Fanfare Reviews

Fanfare Reviews

HERZOGENBERG String Quartets: in g, op. 42/1; in d, op. 42/2; in G, op. 42/3. BRAHMS String Quartet No. 1 • Minguet Qrt • CPO 777 084-2 (Download: 12842)

Brahms & Herzogenberg: String Quartets, Vol. 2

Itʼs no fault of the Minguet Quartet, a number of whose previous releases have been well-received, or of CPO, which has invested much capital in promoting the works of Heinrich von Herzogenberg, that perhaps the most arresting performance of Brahmsʼs C-Minor Quartet, op. 51/1, Iʼve ever heard, courtesy of the New Zealand String Quartet, happened to arrive and be reviewed first. This performance by Germanyʼs Minguet Quartet is really good too, but it doesnʼt quite match the wound-up angst and intense urgency of the New Zealandʼs reading. On the other hand, the Brahms Quartet here is really kind of an afterthought, offered as a makeweight to fill out the second disc in what is physically a two-CD set. The main business at hand is the three op. 42 String Quartets by Herzogenberg (1843–1900), one of Brahmsʼs greatest admirers and allegedly the most dogged of his imitators. Brahms wasnʼt overly fond of Herzogenberg—the latter imagined himself to be better liked by the elder composer than he was—but Brahms kept up a façade of congeniality, mainly for the sake of Herzogenbergʼs wife, née Elisabet von Stockhausen, who had been one of Brahmsʼs favorite piano pupils and a serious romantic interest. This is evidenced by the cordial correspondence that Herzogenberg and Elisabet kept up with Brahms for a number of years. The charge that Herzogenberg was a shameless Brahms imitator doesnʼt really stand up to scrutiny. One has only to listen to these three quartets to realize that the Brahms quotient in this music isnʼt nearly as great as itʼs purported to be. Of course, now and then, one hears a phrase, a harmonic progression, a melodic outline that suggests Brahms, but itʼs like picking from among suspects of similar appearance in a lineup; the identification will never stand up in court. Counting the entries without opus number, Herzogenberg composed a total of seven string quartets; the three on this release were written and published together under a single opus number in 1883, and I have to say theyʼre real beauties. The Minguet Quartet has already recorded the F-Minor Quartet, op. 63, coupling it with the composerʼs Piano Quintet in C Major, op. 17. I didnʼt care much for the rambling quintet in 333, but that was a fairly early work for the late- blooming Herzogenberg, who hadnʼt composed a great deal up to then when he wrote it in 1875 at the age of 32. The much later F-Minor Quartet, with which it was paired on the earlier recording, came in 1889, and it made a more positive impression. The three op. 42 Quartets heard here evidence a composer very comfortable with the medium and gifted with a keen ear for lovely melody, dramatic conversational exchanges between the instruments, and the ability to work out his materials in a convincing and satisfying way. It canʼt be said that the Minguet Quartet has the field exclusively to itself. At least one of these quartets, the G-Minor, op. 42/1, has been recorded by the Mandelring String Quartet and was reviewed in 315, but apart from that I find no other competition to the Minguet in Herzogenbergʼs string quartets. Luckily, the performances are top-notch. The ensemble produces a beautifully burnished yet nuanced tone that seems to change colors in response to the various emotional states of the music. I would just single out as one example the second movement (Andante) of the D-Minor Quartet, op. 42/2, for how mood-affecting this can be. It has the effect of evoking both sadness and comfort, and of making you feel like youʼre floating among the stars in ethereal space. Thereʼs nothing quite like this I know by Brahms; this is Herzogenbergʼs own unique and original voice, and itʼs profoundly moving. This deserves and earns a very strong recommendation. Jerry Dubins

This article originally appeared in Issue 402 (Nov/Dec 2016) of Fanfare Magazine.

ONSLOW String Quintets: No. 20 in d, op. 45; No. 26 in c, op. 67 • Elan Qnt • NAXOS 8.573600 (Download: 6500)

Georges Onslow: String Quintets, Vol. 1

George Onslow wrote 34 string quintets, only half a dozen of them for two violins, two violas, and cello in the manner of Mozart. The remaining 28 appear to be scored for two cellos instead of two violas, à la Schubert, and in a majority of those, Onslow allowed for a double bass to substitute for the second cello—more on which in a moment. So, where do you start if youʼre a quintet of string players embarking on a project to record Onslowʼs complete string quintets, of which this release is labeled Volume 1? Well, with the Quintets Nos. 20 and 26, of course. It makes perfect sense, doesnʼt it? Actually, on the surface, it doesnʼt, but let me offer an explanation for why I believe the Elan Quintet has begun its survey of Onslowʼs string quintets where it has, and why itʼs going to be impractical for this particular ensemble, as itʼs constituted, to perform and record the composerʼs complete string quintet canon. The album names the five players of the Elan Quintet and the instruments they play: Benjamin Scherer Quesada, violin; Lelia Iancovici, violin; Julia Chu-Ying Hu, viola, Dmitri Tsirin, cello; and Matthew Baker, double bass. Note that there is no second cello. The ensemble is made up of two violins, a viola, a cello, and a double bass, a combination of instruments for which there is a fairly limited repertoire. Now, the D-Minor Quintet, op. 45, is scored for two violins, viola, and two cellos. However, this is one of those aforementioned quintets for which Onslow did provide an alternate part for double bass as a substitute for the second of the two cello parts. Indeed, but for his first three and last three quintets, which call for two violas, itʼs believed that Onslow consistently began providing alternate double bass parts for all of his two-cello quintets, beginning with the Quintet No. 10 in F Minor, op. 32, after hearing the famous double bass player Domenico Dragonetti (1763–1846) in London stand in for the absent second cellist in a performance of one of his quintets sometime around 1828. Thereʼs nothing, of course, preventing the substitution of a double bass for the second cello in any of Onslowʼs earlier two-cello quintets, but this does tend to explain why the Elan Quintet has begun its survey with two of the later quintets in which the composer himself not only authorized the practice but may have preferred it. The problem for the Elan Quintet will come with the first three quintets, published as a set under op. 1, and the final three quintets, opp. 78, 80, and 82, all six of which, as noted above, call for two violas, with no alternate parts for double bass. To perform these quintets as written, the ensemble would have to pick up a second violist and put Matthew Baker, its double bassist, on temporary leave; either that, or the second viola part would have to be transcribed for double bass, which would put it below the range of the cello, thereby altering not just Onslowʼs scoring but the fundamental balance and character of the music. Naxos has asterisked the D-Minor Quintet (No. 20) as a world premiere recording, a claim I take at face value, since I find no other current listings for it. The C-Minor Quintet, on the other hand, has had at least one other recording I know of; in fact, I reviewed it in 302. It was with the Quintett Momento Musicale on an MDG CD, and it, too, like this new one by the Elan Quintet, was given in its double bass version. Onslow has proved a difficult composer for me to warm to. His works are nothing if not technically well made and beautifully crafted, but neither originality nor inspiration seems to be in abundant supply. In terms of style, these quintets by Onslow resemble nothing as much as middle Mendelssohn. The D-Minor Quintet, composed in 1832, bears the same thrusting sense of urgency and angst, relieved by a second theme of flowing, honeyed song that one hears in Mendelssohnʼs A- Minor String Quartet, op. 13, composed just a few years earlier in 1827. If you were familiar with the Mendelssohn quartet but not the Onslow quintet, you wouldnʼt need to feel embarrassed if you guessed the work by the latter to be a work by the former. The second movement, a Menuetto marked presto (odd!), makes a stab at emulating a Mendelssohn scherzo, but misses the mark with its bearing, which is too heavy and lacking in gossamer texture. There are moments in the following Andante catabile movement that remind me of some of the slow movements in Haydnʼs quartets, though the harmonic progressions and modulations are, again, close to Mendelssohn. The finale, marked Allegro innocente, doesnʼt sound very innocent to me. It recalls in spirit, if not in actual thematic material, the first movement with its dramatic outbursts and minor-key uneasiness. There is much to like about this quintet; itʼs melodious, filled with interesting, unexpected twists and turns of phrase, and itʼs generally satisfying on an emotional level. But I canʼt say I found it inspiring or deeply moving, and it still hasnʼt persuaded me to elevate Onslow to a higher level than that of a very competent second-rate composer. Letʼs see if the C-Minor Quintet (No. 26) has any more success in that regard. Composed in 1844, itʼs a fairly late work in Onslowʼs canon of string quintets, though he still had another eight of them in him. According to the liner note, itʼs performed here in its original instrumental configuration, by which author Kay Hamilton means two violins, viola, cello, and double bass. But the editions Iʼve checked indicate that may be no truer of this quintet than it was of the No. 20. Just as with all of the other two-cello quintets, the double bass part that replaces the second cello appears to be the alternate choice. It is true, as Hamilton writes, that Onslow dedicated the score to his friend Henri Gouffe, who at the time, according to Edition Silvertrust, “was considered the leading bass player in France, and who, in collaboration with French instrument maker Bernadel, introduced the four stringed bass into France and helped invent the brass wound string which doubled the brilliance of the bass.” “So, it is perhaps fair to assume,” the Edition Silvertrust write-up continues, “that Onslow probably intended the work to be played with bass rather than a second cello, though as always, he included a second cello part.” I guess the question hinges on the word “included.” Which part came first, the one for cello or the one for double bass, and which one was “included” secondarily as a substitution option? Mendelssohn still seems to figure heavily in this C-Minor Quintet, but there are moments when it sounds like Onslow is looking back to the string quartets of Schubert. This time the second movement is designated a scherzo, and an effective one it is, too, as long as you like scherzos that arenʼt musical jokes but black, menacing, and malignant. The contrasting trio section is very Schubertian. The slow movement turns decidedly Schubertian as well, with a number of that composerʼs characteristic chromatic sidestepping, enharmonic modulations, and sudden angry outbursts; listen from 618 to 710 to see what I mean. Itʼs pure Schubert. The finale returns in mood and similar thematic material to the restless, unsettled feeling of the first movement, ending unhappily ever after in a scream of anguish and despair. In these final bars, Onslow comes close to anticipating the C- Minor String Quartet by Brahms. Any composer who can write codas of such tragic force and total annihilation, leaving no survivors and no hope, is a man (or woman) after my heart. Maybe Iʼm warming to Onslow after all. The C-Minor Quintet here is duplicated on the aforementioned MDG disc with the Quintett Momento Musicale, but itʼs paired there with Onslowʼs C-Minor Quintet, op. 38, nicknamed “The Bullet.” Here the paired D-Minor Quintet is unduplicated anywhere, being a first-ever recording. The performances by the Elan Quintet are outstanding—brilliant playing all around, really. So little of Onslowʼs total output has been recorded that, should this effort eventually materialize into a complete survey of the composerʼs string quintets, it will be a landmark achievement. Definitely recommended. Jerry Dubins

This article originally appeared in Issue 404 (Mar/Apr 2017) of Fanfare Magazine.

FUCHS Symphonies Nos. 1 and 2 • Karl-Heinz Steffens, cond; WDR SO • CPO 777 830-2 (6959)

Robert Fuchs: Symphonies Nos. 1 & 2

There is an undated photo of a young Robert Fuchs (1847–1927) inside the CD booklet showing the composer, perhaps in his late teens, with wild, piercing eyes and no smile, glaring forth with arms folded. I might have expected such a pose from a young Scriabin, but Robert Fuchs? Robert SERENADE Fuchs? It just doesnʼt add up. Somewhere in time between that photo and the music that we have come to know, Robert Fuchs mellowed. In his lifetime, he published 117 works in all of the major categories: solo, chamber, concerto (a lone piano concerto), symphony (three), choral, and opera. His music hews to the German school and the muse of Brahms and Schumann is never far away. Fuchs was especially prolific in composing chamber music, much of which has been recorded (and which is quite fine, too!). Despite this attention from record labels, there are currently only 34 recordings of Fuchsʼs music listed at ArkivMusic. Thatʼs less than the number of recordings of Dvořákʼs Symphony No. 6 alone. Such is the fate of composers of the second rank. This CPO release duplicates the program from a 1997 Thorofon CD performed by the Moravian Philharmonic under Manfred Müssauer. That Thorofon disc is very good, with solid performances in fine sound. If you have that (as I do), then this new one is superfluous. But if you are new to Fuchs (or are a rabid collector like me), then there is much to be said for these CPO performances, which really leaving nothing to be desired and are in very good sound to boot. These recordings were made way back in 2011 and sat on CPOʼs hard drive for nearly five years before seeing the light of day—puzzling, for sure. But when the laser encounters the first pit, Fuchsʼs sturdy melody that leads the first movement of Symphony No. 1 brings much enjoyment. “Hey, I know that melody” said I to me. Of course it was simply the remembrance of the Thorofon recording coming back to life. Most second-rank composers are that way because they lack a memorable melodic gift, but Fuchs was perhaps more hit than miss in this sense. Just the fact that I could recall that first movement melodic line testifies to the memorability of the music. But, of all the music on offer with this release, that is really the most memorable bit. The movement builds around that opening motif in a dramatic fashion, bringing to my mind Brahms and, to a lesser extent, Schumann—truly outstanding stuff. After the peak of that first movement itʼs a bit downhill for the rest of his First Symphony. The second movement (Intermezzo, presto) is a playful romp followed by a slow movement that lacks a strong melodic profile. The finale is Schumann redux but in a good way. The whole is well orchestrated and the WDR Symphony under the direction of Karl-Heinz Steffens plays the music for all of its considerable worth. A noble brass fanfare begins the Second Symphony. Here the melodic profile is a tad less memorable, but the working out of the theme is effective. At 18 minutes in length (nearly equal in length to the next three movement combined) the movement is too long for the material and Fuchs would have been wise to trim it. The orchestral sonority remains that of Brahms, but without that masterʼs turns of phrase that make him so delectable. The ensuing Andante movement is taken by Steffens at a nice, flowing pace. A Menuetto follows with some lovely wind playing. Brahms is never far away in this music. The finale completes this symphony with drama and flair. The booklet notes are by Eckhardt van den Hoogen whose long, sprawling essays in many past CPO releases have, I think, suffered from non-idiomatic translations. In this instance, the notes in their English version are lucid, informative, and entertaining—one couldnʼt ask for more! I may have come across as somewhat hard on Fuchs in this review, but the fact is that I really like this music. The playing of the WDR Orchestra is excellent under Steffens and the audio quality is also quite fine. Rather than giving Johannes another spin on your player, why not give Fuchs a try? It might bring a smile to the young man. Recommended. Mark Novak

This article originally appeared in Issue 401 (Sept/Oct 2016) of Fanfare Magazine.

BRAHMS Cello Sonatas Nos. 1 and 2 • Marie-Elisabeth Hecker (vc); Martin Helmchen (pn) • ALPHA 223 (5239)

Brahms: Cello Sonatas

Martin Helmchen and Marie-Elisabeth Hecker are husband and wife; this is their first recording as a duo, although they have made other recordings together in the company of other musicians. The Brahms F-Major Second Sonata was the first piece they played together, 10 years ago. The notes to this CD consist entirely of an interview with the two artists. Hecker and Helmchen do seem to be well in synch in these straightforward readings of the two sonatas. Helmchen is perhaps a bit too deferential, but he was similarly low-key in his recording of the Brahms Clarinet Sonatas with Sharon Kam (Fanfare 334). These performances seem to lack character, though: the Allegretto quasi minuetto of the E-Minor First Sonata has little lilt, while the first movement of the F-Major is insufficiently ebullient. The exposition repeat in the E-Minor Sonata is taken. Heckerʼs playing is technically beyond reproach, but I find her sound smallish, and she scratches when attempting to play at the higher dynamic levels Brahms sometimes demands, particularly on the C-string. Her tremolos in the first movement of the F-Major donʼt really come off—they sound simply like double- stops. Of recent versions of these sonatas I prefer that of Paul Watkins and Ian Brown (Chandos); however, even they still donʼt measure up to the touchstone readings of Yo-Yo Ma and Emanuel Ax (RCA) and Mstislav Rostropovich and Rudolf Serkin (DG). Richard A. Kaplan

This article originally appeared in Issue 401 (Sept/Oct 2016) of Fanfare Magazine.