Bach: St. Matthew Passion. Pears, Fischer-Dieskau, Schwarzkopf, Ludwig, Gedda, Berry, Philharmonia Orchestra and Chorus, Otto Klemperer (cond.) EMI (Warner)
There was really only one possibility for this work. I find it shocking that people would make an argument against Klemperer. If there was ever a no brainer for this series this was it.
Whenever I listen to Klemp's SMP, the tempo always takes some adjusting to. Once I've acclimatised, however, it's a fabulous listen. Oddly enough, I was listening a 1970s recording of the Fireworks Music the other day, conducted by – of all people – Boulez. The slow speed bugged me at first, but I soon got used to it, and quite enjoyed the performance on its own terms.
As someone who absolutely and totally prefers 'historical' performances of the St Matthew, I have to admit that Klemperer only comes third for me even among the 'traditional' performances. My favourite among those is Jochum (he's also my favourite 'traditional' conductor in the B-minor Mass), followed by Richter's first recording, and only then comes Klemperer. That said, I recognise the historical fact that Klemperer's recording of the St Matthew is more celebrated and has greater name recognition than either the Jochum or the Richter; in fact, in the name-recognition category (for the Passion specifically, not talking about overall name-recognition), Jochum is probably well below both Richter recordings, not to mention Klemperer's. It's a recording that somehow 'flew under the radar' and didn't get the attention that I, personally, believe it deserves. In the Mass, BTW, Klemperer is my second-favorite 'traditional' performance, straight after Jochum, and Richter comes way down the line — I find much of his Mass intolerable (and no, this is not my general feeling towards Richter's Bach, a lot of it is glorious, but not his Mass)
There's something about the very sonority of Klemperer's recording that immediately sets it apart from all the others. I have no idea how to define it, but if I had to, it would probably require me to refer to colors and tastes (yes, I admit to having some synesthetic issues…). But beyond that, this particular performance always sounds to me "ancient" or "biblical" – it makes me feel I'm roaming the streets of the Jerusalem of Christ's era. Being an Israeli, I do have some idea what that might have felt like, not to mention going down the Via Dolorosa and ending in a complete tour of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, which I did several times. Considering the notion of a "Reference" recording, I personally prefer using the term "Classic" instead – "Classic" in this context meaning a recording of overall high quality that became a classic for critics, listeners and musicians. "Reference" resonates in my mind as "definitive". My bad, of course 🙂
Another thing about Klemperer's "slowness": he still manages multiple occasions of real drama throughout the recording. You can't do that if your interpretation is "too slow."
Yes, well said. It is a very special recording. One of the advtanges of the slower tempi for me is the clarity it brings to the counterpoint. This is especially true in the big chorales. The entry of the children's choir in the first chorale is simultaneously so huge and so clear. It's this simultaneous enormity and transparency that I find so endearing in Klemperer. When I commented 'too slow for most people' on the last video, I was thinking about the people in my vicinity: Deutsch Bach-nuts in Berlin, for whom Jochum and Herreweghe seem to be the names that come up most. It's nice to know that a reference doesn't have to be somehow prototypical. Maybe Richter's slow late Schubert sonatas will find a place. And Gould's Goldberg – the apex of 'idiosyncratic' reference – must come along soon.
I understand why this iis considered a reference recording. I would go further and label it an historical recording. I don't mind the slow tempos as much as the heavy rhythmic tread. If the HIP movement has taught us anything of value, it's that, even in solemn sacred music, Bach's rhythms (deriving from dance forms, more often than not) must be lifted. This afternoon I was listening to the Kleiber recording of Mozart's Figaro and it dawned on me that this is probably the reference recording for that work, given the classic Vienna Mozart cast and the dynamism of the conducting.
I love this performance. But then, i like my Bach 'fat'. And why does the HIP crowd think that everyone before the 19th century was in such a big hurry??
I can follow those who raises the question as to whether this really can be considered the (or a) reference recording of the work? The question, though, is absolutely futile: Klemperer's St.Matthew Passion is a monument, a GOTHIC CATHEDRAL erected for THE GREATER GLORY OF GOD! AMEN!
It doesn't have to be the definitive answer. It is better to ask questions and try to formulate answers to get a better understanding of the reference.
Can't resist adding this classic story about Klemperer and his recording of Bach's St. Matthew Passion, as told by Daniel Barenboim, who had heard it from people at the recording sessions:
Klemperer and the great baritone Dietrich Fischer-Dieskau, whom Klemperer often needled by abbreviating his name to "Herr Fieskau," could not agree about how one of the major arias should go. Neither one would give way. So they kept putting off recording it, knowing that the whole work was going to require many recording sessions anyway.
But one day Fischer-Dieskau came to the session and said, "Doctor Klemperer! Last night God came to me in a dream. He said my way with the aria is the right way!"
Klemperer did not react at all. Nothing. Not a word, not even a
look. Silence.
The next day Klemperer walked into the session, said good morning to everyone, then suddenly added:
"Herr Fieskau! Last night, God came to me in a dream. He said he's never heard of you!”
It’s not about what tempo, it’s whether or not the tension and momentum carries and to my ear, the only chorus where the momentum dies is O Mensch Bewein at the end of Part 1.
Other than that, this is absolutely 100% required listening for anyone who cares about this piece.
The soloists are absolutely better than every soloist on the period instrument recordings, it’s absolutely glorious and one of the most special recordings of Bach that anyone ever made.
But even in 1962 via OK's conception it did sound like the oratorio Brahms never wrote. Important as it may be, historically, I've tried for fifty years (and failed) to sit through this recording. The great Mahler 2 from the same period makes a way better monument to Klemp and these forces.
From what Dave has said, and some of his comments here, it seems that the choice of a reference recording has quite a bit to do with the marketing by the record company that published it. A well marketed release by an internationally distributed company would be the one that would imprint on the most people — I imprinted on Karajan's version of the Brahms German Requiem when I was 16. What did it know! I would be interested to hear what Dave thinks the best recording actually was back in the day when the consensus for each reference was being decided. It sounds like in this case it would be Jochum. (and I totally agree about Herreweghe.)
I'm one of those who find the Klemperer "perfectly fine." I love this recording! I'm so tired of hearing the period instrument people making the opening chorus sound like a gigue.
It is a beautiful rendition indeed but its slowness is more than a minor detail. 3 hours and 44 minutes, 224 minutes, that's a lot of minutes! A little mercy on the poor listener, please. Unless, of course, you want to engage the audience into the pains of the passion.
Dave, I love your channel and I regularly agree with you. But for this work I thought Richter would be the RR. I lived in Germany for ten years and I have seen the Richter versions (on LPs or CDs) everywhere, and rarely Klemperer. The same goes for the other Bach messes ans passions. Richter seems to have been the reference conductor in Germany (before the HIP) for those works. What do you think?
Klemperer had a talent of being able to make "slow" sound good.
There was really only one possibility for this work. I find it shocking that people would make an argument against Klemperer. If there was ever a no brainer for this series this was it.
Whenever I listen to Klemp's SMP, the tempo always takes some adjusting to. Once I've acclimatised, however, it's a fabulous listen. Oddly enough, I was listening a 1970s recording of the Fireworks Music the other day, conducted by – of all people – Boulez. The slow speed bugged me at first, but I soon got used to it, and quite enjoyed the performance on its own terms.
As someone who absolutely and totally prefers 'historical' performances of the St Matthew, I have to admit that Klemperer only comes third for me even among the 'traditional' performances. My favourite among those is Jochum (he's also my favourite 'traditional' conductor in the B-minor Mass), followed by Richter's first recording, and only then comes Klemperer. That said, I recognise the historical fact that Klemperer's recording of the St Matthew is more celebrated and has greater name recognition than either the Jochum or the Richter; in fact, in the name-recognition category (for the Passion specifically, not talking about overall name-recognition), Jochum is probably well below both Richter recordings, not to mention Klemperer's. It's a recording that somehow 'flew under the radar' and didn't get the attention that I, personally, believe it deserves.
In the Mass, BTW, Klemperer is my second-favorite 'traditional' performance, straight after Jochum, and Richter comes way down the line — I find much of his Mass intolerable (and no, this is not my general feeling towards Richter's Bach, a lot of it is glorious, but not his Mass)
What is there not to like about this reference recording? Dame Elisabeth's cross eyed cat perhaps?
Started listening to Celibidache’s version last week and still not heard the final chorus. Only a few days to go!
There's something about the very sonority of Klemperer's recording that immediately sets it apart from all the others. I have no idea how to define it, but if I had to, it would probably require me to refer to colors and tastes (yes, I admit to having some synesthetic issues…). But beyond that, this particular performance always sounds to me "ancient" or "biblical" – it makes me feel I'm roaming the streets of the Jerusalem of Christ's era. Being an Israeli, I do have some idea what that might have felt like, not to mention going down the Via Dolorosa and ending in a complete tour of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, which I did several times.
Considering the notion of a "Reference" recording, I personally prefer using the term "Classic" instead – "Classic" in this context meaning a recording of overall high quality that became a classic for critics, listeners and musicians. "Reference" resonates in my mind as "definitive". My bad, of course 🙂
Another thing about Klemperer's "slowness": he still manages multiple occasions of real drama throughout the recording. You can't do that if your interpretation is "too slow."
Yes, well said. It is a very special recording. One of the advtanges of the slower tempi for me is the clarity it brings to the counterpoint. This is especially true in the big chorales. The entry of the children's choir in the first chorale is simultaneously so huge and so clear. It's this simultaneous enormity and transparency that I find so endearing in Klemperer. When I commented 'too slow for most people' on the last video, I was thinking about the people in my vicinity: Deutsch Bach-nuts in Berlin, for whom Jochum and Herreweghe seem to be the names that come up most. It's nice to know that a reference doesn't have to be somehow prototypical. Maybe Richter's slow late Schubert sonatas will find a place. And Gould's Goldberg – the apex of 'idiosyncratic' reference – must come along soon.
I understand why this iis considered a reference recording. I would go further and label it an historical recording. I don't mind the slow tempos as much as the heavy rhythmic tread. If the HIP movement has taught us anything of value, it's that, even in solemn sacred music, Bach's rhythms (deriving from dance forms, more often than not) must be lifted. This afternoon I was listening to the Kleiber recording of Mozart's Figaro and it dawned on me that this is probably the reference recording for that work, given the classic Vienna Mozart cast and the dynamism of the conducting.
Klemperer has a certain something that, while using slow tempi, doesn't necessarily sound slow.
I love this performance. But then, i like my Bach 'fat'. And why does the HIP crowd think that everyone before the 19th century was in such a big hurry??
I can follow those who raises the question as to whether this really can be considered the (or a) reference recording of the work? The question, though, is absolutely futile: Klemperer's St.Matthew Passion is a monument, a GOTHIC CATHEDRAL erected for THE GREATER GLORY OF GOD! AMEN!
It doesn't have to be the definitive answer. It is better to ask questions and try to formulate answers to get a better understanding of the reference.
Can't resist adding this classic story about Klemperer and his recording of Bach's St. Matthew Passion, as told by Daniel Barenboim, who had heard it from people at the recording sessions:
Klemperer and the great baritone Dietrich Fischer-Dieskau, whom Klemperer often needled by abbreviating his name to "Herr Fieskau," could not agree about how one of the major arias should go. Neither one would give way. So they kept putting off recording it, knowing that the whole work was going to require many recording sessions anyway.
But one day Fischer-Dieskau came to the session and said, "Doctor Klemperer! Last night God came to me in a dream. He said my way with the aria is the right way!"
Klemperer did not react at all. Nothing. Not a word, not even a
look. Silence.
The next day Klemperer walked into the session, said good morning to everyone, then suddenly added:
"Herr Fieskau! Last night, God came to me in a dream. He said he's never heard of you!”
Is the latest remastering in the box of Klemps vocal recordings a big improvement????
It’s not about what tempo, it’s whether or not the tension and momentum carries and to my ear, the only chorus where the momentum dies is O Mensch Bewein at the end of Part 1.
Other than that, this is absolutely 100% required listening for anyone who cares about this piece.
The soloists are absolutely better than every soloist on the period instrument recordings, it’s absolutely glorious and one of the most special recordings of Bach that anyone ever made.
But even in 1962 via OK's conception it did sound like the oratorio Brahms never wrote. Important as it may be, historically, I've tried for fifty years (and failed) to sit through this recording. The great Mahler 2 from the same period makes a way better monument to Klemp and these forces.
From what Dave has said, and some of his comments here, it seems that the choice of a reference recording has quite a bit to do with the marketing by the record company that published it. A well marketed release by an internationally distributed company would be the one that would imprint on the most people — I imprinted on Karajan's version of the Brahms German Requiem when I was 16. What did it know! I would be interested to hear what Dave thinks the best recording actually was back in the day when the consensus for each reference was being decided. It sounds like in this case it would be Jochum. (and I totally agree about Herreweghe.)
I'm so tired of these "original instrument" people thinking they know the best.
I'm one of those who find the Klemperer "perfectly fine." I love this recording! I'm so tired of hearing the period instrument people making the opening chorus sound like a gigue.
It is a beautiful rendition indeed but its slowness is more than a minor detail. 3 hours and 44 minutes, 224 minutes, that's a lot of minutes! A little mercy on the poor listener, please. Unless, of course, you want to engage the audience into the pains of the passion.
It has the Passions’ gravitas and the Singers to bring it off !
Dave, I love your channel and I regularly agree with you. But for this work I thought Richter would be the RR. I lived in Germany for ten years and I have seen the Richter versions (on LPs or CDs) everywhere, and rarely Klemperer. The same goes for the other Bach messes ans passions. Richter seems to have been the reference conductor in Germany (before the HIP) for those works. What do you think?