The decline in the classical music industry over 
                the past few years has been marked by the termination of contracts 
                and the aborting of recording projects with many staff being made 
                redundant. What cannot be done away with is the recorded archive. 
                However, if its retail value is to be realized, then market awareness 
                should be present and functioning in the staff that remain. If 
                the inadequate presentation of the sixteen operas in this latest 
                release from the Sony archive is any indication, there must be 
                real doubt about whether there is anybody left in that company 
                with a vestige of marketing expertise. The leaflet introduction, 
                in German and English, devotes a mere seven lines to the plot 
                and without any track indications either. There follows a track 
                listing with the opening phrases in the normal way, but without 
                any indication as to which character or characters are singing. 
                It is possible to get away with this with the likes of ‘Madama 
                Butterfly’ (reviewed elsewhere on this site), which is so well 
                known, but not so for lesser-known works such as this Gluck opera, 
                or the majority of these issues, which don’t even give the vocal 
                registers of the singers. I write the foregoing as much in frustration 
                as anger that such a presentation will limit the commercial appeal 
                of these discs which some accountant will then decide to have 
                deleted from the catalogue, consigned to slumber in the archives. 
                Whilst few of these issues might be first choice, they are all 
                worthy to be present in the catalogue. 
              
 
              
This 1992 recording, with the full ‘La Scala’ 
                forces, came into direct competition with John Eliot Gardiner’s 
                1986 Philips recording and without displacing it from critical 
                affection. In attempting to master the fiendish acoustics of ‘La 
                Scala’ the engineers set the solo voices very close with the orchestra 
                and chorus set further back in the sound perspective. This has 
                the disadvantage of accentuating the vibrato in Carol Vaness’s 
                voice. Hers is a big toned dramatic interpretation, perhaps lacking 
                something of the ethereal quality that the part needs and gets 
                on later more scholarly interpretations. However, whilst I do 
                like her fuller tone, and her ‘Ô malheureuse’ (CD1 tr. 30) 
                is formidable, by scene 3 of the last act (CD2 trs. 21-23) I found 
                her vibrato more intrusive and the forward recording of the voices 
                distinctly tiring. As Pylade, Gösta Windbergh is open-toned, 
                elegant and sensitive in his phrasing (CD 1 tr. 2). I could sense 
                from this recording the Wagner roles to come before his premature 
                death. Windbergh’s sensitivity is to be preferred to some of the 
                big voiced Italian tenors who have recorded the role. 
              
 
              
Thomas Allen repeats the characterful Orestes 
                he recorded for Gardiner. His burnished tone and vocal manners 
                make him ideal in this repertoire. The Thoas of Giorgio Surian 
                is woolly of tone but the part is small. The minor parts are adequately 
                sung by the theatre comprimarios. Any ‘La Scala’ performance will 
                revolve around the work of the chorus and the conductor’s interpretation. 
                In Gluck’s reform operas the chorus is a vital component and here 
                the Scala forces are vibrant and well articulated, especially 
                welcome when they are set back in the aural perspective. Muti’s 
                interpretation is hard driven and furious at times, but that is 
                valid and better than the nondescript placidity that is the downside 
                of some later, supposedly more scholarly, interpretations. 
              
 
              
This recording deserves its place in the catalogue. 
                Pity about the presentation though. 
              
Robert J Farr