# Shostakovich 5-athon



## techniquest (Aug 3, 2012)

I've been listening to Shostakovich's 5th symphony in four different recordings today in a Shos 5 marathon 
First up - and my reference recording - the Czech Philharmonic under Karel Ancerl in a vintage 1961 recording by Supraphon. I grew up with this recording on vinyl (Music for Pleasure) but now have the CD transfer from 1994.
1st Movement: This comes in with a fairly brisk moderato; the woodwind and brass being particularly well recorded with beautiful expressive playing. At the start of the scond section of this movement there is a real sense of foreboding with very low horns over the rhythmic low piano. The martial part after the build-up has very sharp staccato trumpets and a menacing snare drum, and this section builds up into a real frenzy with the Czech Phil brass on top form. It all slows down as we enter the big orchestral unison which culminates in a good tam-tam stroke. The tricky flute / horn duet which comes next has a rather unfortunate vibrato flute followed by a similarly wobbly oboe and it's all a bit too fast but it slows down before the second flute subject and the return of the opening string calls with nicely tinkling celeste.
2nd Movement: This Mahlerian piece (a kind of Landler) again highlights the superb woodwind playing - especially the reedy woods. The 3/4 rhythm is kept very tight by Ancerl and the tempo is just right. The solo violin/harp section fiollowed by the flute/bassoon/harp is beautiful and sparkling. I like the way the percussion is balanced so well in this recording being neither too forward nor hidden at the back.
3rd Movement: Possibly Shostakovich's most beautiful and searching symphonic movement, this - marked Largo - is much slower than anything we've heard thus far. The Czech Phil strings put their heart and soul into it and the first big crescendo at 4.5 minutes in is superb. Then the searching oboe over tremolo violins is very beautifully played, as is the clarinet that takes it up later. The descending tremolo scale leads to a sad low string chorale brfore the flutes take on the tune with a tiny tinkling celeste / glockenspiel. Low woodwinds reiterate the opening theme before the strings join in to take us to the big climax. It's a little on the quicker side of largo and I hear no hammering 'tremolo' piano chords - whether Ancerl omits these or whether they are recorded too far back I don't know, but the 'wall of sound' effect is slightly lacking here. Towards the end of this movement the harp is again beautifully recorded; an important but often undervalued instrument as is the celeste, played at the lower end of it's register here towards the end of the movement.
4th movement: The big martial opening to this movement with it's bashing timpani and brass fanfares has a constant pace and does not speed up seconds into the movement (thankfully). The tempo only picks up more as we head towards the end of this whole section and another tam-tam crash with thumping doubled timpani, and here in this percussive section there is no exaggerated slow-down either. The central section of the movement is quite brisk with more of that lovely woodwind and you really can hear detail in these quieter passages. The entry of the snare drum and quiet timpani in the final section is again taken quite briskly so no need to speed up anywhere in this section as it builds in volume and intensity and it keeps at this pace right through the 5 bass drum hits and only slows down during the snare drum roll crescendo after which we are sent straight back to the initial tempo of the movement. In the final bar or two, Ancerl slows us down to the last thud.
So that's that for part 1. In part 2, I'll look at the 2005 Kitajenko recording on Capriccio.


----------



## techniquest (Aug 3, 2012)

Shostakovich 5-athon part 2: Gurzenich-Orchester Koln / Dmitri Kitajenko, Capriccio complete symphonies box set,2005.

1st Movement: At 16:32, this is over 2 minutes longer than the Ancerl rendition and the initial section of the movement certainly feels a lot slower. In this section, the stabbing 3-note chords before the strings repeat the opening phrase sound exaggeratedly dissonant. Nice as they are, the woodwinds don't sound as crisp and precise as the Czech Philharmonic, but there is heavier piano at the start of the second section though the low horns lack the sense of foreboding. Here the tempo is around the same as Ancerl and the recorded sound is excellent. At the cymbal crash (prior to which there is a marked speed-up) the pace is definitely martial and the brass build-up after this is really frightening - the state-of-the-art digital recording shines here. The orchestral unison passage is much slower and heavier than Ancerl and the orchestra boast a bigger, deeper, heavier tam-tam. The quiet flute/horn section that follows now sounds hurried but it slows down when the clarinet enters; in fact the whole movement gets slower and slower until the low flute over low strings brings the movement to a close.
2nd Movement: This movement opens with punching low strings at about the same speed as Ancerl (there's just 10 seconds difference in the overall timing of the movement). Maybe the 3/4 timing doesn't feel as precise and 'dance-like' as Ancerl, but it is a well-played movement and the pizzicato strings/bassoons are recorded brilliantly, though the xylophone is weak.
3rd Movement: The Largo is over a minute longer in this recording and the opening has none of the emotion inherent in the Ancerl version despite the spot-on playing. The first crescendo offers more feeling though and the oboe solo is beautiful against very quiet tremolo violins - infact this whole section is really delicately done. The build to the big climax is held deliberately at the same tempo as what had preceded it (there is a temptation to speed up here) and the hammering 'tremolo' piano really sears through like a huge warning cry. In this recording, you really notice the change to major chords at the end.
4th movement: The opening fanfare isn't too fast, but it rapidly speeds up for the main theme which is a shame. However it's not too rushed and i soon got used to the pace which is actually very similar to Ancerl. But it gets faster - frantic in fact - and sounds really good but the collapse of this to the tam-tam and hammered timpani is really weak. The quieter section that follows is really nice with brass chorales kept hushed while the rocking string motif keeps things gently moving. The entrance of the snare drum over timpani and low snarling brass is very slow - just how I like this section. The pace is kept very precise right up to the bass drum hits, then right through the horn and trumpet calls and right through snare drum roll but loses it at the cymbal crash when it suddenly gets far too fast. So it goes until those final couple of bars when it brakes to a halt.
That's it for part 2; next I'll be discussing the WDR Symphony Orchestra / Barshai recording.


----------



## techniquest (Aug 3, 2012)

Shostakovich 5-athon part 3: WDR Sinfonie Orchestra / Ralph Barshai, Brilliant Classics complete symphonies bargain set, 1995/6.

1st Movement: At the opening, the high strings sound a little wobbly and the first entry of the solo horn sounds clipped and too forward in the mix but these early oddities don't detract from the overall feel of the movement. The start of the development section has great low piano and horns and you can hear more piano chords later as the music builds. The martial section is very well done but the xylophone at the end of this section is lost and it all speeds up to a really quick repeat of the opening string motif before slowing down again for the unison section. The tam-tam is superb and the heavy timpani and growling brass just right before it all dies down. The flute / horn part that follows is effortless though to my ears the hornb doesn't sound quite real (though I'm sure it is), and the bassoon a little after this has an odd ugly tone.
2nd Movement: Almost identical timing to Ancerl but very clear timpani and horns make for a more exciting listen - and is that a tuba I hear omm-pahing away there? And a contra-bassoon? This is the first time I've really noticed these instruments in this piece. The xylophone is better recorded than in the first movement and everything is clear, bright and perfectly paced except...I'm not sure about the slight hesitation at the start of the horn chorales, it just upsets the rhythm a little.
3rd Movement: The opening of this movement is better than Kitajenko but still doesn't capture the emotion quite like Ancerl and there's a tad too much vibrato. But the pacing is just right, especially at the first climax which is superb - the orchestral texture (minus brass) really showing. In the section with the tremolo strings, I can hear echoes of Mahler 7 and some dissonances that I hadn't noticed before - this is just wonderful stuff. The build up to the big climax is again handled superbly and the wall of sound from the tremolo strings, woods and piano is so powerful as is the string part that follows; there;s so much in here that i didn't find in the previous two recordings. The muted section that follows with the climbing upper strings has a mystery and beauty all its' own and at the end the closing major chords have a different feel - this is no relief.
4th Movement: I don't like it when the music speeds up after the initial brass/timpani fanfare, but that's exactly what happens here. Only Ancerl has resisted this so far. But the recording is clear, the playing great and that big tam-tam leads us into to the quieter brass and rocking strings. There are some hefty dynamics changes in this section - more so than I'd noticed previously and it has a brisk tempo. There are also some very low notes and a nice picky harp which leads to a much slower snare drum / timpani entry. Once again I hear things I hadn't noticed such as clarinet and timpani hits. This build-up continues and really blasts out of the speaker and there is no change of tempo after the cymbal crash so this takes on a completely different feel to the ending of the Kitajenko, and that single-note high string really grates against the brass causing some big dissonance: fantastic!
That's it for the Barshai. Next I'll be looking at the Ashkenazy recording with the Royal Philharmonic on Decca.


----------



## techniquest (Aug 3, 2012)

Shostakovich 5-athon part 4: Royal Philharmonic Orchestra, Vladimir Ashkenazy, Decca 1990.

1st Movement: The opening and first section of this recording is so similar to Ancerl in tone and pace that I'm immediately comfortable with it. At the second section a very forward piano and growling horns change the tone as well as the pace - in fact the speed really does get hectic and there are times when I wonder if everyone can quite keep up! The music settles back a little uneasily into the martial section before speeding up manically again only slowing down when we get to the unison orchestra part which is very powerful. A lovely, lingering tam-tam ends this part and things really do calm down. The whole final section of this movement is handled beautifully and the last celeste scale slows right down in it's final ascent.
2nd Movement: There's all sorts going on here that I haven't noticed before, mostly in the form of glissandi - french Horns, solo violin; very Mahlerian. This recording also boasts the best xylophone so far.
3rd Movement: The opening of the largo sounds a little thin, but the basses help raise the focus in the first crescendo though it's nowhere near Barshai. The oboe solo is beautiful in it's simplicity as is the clarinet that follows and for me this is the best part of this movement in this recording. You can really hear the individual piano hits in the 'wall of sound' and the xylophone is strong, but the following section doesn't sound quite right with woodwind losing out to very tremolo strings initially.
4th Movement: Here we go with the speeding up intro to the 4th movement again; the timpani sounds a bit tinny too, but maybe that's just me. Excellent horn dissonances before it all speeds up again; come on cellos keep up! The pace seems to slacken off a touch before the climax of this section with great stand-cymbal crescendo, tam-tam and timp-hammering as it slows even more; almost to a stop. A better pace is resumed for the central section, not as hurried as it sounds in the Barshai recording. The start of the the third section (snare, timps, woodwinds) is around the same tempo as Ancerl and, other than slowing down at the entry of the final theme, stays there until the final bars when once again it slows right down. There are really good bass drum hits at the end which continue to double the timps beyond the 3-hit solo.
There - more to follow...?


----------



## drpraetorus (Aug 9, 2012)

Interesting. See if you can find the Kondrashin recording that Melodia put out in the 60's. interesting rendition.


----------



## Vaneyes (May 11, 2010)

When you get done, could you do a Readers Digest version?


----------



## Hausmusik (May 13, 2012)

Tech, will you be dong Haitink/RCO? That's my favorite. Also be curious to hear your take on Petrenko, a much-(over?)hyped one.


----------



## david johnson (Jun 25, 2007)

you must hear mitropoulos/nypo, if you have not done so.


----------



## TheVioletKing (Jan 9, 2013)

What do you think of Bernstein's interpretation with The New York Philharmonic?


----------



## Bone (Jan 19, 2013)

I need to find a good recording of 5 - just haven't found one that I think is "complete." I heard Ancerl's #7 years ago and really liked it, so I'll probably spring for 5 and see how it goes. Never a huge fan of Ashkenazy's 5: the word "strained" always comes to mind. Never heard Barshai or Kitaenko.


----------



## mgj15 (Feb 17, 2011)

I have a couple of versions; first with the Leningrad Philharmonic, Mravinsky conducting, second LB in front of the NYPO, like the above video. Not sure if it's the same performance or not, but the recording I have and that video are both fantastic. (Unfortunately I don't have an ear that would be able to discern if they are different yet!). The Mravinsky version is good, but recording not that great.

I also saw the Boston Symphony Orchestra perform this piece last year, also marvelous.


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

mgj15 said:


> I also saw the Boston Symphony Orchestra perform this piece last year, also marvelous.


You and I may have been at the same concert! Was it on Saturday?


----------



## mgj15 (Feb 17, 2011)

I believe so! Stravinsky concerto for piano & winds and Ravel La Mer L'Oye were the first half of the program if I recall. Really enjoyed the Ravel, but I've yet to find much I love in Stravinky. Interesting program nonetheless.


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

mgj15 said:


> I believe so! Stravinsky concerto for piano & winds and Ravel La Mer L'Oye were the first half of the program if I recall. Really enjoyed the Ravel, but I've yet to find much I love in Stravinky. Interesting program nonetheless.


Exactly.

Well, I came partially because of the Stravinsky, so tastes differ. It was a great program, and good performances all around. I just wish that the horn hadn't flubbed the solo in the DSCH 4th mvt so obviously.


----------



## joen_cph (Jan 17, 2010)

*techniquest*, thanks for the interesting posts. I´ll bear your remarks in mind when re-hearing my versions (a somewhat random pick-up of Mravinsky, Barshai, Fedoseev, Mitchell, Rowicki and Haitink) 
& so far I´ve found out that I need at least the Ancerl recording as well.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

I'd like a review of the Petrenko recording, if anybody's heard it. TIA!


----------



## mgj15 (Feb 17, 2011)

Mahlerian said:


> Exactly.
> 
> Well, I came partially because of the Stravinsky, so tastes differ. It was a great program, and good performances all around. I just wish that the horn hadn't flubbed the solo in the DSCH 4th mvt so obviously.


First I mistyped Ma Mere..oops!

Second, it appears that non-discerning ear of mine may have been a blessing because that flub escaped me!

I also saw Symphony of Psalms last year, which, while entertaining, didn't engage me as I had hoped. Though, some of my favorite music has taken repeated listens to sink in, so perhaps I need to revisit Igor's non-Rite/Firebird works.


----------



## Vaneyes (May 11, 2010)

Suggested Shostakovich Symphony 5 recs. - ACO/Haitink, LPO/Masur, LSO/M. Shostakovich, Philadelphia O./Muti.


----------



## techniquest (Aug 3, 2012)

KenOC, I'll do a review of the Petrenko for you as soon as I get the chance to sit and give it a good listen. Also coming up will be the Temirkanov 1981 recording from the Brilliant Classics Historical Russian Archives set and the Michael Tilson Thomas / San Francisco SO live recording from 2007 which accompanies the 'Keeping Score' dvd presentation. That will exhaust all the recordings I have of the piece.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

techniquest said:


> KenOC, I'll do a review of the Petrenko for you as soon as I get the chance...


Thanks!


----------



## julianoq (Jan 29, 2013)

I am just starting to dig Shostakovich and classical music in general but I heard Gergiev version on YouTube and loved it, may worth a check.


----------



## techniquest (Aug 3, 2012)

Okay here goes with another: Vasily Petrenko / Royal Liverpool Philharmonic, Naxos 2009

1st Movement: The symphony gets off to a rather slowly paced opening and immediate you can hear careful phrasing and a sense that this is going to be a serious and considered approach to the score. At times it feels as though Petrenko allows the music to ever-so-slightly slow down which gives it a slightly sluggish feel. Also there are times in the quieter moments when it is simply too quiet - this is going to plague the whole recording.
The piano comes in to quicken the pace somewhat, but in these few pages of the score the orchestra gets gradually faster until the martial section brings it back to heel a touch with heavy snare drum and some odd quacks and parps in the brass which give more of a dissonant feel than I'm used to. It stays at this pace a for while longer before accelerating again (until we are on a par with Ancerl) until we get to the orchestra unison where it again ever-so-slightly starts to slow down...keeping up with these changes in tempo is getting exhausting! A disappointing tam-tam brings this section to a close and we come to the flute/horn exchange and to me the first note from the flute sounds flat, but then I'm no musician. I think there's a slight horn fluff at that very high note too. Thereafter the playing is gentle and controlled with a lot of dynamic nuances and more tempo changes.
2nd Movement: This opens faster than I'm used to, but that's okay., Shrieking woodwinds bring in the main theme of the movement and again phrasing and dynamics are to the fore. Don't expect any of Ashkanzy's glissandi however, they simply aren't there in any form - not even the harp. The pizzicato section is done nicely as is the bassoon in thsi part, but - at the end - it suddenly slows down considerably until a final faster flourish. This movement isn't done as well as any of the preceding recordings discussed: it doesn't bounce along a la Ancerl, there's little sense of fun and the horns are too far back to make any impact.
3rd Movement: If the last movement was disappointing, the same cannot be said for anything that follows in this symphony (apart from more of those annoying super-quiet quiet bits in this 3rd movement). That being said, in the opening here the pace is slow - well it is 'largo' - and there is no messing about with the tempo; just beautiful restrained playing that continues up to the first big crescendo. Even this is achieved without any inclination to speed up as as such it holds a power and depth of emotion that is so often missed. The mournful oboe tune that follows is gorgeous and - the best - and it's left hanging with just distant tremolo strings playing before the clarinet comes to the rescue and gets the tune back on it's feet. It really does feel as though the oboe is too distraught to carry on; what wonderful writing and wonderful playing. Unfortunately the quiet string interlude before the flute entry is pushed so far back it loses everything, but I blame the producers here and it's a real shame. You might like it, but for me it doesn't work.
The second crescendo is handled well with no speed-up and the wall of sound really works. Unfortunately the string/woods section that follows is a bit thin and there is a really off sound at one point (bum note) which you'd have to hear to understand. Anyhow, after this climactic part it's back to the quieter music and the movement meanders towards the end with a desolate, empty sense which the final major chords can do nothing to relieve. Superb.
4th Movement: This movement opens with a roar and pounding drums and within seconds predictably speeds up to find a brisk but not too speedy tempo. This whole thing builds up and up, gets a bit quicker before the whole thing is brought to an close with an almighty tam-tam and thunderous timpani hits. It suddenly got very frightening - and there's a lot more of that to come! The central section is again very well phrased with what feels like meticulous attention to playing. The start of the final section which opens with quiet timpani, snare drum and very low horns is very quiet and VERY slow. It's forboding and precise but wow it's slow. And guess what - it never speeds up, not one jot for the remainder of the movement. Given that the movement is marked 'allegro non troppo' it could well be that Petrenko is taking something of a liberty with the score (I remember hearing live performances by Mark Wigglesworth in which he belts along at break neck speed during this last part not even slowing down for the final timpani/bass drum hits and the movement loses everything), but it gives the piece a whole different meaning. There are massive brass dissonances here and the single repeated high string note is relentless, doubled with piano hammering out it's highest notes. At the very end the timpani / bass drum hits are the biggest ever! This is no triumphant finale, this is a terrifying, brutal conclusion. 
This disc has the added advantage of a really sparkling performance of the 9th symphony coupling the 5th so I would absolutely recommend it. The first couple of movements of the 5th are not the best, but they are by no means bad, and the finale is a 'must hear'.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

techniquest said:


> Okay here goes with another: Vasily Petrenko / Royal Liverpool Philharmonic, Naxos 2009.


A great review! I thank you, Mr. Wallet may not.


----------



## drpraetorus (Aug 9, 2012)

re the 4th movement finale; exactly what Shostakovich had in mind


----------

