Double double. (The Music).

Long-time readers know that Tom Lyle and I are fans of large-scale orchestral music. The symphonies of Mahler, Shostakovitch, and Bruckner have been the subjects of many of our comparisons, and for this issue, we are once again comparing two recordings of a large-scale orchestral work, Sir Malcolm Arnold's Symphony No. 5, which Sir Malcolm completed composing in 1961. The two recordings we have selected for comparison are an established favorite version, Richard Hickox leading the London Symphony Orchestra on a 1995 Chandos release (CHAN 9385) and a recent (2001) budget-priced release on the Naxos label featuring Andrew Penny leading the National Symphony Orchestra of Ireland (8.552000). Both recordings also include performances of Sir Malcolm's Symphony No. 6; however, to make our lives simpler, TL and I decided to limit our comparison to No. 5.

As always, Tom and I have refrained from discussing these two recordings with each other and have written our remarks entirely independently. Because this is an odd-numbered issue, I will lead off with my comments and then Tom will present things from his point of view.

KWN: This has been both the easiest and hardest Double Double comparison that I have done in quite some time. The easy part has been listening to the recordings, because both of them are excellent and because this symphony is one that I really love. I must thank Harry Pearson of The Absolute Sound for first turning me on to this music. Back in the 1970s, HP raved about the EMI recording of this music, and I was intrigued enough to order the LP from England. Both the sound and the music were as splendid as HP had written, and I was especially taken by the rich writing for brass. My best friend from junior high and beyond played trombone and baritone, and to this day, when I listen to this symphony, I think of my dear friend, Mike Masteller (whom I hope smiles when he reads this).

Another factor that made this comparison so easy was that my wife really likes this music, too, even to the point of thanking me for playing it so much rather than asking me what the heck I was up to. So far, so good.

But what made this comparison harder than usual was first that I misplaced the remote control for my preamp, making it more difficult to do quick A/B comparisons of passages, and second, that both recordings are so excellent that it was really hard to pick a winner. Both versions are still in my collection, and will remain there (along with the CD version of the composer-conducted performance on EMI).

In terms of performance, I finally would up with a slight preference for Penny, especially in the first movement, where his slower tempo and playful phrasing made the music seem a little bit more magical than it did in Hickox's account. In terms of sound, the choice was difficult, as both recordings are exemplary, but in the end I found myself slightly preferring the Naxos sound (engineered by Tim Handley).

Perhaps you can see where I am ...