Bach's Magnificat in D major, BWV 249, like the Easter Oratorio, began
its life in another form.  Originally in E flat and composed for Christmas,
Bach revised it nine years later and set it in the brighter key of D major.
This work is likely the most popular Magnificat composed up to this time.
It's through-composed and has a grand total of seven arias including a duet
and trio; there are also five choruses.  That's a lot of great music as the
recitatives take a vacation.

For comparsion listening, I'm using Herreweghe on Harmonia Mundi, Parrott
on EMI, Gardiner on Phillips, Suzuki on BIS, and Sigiswald Kuijken on
Virgin Veritas.

The opening chorus is pure excitement and exaltation.  Kuijken shows that
great excitement can be obtained from a 3 minute performance.  Except for
McCreesh, Gardiner is the fastest and I was thinking he might be a little
too quick until the chorus entered and great washes of sound enveloped me.
This is fantastic choral execution.  McCreesh is another matter as he races
so fast that even the trumpet has trouble maintaining projection.  When the
chorus enters, I hear no great washes of sound; I hear four brave singers
trying to keep up with McCreesh.  This performance isn't exalting; it's
exhausting.  McCreesh has put himself in a big hole, and it's only the
beginning.

The first aria is for soprano, and it's one of Bach's best.  As in the
opening chorus, exaltation is in the air as represented by the rising
motif.  The music has a wonderful momentum, string contributions which
stretch the envelope, and the music's flow carries me ever higher into
musical bliss.

My following comments pertain to tempo and the sopranos.  At the usual or
slow tempo, the aria has a strong degree of nobility.  Gardiner, who speeds
things up, loses that nobility and replaces it with nothing.  This is where
the even faster Parrott and McCreesh come in.  They also lose the nobility,
but they do replace it with excitement.  Unlike in the opening chorus,
McCreesh's very fast tempo pays dividends.

But all is not well for McCreesh.  There's the matter of the appropriate
type soprano voice.  Since the aria is based on a 'rising' motif, I feel
that the voice which best matches the music is a high and naturally
optimistic one.  For example, I think that Barbara Schlick would be a
disaster in this aria; she's all about urgency, pleading, and bad times.
Well, McCreesh's Julia Gooding has the deepest voice of any version I've
heard.  It's a fine voice, but I consider it ill-matched for the music and
it brings diminishing returns.  There is one other soprano I want to tell
you about - Evelyn Tubb for Parrott.  The woman has serious pitch problems
and it is painful to hear them; this is just not acceptable.  Whatever
happened to re-takes? I like the Suzuki and Herreweghe versions most.
Suzuki has the best momentum, and Herreweghe the best strings.  Also, Agnes
Mellon for Herreweghe and Yukari Nonoshita for Suzuki shine in the aria.

The aria with the rising motif is followed by another with a falling
motif for soprano. The music has a strong element of sadness with the
oboe d'amore providing a haunting melody.  Herreweghe makes a good decision
in using Barbara Schlick here instead of in the previous aria.  She brings
urgency and a little desperation which enhances the impact of the music;
most important, falling motifs simply play into her vocal strengths.
Herreweghe's tempo is just about average.  McCreesh is quicker, but nothing
unusual.  His soprano Kimberly McCord, excellent in the Easter Oratorio,
comes up with another great performance.  As with Schlick, McCord is a
natural for this type music although she is not as expressive as Schlick.
So Herreweghe and McCreesh lead the way in this aria.  Kuijken's version
could have been in this category with some lovely singing from Greta de
Reyghere; however, he uses the instruments to essentially add notes by
reducing note values and thereby maintaining the beat.  I don't like it
as the music loses substance; to me, Kiujken is just messing around.

Without pause, the powerful and assertive chorus "Omnes generationes"
begins.  The reason for no pause is that the two words of the chorus, "all
generations", completes the verse of the previous aria.  Some versions have
a sledgehammer effect; that's not inappropriate but I find it too much of
a good thing.  McCreesh has a more serious problem in his chorus; it sounds
like a motley crew at best.  My ears tell me that some of them must have a
microphone in their throats as their projection is so much stronger than
the other members.  Even worse, those same voices sound poor; the low ones
are blustery, and the high ones unmusical.  What a relief it is to turn to
Kuijken whose chorus is majestically distinct and at the same time fully
in unison.  This performance shows that there's plenty of wallop and
intensification toward the climax without pummeling the listener.

Power and assertiveness are also major elements of the bass aria with
bass continuo.  However, this isn't the up-front strength of the previous
chorus; it is the supremely confident strength of the Lord who feels no
need to prove might.  Also, there is a tenderness and understanding in
the music and text which performers should recognize.  The Suzuki and
Herreweghe versions get it right.  Peter Kooy for Herreweghe and Chiyuki
Urano for Suzuki express the range of personality in the music superbly.
Also, Herreweghe's bass continuo is beautifully confident, while the
harpsichord contribution of Mamiko Nagahisa for Suzuki is wonderfully
playful and uplifiting.  I'd also like to give special notice to Pierre
Hantai's harpsichord playing in Parrott's version, easily the best element
in that performance.  As for McCreesh, he is faster than the others, but I
don't have any problem with his tempo.  However, Neal Davies is rather
blustery and not the type that anyone would want to worship unless forced
or tricked into it.

"And his mercy is on them who fear him throughout the generations".
That's the text of the aria for alto and tenor.  This "fear" element is
quite prevalent in many religions; personally, I don't feel that a true God
would require it.  However, humans at the source of power love using fear
to consolidate their positions and ward off challengers who are also using
fear to move up; its a potent weapon.  That's as far as I'm taking this
theme.

Kuijken clocks in at about 4 1/2 minutes; Parrott takes it down to under
3 minutes, and McCreesh finishes it off in 2 1/2 minutes.  But to me,
the aria is all about urgency and mystery.  Can performances as quick as
Parrott's and McCreesh provide those qualities? Since Parrott doesn't and
McCreesh does, I'd have to say yes.  Also, McCreesh's soloists, Blaze
and Agnew, do very well together with well-proportioned contributions.
However, I do prefer the slow and very serious Kiujken reading and
Gardiner's exciting performance.  Both use pacing to establish a strong
reservoir of urgency, and the mystery is pervasive through their swirling
flutes and strings.  I'd also like to note that Suzuki, although giving a
lovely performance, is rather benign as he pays little attention to mystery
or urgency.

The next chorus deals with the power and might of the Lord.  Now that's
a good reason to have some fear; the Lord can snuff you out at will.
Ultimately, the power of the Lord leads to an omnipotence which a fine
performance needs to display.  McCreesh is the fastest of the six versions,
but I don't feel that the tempo is extreme.  The problem this time is again
the quality of the vocal soloists.  They don't blend well together, and
I had the impression that they had no desire to blend at all.  Further,
a couple of them don't sound good to begin with and seem to think it's
"opera time".  I must also relate that McCreesh does little to provide the
requisite power and omnipotence until the conclusion which is a blast.  My
preferred versions come from Suzuki and Gardiner.  Suzuki's reading is
majestic, and Gardiner's provides the most thrilling display of power and
might.

Speed goes too far in the tenor aria which concerns how the Lord takes down
the powerful and lifts the lowly.  Both Gardiner and McCreesh sound like
they are rushing along; this high speed needs excitement as compensation,
and they don't give it.  Gardiner has the added disadvantage of a snarling
Anthony Rolfe-Johnson; it doesn't suit him at all.  Herreweghe's reading is
a pleasure with those wonderful strings.

Next is an alto aria which is uplifting music quite calming and serene.
Two flutes provide an exquisite melody line, and an excellent alto can wrap
up this gorgeous music into a hugely pleasureable three minutes.  Kuijken
takes a little over three minutes with a lovely reading; Rene Jacobs is at
his best.  At about the same tempo, Herreweghe is just as effective, and
Gerard Lesne is excellent although I do prefer Jacobs.  But even better
than Jacobs is Akira Tachikawa for Suzuki; the voice is fantastic and very
expressive.  However, Suzuki is a little quick for my tastes with reduced
calm.  Gardiner is also on the quick side; Charles Brett is very good but
not in the same league as Jacobs, Lesne, or Tachikawa.  Parrott picks up
the speed even more although I hardly notice it with flutes that are
mesmerizing; Caroline Trevor is really good - probably not as fine as
Tachikawa - but a voice that brings out my sensual side.  It wouldn't be
easy for McCreesh to equal the versions of Parrott, Suzuki, or Kuijken, but
he almost gets there.  He's only held back by less expressiveness on the
part of Robin Blaze compared to his very tough competition.  Regardless,
it's a fine performance on McCreesh's part.  For my part, I'm going back
to more of Caroline Trevor.  Unfortunately, there is no photograph of her
in the booklet, just one of Parrott.

What follows is a trio for two sopranos and alto, although Kuijken treats
it as a Coro.  This is quite a piece of music: soothing yet poignant,
comforting yet urgent, uplifiting yet sad.  It can suck in the listener in
a flash, and all six versions do just that to me.  Perhaps it's just the
mood I'm in, but I feel that every conductor and vocalist is totally taken
in by this trio and in the same ways.  Tempos are hardly different among
them, no vocalist tries to stand out, the oboes are equally effective, etc.
I give a big round of applause to all involved.

Some may consider the next fugal Chorus to be a rousing one, but McCreesh
treats it in a very restrained manner and I love it.  He and his vocalists
are in total unison in applying this restraint.  I consistently get the
feeling that they will break out into great washes of sound, but it never
happens.  They keep me on the edge throughout the performance.  Another
big plus is the McCreesh speed which enhances the joy in the music.  Until
listening to McCreesh, I doubted that I would hear as fine a reading as the
Gardiner which is so uplifting and exciting.  Although very different,
McCreesh is Gardiner's equal here and his interpretive decisions are
exceptional.

The final Chorus has two basic sections.  The first is pure majesty, the
second goes back to the first movement.  Herreweghe and his chorus can't be
beat in the finale; the majesty is supreme.  McCreesh does quite well and
is competitive.  Parrott's reading is somewhat anemic with singing of
little distinction.

Does McCreesh's Magnificat hold up to the best versions? No it doesn't.
Too frequently, his fast speeds are problematic and his vocalists either
not sufficiently engaged or of low tonal beauty.  Kuijken, Herreweghe, and
Suzuki are, in my opinion, much more consistently satisfying.

Don's Conclusions: McCreesh would be well advised to re-think tempos,
sharpness, and whatever reasons used in selecting vocalists.  Without these
reconsiderations, I think it unlikely that he will join the select group
of Bach conductors.  For those who tend to be of differing opinion, just
sample the opening movements of the Easter Oratorio and Magnificat.  If
impressed, the disc should be a fine acquisition.  My overall
recommendation is to proceed with caution.

Don Satz
[log in to unmask]