Ludwig van Beethoven, Jean Sibelius, Bruno Walter Beethoven, Sibelius: Violin Concertos Genre:Classical The Sibelius Violin Concerto was a David Oistrakh specialty. He brought to it a personal warmth and poetry, and he made the most of what critics call Sibelius's "Russian melancholy," which is the term applied to Russian... more » music when it sounds most Finnish. But seriously, the great Finnish composer was a strong admirer of Tchaikovsky, whose Violin Concerto was another Oistrakh specialty. Eugene Ormandy's Sibelius credentials were similarly well established at the time that this great recording was made. At a budget price, with a terrific Beethoven Violin Concerto tossed in, you'd have to be nuts not to want to hear it. --David Hurwitz« less
The Sibelius Violin Concerto was a David Oistrakh specialty. He brought to it a personal warmth and poetry, and he made the most of what critics call Sibelius's "Russian melancholy," which is the term applied to Russian music when it sounds most Finnish. But seriously, the great Finnish composer was a strong admirer of Tchaikovsky, whose Violin Concerto was another Oistrakh specialty. Eugene Ormandy's Sibelius credentials were similarly well established at the time that this great recording was made. At a budget price, with a terrific Beethoven Violin Concerto tossed in, you'd have to be nuts not to want to hear it. --David Hurwitz
"I've owned this CD and the Heifetz/Reiner Beethoven for years, and it's hard to imagine that both violinists were playing from the same score. Francescatti makes a regular practice of holding a note just a bit, to shape a phrase or add emphasis. Heifetz makes a consistent practice of avoiding this and moving briskly on--which raises the issue of tempo: in the first movement, Heifetz takes a full 2 minutes less than Francescatti (despite Heifetz' somewhat elaborate cadenza), and the remaining movements are similarly timed. As he bustles along, Heifetz tends to vary the force of his notes more subtly than Francescatti, who deploys a wider range of volume levels.
As a result, lovers of the Francescatti approach may find Heifetz clipped, brusque and impersonal, while lovers of the Heifetz approach may find Francescatti slow, heavy and mushy. Or to put it in positive terms, Heifetz excels in maintaining and building rhythmic energy, while Francescatti is best in developing the emotional content of the work and letting it "breathe." It took me a long time to come to appreciate both approaches, and I signal this as a study in contrast. At this low price, you can buy both and decide for yourself. (My favorite? This one.)"
Pleased with Purchase
Mark Van Vlack | new york | 08/13/2007
(5 out of 5 stars)
"David Oistrakh plays the Sibelius as if he is in constant battle with the orchestra, putting himself in technical danger all the way through, and giving true desperation to an already magical peice of music.
If you love this concerto as I do, then you should own a copy of the heroic Oistrakh right next to your sinister Heifetz!
I was very pleased with the francescatti violin in the Beethoven concerto. I found myself whistling along with him (which doesn't happen often enough these days)and in a good mood the rest of the day!"
You Can't Go Wrong With This One
Neal Stevens | Greensboro, NC | 03/10/2009
(5 out of 5 stars)
"There is heavy competition in the Beethoven. The previous generation of violinists produced a slew of great recordings, and the violinists of the current generation are no slouches either.
Zino Franscescatti was a very elegant violinist. Always tasteful and usually quite restrained. But he evidently fell under the spell of Bruno Walter here and produced a wonderfully warm and earthy version of the Beethoven. The audio press has been so busy going ga ga over the Heifitz version that the Francescatti has received little mention. The Heifitz is also a superb recording, very aristocratic and polished. The Fransescatti makes a great addition for anyone who already has the Heifitz, as the personality of these performances is so different, and yet both are great recordings.
Oistrakh's recording of the Sibelius was originally issued on LP with Ormandy's spellbinding version of The Swan Of Tuonela. An ear candy combination. I cannot be objective about this recording. I bought three copies of the LP, so that I would never be without a fresh, static free version. Then I bought the first digital reissue when it came out. Oistrakh plays this with more passion and with a more beautiful tone than anyone of his generation or ours. Heifitz by comparison is ice cold. Mutter and Spivakovsky do give Oistrakh keen competition, but like the young Ali, Oistrakh is still the winner and champeen.
It is almost unbelievable that two such outstanding recordings should be issued together on a single disc, and at budget price to boot. Highly recommended.
"
Two classics for the ages
Discophage | France | 12/31/2009
(5 out of 5 stars)
"I have this version of Beethoven's Violin Concerto by Francescatti and Walter on an early Odyssey CD which is not even listed on this website. And surely Beethoven's VC is too short for a CD, so it is good that Sony has reissued it with a coupling, although it is curious that they chose Oistrakh and Ormandy's Sibelius (which I have in a previous outing, on Sony's Masterworks Portrait series, coherently paired with Tchaikovsky by the same forces, Tchaikovsky: Violin Concerto in D Major / Sibelius: Violin Concerto in D Minor), rather than Francescatti's own (with Bernstein; it is coherently paired on Brahms: Concerto for Violin and Orchestra in D Major Op. 77 / Sibelius: Concerto for Violin and Orchestra in D minor Op. 47 (The Royal Edition) or on Sibelius: Orchestral Works, a motley but interesting Sibelius collection), or any other concerto by Francescatti.
Anyway, as they are, these are major recordings and it's good to have them available.
The Beethoven Concerto was taped in 1961 and is Walter's third studio recording (after the two he made with Szigeti, one in 1932 in London and the next one in 1947 with the New York Philharmonic, see my review of Beethoven: Violin Concerto; Violin Sonata No. 5 "Spring"), and Francescatti's second (the first was with Ormandy in 1950, Zino Francescatti Plays Beethoven). It is, by far, Walter's best, and by a smaller margin Francescatti's as well.
It has to do with sonics (the 1961 stereo sounds wonderfully natural and offers great presence) but not only. Walter's 1947 recording is disfigured by Szigeti's sour intonation and frequent finger slips. In 1932 Szigeti's purity of tone and very modern style of playing (no wailing portamento there) finds in Walter a wayward and "old-school" accompanist, prone to playing accordion with tempos, especially in the first movement. There is still some of that in 1947, but not as pronounced.
In 1961 Walter is a model of discipline. Not that he is inflexible in tempo, and he slows down and lets Francescatti sing with all stops out when come the more lyrical moments in the first movement. But in the orchestral tuttis Walter adopts a tempo and sticks to it, steady as a rock. As in 1947 (a little less so perhaps) he whips his orchestra to fine muscularity in the fortissimo moments.
Add to that - and it is an phenomenon also encountered in Walter's two Beethoven symphony cycles, the later one in stereo and the earlier one(s) made (mainly) with the New York Phil in (mainly) the late 1940s - that, whatever the reputation of the New Yorkers, the so-called Columbia Symphony Orchestra in 1961 plays MUCH better than them in 1947. The strings' 16th notes in the fortissimo tuttis are cleanly articulated rather than sounding like a mere rumble. In the finale the woodwinds and horns engage in dialogues of marvellous crispness and verve.
Francescatti and Walter's basic conception remains the same as Szigeti-Walter's or Francescatti- Ormandy's: ample, very lyrical, taking time to breathe and sing in the first movement, playing the middle Larghetto more as a Largo, and with a finale that is lively and robust but easy-going: the opposite pole from Heifetz, in both his recordings, with Toscanini in 1940 (Beethoven: Violin Concerto; Piano Concerto No. 3) and Munch in 1955 (Heifetz Plays Beethoven & Brahms) - and I find Heifetz equally lyrical, in a more searing and intense manner. Ormandy in 1950 is marginally more muscular and pressing than Walter 1961, but the latter easily compensates with the added crispness of articulation of his woodwinds, and his lovingly-molded phrasings.
Francescatti is, even more than Szigeti in 1932, the ideal partner to that conception: his tonal production has an unfailing purity, sweetness and pitch-precision. Thanks to the improved sonic presence he sounds better, purer, more angelic, in 1961 with Walter than in 1950 with Ormandy, as recaptured by the Biddulph transfer. He's also corrected some of the - very few - minuscule finger slips from 1950, and has done away with the - very few and very discreet - portamentos on octave leaps.
Beethoven's Concerto can welcome other, more fiery approaches, but this is by all means a classic. You can do different, but hardly better.
Oistrakh-Ormandy Sibelius from 1959 is equally a classic. It is Oistrakh's second studio recording, after the one made with Sixten Ehrling in 1954 (Beethoven/Sibelius: Violin Concertos) and before Rozhdestvenski for Melodiya in 1965 (David Oistrakh: Khachaturian / Sibelius). As for Ormandy, he made two subsequent studio recordings: with Isaac Stern in 1969 (Tchaikovsky, Sibelius: Violin Concertos) and Dylana Jenson in 1980 (Oops ! Out of authorized links. See ASIN:B00000E6EB).
Oistrakh strikes a fine middle balance between the fast and fiery approach of Heifetz, Gitlis and Stern and the more ample view of Camilla Wicks or Ginette Neveu; but make no mistake: by today's standards, he is forward moving and muscular (compare his timing in the first movement with Hilary Hahn's: 14:43 against 17:10!). And it is fine like that: the initial allegro isn't changed into a moderato, and it entails no loss of lyricism whatsovever: it pours out of every note of the score. As expected, Oistrakh plays with beautiful and plush tone (more than in 1965, where he sounds more husky and gritty), and, as mentioned, his lyricism is all the more intense that it doesn't linger. As recorded in 1959 the orchestra has great surrounding stereo presence (overall more than in the 1965 Soviet recording, at least in my Chant du Monde transfer from the early days of the CD), even boomy basses (and some car rumble in the distance), and in the finale all the solo instruments from the orchestra come out vividly. I can see a few spots which leave place for more biting accents than those demanded by Ormandy from his orchestra, but it chimes well with Oistrakh's highly lyrical approach - and I'm being finicky anyway. Their middle movement develops to exceptional intensity, thanks to the soloist but also to the Philadelphian's great instrumental presence (heart-wrenching trumpets). Their finale is not fast but powerful and vigorous. As everybody else until Hahn (and that includes Heifetz), Oistrakh scrambles to keep in-sync with the orchestra in the fiendish octave leaps, but he plays with great bounce and imagination."
