Phonograph Monthly Review, Vol. 3, No. 3 (1928-12)

80 The Phonograph Monthly Review December, 1928 is futile as far as recording is concerned, as un- der the terms of the contest, the recording rights are exclusively Columbia’s. Stokowski has been praised for his performance of Atterberg’s Sec- ond and Fourth symphonies; Schneevoight should do them well also, but even the interest generated by the present work is not hardly likely to lead to the recording of some of the others. And yet, stranger things have happened in the phono- graphic world. It is not insignificant that the three works by contemporary composers are all recorded in versions with which one can find little quarrel, whereas with many of the older works in the recorded repertory it is far from difficult to point out many instances where the conductor was un- wisely selected. It might be claimed that the more modern works are less familiar to us, and that consequently we are less discriminative in our judgment of the performances than in the case of the classics. There is an element of truth in this, and also in the fact that the interpre- tations of contemporary works are seldom “fixed,” that is, they have not yet developed an established tradition. Consequently, the first reading we hear that is competent and of positive interpre- tative qualities is likely to impress us as the ideal one. However, to my mind, the real secret of the success of the recordings of the three sym- phonies mentioned (and also of the more numer- ous recorded modern works in other forms) is to be attributed to the manufacturers’ choice of ap- propriate conductors. Any recording conductor is liable to be entrusted, or saddled, with works in the established repertory, but modern com- positions are almost invariably given only to those conductors who have either a special aptitude for such music, or who are especially distinguished for their performance of a particu- lar work. (An apt example of this latter type is Sokoloff, noted for his performance of the Rachmaninoff symphony, and also for his per- formance of the Symphony in E flat by Arnold Bax, as yet unrecorded). (To be continued) What Music Means to Me By HAROLD W. REHRIG (Member Philadelphia Symphony Orchestra) The Art of music has been the subject of much con- versation and many classes of people have written about it. Although it is the youngest of aU the arts, it has a considerably large amount of good and worthwhile litera- ture to it’s credit already. Music does not mean popular “jazz” to me! It means the works of the inspired masters such as Bach, Mozart, Hay- dn, Beethoven, Schubert, Franck, Debussy, Tchaikowsky, Wagner, etc. I believe it is the most direct demonstration of that peculiar hidden force underlying all the myriad mani- festations of form and known as spirituality to a great number of thinkers. I’m sure you can agree with me on this point from many of your own experiences on hearing “inspired” music. Music cannot be touched and handled as we can an object of art or a picture. We cannot see music. True we can read music with our organs of sight but I mean we cannot grasp the spirit of music through a reading of it. This leaves us only the sense of hearing. Music affects the soul of us—really, that spiritual part of us that knows and perceives from an inner source. For instance, do we not often come across such musical ex- pressions as “Food for the Soul”, “language of heaven”, “language of emotions”, “Where words fail, Music begins”, and “Music is the lament of the soul,” or, “A prayer to the Gods.” The painter or the sculptor have their images and models before them. When they do not have them to go by they must rely solely on pictures which have formed in their minds from impressions of things made thereon at some time or another or immediately at the time of painting or modeling. In other words, the artist or the scuptor must rely on his own past experiences or on the history of Art to furnish him with ideas, etc. in order that he may bring forth these thoughts and put them in outline, form or color. With the musician it is very different. Music comes as a direct inspiration to him and he must re-create it or may- be a better word would be “materialize” it. That is, he must re-create it—bring it into form as it were, each time it is to be heard. When a picture is painted it is finished for all time. We can look gt a masterpiece a hundred different times and the painting will always remain the same but hearing a musical masterpiece many times often changes its spiritual content to a great extent. When we stop to think of the wonderful works created by Beethoven during his last years on earth, stone deaf, we must admit that there is something in music that escapes a great many people. The masters of the past and the masters of the present are men who have extraordinary musical genius. They were in a receptive state to absorb the divine inspirations. I have often been asked why there are so few great com- posers since 1900. One reason is that the world today is more material-minded than it has been for ages. When we compare how people lived in the nineteenth century and prior to this time, to the way they live at present, it is not surprising that we have so few really “great” composers today. Music needs the “spiritual” man to create it and under- stand it. People today are not as spiritual as our fore- fathers have been. The world in its present state is pro- bably at the heighth of Materialism but there is also a gradual tendency towards developing those higher forces in Man. We cannot be bound by the future. We have already in our midst such eminent and worthy composers as— Richard Strauss, Hindemith, Resphigi, De Falla, Ravel, Dukas, Strawinsky and so on. Their music will live on and on. Now we have the other extreme. Many people want to hear nothing but “modern” music. I have actually seen them walk out of the auditorium before playing a Brahms symphony, after hearing a modern number. I can’t help but have a feeling of pity for those who must do this. They cannot possibly understand the great music of the past. A Brahm’s symphony brings as much inspiration and arouses many deep emotions in me as attending an inspiring church service. There is a sacredness about a Brahms’ symphony that penetrates to one’s innermost being, and this feeling