Cello Works of Tchaikovsky, Faure, Saint-Saens, and Lalo.

Cello Works of Tchaikovsky, Faure, Saint-Saens, and Lalo. Paul Tortelier, cello; Herbert Menges, Louis Fremaux, Philharmonia and City of Birmingham Symphony Orchestras. EMI Classics 7243 4 76868-2.

As you are probably aware, EMI has been repackaging a lot of its older material into mid-priced sets under the banners "Great Recordings of the Century" and "Great Artists of the Century." It's as good a way as any of getting our attention. In the case of this disc, the "Great Artist" is cellist Paul Tortelier (1914-1990), and he certainly seems worthy of the praise.

Most of Tortelier's recordings were done for EMI from the 1950s onward, so the company had a good back catalogue of things to choose from. On this album, the cellist plays Tchaikovsky's Variations on a Rococo Theme; Faure's Elegie in C minor; Saint-Saens' Cello Concerto and Allegro appassionato; and Lalo's Cello Concerto. The performances are, as expected, uniformly excellent, displaying the musician's ability to produce strong, sleek, outgoing passages as well as quiet, introspective ones.

The controversial part of the disc may its sound. Understandably, there are going to be some differences from track to track, given that the recordings range in date from 1955 to 1975. The earliest ones, with the Philharmonia, are in both mono (the Saint-Saens Concerto and the Faure) and stereo (the Saint-Saens Allegro and the Tchaikovsky). The most-recent recording, with the City of Birmingham Symphony, naturally is in stereo (the Lalo). Yet it appears that the EMI engineers made a conscious effort to ensure that they all sounded as much alike as possible. Namely, they all seem a touch bright and lean. Now, understand, this is how most of EMI's fifties' stereo sounded, but it's not necessarily how the Birmingham Symphony recordings sound. Here's the interesting part: I have the same Lalo concerto as here on an early EMI Studio CD, and comparing the older mastering to this new remaster, the old disc sounds slightly warmer, richer, and less bright. Did EMI intentionally brighten up the Lalo to make it fit in this time out? I don't know. The other minor problem is that the early stereo in the Tchaikovsky tends to favor the left side of the sound stage overmuch.

In any case, the sonics are never a distraction, and with playing of such distinction, I doubt anyone will care even if they are. Heck, even the mono sounds good, fuller and better tonally balanced than most of the stereo on the disc, so, as I say, I can't imagine anybody complaining.