Maurice Gendron. 6 Bach Cello Suites for solo Cello.
Maurice Gendron. Philips Classics. 442293-2 Digital remaster released 1994
Recorded Feb 1964 Aufnahme. Originally released on LP in Mono.
General Comments.
This studio recording by Gendron, is widely respected and continues to be recommended by many critics. I find it arouses in me a number of varying emotions and views. It also provides food for thought on two major issues which are important regards the Bach Suites. Firstly is the use of vibrato and secondly, intonation.
Vibrato.
The listener will be left in no doubt that Gendron uses a lot of vibrato. For the non-cellist, vibrato is the “subtle” oscillation of pitch brought about by slight rolling of the finger on the string being played. The link below gives a little insight into the intricacies of this:
http://www.cello.org/newsletter/articles/jensen/jensen.htm
In general, modern romantic interpreters of the Suites may use a fair amount of vibrato and those who advocate an authentic baroque style will use it sparingly. From a little background reading after forming my opinion, it is evident that Gendron was renown for his expertise in this area. You may well ask: Why does it matter if a performer uses vibrato a little or a lot in the Suites? My thought on this is that is makes a huge difference. My view- and it is not authoritative, is that vibrato produces a richer sound by increasing the volume of sound from the fundamental note played. This is at the expense of the harmonics. The end result is a richer “fatter” sound.
For more information, follow this link:
https://www.teachmeaudio.com/recording/sound-reproduction/fundamental-harmonic-frequencies/
Polyphony.
Unfortunately, if the higher harmonics and overtones are not heard so much then this may reduce the impression of polyphony that the Bach Suites can create. This is especially so when played in baroque style. Essentially it can end up being a balance between a rich powerful tone and a thinner but more polyphonic sound. This is one of the wonders of the Bach Suites. Whilst (apart from some double stopping and chords), the music is made up of a single line, nevertheless, the composer can create the auditory impression of multiple voices and harmony. This is aided by harmonics, overtones and echo.
Intonation.
The other contentious issue which this performance by Gendron brings to the fore is that of intonation (accuracy of pitch). Again, this is far from simple. To get to the point; to my ears Gendron is often a fraction flat. This is persistent and of a constant degree so is, I am sure, deliberate. The following link gives some interesting background:
http://www.cello.org/Newsletter/Articles/cellomind/cellomind.htm
As an amateur cellist I am aware that there are issues for a cellist playing with a piano and also with instruments tuned electronically. However, my struggle is to play as tunefully as possible so the different types of intonation are beyond my practical grasp!
Coming back to Gendron’s performance, I am not sure what he wishes to achieve with the particular form of intonation he uses and I am aware that Casals employed similar devices referenced in the above link. It is interesting to note that Gendron studied for a while under Casals.
The Music.
Back to listening impressions of this performance. For me the issue of very audible vibrato and the intonation were slight detractors. For others they may be an attraction. At the end of the day I aim to to draw these issues to the reader’s attention for you to make up your own mind.
The Recording.
For a recording from the early 60s this is a very full bodied sound, set centrally and a little back in the soundstage. Gendron’s style is bold, strong and assertive. Again after forming my listener’s view I read that Gendron had a rather fearsome reputation as hard taskmaster to his pupils and the owner of a fearsome temper! This should be taken in context of a very tough early life being sent from home to study in Paris at age of 17. Apparently he had to sell newspapers to subsist. Later, he was exempted from military service due to malnutrition. During the war he refused to perform in Germany at some personal risk.
This strong and assertive style together with his rich vibrato fuelled tone comes to the fore with his rendition of the 6thSuite which is very impressive. It may not be authentic but it is certainly a tour de force!
Some generalisations.
For all the Suites, I feel I can make a few generalisations.
The Preludes are steady paced.
Allemendes are phrased to perfection being fascinating conversation pieces in a similar style to Tortelier.
Courantes tend to be steady rather than brisk. The exception being that of the 2ndSuite which I found to be very exciting.
Sarabandes tend to be made up of contrasting halves. The first being bold and grand, whilst the second half tends to be quieter and more reflective. Quite effective in my view.
Gavottes and Bourees again are bold and assertive but lack the bounce of a dance.
The Gigues whilst being big in sound are often a little pedestrian in pace.
Other specifics.
Other specifics to end with were the observation of quite marked stressing of certain low notes at the end of phrases. The low C in the last bar of the 3rdSuite Allemende is a specific example. Gendron also seems to use a lot of marked staccato playing particularly in the Courantes. Really more spiccato than staccato!
However, Gendron plays the Suites with great passion and musicality. His phrasing is particularly impressive as are his use of dynamics and restraint with flexibility of speed (rubato). This last point is welcome particularly in the Allemendes which often have complex timing with which other performers seem to go “off piste” !
Conclusion.
In summary, I would not take this particular recording with me on a desert island but feel this is a version worth auditioning. It certainly is one that arouses a lot of discussion points.
Charles.
Maurice Gendron The 6 Cello Suites (Philips Duo 442 293-2) Rec.1964
The Cellist.
In the relatively early generation of Bach interpreters on record, Gendron is one of the leading lights. His version of the Suites was recorded in the early 60’s and yet is still being reissued in the past decade. It is also highly feted including a top rated 3 star review in The Penguin Guide. Its standing is also evident from reading listener reviews on Amazon. All of which gives me an issue. Truth is, I really don’t like this version….
The Music.
I don’t intend to dissect particular movements of the Suites as I found it quite hard to maintain focus and indeed struggled to plough through to the end.
What follows are therefore just my impressions and opinions, which perhaps can balance out other people’s positive views of his recording. As soon as the 1st Suite commenced I immediately knew there were going to be issues for me.
For sure, the recording’s presence is impressive for a 1964 recording, but to use an analogy of a modern tv’s audio options, this one seemed to have been set at “Stadium Sound”. This feels to me just plain wrong for Bach’s Suites.
What would Bach think?
I accept we don’t know for sure how Bach wanted them performed (hence the joy of listening to different versions). I think we can assume solo instrument pieces would be intended for chamber or church performance in public. (if indeed for public performance at all…). Gendron’s sound is frankly massive in scale (and at times sounding more like it is double tracked!).
Now given his undoubted superb technical capabilities, that could I accept produce wow moments in terms of pure sound, but what I want to hear is more of Bach and less of the performer. As the Suites progress he also demonstrates evidence of being the fastest “Vibratoslinger” in the west, but it just doesn’t sound like Bach anymore.
More gripes.
Indeed on some of these fluttery passage endings he also seems to hold on to them so long that if I didn’t know better I would think that the cd was stuck!
I tried to find redeeming features as I went along. Whilst almost enjoying the less mannered never ending tune of the 6th Suite Prelude, I realised at the top of the line he suddenly seemed to play under the note. I can’t think why, as his capabilities as a cellist are prodigious, but it really grates on me. To close this section on a positive note, the recording iis mercifully free of errant finger tapping on the fret, which given its vintage again reinforces my view that this is a modern recordings problem.
Conclusion.
Now some readers may think I am being inconsistent in my reviews, given how highly I rate Maisky’s first, big and bold, recording. However, at no point in Maisky’s version did I feel that Bach was not at the forefront in his mind. I am well aware that some points I highlight as criticisms may be to some a strength, in which case fill your boots with Monsieur Gendron’s set (after all we cannot all like the same things.) Unfortunately for me this is a version I probably won’t return to again.
Mark.