Customer Rating: 
Summary: An interpretation of Stravinsky's Violin Concerto that stands apart
Comment: Here is why Hilary Hahn's recording of Stravinsky's Concerto is not only a fine interpretation, but also one that stands apart.
Stravinsky was notoriously touchy about how his works should be played: he countenanced no interpretive liberty. Going exactly by the score was a starting point, but wasn't enough. Stravinsky was also defiant of the score's ability to convey ALL the composer's intentions. After all, there aren't so many ways to mark an accent, and so many ways to PLAY it. And the same is true with dynamics, articulation, orchestral balance - just about every parameter of music other than pitch and rhythm.
Therefore, Stravinsky insisted on recording all his output: in addition to score, every subsequent interpreter was to refer to his own recordings to know how the piece should be "interpreted" - in both senses: played, but first, construed. Of the Violin Concerto Stravinsky conducted two recordings, the first one in 1935 with the work's commissioner and first performer Samuel Dushkin (Igor Stravinsky: Composer & Performer, Volume II), and the other one in 1960 with Isaac Stern (Stravinsky: Concertos or Stravinsky: Violin Concerto / Rochberg: Violin Concerto / Stern / Previn).
Except maybe in the three Russian ballets, I find that Stravinsky's stereo recordings have rarely been equaled, let alone surpassed. His later recording of the Violin Concerto with Stern is outstanding, and not only because of the great violinist: every orchestral detail comes out clearly, with great character and instrumental pungency. There have been a few great recordings since (not so many, though): Oistrakh (Mozart Violin Concerto 1 / Stravinsky Violin Concerto - Oistrakh, Haitink), Grumiaux (Berg / Stravinsky: Violin Concerto - Grumiaux, Markevitch, Bour), Chung (Prokofiev: Violin Concertos 1 & 2; Stravinsky: Violin Concerto), Zimmermann (Berg: Concerto for violin; Ravel: Tzigane), but I could live happily for eternity with only Stern-Stravinsky.
And this is where Hilary Hahn comes in. If she had "only" played well, with character, fine purity of tone and technical assurance, and if Marriner and the Academy of Saint-Martin-in-the-Fields had played with snap and precision and brought out those many essential orchestral details (which they do, adding a fine, chamber-music quality in the dialogues between soloist and orchestra), it would have "only" taken place among the short list of best versions. But there is more. In the remarkable liner notes which she wrote herself, Hahn recounts how puzzled and interested she was, when she discovered the Concerto, by the fact that no recording she could find (and that, one surmises, includes Stravinsky's own) played the first movement as fast as at the tempo indicated by the composer's metronome mark (120 to the quarter-note). Now this raises fascinating issues. Sure, a score is open to many interpretations - but NOT metronome marks. There is nothing more precise, mathematical, undisputable - Stravinskian, in short - than metronome marks. So what is, after all, the "true" Stravinsky: what he wrote or what he conducted? Did he imagine in his "mind's ear" a certain tempo while composing and then, coming to performance, realize it wasn't really what he wanted? (but if so, why didn't he correct the metronome marks when the score was published or re-published? He did re-orchestrate his earlier, Russian works in the 1940s). Or when he came to performance was he confronted with the inability of violinists and orchestras to perfectly realize his true intentions, and adapted his tempos accordingly?
One doesn't need to answer. The fascination of music (and I'll counter Stravinskian dogma here) is that a score is open to many interpretations, like an object that can be seen from various angles. Each highlights the composition, which cannot be reduced to one interpretation, be it the composer's own: it is the sum of diverging approaches.
So what makes Hahn's version not only one in the shortlist of best, but one that stands apart, is that she takes this first movement not at the traditional, composer-sanctioned tempo (something like 100 to the quarter-note), but at the much faster one indicated by the metronome mark. Consequently, it takes her 4:47 to get through, instead of the composer's 5:32 - and Stravinsky is rather brisk compared to most others. It is, naturally, both jarring and ear-catching, like when the period instrumentists tackle Bach or Brahms for audiences nurtured on Furtwangler and Bohm. Furthermore, she, Marriner and the Academy magnificently pull it off: no sense of strain, superb dash, snap and bounce.
Truth is, Hahn's approach would have been more illuminating had she consistently applied the same strict observance of the score's tempos in the remaining three movements. In fact, she does the opposite: her finale is dazzling in its forward dash, faster than anyone else and by a wide margin - but also significantly faster than the composer's indicated tempo of 120 (as in the first movement) to the eighth-note, something like 168 (Stravinsky himself takes it a little faster than 120). She also takes the two slow movements (especially Aria II) MUCH slower than the score's tempos and than any other version (Stravinsky here is closer to his own marks, although not as fast in Aria I), which leads her to a slight but unrequested tempo change at 2:30 in Aria I, because she would habe been TOO slow for the new section's character. Had she been consistent in her observance of the score's tempos, I'd have claimed Hahn's version to be historical, along with Stravinsky's two recordings. Still, taken on its own, I find Hahn's approach quite convincing, and certainly unique. For that very reason, it can be recommended as an indispensable complement to Stravinsky's stereo recording with Stern.
It's easier to hear all the significant recordings of Stravinsky's Violin Concerto than of Brahms', of course. These are innumerable, and I haven't done the same kind of thorough comparative recording as with Stravinsky, so I can't assess if Hahn's reading really stands out. It does seem to me that she and Marriner go much more by tradition than in Stravinsky (it is harder to escape from it here too) and offer less of an ear-cleansing process. But she does play with admirable purity of tone, the Academy must have been reinforced, as it sounds fuller than a chamber ensemble, but still affords great instrumental clarity while avoiding any sense of ponderousness. So this is as good as any version, although to me it is really a (very substantial) bonus to Hahn's outstanding Stravinsky.
Customer Rating: Summary: Absolute reference material here...
Comment: For some reason, I never got around to getting a recording of the Brahms concerto even though I've had the other warhorses (i.e. Mendelssohn, Tchaikovsky) for awhile. After hearing Joshua Bell give a live performance, it rekindled my fondness for the concerto and I just had to get my hands on a good recording of it. After listening to several samples on Amazon, the sample recording of this CD was the only one I kept coming back to, so I took the plunge and boy, am I glad I did. Hilary's playing here is pure joy to listen to. Her double stops are clean and crisp with faultless intonation. She produces a very sweet and clear tone from her fiddle which was never fatiguing to my ears. (I could listen to this recording all day!) By comparison, I am not a fan of Mutter's thin tone. I can never listen to her (Mutter's) recordings for more than a minute. In addition, out of all the other recordings I sampled, I felt Hilary really nailed the tempo in the third mvmt of the Brahms. I can't stand some other Brahms recordings which slow the third mvmt down way too much, sucking all the exuberance from it. Here, Hilary maintains the sparkle throughout with a perfect tempo and her precise bow work .
As for the Stravinsky, I wasn't at all familiar with the work, but Hilary brought the same sense of excitement and technical perfection to it as well. At any rate, this recording has converted me to a Hilary fan. My wife and I had tix to go see her play the Goldmark, but she cancelled at the last minute due to illness. Come back to H-town for a visit, Hilary! But bottom line, this recording is definitely reference Brahms material. Highly recommended!
