Beethoven: Violin Concerto, Two Romances. Josef Suk, Czech Philharmonic, Franz Konwitschny 1962, Prague Symphony Orchestra, Vaclav Smetacek 1970. Supraphon “Crystal Collection” 11 0628-2 011 (1988) barcode 8596911062821, also 099925062828:
Reissue Supraphon SU 3164-2 011 (1999) barcode 099925316426:
Recorded 28 April 1962 at the Dvorak Hall of Rudolfinum, Prague (Concerto), 5 January 1970 at the Prague Radio Studio (Romances)
Traditional, very expansive, strong on lyricism but short on drama – and a Larghetto that stands out
Originally posted on Amazon.com, 31 December 2012
Some performers are people of only one interpretation. Whenever they re-record a piece, may it be decades after their earlier recording(s), it is striking how unchanged their interpretation has remained over the years. Heifetz was such a case – if anything, he insisted in his stereo remakes in playing even more, if marginally, urgently than in the 78rpm era, if only to prove to the world that his technical powers were undiminished by age (see my review of his March 11 1940 recording with Toscanini). I’ve listened recently to Arthur Grumiaux’ three studio recordings of Beethoven’s Violin Concerto, made over nearly two decades (1957 with Van Beinum in mono, reissued in 2009 by Australian Eloquence, 480 0428 barcode 028948004287 ; 1966 with Alceo Galliera, Philips 426 064 2 barcode 028942606425; 
and 1974 with Colin Davis, 420 348 2 barcode 028942034822), and the only difference comes from sonics and conducting. Josef Suk in Beethoven is another case in point.
Born in 1929 and died in 2011, Suk was the Grandson of the same-named Czech composer and the great-grandson of Dvorak. He was also Czechoslovakia’s most famous violinist from the second half of the 20th Century. He recorded extensively for Supraphon, with occasional outings on Decca (famous Brahms recordings with Julius Katchen and Janos Starker) and EMI (his Bach Sonatas & Partitas were reissued a few years ago on EMI Double Forte 5 73644 2, 
barcode 724357364423) but somehow he didn’t have the international recognition he deserved, possibly because a) he was Czech, and recording Dvorak, Smetana, Janacek, Martinu, Suk and Fibich for Supraphon, will never bring you the kind of recognition you get when recording Beethoven or Tchaikovsky for Columbia or RCA or EMI and b) he wasn’t Russian. And I am talking here of popular recognition. Suk has always been held in high esteem by the cognoscenti. He made a magnificent recording of Berg’s Violin Concerto with Karel Ancerl in the LP days when Berg’s VC was still rare stuff and “modern” music (Karel Ancerl Gold Edition vol. 3, Supraphon SU 3663-2 011 barcode 099925366322
), and his Martinu Violin Concertos were dear to collectors with an interest in that kind of repertoire (SU 3967-2, barcode 099925396725).
Suk’s most widely circulated (in the West) recording of Beethoven’s Violin Concerto was the one he made in 1970 for EMI with Sir Adrian Boult conducting the New Philharmonia Orchestra, which used to be the cheapest-selling version of the composition on the Amazon marketplace, one cent! – not any more, but it still sells for less than a dollar (first CD reissue in 1988 on EMI’s budget series Laser CDZ 7 62510 2 barcode
077776251028, paired with the two Violin Romances conducted by Neville Marriner). Not a bad deal for that price, and not an uninteresting version, but not one that can garner an unreserved recommendation either. Its distinguishing feature was its VERY expansive tempi throughout, and especially in the first movement, up to the cadenza the slowest version I’ve heard among more than fifty (but I haven’t heard Menuhin-Masur and I’ve read they were very slow too – available on a rare French edition from 1995, Voix de son Maître 4 83497 2 barcode 724348349729). The impression is very lyrical and gentle (abetted by Suk’s beautiful purity of tone), majestic and not without power in the orchestral tutti, but also leisurely to the point of laziness, lacking the element of drama and urgency that is also, alongside the songfulness, a part of Beethoven’s Violin Concerto, as well as the dance-like playfulness of the finale. The middle movement was also very held-back, more a Largo than Beethoven’s Larghetto, but no record-breaking there, there had been slower still and there was a tradition for that, starting with Kreisler-Barbirolli in 1936 (Biddulph LAB 001-3 “The Art of Fritz Kreisler” barcode 0744718000326).
This earlier recording, made in April 1962 with the Czech Philharmonic Orchestra under Franz Konwitschny, is strikingly similar in the outer movements. On first hearing I had the impression that 1962 was even more expansive and sluggish than 1970, and some of Konwitschny’s phrasings may feed the impression, but a check at the timings and a direct A-B comparison, while it confirms the impression in the finale, belies it in the first movement: there, 1970 is marginally slower, if only by a few seconds. Anyway, in those two movements, there is little to choose between Suk-Konwitschny and Suk-Boult: slightly more clarity on the violin in 1970 and more “ambient”, surrounding stereo from the orchestra plead in favor of the later recording, but 1962 benefits from more characterful crispness in the woodwinds. The stately, elegant dance into which Suk turns the finale (even more in 1962 than in 1970) may not convey the same excitement has faster versions, but it has a charm of its own. Supraphon doesn’t tell you, but EMI does: the original cadenzas played by Suk (an extended one in the first movement, short ones in the second and third) are by his compatriot Vasa Prihoda, they are great and a welcome change from the superb but overheard Kreisler’s.
The two Romances may be an incentive in favor of the later recording – not that, here again, Suk radically changed his interpretation, and no wonder, since the two versions were recorded only two months apart, in January (Supraphon) and March (EMI) 1970. And the interpretation is very much in the norm of those days, e.g. too solemn and stately, processional even, and too sentimental for those unassuming works’ own good: more pressing versions, like the recent ones of Kremer with Harnoncourt (Teldec 090317488127) or Kopatchinskaja-Herreweghe (Naive V 5174, barcode 822186051740), show how much they benefit from this underlying sense of urgency, which brings more playfulness to the first (here the score bears no tempo indication) and drama to the second (“Adagio cantabile”). But Suk-Supraphon is even more stately than Suk-EMI (although the difference isn’t so perceptible: the basic mood remains the same), and at least Marriner and the Academy of Saint-Martin in the Fields, Suk’s partners on EMI, bring the orchestral accompaniment more muscularity and clarity in the string tutti, more crispness and character in the woodwinds, than Vaclav Smetacek and the Prague Symphony Orchestra.
Nonetheless, it is the Larghetto of the Concerto that may ultimately tip the scales in favor of the Supraphon CD. There, it is an interpretation that truly stands out from the fold: the earlier Suk is even more radical – e.g. radically slow – than the later one, and more radical than anyone else I’ve heard except, by a very small margin, Wolfgang Schneiderhan with Van Kempen in 1953 (reissued on DG’s “Original Masters”5-CD set “Wolfgang Schneiderhan – The 1950s Concerto Recordings”, 477 5263 barcode 028947752639). Other expansive versions include those of Max Strub with Böhm in 1939, Erich Röhn with Furtwängler in 1944, Menuhin with Furtwängler in Lucerne in 1947, Stern with Bernstein in 1959 and Christian Ferras with Karajan in 1967: they all crossed the 10:30 threshold up to the cadenza. Suk-Boult were there in 9:51, and for comparison, Heifetz-Munch in 8:12 (first CD reissue in 1985 on RCA RCD1-5402 barcode 07863554022 and RD85402 barcode 0035628540225), same timing as the recent Jensen-Järvi. Schneiderhan-van Kempen and Suk-Konwitschny are the only ones I know who got there in more than 11 minutes – respectively 11:14 and 11:06. Appreciation will be each listener’s reaction. I find that slow unfolding and solemnity of Suk quite beautiful.
None of Suk’s two studio recordings will give you a “complete” or even balanced view of Beethoven’s Violin Concerto and Romances, and in fact they will give you a very slanted view of the works: very expansive, very strong on lyricism but short on drama. That is also their interest and value: they are, so to speak, strongly opinionated interpretations. How you will react to the “opinion” is up to you. Of the two, Suk-EMI has the advantage of the better sonics – and, naturally, of price -, but Suk-Supraphon has this even more radical Larghetto, and for that reason alone deserves to be known.