CELEBRATING 53,000 Classical CD reviews on-line (Sept 2016); 21,000 page views each day. Return to MusicWeb International
Vashegyi's Rameau Castor et Pollux
Posted by Evan Blackmore on October 24, 2025, 10:41 pm
Thanks to Ralph Moore for his helpful review of this recording. Does anyone have any idea how it compares to the two earlier recordings of the same 1737 form of the work (Harnoncourt 1972 and Christie 1992)? Would someone who has those gain anything significant by buying this one?
Thanks, Evan; I did not have access to those earlier recordings and to be honest reviewing this latest was something of a venture into largely unknown territory for me. However, there are some previous comments and reviews on MWI. Kirk McElhearn says in 2015 "Nicolas Harnoncourt has the oldest recording here, the 1972 Castor et Pollux, whose sound is very thin and lacking depth; some of the singers are totally wrong for this kind of music." Jonathan Woolf warmly reviews a Naxos issue here: https://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2004/mar04/Rameau_Castor.htm
I have not been able to find a review of the Christie recording on MWI - but it features some singers not at all to my taste....
Previous Message
Thanks to Ralph Moore for his helpful review of this recording. Does anyone have any idea how it compares to the two earlier recordings of the same 1737 form of the work (Harnoncourt 1972 and Christie 1992)? Would someone who has those gain anything significant by buying this one?
Thank you so much for your prompt and thorough response, Ralph. And I must say I've much enjoyed your forays into this area, precisely because they come from a different perspective. I recall that a recent compilation Rameau disc was reviewed on MWI by both yourself and Johan van Veen, and to my delight I found that both reviews gave a very precise and informative sense of the character of the recording, even though their conclusions were very different. To have either one of those reviews on its own would have been quite adequate; to have both was a rare luxury!
In this case, I wasn't so much wishing to learn the characteristics of the earlier recordings (since I already own them) as to find out how the new one compares with them. I fully agree that both of them are unevenly cast, but I wonder how far the new one differs in that respect. Of course one needs a very different level of tolerance in Rameau than in 19th century opera!
I'm also a bit wary because, in Vashegyi's earlier recordings, I've tended to find his conducting a bit too wooden for my tastes--perhaps because he "aims to represent the ultimate in authentic period practice," something that neither Harnoncourt nor Christie attempted (indeed, H repeatedly scoffed at the idea that such a thing was either possible or desirable). There could have been no modern-style conductors in Rameau's day.
The Naxos recording isn't of the 1737 Castor but of the substantially different 1754 score. For my own private use, I've made a very rough mud map to distinguish the recordings of the different versions of the Rameau operas, and perhaps some other people might also find it helpful. The list contains only commercially released audio recordings, and only of the operas that exist in multiple substantially different forms:
Great stuff, Evan - you should clearly be reviewing for us. Your observation regarding Vashegyi's conducting might explain why despite my admiration for that recording it did not consistently hold my attention - but I am a novice in that field. I was aware that there are distinct versions of the opera but your list makes a handy reference.
Previous Message
Thank you so much for your prompt and thorough response, Ralph. And I must say I've much enjoyed your forays into this area, precisely because they come from a different perspective. I recall that a recent compilation Rameau disc was reviewed on MWI by both yourself and Johan van Veen, and to my delight I found that both reviews gave a very precise and informative sense of the character of the recording, even though their conclusions were very different. To have either one of those reviews on its own would have been quite adequate; to have both was a rare luxury!
In this case, I wasn't so much wishing to learn the characteristics of the earlier recordings (since I already own them) as to find out how the new one compares with them. I fully agree that both of them are unevenly cast, but I wonder how far the new one differs in that respect. Of course one needs a very different level of tolerance in Rameau than in 19th century opera!
I'm also a bit wary because, in Vashegyi's earlier recordings, I've tended to find his conducting a bit too wooden for my tastes--perhaps because he "aims to represent the ultimate in authentic period practice," something that neither Harnoncourt nor Christie attempted (indeed, H repeatedly scoffed at the idea that such a thing was either possible or desirable). There could have been no modern-style conductors in Rameau's day.
The Naxos recording isn't of the 1737 Castor but of the substantially different 1754 score. For my own private use, I've made a very rough mud map to distinguish the recordings of the different versions of the Rameau operas, and perhaps some other people might also find it helpful. The list contains only commercially released audio recordings, and only of the operas that exist in multiple substantially different forms:
Evan, if you can accept DVD/Blu-Ray versions, Pichon (2020) uses the 1757 version of Hippolyte. There is also a Rattle performance from Berlin (2018), which I have neither seen nor heard; it may use a mixed version.
As for Castor, I own the Christie recording and have streamed excerpts of the recent Vashemyi; I have never heard the Harnoncourt recording. For what it is worth, I find Christie's conducting superior to Vashegyi's, who seems to be a man in a hurry. Christie's more measured tempi add clarity and pathos, at least for my taste. Nor do I find that Vashegyi compensates by offering more excitement. To my ears, Christie's soloists and choir also have the edge over Vashegyi's. Neither Castor is ideal, but I prefer Crook for Christie to Van Mechelen for Vashegyi. Gens' Phébé for Vashegyi is bettered by her younger self for Christie, and Christie's Télaïre sounds more idiomatic that Vashegyi's. The minor roles are also more consistently cast in the earlier recording.
Vashegyi attempts to follow the conventions of Rameau's day closely and uses the most recent edition. I have no doubt that research on these matters has made progress since Christie's recording in the early 1990s; Vashegyi's choices may be "more authentic" (I am not a musicologist specializing in Baroque opera and have no way of knowing), but I still prefer the earlier recording.
I must confess that I'm particularly sceptical about claims of "authenticity" in the performance of Rameau.
Rameau's writings on music theory give a very vivid impression of his personality. Plainly he was an extremely strong-minded, independent-minded spirit who was happy to go his own way even if no one, at the time, seemed to be following him.
He rejected many of "the conventions of his day" in matters of music theory, so it isn't probable that he would have accepted them wholesale in matters of music performance. Therefore, it seems to me that Rameau recordings can be "authentic" in regard only to those very few points of performance practice about which we have his own personal statements.
I strongly suspect he would have said that the art of conducting and singing his operas is still in its earliest infancy. And as for the art of staging them...!
Previous Message