Phonograph Monthly Review, Vol. 3, No. 1 (1928-10)

October, 1928 The Phonograph Monthly Review 7 Passing over the Germans, to whom Franck’s aesthetic philosophy is entirely alien, we might pick out Beecham as first choice, with perhaps Goossens and Gabrilowitch following. I wonder what Mengelberg does with this work. I have never heard him play it and I should hesitate to guess whether his version was superb or hope- lessly inferior: it would surely be no merely indifferent one! Stock should do it well, Sokoloff even better, I think—at least if he mustered up energy to drive his men and himself. He is capa- ble of conceiving an ideal interpretation, but I doubt if he could execute it with sufficient force- fulness. Yet there are some passages he would unquestionably do superbly. Sokoloff possesses qualities of tenderness and emotional insight that are very moving. His version of Schubert’s “Un- finished” is a revelation: it is sensitive, warmly colored, and yet alive with a pulsating vitality that all the sonorous splendors of Stokowski’s recording can never simulate. If not Franck’s Symphony, Sokoloff would certainly give us im- pressive performances of some of the composer’s lesser works. The Psyche music and Les Eolides have never been recorded, and Le Chasseur Mau- dit only acoustically and probably none too com- petently. I can imagine with delight the beauties of a Sokoloff performance of the organ Chorale in B minor as arranged so superbly by Wallace Goodrich for organ and orchestra and given by various eastern orchestras with Dupre as soloist. Turning from Franck back to Rimsky-Korsa- kow, it is evident that while Stokowski’s version is unsurpassable as a musical exposition of Scheherazade there is no reason why some en- terprising company should not take advantage of the opportunity offered and issue a version that will be frankly and completely the usual drama- tic “programatic” reading so successful in the concert hall. On records it should be no less sure of bowling its hearers over. Goossens’ cut version for H. M. V. is in essence of this type, but its se- vere abbreviation and the none too startling pow- ers of the Covent Garden Orchestra rule it out. Koussevitsky’s performance, which New York no less than Boston exulted in, would be the ideal one, but as yet Koussevitzky is not on records. Klenau has been suggested by various record connoisseurs, and given a good orchestra and flawless recording he should do well, but Gaubert, it seems to me, has demonstrated his abilities with similar types of music sufficiently to ensure a performance that would have all the desirable brilliancy, dramatic force, and flamboyant color- ing. Hamilton Harty might be considered, but I am afraid that he might be tempted by the poetic qualities of the work to emulate Stokowski in putting the music before the story. Blech and Coates would be first-rate choices, but they both are on the Victor side of the fence. More Recorded Symphonies The comparative success of various recorded versions of three well-known symphonies have been discussed in this and previous instalments of this series. Tchaikowsky’s Fifth, Dvorak’s “From the New World,” and Franck’s D minor have been the object of our study from the point of view of their recorded “personality”—the personality of the conductor as a medium of expression for the characteristic and authentic qualities of the composer’s genius and the particular composi- tion’s essential values. As the Editor stated in his General Review last month, the Studio Li- brary contains electrical recordings of thirty-one symphonies, most of them in more than one version. The practical comparative merits of the various sets are more or less familiar to most readers of this magazine, but it may be profitable to run through the list once more, ignoring for the moment the purely technical questions that must figure so predominatingly in a review (where in- formation on the effectiveness of the actual re- cording is the first thing sought by the prospec- tive record buyer), and concentrating upon the worth of the musical performance and the suita- bility of the choice of conductor. Where there is but one recorded version of a symphony we must ask ourselves if it is adequately expressive of the composition, and if not, what conductor or type of conductor would be most likely to supply a satisfactory interpretation. If the sole version is adequate, we can still ask whether there is not a need for another type of interpretation stressing a side of the composition sharply dif- fering from that of the recorded performance, and yet a side which is no less characteristic of the composer and of the work. If there is more than one recording of a symphony it is necessary to determine which conductor comes closest to the “ideal” reading, or whether two or more can be declared equally successful. Of the nine Beethoven symphonies, Beecham’s Second, Harty’s Fourth, and Weingartner’s “Pas- toral” are virtually unrivalled. It is difficult to conceive more praiseworthy or characteristic Beethoven performances than these, each in its own way—that is, the way of the natures of the composition and the conductor, ideally matched in each of these three instances. Beecham brings out all the rough, “unbuttoned,” exuberance of the Second, yet never descends to uncouthness; Harty loses nothing of the resilient grace and lightly poised vitality of the Fourth; Weingartner reaches the pinnacle of his recording career in the “Pastoral": one seldom has the pleasure of hearing it played so well and sounding so well in concert. The First is electrically recorded by Sir Georg Henschel and while one can sympathize with the Columbia Company’s happy thought of giving this doughty and ageless veteran the op- portunity of recording a typical Beethoven per- formance of the “old school,” his version (to modern ears, accustomed to a less complacent way with even the Master’s lesser works) is of greater historical than artistic significance. Which is the kindest way of saying that his read- ing is very dull indeed. Dr. Weissmann in the acoustical Odeon version was able to find the right balance between animation and formality which the work demands; his electrical recording of the disputed “Jener" Symphony is further proof of his signal superiority with early Beetho-