Issac Stern Auditorium at Carnegie Hall, Center Balcony (CB Center Left, Seat O21, $46.)
Program
Prelude to Legend of the Invisible City of Kitezh, Op. 4 (1903-1904) by Nikolai Rimsky-Korsakov (1844-1908).
Cello Concerto No. 1 in E-flat Major, Op. 107 (1959) by Dmitri Shostakovich (1806-1975).
Symphony No. 4 in E Minor, Op. 98 (1884-1885) by Johannes Brahms (1833-1897).
We again went to this concert with the Yangs. Even though traffic reports seemed to indicate congestions everywhere, we managed to get to Carnegie Hall in good time, the last few blocks did give us some problems. We had a quick bite at a new restaurant on 8th Ave (don’t remember its name, and Google map doesn’t show it), reasonable food, reasonable prices.
There were scattered empty seats in the auditorium, and in our section there were a lot of students. These balcony seats in Carnegie Hall are worse than economy seats on an airline. At my modest height I feel my knees already touch the head of the person in front of me. The gentlemen next to us must be six foot tall, and there simply was no way for him to be comfortable. Good thing we had empty seats to move to this evening.
It is a large orchestra, for the Brahms symphony there were 16 first violins, 26 second violins and violas (couldn’t tell them apart given where I was), 10 cellos, and 8 basses. The program called for only one percussion (a triangle) and a set of timpani (which never sounded exactly in tune). Also, the number of woodwind and brass instruments is quite small.
The Prelude is a short piece at less than five minutes. It actually used the largest number of musicians, including two harps. This is the first time I saw a man playing a harp, so I guess Vienna Philharmonic will be contacting him soon. I enjoyed this piece, the sounds were pleasant, and – despite the large orchestra – soft and sweet. I didn’t know Rimsky-Korsakov wrote operas, and he actually wrote 15 of them. Anne, however, thought the orchestra was not together, and that turned out to be much of her refrain for the evening. The conductor didn’t use a baton, I wonder if that contributed to the occasional imprecision.
I generally enjoy Shostakovich’s music, although usually not at the first listen. The cello concerto, however, is easy to listen to, and easy to like. The Program Notes says Shostakovich was inspired by Prokofiev who wrote one a few years earlier dedicated to Mstislav Rostropovich. I am not sure “inspired” is exactly the right word, I am thinking along the lines of "competitiveness".
The concerto begins with a four-note motif that isn’t quite tonal (yet singable), and the motif gets worked into the piece multiple times. The first movement (Allegretto) was very enjoyable, with a solo horn often in dialog with the cellist. There is also a celesta that adds quite a bit of color to the music. There was some scattered applause after the first movement. The second movement (Moderato) was played a bit too softly by the soloist for the nose-bleed and cramped-leg set; this is particularly true with the second half which contained a lot of harmonics. Interestingly, the Cadenza is considered a separate movement. Not being a cellist, I can’t tell if it required a high degree of virtuosity, but it didn’t come across as a technically challenging movement. The fourth movement (Allegro con moto) sounded okay, and as advertised did come to a close with a strike of the timpani. I wonder my perception of a great first movement and just-okay later ones is due to the fact that one could digest only so much new Shostakovich in one sitting, or the quality of the performance dropped after the first movement.
In any case, Alisa Weilerstein is an engaging young (born 1982) soloist, and I suspect we will hear from her quite a bit.
We heard Brahm’s fourth symphony in October, 2010 at the New York Philharmonic, with Alan Gilbert conducting. I didn’t realize that until I got home and looked at my earlier blog posts. And I still find the fourth movement unfamiliar.
Anne is correct in saying the orchestra is not together. The concertmaster, among others, on several occasions either jumped in too early, or was over enthusiastic in terms of volume. And sometimes you wonder if the music was written so one section was to follow another with a split-second lag. All these add up to a muddled effect every now and then. But the sound in general was just very pleasant, and it was obvious from the first descending third of the first movement (Allegro non troppo). I complained about the Carnegie acoustics before, so it had to be the orchestra.
There are other things one could nit-pick about the performance. The second movement (Andante moderato) was played through with a nice sound but not much emotion. It is a pity that the melancholy one usually associates with the movement was not to be found. The third movement (Allegro giocoso) was lively and enjoyable. It was at my last concert that I realized that Brahms loved variations; on that occasion it was Variations on a Theme of Schumann written in 1854, tonight it was the fourth movement written a good 30 years later. The Program Notes here says there are 30 variations, and Alan Gilbert said there were 32 in the October 2010 concert. I am glad even professionals don’t agree. For me, it just sounded like a “regular” fourth movement (Allegro energico e passionato).
A few other thoughts. Since the four-note motif in Shostokovich was used multiple times in the concerto, you could hear people humming it during intermission. I was sure I would remember it, but to my dismay had forgotten it by the time we finished the concert. A tribute to the composer who can do so much with so little. Similarly, the first movement of Brahms builds on simple descending thirds and rising sixths to get to a rich symphonic texture. Both Rimsky-Korsakov and Shostokovich managed very complex sounds with minimal use of percussion instruments . Contrast that with some modern composers who despite the use of everything under the sun still manage to write music that is more interesting to look at than to listen to.
In any case, even though there were quite a few things one could quibble with, the overall concert was very enjoyable.
[A later note.] We left right after the concert so wouldn't have to wait for the attendant to bring up our car. Thus we missed the encore. I also found the New York Times review, which calls the orchestra sound "Russian." I am not objecting to that characterization, but recall a Beijing concert I attended in the mid 90s sung by a Russian Army Chorus. I told people it sounded like the ending scene of "Hunt for Red October," and certainly was very different from what I heard today.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment