY NO. 2: Johannes Brahms once compared this symphony to a stretch of grass, dotted with so many flowers that you could not avoid crushing a few underfoot as you walked by. It is intensely melodic, reeks of Spring, and in spots anticipates the fleet, gossamer textures of Mendelssohn. Kertesz's interpretation is a bit more vital than with the 1st symphony. And because Kertesz takes the rarely played first-movement repeat, we get to hear its brief-but-deft "first-ending" transition (we get to hear several of these, in this cycle). Still, this movement works better without the repeat. Kertesz does not quite equal the heady atmosphere and style of either the 1949 Munch / Boston (on an old RCA "EP" set) or the 1954 Beecham / RPO (on SONY).



SYMPHONY NO. 3 : This is smaller in time-scale and more polished and concise than the 2nd. Throughout the early symphonies, Kertesz tends to take the Menuettos so briskly that, in order to offer contrast in the Trio section of these movements, he is compelled to make "gear shifts" into slower tempi which sometimes work, sometimes do not. (In this symphony, they DO work.) The Finale is rather Rossinian, and invites felicious playing from the Vienna Philharmonic.



Beecham's RPO / EMI 3rd is, deservedly, a well-loved classic. But to my ears it almost smacks of "taffy-pulling" , i.e., making more of this exquisite, small-scale work than Schubert intended...My favorite 3rd remains Eduard van Beinum's 1955 Concertgebouw / Philips version. Even more exquisitely played than Beecham's, it may be to the Beecham what long-lingering lilac perfume is to the fleeting-but-powerful scent of a REAL clump of lilacs.



SYMPHONY NO. 4 : Kertesz broadens his overall approach to turn in a beautifully paced first movement, and he does nicely with the Finale and what William McKnaught described as the "country walk" of the second movement. (Its melody recalls the Andante movements of Haydn's "75th" and Mozart's "39th" - not to mention its constantly reoccuring phrase-tag of "...morte mi da" from DON GIOVANNI !) But Kertesz nearly falls off his horse in the Menuetto, which is taken at a Tally-Ho-The-Fox kind of clip - necessitating one of those Trio-section "gear shifts" into a slower tempo. To my ears this jarrs a bit, but some may like it. My favorite Schubert 4th remains the 1961 Maazel / Berlin (on DG ELOQUENCE.) There, the "country walk" really is just that; the Menuetto is a MENUETTO (not a Tarantella); and the outer movements, while kept reasonably taut, are given enough "tempo space" to beguile the listener with their lyricism. Van Beinum's 1952 Concergebouw version, IMHO, just misses first place due to its uncharacteristically stodgy, meat-and-potatoes third movement.



But getting back to Kertesz...From this point forward, we encounter nothing but treasures.



SYMPHONY NO. 5 : This is generally the most technically polished and popular of the early Schubert symphonies, and often described as "ineffibly Mozartean." True enough, but passages such as the Minuet's Trio are more "rustic" than "salon" - and , in fact most performances of the Schubert 5th tend to short-change the "rustic." (This is true even of Beecham's 1958-9 RPO version, less so of his 1937 LPO recording.) My preferred 5th is still Fritz Busch's Winterthur set (circa 1950, on an old MMS 10-inch LP); granted, there may be some moments of rough-and-tumble ensemble, but it captures the "rustic" better than any other. Even so, Kertesz acheives a superb balance between "salon" and "rustic" - thus out-performing both of Bohm's DG verions (Berlin & Vienna), with even better playing and sound.



SYMPHONY NO. 6 : It is usually assumed that not until the UNFINISHED does the "mature symphonic Schubert" show himself. AU CONTRAIRE: as I see it, the "mature symphonic Schubert" first raises his head in the outer movements of the 6th (and perhaps there is a premonition of this as early as the first movement of the 2nd). Things are expanding; this sexy, buxom "Fraulein" of a romantic symphony cannot quite fit comfortably into that Mozartean "corset." Still, this has not prevented even some great conductors from trying to squeeze Fraulein Sechste (Miss Sixth) into that corset. If you prefer this kind of approach, then Van Beinum's 1955 Concertgebouw (on Philips) may be the most successful 6th on record. Bohm makes a noble effort in the same direction, but it does not quite come off.



Beecham, in his 1944 LPO 6th (and less so in his slower and more langorous 1955 RPO remake), made as strong a case for this work as anyone did until Kertesz, who (IMHO) has given us the most successful hi-fi/stereo realization of this work. The music never "sags," and yet throughout, Fraulein Sechste is given enough "room" to shake out her tresses and radiate her rustic, slightly naughty charm.



The three overtures, scattered throughout this box, are also must-haves. In the early Overture to DES TEUFELS LUFTSCHLOSS (which falls merely two catalogue numbers ahead of SYMPHONY NO. 1), Kertesz "massages" the weak middle section such that it can at least bear the "company" of the stronger outer sections, and so we can enjoy the whole thing without reservation. Kertesz and the Viennese are astounding in the ITALIAN and FIERABRAS Overtures, the FIERBRAS, in particular, exuding a Furtwanglerian sense of awe and spaciousness.



The opening of the UNFINISHED is so softly played that it is nearly inaudible. But the INTENSITY is there, and from this point onward, we encounter perhaps the greatest stereo UNFINISHED ever recorded. Certainly this is the only UNFINISHED that made me (temporarily !) forget Van Beinum on the one hand, and Furtwangler on the other. The Vienna Philharmonic, in 1963, still retained that legendary burnished tone which one can hear in the Solti RING. (Beginning in the mid-60s, many of the older players who dated back to the pre-war days, began to retire, and their unique sound was soon gone forever. Certainly, it is less evident in the 1970-71 recordings of the early symphonies in this set.) Only Furtwangler, in his live 1952 Berlin UNFINISHED, "breathes" as naturally and deeply.



Finally, the "GREAT" : I am tempted to let this one-word caption stand for and by itself. (Why try to describe the ineffible?) Still, I will say that this ain't no "cooly-chiselled, classical" approach to the GREAT (as Philip Hart described Reiner's live GREAT). It is BIG, full-bodied and leisurely, but it never lacks underpinning rhythmic tension. This is all-important in the GREAT which, unlike Schubert's other symphonies, has no real points of "repose." Still, the sheer tonal beauty of the Viennese, especially in the second movement, almost conjures up an illusiuon of such "repose" while remaining IN TEMPO : amazing ! For once, Furtwangler has met his match. (BTW: contrary to popular opinion, I find Furtwangler's live Vienna Philharmonic GREAT of 1953 quite superior to the 1951 DG Berlin studio version.) Certainly I have heard no greater GREAT than this Kertesz (on disc, vinyl, tape, or cylindrical foil for that matter). Van Beinum's live 1950 Concertgebouw is closer to the "classicizing" approach, while remaining true to the spirit of this symphony. Szell took an even more "classical" take on the GREAT with his magnificent Cleveland Orchestra - adding an exciting (if rather nasty) "edge" to the proceedings. (Szell's theory was that Schumann, not Schubert, really invented the "romantic" symphony; I have always suspected that this compelled him to "classicize" the Schubert GREAT, after the fact.)



It would be a musical grace if Universal put out a 2-CD "Originals" set of Kertesz's Schubert, with the following (the timings WOULD fit):



DISC 1: the 5th & 6th, the FIERABRAS & ITALIAN Overtures

DISC 2: the UNFINISHED & GREAT.



These performances alone make this set indispensible."