Bolero Paradox
296 views
Skip to first unread message
Jerry
Dec 15, 2021, 12:05:26 PM12/15/21
to
Ravel’s Bolero may be the most maligned work in the orchestral repertoire. So many of you, like myself, probably haven’t given it a listen in quite a long time. It’s just too repetitive. Then I stumbled upon a difficult-to-find CD reissue of a recording that I had during those early pre-stereo LP days [Pedro Freitas Branco conducting]. The sound is surprisingly good and the performance quite engaging.
So where’s the paradox? At a timing of 18:36, it may be the slowest ever and, logically, might be expected to be the most interminably boring reading ever. But not so. Ravel’s own recording is said to be slow (I haven’t heard it and can’t be sure of its actual timing), but it appears as if most other recordings seem to fall somewhere between 14 ½ and 15 ½ minutes. Could it be that most conductors these days have it all wrong?
Another longish recording is Previn’s LSO on EMI at 17:21 that might be worth considering even if you’ve vowed never again to listen to that piece.
So where’s the paradox? At a timing of 18:36, it may be the slowest ever and, logically, might be expected to be the most interminably boring reading ever. But not so. Ravel’s own recording is said to be slow (I haven’t heard it and can’t be sure of its actual timing), but it appears as if most other recordings seem to fall somewhere between 14 ½ and 15 ½ minutes. Could it be that most conductors these days have it all wrong?
Another longish recording is Previn’s LSO on EMI at 17:21 that might be worth considering even if you’ve vowed never again to listen to that piece.
number_six
Dec 15, 2021, 4:07:53 PM12/15/21
to
I can see how a slower tempo, if well played, might allow a better opportunity to appreciate the piece.
Dan Koren
Dec 15, 2021, 5:58:18 PM12/15/21
to
and barrel. His last performance of the work is roughly 18+
minutes excluding pre and post applause:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m739p0sFwDs
I listen to the Bolero every morning so I can gradually
wake up without the intrusion of vulgar alarm clocks.
The Bolero is one of the greatest music masterpieces.
Ravel achieves in only 18 minutes what takes Brother
Anton an hour and a half! ;-)
dk
gggg gggg
Dec 16, 2021, 12:17:53 PM12/16/21
to
On Wednesday, December 15, 2021 at 9:05:26 AM UTC-8, Jerry wrote:
Dan Koren
Dec 16, 2021, 2:32:50 PM12/16/21
to
On Thursday, December 16, 2021 at 12:17:53 PM UTC-5, gggg gggg wrote:
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bol%C3%A9ro#Tempo_and_duration
Why don't you just say
whatever it is that you
are trying to say ?!?
dk
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bol%C3%A9ro#Tempo_and_duration
Why don't you just say
whatever it is that you
are trying to say ?!?
dk
JohnGavin
Dec 16, 2021, 4:34:54 PM12/16/21
to
His taste was impeccable. Just my opinion of course.
Frank Berger
Dec 16, 2021, 4:57:06 PM12/16/21
to
JohnGavin
Dec 16, 2021, 6:01:49 PM12/16/21
to
Kerrison
Dec 16, 2021, 6:04:31 PM12/16/21
to
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E__RMXWy4Jo
At the other end of the scale, Stokowski's 1940 All-American Youth Orchestra recording at 12 minutes suffers from a low-level transfer and much manipulation of the volume levels for each solo instrument at the start. This was recorded on two 10-inch 78s (four short sides) which doubtless accounts for the tempo adopted ...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p3o-wiS16jk
As to Celibidache, there are half-a-dozen performances by him on YouTube, with several different orchestras over the years, and with timings ranging from around 17 to 20 minutes, so take your pick! ...
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=Celibidache+Ravel+Bolero+
Evidently, Toscanini's 14-minute reading didn't please the composer but I think I prefer it to the oh-so-slow versions out there ...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HiYIiPWZ6cQ
gggg gggg
Dec 17, 2021, 3:13:29 AM12/17/21
to
https://www.google.com/books/edition/Bolero_The_Life_of_Maurice_Ravel/Mbt8CgAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&bsq=%22he%20only%20element%20of%20variety%20is%20provided%22
gggg gggg
Dec 17, 2021, 3:17:03 AM12/17/21
to
On Wednesday, December 15, 2021 at 7:05:26 AM UTC-10, Jerry wrote:
Steven Bornfeld
Dec 17, 2021, 11:00:48 AM12/17/21
to
Ricardo Jimenez
Dec 17, 2021, 1:35:06 PM12/17/21
to
think the more spectacular the recorded sound, the better. So which
performance has the best sonics?
Frank Berger
Dec 17, 2021, 2:46:28 PM12/17/21
to
Frank Berger
Dec 17, 2021, 2:57:32 PM12/17/21
to
https://tinyurl.com/2p8ejzea
I don't disagree with what you said, but the quality of the recording is rarely going to be a major factor for me in any recording.
mINE109
Dec 17, 2021, 3:07:06 PM12/17/21
to
On 12/17/21 12:34 PM, Ricardo Jimenez wrote:
> Since the interest in the piece is the varied orchestration, one would
> think the more spectacular the recorded sound, the better. So which
> performance has the best sonics?
You'd think there would be plenty, and there are so many a recent
> Since the interest in the piece is the varied orchestration, one would
> think the more spectacular the recorded sound, the better. So which
> performance has the best sonics?
Gramophone article overlooked the Dutoit/Montreal effort. The audiophile
faves include Skrowaczewski, Martinon and Munch. The Gramophone prefers
Boulez/NYPO.
Frank Berger
Dec 17, 2021, 3:28:51 PM12/17/21
to
Al Eisner
Dec 17, 2021, 5:44:47 PM12/17/21
to
--
Al Eisner
raymond....@gmail.com
Dec 17, 2021, 7:03:12 PM12/17/21
to
Bolero is a great piece of music regardless.
https://youtu.be/NCex9IjPNCo
Ray Hall, Taree
Kerrison
Dec 18, 2021, 4:46:06 AM12/18/21
to
> One of the funniest short films is that by Patrice Leconte, Le batteur du boléro, the link as below.
> Bolero is a great piece of music regardless.
>
> https://youtu.be/NCex9IjPNCo
>
> Ray Hall, Taree
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wkfXZSYzUxA
gggg gggg
Dec 21, 2021, 12:49:55 AM12/21/21
to
gggg gggg
Jan 11, 2022, 2:21:59 PM1/11/22
to
On Wednesday, December 15, 2021 at 9:05:26 AM UTC-8, Jerry wrote:
How It's Done: Ravel Boléro
number_six
Jan 17, 2022, 4:44:41 PM1/17/22
to
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages