Bach's Second Brandenburg Concerto - A Recording Survey
Let us now head to my other favorite Brandenburg: the Number 2, BWV 1047. Scored for solo trumpet, recorder, oboe and violin; what a diverse ensemble!!
 |
|
Let us start with Jeanne Lamon, conducting the Tafelmusik, gives a rather standard account and not one of my preferences. The first movement lacks some energy, the treatment is rather standard, and the soloists do not shine enough for me.
Lamon's tempo in the second movement is the fastest among the versions I will review. It gives a new point of view but, overall, I feel that it is rushed. This is a very restrained approach to this emotional movement. Some slowing down to let the melody breathe is preferred.
The third movement again is lusterless and lazy sounding when comparing it with others who take an energetic urgent tempo.
Alas: a rather bland account by Lamon. Maybe I will change my mind on future listenings, but it does not help her when I listen to her recording after all the previous fine versions I will mention.
 |
|
Pinnock and the English Concert, is a marvelous account of one of my favorite works; here on period instruments. The first movement shows a fine balance between the soloists and the rest of the orchestra. Tempo is well-chosen, not too brisk, and it is just fitting. The soloists conversing with each other are spectacular, and each instrument is closely heard with the least compromise.
The second movement is given a warm account. Standage violin is superb. Not also mentioning the high recording and sound quality here. Let us not forget the superb harpsichord continuo by Pinnock. This is my favorite second movement.
The third movement is taken at a more or less relaxed tempo, but the clarity of each line avoids the lusterless conclusion reached by Lamon and the result is especially pleasant.
 |
|
Marriner and the Academy of St. Martin in the Fields (with his all-star soloists, Szeryng, Holliger, Petri and Bernard) pull off a first-rate second concerto. Marriner's ethos of ‘let the music speak for itself' is always welcomed when the results are that good. I cannot speak more highly of their sense of ensemble.
The first movement has a superb balance between the
concertino and the ripieno. The tempo is the most perfect (not too fast like
Richter, and not too sluggish like Harnoncourt). The sound of the trumpet here
is the least intrusive; not too bright as many modern instruments, and not too
choked as some period instruments. I cannot stress more on the highly connected
melodic line achieved by Marriner; your attention won't wander for a second;
this is the real definition of the concerto grosso. Even the low moods of the permutations of the minor mode is captured.
I sometimes find myself preferring Marriner's second movement to Pinnock's, mainly due to the warm sound of Szeryng's violin (even after taking into account Pinnock's superior harpsichord). This is a very heart-felt performance; even if the tempo is a tad slower than Pinnock's.
Marriner also does not fall in the trap of a dawdling third movement and goes for a well-chosen tempo. Overall, Marriner's version is a very safe option to go for, when choosing a favorite.
 |
|
Harnoncourt's effort is actually... funny!! Let us look at the first movement; the tempo is that of a snail trying to race with a tortoise. The trumpet is way intrusive (as if the sluggish tempo is not enough). This is a complete waste of the soloists' talents. The record also suffers from the instruments abruptly sounding into the foreground while others are drowned; dismissing the last hope of respect to a meaningful melodic line. The result is a "marching band" concerto.
The second movement is actually a very nice version; thank God there is no trumpet here.
Unfortunately, the third movement also suffers from the slow tempo.
 |
|
Savall's version is a very good one overall, but the problem with this version is the timbre. The sound in general reminds me of Savall's recordings of earlier music (his Monteverdi interpretations come to mind). Even the harpsichord has this ‘skeletal' sound to it (refer to Thomas Beecham's quote on harpsichord and skeletons) that reminds me of earlier music. There is also a bit of hall ambience.
There is also a rather heavy treatment of the ripieno and the continuo echoing throughout (You can even hear the ‘skeletal' harpsichord in the distance). And the sound of the period violins in the low ‘register' can be quite irritating. But let us not nitpick; and let us leave the sound and the recording ethos of Savall altogether and discuss the interpretation.
Despite all what I mentioned above; this is one of the best interpretations I heard of the second. The first movement and the second movement are refined and purposeful, and executed sensitively. The third movement in particular, is one of the most unique interpretations I have heard. The execution is elated ... perhaps even manic. At 1:19 the ripieno and the skeleton (pardon, I mean the harpsichord) enter in an episode of frenzied beats, and then they enter again forcefully at 2:13... all the way to the end of the movement!!
 |
|
Karl Richter's first movement (with the Munchner Bach-orchester) gives me a feeling similar to what I get from Savall's third movement. This time the performance is not manic... but rather euphoric. Here on modern instruments, with the ripieno somewhat distant; the soloists are in full exposure, with crazy recorder-playing by Hans-Martin Linde.
Second movement gets a very sensitive rendering. Unfortunately the harpsichord gets somewhat a low profile, and I wished it had more presence and a more beautiful sound. But let us not grumble and nitpick; this is a continuo line after all.
The third movement is given a very energetic and fast account.
 |
|
Karajan's recording with Berlin Philharmonic exhibits heavy hall ambience effect. The first movement is given a slow and standard treatment (as I expected). However, of special note here is a certain tendency to reveal some lines (especially some imitation) I have not heard in other recordings. This may shed new light on the movement, but may sacrifice the main melodic line. The soloists (who, I assume, belong to the Berlin Philharmonic) are excellent, of course... I particularly refer to the first violinist.
The second movement gets an uber-romantic rendition with very beautiful sound. Another worthy addition to his ‘Adagio' box set. In fact, I like it.
The third movement, relatively speaking by Karajan's standards, is given a more or less fine performance for that matter.
To quickly summarize:
I can't speak for these because Harnoncourt's treatment is mediocre, Lamon is somewhat lusterless and characterless and Karajan is in the middle-of-the-road.
Richter is a great rendering with the most propulsive forward momentum I have heard. I have yet to hear faster performances with the same clarity but I have been told that Alessandrini takes a supersonic approach; I have yet to hear his set. Take care of the solo action in the first movement. The only downside is a weak harpsichord sound.
I would have certainly chosen Savall for a favorite but let us not dive again into his tastes in recording and his choices of timbre. You should certainly give his account a listen to believe me that his interpretation is excellent nevertheless. Of course, listeners who are used to extreme ‘authentic' treatments will certainly find his version the best, and then I would have to agree with them.
As for my personal favorites; I find myself going for the English conductors. Both Marriner and Pinnock give equally excellent accounts. These are even the safer choices for those who are still not well acquainted with this work. Fans of period instruments will go for the Pinnock; while who prefer a more warm sound of the strings will agree with me on the Marriner. And for sheer drive and jubilation, I go listen to Richter.
Ahmed Bassiouny
