New York Philharmonic – Juanjo Mena, conductor; Daniil Trifonov, piano. January 6, 2015.

Avery Fisher Hall at Lincoln Center.  Orchestra 2 (Seat BB11, $64.50).

Program

Capriccio espangnol, Op. 34 (1887) by Rimsky-Korsakov (1844-1908).

Piano Concerto No. 1 in F-sharp minor, Op. 1 (1890-91; rev. 1917) by Rachmaninoff (1873-1943).

Symphony No. 6 in B minor, Op. 74, Pathetique (1893) by Tchaikovsky (1840-93).

This is a (nearly) all-Russian program.  Two popular pieces by well-known Russian composers, a virtuoso piano concerto played by an up and coming superstar: ingredients for a great concert.

It was only a good concert when measured against my extremely high expectations.  I was thinking about this during the concert and afterwards.  Even for a tough grader like me, New York Philharmonic concerts would (say) earn an average grade of 95.  The great ones would score a 98, the really “bad” ones would get a 92.  I was hoping for a 99, but thought it rated a 96 only.

Capriccio espangnol supposedly is orchestrated “to the highest degree of perfection,” by a composer well-known for his orchestration skills.  This is a familiar piece that contains five self-explanatory movements: (i) Alborada (Morning Song) (Vivo e strepitos); (ii) Variazioni (Variations) (Andante con moto); (iii) Alborada; (iv) Scena e canto Gitano (Scene and Gypsy Song) (Allegretto); and (v) Fandango asturiano (Asturian Fandango.)  I cannot argue with all the accolades in the Playbill about how great this piece is (e.g., the quote that it is a brilliant composition for the orchestra,) but I must say it didn’t come across as such.  The beginning was simply uninspired, and Staples’s solos while crisp and elegant, sounded too soft.  During the faster runs the music sounded muddled.  Things improved considerably as the piece progressed, and it actually ended very well.  The movements were to be played through without pause; however, that was not to be as many thought the piece came to an end at the end of the third (?) movement which ended in a flourish.

Rachmaninoff started on his first piano concerto when he was 17, still a student.  It was revised extensively nearly thirty years later, but kept its Op. 1 designation.  It certainly has not enjoyed the same level of popularity as his second and third concertos.  While I do have a copy of it on my iTunes, I don’t remember ever listening to it.  It is relatively unpopular for good reason, at least as far as I am concerned.  There is no doubt that this is a virtuoso piece, some passages call for such rapid finger and hand movements that they looked like a blur from where I sat.  However, it lacks the melodies and structures of the other concertos that would immediate grip the listener.  There is a rather long cadenza that left me scratching my head: it didn’t look or sound any more difficult than the “regular” concerto.  The Playbill indicates there are some subtleties that require the performer to make choices, and naturally I don’t know what they are.

I still remember being greatly wowed by Trifonov when I first heard him a couple of years ago.  I remember (without looking at my blog entry) that his play was so amazing and confident that while I was mesmerized I was not at all worried that he would get the notes out correctly.  There were no such concerns today either; but sadly the thrill was greatly diminished.  I still admired how easy he made the playing look, but there was not as much story-telling as I thought there should be.  Somehow the lines sounded a bit disjoint, and the balance with the orchestra was problematic at times.

One thing I didn’t notice last time was his playing stance.  It reminded me of Linus of Peanuts’ cartoon fame hunching over the piano.  Okay when one is thin and young; let’s hope this posture won’t give him problems when he is 30 pounds heavier and 30 years older.  One can avoid the former, but there is no fighting with Father Time.

In any case, the audience gave an enthusiastic applause afterwards, and Trifonov played an encore.  I have no idea what the piece is, but would characterize it as Debussy on steroids.

The Tchaikovsky symphony lived up to its billing (Pathetique).  This excerpt from the Playbill hints at the program in the composer’s mind: “The ultimate essence of the thirst for activity.  Must be short.  (Finale DEATH – result of collapse.) Second movement, love; third, disappointments; fourth ends dying away (also short.)”  Well, short is subjective; the symphony is about 45 minutes long, after all.  The four movements are (i) Adagio – Allegro non troppo – Andante – Allegro vivo – Andante come prima – Andante mosso; (ii) Allegro con grazia; (iii) Allegro molto vivace; and (iv) Adagio lamentoso – Andante.

This series is the debut for the Spanish conductor Juanjo Mena, music director of the BBC Philharmonic.  For the symphony he didn’t need the music, and got good response from the orchestra.  As advertised, the music took the listener through different emotion highs and lows, and ended on a whisper, held there by the still-raised arms of the conductor for perhaps a few seconds too long.  The enthusiastic response from the audience was well-deserved, although I felt more despondent after the BSO performance a few years back, if memory serves.

The New York Times review contains many flowery words for Trifonov's performance, so I guess the reviewer like it.  He also had good words to say about Mena, but shared my sentiment about the Tchaikovsky piece: "without quite letting in the degree of intensity its composer intended."  Indeed the encore by Trifonov is by Debussy (if the same piece was played.)

After the concert, we stopped by Newark Airport to pick up CS and Shirley who returned from a 12-day trip to the West Coast.  Traffic was no problem in both directions.