Dimitry Markevitch. Bach Cello Suites CD Gallo CD670/1 Released 1992.
Also available on usual streaming services.
No details of recording venue or instrument used.
Introduction.
There is a very informative and fascinating article about Dimitry Markevitch on the Internet Cello Society by regular contributor Tim Janof here:
http://www.cello.org/Newsletter/Articles/markevitch.htm
The first section details the considerable contribution Markevitch has made to the performance history of the Suites. Also, to the advancement of cello performance more generally. His later mentor and teacher was Piatigorsky.
The bulk of the interview section is taken up with a rather pedantic interrogation of the interviewee about his bowing principles. This is primarily to start phrases with an up bow to emphasise the melody line even if off the beat. This becomes very relevant in appreciation of parts of the performance under review.
The Recording.
Sadly, I have to report that the quality of this recording is disappointing. The bandwidth seems rather constricted with little evidence of fundamentals in the lower strings and harmonics at the top end. Whether this is a result of the actual recording or the mastering, I cannot tell. The end result is a rather coarse and nasal sounding cello.
Markevitch was an early exponent of authentic Baroque performance. However, during the above interview Markevitch states that this recording, his sixth version, was played on a modern instrument. Vibrato is not excessive, gut strings might contribute to the coarse sound but there is plenty of legato playing. Articulation is generally very clear.
There is little impression of the room acoustic or resonance. The cello sounds a little to the back of the soundstage and there is no additional sound from fingers or breathing which suggests microphone position might be quite distant. Certainly, I needed to turn the volume up a notch.
The Music.
Technically, Markevitch is no slouch, and I have no quibble with his intonation or facility. There were a few notes and additions which were unfamiliar or dissonant but I suspect these were entirely deliberate.
Overall, the phrasing especially was first class. Particularly in the Courantes and Preludes. For instance, in the sixth Prelude the bowing technique outlined in the interview mentioned above imbued the music with very distinctive character. The performer picking out previously overlooked (by me) melody in the music. Certainly, having experimented with this approach myself, I agree it can bring a whole new perspective to many of the movements. Marianne Dumas has made an extensive study of this herself and applies it to her own recording.
There is an exquisite moment in the sixth suite Gigue 4 bars from the end where the performer leans into the repeated top D in such a way as to land on the first A of the following semiquaver group perfectly.
For me however, the big detraction of this performance apart from the sound quality is the lack of variety in the cello voice. There are dynamics but the voicing is the same whether loud or quiet. There prime voice is bold and assertive, with very little gentle, sweet, timid, or angry voice to spice up the interpretation. I think if Markevitch played at the Carnegie Hall all six Suites in a row like this recording, I would have wanted to leave after the third Suite! In doing so I would have missed the best bits, but my point is that great technique and strong bold sound with excellent phrasing is not enough on its own to hold a listener’s attention.
Conclusion.
To summarise, this is a very flawed recording but with significant merits. Markevitch commands respect for his contribution to the stature of cello performance in the last century, but perhaps neededed to question himself a bit more and listen to others, to achieve his full potential.
Charles.