Klemperer's Beethoven, New Issues!

Dear Dai,

That very recording of the Little G Minor Symphony I listened to on Sunday. Not even Norrington would have dared to attempt those tempi! Of course he never had a crack band like the Philharmonia as his in the first place. Can you imagine what the ensemble would be like with RN conducting at that speed? I bet even the Philharmonia were sweating internally with Klemperer! I know one performance that is as fast, but varies [the second subject group is much slower, and it does not really hang together as a reading in my view] as to tempo significantly: Bruno Walter and the VPO live at the Salzburg Fesrtival in 1956 - on Orfeo [from Austrian radio tapes]. And yes they do play all the notes as well, but one senses a certain strain to it! Not so with the Philharmonia who out-manouvre the NBC for Toscanini when he is going very fast, in retaining their poise and musicianship! The beneficiary is the music of course...

I think Klemperer's approach to each individual piece from a grerat master was always a response to the music and not some pre-conceived "principle" of style that straight-jacketed him. Thus he would be quite driven, or flexible, or even on occasion monumentally stable as to tempi, but always his tempi related across the entire piece giving a massive sense of architectural strength and natural inevitability [as well as a stoic quality] which perhaps has not been equalled since.

The very monumentality of some his readings can be off-putting as it completely avoids obvious short-termist expressive devices, and can give the impression of slowness, because everything is so poised and thoroughly thought out. In may ways only when Klemperer is heard in live recordings does his genius become fully apparent, because the spur of live performances releases all his latent energy and interpretive genius to "fly as an eagle, high above the normal" in music making...

ATB from George

quote:

Originally posted by Dai Compi:
I did not intend to give the impression that I thought all modern performances of Beethoven lacked grandeur, but many do - such as those by the conductors mentioned by Tam!

Well, each to their own. I'd be interested to know which ones you think do then.

I don't think anyone here said Klemperer was always slow, certainly his late Beethoven was, but the live Fidelio on Testament isn't, and is magnificent.

regards, Tam

That Fidelio [Covent Garden, live] recording is on my list. I have the EMI Klemperer studio set, which is very well done and worthy, but from what I have heard the Opera House production is magnificent! I knew the guy leading the basses in the orchestra in that production, and have some splendid anecdotes about the time!

ATB from George

The live recording is a must, and the one I'd take to my desert island (I'd choose it over Mackerras, and you know praise doesn't come much higher than that from me where Beethoven is concerned).

regards, Tam

George. I agree with you!

quote:

quote:
Originally posted by Dai Compi:
I did not intend to give the impression that I thought all modern performances of Beethoven lacked grandeur, but many do - such as those by the conductors mentioned by Tam!

Well, each to their own. I'd be interested to know which ones you think do then.

The ones that come to mind are firstly Roger Norrington's. These sound very impressive on first hearing, and I rushed out to get his CD of the Ninth after his Prom performance some years ago, but on repeated listening I found it superficial and lacking any depth. The same applies even to the Eroica, one symphony where a fast tempo usually is beneficial. I avoid Norrington's performances now.

Secondly, Simon Rattle, whose cycle I heard performed live in Birmingham. (This will be sacrilege to some.) There was much to admire, but again there was a void at the heart of the music in some of them, especially the Fifth. The first movement of this is one of Beethoven's most intense musical arguments, and if the detail is swamped by excessive speed, or the critically important pauses impetuously curtailed, the result is so often trivial.

To be fair to Rattle, his view of the music seems to have changed since he went to Berlin.

Dai,

I wonder if we're talking at cross purposes, I meant which recordings you thought did have grandeur. I too avoid Norrington's performances (in part for musical reasons, but also because the one occasion I heard him live he kept turning and grinning inanely at the audience mid-performance, I found this so annoying that he won't be seeing another penny of my money).

I don't much care for Rattle in Beethoven earlier (though he and his Berliners can take credit for the finest performance of my favourite chord towards the close of the 3rd movement of the 9th when I heard them live at the Proms a couple of years ago). What amazed me about his VPO cycle (which attracted rave reviews in some quarters, but has the unique distinction of being one I've let go), was the way he managed to make them dull. In fairness to Rattle, I tend to find his performances either dull (the Sibelius cycle falls into the same category for me) or extraordinary (some of his Mahler and his recent Schubert great C major, which I'd probably take to my desert island).


regards, Tam

Tam,

I don't want to get into protracted discussions, but some of those Beethoven performances which I think do have grandeur have been made by (in no particular order) Klemperer, Böhm, Walter, Jochum, Colin Davis and Carlos Kleiber. Also Karajan, although not in all his recordings by any means; he has always struck me as a conductor better suited to the late romantic period than the classical or early romantic.

OK, they are all of the older generation, but then so am I!

I'd actually agree with most of those. I'm a big fan of Jochum - his 3rd symphony with the LSO is a magnificent example of grandeur in my book. I'm also very fond of Davis's Dresden readings (which I did mention in my earlier post). I suppose I count them as modern performances, in the sense of the time when they were recorded, though of course in style it's true that they aren't really.

regards, Tam

What is curious about this is is that apart from Davis all the people Dai mentions learned their craft in the old way of being a chorus repetiteur in the old opera houses in the German speaking world, and what a grounding this was. The young aspirant had to master every style and be fully able to coach Choirs, take orchestral rehearsal, and even coach solo singers, and know enough of the business to do this without lossing control and discipline with some of the toughest professionals that could be imagined. For this he would stand by as second conductor for any performance the first conductor could not do, and this was fairly rare!

Before they emerged as signicant conductors of the symphonic repertoire they were already middle aged! Half a working lifetime of experience and gained wisdom under the belt.

Where I think the modern young conductor has a distinct disadvantage is he or she is expected to produce music making of anything like the significance of these wise middle agaed and sometimes old men in their thirties, at a time when they would have been better using their time learning their craft [and even the tricks of the trade] from more senior collegues, and also conserving a living performing tradition with roots back to the music itself.

The loss of this system of gaining seniority in music making has led to a dismantling of a real performance tradition that goes right back in a single line to Beethoven and haydn at the least, and it is hardly surprising that some of the musically feeble attempts at HIP have indeed seemed not to come close to being as musically satisfying as some of these older meastros' work. Even Furtwangler was baptiused in the same fire, though his charmed existence from 1922 onwards when he gained the musical direction of both the Berlin Philharmonic and Leipzig Gewanthaus Orchtras, as well as becoming "de facto" musical director with the VPO is the stuff of legend!

If you look at both Klemperer and Walter, they were both apprentices to Gustav Mahler! The system would be undermined by more modern, higher speed transport which allowed for a conductor to make one star appearance in say Milan one day and another in say london the next.

In England the situation was different, without the opera house system to rely on, but Boult made his early career leading the Carl Rosa opera Comapny for several years [and concurrently the Bach Choir in London], and his early career studying the work of Artur Nikisch in Leipzig probably means his grounding was as through as his German collegues, though in some ways significantly broader as the range of music he was successful in leading. Toscanini rose from the ranks of the orchestra in Italian opera houses to become the greatest conductor from his country, though he made his most lasting and legendary success in the USA.

Beecham could afford to pay his orchestras without concern for the profits in the earlier days [but went personally bankrupt in the end with his opera productions], and founded for his own works the Beecham Philharmonic, the London Philharmonic and the Royal Philharmonic Orchestras!

Barbirolli, like Toscanini, rose from the position of cellist in the orchestra to founding his own chamber orchestra, in the mid twenties, and after working in London and Scotland was appointed as the conductor of the NYPSO to succeed Toscanini [after he left to for his own NBC Sympony Orchestra] within about twelve years of starting to conduct professionally. That is meteoric rise based on talent if ever there was.

Rattle more or less left Music School to become a Big Name conductor at an age when most of his forebears were merelty apprentices! He has had to learn the trade in a much less unstructive way, and I would guess that by the time he is sixty he may well be as interesting a leader of orchestras as his illustrious predecessors!

ATB from George

The real problem is. Since the emergence of pop music, all the musicians have gone on to aspire to becoming pop stars. This means fewer musicians in the classical talent pool.

Serious concert music does not have the prestige it once had.

If Mahler was alive today he would be wielding a Stratocaster and not a baton. I'm afraid the classical world has been taken over by well built ladies with little to say of their art.

Dear Unstoppable,

Are you suggesting that pop music is going through some golden era, better than ever before, and that classical music is played or sung much worse than in past times?

Do you think that somehow the two are linked?

Are you also suggesting that most people associated with clasical music are unarticulate fat ladies?

Only with your precise views on these aspects can I make a few related responses on what might be the meaning of your post above.

ATB from George

quote:

Are you also suggesting that most people associated with clasical music are unarticulate fat ladies?

No, I was suggesting the opposite. The women are good looking but less interesting as artists.

quote:

Originally posted by GFFJ:
Are you suggesting that pop music is going through some golden era, better than ever before, and that classical music is played or sung much worse than in past times?

You know, I think you may have a point, even popular music is in the creative doldrums. I think if Klemperer were born 60 years later, he would be working for some large multi conglomerate corporation and making six figures a year and composing on the side. His music would be good enough to perform in concert halls around the world.

Did you know, when Vladimir Horowitz was accepting pupils for study in the 50's he refused to accept either women or Orientals. Sounds pretty bigoted doesn't it ? Know what his reasoning was, he thought of music as a man's game, he also believed women would just abandon their career for raising children as soon as they got married. As far as Orientals, he believed they were imitators. While I'm on the subject, Classical music has become so re creative and not creative, that this has further alienated it from a lot of interesting, talented people..


I'm not suggesting women or Orientals aren't fine artists, only that the form has been abandoned by a large section of humanity out of hand.



US

Dear Unstoppable,

The crisis in the production of new "classical" music was recognised in the lifetime of Brahms.

What could be done that was original after Brahms, Haydn, Beethoven, and Haydn in the Symphony, for example?

This is a something of a nonsense of course because, as Sibelius, Walton, and Schostakowich [for three great examples of being” master of the symphonic form”] were yet to demonstrate, the Symphony was capable of containing massive innovation whilst reatining its recognisable form. But there were issues, becaus it was no longer felt in some critical circles that writing another symphony was of itself not suffiecently original. This is in stark contrast to Haydn's comment that he dared to be unoriginal [in his use of form], but because he was physically isolation from the mainstream for a long part of his career, never the less was truly original and fresh in his artistic inspiration...

I don't think the crisis in "classical music production" is related to popular music in any way in other words. The problem would then arise that the "new music" of for example the Second Viennese School was so original even in its very musical language and tonality [in the musical rather than hifi sense] that a large part of the classical musical audience was becoming alienated from the new production. Music like modern architecture was beginning to get so clever that its beauty was not apparent to the majority of people whether they were happy to enjoy the old classics or not.

Though I see no linkage between the decline of modern [i.e. twentieth century] classical music and popular music, I cannot see how the high and low points in this are directly connected of themselves, but I actually do see a cultural linkage between the seeming demand for the inane and bland at the popiest end of the pop music sector, which is now very commercial, and the demand for technical perfection over a spiritual probe of the depth of the music being performed. This is represented in my view by the quality of the so-called chart hits, based on sales, and the phenomenon of the ever increasing technical quality of performance practice in classical music, while the actual performances are simply getting less interesting as essays on what the music is about and for...

It seems to me the seem demand for bland but over produced pop music, is also a driver in the general cultural demand for classical music on records, but more importantly in the concert hall, which is phenomenally well performed technically, but not particularly probing of the music's inner core - the spirit, the swing of it! It is easier to discuss the technical aspects as you don't need to have a deep interest in or understanding of the spiritual aspects contained in the music, but it is quite clear when the technical side is less than perfect. We live in an age where the spiritual is almost regarded as eccentric, even approaching the mad. Generous people are derided as fools, the honest derided for not competing to the last degree, and those who are not financially successful are regarded as failures, though they may be the nicest and most emotionally successful people you could met! It is part of this wholesale acceptance of the capitalistic, materialistic dream which is driving mankind from generous spiritual happiness to selfish and unhappy materialism, where the quality of a thing is judged on it cost and perfection rather than its ability to bring some balm to the human soul.

In practice modern musical performance is consistently more competent than the playing and singing of fifty and more years ago, whilst being almost embarrassed by the spiritual implications of what is being played. Some but not all HIP style musicians actually attempt to almost entirely remove the sentiment of the music, without realising the difference between sentiment and sentimentality! One is genuine expression of emotions and feeling released in the music and the other one is than kitsch application of a style inappropriate to the music in hand. One would not even in the 1930s have dreamt of playing Bach similarly to Rachmaninov! At least going on the recorded performance of the most tasteful artists of the day!

Therefore it will be clear that I can agree that in many cases the physical beauty of the performer may well be seen in our modern and shallow world as being more successful commercially, than the spiritual beauty of the performance! Capitalism and cultural shallowness have turned over the priorities in a way some of us might regard as being as catastrophic as capsizing a boat. Everything good is lost and ruined on the alter of some false deity! Completely topsy-turvy!

Thanks for you clarification. I spent the last day considering this reply, which I hope you enjoy!

ATB from George

Great post George.



The music of the Second Viennese school became too clever for it's own good. Pretty pertinent observation, but I think you made my point, with fewer folks listening, the art of Classical music was bound to suffer. Brahms and Haydn had an intelligent musically astute audience ready at hand.

quote:

Originally posted by GFFJ:
- the spirit, the swing of it!

Some would argue that a lot of popular music and jazz from its golden age retained a lot of the spirit that was lacking in moribund Classical music forms. That was part of my point of which you do not agree.

quote:

Originally posted by GFFJ:
Therefore it will be clear that I can agree that in many cases the physical beauty of the performer may well be seen in our modern and shallow world as being more successful

Eventually, the cheesecake will get boring, then the market will really collapse for Classical, if it hasn't already. The record companies have become their own worst enemy in their shallow marketing techniques..

quote:

In practice modern musical performance is consistently more competent than the playing and singing of fifty and more years ago, whilst being almost embarrassed by the spiritual

Yup, that's getting into the pretty profound territory....



US

quote:

Originally posted by Unstoppable:
... George.



The music of the Second Viennese school became too clever for it's own good. Pretty pertinent observation, but I think you made my point, with fewer folks listening, the art of Classical music was bound to suffer. Brahms and Haydn had an intelligent musically astute audience ready at hand.

quote:

Originally posted by GFFJ:
- the spirit, the swing of it!

Some would argue that a lot of popular music and jazz from its golden age retained a lot of the spirit that was lacking in moribund Classical music forms. That was part of my point of which you do not agree.

_____________

quote:

In practice modern musical performance is consistently more competent than the playing and singing of fifty and more years ago, whilst being almost embarrassed by the spiritual

Yup, that's getting into the pretty profound territory.... US

Dear Unstoppable,

I agree with your point, especially about Jazz having the swing and drive once found in the classics, but I don't think it is really a question of this quality transfering from the old style. The players ans audience for Jazz really came from parts of society that were untouched and uninfluemced by classical music. And some clssical music kept the old flame alive. Can you think of anything more brilliant in this respect than much of William Walton's music! He dared to be original within easily understood forms, and yet was unique in his output just as much as the old Viennese Masters.

I think that the second point I highlighted from your post makes the point that in reality music has much about it that is profound. This used to be prized, but seems less so the more we more towards capitalistic materialism.

Thanks for the answer! ATB from George

quote:

Originally posted by GFFJ:
Jazz really came from parts of society that were untouched and uninfluemced by classical music.

Hmmm..

We all know of Jazz's influences on Classical, but not much of classicals' influence on such artists as divers as Art Tatum and Oscar Peterson. Miles Davis was heavily influenced by the Classics.


From Wikipedia,


Miles Davis. CD : "Kind of Blue"

accoustic setting, influenced by Claude Dubussy (a great classical composer). The tunes "Blue in Green", "Flamenco sketches" and "So what" are just too good


From "JazzScript"

" He also provides a thorough, knowledgeable discussion of Tatum's music, from his early influences, such as stride pianist Fats Waller, to his mature style in which Liszt, Rachmaninoff, Debussy, , Waller, and Earl Hines all become grist for his harmonic mill."


The list goes on and includes Gato Barbiere, Kieth Jarrett and countless others.


All influenced by Classical music.


US

Munch,

Yes, I mean later twentieth Century Classical, which would not categorically be termed 'modern'.

Check out Bernstein's 'Prelude Fuge and Riffs,'and 'West Side Story'.


Lots of Debussy, especially 'Estampes'


Honegger, 'Pacific 231'


All of Gershwin ect...




US

Dear Unstoppable,

The time lines are relatively straight forward. Jazz emerged in the early part of the twentieth century as a vibrant new style, and many records exist from this first phase. Jazz would influence classical composers, not the least William Walton considering that I have already mentioned him, though his vibrancy was such that his non-Jazzy pieces are just as alive as the ones with Jazz influences.

By the time Miles Davis and other came to be prominent in Jazz, influences were indeed coming from the classics into Jazz as well, but they were not part of the first phase of Jazz in the historical sense.

By now even Rock Music is on occasion having an influence on so called modern classical music as well, and the influence of the classics on mainstream pop has always been apparent in certain repects, though obviously not in all that many cases of individual songs at any one time.

So perhaps my initial quote should have been qualified as follows: Jazz really came from parts of society that were untouched and uninfluemced by classical music, in its origins.

All good stuff, and thanks for encouraging me to clarify this point.

Interesting to consider that Klemperer himself, though not influenced by it in his own composition was open to the newly emerging Jazz as it found its way to Weimar Berlin!

ATB from George

Dear George,

A lot of words seem to have been written since your posting of 16.10.07 at 01:45, but I just wanted to make a brief reply to say that I agree with you. There is so much intensive training in various academies these days, which turn out large numbers of competent but undistinguished conductors, who may hope to go straight to the top. In fact there will be only a few who become truly great, after many years of possibly bitter experience in a world which is much more ruthlessly competitive than in the days of the "hard grind" of apprenticeship to a master.

I ought to add Boult and Tennstedt to my list of conductors of "grandeur".

Dai

Dear Dai,

The trouble even now is that by the time these musicians have faced off half a lifetime of fairly back-stabbing competition [instead of constructive, if hard, work in apprenticeship] they will no longer look photogenic! Thus the media will ignore them as being too old and passed it to have all the typically shallow apeals which are necessary to strike a chord with the modern audience.

Can one imagine that Rattle will have had the time to compose musoic in amongst his jet set lifestyle in the way that Klemperer did for example, and which in old age he was allowed to take into EMI's recording studio! A lot has been lost with the Jet-set generation in terms of the time to reflect and improve quietly at a pace suitable to gaining wisdom, rather than the mad competitive rush of the current day...

ATB from George

On Monday I shall be placing orders for some of the live recordings issued by Testamant! My favourite record shop has agreed to a mail order solution for me! The shop is in Hereford, and I would rather patronise a real shop than some online business as long as that remains possible!

I cannot wait, now that I can stretch to a couple of CDs a week for a while!

ATB from George

Dear Friends,

Klemperer, and the Berlin Phi;harmonic! Sounds an unlikley combination, but this is very special. So far I have just listened twice to Beethoven Four and Five, from a live concert in 1966, so late vintage Klemperer if you like, but it is not exactly as you might expect! Certainly the BPO sounds very little like the orchestra we are familiar in Beethoven with under such conductors as Karajan or Furtwangler. Indeed they sound more like the Philharmonia, which may be a pointer to the fact that as cheif conductor Klemperer really moulded that orchestra after his own ends.

I will give a fuller commentary tomorrow! Needless to say this is one of the best Beethoven orchestral discs I have come across in a year or several!

ATB from George

12th. May 1966, in the New Philharmonic Hall in Berlin. The Music, Beethoven's Fourth and Fifth Symphonies. The Musicians, The Berlin Philharmonic conducted by Otto Klemperer. [Testament SBT1387].

Names to conjure with, but perhaps not in this combination, or so history must lead you to believe {Klemperer having left Berlin in 1933 for political reasons and a personal threat]. In fact this is a performance late in Klemperer's career and long after having re-established an effective relationship with the BPO, when he was not always physically on top form. Sometimes his concerts from this time could seem incredibly dogged, even perverse, and sometimes too slow for the music's good. Dogmatically wrong on occasion!

Not here though. Apparently his relationship with the BPO was quite a clash, though the orchestra persisted in inviting him back for the results alone. Some of the orchestra were happy to place him as one of the two greatest conductors they ever invited, the other favourite being of course Wilhelm Furtwangler. Certainly the orchestra is completely happy to second Klemperer's view of the music, which is quite different to their own tradition or indeed the sound world Karajan was encouraging in the 1960s. Klemperer apparently asked for and got an entirely different balance of strings and winds than they were used to, and this reflects the importance that Klemperer always placed on the wind solo voices amid the massed strings and also the significance that he always placed on the weakest string section as heard in more normal orchestral balancing - the violas.

Klemperer brings the winds forward in the balance by two methods, cultivated over more than a decade in London with the Philharmonia. Physically the winds were brought forward in the seating layout, which enable the strings to more easily hear their solo colleagues, and to actually ask the wind to project just a bit more - to actually play slightly louder. In the olden days this would often be achieved by doubling the wind lines with two players on one line. This has the disadvantage of turning the line from a solo into a section contribution, which transforms the expressive effect. In Berlin, though this rebalancing was not at first so easily achieved in rehearsal though the end results proved a revelation to the players, who revelled in the new found "plasticity of sound" and "flexibility of phrase," which this proximity and rebalancing brought.

Which perhaps indicates why these Berlin appearances by Klemperer were considered significant at the time, and miraculously now shown to be so in this recording concert performance from a good mono radio tape.

The Fourth Symphony is at a similar set of tempi found in the EMI studio recording, and is just as well played, with a similar lightness and rhythmic accuracy and vigour, but with the greater weight of the Berlin string sound, which is never-the-less fined down in loudness to allow the winds their crucial contribution to the momentum of the music, all the more compelling for the continuity and thrust of a live rendering It is neither fast nor slow, and interestingly somewhat faster than Furtwangler's vision of the music, consistently.

The opening, in the minor, is very dark [and for once beautifully in tune!], and leads, with inevitability to the sunlight and urbanity of the Allegro without on hint of calculation, but rather a grand sense of joy at the subsequent light after the dark. The slow movement is perhaps faster than might be expected, and achieve what is inherent in the music. A sense of inner exhaultation. The same seeming artlessness of the Scherzo is once again a case of great art concealing itself, and it is gloriously played, with a surprising resilience to the spring in the rhythm. The Finale starts as it means to continue, with indeed a greater breadth of tempo than many allow for. It is not slow, and the timings show it as quicker than Furtwangler with the same orchestra, but somehow the security of basic rhythmic pulse allow for every detail to emerge clearly, without scramble, without strain, and with immense momentum and joy. The bassoon solo, just before the coda, for once emerges as humourous, rather than moment the player would rather not have to face!

The Fifth Symphony was a Talisman for Klemperer. His approach in the first movement is severe, uncluttered and executed at a fast basic tempo. Even at this late stage there is not doubt of the old Maestro’s grip on proceedings. The orchestra seem to revel in being allowed to balance the actual lines so lucidly. If you listen you will be struck by just how much detail Beethoven invests in his wind parts, which Klemperer allows to speak freely among the strings, which also helps make s the progress of the music that much more compelling.

The slow movement is one which can seem a curious affair. Klemperer at an unexceptional tempo makes its lines both beautiful and forward moving, and this movement takes it rightful significance as an oasis of peace [not entirely without hints of unrest towards the end of the movement] with the Titanic struggle the symphony as a whole represents.

The Scherzo and Finale are unusually closely bound together by taking one basic tempo precedente right through the joined pair of movements. This is a daring thing to do, for the Scherzo could either become too slow or the Finale too quick for the music to benefit, but as so often in earlier performances, the art of selecting and then modifying [albeit briefly] a suitable tempo to architecturally bind a long span of music was one of Klemperer's great skills. The resultant inevitability of the great C Major Chorus of instruments that launch the Finale is a moment of complete release and joy after the ever-buidling tension in the Scherzo.

Klemperer takes the last movement exposition repeat, which on paper if compared to a performance without it would lead you to believe this is incredibly slow as a performance, and this only builds on the life affirming emotional impact of the whole reading. This is anything but a gloomy version! It breathes nobility, strength, determination, and most of faith in the possibility human goodness.

The Symphony really is a journey from dark to light in this performance. A phenomenally life enhancing performance to treasure, and one where the orchestra seem to have shared their illustrious guest's radical view of the music, so different in its way from their normal performance tradition.

Klemperer was never one to be easy on himself or his orchestral musicians with hindsight, but he wrote to a friend of this performance, "They did very well... they held it all together beautifully." He seems to indicate that they actually met and even exceeded his own expectations of what was possible.

ATB from George

Sorry to say this, but I really do hope with every fibre of my musical body that some of you will seek this out. It is as tragically inevitable as Beethoven's own optimistic vision in the manuscript. Nothing sacreficed to Dogam this is a real example of the real deal! Even what in music might be expressed as optimismus.

ATB from George

One to look out for indeed. I didn't know the recordings existed!!