Recording The Tchaikovsky Symphonies | Part Seven

“Manfred” Symphony, op. 58

You will recall from the last blog post that we re-recorded the “Pathetique” Symphony in the late fall of 1986, after having put it on tape the previous August. The reason for this was that our chief conductor Mariss Jansons felt that what was recorded in August, while very good, was not up to the orchestra’s usual high standards and that some movements needed to be re-done, As it turned out, we scheduled two sessions for early November of that year, and then re-did the entire symphony, with results that were much more satisfactory.
Prior to these extra sessions, it was decided to schedule the recording of Tchaikovsky’s dramatic Symphony in B minor, Op. 58 (known as the “Manfred” Symphony) for the month of October. Again, these sessions were to be held in connection with the regular concert schedule, with the sessions taking place at the end of the regular concert week, with the first session on the Friday morning, and the concluding three-hour session on the Saturday.

Tchaikovsky: Manfred Symphony

There was some talk of pushing back the recording of “Manfred” to ease the strain on the recording team having to make repeated trips back to Oslo, but that problem found a quick resolution, of which more later.
The “Manfred” Symphony is an odd work, not merely because it is not among the numbered symphonies. It consists of four movements, and uses a larger orchestra than Tchaikovsky usually scored for. It includes a large percussion section (four players), an organ, two harps and is best played with a full string section. Tchaikovsky based the work on Byron’s “Manfred”, giving the work a programmatic quality, reminiscent of Hector Berlioz in his dramatic symphonies “Romeo et Juliette” and “Harald et Italie”.

The Situation At This Point

The recording situation was a little delicate at this stage. By now, we had recorded all the numbered symphonies, with only “Manfred” and the “Capriccio Italien” left to record. Two and a half years had passed since the first sessions in January 1984, and Mariss Jansons and the Oslo Philharmonic were no longer an unknown quantity. Several recording firms contacted us, and it was at this point, when we were about to record “Manfred”, that EMI came calling, with an attractive offer of fourteen recordings over an eight year period. Chandos countered with an offer that would allow us to record whatever we liked over a similar period of time. We would in effect, be exclusive.
We were satisfied with Chandos – they had released a recording of Brucker’s 9th Symphony with completed finale and sketches by William Carragan under Yoav Talmi’s direction just a month or so previously – but there was a feeling that EMI could do more for us internationally, and so it was decided that Chandos would wrap up its current contract with us with the rest of the Tchaikovsky cycle, and that EMI would be in charge of future recording sessions.
Chandos made its plans accordingly, and asked James Burnett to lead the recording team for both the “Manfred” and “Capriccio” sessions. As I mentioned earlier, the “Manfred” sessions were scheduled for October 1986, and the “Capriccio” session was scheduled for June of 1987. He was assisted by the able NRK resident engineer Dag Kristofferson.
While Mariss and the orchestra worked well with Brian and Ralph Couzens (who came back for the re-recording of the “Pathetique” in November), it was pretty special when Jimmy Burnett was in charge. He had a knack for balancing and mixing the sounds, and any record that he produced was of high quality acoustically. This the orchestra appreciated very much.

Preparations

As with the early symphonies, the orchestra was not as familiar with the “Manfred” symphony as the were with the last three symphonies, which is not unusual among orchestras even today. It requires greater preparation on the part of all concerned (whether he or she be musician, conductor, or recording staff. It sure helped having rehearsed and played the work in as part of a subscription cycle of concerts. We as an ensemble were better able to take the measure of the work. Another ace-in-the-hole was Mariss’s rehearsals, which were very comprehensive so that by the time of the concerts, we were more than ready to commit the performances to tape.
“Manfred” has excellent parts for both timpani and percussion, and I was joined by my colleagues Per Erik Thorsen, Trygve Wefring, Per Melsæter, Bjørn Løken and Einar Fjærvall.(Einar filled in when one of our regular percussionists had a scheduling conflict with one of the recording sessions.)
For instruments, I used a mixed set. I used the Light Metropolitan B 26” and 29” drums in the middle, with a 25 inch Hinger for the top e, and our recently acquired Continental Chain drum – 31 inches – for the low drum. As a matter of fact, this was one of the first outings for that instrument. If memory serves me, we took delivery of the instrument about three weeks prior to the sessions.
The heads on all the drums were Remo hazies, with the Metros having the insert-ring heads on them, and Hinger and chain drums having the standard extended collar head.
For mallets, I used the wood shafted Hingers – generals, medium hards, and hards as well as medium generals, I mixed and matched them with Feldman mallets of the same felt type and a pair of older Hinger aluminum mallets given to me by Dan Hinger the previous summer. These were a shorter pair of mallets – about 15 inches in length – that he used to use for recordings with the Philadelphia Orchestra. They were amazing, and assisted me greatly in projection. They were also very articulate. I was glad to have them.

The Sessions

As mentioned earlier, the sessions were scheduled at the tail end of the concert cycle which featured the “Manfred’ symphony as the main work on the program. This meant that we’d record on the Friday morning (which was also the day of the second concert of the cycle) and the Saturday morning as well. The sessions generally ran for three hours – from 10:00 am until 1:00 pm.
Recording producer for these sessions was Jimmy Burnett ( as I mentioned earlier) and he was assisted by Dag Kristofferson, NRK’s resident engineer. I also remember Charles Almås, another of the NRK engineers assisting, and I believe he was at these sessions.
This was not an easy work to put on tape, as the textures in the outer movements were thicker and heavier than usual, and the inner movements, while more delicate, had their challenges as well. Add to that the Konserthuset’s problematical acoustics, and things could have gotten out of hand.
However, Mariss’s detailed preparations (plus the fact that we were “playing the work in” during a concert cycle took care of the orchestral problems, and Jimmy Burnett and the engineers performed their usual magic.
The second movement provided me with a challenge. Midway through the movement, there is a passage from one bar after Rehearsal P until Rehearsal T in which there is a long pedal for timpani on the note G sharp then going down a half step to G. Not too much of a problem if one has pedal timpani – one could do it all on the 31 inch – however, in this instance, I had a Light Continental Chain for a 31 inch. There was no time to make the half-step switch from G sharp to G, so I did the logical thing and played the G sharp on the 29 inch Light Metropolitan B. I was a bit nervous about how it would sound, as I like the lower notes on the larger drum. I had been having troubles with the Remo hazy head on the Continental chain – for some reason, the sound was hard – it didn’t have any “bloom” to it. I made sure that the drums were sufficiently “prepped”, and played my best, leaving the rest to Providence.
As it turned out, I needn’t have worried so much. Listening to the takes during breaks in the recording session, the rolls came off clean, and the pitch changes were precise, as were the dynamic changes.
As I listen to the recording twenty-nine years after the fact, I am pleased with the overall result, although there are some moments in the first movement in which I wish I had a little more self-confidence when it came to altering pitches. There are one or two instances in which I played what was written (mainly single strokes on d and e) in which a pitch alteration was called for.

Capriccio Italien, Op. 45

We were supposed to record the Capriccio back in the late winter/ early spring of 1985, when we were taping the 1st Symphony. It was meant to be a filler on that recording. However, the NRK wanted a studio TV performance of the work to be broadcast at a later date, and the only date that they could videotape was they day that was allotted to record the Capriccio for Chandos. A compromise was reached in which both teams worked side-by-side in the hopes that something usable would come of the proceedings. In the end, the NRK was able to air their version, but for Chandos, there was no way we could use this a filler for the 1st Symphony. There was not time for the usually editing, so it was decided to re-record the work at a later date.

Tchaikovsky: Symphony No. 2 and Capriccio Italien

That later date came two years later. By that time, our contract with Chandos had officially ended, and we had begun recording for EMI.
The Capriccio was the only work left to record, and Chandos asked Jimmy Burnett to record the work, which was scheduled for early June, 1987. If memory serves me correctly, we did this at the end of a week recording Shostakovich’s 5th Symphony for EMI, which was our initial offering for that company. As was the case in early 1985, only one session was allotted, as the work was only one quarter the length of a normal Tchaikovsky symphony.
That being said, this work should not be considered easy, as it is a showpiece, and a degree of virtuosity is required in all sections of the orchestra.
For this session, I used the same setup that I used for “Manfred”, namely the three Light drums we had, plus Hinger 25 inch on top – it was also the same setup that I used for the Shostakovich.
The session went well enough, however, upon hearing the final result, even though I felt that though it was good – it in fact was a great performance – the overall sound was a bit recessed. This was due to the acoustics of the concert hall and also the fact that there was not as much time to attend to details as we would normally have if we were recording a full-length symphony.

In conclusion

Upon the conclusion of the recording of the Capriccio, our work with Chandos was done. We had recorded Bruckner’s 9th with Yoav Talmi, and we were to do one more recording for Chandos in 1989, but these were special one-of-a-kind sessions – not part of a contract.
Chandos had helped to put us on the musical map, as these recordings were a calling card for the orchestra and Jansons when we toured. All of the recordings gathered critical acclaim, and they are still selling well nearly thirty years later. I was sad to see the end of the Chandos collaboration, as they were an adventurous team and we could have recorded a much wider range of repertoire than we ultimately did for EMI. EMI had the better circulation at the time, and it seemed like the way to go at the time. However, hindsight is better than foresight. I was just grateful to be part of an exciting enterprise and to gain valuable experience. We were all better for it, and it allowed conductor and orchestra to grow, and this was the most important part of the whole exercise.

Here is the YouTube link for the symphony:

And here is the link for the Capriccio Italien: