It may seem a curious recommendation for one singer, to say there is less of him on his disc than there is of his counterpart in what is the fairly obvious competing recording. The Handel recital by David Daniels was highly praised here a few months ago, and it is probable that readers will still have it on their shopping-lists. If they have hesitated, it could have been with the thought that maybe a whole recital of countertenor solos would prove too much of a good thing. In that case, give a thought to this one, where the singing alternates with instrumental pieces so that the programme as a whole may exercise a wider appeal.
There are other reasons for thinking of it. Scholl is pre-eminent among today’s countertenors for the fine quality, roundness and power of his voice as well as for the artistry of its usage. In this new recital, the sheer opulence of tone impresses afresh, and its firmness make the more dramatic vibrancy of Daniels seem somewhat loosely focused. Not that Scholl’s own singing lacks a sense of drama: the recitative in Admeto shudders with the hopelessness of ‘omai tornate’, and, in the solo from Rodelinda, Bertarido confronts his own epitaph with convincing emotion.
Nevertheless, that extract introduces a less certain factor, concerning the choice of tempos. This is the recitative which precedes the famous aria ‘Dove sei?’. Scholl and the Berlin ensemble take it much more slowly than Daniels, whose conductor is Sir Roger Norrington. The quicker speed assists the urgency of the recitative and does not affect the serenity of the aria; in fact there is rather more sense of its being soliloquy. In Caesar’s huntsman aria (‘Va tacito’), Scholl’s slower pace is better, more stealthy and pictorial; the horn solo too has delightful touches, finely played by Christian-Friedrich Dallmann. In the Concerto grosso for Alexander’s Feast, however, there’s a certain heaviness of touch, related to the speeds both fast and slow, that does not compare well with the performance under Gardiner in his complete recording of the work.
The booklet-notes, incidentally, tell us nothing about how that concerto comes to be there, nor about several other items in the programme; a cheery contribution from Peter Giles about countertenors and eunuchs hardly compensates.'