The trouble is that for years and years Rubbra was 
          notoriously the prime target of those "progressives" who sought 
          to dictate public taste with their simplistic formula "atonal is 
          good, serial is better, a dose of healthy fragmentation is better still". 
          With all the force that William Glock, the BBC and their fellow moral 
          (?)-crusaders brought to bear on the systematic elimination of tonal 
          old-fogies like Rubbra from our musical life (all right, don’t write 
          in about the black list that wasn’t, I know it didn’t exist in a pen-to-paper 
          sense, it didn’t need to), it was only natural that the legend got about 
          that there was a stack of sheer masterpieces, every one of them more 
          spiritually enriching than the next. So fiercely was this view held, 
          with a conviction normally reserved for those scientific laws which 
          make the world go round, that still today, when tonal music can be heard 
          and even written once more, no one wants to risk his neck by admitting 
          that Rubbra’s detractors had at least a point; namely that when not 
          at his best he could, in his very different way, be just as thick-textured 
          and obtuse as any Schönberg disciple. 
        
What doesn’t work in Rubbra can be seen once for all 
          in the first of his 8 Preludes for Piano, op. 131 (which he once played 
          himself for a BBC broadcast – does the tape still exist?). The opening 
          is spacious and attractive and promises great things. Then with inexorable 
          logic the contrapuntal lines wind upwards (the piece covers a mere page) 
          until they climax on a fierce dissonance, and Rubbra’s insistence on 
          one sort of logic seems to have led him to reject another which might 
          have revealed to him that he had by this time landed in a zone high 
          up on the piano keyboard where his climax chord sounds perfectly horrible 
          and does not make a satisfying climax at all. 
        
And so it is with "The Morning Watch", where 
          the grave orchestral opening pre-announces much spacious and noble development 
          to come. But then, as the counterpoint piles up and the choir is crowded 
          into action, everybody sounds to be bawling his own contrapuntal line 
          at the others, the recording seems on the point of overloading under 
          the weight of it all and the best the conductor can do to elucidate 
          it is to balance it as a sort of two-part invention for trumpet and 
          high strings, with all the rest left as an indeterminate mess. "Oh, 
          but the transcendental mysticism of it!" his admirers will say, 
          but the mystery to me is where the blame for the confusion lies. Is 
          the Brangwyn Hall too small to contain all the sound? Did the engineers 
          mix in too much ambience at the expense of clarity? Did Hickox not do 
          enough to sort out the balance problems? Did Rubbra himself pile it 
          on too thick? I suspect it’s a bit of all four, but regarding the latter, 
          remember how Stokowski gave the Fifth Symphony a few performances and 
          was accused of gilding the lily, so clear and transparent were the textures 
          (now, does a tape of that survive anywhere?), until the composer 
          said that finally he had heard the symphony as he had written it. Small 
          thanks to the Boults and Barbirollis who had done their best by him 
          over the years (and incidentally, the c.1950 Barbirolli Fifth is a model 
          of textural clarity compared with the present offering). 
        
Rubbra did clarify his orchestral textures with the 
          years and the opening of "Ode to the Queen" impresses by its 
          fine luminosity and transparency, as well as its vitality. The problem 
          is that vocal writing may not have been Rubbra’s strongest suit. In 
          "The Morning Watch" he pushed the voices up dangerously high, 
          and in this piece Susan Bickley copes – with impressive security and 
          clear diction, I should add – with a line which often seems more for 
          pure soprano than mezzo. It’s all in that semi-melodic declamatory style 
          which composers of the Britten generation could churn out by the furlong 
          (now come off it, Chris, you’re a paid-up British Music Society member, 
          they’ll be after your blood for this!) and which, when it wants to emphasise 
          a word – and it emphasises a good many – has the voice shoot up to a 
          sudden high note; see "perfect emblems" in no.1, "gladsome 
          welcome" in no. 3. Half the time, is there really any reason 
          why the voice should go up rather than down, down rather than up? I 
          did appreciate the imaginative atmosphere of no. 2 and the general lilt 
          of the last, though the end sounded unmotivated to me (Adrian Yardley, 
          in his notes, describes it more kindly as "surprising"). 
        
"A Tribute" has an opus number consecutive 
          to "The Morning Watch" and goes through the same motions on 
          a smaller scale – the notes are different but the music 
          is the same so did he really need to write it? Unkind phrases began 
          to turn in my head – "says in four-and-a-half minutes everything 
          he spent his life trying to say" was going to be the line – but 
          then came the "Sinfonia Concertante" (first on the disc, but 
          I heard it last). Yes, you get the usual slow, grave beginning, but 
          right from the start, with the piano’s rippling entry, somehow you know 
          the composer is fully engaged. When the Allegro comes there is an angry 
          power to it that is quite riveting and the movement succeeds in alternating 
          the two tempi with total mastery and conviction. The brief "Saltarella" 
          second movement is no mere folkloristic romp, it has a granitic strength, 
          and finest of all is the slow "Prelude and Fugue" finale, 
          written in memory of Rubbra’s teacher and friend Gustav Holst. On the 
          face of it, the prospect of a fugue by Rubbra is about as attractive 
          as that of one by Max Reger (but also in that case, expectations can 
          be belied by the results). But listen to how the moving Prelude halts 
          on a chord of C major and the Fugue theme rises from it on the cor anglais 
          – an unforgettable moment indeed, yet it is capped by the entry of the 
          piano which, after a lengthy orchestral working of the theme, comes 
          in as if it had nothing to do with it, and yet you are immediately convinced 
          that it had to enter this way. 
        
A concertante work with a slow, quiet ending is unlikely 
          ever to become popular, yet this surely ranks high among 20th 
          Century works for piano and orchestra, of whatever nationality. Shelley 
          and Hickox plainly believe in it and their performance is totally convincing. 
          So the disc is an essential purchase, no matter what I’ve said about 
          the other works. 
        
Let’s be clear, then: Rubbra was shamefully 
          treated, he did write a number of masterpieces, but he didn’t 
          only write masterpieces (what composer did?) and, now that we 
          can actually hear a certain quantity of his music, we have to decide 
          which are the works we really want to keep with us. If you don’t 
          know the symphonies yet, start there, but the "Sinfonia Concertante" 
          is another must. 
        
 
          Christopher Howell