Oh yes! Norman tells it like it is.
All I can add is that I wouldn't mind paying to hear this lady if I could stand what she does musically. But I can't. Her Korngold recording, to be fair, is OK, but the Tchaikovsky that's paired with it is cringe-worthy...as for the Mozart, well, we'll see.
8 comments:
Mutter does indeed have a problem coming across well... although in person she looks quite stunning. What I have heard in exerpts from the new sonata recording (i just assume it wasn't the actual finished product) was nothing less than awful. Orkis' twangy "Mozart Fluegel" doesn't help either. If I want to hear these works on (two, not one) original instruments, I'll turn to Podger (whose second volume is coming out later this month or in Nov.) or - as I've just heard and been very happy with - Manze's new recording with Egarr.
The concerti with the LPO (and Bashmet in the Sinfonia Concertante) are fine - but no more. Her Korngold is well played, I grant... but it makes me think "Hollywood", everytime. I don't listen to it anymore - I find Gil Shaham's (coupled with an excellent Barber) much more pleasing. Can't wait to dissect her Mozart trios, either. With hubby Previn on the Grand and D.Mueller-Schott on the cello, at least it gives a young player another boost. But that seems to be it, too.
One recording I think is excellent is her second recording of the Brahms. It's different - but not in a gratuitous manner.
Thanks for pointing to Norma's article. (Someone pointed to your pointing in an ionarts comment where I extolled the virtues of the ASM-supported A.Steinbacher. Although fairly good looking, that lass actually has skills that genuinely impressed me. And, like her fellow student J.Fischer, she seems wise in her recording/career choices that are far from flashy.
best,
jfl
"someone" tee hee.
Mutter's an oddity, to say the least (which is too bad, because when she was younger I thought she was great). It took all my will-power to get through her latest Tchaikovsky, and I am not in any rush to hear her new Mozart cycle. I liked the recording of the 3rd concerto she did with Karajan years ago, but now I don't have enough curiosity or gluttony for punishment to actively seek out the new version. Having said that, she still has good moments; I agree with jfl about her second Brahms recording -- it's sort of white-hot and muscular, and well done. But these days my ears are elsewhere; jfl mentioned Fischer, whose playing I like a lot. I haven't heard a recording of the solo Bach pieces as wondrous as hers in a while.
Should be banned? Why?
Michael says that Mutter’s an oddity. Well, perhaps she is, but I’d say that Lebrecht is probably the chief oddity here. He says that Mutter’s a “bumptious fiddler” who should be banned. Well, that’s his opinion. How does he substantiate his opinion?
It seems that she gives little value for money because she seldom looks at the audience or gives an encore. Well, I’ve seen Mutter perform maybe seven or eight times over the past twenty or so years and I haven’t noticed her reluctance to look at the audience, so perhaps she only averts her eyes when Norman is present. Besides which, I have seen performers who don’t look at the audience and – quite frankly – this doesn’t both me, because I go to concerts to hear music, not to be looked at. As for encores – they can be enjoyable, but most serious music lovers can do without them. I heard a wonderful John Lill recital in 2001 in which he played three Beethoven sonatas. His performances were excellent and the response from the audience was ecstatic. He came back onto the stage and announced that he did not think it appropriate to follow opus 101 with an encore and the audience applauded this sensible decision.
Lebrecht complains that Mutter charges too much money, but then goes on to say that she was forced to lower her fee because London orchestras were not willing to meet it. Clearly if she is unable to attract adequate audiences (as Lebrecht suggests) then her fee will have to change accordingly. It’s horrible that Art must bow to Capitalism in this way, but that’s the world we live in. And capitalism has not done us music lovers badly in London. If there is a problem in London it is that there are just too many great musicians available to us – and there’s no shortage of new young talent making the most of it.
Other than that his main objection seems to be that she is glamorous and wears off-the-shoulder frocks, that she knew Karajan and is married to Andre Previn. O Norman, how dreadful!
The only time that he refers to her musicianship is when he refers to her “pre-packaged” and “over-polished” Mozart. Well, here we come upon the thorny problem of differing opinions about her playing. I heard her Mozart performances on the South Bank and, personally, found them very fine (in fact, her Sinfonia Concertante performance with Bashmet was outstanding). Whether they were “pre-packaged” – by which I assume Lebrecht means that they were the same as her recorded versions – I could not say since I haven’t heard the recordings. Either way, I think I got my money’s worth (there’s that awful capitalism again).
Of course, it would be a wonderful world if artists received remuneration appropriate to their ability. Certainly, in my view, Rachel Podger would be as rich as Mutter (she might be for all I know), as would Manze. But that doesn’t make Mutter any less of a musician. Lebrecht may think that Mutter’s a nuisance, but I don’t.
That's exactly the point. Mutter's admirable in many ways, but no more admirable than any other star violinists. So why should our impoverished orchestras be held to ransom by her barmy fees? In any case, I can think, without even trying, of 20 fiddlers I would rather hear than her. In no particular order: Vengerov, Repin, Kavakos, Little, Graffin, Hope, Rachlin, Jansen, Batiashvili, Bell, Manze, Fischer, Zehetmair, Tetzlaff, Znaider, Zukerman, Vassilev, Hahn, Chang, Capucon. And that's just for starters.
I take your point, but the fact is that orchestras are NOT "held to ransome" by Mutter's barmy fees. They can choose not to pay them. Perhaps they'll be less inclined to now, if - as Lebrecht says - her recent Barbican recitals were so poorly attended. But I find it odd that Lebrecht assumes that the people making programming decisions are somehow being brow-beaten into hiring Mutter or - unlike Norm himself - they are not knowledgeable or educated enough to judge soloists on their musical merit. Well, to adapt Orwell: only a member of the intelligentsia would believe such a thing. No ordinary man would be such a fool.
I like your blog, by the way. very sparky.
Thanks, Horace! I remember interviewing Norman when The Maestro Myth was published some years ago: one of his bugbears is the way that agents have pushed up conductors' fees to such crazy levels. I asked him why they don't just say no. "Exactly," he said.
Post a Comment