Brahms; Tchaikovsky: Violin Concertos
|
List Price: Our Price: $6.64 You Save: $5.34 (45%) Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days Buy Used: from $2.72 (click here) Category: Music CD See more new music releases 
|
|---|
Buy this Music CD at online store in your country
Canadian Music Store
Canadian Music Store
Free Music Notes for Brahms; Tchaikovsky: Violin Concertos
Free Music Review: Tchaikovsky finds wanting
Hit: 4 Stars
Don't get me wrong - Heifetz was a superb technician and never failed to show it, even in the most demanding passages of the most difficult pieces written for the violin. But about this Tchaikovsky rendition: Where's the fire? He blasts through the first movement as if he were playing Paganini's Moto Perpetuo Op. 11 or the last movement of Beethoven's third Rasumovsky quartet. This movement is meant to be taken at a relaxed tempo and every note savored; it is Russian Romanticism, after all. Typically lasting around 17-18 minutes, Heifetz makes it last 15. I seem to recall one reviewer positing that the faster a concerto is played, the better since the purpose of a concerto is for the soloist to show off his technical skills. I wholeheartedly disagree. No doubt there are concertos meant to be played this way as a display of virtuosity, but there is (and should be) much more to a performance of any piece than mere speed. Music is meant to be played and deeply felt, not used as a tool for promoting one's image as a technical wizard. This being said, the rest of the Tchaikovsky is extremely well done and the Brahms is breathtaking, though maybe slightly on the fast side. The Brahms concerto, in my opinion, is better suited to Heifetz's style. It is meant to be dug into and played with the intensity for which Brahms' music is so well known. Every note is clear and pronounced and not a single beat is missed. I honestly do not think a better rendition of this concerto can be found anywhere.
So, buy this CD more for the Brahms (unless you agree that the Tchaikovsky should be played this way). Overall, you will not be disappointed.
Free Music Review: The best recording of Tchaikosvky. 3 Stars for Brahms!
Hit: 4 Stars
If you want a recording of the Tchaikovsky Concerto, this is the final. Simply the best performance of that concert!
In the concert of Brahms, find another recording. I recommend David Oistrakh, wich with Heifetz is the greatest violinist of the century. Oistrakh recorded several times this concert of Brahms, and is unbeatable!
Heifetz gave in Brahms's concert an excess of acceleration, and thus sacrifices the lyricism of Brahms that the work requires.
Do like me. Buy the CD thinking about the Concert of Tchaikosvky. After hearing this concert with Heifetz you will have difficulty in hearing with another violinist.
Free Music Review: The best recordings of both of these concerti
Hit: 5 Stars
The Brahms is absolutely magnificent. It is lyrical, exciting, and utterly perfect. The Tchaikovsky is similar. Heifetz plays these two pieces at faster tempos than other violinists, but they never sound rushed. In fact, they sound more wonderful and beautiful than any other recording. After you buy this CD, you'll wonder how you were ever happy before. I know this sounds like a bit of an overstatement, but I mean it. A lot.Free Music Review: Preferables Barbirolli and Koussevitzky's mono recordings
Hit: 3 Stars
There are two versions of Thaikovsky' violin concerto: the original composer's version with some hateful repetitions in third movt.(Grumiaux, Mullova, Vengerov' versions, etc.), and Heifetz teacher Leopold Auer's version, without that repetitions, which I prefer. In this recording Heifetz plays -fortunately- Leopold Auer's version, but the problem here is the performance's speed, because this is a virtuose but at the same time an acelerate version, and I think with J. Buxton that Heifetz-Barbirolli 1937' version, now edited in NAXOS label, is preferable, but in my opinion the definitive version of this work is Erica Morini-Arthur Rodzinski's with Royal Philharmonic Orch. in UNIVERSAL, yesterday Westminster, in a 20' bit resolution edition. At the same time, in Brahms' violin concerto, I also prefer mono Heifetz-Koussevitzky version, with Boston Orch., and the definitive version for me is Henryk Szeryng-Pierre Monteux's with London Symphony in RCA label, commented here, a 1958 recording that sounds better than more recent versions. Oscar Olavarr?a A.Free Music Review: Reiner forgot his glasses
Hit: 1 Stars
How can people be called "melomans" when they give high points to these awfull recording?
Awfull, because there is a great pair of concertos. This is big music. Big and contrasting, for here you have one of the most virtuosic and at the same time beautiful of the entire repertoire (Tchaikovsky) and the best violin (and perhaps of any instrument) concerto (Brahms).
So I see Brahms as the best, because his is a unique blend of tragic pathos, autummnal lyricism and enchanting orchestral colours (with a no giant orchestration), combined with the greatest artistic wisdom. Tchaikovsky adds melodic beauty and is more virtuosic, I think. I would like having in one CD Sibelius (they say is the best 20 century) and Brahms. Beethoven - Brahms in one CD is useful to understand Brahms point of departure (overall plan is the same), but Brahms is better than Beethoven in every measure. Only a great composer can win over a great work of another great composer. Please dont vociferate: Brahms has greater emotional range and please, Beethoven never was a great concerto writer, in the sense that his orchestra never is used at his full potential to have a dialogue with the soloist. For that, please go to this brahms or the late Mozart piano concertos. Please see what limited is the wind writting in Bethoven and how Brahms orchestra gets more colours (in essence the instrumentation is not so different). Beethoven set the basis, brahms improved it.
I said in this review about a magical blending of pathos and lyricism. "pathos" and tragedy: some sections are really dramatic and should be played with the appropiate urgency, but there are moments where poetry is the centre of the passage. And that is where Reiner fails. For heifetz is one of the best violinists and is a great concerto artist, but fell in a wrong field. Reiner suffered from his eyes, did you know? And here he forgot his glasses. He couldnt read the score, namely the parts marked MA NON TROPPO!!!!!!! Where is the elegiac, autummnal quality that gives this concerto his fragance? please, Reiner spoils this best of the best concertos with that speed. If you want Heifetz' Brahms, go for Naxos with Koussevitzky (sound is not so worse). Another point is that brahms was a lover of ancient music. He was interested in polyphony and this point is present in all his works: the internal voices. here they are engulfed by a huge string, insensitive to the colour nuances that make this work so unforgetable. Please, for Brahms go to Harnoncourt.
And speaking about Tchaikovsky, frankly I did not listened too much. If Reiner fails so evidently in the best violin concerto, there is no reason to go forward listening. I have a special place in my heart to a live recording (with deserved final applause) given by Oistrakh and recorded by Melodya label. This concerto belongs to Oistrakh and to no other else.