Which is the authentic Tchaikovsky??

I find myself mostly agreeing with Brodsky. Symphonies 4,5 and 6 work in the hands of Mravinsky but Tchai irritates me until you get to the operas, and particularly Onegin.

I once sat through a performance of Tschaikovsky's 5th by our local sub-par orchestra, conducted by some young chap who tried his best, failed to notice that his best wasn't enough.

The one thing I hate more than going to concerts (sometimes I still go if it's free or when I'm invited and I can't think of a good excuse) is Tschaikowski's music - and that evening was close to the worst musical experience in my life.

(The absolute worst was a Christmas performance by a local mandolin orchestra, years ago. I still have occasional nightmares of an asynchronous tremolo version of "Rudolph the Red Nosed Reindeer", played on 20 badly tuned toy instruments. TRRRR TRRRRR TRR TRRRR TRRRR TRRRR TRRRRRRRRRRRRRR....)

The Mavrinsky recordings (second stereo set) are for me one of the finest set of performances of anything ever recorded. The quality and uniqueness of the playing are just so sensational that I cannot find other recordings that even come close in terms of engaging me. Onegin is also a wonderful opera - but then it is based upon an equally wonderful poem by Pushkin, so he could not do much to improve it. 'Kuda, kuda' always sounds in me head when I read Turgenev, Lermontov or Pushkin.

I would agree that Tchaikovsky does best when the classical elements are emphasised over the overtly emotional. Tchaikovsky somehow benefits from an unsentimental approach. And I make no apologies for putting on marche Slave once in while - what a friend of mine always used to term 'a jolly good shout'. 

Just to clarify, Re "Classical" performances of Tchaik, I didn't mean the bland internationalised versions so dominant in the West, but something lighter, spicier, more chamber scale. This is more a theoretical curiosity than something I've actually heard, though as an example Karajan's recordings sound quite classical next to the heavy Rostropovich cycle.

I don't know how "authentic" the 20th c. Russian tradition is in performances of Tchaik. As I recall, Russian orchestras up to mid-late 19th c were still generally under the tutelage of Italians and Germans. My theory is the Russian sound really started after 1917.

I am no expert but I always assumed the concept of an 'authentically Russian' approach was born of three factors: the fact that 19th and early 20th century orchestras were predominantly filled with national players (though I could be very much worng with my assumption), the difference in instrument manufacture that gave distinct timbres to orchestras and the building of local schools of thought to interpretation. In the latter case if you look at Mavrinsky's recordings and then Jansons you will notice that both had a way of dropping below the dynamics marked (diminuendo?) just before a climax or tutti. With Mavrinsky it sounds natural and inspired, but for my money Janosns just sounds mannered, like a poor imitation of his teacher and mentor.

We are at the fringes of my "expertise" too. I did read a bit about 19th c Russian classical music performance (in a Tchaik biog, I think), but it was a while ago. The tradition was kicked off as part of Peter the Great's modernisation/westernisation program, which naturally began with wholesale import of artists and goods (recently watched a fascinating doco covering this called Art In Russia). I don't know what percentage of players would have been foreign in Tchaik's time, but I imagine some of them hung on as teachers. I've no idea about the development of instrument making in Russia - that would require a real expert on the subject.

One thing I theorise is that in the turmoil of the 1920s there would have been a lot of unusual crossover - classical musicians required to play "suitable" music for the proles; possibly, with post-war shortage of manpower, personnel from military bands were drafted into orchestras as needed. The official frowning on elitist entertainment may well have influenced a rougher, more "naive" style to emerge. All this is pure speculation on my part.

Mrav vs. Jansons (I'd say the epic is not the latter's natural field). You may well have spotted a Russian interpretive characteristic there; as for artificiality, I can't help wondering how convincing these old masters would remain if they emerged from behind the mystique of their ancient, crackly, congested sound ;)

Well Tagalie, I'm not sure what you'd think but the 5th especially is rather stunning in its uniquely Klempererian way. I'd beam it down to you if I could.

I seem to have made a complete mess of the 'Spring' comment. I was trying to refer to those of you in the southern hemisphere for whom not spring but autumn is approaching. Someone on the Forum lives in Brazil, I think, and now I've no idea who I should have named! Oh dear! Anyway double apologies to both of you!

Chris