|
The
people who produced the rather narcisstic Pachelbel's Greatest
Hit (RCA 60712-2-RG) are back - this time with Ravel and ten
different iterations of Bolero: yes, that fifteen-minute classical
shibboleth with its infamous pom tiddly pom tiddly pom pom, pom
tiddly pom rhythm that you either can't, or can, have
enough of. (Presumably, BMG thinks that there are viable numbers
in the former.)
| Classical
Overkill
Pachelbel's
Canon and Ravel's Bolero are but two of the
several anthologies which BMG (aka RCA Red Seal) have released
featuring myriad versions of the same work, rendered on different
media. The tip of the iceberg, as it were, was the nattily-named
Pachelbel's Greatest Hit (RCA Victor 60723-2), featuring
no less than eight versions of the Canon. This, not surprisingly,
was a big hit (pun unintended) - so much so that other classical
pieces chosen to join into the fray.
Next
to follow was The Ave Maria Album (BMG 09026-63260-2),
with renditions of you-know-what by luminaries such as Lanza,
Caruso and Domingo. Not content to leave well enough alone,
Barber's Adagio (BMG 09026-68758-2) and Rachmaninov's
Vocalise (BMG 09026-63669-2) appeared next - the latter
featuring a cornucopeia of Vocalises ranging from Kissin
to Galway, and the Norman Luboff Choir to Isao Tomita's space-age
synths. Can twenty versions of The Four Seasons or
Für Elise be far behind ? We shudder and wait.
|
There
are three full-length recordings, one by the Dallas Symphony and
two by the Boston Symphony, each separated by twenty years. These
naturally provide for interesting comparisons of how different conductors
can stamp their hallmarks on this otherwise immutable music. Munch's
1956 version with Boston was, for its time, in a demonstration class
- but the digital fidelity of the modern medium simply demonstrates
nothing but the limitations of its dynamic range (even after remastering).
At the risk of irking historical afficionados, there is even less
to be said of the technical quality of Koussevitzky's mono 1930
recording.
Mata's
version, taken very literally at the composer's Tempo di Bolero
moderato assai marking, is also available on RCA Navigator (74321
17902-2). His speed is closer to Ravel's own intended tempo than
either of the other two Boston orchestral versions. The level of
concentration and the expansive climax is very compelling - certainly
more than Munch - vividly evoking images of the tavern brawl that
occurs in the choreography of the ballet version by Ida Rubinstein.
Koussevitzky's
reading has its additional value for its historical interest. It
starts out slower than one expects, but suddenly picks up tempo
as more and more instruments are thrown into the mix. The climax
loses out in volume, unfortunately, and this version would only
be of interest for the sake of hearing Koussevitzky. The build-up
in both Boston renditions is remarkably well-sustained, with Koussevitzky
having the edge over Munch.
 The
Boston Pops under Fiedler, predating Munch by three years, offer
an edited seven-minute version - a Bolero "Lite", so to speak
- providing a sampling of what Ravel (left) has to offer without
going the whole way. Bolero is not, of course, the hardest piece
of music to edit, being the same two tunes repeated over and over.
The result, however, is a bit of a curate's egg: some may find this
sacrilegious approach to Ravel's inspired orchestration hard to
swallow, but others who appreciate that brevity is a virtue might
take to it.
Also
weighing in at seven minutes is the renowned (or infamous, depending
on your tastes) Isao Tomita, who does a pretty far-out ten-minute
synth cover. I have to tell you, three minutes into Tomita's effort,
and I felt like I was trapped in a lift and attacked by this evil
sadistic music. His colourful (to say the least) interpretation
of the work's climax will no doubt send the classical faithful running
for cover, if not howling in straightjackets. This is what happens
when classical music is watered down to the gruency of kitsch.
Filling
out the remainder of items are solo piano, duo-piano, foxtrot, brass
quintet and percussion-based concertante-style versions.
Probably the item of most interest will be Ravel's own two-piano
transcription, here presented as another historical recording by
Jacques Fray and Mario Braggiotti. There are some snazzy touches
of syncopation, and Ravel's famous ability as arranger/orchestrator
aside, this works surprisingly well. The quality of sound (from
1934) can't helped, but the contrast against Tomita's immediately
preceeding synth version couldn't be greater.
Ditto
for Morton Gould's somewhat excessive solo piano arrangement and
performance of the music, replete with arpeggios, scalar runs and
tone clusters in the bass. Says David Wright in the progamme notes:
"One imagines Maurice Ravel, Franz Liszt and Charles Ives having
several bottles of wine at the cafe, then pulling out pen and paper
and composing music like this."
Faux
sophistication or just plain loony ? Could be either, I think, depending
on how your personal sentiments run. The quality of this recording,
from 1932, is also as foggy as you can expect, especially so because
noise-reduction was not used during the transfer to master to preserve
its full-frequency content. (We wonder why.)
The
Canadian Brass, not content to leave well enough alone, also produce
their own vivid rendition, with rather amazing colouring of individual
brass timbres to represent the orchestral colours. Going the other
extreme, Evelyn Glennie (through the electronic wizardy of overdubbing)
delivers a punchy percussive Bolero, going through an array of noisome
implements, in another effective arrangement by Gordon Langford.
Finally,
composer-arranger-conductor Nat Shilkret also has a hand, turning
the Bolero into a Foxtrot - that is, if you think about it, making
it four beats to a bar instead of three - kind of like the music
running a three-legged race. The final result doesn't sound as bizarre
as this description suggests, and probably says more for the popularity
of the Bolero theme than anything else.
It
all comes down to this: how much do you really like the Bolero
- enough to invest in seventy-odd minutes of it ? Of course there
are reasons of interest for those who'd like to hear the alternate
arrangements, especially the historical pianistic versions, but
if that is the only reason then this would be an expensive acquisition
indeed.
Otherwise,
neutrals who have no particular preference for or against Bolero
would be well advised to steer clear and leave this collection of
muzak alone - you can have too much of a good thing.
There are far better renditions of the Bolero to be had elsewhere,
and putting onself through seventy-something minutes of the same
two sixteen-bar phrase in various contortions ad nauseam
smacks just too much of masochism.
BENJAMIN
CHEE strongly believes that quality and quantity are
not interchangeable commodities in art.
885:
4.3.2001 © Benjamin Chee
All
original texts are copyrighted. Please seek permission from the
Classical Editor
if you wish to reproduce/quote Inkpot material.
|
