Founding Editor Rob Barnett Editor in Chief
John Quinn Contributing Editor Ralph Moore Webmaster
David Barker Postmaster
Jonathan Woolf MusicWeb Founder Len Mullenger
CÚsar FRANCK (1822-1890)
Symphony in D minor (1886-1888) [35:06] Ernest CHAUSSON (1855-1899)
Symphony in B flat (1890) [33:05]
Suisse Romande Orchestra/Marek
rec. Dinemec Studio, Gland/Geneva, Switzerland, July 2006. SACD PENTATONE
CLASSICS PTC5186078 [68:25]
The Franck Symphony was one of my adolescent loves. I listened
to it over and again in the school music room. The performance
which fixed the work into my consciousness was contained in a
Readers’ Digest album and was conducted by Sir Adrian Boult.
As I grew up, if that’s what one really does, the work tended
to lose its freshness. But I also came to feel that none of the
performances I heard captured the same conviction and ardour
as that Boult performance, no longer accessible to me. They seemed
slow and heavy, Germanic and often lost their way amidst the
meandering structures. Or was I just seeing the past through
rose-tinted spectacles? I missed an RCA issue of the performance
on LP but picked it up many years later on Chesky. It was also
included in the Boult volume of “Great Conductors of the 20th Century” (7243
5 75459 2 1). Hearing it again rekindled my love of the symphony.
I have since read that as a young man Boult had heard Franck’s pupil PiernÚ conduct
the symphony and modelled his own reading on that performance, so his Franck
can claim authenticity no less than his Elgar. I know of two other conductors
who took a similarly virile, impassioned view: Toscanini and Mario Rossi. Toscanini
may have heard PiernÚ, too, but he was unlikely to model himself on anybody and
presumably worked out from the score that this was how it should go. I imagine
Rossi was well acquainted with Toscanini’s interpretation. I have also found
much to appreciate in Munch’s recording. This is a little broader and freer,
perhaps less structurally sound, but it also has much of his inimitable verve
and the unmistakably French sound of the Boston orchestra.
Having encountered Janowski previously only in a thoroughly German-sounding Brahms
cycle I feared something heavy and Teutonic. I got quite a surprise. After an
expectant, mobile opening the following tremolando string passages move forward
strongly, with flexible paragraph-shaping and an acute sense of orchestral colour.
In the Allegro sections Janowski is closer to Munch than Boult in his wider range
of tempi, yet his control of the structure is magnificent. No less than Boult,
he succeeds in making each climax more overwhelming than the last, rising to
a triumphant conclusion.
The Allegretto is again fairly mobile – not so much as to rob the famous cor
anglais melody of its grave charm, but enough to give a certain volatility to
the scherzo sections Franck has built into the movement. The Finale is a notable
success. Janowski is a shade broader than Boult and succeeds in welding the whole
into a developing argument. He never gets stuck, even when the second movement
melody is recalled. The moment where this theme comes back as a thumping climax
rung out on the trumpet has embarrassed some commentators. Boult is terrific
here; he takes it at face value, letting the trumpet play his heart out with
a rallentando at the end. Janowski skilfully integrates it into the general flow – an
original and effective solution. Incidentally, Janowski takes one second (!)
longer than Boult over the symphony, though in detail he is a little faster in
the first two movements and a little slower in the last. Munch takes slightly
longer over all three.
The Boult recording sounds extraordinarily well for 1959, but it is nearly
fifty years old and there is no doubt that the new SACD recording - which I heard
as a plain CD - has added depth, range and detail. Janowski also shares with
Munch a very French-sounding orchestra, with wonderful braying brass. The Suisse
Romande has had a number of conductors since Ansermet who were not exactly cultivators
of the French sound – Sawallisch for example – so it’s heartening to hear that
they can still produce these timbres when required.
I shall no more jettison Boult than I shall abandon hearth and home, but for
those who have no sentimental attachment to it, or who wish to have superb modern
sound, or who find it easier to relate to living artists, I’m delighted to be
able to recommend a version of this much maligned and often maltreated work that
matches the great versions of the past. It’ll be a toss-up whether I get out
this or Boult myself for future listening.
The Franck Symphony made an enormous impression on French musicians and spawned
a number of imitations, of which Chausson’s – of just two years later – is generally
considered the most important. Some have even rated it above the Franck, though
I find its themes lack the sheer “stickability” which Franck attained in every
one of his themes in his Symphony. In a sense more subtle, it is also more cluttered.
But this is not to deny that it can still offer both excitement and magic. Moreover,
Chausson is very much his own man. Though it’s a cyclical work in three movements,
like the Franck, it has none of the latter’s religious fervour, combining hedonism,
Hellenism and sultry decadence in fairly equal proportions. And, while many a
lesser work opens with a wonderful surge of inspiration that gradually peters
out, Chausson reserves his finest cards for the end. Janowski plays it with total
conviction, mixing the colours with a sure hand and never letting it get sticky.
I’m sorry I didn’t have the Ansermet versions of these works to hand, to compare
the orchestra then and now, but I think the great Swiss maestro would have been
proud of his old band.
from previous months Join the mailing list and receive a hyperlinked weekly update on the
discs reviewed. details We welcome feedback on our reviews. Please use the Bulletin
Please paste in the first line of your comments the URL of the review to
which you refer.