OCKEGHEM. Masses 2 — Beauty Farm
[7.9.219]
frabernardo.com |
medieval.org
To be released in Christmas 2019
https://vimeo.com/344929241
Johannes OCKEGHEM (c 1420 – 1497)
A
MISSA Mi-Mi a 4
MMISSA ECCE ANCILLA DOMINI a 4
B
MISSA CAPUT a 4
MISSA CUIUSVIS TONI in mi a 4
beauty farm
Bart Uvyn [countertenor]
Adriaan De Koster | Tomáš Lajtkep | Achim Schulz | Hannes Wagner [tenor]
Arnout Lems [bariton]
Joachim Höchbauer [bass]
fb 1909373
2 CD
total time c 112 min.
EAN 4260307433734
Who
was Johannes Ockeghem (c 1420 – 1497)? For a long time he was perhaps
the most famous unknown person in music history, especially in the
Renaissance. There was no doubt about his contemporary fame, his
position as the most important representative of the „second generation“
of Franco-Flemish composers, as the link between Du Fay and Josquin.
But what its significance actually was and how its artistic development
could be described, there was a long lack of clarity about it, which has
only been somewhat cleared up in recent decades thanks to intensive
research (and excellent interpretations of his works).
Wer
war Johannes Ockeghem (ca. 1420 – 1497)? Lange Zeit war er der
vielleicht berühmteste Unbekannte der Musikgeschichte, speziell der
Renaissance. An seinem zeitgenössischen Ruhm, seiner Stellung als des
bedeutendsten Vertreters der „zweiten Generation“ frankoflämischer
Komponisten, quasi des Bindeglieds zwischen Du Fay und Josquin, bestand
kein Zweifel. Doch was seine Bedeutung eigentlich ausmachte und wie sich
seine künstlerische Entwicklung beschreiben lässt, darüber herrschte
lange Unklarheit, die sich erst in den letzten Jahrzehnten dank
intensiver Forschung (und hervorragender Interpretationen seiner Werke)
etwas gelichtet hat.
[7.9.2019]
medieval.org Remarks
http://www.medieval.org/emfaq/cds/remarks.html
8 January 2020
Todd M. McComb
———
The Beauty Farm project continues apace with a
new Ockeghem double album, and to remove any suspense, I did
add it to my personal
list: In fact, the discussion there quotes the prior discussion
of the Sound and the Fury's Johannes
Ockeghem 2, which ended up being the most read entry over
in the "cdc" listings. In particular, I discussed my
view of the vocal interpretation, the approach to ensemble tuning,
etc., and why I (greatly) prefer it to the more "ethereal"
versions featuring meek singing & alignment focused on the
highest registers. Of course, Beauty Farm continues the same
priorities, and is consequently even more committed to that approach
— if perhaps their voices end up sounding a little more
"professional."
In any case, that digression into my
past comments aside, the first disc of the new double album duplicates
that prior program, and does so with even more energy &
sophistication. (The Beauty Farm version is about ten percent
faster, in factual terms.) In this, they continue the tradition
of their own prior Ockeghem program (which
ends up being their only single CD album to date, actually) —
still a superlative performance — & even go on to duplicate
much of the next SATF Ockeghem program
with a newly sophisticated take on the Missa Cuiusvis toni.
The latter is paired, finally, with the early Missa Caput,
which although not a major feature of the double program for me,
is also given a strong interpretation. And as noted in the paired
discussion, the Missa My My of the first disc remains one
of Ockeghem's most striking cycles, here in a particularly striking
interpretation as well, while the Missa Ecce ancilla Domini
is one of his most satisfying "traditional" cantus firmus
masses.
At times, Beauty Farm seems noisier or "grittier"
than SATF, particularly in the lower parts, but while part of that
is improved articulation, part of it relates to recording balance
& resonance. And although I hadn't talked much about recording
quality until recently, experience with contemporary repertory has
let me hear how much the newer technology can improve clarity,
something that still seems to be in flux when it comes to engineering
these resonant church settings: So here the greater sense of space
is welcome, but the resonance is also a bit much (i.e. hazy) at
times. (It's also amazing that the SATF program being reprised was
recorded nearly ten years ago. Time flies.)
While the notes go
on to discuss the Phrygian mode (around not only Missa My My
& Missa Cuiusvis toni, but the model chanson Presque
trainsi as well), they also make a quality attempt to locate
these cycles within Ockeghem's output as a whole. (One thing they
don't discuss is his five-voice cycles — & how these also
elaborate new techniques while pointing to the future....) So
that's welcome, and I might also note e.g. how abruptly some of
these cycles seem to end, particularly as compared to e.g. Josquin's
carefully prepared climactic endings in the next generation.
Comparatively, Ockeghem's music simply seems to run its (lyrical)
course — & one can even come to appreciate why a handful
of his cycles end with the Credo....
So is there such a thing as
"a great interpretation" in this repertory? For years,
it seemed like we were struggling just to understand the notes &
rhythms, let alone the overall flow of the pieces, but things do
continue to develop. I still find myself regularly preferring the
latest releases, as understanding & command continue to improve,
but perhaps that changes at some point? It seems that I continue
to feel, so often, that another group has achieved a new standard....
(And if some of Ockeghem's masses "resist categorization"
for their "experimental" qualities, it stands to reason
that they would be among the last to receive their due today....
Yet, I suppose that situation is also countered by the relative
frequency of these re-readings.) These interpretations are indeed
following other quality interpretations, though, and so I should
note that although I came to prefer them, they didn't necessarily
jump out with a huge first impression, but rather created a stronger
sense of the music over time. And that seems more typical of a
more mature performance repertory....
Finally, perhaps I should
say something about the delay in discussing this album: When I
first learned of its release, it was marked for December, and so I
didn't check back until last month (& wanted to avoid holiday-time
shipping if I could), but it turned out that it was released in
October & so I could have done this write-up a while ago....
As it is, then, there were "only" four albums added to
my personal list for 2019, with this being the most impressive (if
I'm tempted to reprise the Record of the Year after a hiatus...),
and with (coincidentally, I guess) the other
Ockeghem release being particularly valuable (although
"incomplete," e.g. no Presque trainsi, until its
pending second volume appears) as well. So I guess this was an
"Ockeghem Year," for some reason. As far as criticism,
I'm also really getting tired of these covers, boring pictures of
models against garish backgrounds... but I suppose they're easy to
spot.
Although The Sound and the Fury's first Ockeghem disc, featuring
the Missa Prolationum & Missa L'homme armé,
didn't make much of an impression on me (and it was their first
non-Gombert recording), this second Ockeghem disc arrives four years
later with much higher expectations built off such landmark recordings
as their Caron & La
Rue discs. The Missa Mi-Mi has been one of Ockeghem's
most enigmatic works, and here we finally have a performance that
makes sense. Additionally, the Missa Ecce ancilla Domini
has been a favorite in a more traditional style. So there are high
expectations here, but they are met admirably.
Obviously I've greatly enjoyed The Sound and the Fury's recordings,
generally speaking, and perhaps more explanation of the style is
in order here. First of all, they have a very keen sense of both
phrasing & ficta (and note that these really go together). This
is what makes the Mi-Mi really come together: They're singing
correct notes (or at least more correct than anyone's managed yet),
and they're singing them in groupings that create coherent phrases
that in turn add up to a movement that makes sense. Ockeghem's
music features many partial cadences, meaning some voices might
cadence while another continues undisturbed, and this contributes
to the "sweep" of his music. His mass movements have a
sort of onward momentum that seems to continue forward to the close,
and it takes a studied approach to the individual phrases in the
individual parts to make it both energetic & balanced. The
Mi-Mi is particularly in need of sensitivity on this point.
The styles of the two masses on this CD are rather different,
of course. The more chordal Mi-Mi is more forward-looking
and has more outgoing energy, whereas the Ecce ancilla Domini
is more historically-oriented & reflective. One thing The Sound
and the Fury does is let the listener hear each individual part
clearly, which is very welcome. However, I've seen some complaints
from people that it disturbs the "blend" — presumably
a desire for a smoothed-out overall sound that's characteristic of
some ensembles (who mostly sing later music). Research is rather
clear that this modern emphasis on "blend" was a later
creation, and not something from the period, which expected individual
voices to have individual characters. A distant recording that's
reflecting a lot of resonance might make sense for an audience, but
it's the up-close interaction of the singers that was how the
practitioners heard the music. This repertory in general is music
by singers for singers, complete with its oblique allusions that
the general public would have never understood. Listen to The Sound
and the Fury's version of close harmony on Ecce ancilla Domini...
the distinctive individual voices, each clearly audible, but with
their overtone relations closely matched. Listen to how the overtones
dance, aligning in one point of the spectrum, and then another, as
the music moves along. The alignment & sense of detail are
impressive. I've also seen a complaint that the tenor notes aren't
held long enough. This music isn't undertaken as an exercise in
vocal stamina, but rather in judiciously sounding long repeated
notes when necessary to support the music. Again, this is based
on research. Red Byrd has applied this
approach to early organum, in fact. The light play of overtones
would be impeded in this music if the tenor set out to hold notes
as long as he could. In short, there's a delicacy brought out in
this interpretation that is another milestone.
That's what's made The Sound and the Fury's recordings so
compelling, of course. Almost every one has revealed something new
about music of the period, whether new repertory, an advanced
understanding of the notes themselves, or of vocal practice. Someone
who dislikes this latter aspect should be asking themselves if they
like this music at all, because the practice is based on sound
historical research, rather than modern ideals. The near-simultaneous
release of a recording by Cappella Pratensis of the Ockeghem &
La Rue Requiems does make a good contrast: This is a pleasant
performance of the Ockeghem — doesn't take into account the
latest research on the notes for the La Rue — and succeeds
at being completely unchallenging to the listener, because it does
not advance knowledge of this music in any concrete way. So yes,
there's a contrast.
[20.2.2020]