General Category > Gustav Mahler and Related Discussions

Thielemann/MPO/DG Beethoven and Brahms Symphony No. 1 (OOT)

(1/1)

John Kim:
It was just reviewed by DH getting 6/9 for performance & sound:

LUDWIG VAN BEETHOVEN
Egmont Overture
JOHANNES BRAHMS
Symphony No. 1


Munich Philharmonic

Christian Thielemann

Deutsche Grammophon- 477 6404(CD)
Reference Recording - Brahms: Klemperer (EMI)
 
 
 
I had the opportunity to see Thielemann perform Brahms' First Symphony a few years ago, and happily his interpretation has matured over time. He still has the same bad habits that combine to constitute his personal style, if you want to call it that: a tendency to slow down when the music is quiet and speed up when it's loud, to undermine climaxes with an oily legato phrasing, to rewrite the composer's dynamics to suit his convenience, and fondness for blurry rhythm aided by a tolerance for surprisingly sloppy attacks and releases. You can hear most if not all of these qualities at the end of the exposition of the first movement of the Brahms, and at the distressingly non-happening moment of recapitulation in the same movement.


However, it has to be said that there are moments of great subtlety too. You may not like the incredibly slow first-movement coda, but the gradual deceleration to get there is very smoothly handled. The inner movements are gorgeous, the andante flowing seamlessly with the spontaneity of an improvisation, and the Un poco allegretto as fresh and light as anyone could ask. The finale presents some of the same problems as the first movement, as you might expect: an introduction that tends to hang fire, the main allegro's "big tune" very timidly presented at the start, a wet noodle of a climax at the return of the alphorn theme in the recapitulation, and worst of all a whopping slowdown for the final chorale that, combined with sloppy rhythm, is the opposite of grandeur.


Such things are simply lapses in taste, and individual listeners can decide for themselves how much they matter. The main problem with Thielemann is that when he indulges in bad taste the result turns out to be boring, whereas with someone like Furtwängler, the ends often justify the means--no matter now bad the playing or questionable the excesses committed in the heat of the moment, the result could be thrilling.

Beethoven's Egmont Overture offers a testament to Thielemann at his worst, as he usually is in Beethoven. The introduction begins dramatically but flat-lines almost immediately. The allegro has little sense of menace. Thielemann predictably slows down at the fanfare figures, breaking the music's rhythmic back. Also predictably, he then races through the coda. It's unutterably pedantic and dreary.


Through all of this the Munich Philharmonic gives him exactly what he wants, including apparently some smeared rhythm in the violins in Egmont and bits of the Brahms. As such, the playing is quite beautiful. There's no question in my mind that Thieleman has matured in his approach and gained something in finesse, at least on this outing, but there's so much excellent competition in this music and the results are still so much less good than they can and should be, that it's hard to recommend this release with anything other than serious reservations. The live sonics, by the way, are natural and well-balanced. Perhaps in another 10 or 12 years Thielemann will actually be ready for Brahms and Beethoven. Then again, perhaps not.


--David Hurwitz


I am really curious to hear this CD as I liked Thielemann's Bruckner 5th very much.

John,


 

akiralx:

I have this CD and like it a lot.  While I read DH's reviews, he can be ignored with respect to Thielemann as he clearly has a downer on the man, or he just doesn't 'get' him.  Which is OK in some ways, as he is an acquired taste.  I like all his CDs that I have heard.

The Brahms 1 is a bit of a slow burner, starting in a slightly subdued fashion - CT obviously sees the work as a crescendo.  The playing is excellent, and the inner movements are especially fine.  CT rather opens up Brucknerian vistas in the finale, which a listener may or not like - I do.  But the work reaches a triumphal conclusion which makes sense of CT's interpretative approach.

The Egmont is also finely done, more weighty than incisive, but powerful.  Gramophone gave this CD a good review, especially the Egmont which the reviewer Richard Osborne rated as one of the best available.

barry guerrero:
Sorry, but I just don't "get him" either. What is there to get? Take his Bruckner 5th:  marvellous brass chorale at the end. However, pretty much everything before that is horrendously awful; unless you think that excessively willful conducting is a prerequisite for Bruckner. I think that the music is better than that.

Barry

Navigation

[0] Message Index