# Vanska's Sibelius 7 Symphony "dauntingly literal"



## Forster (Apr 22, 2021)

An article from last year in the BBC Music magazine selects one version of the symphony as top, though also recommending three others. I'm less interested in the actual choices, more in what was implied about the symphony by the writer's descriptions of the interpretation.

For example:



> The trombone theme is thrilling in each one of its appearances: through the swirling storm clouds at the heart of the symphony, but best of all at the stunning apotheosis, the singing building majestically, despite the feeling that earth and sky are convulsing around it, and culminating in a spine-chilling whoop from the horns.


More technically, he writes:



> how does he make something as simple as a rising *crescendo* scale sound so eloquent, so full of potential dramatic energy? In the rapt hymn for strings that follows there’s a sense of a controlled, steady rise in background intensity, and yet the foreground is full of finely featured expressive detail – each tiny phrase (I almost said ‘word’) counts.


What do you make of these descriptions?

The full article is here:


----------



## N Fowleri (5 mo ago)

I expect critics to be subjective, but I am less impressed when they try to rationalize their subjectivity with flowery language that adds so little actual information.


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

The critic identified the importance of the trombone passage, whose three appearances are the structural pillars of the work. And there is an interesting thesis about literalism in the interpretation, which might be worth examining while listening to the performance with the score. I find nothing inherently odd or off-putting about the language or descriptions, I'm simply not in a position to determine their value because I don't know the performance.


----------



## sasdwf (Feb 6, 2021)

Thanks for the link to the article. I have not heard the Vanska/Minnesota recording though I enjoyed Vanska’s previous recording with the Lahti orchestra. I’m also a fan of Davis’s Boston and LSO live performances. Curiously, none of Berglund’s performances made the list, despite his efforts to correct mistakes in the Sibelius scores and his influence on a number of conductors including Vanska. I’ve especially enjoyed both his Bournemouth and Helsinki performances.

BTW, the Cambridge Companion to Sibelius concludes with brief interviews with both Davis and Vanska.


----------



## Knorf (Jan 16, 2020)

Embarrassing twaddle, but all too typical from so many critics. 

The first warning sign was the claim for The Best Recording. Such a thing does not exist, can not exist, should not exist: not when it comes to art and artistic experience. It's not a forking dog race! 

The lover of music is advised to be suspicious to say the least of all such claims of knowing The Best when it comes to music. 

Having said that, among those choices, I do like the Karajan.


----------



## Forster (Apr 22, 2021)

The writer is a regular presenter on BBC Radio 3's Building A Library/Record Review.

I agree that there is no such thing as "the best recording", but I have found his reviews and recommendations provide helpful pointers to the recordings I might consider - given that there are often so many, as in this particular case, and others. The "flowery language" aside, his reviews also point to particular passages, motifs and structures (as Edward Bast notes above) that can help the listener understand how a piece has been put together.

Here's an example of the programme, reviewing Mahler's 10th.


----------



## OCEANE (10 mo ago)

Forster said:


> The writer is a regular presenter on BBC Radio 3's Building A Library/Record Review.
> 
> I agree that there is no such thing as "the best recording", but I have found his reviews and recommendations provide helpful pointers to the recordings I might consider - given that there are often so many, as in this particular case, and others. The "flowery language" aside, his reviews also point to particular passages, motifs and structures (as Edward Bast notes above) that can help the listener understand how a piece has been put together.
> 
> Here's an example of the programme, reviewing Mahler's 10th.


I also like to check out those reviews such as BBC as reference and would try those recommended very often.
Nevertheless I don't believe in 'the best interpretation or recording' in classical music but something better and also personal preference counts.


----------

