...from Brilliant Classics:
http://www.jpc.de/jpcng/classic/detail/-/art/Complete-Music-For-Violin-And-Piano/hnum/3790049 (http://www.jpc.de/jpcng/classic/detail/-/art/Complete-Music-For-Violin-And-Piano/hnum/3790049)
What pieces does this contain? I can't imagine Rubinstein at his most verbose filling 3 cds with 3 violin sonatas. And there are only a few other violin and pf pieces in his oeuvre.
Violin Sonata No. 1 in G, op 13 (34 minutes)
Violin Sonata No. 2 in a minor, op 19
Violin Sonata No. 3 in b minor, op 98
3 pieces for vn, pf, op 11a
Grand duo on motifs from Meyerbeer (1849)
well, also a Romance arranged from the Soirées Op.44 and it seems independently played,
the 12 Russian folksongs Op.78 I gather are also for violin and piano
and I'm guessing that the violin concerto and perhaps cello sonatas may exist in arrangements that may end up being included (who knows...- bit of a waste)- and there's always the possibility of some not yet published mss. (maybe mentioned in books on Rubinstein- haven't checked).
More details here:
http://www.brilliantclassics.com/release.aspx?id=FM00085627 (http://www.brilliantclassics.com/release.aspx?id=FM00085627)
Download here:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Rubinstein-Daniela-Cammarano-Alessandro-Deljavan/dp/B00GZBGKN4/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1386004804&sr=8-1&keywords=rubinstein+cammarano (http://www.amazon.co.uk/Rubinstein-Daniela-Cammarano-Alessandro-Deljavan/dp/B00GZBGKN4/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1386004804&sr=8-1&keywords=rubinstein+cammarano)
Thanks, Alan.
...but unfortunately not available until 17 January.
Quite so. But the audio excerpts are enticing, I think...
Well, the audio excerpts are actually more enticing than the experience of listening to the pieces as a whole. This is Rubinstein - unfortunately - at his most undisciplined. For example, Sonata No.3 runs to over 54 minutes - and it simply collapses under the weight of its own pretensions. As always with this composer there are many incidental felicities, but one just has little sense of any overall design - it seems like a series of very looooong episodes.
Give me Raff any day in this type of repertoire. Or Draeseke. Or Gernsheim. Or just about anyone who can discipline him/herself properly. A violin sonata of this length requires a genius. Rubinstein was a long way from that, sadly. A very long way.
Avoid this set unless you have extraordinary patience. Any redeeming features? Cheapness. And it's pretty well performed. But this music assuredly belongs in the category of 'deservedly unsung'.
It is such a pity that Rubinstein so often outstays his welcome. As you say, Alan, there are frequent felicities and a few gorgeous moments in many (if not most) of his works but he just doesn't have the discipline to know when to stop. "Less is more" would have been a good maxim for Anton to have embraced.
Alan, do your homework! Imagine if we judged Raff''s Piano Quintet based on the sleepy MDG recording alone.
So far, three pairs of musicians have recorded all three of Ruby's violin sonatas: Robert Murray and Daniel Graham for MHS, Carlo Lazari and Stefano Gibellato for Nuova Era/Tizano, and now Daniela Cammarano and Alessandro Deljavan for Brilliant. I'm not a believer in stop-watch criticism -- in fact, I loathe it -- but a little use of the stop-watch will tell us wonders here.
Murray & Graham Lazari & Gibellato Cammarano & Deljavan
Sonata 1
7:51 10:26 14:33
8:12 9:01 13:12
4:37 6:32 7:12
7:54 9:38 11:09
Total: 28:34 35:37 46:06
-----
Sonata 2
9:02 12:28 12:44
4:48 5:58 7:00
8:49 10:16 14:12
7:58 9:48 11:50
Total: 30:46 33:27 45:46
-----
Sonata 3
13:01 19:50 20:08
5:13 7:00 8:29
8:35 9:29 12:35
8:52 9:50 13:10
Total 35:41 46:09 54:22
-----
It takes Cammarano & Deljavan more than 17 minutes longer than Murray & Graham to get through the First Sonata, 15 minutes longer to get through the second, and 19 minutes longer to get through the third! In each case, Murray & Graham save you just about enough time to hear the entire Schumann First Sonata! This is amazing. This isn't just a few minutes over the course of a work. This is enough time for entire movements, even entire multi-movement works. Look at the first movement of the first sonata. Cammarano & Deljavan are playing at half the speed of Murray & Graham. Even Lazari & Gibellato, who I first took to be a bit leisurely, are speed demons compared to Cammarano & Deljavan: 11 minutes faster in the First, 12 minutes faster in the Second, and 9 minutes faster in the Third -- each difference the length of an entire movement.
Rubinstein's violin sonatas are among his best works, but don't form you opinion based on these dead-in-the-water performances.
Point taken, although Raff's Piano Quintet (a true masterpiece) easily survives the sleepy performance on MDG. In fact I first heard that work in precisely that recording and I was convinced all along about its stature as a work. Masterpieces can survive just about anything.
By contrast Rubinstein's inferior pieces just fall apart in the BC recordings. That tells you everything. (For comparison purposes I have Feyghin/Poltoratsky in No.2 which is much better played [Feyghin was one of the Russian greats], but I doubt whether his 3rd movement is really a true Adagio non troppo, whereas Cammarano/Deljavan attempt something much more daring and subtle there - but the music's just not up to it).
Incidentally, are there any textual issues involved here? (Just making sure I've done my homework ;))
Re: "Masterpieces can survive just about anything", Alan Walker raises just this point in the 2nd volume of his Liszt biography, and it's an interesting one- but too tangential for this topic, I'd agree in advance...
I've now ordered the Murray/Graham performances hoping for an epiphany. Watch this space...
Very instructive, John. Thank you.
Maybe the differences relate to exposition repeats (or not)? Is the Murray recording only available as an LP? (that's all I could find). The Lazari is available on two CDs, but on Amazon I could only find pricey 3rd party sellers...
In general, I prefer energetic over lethargic interpretations (many of us remember Gould's veeeeerrrryyy slow Brahms...).
Ahoy, Alan!
Don't expect any revelations with the Murray & Graham recordings, much less an epiphany, even should the recordings arrive on January 6th. What Murray & Graham accomplish is convincing the listener that these are decent works up to Rubinstein's usual standards, but that's all.
But why all this sudden talk of masterpieces? Rubinstein wrote none, as anyone who has plowed through his works can attest, so it would be unprofitable to suddenly expect one. And I don't grant that masterpieces can survive just about anything. I've heard many dull performances of masterworks, performances so bland it made one wonder what the fuss was all about. Indeed, many masterpieces take really good performances to bring off (say, anything by Brahms), while many lesser works deliver happy results as if by themselves (for example, those glittery, showy pieces that Schumann so despised).
I'm glad you like Raff's Quintet more than I do! It's a good work, one of his better ones, but no masterpiece in my book. But then, Raff wrote no more masterpieces than Rubinstein. Better, more polished compositions to be sure, but nothing more than that.
This brings us back to the Rubinstein sonatas. Rubinstein is surely one of the weakest composers discussed on these boards, at least from the point of view of polish, formal structure, sophistication, and professional accomplishment. Raff, Rheinberger, Fuchs, Herzogenberg...they can all compose circles around him, making him look downright amateurish. But there's something about him, some special daring quality, that draws me to him again and again. These three sonatas are excellent examples. They try so hard yet fail, but there is something in their magnificent failure that is fascinating. They are to music what Scott is to exploration, the Titanic to transatlantic passenger service, and the Tay Bridge to river crossings...and so I keep returning to Rubinstein despite his glaring faults.
One of the nicest things about listening to so much 3rd rate music like Rubinstein (or 2nd rate music like Raff) is that when I find myself back in a concert hall listening to 1st rate music, I am suddenly reminded how great music can really be.
But one more thing about Murray & Graham: you asked about textual differences. They do not include the exposition repeat in the first movement of their 3rd Sonata, shaving 3:30 off the time. Had it been included, the running time would have been 16:31, still nearly four minutes faster than the hapless Cammarano & Deljavan.
But do let us know if Murray & Graham promote the sonatas from dreadful to at least enjoyable! Just don't expect masterworks!
John
Herr Balapoel,
As I mentioned to Alan, the opening movement of the 3rd Sonata as performed by Graham and Murray is shorn of it's expositional repeat, saving 3:30 seconds. Beyond that, I don't recall any cuts. The Graham & Murrary should be easy to find. It's issued by Raven Records. But beware: it's an LP transfer. The source tapes were lost.
As for Gould's notoriously slow Brahms D-minor concerto, the one with Bernstein's equally notorious disassociation speech, it's instructive to note that the recording is one minute faster than Bernstein's later recording of the concerto for DG with Zimmerman. Go figure!
John
I agree about Rubinstein. No masterpieces at all, but he does fascinate and attract because his melodic gift is so strong and persistent. But Raff's a different matter: I've come to believe that Symphonies 2, 3, 4 and 5 are masterpieces, and that his chamber music is stuffed full of them. The two Piano Quartets and the 1st String Quartet are just three examples. Why? It's that ability to write utterly memorable music, perfectly attuned to the genre involved, and characterised by a Schwung (for want of a better word) that makes, say, Brahms seem a lumbering dolt by comparison.
Anyway, I digress - and I still like to be assured that no further textual issues explain the timing differences between Cammarano/Deljavan and the rest.
Well, Alan you opened the door. I will disagree with you about the Brahms comparison - by no means is his chamber works lumbering or doltish. Indeed, the seriousness, the complexity but also coherence and the memorable melodies make Brahms among the most important chamber composers. The breathtaking heartache of the first string sextet for instance...
From my view, Raff is certainly competent in chamber music, but suffers in comparison with Brahms.
Mine is obviously very much a minority view. However, I digressed - so back to Rubinstein...
Hrm. Raff's string sextet and Rubinstein's might do not-half-bad on a CD together- I wonder, I wonder.
QuoteBut Raff's a different matter: I've come to believe that Symphonies 2, 3, 4 and 5 are masterpieces
Count me in. I could never figure the neglect of 3 and 5 from the first moment I heard them (D'Avalos and Herrmann respectively). Here is music that is entirely the equal of the 'sung' composers (and no, I won't accept 'second rate' for a moment). These symphonies have impressive structure and cohesiveness - and great *melodies*, let's not forget..... The number of 'spine-tingles' I get from "Im Walde" every time I hear it reminds me why I love this music so much. This is superior music to much of Mendelssohn's output, for example, and he is sung to the rafters by comparison.
It took longer for 4 to sink in and I thank Stadlmair for that. But number two? A masterpiece? I didn't think so until a certain Estonian maestro turned up and changed everything.
Could Jarvi do the same for Rubinstein? I doubt it - his material is more diffuse and rambles in a much less disciplined way than even Raff's weakest efforts.
I enjoy Rubinstein too, even though the Ocean Symphony has more than once caught me asleep by the end!
Even so, I'm ready to try the violin sonatas - probably not these interminable performances though.... :)
I'm done with my homework, Mr. Howe! You wanted me to settle all textual questions. Well...
Alan, I dusted off my turntable and just spent the last one hour, thirty five minutes, and one second (1:35:01) of my life with scores in hand listening to Murray & Graham tear through the three Rubinstein violin sonatas...in their entirety. Yes, they play every note and observe every repeat except for the exposition repeat in the first movement of the third sonata. This last choice makes sense since the movement is quite long anyway and neither of the first two have expositional repeats.
Now by "every repeat" I mean all normally observed repeats. In a scherzo and trio constructed thus:
|:A:| - |:B:| - Fine - Trio, da capo al Fine
the A and B sections are only repeated the first time through, not during the da capo repeat.
They are like the Michael Ponti of violin/piano duos: they play at tempos like no others!
So there you have it. Total time for all three sonatas:
Murray & Graham Cammarano & Deljavan
1 hr., 35 min., 1 sec. 2 hr., 26 min., 14 sec.
It takes Cammarano & Deljavan an amazing 51 minutes longer to get through just three works, longer than any of Stadlmair's performances of any Raff symphony save the first!
Good grief! Moral: get the Murray & Graham performances and forget Cammarano & Deljavan ever happened.
John
Whether he's a first, second or third rate composer, Rubinstein surely generates the hugest amount of discussion on this forum. He certainly sets Alan off on one every time.
For what it's worth, I went to a performance of his opera The Demon at the Stanislavsky in Moscow. I couldn't hum a single note afterwards, but it was atmospheric in the extreme (and very well staged too). I thoroughly enjoyed it and would go again.
Quote from: John 514tga on Sunday 05 January 2014, 01:13
I'm done with my homework, Mr. Howe! You wanted me to settle all textual questions....Moral: get the Murray & Graham performances and forget Cammarano & Deljavan ever happened.
I'm grateful to you for settling the textual issue. As I said, I've ordered the Murray/Graham performances (from ArkivMusic) and I look forward to listening to them. Again, many thanks for your input.
FWIW I quite like his _cello_ sonatas (available now in a few recordings :) ).
In any case two of the violin sonatas are, it seems, contemporary-or-so with his earliest published piano trios (and his first piano sonata), only one of the three being a work of his maturity.
Thank you John, for the investment of time and the analysis. Luckily, I have Murray and Graham.
As for Rubinstein's ability to generate discussion at UC, it was ever thus and, I suspect, will remain so. I'm not going to rehearse the arguments here (I did so only recently in the Russia thread). Personally, I think he's a real curate's egg of a composer (i.e. good in parts), at his best in genres which don't commonly have a formal structure, or which feature a piano in the ensemble or were written for the instrument. I suspect his appeal to those who rate him overall more highly than I do may be because he had a wonderful melodic facility, and could certainly come up with arresting textures in his orchestral writing. Unfortunately, for me his self-admitted unwillingness to edit his music, once he had written it in what we would nowadays call a stream-of-consciousness, makes many of his large scale works diffuse and repetitive, no matter how melodic or colourful they are. Others, I know, will disagree.
Who said Michael Ponti lol?:):P That duo playing Rubinstein must be "Demons"!Steve(Ponti freak:))
I know extremely well Rubinstein violin sonatas and after listening two first class artists like Deljavan and Cammarano playing second category music I can't imagine any other point of view for those pieces.
I have the Epstein/Politovsky recording of the op. 13 that is extremely poetic, very fast in my opinion and they cut the last movement. 24 minutes(only three movements)
Then I know the recording of the second Sonata by Poltoratsky/Feyghin that is very messy but in a way artistic...
Both are extremely far from this new Brilliant's recording. It is a complete discovery in my opinion.
I hope they will go on with the chamber repertory of Rubinstein.
Alan,
Did you ever listen to the Murray/Graham and, if so, what did you think?
They're excellent, if somewhat elderly-sounding.