Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky (1840-1893)
Symphony No. 4 in F minor Op 36
Cleveland Orchestra/Franz Welser-Möst
rec. 2021, Mandel Concert Hall, Severance Music Center, Cleveland, USA
Reviewed as a download from a press preview – digital only release
The Cleveland Orchestra Recordings TCO0009D [39]
It is hard to imagine now that during his lifetime Tchaikovsky, most people’s idea of a Russian Romantic composer, was regarded as not Russian enough. Of all of the major nineteenth century Russian composers none faced as much toward the Western tradition. It is obvious that he kept au fait with developments there even if he was seldom complimentary about any of them. Above all the influence of his beloved Mozart is audible in the grace and refinement of his scoring – a fact often overlooked, eclipsed by his wilder, more impassioned moments. I say all this by way of introduction to a most un-Russian recording of possibly Tchaikovsky’s most Russian symphony.
Whilst in thrall to Mravinsky’s interpretations of the late Tchaikovsky symphonies, I leave room in my affections for more classically minded views – I retain a soft spot, for example, for a refined and rather restrained version of the Pathétique by Abbado and the VPO. Despite its reputation as the agonised final chapter in Tchaikovsky’s autobiography, his last symphony is a much more sophisticated piece than it is usually credited as. The Fourth, seems to me, another matter. A well made work, obviously, but one that needs the fervour of a catastrophic period in the composer’s life at the time of his disastrous, ill conceived marriage if it is going to register its full impact.
Sometimes appearances can be deceptive but in this instance my fears that Franz Welser-Möst is temperamentally a poor match for this work proved largely correct. If, on the other hand, you are looking for a more restrained, musically reserved version of this sometimes lurid score then your search is over. Haitink’s Tchaikovsky demonstrated that letting Tchaikovsky’s notes speak for themselves doesn’t have to result in lukewarm music making but right from the opening horn fanfares which ought to blaze out the Fate motto it felt that there was an ingredient missing from this performance. Simply put, the horns, perfectly tuned, ripe in sound, are just too well behaved for my liking. This work thrives on its big, set piece moments and, in the case of the slow movement, its despairing climax was largely absent.
The playing of the Cleveland Orchestra is beyond reproach and herein lies a bit of a conundrum. It is highly likely that playing at this level can only be achieved through the kind of fastidiousness that Welser-Möst brings to the party. Not that the playing of the Leningrad Philharmonic under Mravinsky gives much away to the Clevelanders technically but the approach of the veteran Russian conductor would seem to preclude the kind of polish that Welser-Möst clearly values. I found it absolutely fascinating to hear Tchaikovsky’s scoring given this kind of care but I wouldn’t want to hear it every time. The sheer perfection of the many woodwind solos is startling. For all its cooler temperature, this account doesn’t lack character.
I am left wondering what made everyone involved think that this was a performance that demanded being released. Previously issues on the Cleveland Orchestra’s own label have more obviously showcased the orchestra’s return to the very first rank, most notably with a glorious Prokofiev 5 and some electrifying Schnittke. Even this present recording makes me envious of the quality of orchestral playing regular concert goers in Cleveland must enjoy. But ultimately it feels like a mismatch between conductor and composition however well it is played.
David McDade
Help us financially by purchasing from
