Phonograph Monthly Review, Vol. 1, No. 6 (1927-03)

260 The Phonograph Monthly Review *81 1 — - follow all the monthly supplements, but I saw no mention of these works. Similarly, Rimsky-Korsakow’s Spanish Caprice, reviewed last month in The Phonograph Month- ly Review, caught my attention, but my dealer was unable to give me any information about it. Some time after my first inquiry he discovered the work which was not listed in the regular supplements. I like to get the best things, but how is one to know when they are issued? L. R. Philadelphia, Penna. Editor’s Note: Many other people have written in or spoken personally about this difficulty. It is indeed a pity that when fine recordings are issued, enthusiasts should not have knowledge of the fact. Dealers are supplied ivitli all supplements, regular and special, and should ( theoretically) know about every record issued by their company. Unfor- tunately, as most dealers are not interested in symphonies, etc., they pay no attention to notices of such works and consequently are unable to give any information to their customers, who often have experiences similar to that de- scribed by Mr. Bucholz in his letter to these tmges in the February issue. All recordings, however, come to the Studio for review and ice may be depended upon to call them to the attention of those interested. But it hardly seems fair for either manufacturer or dealer to complain that the highest type of music “won’t sell,” unless they give it a chance. No type of mus*c will sell unless the public is given opportunity to know that it is on the market. The veteran enthusiast takes pleasure in ferreting out little-known works and be- comes expert by virtue of long practice, but the less experi- enced are totally at a loss. It would be an interesting ex- periment for some company to advertise its “classical” records entirely one month instead of its “popular” ones. The word “popular” might soon have to be applied to the symphonies! Great progress has been made in this direc- tion, however, and one of the best examples is the adver- tisements of the leading recording companies in symphony orchestra and soloists’ program books. Editor, Phonograph Monthly Review : I have just read Captain Barnett’s “British Chatter” and found it very interesting. Perhaps be or The Editor will give some of us a little help on how to take care of ma- chines and records. I seem to have been very unlucky with breakdowns, records getting all worn out, etc. You have printed some letters about cataloguing records, but they seem to be all for very large collections. How should a man with just a small library do? Also I have been told that with the new machines and records it is very im- portant just where you place the phonograph in the room and that the size and shape of the room counts for a lot. This sounds reasonable, but how is some one with no musi- cal training to know how to place the machine? I am beginning to think that there is a lot more to the phonograph than just winding it up and putting on a rec- ord. I’d like to know even the most efficient way of doing those two things! D. PI. Cohn. Brooklyn, N. Y. Editor, Phonograph Monthly Review : Although unable to attend symphony concerts or hear the leading quartets and soloists in recital, I have gathered a large library of symphonic and chamber music and made myself fairly well conversant with the standard musical masterpieces. However, I have stuck pretty close to the “Old Masters” and have heard little or no contemporary music by the so-called radicals and modernists. Schelling’s Victor Ball and Holst’s The Planets, the only two such works I do own, tempt me to write asking for the names of a few modern works which I should do well to know. L. B. van G. Lincoln, Nebraska. Editor’s Note : We should recommend the following works (to be taken in not too large doses!) The Fire- Bird Suite, Strawinski ( Victor, Polydor) ; Little Suite. De- bussy ( Columbia , H. M. V., etc.); Vaughn-Williams’ “Lon- don Symphony” (Eng. Columbia); Fireworks. Strawinski (Victor) : Petrouchka, Strawinski (Victor) ; Dance Rhap- sody, Delius (Columbia) ; Minstrels , Debussy (Brunswick , Victor); Harp Sextet. Ravel (Columbia); String Quartet and Quintet for Wind Instruments. Hindemith (Polydor); ?!5V Concertino, Straivinski (Polydor) ; Ragtime (Piano — H. M, V.); The Birthday of the Infanta and Excerpts from Der Schatzgraber, Schreker (Polydor); Resurrection Symphony, Mahler (Polydor); Adagietto from Fifth Symphony, Mahler (Eng. Columbia) ; Poem of Ecstacy, Scriabin (Columbia); Brigg Fair, Delius (H. M. V.) ; Goossens’ Tam O’Shunter (H. M. V.); Excepts from Pelleas and Melisande, Debussy (French H. M. V.). The list may be considerably extended. Editor, Phonograph Monthly Review : Since no one has written to you taking a stronger stand in favor of the creative artist (in the discussion started by the letter on the subject of the creative vs. the interpreta- tive artist in the General Review for January), I feel I must do so. This is a subject that is eternally misunder- stood. Season after season, conductors, pianists, violinists, and above all, singers, take every imaginable liberty with the compositions of the great masters of music, liberties which must make the composers turn in their graves, and hardly a single voice is raised in protest. Read the autobiographies and letters of the great com- posers; they are almost one continuous complaint against the conductors and soloists of the day. Living, the com- posers had some chance to achieve adequate performances (at least they could — and often did — denounce certain per- formances as incorrect and unauthentic), but once dead, every virtuoso interpretative musician can have his own obstinate way, even although it be absolutely contrary to the expressed wishes of the composer. Read in Rimsky- Korsakow’s ‘“My Musical Life” what he thought of the way his operas were staged during his lifetime. (After his death, his wife vainly protested against the making of .“Scheherazade” inter a ballet.) Or read in Berlioz’s Auto- biography what he thought of contemporary performances of his works. Schumann’s letters and critical writings bear out the same story. I am unashamedly a purist in music — and all art. To me, the man who conceived and developed a great work of art, working over it for years oftentimes, is the man who should have the final word as to its so-called inter- pretation. This word is the source of all the trouble, for instead of “reading” a work, performing it as written and as the composer indicated, conductors, etc., hoist the ban- ner of “interpretation” and under its cover proceed to do exactly as they please. Inflation, distortion, exaggeration — nothing is too extreme for them. And the audiences fairly swoon at their feet and hail them as “inspired inter- preters” ! What the composer would say should he hear his piece desecrated in this way can be left to tbe imagina- tion. Read the composers’ own words, I repeat, and compare authentic performances with Virtuoso ones, and judge for yourself. Hear, for example, a Scarlatti or Mozart piece thundered out on a modern grand piano, and then hear it played on the instrument for which it was intended. If the people want exaggeration and “drama,” give it to them, but have the conductors state on the programs: Beethoven Symphony, my version. Or better still, leave poor Beet- hoven’s name off the program entirely; he probably would prefer it so! O. F. H. Albany, N. Y. Editor, Phonograph Monthly Review : May I ally myself with those who approve of conductors infusing new life into old compositions by taking advantage of modern developments. I don’t care anything about tradi- tion, custom, and sanctioned readings, for I have seen an audience doze in boredom before an “authentic” reading of a great work and only appreciate it. when it was given with dramatic fire and life — let the pedants protest as they may. Suppose Beethoven’s Fifth was always played exactly in the approved manner — how many times would one want to hear it? But when Ronald plays it one way, Ivoussevitzky another, Furtwaengler, Weissmann, etc., others, the work is always fresh and new. Wagner’s operas would be fossils today if the Bayreuth tradition could have had its way. The so-called liberties that the conductors take are exactly what liberate the works from the shackles of custom that are sure to enchain them. No, I say, let Stokowski play a Strauss waltz for an orchestra of a hundred and fifty with a brass band and