Stunned by Boulez (the conductor)

I've been living with several different versions of Debussy's Jeux, none entirely satisfactory in interpreting this elusive score. The best was Boulez/Philharmonia. I just put on his DG recording with the Cleveland. Well, I'm stunned. Not only is it as good as one can imagine it played - all the details and tempi one would like, it's even better than that. It is full of ingenious musical solutions, exquisite details, suspenses and releasers, all in a totally compelling overall architecture. This is - for me - as good as it gets.

I question whether there is a conductor alive that is anywhere near Boulez at his best.

It depends on the repertoire.

It's well known he excels at the French impressionists. His Debussy and Ravel recordings (Sony and DG) are all superb. His Mahler OTOH ...

Yes, but not quite in the sense that you mean. It's not true that he can't give good performances of music not written by the French.

I'll agree with you on the Sony but am a heretic on some of the DGG. (Have to go listen to the DGG Jeux, again, though.)

It depends on which Mahler performances you base your opinion. For the last decade and more, Boulez has generally been much better live than on DGG, and as far as I'm concerned, the farther you go back in time, the better conducting you will find from Boulez, even in the case of some of his own music. So if your opinion of his Mahler is based on later commercial recordings rather than early live ones, you're hardly listening to the conductor I have in mind when I use the proper noun 'Boulez.'

-david gable

Neither did I say nor imply that. He also is a great conductor of Schoenberg and Stravinsky.

But these are the ones that survive. And they (DGs) are dry bones.

-david gable

<< I've been living with several different versions of Debussy's Jeux, none entirely satisfactory in interpreting this elusive score. The best was Boulez/Philharmonia. I just put on his DG recording with the Cleveland. Well, I'm stunned. Not only is it as good as one can imagine it played - all the details and tempi one would like, it's even better than that. It is full of ingenious musical solutions, exquisite details, suspenses and releasers, all in a totally compelling overall architecture. This is - for me - as good as it gets.

My teacher played under Boulez in Cleveland during the Szell era and always marveled at their broadcast performance of 'Jeux.'

I question whether there is a conductor alive that is anywhere near Boulez at his best. >>

It wouldn't take long to count them.

David Hattner, NYC

I like his Mahler #1 (On DG I think)...

I thought his Mahler 6 of a few years ago with the London Symphony, heard live at Carnegie, was phenomenal, with an absolutely coruscating finale, and coupled effectively with the Berg 3 Pieces before intermission. I also liked his Mahler 3 with the Vienna Philharmonic last year, and I've heard him in other live performances that I thought extremely effective - such as the Ligeti Violin Concerto with Christian Teztlaff, the Bruckner 9th, Petrouchka, and his own Marteau sans Maître. I emphasize 'live' as I agree with those who find him more effective in the concert hall than in the recording studio.

I'm finally listening to a live Boulez/VPO broadcast of the 3rd (2/25/2001) that a friend of mine sent to me some time ago, and the first movement is surprisingly effective.

-david gable

This is slightly edited from e-mail I just sent to a couple of friends:

I've finally listened to the first and last movements of Mahler's 3rd as well as 'O, Mensch, gib acht' in a live performance from Vienna with Boulez and the VPO from 2001 that somebody sent me. Not entirely sure what I think of Van Otter's contribution yet, not that she's ever anything less than musical, but the last movement is not to be believed. Boulez tears into it full throttle. The first statement of the opening melody is almost too precipitous. After listening to some of Boulez's tamer performances, this one could be called The Return of Overwhelming Urgency. He's shaping and phrasing all over the place and at different levels. I didn't think there were any conductors left who could do this sort of thing any more, but on the evidence of this performance, the art of phrasing is not yet a dead art. This is not one of those good but understated Boulez performances either. I haven't heard so much horse hair digging into cat gut in a long time, and the détaché notes in the violin parts are truly detached with enormous airholes between them and they're vigorously sketched in to boot. The sound has a lot of that Boulezian purity to it, but neither sheen nor a pure transparent sound seems to be his main goal here, and there's more meat on the bones of his sound than usual. Not that the sound qua sound is the most important thing, but it's symptomatic of the strengths exhibited by this driven and strongly etched performance. Caught up in Mahler's music, instead of polishing to a high sheen, Boulez is deeply engaged in building and phrasing. It probably doesn't hurt that the last movement of Mahler's 3rd is a good example of the one form Boulez understands best: a long continuous crescendo spawning all manner of contrapuntal developments. I doubt anybody'll ever give a better performance of it.

-david gable

I remember reading recollections of Stokowski by someone who'd played under him late in his life. They remarked that Stokie achieved his desired effects by quite simple means, things as simple as asking the horns to play bells up or bells down depending on the passage.

So the question naturally comes to mind: aside from rhythm, what techniques does PB use to get the marvelous effect you describe?