domingo, 31 de agosto de 2025

Shostakovich: El Año 1905.


Dmitri Shostakovich 

SYMPHONY NR.11, Op.103 "The Year 1905"

Royal Scottish National Symphony Orchestra.

Dir: Alexander Lazarev.

(LINN)

*

   A primera audición, la Sinfonía Nr.11 es en apariencia una obra "propagandista" de los "valores" del realismo socialista soviético, al haber sido compuesta en homenaje a una fecha notable de las efemérides patrias, pero al examinarla en profundidad de nuevo nos encontramos con los enigmas cifrados que sólo un genio como Shostakovich podía plantear en su música. Una obra conmemorativa en apariencia se torna en una hermosa y conmovedora página evocadora del eterno ciclo de sufrimiento-reivindicación que han vivido los pueblos oprimidos en lo general, Rusia en lo particular.

*

    La obra fue compuesta en 1957, cuatro años después de la extinción de la férula estalinista. El argumento de la música está basado en los hechos que circundaron a lo que se conoce como el "Domingo Sangriento" (9 de enero de 1905, calendario juliano), y que no fueron más que el preludio a la gran revolución de 12 años más tarde. El compositor debería haberla concluido lógicamente para el año 1955, en conmemoración del cincuentenario, pero diversos disturbios familiares y personales se lo impidieron, y no fué hasta el año siguiente, 1956, en que el mismo decidiría salir de su inercia. ¿Qué lo sacó de ese marasmo?

*

    El 30 de noviembre de 1956, los tanques soviéticos invaden Hungría, y se aplasta sangrientamente la revolución nacionalista húngara. Se instala entonces el gobierno comunista pro-soviético de Janos Kádar y miles de personas son ejecutadas, encarceladas ó enviadas a los Gulag. Los eventos en Hungría habrían despertado la inspiración creativa de Shostakovich, y de este modo nació la 11ma sinfonía. La obra evoca pues en apariencia a las víctimas de la cruel autocracia zarista, pero en sentido más amplio hace memoria a todas las víctimas de todas las tiranías y todos los despotismos del antes y después.

*

    La obra fue estrenada el 30 de octubre de 1957, en Leningrado, con la Orquesta de la Union Soviética, bajo la dirección de Natan Rakhlin. El éxito fue inmediato y colosal, el compositor no era aclamado a estos niveles desde la creación de la ¨Leningrado", y le valió al año siguiente el Premio Lenin a las artes, así como su rehabilitación de la mocion de censura que se le había impuesto 10 años antes a consecuencia de la "doctrina Zhdanov"... Shostakovich volvía a ser héroe de la Unión Soviética.

*

     La sinfonía está estructurada a modo de obra programática, de tonalidades épicas y de proporciones narrativas cinematográficas, una "música de película, pero sin película". La misma es definitivamente tonal, en estilo romántico, pero distribuida en los clásicos cuatro movimientos. La orquestación figura dentro de la más característica de lo mejor del compositor y el trato de los temas y el simbolismo sugieren mucho a Mussorgsky, quien siempre fue uno de los íconos de Shostakovich. Cada uno de los cuatro movimientos conllevan un título alegórico, lo cual soporta el análisis de la obra como programática:

+

1) La Plaza del Palacio de Invierno (Adagio): en una música introductoria, ominosamente atmosférica, el compositor representa el ambiente general en los tiempos previos a la masacre. La música es distante, subrepticia, oscilante, amenazante, embrionaria, con melodías de vientos y sonidos de percusión que apenas se insinúan aquí y alla, sin disparar un verdadero desarrollo. Algunos recursos mahlerianos no dejan de apreciarse en esta introducción.

+

2) El 9 de Enero (22 de enero, calendario occidental): tras una tranquila transición, el 1er movimiento abre paso sin pausa a este inolvidable Allegro, que pasa a narrar los hechos propios de ¨el día en cuestión¨. El mismo se divide en dos partes, una primera que evoca a los manifestantes congregándose en un lado de la Plaza del Palacio, y a la guardia zarista en el otro lado aguardando órdenes. La música va adquiriendo fuerza y turbulencia y tras un pasaje intermedio calmado se abre paso un estridente y violento tambor militar que inicia la segunda parte, o sea la masacre. Se desencadena una implacable marcha militar que representa a la tropa arremetiendo y matando sin piedad a los manifestantes, con golpes de timbal y tam-tam que sugieren disparos, en un descriptivismo musical aterrador. Finaliza la masacre y en ese momento, al igual que en la inolvidable marcha de la Sinfonía Leningrado, la música se quiebra, creando en el escucha un golpe psicológico definitivo. La calma del 1er movimiento vuelve a cargo de unas cuerdas lejanas y nos hacen ver fácilmente a la gran Plaza del Palacio desolada, plena de cadáveres y nieve.

+

3) Memorial eterno (In Memoriam): a continuación y de nuevo sin pausa, adviene el tercer movimiento, un adagio en forma de marcha fúnebre, melancólica y torturada, y que constituye un lamento a la violencia. Luego de la ferocidad implacable del movimiento anterior, actúa a modo de analgésico, y como transición al movimiento final.

+

4) Tocsin (La Campana): la obra finaliza con este formidable Allegro non troppo, que inicia a modo de marcha-scherzo cuasi-bruckneriano y que recopila diversos materiales que ya hemos conocido en los movimientos precedentes. El estilo y el simbolismo mussorgskianos adquieren relieve a medida que la orquesta va aumentando su intervención en el desarrollo y la aparición de una gran campana de alarma (Tocsin) establece un conflicto sonoro entre dos bandos (la Campana tañe en sol menor mientras la orquesta lo hace en sol mayor) que pretende comunicar una moraleja y el modo abrupto en que ambas finalizan de tocar al mismo tiempo sugieren que ninguno de los bandos obtendrá ganancia hasta que llegue la hora definitiva (1917).

*

     Les comparto las siempre interesantes notas de Mark Wigglesworth, en ésta ocasión referentes a la Undécima: 

*

Mark’s notes on Shostakovich Symphony No. 11

 Revolution

 On the morning of Sunday 9th January 1905, thousands of Russians gathered in front of the Winter Palace in St Petersburg. The country’s economy was in dire straits; and yet despite extreme poverty and hardship, the assembled crowd had no intention of anything other than presenting their government with a peaceful petition. They were simply asking to have their grievances heard and not only did they expect to be received with respect and maybe even kindness, but genuinely believed that the Tsar would be able help. Many of them had huge regard for him; they even sang ‘God Save the Tsar’.

 No one will know what would have happened had an unnecessarily apprehensive Tsar Nicholas II not made the tragic mistake of deciding at the last minute to leave the city in advance of the demonstration. In his absence the people grew restless and, when the police ordered them to disperse, confusion arose, and a group of young and nervous Cossack troops suddenly opened fire. In the ensuing chaos, over a thousand men, women, and children were mown down by gunfire. The snow turned red with the blood that was spilled.

 One who survived was Dmitri Boleslavich Shostakovich, and his son Dmitri Dmitriyevich was born the following year. The massacre was frequently discussed in the young composer’s home, and its unprovoked brutality left an indelible impression on the young and sensitive child. In Testimony, the book published in 1979 by Solomon Volkov, Shostakovich is quoted as follows:

 ‘Our family discussed the Revolution of 1905 constantly… the stories deeply affected my imagination. When I was older I read much about how it all happened… They were carting a mound of murdered children on a sleigh. The boys had been sitting in the trees, looking at the soldiers, and the soldiers shot them – just like that, for fun. They then loaded them on the sleigh and drove off. A sleigh loaded with children’s bodies. And the dead children were smiling. They had been killed so suddenly that they hadn’t time to be frightened.’

 It would therefore have been with understandably mixed feelings that fifty years later the celebrated composer accepted a commission from the Soviet authorities to write a symphony commemorating the event, and it is not surprising that it took him a while to start its composition. It was perhaps events outside Russia that in the end stimulated him to begin work.

 On 25th October 1956, a build-up of local protests resulted in thousands of Hungarians amassing in Budapest’s Parliament Square to demonstrate against their government. The puppet régime that the Soviet Union had installed there was particularly oppressive. Random abductions, false imprisonment, and forced confessions equalled those of Stalin’s Russia, and rough estimates say that over ten percent of the population had passed through the country’s torture chambers and prison camps at some point since the Second World War.

 When the secret police turned their machine guns on the crowd, leaving an estimated six hundred dead, Soviet tanks had to be sent in to put down the uprising that followed. No one was more horrified than Shostakovich at the depressing repetition of events that this seemed to exemplify and it was not hard to draw parallels between Budapest in 1956 and St Petersburg in 1905. A similarly courageous struggle for a just cause won the protesting Hungarians many tacit supporters back in Russia.

 But tacit, of course, is what such support had to be. Despite Stalin’s death in 1953 and the undoubted ‘thaw’ that had followed, there was no lessening of the risk incurred by suggesting that the Soviet reaction in Hungary was heavy-handed and over the top. In appearing to describe a similar uprising of fifty years before, Shostakovich was able to express his current sympathies without upsetting anyone in the government.

 Yet it was not that difficult for anyone who wanted to draw comparisons between both atrocities to be stimulated to do so on listening to the symphony. After the première an elderly lady was overheard saying: ‘Those aren’t guns firing, they are tanks roaring, and people being squashed.’ And when this was related to Shostakovich, he is reported to have replied: ‘That means she understood it.’ Even the composer’s own son apparently asked his father: ‘Papa, what if they hang you for this?’ But he was not hanged. In fact the work was a huge success and resulted in a Lenin Prize for the composer the following year. It is ironic that the symphony should have been so praised by a régime that it was probably secretly denigrating.

 It makes sense for a work that is essentially about the spirit of revolution, albeit a failed one, to have as its musical basis several revolutionary songs – all of which would have been extremely well-known to contemporary Russians. This was music that Shostakovich grew up singing as a child, and the texts would have been so familiar to his audience that he did not feel any need to have them articulated by voices. It raises the question as to whether a non-Russian can relate to the symphony in the same way. The answer is probably not, but the simplicity and power of the melodies themselves certainly evoke the right emotion, even if it is experienced away from the specific context of twentieth-century Russian history.

 Played without a pause, the symphony’s four movements are all given titles by the composer. Palace Square serves as a slow introduction: its cold and desolate vastness depict the snow-covered square at daybreak; ominous timpani strokes fatefully suggest an uneasy calm, whilst distant brass fanfares evoke the soldiers’ early morning ‘reveille’. As the sun rises, the melodies of two revolutionary songs emerge. Listen! and The Prisoner were both well-known to prisoners trying to come to terms with the slow pace of time whilst in captivity, with only the crying of fellow inmates to keep them company during the long dark nights.

 Entitled The Ninth of January, the following Allegro cinematically depicts the crowd, at first calm, then gradually giving way to more impassioned pleas for help. But these receive no answer, and we sense the people’s dejected frustration: a silent stillness that is suddenly interrupted by the sound of rifling drum shots, as seemingly unprovoked and unexpected as, by all accounts, the real gunfire was in 1905. The confusion and panic in the music is unmistakable, as is the hollow and ghostly emptiness of the terrifying quiet of the now lifeless, body-strewn square with which the movement ends.

 The third movement, an Adagio headed In Memoriam, laments those who lost their lives in the atrocity. Sometimes resigned and sad, in other places angry and defiant, it is based on the revolutionary funeral march You fell as victims, with un-selfish love for the people, a song that was heard at Lenin’s funeral in 1924.

 The finale, Tocsin (an alarm or warning bell), is a gesture of defiance on the part of the survivors and on behalf of those who gave their lives in resistance. In anticipation of future uprisings, it uses the songs Tremble, Tyrants and Whirlwinds of Danger to predict an ultimate victory for the revolutionaries. 

 Whether or not ‘the ultimate victory’ as manifested in the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917 was something to glorify is left unanswered by the composer. Though the ringing bells that close the work suggest a certain triumph, they sound hollow in the context of a resilient G minor tonality, and it could hardly be called an optimistic ending to what is a very dark and brooding symphony as a whole. All revolution is essentially tragic, just as all war is basically civil war, and no bloodshed at any time, or any place, can ever be something to celebrate. Shostakovich elaborated on the depressing nature of recurrence in Testimony:

 ‘I think that many things repeat themselves in Russian history. Of course the same event can’t repeat itself exactly, there must be differences, but many things are repeated nevertheless. People think and act similarly in many things… I wanted to show this recurrence in the Eleventh Symphony. I wrote it in 1957 and it deals with contemporary themes even though it’s called “1905”. It’s about the people, who have stopped believing because the cup of evil has run over. That’s how the impressions of my childhood and my adult life come together. And naturally, the events of my mature years are more meaningful.’

 Ultimately, the debate about whether Shostakovich is portraying the heroism of Russians in 1905 or Hungarians in 1956 is irrelevant. It does not matter whether he is attacking the violence of Cossack troops or the aggression of Red Army tanks. What is clear is his obvious empathy with all who try to rise up against tyranny and his passionate antipathy towards all who oppress them. The symphony may on the surface be a costume drama, but it is one that still resonates today. In the end, Shostakovich writes about emotions and states of mind, rather than specific dates, and even if he does use facts as his focus, they are invariably symbols for universal sentiments. That is why his music remains both timeless and topical.


© Mark Wigglesworth 2009

*

      En cuanto a la discografía de la 11, la misma ya la había publicado hace algunos años, a través de una de mis grabaciones favoritas, la de Vladimir Ashkenazy con la orquesta local de San Petersburgo. Es una obra que requiere el máximo despliegue sonoro de una gran orquesta, y así tenemos grabaciones emblemáticas, las de pioneros como Leopold Stokowski, André Cluytens y el mismo Rakhlin, las más comerciales de los ciclos de Haitink, Rozhdestvensky, Petrenko, Wigglesworth ó el mismo Ashkenazy... De entre grabaciones modernas y en sonido ideal, una de las que más me ha impactado ha sido la de Alexander Lazarev al Frente de la Orquesta Nacional Escocesa (compensa la que Neeme Järvi no pudo hacer allí). Se trata de una grabación perfecta, de alto impacto, que toma plenamente el sentido cinematográfico de la obra, y en una calidad sonora que supera los estándares. Aunque se tenga una favorita, ésta debe ser conocida.

*

M-S.

 

miércoles, 27 de agosto de 2025

Norgard: Sinfonías 4 y 5.


Per Nørgård

1-2)  SYMPHONIE Nr. 4

3-6)  SYMPHONIE Nr. 5

Danish National Radio Symphony Orchestra

Dir:  Leif Segerstam.

(CHANDOS)

*



sábado, 23 de agosto de 2025

Ferde Grofé: El Gran Cañón.


Ferde Grofé  (1892-1972) 

GRAND CANYON  (ORCHESTRAL SUITE)

The Philadelphia Orchestra.

Dir:  Eugene Ormandy.

(CBS-SONY)

*

   Visitando por primera vez en ARPEGIO otra obra de gran popularidad y obligatorio conocimiento como es la Suite ¨Gran Cañón¨ del compositor norteamericano Ferde Grofé.  Un esencial de los clásicos populares.  Eugene Ormandy al frente de sus ¨Fantastic Philadelphians¨ nos dejó un registro atesorable.


 

miércoles, 20 de agosto de 2025

Grieg: Peer Gynt.


Edvard Grieg

PEER GYNT (COMPLETE INCIDENTAL MUSIC), Op. 23

San Francisco Symphony Orchestra.

Dir:  Herbert Blomstedt.

(DECCA)

*

    Por primera vez en ARPEGIO la música incidental completa del Peer Gynt de Edvard Grieg, su obra cumbre, y en una grabación fácilmente considerable como referencia.



jueves, 14 de agosto de 2025

Waxman: Sunset Boulevard.


Franz Waxman

SUNSET BOULEVARD (SOUNDTRACK)

Royal Scottish National Symphony Orchestra.

Dir: Joel McNeely.

(VARÉSE)

sábado, 9 de agosto de 2025

Shostakovich 50: La Décima.


Dimitri Shostakovich

SYMPHONIE Nr.10, Op.93

Berliner Philharmoniker

Dir: Herbert von Karajan.

(DG)

*

     Hoy hace 50 años, 9 de agosto de 1975, fallecía en Moscú Dimitri Shostakovich, probablemente el último gran compositor sinfonista en la gran tradición inaugurada por Haydn, y permanente piedra en el zapato del brutal régimen comunista de la entonces Unión Soviética.

*

      Su muerte no fue anunciada por Pravda hasta tres días después, aunque se le dieron funerales ¨de estado¨ entre el 14 y 15 de agosto. Sin embargo la noticia se difundió casi inmediatamente en Occidente. Es célebre el momento de aquel 9 de agosto en que en medio del concierto de Tanglewood donde Rostropovich dirigía la 5ta sinfonía, se leyó en el intermedio el telegrama dirigido a Ozawa con la noticia y Rostropovich elevando la partitura y con lágrimas en los ojos la besó.

*   

       Aunque el tema es discutible, muchos consideran a la Sinfonía Nr.10 como su mejor obra sinfónica. La Décima arriba después de un largo silencio sinfónico. Fue iniciada por Shostakovich en julio de 1953 y terminada en octubre de ese mismo año, aunque varios de sus materiales ya estaban hace rato en las gavetas del compositor. La Premiére estuvo a cargo de Evgeni Mravinsky, quien la dirigió en Leningrado (actual San Petersburgo) el 17 de diciembre de 1953.

*

     El 5 de marzo de 1953 moría Stalin, después de tres décadas de terror y de brutal opresión. Shostakovich se había mantenido en bajo perfil después del disgusto ocasionado al dictador por el episodio de la 9na Sinfonía y de la condena oficial de ésta obra así como de la Sinfonía Nr. 8. Con la muerte de Stalin y Zhdanov se dió paso a un ligero ambiente de distensión en todos los ámbitos de la sociedad soviética, y el mundo de las artes no escapaba a éste definitivo cambio de era. Ya Shostakovich era un valor nacional demasiado importante para poder tocarlo sin consecuencias, y de este modo ya no sentía tanta presión de transigir en cuanto a su lenguaje musical. Con coraje permitió que se presentara entonces la 10ma, una obra encriptada como las anteriores y totalmente alejada del optimismo y del "realismo socialista". 

*

     Las reacciones fueron igual de encontradas que en los casos de sus dos antecesoras. La obra encontró oposición. Fue criticada por su complejidad, sus texturas lúgubres y sus tendencias nihilistas. El sindicato de compositores soviéticos se sumergió en la bizantina discusión sobre si la obra era suficientemente optimista, llegándose a una solución rocambolescamente insólita, al catalogarla como expresión de "optimismo pesimista". Como suele ocurrir en el socialismo, se injerta un significado políticamente conveniente a una expresión artística que no entienden.

*

     A continuación anexo las siempre valiosísimas notas de Mark Wigglesworth, en éste caso referente a la obra que nos ocupa:


Symphony No. 10 in E minor, Op.93

 

The first movement, a huge arching slow waltz that builds to a climax as inevitably as it recedes away from it is an amazing journey that, despite apparently ending where it began, has travelled an enormous distance. Structurally it is the most perfect single orchestral movement he ever wrote. Emotionally there is a tired and drained quality that reflects Akhmatova’s line: ‘How sad that there is no one else to lose, and one can weep.’ We feel the exhaustion of all who lived through the twenty-five years of Stalin’s tyranny.

 

It was a regime whose brutal inexhaustibility Shostakovich portrays in the breathtaking second movement. It begins fortissimo and is followed by no fewer than fifty crescendos. There are only two diminuendos. The effect is self-explanatory. The emotion is not so much a depiction of Stalin himself, but an anger that he ever existed. In fact, such was his hold over the people, that the hysteria greeting his funeral cortege was so great that hundreds of people were crushed to death by tanks trying to keep order and protect the coffin. It is typical of Stalin that he should have continued to be responsible for people’s deaths even from beyond the grave.

 

Like the first movement, the third is another attempt to dance. This waltz is more macabre and is based on a theme that is the first four letters of the composer’s own initial and surname. When the letters DSch are turned into German musical notation, they spell the notes D-E flat-C-B. But defining his identity like this does not seem to get him anywhere. The music keeps falling back on itself. There seems no way out until the cellos and basses, in a desperate crescendo, stumble as if by chance upon an an initially enigmatic horn call. This five-note theme appears no less than twelve times – every time almost identical – and bears a striking resemblance to the opening horn fanfare of Mahler’s Das Lied von der Erde. The message of this deeply optimistic work would have undoubtedly struck a chord with Shostakovich. Despite all the horrors, life itself is beautiful and will always be so despite man’s attempts to ruin it. The world will always renew itself. Another possible meaning for the theme is that, using the French system of notation as well as the German one, the horn call can be taken to spell the name ELMIRA: E-L(a)-Mi-R(e)-A. Elmira Nazirova was an Azeri pianist and composer who had studied with Shostakovich. He had become infatuated with her and wrote her numerous letters during the summer of 1953. Maybe both ‘translations’ are relevant. One represents eternal nature, the other human love. Both are forces for good and as such, the most powerful weapons against an evil like Stalin’s. The horn call symbolises an alternative. Unfortunately there seems no way of connecting with it. The movement recapitulates the DSch waltz and it becomes increasingly desperate. There is a story that Gogol used to stare constantly into a mirror and, in mad self-contemplation, repeatedly call out his own name. There is something of this mania here. Over and over again the DSch motif is repeated, frantically trying to assert its individuality. At its almost hysterical climax, the eternal love theme returns, this time on all four horns and fortissimo. Yes, that is the answer. That is the alternative. But you wonder if the realization has come too late. The final horn call is a long way away, beyond our grasp again.

 

The finale opens in a Siberian landscape with solitary woodwind voices trying to communicate with each other across the barren plains. It is the slowest music of the whole symphony, a timely reminder of the desolation that the prisoners were actually experiencing. To survive the camps was a miracle. It was not uncommon for forty men to be kept in a cell built for four. In fact many were simply shot as their sentence came to an end on the presumption that if they were still alive they had either worked less than they should have or eaten more than their share. At home, life goes on and the ensuing Allegro depicts the humdrum and meaningless existence of people trying to avoid their own deportation. The symphony is not sure which is worse. At least the prisoners were allowed to cry. The fast music never really gets going. As Shostakovich said, ‘it is very hard to run free when you are constantly looking over your shoulder.’ You can pretend to be playing games but you will always be playing them in a kind of prison. The poet Osip Mandelstam’s description of the time is haunting: ‘We were capable of coming to work with a smile on our face after a night in which our home had been searched or a relative arrested. It was essential to smile. If you didn’t, it meant that you were afraid or unhappy. Nobody could afford to admit this.’

 

The purges had made virtually everyone an accomplice. It was like a snowball, gathering up all it touched. As the somewhat gossipy bassoon begins the finale’s coda, it is joined one by one by almost everybody else. Galloping alongside is the evil rhythm of the second movement – the return of the snare drum giving us no option but to realize that Stalin is the one pushing the snowball down the hill. But the horns and timpani fight back, hammering out the DSch motif and with it the desire to remain individual. ‘I will not be beaten’, he is shouting. ‘You will never get me.’ The defiance is remarkable. The fact that the opposition to it is still there, however, lends credence to the fact that Shostakovich could have conceived this work before Stalin died. Perhaps he just realized that after Stalin would simply come somebody else to repress the people. Either way, there is no sense of relief at the end of this work, just a triumphant assertion that, despite the continued presence of tyranny, an individual with a strong enough spirit can survive. ‘Even if they chop my hands off,’ he said, ‘I will continue to compose music – even if I have to hold the pen between my teeth’. Only Shostakovich can be so optimistic, pessimistic, and ultimately realistic in one work without any sense of contradiction. It is what makes all his symphonies such vital chronicles of the Twentieth Century.

 

© Mark Wigglesworth 1998


DISCOGRAFÍA.

*

     En cuanto a la discografía de la Décima, como una de las obras más conocidas y populares de Shostakovich, es de entender que cuente con una amplia discografía recomendable, desde las típicas y enérgicas grabaciones de Mravinsky, quien hizo la primera grabación, pasando por otros grandes directores soviéticos, las emblemáticas grabaciones de Dimitri Mitropoulos y de Karel Ancerl, éste último ya publicado en ARPEGIO y llegando hasta nuestros días con grandes registros como el de Semyon Bychkov en Colonia o el de Vasily Petrenko en Liverpool.  De entre las grabaciones más memorables del Op. 93 están adicionalmente dos hechas por Herbert von Karajan al frente de la Filarmónica de Berlín y que cuentan con una altísima reputación bien ganada entre la crítica. Sin ser un director asociado a Shostakovich, por alguna razón Karajan tomó a la Décima como un caballito de batalla, dirigiéndola varias veces y dejando dos grabaciones comerciales para el sello Deutsche Grammophon: una de los años 70´s y luego una más reciente con la entonces tecnología digital. Las dos son un portento interpretativo, por supuesto ganando la versión digital el calidad y nitidez sonora. Aún dentro de una amplia gama de grandes registros, ésta es la recomendación más fácil y estandarizada.

*

In Memoriam, Maestro DSCH.

*

M-S.




miércoles, 6 de agosto de 2025

Ravel - Ormandy.


Maurice Ravel

1)   BOLERO

2-5)   RAPSODIE ESPAGNOLE

6)   ALBORADA DEL GRACIOSO

7-10)   LE TOMBEAU DE COUPERIN

11-18)   VALSES NOBLES ET SENTIMENTALES (*).

The Philadelphia Orchestra

Dir:  Eugene Ormandy.

(*) Charles Munch/Boston Symphony Orchestra. 

(SONY)

*

      Con éste magnífico ejemplar discográfico finalizo la serie homenaje a Ravel.


sábado, 2 de agosto de 2025

Chuck Mangione: Feels So Good.


Chuck Mangione  (1941-2025)

FEELS SO GOOD (1977)

A&M

*

       Homenaje al más clásico de los jazzistas, recién partido a la eternidad.  Paz a su alma.