Classical Editor: Rob Barnett
 

Music Webmaster
Len Mullenger: Len@musicweb-international.com

A consideration of two versions of the Symphonic Dances

I discovered the Symphonic Dances quite by accident in 1980 when I ordered a double cassette from Decca (a Mahler symphony I think) and found the second cassette to be correctly labelled but actually containing an incorrect tape of the most wonderful unknown music. I soon decided it was Rachmaninov and found that the other side contained the Isle of the Dead so this had to be the then new Ashkenazy recording. I have treasured those performances ever since.

Rachmaninov refused to talk about death and yet his music discusses it all the time - even in the Symphonic Dances the Dies irae stalks abroad. This was Rachmaninov's final work and he referred to it as a 'final flicker'. It was 1940, France had fallen and the world outlook was bleak. Rachmaninov was recovering from a minor operation on a secluded estate on Long Island. Ormandy was able to visit him for a piano run-through of the new score - Fantastic Dances in three parts Noon, Twilight and Midnight. These titles were soon withdrawn and the work renamed Symphonic Dances (many regard it as his fourth symphony). Rachmaninov quipped that this title was chosen so that the public would not be confused into thinking he had created a Dance Suite for Jazz Band. However the movements are written as dances and Rachmaninov hoped Fokine would make a ballet out of them. Fokine had been impressed by an earlier run-through of sketches at the piano and made the suggestion to Rachmaninov that he should relax his self-imposed stranglehold of strict waltz rhythm. Dance rhythms, nevertheless, are central to this piece.

The orchestration was started in the October whilst Rachmaninov was actually on tour. Every spare minute had to be utilized as it had to be completed in the December for an early January première. At the final rehearsal Rachmaninov said to the orchestra "Years ago I composed for the great Chaliapin. Now he is dead and so I compose for a new kind of artist, the Philadelphia Orchestra" Ormandy gave the first performance in Philadelphia and then it moved to New York. As with the First Symphony, the critical reaction was harsh - one description was of a mere novelty and a rehash of old tricks. Rachmaninov wanted to record the work but difficulties were deliberately put in his way to prevent this. The first recording was eventually made by the Chicago Orchestra under Dr Frederick Stock - which Rachmaninov greatly resented. Symphonic Dances did not meet critical approval until performed by Mitropoulos and the New York Philharmonic in 1942 after which Rachmaninov was given a surprise 50th birthday party and received a present of a new piano from Steinway.

By now Rachmaninov was feeling ill and tired and had to abandon his 1943 tour. He was hospitalised and diagnosed with melanoma cancer. He died on March 28th 1943.

---

Being dances, these pieces are intensely rhythmical. The first dance opens with a soft ticking on the strings which you could tap out as follows:

| 1 2| rest |1 2|  ./.  |rest |3 4| |5 6| |7 8|   ./. |1 2| |3 4| |5 6| |7 8|  ./. etc.

The cor anglais overlies this with a three-note motif with the third long-held; a motif that is heard throughout the movement. The strings increase from pp to ff and the dance is stamped out in an irregular rhythm involving two then three then four notes in the bar - molto marcato (strong accentuation). There is an immediate difference here between Ashkenazy and Polyansky and their conducting styles happen to be mirrored by the recordings. Ashkenazy produces an exciting, driven performance which sounds as if it is twice as fast as Polyansky although it is actually only 10% faster. This is matched by a typical bright close-up sound by Decca which loses much of the Concertgebouw hall resonance. It is an exciting recording that has impressed me for years and everything seems crystal clear -- but is it? I have always favoured the Ashkenazy over all other recordings but Polyansky is the only conductor to make me listen to this work afresh. His recording from the Moscow Conservatoire has a warm natural acoustic and indeed yes I can hear more. His pace is steadier, which is surely how it would have been if danced, and this allows each player time to phrase their parts and make more impact. At 6 after [4] there is a piano entry that reinforces the basses and contrabassoon and underpins the trumpets. This is barely noticeable in the Concertgebouw recording but it comes out very clearly with Polyansky. After all this intense rhythmic activity the movement dissolves into a pastoral passage for oboes and clarinets and a marvellously slinky alto saxophone. Whilst far from inaudible in the Ashkenazy recording Polyansky's sax produces a more virtuoso performance - almost like listening to Jan Gabarek. It is points like this that enable one to hear a work as if with new ears.

I can sum up my first movement impressions by saying that Polyansky is more flexible in his approach to rhythm, supported in this by a virtuoso orchestra, and he allows his instrumentalists time to phrase and present a passage that may go for little or nothing with Ashkenazy. I have been very impressed, so can this now become my first recommendation? This flexibility is most obvious in the waltz of the second movement where Polyansky constantly varies the tempo introducing hesitations and slight accelerandi to produce the swaying ebbing and flowing of a real dance; Ashkenazy is more set on speed. Philip Taylor in the accompanying notes refers to this passage as valse triste - parts are reminiscent of the Sibelius - it is more valse and much more triste with Polyansky. Ashkenazy gains a whole two minutes on Polyansky in this movement, which is an incredible difference and yet, even so, I have never felt that Ashkenazy lacked anything when it came to expressiveness. I regret that Polyansky's much slower speed does becomes self-indulgent and he begins to lose its way. When my mind starts to wander something must be wrong. This is the critical movement to hear if you are wondering whether to purchase this performance. I can admire the way in which it is done without always approving of it.

Polyansky recovers in the third movement; midnight sounds and the orchestral sound flickers and then there is a wonderful energetic melody on the strings which Philip Taylor identifies as a Russian Orthodox chant. The quiet reflective section that follows again emphasises the different approach of the two conductors. With Ashkenazy it passes without incident; with Polyansky it is much slower, almost grinding to a halt but what a wonderful bass clarinet leading us to the allegro vivace. Polyansky brings out the supernatural in this work. It is in the climax itself that Polyansky's approach reaps dividends. With Ashkenazy the climax is almost perfunctory but Polyansky makes a majestic climax topped off through the taking of a little liberty with the tam-tam which is well and truly wound up with each stroke, culminating in a long held crash that only slowly dies away. Laisser vibrer indeed!

The Polyansky is faultless as a recording and make the Ashkenazy now sound a little brash but overall it is still the Ashkenazy performance I would want for repeated listening. On wide-range equipment here is a noticeable hum on the Decca recording at the very opening. Either it dissappears after that or I just get used to it. It has never marred my enjoyment of the disc. [I have been listening to the original full price recording and this may have been improved on remastering.] But there are further considerations. The Ashkenazy is now at mid-price and is coupled with a truly magnificent, compelling Isle of the Dead; unbeatable at any price. This make the Decca the must-have disc. Polyansky has the earlier cantata The Bells. My gripe with Chandos here is that they have presented the text in English, German and French and Russian cyrillic. This makes it quite impossible to follow and must have involved considerable expense in typesetting. The usual practice is to include a transliteration that can be followed alongside the english text.

Reviewer

Len Mullenger

Ashkenazy

Polyansky

Reviewer

Len Mullenger

Ashkenazy

Polyansky

Reviews from previous months