the Ashkenazy came out quite well, if not a top choice, and we were completely divided on the Svetlanov, which I loathed, calling it "a coarse, clumsy, elephantine reading lasting a draggy 24:20, wholly lacking in momentum and poorly played"! So de gustibus strikes again; at least we agree about Wilson's Rach 3.
I can't endorse Ralph's enthusiasm for the Isle of the Dead - the performance is very poor to my ears. The one thing this piece absolutely needs is sonority and it doesn't get it in this performance. Listen to Svetlanov/BBC or Ashkenazy/Concertgebouw to hear what's missing in Wilson. On the other hand, the Rachmaninoff Nr.3, with which it is coupled, is simply sensational.
His Korngold disc was outstanding - but it needs a virtuoso orchestra to play film music, especially Korngold's. (Players in the BPO said playing John Williams, for example, was harder than almost anything else that they had been asked to play.) Their Respighi disc was good too.
I wonder though if the Sinfonia of London is a bit like the original Philharmonia Orchestra from the 1950s - an orchestra of virtuosos where perfect recordings are the aim and that is often at the expense of recordings with some humanity to them. As a project it's not a bad idea - but Wilson and his orchestra haven't yet given us a recording equal to Karajan/Philharmonia and Frank Bridge Variations, or the Sibelius Nr.4.
Until late last year I had not had the opportunity to hear any John Wilson/Sinfonia of London recordings. Then a very generous son sent me 6 for Christmas. Since then my responses have gone from ”excellent” to “good in parts”. This set me wondering why such a change; I came to the conclusion that my first thoughts were clouded by the excellence of the Chandos recordings and the brilliance of Wilson’s orchestra.
As examples – the much lauded Pines of Rome is indeed good but surely, as a performance, nowhere near Reiner; just listen to Reiner’s build up in the final section and then compare with Wilson. Similarly on the ”Escales” disc – sounding brilliant – the Ravel is really rather poor when compared to another recent release by Trevino. Wilson has perfect playing but absolutely no atmosphere.
Finally, at the risk if heresy, the latest string music cd was also, a rather lesser, disappointment. In particular the Elgar which, from the stand-point of Barbirolli, lacks passion and “sweep” and often stutters along and all sounds a bit dis-jointed. The VW is better but again, to me, lacks the passion – that Silvestri and Barbirolli my markers here, bring to it.
I could go on and bore you but you get the point I hope! As I say, I seem to be a minority of one; are critical ears being deceived by the excellence of the playing and recording? Or do I need to seek advice from an audiologist?
OK, this is controversial, and no doubt will get a strong MWI response!
Message Thread | This response ↓
« Back to index | View thread »
Thank you for taking part in the MusicWeb International Forum.
Len Mullenger - Founder of MusicWeb