I’ve been on a wholesale, wholehearted Stravinsky kick of late, drenching myself in Stravinsky recordings, scores, books, etc. I’m almost finished with Stephen Walsh’s two-volume biography, I’ve gone through most of those entertaining-but-unreliable Stravinsky/Craft “Conversation” books, done quite a lot of other reading as well.
But most of all, I’ve been listening and collecting recordings. It all got started because I unearthed a stash of Columbia Records LPs with Stravinsky conducting his own music. Those were made during the 1960s, mostly, when Stravinsky signed contracts with Columbia to record the bulk of his own music in modern stereo. Of course he was getting on in year at that point (he was 80 years old in 1962) and Robert Craft actually did quite a bit of the nitty-gritty rehearsing and the like. In some cases Craft is even listed as the conductor (for example, for “Mavra”.)
There is a shibboleth floating around out there that states flatly that Stravinsky’s earlier, pre-stereo, recordings of his own music are invariably better musically than his later recordings. You find a certain bias against the Columbia recordings, in other words. I’ve been able to make a lot of spot comparisons; typically I’ve managed to collect a more-or-less complete Stravinsky discography during the last month. (I’m hell on wheels when it comes to shopping for CDs.)
What I’ve found is what a reasonable person would expect, which is that the recordings vary in quality, inspiration, and technical polish (both electronically and musically.) In some cases it’s a no-brainer that the later Columbia version is the best. In other cases the differences are more subtle.
So: a few examples. The Symphony in Three Movements was written for the New York Philharmonic; they played the premiere in January of 1946 with Stravinsky and recorded it for RCA with Stravinsky during the same week. Ergo, we are dealing here with a truly “authentic” recording — composer and original orchestra, at the of the premiere. It’s like hearing Haydn conduct the “Surprise” symphony at the Hanover Square Rooms in 1791. And it’s a good performance, as one would expect from the New York Philharmonic. By 1946 Stravinsky was an adept conductor (which is more than you can say for him in 1928), and of course the piece had been carefully rehearsed.
Two later recordings exist of Stravinsky conducting the work: a 1954 with the German Radio Orchestra, and the 1961 recording with the “Columbia Symphony” (a pickup orchestra) on the stereo set. What’s interesting is that both performances are highly similar to the 1946, but that the 1961 is the spunkiest, the crispest, and really overall I would have to say the “best”. I’m pretty sure that the 1961 recording was made by the Hollywood version of the Columbia Symphony (New York on being the other incarnation), which would also help to account for the performance’s being so spiffy: that Hollywood “Columbia Symphony” was made up mostly out of film studio musicians, and those guys were GOOD. At any rate, the 1961 is, I think, the most effective of all of Stravinsky’s recordings of the work. The 1954 German recording is, by the way, amazingly good — overall clearer and crisper than the New York.
And of course there are other performances of the Symphony. I have three more: Ansermet with the Orchestre de la Suisse Romande, Rattle and the City of Birmingham, and MTT conducting the London Symphony Orchestral. The Ansermet is sweet and fun, but the guys in Geneva aren’t up to the piece technically and the strain shows clearly in a lot of places. MTT’s performance is, oddly enough, restrained and somewhat muddy. Part of that is the recording itself — it’s one of the lesser Abbey Road studios. The Rattle is overall the most interesting of the non-Stravinsky recordings in my collection; at least it has plenty of energy. But really, none of them have the bright, crisp, razor-sharpness of Stravinsky’s 1961.
One fascinating example (perhaps a little artificial in this case) comes by comparing Stravinsky’s two recordings of the Symphony of Psalms. The 1931 version was made with the Walther Staram orchestra in Paris and a pick-up chorus of Russian emigrés. The singing is fascinating given that it’s much more florid, scoopy, and “Romantic” than one normally associates with this work. Whether or not Stravinsky actually liked this remains to be seen. The premiere performances had been given by Ansermet in Switzerland and Koussevitzky in Boston, for whom the work was written. (The Koussevitzky wasn’t recorded, but one can assume it was something of a mess, as were most of his new-music performances.) Although this was the first recording of the work, it wasn’t a “premiere” recording in the usual sense. It also suffers from some technical bloops in the orchestra, no big deal, but somewhat disconcerting. But the 1963 recording, made in Toronto with the CBC (Canadian Broadcasting Corporation) Symphony, and the Festival Singers of Toronto, remains one of the jewels of Stravinsky’s recorded discography. It’s *the* performance of the work. Stravinsky seems to have favored a very white, clear choral sound — at least that’s the way that choir sounds on the recording, and it would appear that he had something to do with the selection of that group. Again I have a few other recordings of the work as well: Ancerl and the Czech Philharmonic, Ansermet and the Suisse Romande, Bernstein and the NY Phil, and MTT and the London Symphony. The Ancerl is really quite nice but rhythmically shaky (I don’t know why people talk about his rhythmic control over the orchestra). Ansermet again is so-so given the orchestra, but he did conduct the premiere and so there is a sense of authenticity here. Bernstein’s is over-engineered, over-played, over-sung, and in general something of a travesty. MTT’s is good, but also somewhat muddy.
Stravinsky’s 1938 “Jeu des Cartes” was something of a scandale in its day given that he recorded it with — GULP — the Berlin Philharmonic. (In 1938!!!) However, it’s a good performance, allowing for some slightly off-kilter intonation in the brass. But the 1954 with the German Radio Orchestra is much better. But neither of them can hold a candle to the 1964 Columbia, which was with the Cleveland Orchestra and does the work up proud.
On the flip side, I must say that Stravinsky’s 1949 recording of “Orpheus” with the “RCA Victor Symphony” (essentially the NBC Symphony), is really the jewel, even finer than his 1964 Columbia recording (Chicago Symphony). Stravinsky’s own recording of his Capriccio for Piano and Orchestra (i.e., as the soloist) is probably my favorite, recorded in 1930 with Ansermet conducting the Walther Staram orchestra.
In short, lots of stuff, recordings from 1928 to 1967 by Stravinsky himself, and also recordings by other “authentic” performers like Monteux and Ansermet.