Opinions on the merits of recently issued CDs have been in demand here at the FAQ. Generally speaking, we try to concentrate on factually-based information. However, I am now doing the present editorializing. I will be writing some remarks every month on recordings which inspire me to make remarks.
These are brief remarks, not real reviews. The remarks may assume that the reader is familiar with various other items, or even the recording in question. I urge you to always look at "page of FAQ" links in the referenced files, as well as the CD files themselves. For more comments on what a "review" means to me, as well as links to some other opinions, see the bottom of this page.
Comments are updated at the end of each month, and appear in months during which the CDs actually make their way to me, allowing a few days at the end of the month to prepare the comments. I do not delay in requesting new releases of interest, but the vagaries of shipment from Europe can mean that items arrive here in later months. I do not consider CDs to be "new" if I did not attempt to hear them when they first appeared.
The latest from the Tallis Scholars returns to Josquin with two of his less well-known masses. Indeed, the Missa Ad Fugam appears to be a first recording, with the Missa Sine Nomine only appearing completely once before. To make the program that much more intriguing, these are Josquin's two known all-canonic masses. On this point, Peter Phillips' remarks on why canonic writing can be so appealing to the lay listener are very nicely expressed. I also note with interest that, whereas the New New Grove calls the Missa Sine Nomine an early work, Phillips calls it a late work. The Grove remarks are further notable in that they cite some similarities with late works while classifying it as early. No matter, this is some interesting music, deserving to be widely heard. I have been quite critical of the Tallis Scholars' style at times, but as musicological consensus emerges regarding how works of this era were constructed and notated, their professional talents & experience emerge as a true strength. This item has been added to my personal list. There was also word surrounding this release that it would kick off a complete Josquin mass series, but I have not had that confirmed.
I also received the second volume of Dufay motets by Cantica Symphonia. Together with the prominent isorhythmic motets, these two volumes include all of Dufay's more elaborate contrapuntal writing in the motet genre. These recordings do not set any new standards in performance or vary much from what has been done before, but they do present a good two-volume compendium of some very good music. Compared to the Huelgas rendition, there are strengths and weaknesses: a little better flow much of the time, but also not quite as much precision at times. All in all, I prefer Cantica Symphonia's version by a slight margin. This set was added to my personal list.
Nothing ready to report this month. I have some items in hand to discuss in April, however.
A new recording from Ensemble Syntagma focuses on the little-known trouvère Gautier d'Épinal. The emphasis is on the more unusual or original aspects of Gautier's music and poetry, as well as his German-conditioned setting in Metz. The performance features a wonderful variety of sonorities, although mainly in subdued tones which interact nicely with the fairly emphatic rhythm often adopted. A little clearer articulation from the voices would be welcome, but overall this is a very enjoyable and sophisticated interpretation, drawing upon a wide range of knowledge and opinion about medieval performance.
Nothing to report this month.
The Ensemble Musica Nova has released quite an interesting Ockeghem program, consisting mainly of the Missa Cuiusvis Toni performed in each of the 4 authentic modes. Whereas such a program does not necessarily sound interesting on its surface, it ends up being quite compelling. Indeed, not only is the music intriguing in this very carefully studied & executed interpretation of the material, but the performance itself is outstanding for Ockeghem's music generally. This interpretation is another strong point of evidence suggesting a previously noted trend, namely that ensembles experienced in earlier music (in this case, Machaut & Dufay) often end up with much stronger performances of the intricate c.1500 polyphony than those ensembles which work backwards from the later 1500s. This recording was promptly added to my personal list. Unfortunately, I am also forced to take this production to task, somewhat, on a personal level. Those familiar with our site will probably recognize the brief "Johannes Ockeghem" essay in English, the 3rd of 4 essays in the notes, as a simple editing of my Ockeghem biography here. I was neither asked nor acknowledged, which I find rather disappointing. Not to be petty about it, but I see no reason for such behavior. I would have been happy to be explicitly a part of this production. On the other hand, one cannot now accuse me of bias in my admiration for this interpretation, so I suppose that is a benefit of sorts. I will, however, repeat my disappointment with whoever saw fit to make that decision.
A second volume devoted to Gombert has appeared on Radio Austria (ORF) by Ensemble "the sound and the fury." In this case, I was unaware of the first volume, dated 2006, until both were brought to my attention recently. These immediately become the most accomplished & compelling recordings devoted to Gombert's masses & motets, from an ensemble featuring long-time creative early music stalwarts John Potter & Richard Wistreich. The first volume contains a somewhat more compelling program, at least to my mind, but the second is also quite worthwhile, and has been added to my personal list. The program notes also speak of a general Renaissance series under the "paradise regained" label, which would be a welcome development from this previously unknown to me ensemble, albeit of limited availability thus far.
Diabolus in Musica has been one of the most consistently interesting & worthwhile medieval ensembles over the past few years, and their latest recording devoted to Dufay's songs continues that success. As regular readers will know, I have been awaiting the "perfect" program devoted to Dufay's songs. They continue to draw regular attention from performers, which can only be a good thing, yet I find myself finding fault with most efforts. In this case, whereas I cannot find the interpretation "perfectly" to my taste, it is quite good, and well worth experiencing. It was added to my personal list. It could certainly be argued at this point that I am too wrapped up in my own personal vision of how these songs should sound, and perhaps I am being unreasonable. Nonetheless, I do not believe we have yet heard anything "definitive."
In a month with many very interesting releases finding their way to me, the last to arrive was the latest from Mala Punica & Pedro Memelsdorff. In this case, it is a dramatic rethinking of the nature of the Faenza Codex sacred repertory, namely from keyboard intabulations to a series of "glosses" and diminutions accompanying the well-known vocal tunes of the time. Whereas I am unsure how much I truly enjoy this music, both the written & sonic arguments are rather persuasive for the approach. The different variations on well-known sacred melodies, interspersed here & there, and simultaneously with, singing the sacred lyrics, can only serve to have spiced up what might have been rather repetitive and well-worn material for many listeners of the day. While many images of the middle ages suggest that such an attitude would not have prevailed for their precious sacred music, I find it easy enough to believe that at least in one time & place, it could have. The Faenza Codex is apparently our evidence of this attitude, and the musicians of Mala Punica do an outstanding job at weaving the variations into a recognizable whole. As to the question of whether the result is truly enjoyable music, that will require further experience, but it is certainly interesting at a minimum, and founded in outstanding musicianship. Ultimately, this recording helps us get at the question: Is the Faenza Codex compelling music, or an interesting historical footnote? Time will tell.
I try to hear nearly every recording of major works of the Franco-Flemish masters, and so found myself with a CD from the German "Coviello Classics" label, which includes Obrecht's Missa Sub tuum praesidium. In this case, the featured ensemble, Capella de la Torre, is a group of wind players, and some of the shorter tracks are instrumental works on winds. The mass, and some other tracks, include voices, often mixed with winds, in what is argued to have been a common combination in the locale from which this manuscript appears. The structure of the mass, with increasing number of polyphonic parts stacking on top of each other, is served well by this combination of sonorities. The vocal performance is too meandering at times, however, and really only seems to get its rhythmic energy from the winds. On another point, I have not yet invested in an SACD player, but even the "regular" CD sound from this hybrid release is outstanding.
I intend to keep 4 to 6 months' worth of comments on this page, depending on the length of the individual entries. Once the comments expire, they are gone forever, and rightly so.
My opinion of "reviews" is as such: It takes a good deal of work to write a proper review. Simply paraphrasing the liner notes and adding something to the effect of "It sounds cool to me; check it out!" or "It doesn't seem like the performance from which I learned the work" does not do the job justice. Any time someone is asked to churn through a long list of recordings to regularly write reviews, there is almost no chance that the reviews will be fully informed. The only chance is if the reviewer is intimately familiar with the music in question, the requisite interpretive decisions, and the intentions of the performer. This can only be true rarely, even for a scholar. We do not attempt to write regular reviews for the FAQ, nor do we call them that. Beyond not wanting to inject more opinion than necessary into our information, this is an admission of our own failings, and frankly, many reviewers should admit the same instead of pretending to write reviews about something with which they have little familiarity (that this happens frequently is patently obvious).
I sometimes write reviews, but I am not attempting to write any here. Hopefully the editorializing I am doing will, however, be interesting. I usually restrict FAQ comments to be positive only, but here I will give some negative comments too, if that is the notable thing about a release. As for what silence says? I leave it to you to infer.
To more of Todd McComb's personal opinions:
See also: discussion of "progress" in interpreting this music, or links to other recordings lists.
To CD Index with search
Todd M. McComb <mccomb@medieval.org>