Bartók Viola Concerto

2nd Part Critical comparison of 2 recordings of the Viola Concerto by Bartók (Rivka Golani, William Primrose) In my opinion it is not the performer's task to decide how is the most authentic way to perform a piece according to the manuscri pt, especially if it is so imperfect and problematic like in the case of the Bartók viola concerto. As a practising violist I believe that a well edited music is the indispensable prerequisite of a proper performance in term of performance practise. Because of the already mentioned reasons it is not my goal to analyse the two recordings according to the manuscri pt. I doubt that I have the adequate knowledge to write an objective unquestioned critical comparison. For the comparison I will use the edition what was prepared for publication by Tibor Serly. The music was published in 1949 by Boose and Hawkes in the USA. The two recordings are: William Primrose viola, Otto Klemperer conductor, Cocertegebouw Orchestra, recorded 11. jan. 1951. Rivka Golani viola, András Ligeti conductor, Budapest Symphony Orchestra, released 25. oct. 1994. I movement The piece starts immediately with a viola solo. The first 4 bars are the theme, like a statement that is followed by a weeping like motive. Here the music gets feaster and more and more excited until bar 12 which is a high long b-flat than a rundown closes the section. The material is built on patterns what are very similar to different ornaments in folk music. The starting tempo is almost the same on both recordings, slower than the advised 104 metronome mark. William Primrose does not pay attention for the written accelerando from bar 8 as a result the ornaments does not have the proper impact on the music. The music looses it's elan in bar 8-9 so the poco rubato and the precipitato cannot create one whole section with the theme. On the recording of Golani the first 13 bars begins the performance like in the theatre the curtain goes up than leaves silence what is indicated and very meaningful. The part from bar 14 to 24 has a similar structure like the beginning of the piece. The solo viola represents the theme again but it is a bit different, it sounds an octave lower. After 4 bars the wind instruments play the theme. The soloist cuts the winds off with semiquavers 3 times but it is rather in a low-key role. In bar 23, 24 the orchestra has a run down that is a similar to the solo viola in bar 13. It closes the music again and gives the opportunity for the third try. The soloists start the tempo in bar 14 a little broader like it is advised. In bar 16 Primrose plays triplet instead of anapestus. In Golani's recording the same rythm is bouncy and dancer what changes the singing mood for a moment. In bar 18 to 20 the semiquaver groups effects raises above the orchestra very clearly. Primrose plays them rather in melodic style. The section from bar 25 last until 54. For the third time Golani starts the theme a nuance faster. She does a little ritartando in bar 33 but the process doesn't stop. Primrose complicates the music too much from bar 25. He does ritartando in bar 28 and after the chrescendo he plays subito quieter dinamyc on top of this he is slower here. The rythm in bar 33 is not clear at all. It is simply incorrect. From here the virtuoso part starts a bit sleepy he arrives to the top in bar 37 without energy but in the following bars the music comes to alive and arrives to the poco meno mosso with great elan. The part with the triplets has a very dance like character. Not for Primrose. He starts very slow around 55 metronome mark instead of 84-88. From here he plays constant accelerando and reaches the tempo in bar 48. It is obvious that this is a concept but nothing indicates it. I think it is incorrect. Golani starts the poco meno mosso a little slower but because of the character it is not disturbing. In bar 48 the tempo changes perfectly expressive. In bar 52 the tempo 1 the audience has a real feeling of arrival. The melody cites the main theme. On Primrose recording this is less effective. The part from 61 has completely new meaning. The advised metronome mark is 92 that is about the tempo of the Hungarian dance czardas. On the contrary downgrade repeated motives are very similar to the Hungarian weeper that is an improvised, slow and completely free genre. Both performers choose the latter diction. Primrose plays the rythms very free until bar 81. He uses glissandos many times this gives gipsy like character to the music. In bar 70 he ignores the subito piano. Golani plays the weeper motives with a correct rythms but it feels like improvisation. She holds back the tempo in bar 70 instead of going forward. The next part is from bar 81 to bar 127. Here we can find the variants of the theme and the accompaniment. Golani plays ritartando in bar 87 like she does in 33 even if it's not written. The tempo of Primrose gets stabile only in bar 88. From the upbeat of bar 100 the music suddenly switches the character to dance like. Bouth of the plays this part very teasty although the upbeat is not short what is incorrect. From here the music demands extremely high technical abilities. Both of them play the difficult passages very virtuoso. Golani finds the balance between the characters better. Primrose goes beyond the tasteful borders here as well. The next part starts in bar 127. There is still 9 bars until the cadenza but the tradition is to play the music free from here. Both of them start it free. Primrose skiffs many details. The cadenza is rushed. He does not leave space before the written cadenza in bar 135. In bar 142 and 146 he plays the first notes of the semiquvever groups tasteless long. In bar 151 the glissando is out of style as well. On Golani's recording the chamber playing with the orchestra is very enjoyable from bar 130 to 135. The whole cadenza is built very well. The balance is perfect between the free interpretation the advised articulation and the dynamic. The recapitulation is not regular. After a kvint scale running up very virtuoso not the main theme comes back but the rustic dance motive from bar 41. Both of them plays in the same way like in the exposition. In bar 170 Primrose plays g flat instead of g. The part that starts in bar 185 in a variant of its pair from the exposition. The tempo marking is slower here. Serly advise 76. This is indicated. In the Hungarian folk music there are such czardas dances where in a 4/4 bar the crochet on the second and on the fourth beat is shorter. This part shows great similarity to these folk motives because of the rhythm. This part is played much slower around 50 on both recordings so to accommodate to the pair in the exposition but like this the folk music roots are not hearable. Primrose plays two wrong notes. In bar 195 instead of the second c sharp he plays c and in bar 197 he plays c flat instead of c. Golani does a tiny ritartando in bar 199 that is not marked. The short part from 207 to 210 is very interesting. The sound set is almost similar to a famous Hungarian folksong "the peacock ascended". The mood is very similar as well. It is a very strong statement. The melody comes after a long preparation in the orchestra. Bartok diversify the song and closes the part in 230. It is a general opinion that the first movement should be closed here and the next 16 bars are a alternative finish. From 207 both players choose good tempo. Golani does a little ritartando in bar 223 that is not indicated but with this she just prepare the following morendo. For the lento Serly writes parlando expression. The plaintive motive followed by the virtuoso runs are more expressive on Golani's recording. II movement We have to know about the second movement that it has the most missing parts. It is especially true for the orchestra part. The manuscri pt contains Adagio tempo marking. Serly added a metronome mark which is 69 in 4/4 also he wrote the Religioso Expression next to the Adagio. This is a crucial difference. The problem is how to match the religious mood with the advised metronome marking. On both recording the performers completely ignore the metronome number in the beginning. They play almost in half tempo. Rivka's metronome number is 35 Primrose is playing a little bit faster in 40. The structure of the 2nd movement is very similar to the first. After the main theme there is a free section that is built from motives like in folk music. Primrose plays almost absolutely in tempo the whole section. Rivka follows the instructions so that the playing feels improvised and like this it is very similar to the folk ornaments. In bar 29 in the poco stringendo Primrose plays the first semiquvavers longer which is not in style. Golani prepare the poco stringendo perfectly. She plays this part a little slower than Primrose but both recording is in a very good plaintive and bitter mood. They play the quasi recapitulation in bar 40 slow again. Primrose plays glissando in 51. The allegretto that prepares the finale is very energetic on both recording. They play faster than the advised but it sounds very good before the wild Rumanian dance of the 3rd movement. III movement The original tempo marking is 126 that is slower than the similar Rumanian folk dances. Golani and Primrose play much faster. They start around 150 which sound extremely good. Golani has more control. On the first quavers there are trills. Here she adds richoset bowing which is not written in the music but Rumanian folk players used to do in the folk music. This makes even more virtuoso her playing. Primrose articulates the semiquavers more like in the folk music. In bar 93 Serly advise spiccato bowing. It is well known that Bartók did not like spiccato maybe because it does not exist in folk music. Golani is loyal to the score Primrose does not change from detasche. The "Scottish tune" that starts in bar 114 is a real resting part in the wild 3rd movement. Primrose plays around 125 which is much faster than the advised 108. For first hear it sounds very good but if we listen Golani's recording where she plays the motive in the advised tempo it turns out that Primrose is too fast. In Golani's recording because of the low-key tempo the pipe like accompaniment and the singing but energetic viola solo makes great difference comparing with the wild Rumanian dance that comes back in bar 177. Primrose pays wrong rhythm in bar 192. Golani plays the tune leggerio in bar 213 according to the music. Primrose does not change the articulaton.

Overall we can say that both recordings can be an example for viola players. Golani's recording is more varied and more loyal to the music. The folk music roots get more emphasis. The recording crates one whole unity from the first note to the last. The tiny differences that are so impotant in the music of Bartók get less emphasis on Primrose's recording.

http://books.google.hu/books?id=sI4sRzCR-s8C&pg=PA25&lpg=PA25&dq=peter+bartok+principal+theme+of+the+viola+concerto&source=bl&ots=tmJ6n6VSwZ&sig=X2IzLfTHSvSmMsZbKA3NE46RtzE&hl=hu&sa=X&ei=WOJ8UYO8HM-EhQfRoIGgDA&ved=0CD8Q6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=peter%20bartok%20principal%20theme%20of%20the%20viola%20concerto&f=false http://www.lib.utexas.edu/etd/d/2001/asbellsa20639/asbellsa20639.pdf