Pierre de LA RUE. Masses — Beauty Farm
[6.1.2018  20:43 GMT+1] • pf
http://frabernardo.com/?portfolio=la-rue-masses-beauty-farm
Release date: March 2018
(3066, 1468, 7, 1515267801, 203, 3066, 'Beauty Farm - PIERRE DE LA RUE. Masses', 'purofuego'
[6.1.2018  20:43 GMT+1] • pf
[16.4.2018  18:45 GMT+2]
Todd M. McComb, 6 April 2018
http://www.medieval.org/emfaq/cds/remarks.html
I was expecting to enjoy the new La Rue
double album by Beauty Farm, but it has exceeded expectations:
Whereas I was most looking forward to another Missa Tous les
regretz recording (as one of La Rue's most characteristic late
parody masses on his own material), and had become intrigued with
the Missa Almana (perhaps La Rue's first mass cycle, which
is interesting enough) after it had been repositioned (again) as
Missa Pourquoy non by William Kempster (including by
his own recording from 2007), I didn't
expect the other two masses to be especially notable.
However,
perhaps in part because of the emerging performance practice, meaning
that these cycles are better interpreted & expressed than most
others of the period at this point (in part by virtue of being the
most recently addressed), the relatively early Missa Puer natus
est & Missa de Sancto Antonio make strong individual
impressions too. These are all four voice cycles, the similar
forces contributing to the overall power of the program, meaning
that they exist (particularly the one later cycle, Tous les
regretz) in something of a different series from that of the
five-part cycles (or the six-part "unicorn").
They're
also, as opposed to the "premiere" assertion prominently
displayed on the package, all second recordings, the first having
been made by Kempster or Michel Sanvoisin in all four cases, which
is curious enough: One might go on to ask what "really"
constitutes releasing a premiere recording, but particularly given
the analysis Kempster has published on Pourquoy non, the
production thus comes off as somewhat underinformed or even
disrespectful. (Nonetheless, although taking up some of Kempster's
observations would have undoubtedly improved the Missa Pourquoy
non interpretation, the result is impressive. That said,
Kempster's recording, with amateur singers, is a credible interpretation
too. Sanvoisin has likewise been focusing on La Rue for a long
time, having recorded six mass cycles, plus a handful of other
pieces, over the years.)
The notes do make mention of the historical
Pourquoy non ascription, but not of the more recent literature.
I also find the suggestions that La Rue's reputation was mainly
based on his mass cycles, and that he never surpassed his early
works in the genre, to be flatly inaccurate. That said, perhaps
the author is implying that La Rue's motets (as opposed to his
chansons, which are clearly at the apex of their genre, or even his
diverse "ritual works") are of relatively more modest
stature (as a group) — and simply asserting (correctly) that
La Rue's early cycles are not to be missed.
All that said, this
double album was an easy addition to
my personal list,
and something I've enjoyed over & over since receiving it from
Germany only a couple of weeks ago: Both program & interpretation
are so impressive! Although I'd still like to see Beauty Farm
release more motet programs, this set of four mass cycles really
shows how far interpretations of music of the period have come:
It's one of the most compelling such albums ever to appear, and the
fact that it consists of music that had been relatively anonymous
speaks for itself. Exceeding (high) expectations is a wonderful
thing, especially when so much from our contemporary moment (&
so much more than medieval music recordings!) has been underwhelming
(or worse)....