# Thoughts on Tchaikovsky



## DrMuller (May 26, 2014)

First of all I want to say that I like Tchaikovsky very much but I have to say I find his works so incredibly sad sometimes that it depresses me. His symphonies are a good example, they just reek of despair and sadness, even his fast and cheerful movements are anything but cheerful. His music is great and it's a sign of how great it is that it can provoke such emotions but does anyone else have the same problem ; having a hard time listening to his music, not because it's not good but because it is so extremely sad and desperate?


----------



## Blake (Nov 6, 2013)

An overly sentimental lollipop, I tell ya'.


----------



## Guest (Aug 1, 2014)

I do think that Tchaikovsky was a master at imbuing emotions and sentiment heavily into his music, but I don't think that sad and depressing are a majority. I don't know how much of his works you have heard, but try some of his earlier symphonies, and his other symphonic works, as well as his ballets. They encompass quite a broad spectrum of emotions.


----------



## Orfeo (Nov 14, 2013)

As far as sadness and despair are concern, not much of them can be found really in his Second, Third, or even his Fourth Symphonies. His Third is especially Joie de vivre (and his Fourth for that matter, despite the Fate a la dramatique in first movement). And I love the darkness to light to triumph in the Fifth. You have a point regarding both despair and sadness in, say, Manfred and Pathetique (and even "Mazeppa"). But his symphonies in particular are anything but one dimensional (Tchaikovsky being as complex as he came).

His Second Piano Concerto is beautifully written and his Concert Fantasy, the Mozartiana Suite, and even his opera "The Little Slippers" show Tchaikovsky at his most relaxed, lyrical, laid-back self (although the opera is quite comical also). His Souvenir de Florence, among my favorite works period, is again lively and absolutely brilliant. His piano works do not represent Tchaikovsky at his very best (for the most part), however, but even his Seasons and 50 Russian folksongs for piano duet show how inventive he was.

Tchaikovsky to me is very deep, profound, honest "wear his heart on his sleeves" type of composer. His music expresses life as he saw and lived it. In other words, a very complete, all-embracing persona.


----------



## Blake (Nov 6, 2013)

There is a place and time for his music. A brilliant composer who specialized in fairy-tale beauty. But he does seem to over-sentimentalize to the point were it feels a bit sticky.


----------



## Vaneyes (May 11, 2010)

OPie needs a Nutcracker, quick.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Sad? Play the final movement of the Fourth Symphony-one of the most manically "up" musical compositions ever created!

An absolute whirlwind!!!


----------



## Vaneyes (May 11, 2010)

hpowders said:


> Sad? Play the final movement of the Fourth Symphony-one of the most manically "up" musical compositions ever created!
> 
> An absolute whirlwind!!!


Lotsa positive energy in most of the concerti, also. And, whattabout Souvenir de Florence.:tiphat:


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Yeah. How about the finales of the Piano Concerto #1 and the Violin Concerto? Very "up" music!

I'm very down with Tchaikovsky!! That's the way we speak in Carlsbad.


----------



## Stargazer (Nov 9, 2011)

Tchaikovsky is one of my favorite composers, but I don't find his music particularly sad or depressing.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

Vesuvius said:


> There is a place and time for his music. A brilliant composer who specialized in fairy-tale beauty. But he does seem to over-sentimentalize to the point were it feels a bit sticky.


LOL. A colleague told me that while in high school, he 'professed' a liking for Tchaikovsky to the band teacher. The teacher said, "How _can_ you like that music. _It is so runny!_ (...like brie cheese at room temperature?) But I get it. Not my favorite composer by far, too much melody melody and repeat of the theme a whole step higher, tons of sequencing, yet, a wholly effective composer, rather blatantly glorious at times, some fantastic woodwind writing I can not help but find both seductive and brilliant -- for a primarily self-taught orchestrator, no slouch -- but this 'emotionality' I hear but am not very much affected, if at all, by that particular stripe or style of it. That is personal, of course, because I get 'all emotional' about other kinds of repertoire, but not P.I.T.

I also agree with others here, there is not so much of Tchaikovsky which is all Slava triste or gloom 'n' doom... and there, I think the listener is bringing their own basket of goodies to the concert, and if that basket has enough of the right stuff in it, it will amplify the perceptions of whatever emotions the music seems to have.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

hpowders said:


> Sad? Play the final movement of the Fourth Symphony-*one of the most manically* "up" musical compositions ever created!


I find that 'manic' in nearly all of Tchaikovsky -- ergo I feel a bit like I'm visiting a psych ward patient whenever I hear just about anything by him, manic 'up' or manic 'down.' Some of the 'lighter' and smaller pieces, apparently, he was having a good day


----------



## SONNET CLV (May 31, 2014)

The _Nutcracker Ballet _may well be Tchaikovsky's masterpiece. If anything can wipe away gloom, it's that. Try it. It's not just for the Christmas season.


----------



## SeptimalTritone (Jul 7, 2014)

Hmm... the sixth symphony is one of my favorite pieces ever, and it's not dark, it's very loving (cathartic). The climaxes of the last third or so of the third movement are earth shattering... it's like looking at a huge celebration (of human ego and dissipation) and being so isolated and alienated from it. And to a beginner's ears, it does seem well-crafted, with the motive, a descending B minor scale starting on F sharp being used in most of the movements as a really effective source of unity when it's used in different rhythms, harmonies, and moods.

I like in particular this recording, which places huge weight on the aforementioned latter part of the third movement:








I'm always surprised why serious listeners don't think much of this piece, perhaps I'm just young and attracted to what I perceive as Tchaikovsky expressing alienation in the most perfect way, but... I think it's an incredible piece.


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

The music of Tchaikovsky I have been most attracted to, the symphonies, the symphonic poems, and the ballets, is full of dark expression. In the case of the poems and ballets this has a mundane explanation; one would hardly compose an upbeat _Francesca da Rimini_ or _Romeo and Juliet_.

With the symphonies it is hard for me to separate expression from technical issues. The fourth and fifth symphonies, although they follow the dark to light, struggle to victory archetype, strike me as predominantly dark and desperate because, IMO, the finales fail adequately to resolve the earlier tensions. One might debate whether these finales don't work because the composer "didn't feel" them. To me it just sounds like he couldn't figure out a convincing way to reintroduce, transform, and integrate the themes of the first movement.

To answer the more direct question: I never had trouble listening to his music because it was too depressing.


----------



## DrMuller (May 26, 2014)

EdwardBast said:


> The music of Tchaikovsky I have been most attracted to, the symphonies, the symphonic poems, and the ballets, is full of dark expression. In the case of the poems and ballets this has a mundane explanation; one would hardly compose an upbeat _Francesca da Rimini_ or _Romeo and Juliet_.
> 
> With the symphonies it is hard for me to separate expression from technical issues. The fourth and fifth symphonies, although they follow the dark to light, struggle to victory archetype, strike me as predominantly dark and desperate because, IMO, the finales fail adequately to resolve the earlier tensions. One might debate whether these finales don't work because the composer "didn't feel" them. To me it just sounds like he couldn't figure out a convincing way to reintroduce, transform, and integrate the themes of the first movement.


That is exactly by point, even the finals of the fourth and fifth feel sad to me; and yes I know what they sound like.  The finale of the forth is fast and triumphant but I still get the despair feeling. Maybe I am hearing something in his music that others don't. People talk about his 6th being the saddest but I actually find is sort of balanced and somewhat peaceful. It's almost as if he knew it was his last. I listen to his 6th a lot and I love it, I think it's one of the best symphonies. Other works I listen to a lot are his Violin Concerto and his Piano Concerto No. 1. I don't find these works depressing at all. And his Nutcracker, Swan Lake and Sleeping Beauty are wonderful and very enjoyable. When I was writing the post last night I was listening to his 5th and I just felt such a wave of desperation. Maybe it was all me.


----------



## revdrdave (Jan 8, 2014)

SeptimalTritone said:


> Hmm... the sixth symphony is one of my favorite pieces ever, and it's not dark, it's very loving (cathartic). The climaxes of the last third or so of the third movement are earth shattering... it's like looking at a huge celebration (of human ego and dissipation) and being so isolated and alienated from it. And to a beginner's ears, it does seem well-crafted, with the motive, a descending B minor scale starting on F sharp being used in most of the movements as a really effective source of unity when it's used in different rhythms, harmonies, and moods.
> 
> I like in particular this recording, which places huge weight on the aforementioned latter part of the third movement:
> View attachment 47802
> ...


Hmmm...afraid I'm not tracking with you here. The sixth _is_ dark, especially the last movement which ultimately fades away in what has always seemed to me to be utter despair. In fact, I think the case can be made that darkness is never far from the surface of much of Tchaikovsky's music--the slow movements of the First and Fourth symphonies, much of _Manfred_, the _andante cantabile_ of the First String Quartet, and significant chunks of _Francesca da Rimini_ and _The Tempest_ all come to mind.

I'm also perplexed by your remark that "serious listeners don't think much" of the _Pathetique_. While there's always been debate about which of Tchaikovsky's symphonies is the greatest, even those whom, for example, choose the Fourth over the Sixth still typically regard the Sixth as a masterpiece. Certainly there are listeners who dismiss Tchaikovsky in general and, therefore, might not think much of any of his music, the Sixth included. But among those who do respond to Tchaikovsky, my experience is they think a very great deal of the Sixth.


----------



## SeptimalTritone (Jul 7, 2014)

Well, it's good that those who like Tchaikovsky think highly of the sixth!

As far as whether the sixth is _dark_, it seems it depends on the listener. And "dark" is a vague word, but... I wanted to emphasize my feeling that it's not nihilistic! Quite the contrary, and that's why I like it so much!

But if your definition of dark includes the above works you mentioned, then yes, the sixth is quite dark. I just wanted to emphasize that it isn't negative, bitter, resentful, nihilistic, etc. In some way, it has incredible hope. To me, it's more than utter despair.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

I'm one of those who chooses the Fourth over the Sixth. Never liked the Sixth. Gives me a headache, quite frankly.

Tchaikovsky's Fourth is the only one of his symphonies I can listen to frequently, without any reservation.


----------



## OldFashionedGirl (Jul 21, 2013)

Tchaikovsky is russian classical music daddy, nuff said.


----------



## Avey (Mar 5, 2013)

"extremely sad and desperate" is a bit of a generalization, no? As most have mentioned already, there are plenty of other examples that evoke--for most--far different sentiments, i.e. optimistic, jovial.

But how you feel with any given piece is entirely subjective, right? So, we may know P.I's circumstances when writing one piece, or his commentary on something, which gives away the underlying purpose and expression with any given work. But, still, it is going to affect any one listener uniquely. Or, a piece simply contains multiple emotions, expresses many colors and shapes, and thus cannot _fit_ into any one genre.

Concrete: I find his _Serenade for Strings in C_ to be his greatest work. It is absolutely flawless, without a superfluous note. And, amazingly, I cannot put a "sentimental" label on it--that is, I am hard-pressed to say it is melancholic, optimistic, wistful, nostalgic, promising, etc. It simply _is_. And that may be the beauty in it.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Avey said:


> Concrete: I find his _Serenade for Strings in C_ to be his greatest work. It is absolutely flawless, without a superfluous note. And, amazingly, I cannot put a "sentimental" label on it--that is, I am hard-pressed to say it is melancholic, optimistic, wistful, nostalgic, promising, etc. It simply _is_. And that may be the beauty in it.


Tchaikovsky seems to have written a fair amount of music that can't called "emotionally intense." The Serenade, certainly (and most of the orchestral serenades too), plus a favorite of mine, the Rococo Variations. And quite a bit more in the ballets etc. Did he write more of this sort of thing than Brahms did?


----------



## sabrina (Apr 26, 2011)

When I was young I remember struggling with the 6th symphony, as I found it utterly depressing. I avoided it since that time. But I tried it recently and I realized that though still sad it is so beautiful...I play it now and it's still the first movement and I still struggle a bit...with sadness and despair. But what a beauty!


----------



## DrMuller (May 26, 2014)

sabrina said:


> When I was young I remember struggling with the 6th symphony, as I found it utterly depressing. I avoided it since that time. But I tried it recently and I realized that though still sad it is so beautiful...I play it now and it's still the first movement and I still struggle a bit...with sadness and despair. But what a beauty!


The first and last movements are the toughest. The inner movements are not as difficult. But yes the symphony is beautiful.


----------



## SeptimalTritone (Jul 7, 2014)

DrMuller said:


> The first and last movements are the toughest. The inner movements are not as difficult. But yes the symphony is beautiful.


The fourth movement is certainly the most famous, but for me, the third movement is the key movement of the symphony, where all the trauma is revealed.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

PetrB said:


> I find that 'manic' in nearly all of Tchaikovsky -- ergo I feel a bit like I'm visiting a psych ward patient whenever I hear just about anything by him, manic 'up' or manic 'down.'


I had to "like" this because it gave me a chuckle. I don't really share your feeling; In certain works Tchaikovsky can go to extremes of subjectivity, but there's so much beautiful stuff in his output that doesn't - that's rather "classical" (if not "Mozartean," to name his favorite composer) in its emotional equilibrium (others have mentioned many such works).

No, I chuckled because you've expressed very much how I feel about Gustav Mahler.
Now there's my-hypersensitive-psyche-as-cosmos grandiosity in wide-screen and technicolor!


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Tchaikovsky was simply one of the greatest melodists who ever lived. The oboe solo that begins the second movement of his fourth symphony is THE most haunting and memorable melody I have ever heard. Fabulous!


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

hpowders said:


> Tchaikovsky was simply one of the greatest melodists who ever lived.


Totally agree. We could study composition for years and analyze music to death and write flawless four-part harmony and sonata-allegros with three theme groups and quadruple fugues in retrograde and orchestral showpieces like Rimsky-Berlioz - and yet never, never in all our lives, come up with a melody such as Piotr Ilyich spilled out every morning before his coffee was perked, or samovared, or whatever they did to it in Russia.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Woodduck said:


> Totally agree. We could study composition for years and analyze music to death and write flawless four-part harmony and sonata-allegros with three theme groups and quadruple fugues in retrograde and orchestral showpieces like Rimsky-Berlioz - and yet never, never in all our lives, come up with a melody such as Piotr Ilyich spilled out every morning before his coffee was perked, or samovared, or whatever they did to it in Russia.


Yes. One of the mysteries of genius. I believe he probably drank tea out of a tall glass, like my Russian grandfather did. The only difference is my grandfather didn't know a melody from a hole in the wall, but he was good at yelling.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

hpowders said:


> I believe he probably drank tea out of a tall glass, like my Russian grandfather did.


"Tea? Yes thank you, a tall one. No, don't bother boiling the water, I'd like a cool one today." The rest is history.


----------



## Vaneyes (May 11, 2010)

hpowders said:


> Yeah. How about the finales of the Piano Concerto #1 and the Violin Concerto? Very "up" music!
> 
> I'm very down with Tchaikovsky!! That's the way we speak in Carlsbad.


He's bad and sick, too.


----------



## Skilmarilion (Apr 6, 2013)

Avey said:


> Concrete: I find his _Serenade for Strings in C_ to be his greatest work. It is absolutely flawless, without a superfluous note. ... It simply _is_.


I feel much the same, but with regards to the utterly superb _Piano Trio in A minor_. Trouble is, I'm not half as eloquent as you are. 

The Serenade is a work I need to get to know better.


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

Woodduck said:


> Totally agree. We could study composition for years and analyze music to death and write flawless four-part harmony and sonata-allegros with three theme groups and quadruple fugues in retrograde and orchestral showpieces like Rimsky-Berlioz - and yet never, never in all our lives, come up with a melody such as Piotr Ilyich spilled out every morning before his coffee was perked, or samovared, or whatever they did to it in Russia.


I always think of that glorious melody at the end of *Swan Lake* when Siegfried makes his final entrance. It plays through twice, once on the strings and then with the addition of brass before fading away into nothingness. Most composers would no doubt have hammered it home _ad infinitum_. I wait for it every time I see the ballet or listen to a recording, and it always sends little thrills down my spine.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Can't recall it offhand. Must check it out. But you point up the ease with which T could simply throw out a great little tune, almost throw it away, never even coming back to it because so many more great tunes are pressing to be heard. One of music's miracles, truly.


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

There is a little build up to it, woodwind figures suggesting the beginning of a storm, and then with a crash the theme breaks in, like the moon coming out from behind a cloud. Absolutely glorious!


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

GregMitchell said:


> There is a little build up to it, woodwind figures suggesting the beginning of a storm, and then with a crash the theme breaks in, like the moon coming out from behind a cloud. Absolutely glorious!


Yes! I know exactly where you mean! That tune sent me into ecstasies at age twelve, when I bought Ormandy's LP of excerpts from the ballet and played it till my parents screamed for mercy. Thank you for the reminder! :kiss:


----------



## neoshredder (Nov 7, 2011)

I love melancholic music. So Tchaikovsky works great for me.


----------



## mikey (Nov 26, 2013)

DrMuller said:


> First of all I want to say that I like Tchaikovsky very much but I have to say I find his works so incredibly sad sometimes that it depresses me.


Can't believe no one has mentioned easily one of the most popular pieces in musical history that is so far from 'sad', sad could go so far underneath the mariana trench that it would still be too close to the surface (ie. this piece). I'll give a hint - some sort of overture with the numbers 1812 in it.


----------



## Lukecash12 (Sep 21, 2009)

dholling said:


> As far as sadness and despair are concern, not much of them can be found really in his Second, Third, or even his Fourth Symphonies. His Third is especially Joie de vivre (and his Fourth for that matter, despite the Fate a la dramatique in first movement). And I love the darkness to light to triumph in the Fifth. You have a point regarding both despair and sadness in, say, Manfred and Pathetique (and even "Mazeppa"). But his symphonies in particular are anything but one dimensional (Tchaikovsky being as complex as he came).
> 
> His Second Piano Concerto is beautifully written and his Concert Fantasy, the Mozartiana Suite, and even his opera "The Little Slippers" show Tchaikovsky at his most relaxed, lyrical, laid-back self (although the opera is quite comical also). His Souvenir de Florence, among my favorite works period, is again lively and absolutely brilliant. His piano works do not represent Tchaikovsky at his very best (for the most part), however, but even his Seasons and 50 Russian folksongs for piano duet show how inventive he was.
> 
> Tchaikovsky to me is very deep, profound, honest "wear his heart on his sleeves" type of composer. His music expresses life as he saw and lived it. In other words, a very complete, all-embracing persona.


His grande sonata for the piano I think is a perfect example of the broad range of emotions Tchaikovsky could express, and Richter I think could change a lot of minds about Tchaikovsky and the piano. But of course when we think Tchaikovsky we normally think of large ensembles, of grand and long themes flowing past each other and eventually being overlaid like we see in the Romeo and Juliet overture (it baffles me that the most quoted portion of that piece isn't even the best part!).


----------



## xpangaeax (Oct 1, 2013)

I'm just now really exploring the Tchaikovsky rep. Symphony 4 will be performed here in November, so I've started listening to that a few times to begin. Captivating piece! I'm looking forward to also finally giving Eugene Onegin a listen, since I wasn't able to get to NYC to see it at the Met last season, and of course branching out from there to other symphonies, operas and ballets.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

The fourth is my favorite Tchaikovsky symphony. Every movement is terrific.

Anyone who is of the opinion that Tchaikovsky wrote depressive music needs to hear the finale to the fourth symphony.


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

hpowders said:


> The fourth is my favorite Tchaikovsky symphony. Every movement is terrific.
> 
> Anyone who is of the opinion that Tchaikovsky wrote depressive music needs to hear the finale to the fourth symphony.


I don't think depressive would be the right word in any case. In describing his darker music, I would say anxious, tense, and unhinged, but not depressive.

The Fourth is my favorite too, but if it has a weak(er) movement, it is the finale. The return of the symphony's opening is not well integrated into the work as a whole. Unlike Beethoven's Fifth, the model for this return (along with Bizet's _Carmen_ and Verdi's operas on Hugo plays), it is just a big chunk-like quotation rather than the product of more sublte thematic transformation. The first movement, on the other hand, along with that of the Pathetique, was highly influential in its structural and expressive profiles. Nearly every later Russian and Eastern European composer echoed it (See, for example, the first movements of Rachmaninoff's Second, Shostakovich's Tenth, Prokofiev's Seventh Piano Sonata and Bartok's Concerto for Orchestra.) Chopin's second and third piano sonatas were another influence on this variant of sonata form.


----------



## xpangaeax (Oct 1, 2013)

Who do we like for Tchaikovsky conductors? I've watched Karajan do Number 4 a couple of times now on YouTube, and I have the Haitink set on my computer that I will be listening to next. Anyone else I should be on the lookout for? Specifically for 4 for now, but also for a complete cycle.


----------



## DiesIraeCX (Jul 21, 2014)

xpangaeax said:


> Who do we like for Tchaikovsky conductors? I've watched Karajan do Number 4 a couple of times now on YouTube, and I have the Haitink set on my computer that I will be listening to next. Anyone else I should be on the lookout for? Specifically for 4 for now, but also for a complete cycle.


I cannot give a great personal recommendation since I only have the 2-CD Symphonies 4, 5, 6 from Karajan. It's excellent all around, but since I've never really heard Tchaikovsky from other conductors, I have no point of comparison. What I can say is that a *very large amount of people swear by Mravinsky's Tchaikovsky* recordings. I guess, Russian conductor for a Russian composer is the way to go.


----------



## JACE (Jul 18, 2014)

Just like Dies IraeVIX, I think Karajan's Tchaikovsky is very fine.

I also enjoy Markevitch's cycle with the LSO:

















Gotta admit that I'm not crazy about Mravinsky's Tchaikovsky. 

But I'm definitely in the minority!


----------



## xpangaeax (Oct 1, 2013)

Mravinsky I'll check out. It makes sense to me that a Russian could pull the best out of him, moreso than other nationalities - the Russian identity has a real mystique to it that some of us won't ever quite grasp (try as I might), and I'm sure it transcends through to music.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

xpangaeax said:


> Mravinsky I'll check out. It makes sense to me that a Russian could pull the best out of him, moreso than other nationalities - the Russian identity has a real mystique to it that some of us won't ever quite grasp (try as I might), and I'm sure it transcends through to music.


Mravinsky's Tchaikovsky is very much the opposite of the lugubrious wallow that some may associate with the "Russian temperament." It's generally swift, sprung, tense, mercurial, spare in texture, passionate without self-indulgence. The music's balletic qualities receive full measure. I'm reminded of the fact that that other lugubrious Russian, Rachmaninov, who was in some ways Tchaikovsky's musical heir, took a less sentimental view of his own music than many of his interpreters, as revealed in his own recordings of his piano concertos and other works. Mravinsky's isn't the only way I like to hear Tchaikovsky - sometimes a lush, deep wallow is just the thing - but it's an exciting way. His studio recordings are essential, but I seem to recall reading somewhere that there are some live performances that are even better.


----------



## Marschallin Blair (Jan 23, 2014)

Woodduck said:


> Mravinsky's Tchaikovsky is very much the opposite of the lugubrious wallow that some may associate with the "Russian temperament." It's generally swift, sprung, tense, mercurial, spare in texture, passionate without self-indulgence. The music's balletic qualities receive full measure. I'm reminded of the fact that that other lugubrious Russian, Rachmaninov, who was in some ways Tchaikovsky's musical heir, took a less sentimental view of his own music than many of his interpreters, as revealed in his own recordings of his piano concertos and other works. Mravinsky's isn't the only way I like to hear Tchaikovsky - sometimes a lush, deep wallow is just the thing - but it's an exciting way. His studio recordings are essential, but I seem to recall reading somewhere that there are some live performances that are even better.


Another great Russian conductor of Tchaikovsky, much in the same vein, but immensely more to my liking is Evgeny Svetlanov; who conducts among the most heroic and aggressive Tchaikosky I've ever heard.

As far as readings of poised, self-indulgent sentimentalism go-- I really love the early seventies EMI Karajan/BPO performances of the Tchaikovsky symphonies; which for me meld the best of the noble and the sentimental.


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

Woodduck said:


> Mravinsky's Tchaikovsky is very much the opposite of the lugubrious wallow that some may associate with the "Russian temperament." It's generally swift, sprung, tense, mercurial, spare in texture, passionate without self-indulgence. The music's balletic qualities receive full measure. I'm reminded of the fact that that other lugubrious Russian, Rachmaninov, who was in some ways Tchaikovsky's musical heir, took a less sentimental view of his own music than many of his interpreters, as revealed in his own recordings of his piano concertos and other works. Mravinsky's isn't the only way I like to hear Tchaikovsky - sometimes a lush, deep wallow is just the thing - but it's an exciting way. His studio recordings are essential, but I seem to recall reading somewhere that there are some live performances that are even better.


I have a Melodiya account of the 5th, dating from 1973, which is, if anything, even more riveting than the studio version. Mravinsky's control of _rubato_ is just incredible, but not in the least self conscious. I heard Maazel conduct Tchaikovsky with the LSO, either the 5th or 6th, I can't now remember, and he to exerted fantastic control over the orchestra, but it was totally self serving and completely unmoving, as if he were just showing us his mastery on the podium. The music got forgotten somehow, which it never does with Mravinsky.

The couplings are interesting too: the "Prelude and Liebstod" from *Tristan und Isolde*, Mussorgsky's "Dawn over the Moscow River" from *Khovanshina* and Liadov's *Baba-Yaga*, all recorded in 1965.


----------

