Felix Mendelssohn (1809–1847)

Generally I am loath to rate established masterworks, as there is the implication that I am evaluating my unquestioned betters. If, on the other hand, these Reviews address only the lesser matter of interpretation, then any down-grade may seem to apply to the original work in question. In this case, I will suspend my usual reluctance. Let it be understood straight-away that while I am a great admirer of Mendelssohn at his best, I have always had the feeling that he tops-out just short of show more what I consider -- and crave with my most ferevent heart -- as true sublimity. The fact that orchestras and more recently that pestilential phenomenon "classical FM" tend to force-feed him upon us, leaves me with the feeling that if I never heard another note by him, I could still die happy.
All that being conceded, I must see that this set of concert performances present the symphonic Mendelssohn at his absolute best, and make me understand why many other people of good will and taste have taken him very seriously indeed. Klemperer and Mitropolulos were vert different sorts of conductors, but each of them -- significantly toward the end of his life -- maintained a pulse and an energy which is incomparable. Mendelssohn is in some sense deceptively easy -- easy to play passably, but difficult to present as poetic and important. In the orchestral colour which they have evoked, and in the subtle give-and-take of inner episodes within a continous pulse, these two conductors gave us better than we might expect -- or deserve. And oh yes, I have always been a push-over, no matter what other inhinitions I have had, for the Mendelssohn of the "Reformation" Symphony. Despite the insipid harmonization in the coda of the final movement, the work has always made me proud to have been raised in the Protestant tradition. show less

This is a gorgeous work, and I'm surprised it's not performed more often. This is one of the first things I sang when I joined the Oakland Symphony Chorus, and it will always have a special place in my heart.

Quartets are good, solid performances. The Octet is a disappointment, lacking in fizz - possibly because there is no tension between playing styles on the various instruments.

as long as the real missing part remains missing perhaps we can credit Henry with some planned fabulous ending. Barring that, not so much