Audition: Stravinsky Petrushka (1911 score) Pierre Monteux, Decca

 

Paris Conservatoire Orchestra/Pierre Monteux

Piano: Julius Katchen

Rec 10/11/1956 Salle Wigram Paris.

In a warning to future critics it’s sobering to see that the Gramophone critic in December 1957 describes this performance as, and I quote, “Magnificent”. It is not - it is occasionally adequate.

The 32-year-old John Culshaw was the producer and this was an early Decca stereo recording. The key problems here are 

• probably significantly inadequate rehearsal - it was recorded in a day 

• poor playing and poor ensemble esp from the strings and winds. 

• Dreadful spotlighting of the solos

It’s amazing that Monteux was happy to have this released.

The interpretation often seems brusque and playing careless with many instruments in action and some solos so horribly spotlighted it’s quite distracting. It’s hard to believe this is how he conducted it at the premier and his later recording seems to show this one as a aberration. It’s easy to believe that this is close to how the ballet Russ audience in 1911 heard it though.

The first tableau proceeds with quite a lot of approximation with Culshaw’s  microphones seldom catching any of the depth in the strings. On the plus side the woodwind are suitably piquant but isolated throughout distorting the balance.

The second tableau is marginally better. Perhaps because the instrumental groups are smaller. Two things emerged from this: Culshaw’s set up and Monteux punctilious conducting are askew - conspire to make for a more vehement if not violent site to this Petroushka

Tableau three is either sloppy or exaggerated for comic effects.  The opening waltz is especially, raggedly the Moor sounds like a bad dancer. Petruska’s reappearance is much more dramatic though - this is may be planned.

The fourth tableau is much better and all goes well with the players but Culshaw curious spotlighting distracts quite a lot of the last dozen pages moreover the sense of what might have been hangs over the proceedings.  It’s hardly an historical document.

Performance: 6 out of 10 

Recording 4 out of 10 

Interpretation 8 out of 10.