Columbia SAX 5280: Szell conducts Mozart
COLUMBIA SAX 5280
Szell Conducts Mozart
Overture to the Marriage of Figaro
Sinfonia Concertante in E flat, K. 364
Symphony No. 28 in C, K. 200
 |
ARTISTS:
Abraham Skernick, viola
George Szell, conductor
Cleveland Orchestra
LABEL/PRESSING:
Semi-circle (first)
MATRIX NUMBERS:
YAX 3332-4
PRICE RANGE:
Median $149, Max $511 (Popsike)
COMMENTS:
It has been a long time since I last wrote a post about the highly sought after UK Columbia SAX releases of recordings from George Szell and the Cleveland Orchestra. I reviewed many of them on this blog about 10 years ago. At that time, my conclusion after listening to these records was that they were nice enough but, in my humble opinion, not sonically worth the high price of admission. Ten years later, I still stand by that assessment. However, I still do wonder if the UK releases offered any tangible sonic improvements over the US Epic or CBS versions. If one studies the matrix numbers, one can see that a number of the UK SAX releases had different numbers than their US counterparts. In some cases, like the one I will discuss below, the UK albums even had different repertoire than the US ones. That leads me to think that the UK Columbia engineers probably remastered some of these recordings for the UK releases. If that is the case, then there is reason to believe that the UK releases might sound different, or even better. One would have to do a direct A/B comparison to know.
This question intrigued me, so once again I set out to do the experiment. I discovered that SAX 5280, Szell Conducts Mozart, has the EMI matrix numbers YAX 3331-3 and 3332-4. The repertoire on this record includes the Overture to The Marriage of Figaro, the Sinfonia Concertante for violin and viola, and Symphony No. 28. There is a corresponding US Columbia record, MS 6858, that has almost the same program but replaces the Sinfonia Concertante with Symphony No. 33 (the Sinfonia Concertante appeared on a separate US Columbia release, MS 6625). The matrix numbers on this are XXSM112490-1F and XXSM112491-1F. So, not exactly the same record for comparison, but probably the closest I'd be able to get with the performances of the Overture and Symphony No. 28.
Let's start with the Overture. This piece always brings back memories of my childhood when my family would pile into our Oldsmobile station wagon and my dad would pop in the factory cassette that came with the car. The opening track on side A was the Overture to The Marriage of Figaro, and my dad would turn up the volume so we could hear the work in all its glory. It's four minutes of joyous, uplifting music. Szell and the Clevelanders take it at a pretty spirited tempo (3:57, quite a bit faster than Klemperer's recording with the Philhamonia at 4:52 but comparable with Bernstein's recording with the NY Philharmonic at 3:56), and it sounds like what one would expect from Szell - energetic, disciplined. Unfortunately, I feel that neither the SAX nor the CBS release do the performance justice. In both cases, dynamics and treble are compressed, and the strings sound dry to my ears. Maybe there just wasn't much that the UK engineers could do to salvage this one. Somewhat of a disappointment. The Klemperer recording, albeit a little bit slower, sounds much better and the tone and clarity of the winds is truly excellent.
The Symphony No. 28, however, is an entirely different story. Here, the sound really opens up in comparison with the Overture, and the dynamic range is wider on both the SAX and the CBS. The sound is fuller, and you can hear more air and space around the orchestra. The presentation is just a bit more recessed on the CBS and a bit closer up on the SAX. The winds are lovely, crisp and clear. What is noticeably different between the SAX and the CBS is the low end. The bass on the SAX is markedly deeper and more resonant than on the CBS. This really gives the performance more heft and, to my ears, gives the SAX the upper hand on this performance.
I'll refrain from commenting on the Sinfonia Concertante for now, until I get my hands on the CBS release for comparison.
So, in this case, what the UK engineers did with the source material improved the sound of the SAX release, but not uniformly. The Symphony No. 28 sounded fuller overall with deeper bass, but the Overture was really no different than on the CBS. I'll leave it to you to decide whether or not to fork out $150 or more for the difference. To my knowledge, there was no UK reissue of this SAX on any of the EMI budget labels.
What I'd still like to know is:
1. What source material did UK Columbia receive from Epic or CBS to produce the SAX releases of the Szell recordings?
2. Did the UK Columbia engineers remaster all of this source material?
3. How was the decision made to switch the repertoire on some of the SAX releases, since this seems like it would have been quite a bit more work for the engineers?
If anyone has answers to these questions and would be willing to share, I would greatly appreciate it!
Well, to answer your questions I am guessing
ReplyDelete1. Source would be copies of the original master tapes (a common practice in the industry).
2. If the matrix numbers on the stampers are Columbia numbers, then we can be pretty sure that everything was remastered. In the case of the overture the original material was probably not good to begin with, hence the underwhelming sound quality in both versions.
3. The change of coupling would have one reason and one reason only: sales. Who in the UK would want to buy a Sinfonia Concertante with unknown soloists, when at the same time you could buy the DECCA recording with David and Igor Oistrakh, to name but one famous record?
BTW, I have done some searching on the CBS/US-Columbia records in my collection and have made some interesting discoveries: I have the French edition of the Brahms Trios recording with the Istomin/Stern/Rose Trio, CBS S 77210. It was mastered by Pathe Marconi, originally an independent French entity which was acquired at some point in the 50s by EMI/Columbia. It would be interesting to know how it compares to the US or UK versions.
The Bruno Walter Brahms Symphonies, CBS S77318, were mastered in France too, but by Philips-the French Country code 380 on the matrix is unmistakable. I have not found any French-mastered Szell records yet. I believe he was not that popular in France-or Europe for that matter, so his records are not exactly abundant.
Thank you for your answers! You bring up a good point about the sales issue. Rafael Druian was the concertmaster and Abraham Skernick the principal violist of the Cleveland Orchestra under Szell. They were probably less well known in Europe at the time. So maybe that was good reason to add the Sinfonia Concertante to this album as a sandwich filler rather than to release it on its own album? The Oistrakh/Oistrakh Decca is a wonderful recording and would've been hard to compete with.
DeleteI remember reading that starting in the 1950s, CBS had a deal with Philips to distribute their music outside of North America. In response, EMI created Angel to distribute their music in the US. Interesting that Pathe Marconi mastered the Brahms Trio recording that you mention. I do like the Istomin/Stern/Rose Trio recordings. They were some of the first piano trio albums I got into when they were reissued on CD in the early 1990s on Sony.
I don't have any experience with the French editions of the US CBS/Columbia recordings. I recently found a copy of the French EMI release of Cziffra performing Grieg's Piano Concerto and the Franck Symphonic Variations (ASDF 703). Very nice cover and dowel rod spine, something that was also commonly seen with the early US Angel mono releases (most of which I believe were manufactured in England). In spite of a very clean surface, the sound quality was unfortunately not great; there was a nice and warm midrange, but clarity was lost to distortion during loud musical climaxes. I'm not sure if that's representative of other French HMV/Columbia releases.
Bit optimistic expecting Szell "EMI budget label reissues" as they'd lost the Epic license. Bruckner 3/Szell about the last issued (SAX5294 - 3/68). As with this Mozart all deleted by 3/69. Bruckner 3 then quickly onto CBS Classics (have : that series all UK mastered). (Have you tried cleaning-up these sleeves?!)
ReplyDeleteAs with life, Tin Ear, I have come to embrace the imperfections. :-)
DeleteThere are only two EMI budget reissues of Szell recordings I have come across. One is a WRC of Walton's Symphony No. 2 and Partita, which I just recently picked up for a few dollars. This one was truly stunning soundwise. I have never heard the Epic, but I would honestly be really surprised if it had anywhere near the dynamics and realism of the WRC. The second is a WRC of Schubert's Great C major Symphony. I believe my colleagues Meles wrote about this many years ago, but when I asked him about it recently, he said he didn't have a good recollection of its merits (or lack thereof).
I recently discovered that the late 1970s/early 1980s CBS "Great Performances" vinyl reissues (with the newspaper headline-like covers) were remastered and remixed using the Dolby system. A number of these were the Szell recordings from the late 1950-mid 1960s. I never picked these up in the past but am now curious as to whether they sound better and more dynamic than the originals.
GP likely a re-hash of (say) mid-70's Dolybied Odyssey's. The following black-sleeved Portrait series were Digital demastered.
DeleteThe advantage (UK/EU) is CBS US transfers were used (Dutch pressings). Szell RStrauss Tone Poems is likely OK for you - but only compared Walter/Brahms Double/Tragic with my (better) 6-eye. Never played the either Szell Mahler 4 (SAX has CBS matrices). The remainder also have as CBS Classic's. My initial GP was a deleted Copland/Bernstein: no way as good as my SBRG's (Salon Mexico severely cramped instead of almost a full side). The Stokowki/Bizet is a shocker, recording-wise!
I had not realised the Portrait series was digitally remastered, I checked the one or two copies I own and you are right, they are DR. Strange that CBS did not advertise it, this was a major selling argument at the time-DECCA gave all the digitally remastered albums a proud ADRM label. Nowadays these albums are all but unsaleable-how times change.
DeleteI will look out for this Stokowski/Bizet album, maybe I shall find it in some flea market or thrift shop.
How bad is the digital remastering (or as Tin Ear wrote above, demastering)? One of the things that I thought many of the CBS releases in the mid to late 1960s suffered from was compressed dynamics. I thought maybe remastering might have alleviated some of that.
DeleteI have not listened carefully to the only Masterworks Portrait record in my collection (I only bought it on Saturday in a french flea market), but it is a recording of Mozart concertos with Rudolf Serkin, hardly the right material to judge dynamics by.
DeleteWhile looking at the various labels and sublabels of Columbia/CBS I found out that the MFP Australia label only published Material by US/Columbia, probably due to some weird copyright reason. It also seems they mastered the records themselves, as they had Matrix numbers that don't correspond to Masterworks/EPIC matrix numbers, or EMI matrices for that matter. I wonder how they sound...
Funny you should bring that up. I just discovered that myself! I saw that MFP Australia did release some of the Szell CBS recordings in Australia. I also wonder if they might be a sonic improvement. If MFP was affiliated with EMI, could they have perhaps used the EMI masters of those recordings?
Delete