China National Symphony Orchestra – Michel Plasson, conductor. March 14, 2010.

Concert Hall at the National Centre for the Performing Arts, Beijing. Seat Level 1, Row 10, Seat 25 (CNY280).

Program
Symphony in D minor by Cesar Franck.
Symphony No. 7 in A major, Op. 92, by Ludwig van Beethoven.

We are in China to visit a charitable organization, and found this concert which fit our schedule. David was with us also; he was the one who bought the tickets at the box office the day before. There are several reasons we could find this concert interesting: we have never seen the China National Symphony Orchestra; this is a relatively new concert hall, completed in 2007; my last experience at a Chinese Concert was quite interesting in that the audience felt free to chat during the performance; and the program is interesting. That a reasonably seat could be had for less than US$50 didn’t hurt either.


The Beijing Performing Arts Center (国家大剧院)

The Concert Hall is one of three auditoria in the Beijing Performing Arts Center. The main hall is the Opera House, and there is another auditorium for theater. All three are enclosed in this dome affectionately called “The Egg.” The Concert Hall, seating about 2000, has the orchestra in the “pit” surrounded by the audience, and feels rather intimate. The seats were quite comfortable. For tonight’s concert the hall was about 70% to 80% full by my estimation.

The orchestra members are by and large on the young side. Given the recent history of China, it is not surprising that there are not that many middle age players as it would be considered bourgeois for them to be playing western musical instruments during their teenage formative years. Which is a great pity. Another unexpected thing is the French conductor who is now leading the orchestra. The Program Notes would lead one to conclude he is now the Orchestra’s principal conductor; however, there is no mention of this fact either at the CNSO website, or the Wiki entry for Plasson. In any case, he was quite energetic for someone in his mid 70s (born October 1933).

I am reasonably familiar with Franck’s violin music, but this was the first time I heard the symphony. It sounds similar in that the themes are pleasant, but get repeated quite often. The dynamic range could be broader, though. The three movements are (i) Largo; (ii) Allegretto, ma non troppo; and (iii) Allegro non troppo.

The slow movement in Beethoven’s Seventh Symphony is made famous, deservedly, by the movie “Immortal Beloved.” The movement sounds very melancholic to me, with the violas playing a prominent role in the beginning. The entire symphony was done very well. The movements are (i) Poco sostenuto – Vivace; (ii) Allegretto; (iii) Presto; and (iv) Allegro con brio.

The acoustics, while okay, is surprisingly bland for such a new concert hall. I don’t know how to describe it except as lack of character: the sounds are clear, but not brilliant; the dynamic range is narrow (perhaps the orchestra?); and one doesn’t come away impressed. The applause from the audience was so tepid that I felt bad for the conductor. At least there was minimal talking during the performance, a great improvement from my last experience.

Someone was trying to use his cell phone to take a picture of the stage during the performance. A laser pointer shining on his device put an end to that rather quickly. A reminder of where we were.

They were also punctual. Started a few minutes after 7:30 pm, and the intermission was reasonably short. Overall I was glad to have attended this concert.

New York Philharmonic – Riccardo Muti, Conductor; Andras Schiff, Piano. March 5, 2010.

Avery Fisher Hall at Lincoln Center, Tier 1 Center (Seat DD07, $59).

Program
Piano Concerto No. 1 in D minor, Op. 15 (1858) by Brahms (1833-97).
Symphony in E-flat for Large Orchestra (1940) by Hindemith (1895-1963).

This was our fourth concert for the week, which must be some sort of a record for me. I still enjoyed the concert, but writing about it could get a bit tedious. We will see.

As I said in my last blog, Muti is spending about three weeks in Lincoln Center conducting Attila and a couple of New York Philharmonic concerts. We originally had tickets for the series next week with Repim playing the Beethoven violin concerto, but had to switch to this one as we will be away.

Brahms wrote two piano concertos, to me the more familiar one being the second with a serene opening. The first movement of tonight’s concert (Maestoso) began with a much faster paced statement and longish introduction by the orchestra, with the piano working its way in quietly about four minutes into the 23 plus minute movement. Having just heard a concert in Carnegie Hall, one immediately notices the difference in acoustics between that renowned concert hall and Avery Fisher. In the former you can hear each section (perhaps even instrument) clearly, here everything sounds a bit muddled. Orchestra seats may have better acoustics, but then all you see are the musicians seated in the front. In any case, Schiff was clearly in command of the music and the interplay between the soloist and the orchestra was very good. There were a couple of passages where he sounded weak and a bit flat, though. Probably because I slept through its playing (or skipped over it when heard on a CD), the second movement (Adagio) didn’t sound familiar at all. The Rondo – Allegro non troppo, began by the soloist, then followed in turn by various strings, got me back on track to enjoying the performance. While the piece was quite enjoyable overall, I didn’t quite get the excitement one should when one takes into account what the music could sound like.

Joachim, whom I knew collaborated with Brahms on his violin concerto, also helped with reassuring the composer that he had a good thing going. He also conducted the premiere of the work with Brahms as the soloist.

When I studied music theory at Cornell, the textbook we used (forget whether it was first or second year) was written by Paul Hindemith. I was sure he taught at Harvard, turns out it was Yale. The Program Notes has an interesting discussion on his background (fled Germany with the ascendancy of the Third Reich,) his ability to play many different instruments, and how the Minneapolis Symphony got to do the premiere because of hemming-and-hawing on the part of Boston Symphony. Commensurate with Hindemith’s decline in popularity, this symphony was last played by New York Philharmonic in 1967.

The symphony lives up to the description of being a “classically structured, four-movement symphony.” The first movement (Very lively) began with a brass introduction that sounded steady and assured, and proceeded at a very lively pace. The second movement (Very slowly) had the oboe and clarinet repeating many times what passes as a tune. The dominance moved to other parts of the orchestra, including horns and flutes. The third movement (Lively) saw the use of the rute which (I think) sounded like a whipped leather belt. The playing got crisper as the movement continued. But at some point the music began to wander – to be fair, it may be my mind that was doing the wandering – and eventually we knew we were in the fourth movement (Moderately fast half-notes) that ended in a march-like manner.

Muti was quite in command and seemed to get the response he needed from the orchestra. I wonder how I would enjoy the concert if the program had contained a more familiar piece than the Hindemith Symphony instead.

The New York Times reviewer was swept away by the Hindemith piece, despite his dislike of the third movement. He characterizes the New York Philharmonic performance as “brilliant.” Wow, wonders never cease.

Metropolitan Opera – Verdi’s Attila. March 3, 2010.

Metropolitan Opera at Lincoln Center – Dress Circle Seat B102 ($147.50).

Story. Attila is laying siege to Rome and captures a group of Roman women including Odabella, daughter of the Lord of Aquileia. Attila is impressed by Odabella’s courage and gives her his sword. The Roman General Ezio offers to split the empire with Attila but is rejected. Odabella’s fiancée Foresto is with a group of Aquileian refugees. He mistakes Odabella’s decision to stay with Attila as a betrayal. During a banquet hosted by Attila with Ezio, Odabella and Foresto attending, the attempt by Uldino – Attila’s slave – to poison Attila is foiled by Odabella who wants to kill Attila herself. Foresto flees Attila and laments Odabella’s marriage to Attila. As the wedding preparation is underway, Odabella meets up with Foresto and Ezio. Attila happens upon the three and accuses them of disloyalty and ingratitude. Odabella stabs Attila to death.

Conductor – Riccardo Muti; Attila – Ildar Abdrazakov, Uldino – Russell Thomas, Odabella – Violeta Urmana, Ezio – Giovanni Meoni, Foresto – Ramon Vargas.

We exchanged tickets for some other opera for this because of scheduling conflicts. I didn’t know much about it until the afternoon of the concert when I got to read up the synopsis on the Met website. The story is straightforward enough, and I was expecting a straightforward experience, given this is one of Verdi’s earlier operas (9th out of 28).

Muti, who will start his CSO appointment next season, seems to be spending a lot of time in New York. We will be seeing him Friday conducting the New York Philharmonic, and he will conduct at least another New York Phil series the following week.

I was somewhat surprised by the opera. When the curtain was drawn up after a very nice but relatively short overture, what we saw was Attila standing amidst massive and brightly lit ruins. In front of the ruins were what I initially thought were dead bodies who ended singing a chorus. Impressive, even though I didn’t know people were using re-bars to build city walls during Attila’s time (5th century). That was one indication of how the designers wanted to make the staging “timeless.” Since Attila is a historical person (although this opera takes a lot of liberty with historical facts), having people wear jeans and heavy parkas just looks weird, not timeless. The other thing is his head gear actually had a group of small lights so it glows in the dark. Interesting, not sure it is germane or necessary.

Towards the end of the prolog, the entire set was raised and Foresto showed up with fellow Romans in the space below. The Met employed a similar technique in Aida (also Verdi) and it worked quite well there also. For subsequent scenes we had this as a regular arrangement. In a couple of them you have this wall of plants with holes on each side where the singers were, and a space underneath for the masses. From where we sat, with our poor eyesight, we couldn’t tell whether the plants were real, fake, or simply projections on a screen. My best guess is a combination as the holes were circled by some leaves, and yet the entire scene moves ala Damnation of Faust. My overall opinion is the overused the effect.

Per the program notes, this is the only Verdi opera where the protagonist role is sung by a bass. The bass Abdrazakov made the best of the opportunity. Although weak in some places, he in general sang well.

Urmana as Odabella needed some suspension of belief on the audience’s part. I have to comment on her hair which was made into this huge beehive (ala Marge Simpson), that, combined with her stature, made her more like a Brunnhilde rather than a princess. And she seems to have one volume setting: extra loud (I guess the proper term is fortissimo) while many passages call for much softer singing. Anne insists there were a few occasions in which she did that; I must have a different definition of “soft,” or simply fell asleep.

The Ezio role was sung by Meoni who substituted for the scheduled tenor Carlos Alvarez. He did well. While not outstanding, his performance was dependable and of uniform quality.

Several years ago Ramon Vargas seemed to be a fixture of the Met, playing quite a few roles. He has not appeared in any of my blogs which I started in 2005, so it’s been a while. I used to wonder why people thought he was good enough to sing regularly at the Met, now after a few years I think he has improved quite a bit. His voice is strong, and steady for the most part (that was my biggest complaint a few years ago.) However, his smallish stature, especially next to Obadella, also strains credibility.

Anne and I had a long discussion on whether a sound enhancement system was used. We base our question on several factors. The singers sounded very loud. We were relatively close to the stage (second role center Dress Circle), but not that close. There was a noticeable difference in the quality (loudness and timber) of the voices when the singers move from the right side of the stage to the left side. It was a bit disturbing as the changes were abrupt. I also wonder if the sound got reflected from the roof as it got louder if I tilted my head up. We couldn’t find any loudspeakers, though. And I thought people used to swear professional opera singers seldom used microphones and speakers.

Overall, while the opera lacks the dramatic effects and historical accuracy compared to the best in the genre, it is still a great Verdi work that can be enjoyed as a musical composition. This is the first ever series of performances of this opera at the Met. And we saw the third show. I enjoyed it, and wonder about how opera houses decide on what to produce.

The New York Times has an interesting article (I couldn’t find a review) on this opera. The Bloomberg review is quite interesting to read. It calls the libretto nonsensical, uses beehive to describe Urmana’s hair, and adds some insight into Muti, the Met, and La Scala.

Today (March 6) I found the New York Times review. The reviewer is very enthusiastic about Muti, various singers, and the opera. He also describes Odabella's hair as "Marge Simpson-y," and is a little critical of the set designs. No mention of the acoustics, though.

Leipzig Gewandhaus Orchestra – Riccardo Chailly, Conductor. Louis Lortie, Piano. February 28, 2010.

Stern Auditorium at Carnegie Hall, Section CB2 (Row E, Seat 114, $37).

Program
Piano Concerto No. 1 in E Minor, Op. 11 (1830) by Frederic Chopin (1810-1849).
Symphony No. 2 in D Major, Op. 73 (1877) by Johannes Brahms (1833-1897).

[Note: some additional comments added on 3/1/2010.]

Chung Shu & Shirley told us about the concert, and the drive up to NYC was quite easy today. Carnegie Hall is quite impressive inside, has much better acoustics than Avery Fisher Hall, but not without its short falls. The most obvious ones are not much space outside of the auditorium, little legroom in the seating area, and inadequate number of washrooms. At times the orchestra sound while clearly distinguishable, sounded a bit dull also, I wonder if it is the acoustics or the orchestra.

The orchestra claims to be the oldest civic concert orchestra in the world. It began in 1743 and given its current name in 1781 when it moved into the meetinghouse of the textile merchants (the “Gewandhaus”). Whatever the qualifying words after “oldest” mean, its still quite impressive. And it counts among its music directors Felix Mendelssohn and Bruno Walter.

Chopin’s Piano Concertos are familiar repertoire pieces, easy to listen to (not necessarily to play) and enjoy. Today’s performance was no exception. The first movement (Allegro maestoso) began with a longish introduction by the orchestra that was played crisply and with great dynamics. The piano also didn’t disappoint. Unfortunately the level was not matched by the second (Romance: Larghetto) and third (Rondo: Vivace) movements. The slow dreamlike movement instead of sounding muted was at times muddled, probably from too much pedaling. The good acoustics actually worked to the disadvantage of the orchestra in the third movement where every mistake a member made was amplified by the stage. There were too many instances of an instrument (usually the violin) playing too loudly, or coming in too fast, or the orchestra not ending a note precisely. I guess there were many pianists in the audience, and too many of them were moving with the music. It’s annoying when you notice them, and I also wonder how many of them think they can do a better job at the piece.

Louis Lortie played one of Chopin’s Nocturnes as an encore. [Note: A commenter on the blog states that this is a Chopin Etude.]

I played the Brahms Symphony as a member of Cornell Symphony in the mid 70s. Come to think of it, it may actually be at Carnegie Hall as part of our centennial tour! Although I haven’t heard it much since, I am still reasonably familiar with it. The four movements are (i) Allegro non troppo; (ii) Adagio non troppo); (iii) Allegretto grazioso (quasi andantino) and (iv) Allegro con spirito. The performance did not get off to an auspicious start with the unsteady French Horns. It did improve to a certain extent as the piece went on. However, there were quite a few fast passages that sounded out of control, verging on chaotic. The last movement (or more precisely, the last part of the last movement) was done well and generated tremendous applause. I don’t know if I missed the greatness of the performance, or this is a case of “this is Carnegie Hall, so everyone who plays here must be good.”

The orchestra played a Beethoven Egmont Overture as an encore. I actually appreciated this more than the actual performance.

One other thing, the same guy (I assume it is the regular concertmaster) led the orchestra for both the concerto and the symphony. There was none of this excusing oneself in deference of the guest soloist business. I wonder if this practice is limited to a few orchestras, or is suspended you are on tour. I guess I need to be a NY Phil groupie and see them during a tour to find out! Or wait for the BSO to play in our area.

New York Philharmonic – David Robertson, Conductor; Gil Shaham, Violin. February 27, 2010.

Avery Fisher Hall at Lincoln Center, Orchestra 1 (Seat V5, $58).

Program
Suite from Ma Mere I’Oye (Mother Goose) (1908-1910; 1911) by Ravel (18751937).
Concerto for Violin and Orchestra, Op. 14 (1939-49/1948) by Barber (1910-81).
The Wooden Prince: A Dancing-Play in One Act, to a Libretto by Bela Balazs, Op. 13 (1914-17) by Bartok (1881-1945).

This is on paper an interesting program, it consists of relatively obscure pieces all composed during the 20th century. One of the pieces (one by Bartok) had only been performed by the New York Philharmonic once, and that was in 1975.

The Ravel piece consists of five movements: Pavane of the Sleeping Beauty; Tom Thumb; Laideronnette, Empress of the Pagodas; Conversations of Beauty and the Beast; and Apotheosis, the Enchanted Garden. It was originally written as a piano four hands for two of Ravel’s family friends but they were too shy to perform it in public, so the premiere was done by someone else. A few years later Ravel scored the piece for an orchestra.

The first three movements were kind of so-so, with not much happening. Pavanes are usually pleasant sounding slow dances, tonight’s wasn’t all that noticeable. The dynamics were quite a bit marked during the last two movements, they felt a bit incongruent given how the first three movements sounded though. We heard this piece conducted by Maazel in September, 2008. Looking back at that review, I have to conclude (on the basis of that review alone, since I have no recollection of the performance) tonight’s was probably an improvement. In Maazel’s defense, the New York Times, in one of its rare praises for him, describes the performance as a “beautifully constrained account.”

The Program Notes are not kind to Barber’s Violin Conerto, even though there is quite a bit of hedging in the writeup. There is an interesting dustup between Samuel Fels, who commissioned the concerto, and Barber on whether the concerto was good enough or too difficult for the intended soloist Iso Briselli. In any case, Barber got his $1000, and Briselli also got vindicated somehow. The overall impression it got me was two movements that were too simple (Allegro and Andante) and one that was virtuoso but short and didn’t quite belong (Presto in moto perpetuo).

So, I decided to listen with an open mind, even though I didn’t know if that was possible given the bias that had already formed in my opinion. The overall performance was much better than expected, though far from either brilliant or deeply musical. Shaham’s Stradivarius somehow got overwhelmed often by the orchestra, and his play just sounded a bit off. Overall it was an acceptable performance, but I expected a better overall experience than I got today. We were seated in Row V which had a good view of the stage (especially with binoculars). While standing there idle Shaham had this hunched stance and an open mouth; he was all serious when he was playing, though, and moved back and forth quite a bit.

The story behind Bartok’s The Wooden Prince is quite simple. A prince falls in love with a princess and tries to draw her attention with his wooden staff carved into a puppet. The princess keeps on ignoring it until he adorns the staff sequentially with his robe, his crown, and finally his hair. And then she falls in love with the wooden prince much to the prince’s dismay. A Fairy takes pity on him and makes him attractive to the princess. Now the princess has to sacrifice her crown before they can fall in love. This is done in many scenes played without interruption: [Prelude]; Dance of the Princess in the Forest; Dance of the Trees; Dance of the Waves; Dance of the Princess with the Wooden Puppet; The Princess Pulls and Tugs at Him (the Wooden Prince) and Tries to Make Him Dance; She Tries to Attract Him (the Real Prince) with a Seductive Dance; Frightened, the Princess Attempts to Hasten to Him (the Real Prince) but the Forest Stops Her; [Postlude].

The scenario creator Bela Balazs likens this to a woman preferring the poem to the poet, or the picture to the painter.

As with the first two pieces, I also didn’t know what to expect of this piece. Bartok has three pieces for the stage, and I have also heard The Miraculous Mandarin before (a couple of times, actually.) This is relatively long at an advertised 45 minutes (a bit longer in actuality). We were quite pleasantly surprised that the libretto (per the New York Times, the original scenario of Balazs) was displayed as the music was played, so we could clearly correlate the action in the orchestra with what we could imagine was going on. I can see how a creative choreographer can then turn this into movements, a stage designer to sketch out the scenery, and the director to put the ballet together. The downside is the words illustrate how silly the story is (“contorted” is the word used in the Program Notes.) Since most of my jet-lagged brain was used to imagine the scenes and dance movements, not enough was left to appreciate or analyze the music itself. Overall though, I didn’t come away very satisfied as I kept telling myself it was a stupid story.

So tonight’s was a program that had a potential to be of great appeal but ended up not living up to that potential. Using my newly coined analogy in comparing disappointing meals with disappointing music performances, this is better than a disappointing meal.

Anne and I both thought the applause at the conclusion was only lukewarm. The New York Times review was very positive. Naturally, as this is a publication that would have liked Robertson to be the successor to Maazel.

Opera Australia – Puccini’s Tosca. February 16, 2010.

Opera Theatre, Sydney Opera House, Circle (Seat N25, A$105).

Story: See earlier post.

Conductor – Tom Woods; Tosca – Nicole Youl, Cavaradossi – Carlo Barricelli, Scarpia – John Wegner.

Six of us went to see this show: Anne & me, Steven & Ruth, Tim & Alyson. We had the exact same seats as the last show, and again there were quite a few empty seats in the circle. This time the usher invited us to move up front, so we watched the entire show in seats in Row L. At a price difference of about $40 per ticket, we can tell ourselves we saved $240!

Anne had been reading several write-ups on the production. “Raw” seems to be the term used most often. I expected a graphic rape scene. The show did depict a more explicit sex act (Scarpia in his boxer shorts and Tosca in her slip), but the word raw more aptly describes the dreamlike state the director wants to produce but unfortunately by-and-large fails to accomplish. More on this later.

The opera didn’t start too auspiciously with Cavaradossi’s tentative singing of the first aria (Recondita armonia). After hearing a couple of his missed notes, I was worried how he was going to last the entire opera. A good thing it was probably a case of the nerves since he improved as the show went on. Nonetheless, Barricelli’s overall performance was not that impressive. Interesting, this was the aria that got most applause afterwards. Australians are not into interrupting with applause, but tonight the reluctance was particularly evident. Could it also be due to their not quite knowing what was going on, or their displeasure?

One moral of the opera is that bad things happen to otherwise ordinary people. Even though we knew things were brewing as Cavaradossi was trying to hide a fugitive, the show began innocuous enough: two people in love with the requisite jealousy shown by Tosca. This show did that quite well.

Youl as Tosca in general has a strong voice that carried well. However, the rendition of “Vissi d’arte, vissi d’amore” was quite weak, a pity since this for most is the highlight of the opera. Since we were seated quite far back, I didn’t have a good look of Tosca, thus the strongest impression I got was that she was quite overweight. I worried that she would trip or collapse the chair she was standing on. Okay overall, but certainly not great.

Scarpia was played quite brilliantly by Wegner. It probably isn’t difficult to get the audience to hate you as Scarpia, and he succeeded brilliantly.

Act III was particularly “interesting,” although - in my opinion and that of others in our group – not in a good sort of way. Instead of things happening in real time, what we had was a fantasy (or dream) sequence experienced by Tosca before she herself was executed by a shot in the head. The director felt the need to explain this in the Program Notes, but the synopsis still carried the traditional story, so I think many in the audience got quite confused. It took me a while to understand how the story was being told. The effect just seemed half-hearted and amateurish. Perhaps the use of a projection screen to display various images (a la Met’s Damnation of Faust), more eerie lighting, and other effects can help make it more of a fantasy sequence.

I don’t understand the need to do things of this sort. The story is compelling enough and in any case should stand or fall on its own merits rather than with the help of people who think they know better. The director’s notes also talks about many bodies strewn on stage, which turned out to be an exaggeration: we have the (fake) body of Angelotti, his sister who may or may not be dead (who is actually a shepherd boy in the “original,” and why is she up on top of the cupboard?), Scarpia, and Cavaradossi. Using the basement of a church for the entire opera also didn’t work that well. As we saw on Saturday in Manon, Opera Australia is certainly capable of making elaborate scene changes professionally, so staying with one scene was not needed. One more head-scratching thing was this TV that kept playing in the room next to the basement.

I saw Tosca a few years back with the NYC Opera and enjoyed it tremendously. This doesn’t nearly measure up in terms of the total experience. Indeed I can’t think of any aspect of tonight’s performance that measures up. We are talking NYC Opera, not the Met, although that was one of the better performances I have seen of NYC Opera.

What I said about Manon applies here also: despite my misgivings, I enjoyed the opera. Another observation: a disappointing opera is usually better than a disappointing meal. Earlier the week we had the experience of eating a A$75 two-course lunch at the Quay, that’s when I discovered this way to describe a disappointing meal not worth the money. Pretty clever, if I may say so myself.

Opera Australia – Massenet’s Manon. February 13, 2010.

Opera Theatre, Sydney Opera House, Circle (Seat N25, A$115).

Story. Manon, on her way to a convent, is persuaded by Des Grieux to run off with him to Paris. They are eventually tracked down by Manon’s nephew Lescaut and admirer De Bretigny. They tell Manon Des Grieux will be kidnapped by his father who disapproves of their relationship, and De Bretigny promises Manon a life of luxury. Manon chooses not to warn Des Grieux and goes to De Bretigny. Des Grieux intends to become a monk at St. Sulpice. Manon goes to visit him and persuades Des Grieux to abandon his vows and rejoin her. When Des Grieux runs out of money he inherited from his mother, Manon gets him to gamble agains Guillot de Morfontaine. Guillot de Morfontaine accuses Des Grieux and Manon of cheating and calls the police on them. Des Grieux is saved by his father, but Manon is detained. On her way to deportation to the colonies, Manon is rescued by her cousin Lescaut who bribes a guard. She reunites with Des Grieux but dies in his arms.

Conductor – Emmanuel Plasson; Guillot de Morfontaine – Kanen Breen, De Bretigny – Richard Anderson, Manon – Amelia Farrugia, Le Chevalier Des Grieux – Julian Gavin.

We were hoping to eat a reasonable dinner before seeing this opera. Unfortunately I woke up from my (jet-lag) nap a bit too late, so we had to rush to the Opera House and gulped down a meat pie and a sausage roll (between the two of us) in a hurry. I did get a whopper afterwards though.

There were quite a few empty seats in the hall, which was surprising as all the other operas I attended at the Opera House were quite full. In fact we moved up three rows after the intermission. I wonder if it is the economy (supposedly Australia has a very low unemployment rate), the time (Saturday evening), or the relatively obscurity of the Opera (relatively well-known, but who knows, after all this is the first time I see it.)

The sets are quite elaborate. There are quite a few changes in scenery, all done efficiently and quietly.

Both lead players (Manon and Des Grieux) have great voices. However, most of the time they seem to need to belt out their lines. There were a few exceptions in Manon’s case, so we know she can capture the audience with soft high notes, but somehow she doesn’t do it enough (in my opinion, many passages call for it.) Even seated in the second to last row in the theater, we could hear the singers very well. Either the place has great acoustics, or they have some sound enhancement system at work. Local write-ups seem to say Farrugia is an up and coming Australian singer; and I can see that.

The story must be well-known enough that at least a couple of operas have been written based on the play. However, what we see during the opera doesn’t quite hang together well enough to get complete audience engagement. As I put it, “a lot of things are happening offstage.” Or there just not enough time to develop the characters so one can understand why they do the things they do. Also, there is quite a bit of parallel between Manon and Violetta of La Traviata. Both are pleasure-seeking women (although Manon isn’t a courtesan, even though she is accused as such), both leading men have fathers that don’t approve of the relationship, and both women end up dying. The death scene in Manon is a bit drawn out, and since there is not a lot of emotional investment in the character by the audience, I am sure many in the audience would say “just die already.”

Despite my misgivings, I enjoyed the performance.

Metropolitan Opera – Strauss’s Ariadne auf Naxos. February 4, 2010.

Metropolitan Opera at Lincoln Center – Dress Circle Seat D106 ($97.50).

Story. This opera has a very interesting structure, a prolog and an opera in one act. The prolog is comic. The richest man in Vienna engages an opera company and a comedy troupe to perform at his house. He eventually changes his mind and wants the abridged versions of the performances performed together so he can start the fireworks celebration in time. This gets both companies upset, with everyone suggesting the others’ parts be cut. The opera is mostly serious, with a bit of comedy thrown in. Ariadne is abandoned by her long-time lover Theseus on an island, and wishes for Hermes the god of death. Instead another god Bacchus shows up in a ship. Ariadne first thinks he is Hermes, then Theseus, and finally realizes he is someone else. After some soul-searching, she joins Bacchus and ascends to heaven. During Ariadne’s internal struggle, Zerbinetta from the comedy troupe shows up and tells her she should move on.

Conductor – Kirill Petrenko; The Composer – Sarah Connolly, Bacchus/The Tenor – Michael Hendrick, Zerbinetta – Kathleen Kim, Ariadne/The Prima Donna – Nina Stemme.

Last week (I am writing this on Sunday) was restaurant week in New York. We booked ourselves into Ed’s Chowder House in the Empire Hotel across from Lincoln Center. At $35 per person for a 3-course meal it sounded like a bargain. Anne had the cod cakes, risotto, and apple crumbs; I had the clam chowder soup, skate, and apple crumbs. With a bottle of sparkling water and one decaf coffee total bill came to about $90, before gratuities. Not a bad meal – and we were full – but these limited menu items tend not to be the most exciting offerings from the restaurant; we are not tempted to go back and pay (say) $60 per person for a regular meal. We were in the back room with two other large parties, and it got quite noisy even though they were all women (except for one lucky/unlucky guy). Another couple asked to be reseated which the restaurant was happy to oblige. The service actually was quite good.

Back to the opera. In theory the structure of talking about how operas are put out and description of behind-the-scenes action can result in an interesting experience for the audience. I am not sure this worked out very well, though. The story of Ariadne itself is quite serious, but the fact that we know it is just a show detracts from one’s emotional involvement; unfortunately you don’t think you should laugh either, so you sit there just trying to enjoy the music.

The set for the prolog is quite interesting, the lower half is where the actors and singers go about their business of chatting and arguing, the upper left quadrant is a staircase of the castle, and the upper right quadrant is the stage at the castle, looking into the audience. So you get to set the actors from the back and realize instead of being on stilts, the actor is actually standing on a platform. This helps explain how the three women singers move around on stage. The set for the opera itself is relatively simple, although by raising and lowering different curtains it produces a very pleasing effect.

Both Ariadne and Zerbinetta sang very well. They both have long and challenges passages in the opera, and both got well-deserved applauses from the audience (usually not done with German operas.) Ariadne has a more mature voice. Kathleen Kim looks to be quite young. She had her Met debut in 2007, and for this season is playing three rather important roles (this, Papagena in The Magic Flute, and Olympia in The Tales of Hoffman. Must be one of the upcoming superstars. The tenor originally scheduled to sing the role of Bacchus was sick, and his substitute had a cold but tried to perform nonetheless. It was a painful sight to see him struggle with the higher notes. Perhaps we can’t fault anyone for this happening, but it is still a pity. The role of the young composer was sung by a woman, which confuses me to no end.

There was a sex scene that was a bit crude and I’m sure made many in the audience uncomfortable. And I am not sure the opera needs it. Many people sitting close to us were looking into the box area where members of the Opera Guild sit. These are all people who contribute substantially to the Met and they make sure people know that by dressing in tuxedos and fancy dresses. There was a lady that everyone was sure had a lot of plastic surgery, and she wore a dress with a wide sash that had to be pinned to her bottom. I am sure she’s glad all her surgery expenses are paying off, at least as far as being noticed goes. Good thing an opera crowd never gets too mean.

I have seen three Strauss operas (Capriccio and Helen of Egypt are the other two) and fail to see heads or tails with any of them. There are always some better known ones that I should see so I will appreciate Strauss as an opera composer. These would be Salome, Der Rosenkavalier, and Die Frau ohne Schatten. Well, I’m not so sure I’ll ever get to that point …

Oh, falling asleep during the show didn’t help either. I woke up early that day, and had a relatively heavy dinner. At least I didn’t snore like the lady next to me. This was one of the least attended Met performances I have been to, both sides of the dress circle were not occupied. We didn’t see them trying to sell half price tickets, though.

The New York Times reviewer saw the same performance. He says Hendrick is an experience Bacchus, so it is really too bad he had the cold. And the reviewer is quite forgiving and is particularly impressed with Stemme's singing. Nonetheless, his overall grade for the opera is about the same as mine.

New York City Ballet – Tschaikovsky’s The Sleeping Beauty, January 29, 2010.

David H. Koch Theater at Lincoln Center – Second Ring Right, Seat BB26 ($47).

Conductor – Clotilde Otranto; The Lilac Fairy – Teresa Reichlen, The Fairy Carabosse – Jenifer Ringer, Princess Aurora – Sterling Hyltin, Prince Desire – Jonathan Stafford.

Story: At the christening of Princess Aurora, various fairies came to give their blessings. Carabosse, who isn’t invited, barges in an puts a curse on the Princess: she will prick her finger on a spindle on her 16th birthday and die. Lilac counters that curse and says Aurora will only fall asleep and will be awakened by the kiss of a loving prince. Thus it happens on Aurora’s 16th birthday, when the spindle is given to Aurora hidden in a bouquet by Carabosse. She and the rest of the court falls asleep for 100 years. Prince Desire is alone during a hunt, and Lilac shows up and tells him to rescue Aurora. He kisses her, she and the court all wake up, and Aurora and Desire get married.

Ellie was in town for the weekend from San Francisco, so we (Ellie, Kuau, Anne and myself) took advantage of the Goldstar discount to see this ballet. We gulped down a pizza before we headed off to the train station. It was a very cold day, but we weren’t outside for too long.

One thing I forgot to mention in my last entry was that the Koch Theater had just undergone an extensive renovation costing in the neighborhood of $50M; “extensive” probably is a better description. The seats and the bathrooms look new, and that’s about it. Perhaps they did something about the acoustics, sound, and lighting system; but I would be hard-pressed to point out any differences. To be fair, I have seen only two ballets since the renovation was completed, so I may not be in a great position to comment on the improvements, or lack thereof. Perhaps each seat costs $10,000, otherwise I don’t know where they spent the money. The seats are nice, but not nearly that nice!

Which brings me to the music. Today’s orchestra performance didn’t sound nearly as exciting as last time (Prokofiev’s Romeo and Juliet.) In fact it was lackluster during Act I Scene 1; the performance improved as the show progressed, but overall it was timid, lacking in dynamic range and emotion, and surprisingly un-romantic for Tchaikovsky. The Sleeping Beauty is one of the composer’s better known pieces and there are some familiar melodies, I wonder what a great performance (with or without the dancers) would sound like.

Perhaps I shouldn’t expect too much drama in the ballet. The story is well-known, and straightforward. The ballet, in my opinion, was written to showcase the ability and artistry of the dancers. Unfortunately I look for drama where there isn’t much, and thus am deservedly disappointed. There are many instances where different dancers would come out and do their number (e.g., different fairies blessing Princess Aurora.) Enjoyable if you appreciate ballet dancing, boring if you want the story to move forward. Actually the choreographer seems to want to imbue each of the fairies with a distinct character, which reminds me of what Wagner did with the various “hildas” in the Ring operas. This would be something only an avid fan would notice, or care about.

There are some light moments provided by little riding hood and the big bad wolf. I don’t know how that fits into the story, and wonder if this is what Tchaikovsky (or whoever did this in the original libretto) had the roles written as such.

The dancers seemed to put on a better performance than Romeo and Juliet, though. The choreography isn’t as athletic as Romeo and Juliet, and sometimes the movements seemed a little rushed. There were a few instances the dancers failed to “nailed the landing,” to borrow a phrase from gymnastics.

I have seen three of Tchaikovsky’s ballets (Nutcracker, Swan Lake, and Sleeping Beauty). Of the three, Swan Lake is most enjoyable. This show certainly hasn’t made me a fan of the genre, though.

New York City Ballet – Prokofiev’s Romeo and Juliet, January 21, 2010.

David H. Koch Theater at Lincoln Center – Second Ring Right, Seat D12 ($47).

Conductor – Faycal Karoui; Juliet – Kathryn Morgan, Romeo – Robert Fairchild, Mercutio – Daniel Ulbricht, Benvolio – Antonio Carmena, Tybalt – Joaquin De Luz, Nurse – Georgina Pazcoguin, Lady Capulet – Darci Kistler, Lord Capulet – Jock Soto, Paris – Adrian Danchig-Waring.

Story: See previous blog.

I bought these tickets through Goldstar at about ½ price. It ended up costing $54.50 per ticket including service charges, which is a good deal. I then found out I had seen this performance before, in early 2008! Nonetheless, we decided to see the show again.

The set looked familiar, much of the music (except a couple of familiar tunes) sounded new, and the story was basically as I remembered it. The set was at first glance an unremarkable center piece that turns into different sceneries called for by the story: house, courtyard, church, tomb, bedroom, etc. It certainly looked simple, but I wonder if the design had to be very clever to accommodate all the different settings. The music is enjoyable, especially the passages that contain familiar tunes. I said many times Prokofiev’s music needs many hearings to grow on me, but this is an exception. The music would be great by itself played by a competent orchestra. Tonight the orchestra was very competent.

At the beginning of the performance the announcer said there would be a substitute for Romeo. This must be difficult to do as there must be a lot of coordination between the particular dancers. I am sure the substitute (standby, understudy, whatever) hadn’t had enough real practice to do the performance well. But I would be hard-pressed to point to any instance where Romeo messed up. It may well be I don’t know what to look for as I am an inexperienced ballet goer.

Kathryn Morgan, who played Juliet, looked very young. Actually she doesn’t appear on the roster as a principal dancer. I thought her performance was good also. The nanny provided some light moments in the otherwise serious story.

Overall, though, this performance didn’t elicit as much an emotion response as the one I saw a couple of years ago. Is it familiarity, or is it because there is a difference in caliber? I can’t tell.

We drove into town mid-afternoon and stopped by the New York Boat Show held at the Javits Center for 90 minutes or so. The show was much scaled down compared to prior ones, a reflection on the economy and how poorly the boat industry is doing, no doubt. We then went to Korean town and had dinner at Wo Jon Restaurant before seeing the show.

The New York Times review (different dancers) is nearly as brutal as the one from two years ago. After reading it, I realized Fairchild has the role of Romeo for other performances during the season, and thus was quite familiar with what needed to be done.

New York Philharmonic – Alan Gilbert, conductor; Yefim Bronfman, piano. January 8, 2010.

Avery Fisher Hall at Lincoln Center, First Tier Center (Seat BB11, $59).

Program
Piano Concerto No. 2 in G minor, Op. 16 (1912-13/1924) by Prokofiev (1891-1953).
Symphony No. 2 in E minor, Op. 27 (1906-08) by Rachmaninoff (1873-1943).

Chung Shu drove us into New York. It took us more than 90 minutes to get to Lincoln Tunnel from our house, so we were quite surprised to see how empty the city looked when we exited the tunnel. Except for a long line of buses, there were very few cars on the road. We grabbed a quick dinner at Ollie’s before the concert.

After an exciting beginning, the first movement (Andantino – Allegretto - Andantino) of the Prokofiev concerto became a bit non-descriptively for me so I had to make sure I didn’t doze off. But that was only for a short while; I was riveted through the rest of the piece. The pianist soon launched into a long solo/cadenza passage and was eventually joined by the orchestra to finish the movement. The second movement is marked Scherzo (Scherzo: Vivace) but it was more like a virtuoso piece for the pianist that was brilliant but not necessarily humorous. The duet with the clarinet was fascinating both technically and contrapuntally. The clarinet was played by an Asian gentleman that we had not seen before; and we couldn’t find any Asian clarinetist in the orchestra roster. In any case, he was congratulated by the principal bassoonist after he was done; many in the audience undoubtedly breathed a sign of relief and admiration. The third moment, called an intermezzo (Intermezzo: Allegro moderato), is nothing like an intermezzo Brahms would have written. It was more like a march. The fourth movement (Finale: Allegro tempestoso) brought the performance to a climatic conclusion. The audience showed their appreciation with a prolonged applause; Bronfman came out several times.

I like Prokofiev, but usually only after I have heard a piece several times since his music is a bit “deep” for me to appreciate upon first hearing. This is an exception. Perhaps it’s because he wrote it when he was only 21 and thus had not developed his complex structures yet? Believe me, the piece is complex enough.

Several other interesting facts. The music was destroyed in a fire while Prokofiev was overseas, and he rewrote it from his memory and sketches more than ten years later. So this may or may not be close to the “original.” Indeed Prokofiev claimed he had incorporated new material in the work. Like Ravel, Prokofiev wasn’t sure he could play his only composition either, but he managed to do it, to mixed reviews, though.

Rachmaninoff only predated Prokofiev by about 12 years, but his music was still basically romantic. The program notes thinks this Symphony can be considered the last grand romantic symphony. It is a bit long at 58 minutes.

The negative reception to Rachmaninoff’s first symphony was so poor that he needed a psychologist and hypnosis to get him back into composing. Evidently he had great counselors as the second symphony is a beautiful piece of music. The orchestration is such that the sounds are very rich, and the melodies are very pleasant.

The tempo markings for the first two movements are Largo – Allegro moderato and Allegro molto – Meno mosso – Tempo I. The third movement (Adagio) is very familiar. Again the clarinet played an important role. The melody is very singable, melancholic, and has a yearning quality to it. Many symphonies have slow movements that may be nice but are not exceptional compared to other movements. Notable exceptions are Beethoven’s Seventh, Mahler’s Fifth, and this one.

Interestingly, the theme from the third movement was used again in the last movement (Allegro vivace – Adagio – Tempo precedente). Perhaps Rachmaninoff liked it very much and wanted to hear it again himself!

Alan Gilbert notes in the Program that the pieces were written by Russian composers and the soloist is from Russia, and that the audience would enjoy the evening. (Bronfman was born in Russia and moved to Israel in 1973.) He was absolutely right, tonight ranks as one of the most enjoyable concerts I have been to. I left very happy. It was a very cold night (below freezing, and windy); if we had some snow, it would have been a perfect Moscow winter evening.

Just as I was beginning to doubt how Gilbert would work out as the music director, we have this performance which must be very reassuring to his supporters.

The New York Times review is all-positive. It is unfortunate the reviewer feels the need to implicitly criticize Gilbert's predecessor.

Cirque du Soleil - Wintuk. January 2, 2010.

Madison Square Garden. Section 203 (Seat X10, $72.50).

This is supposed to be a half price offer from New York Times (full price $110), however, after adding the convenience and facility fees, we ended up paying $72.50 for each ticket; plus an order handling charge.

Ellie & Kuau saw a couple of Cirque shows when they were in Las Vegas, and they like it. Anne & I only attempted to go once (in Orlando) but the show we wanted to see was sold out.

The stage was bigger than I thought, and there were only six live musicians who managed to produce a rich sound. I know there was some pre-recorded music (e.g., during curtain call) but wonder if they used any during the show. However, the music was pretty lame.

We saw Varekai on DVD a couple of days before this show, which set our expectations somewhat in terms of staging and the acrobatics involved. Wintuk didn't quite live up to Varekai on either count. For one, there were not too mnay high-wire acts, one reason is that the clearance on the stage is quite low. The closest they came to a high wire act were two ladies hanging from ropes. There are some acts that are quite difficult, including juggling with 8 tennis balls, rag doll, and bicycle dances. No being experience circus (or whatever) goers, we sometimes had trouble finding where the "act" was. With a DVD recording the producer makes sure the acts are front and center.

There is a bit more of a story in Wintuk than Varekai. The concept is similar to The Nutcracker in that the principals are transported to a fantasy land where various dream-like acts take place.

While this kind of show doesn't appeal to me, I have to marvel at the creativity that brings this about, the technical challenges to put it together, and the doubtless hours of rehearsal that result in a performance with very few mistakes.

A show that is probably okay at 1/2 price. Nonetheless, I am not sure how eager I am to see another one.

New York Philharmonic – Esa-Pekka Salonen, conductor; David Fray, piano. December 4, 2009.

Avery Fisher Hall at Lincoln Center, First Tier Center (Seat BB13, $59).

Program
Music for Strings, Percussion, and Celesta, BB114 (1936) by Bartok (1881-1945).
Piano Concerto in G major (1929-31) by Ravel (1876-1937).
La Mer: Trois esquisses symphoniques (The Sea: Three Symphonic Sketches) (1903-05; rev. 1910) by Debussy (1862-1918).

I usually enjoy Bartok’s music, so I was looking at today’s performance with some anticipation. The Program Notes talks about Bartok’s meticulous instructions on how the orchestra should be organized, and that there are to be two separate string sections; this only adds to the intrigue. Indeed Dicterow and Maples are seated on opposite ends of the stage. I am sure there are more string players than usual (although I didn’t do a count.)

This is a piece written for strings, percussion, and celesta. There is also a piano on board. Given the relative sizes of the instruments, and the frequency at which the piano came in, I am surprised it didn’t get equal billing.

The music is in four movements, basically slow-fast-slow-fast. [Andante tranquillo; Allegro; Adagio; Allegro molto.] The slow sections sounded very flat, the fast sections were much more exciting. Not too many melodies (even for Bartok) to speak of. There were several passages that had considerable flourish, but didn’t quite make up for the overall lack of excitement.

We had a chance to hear Ravel’s Concerto several months ago, played by Uchida with Muti conducting. But we were caught in traffic in Jersey City and missed the first part of the concert. Given how recently we heard the Debussy piece (later in the program), there is this distinct feeling that the New York Philharmonic is recycling its program at an alarming pace. Say it ain’t so.

Anyway, David Fray is a young French pianist (not quite 30 years old) that somehow got to be a rather hot commodity. The Program Notes didn’t talk about any major competitions that he won, or he had a breakthrough performance as a last minute substitute. So it is a bit surprising how he got to be part of the subscription series. Interestingly, he used a “regular” chair with a back, rather than one of these leather-clad piano benches. Too young to have a weak back, and his arms don’t look that long that he can do the whole keyboard sitting in place.

The first movement (Allegramente) starts with the piano accompanying the orchestra by a lot of glissandos, which is quite pleasing to the ear. Nonetheless, it didn’t generate the excitement one would get from (say) Lang Lang playing a Rachmaninoff Piano Concerto. Interestingly, the Basque theme at the beginning of the movement sounded very oriental to me. The second movement (Adagio assai) has the English Horn playing a rather long duet with the soloist. And there are a lot of hand crossovers that make both for an interesting sight and an interesting sound. The third movement (Presto) is again fast, and Fray manages to play the entire chromatic range without leaving his chair.

Ravel himself was a pianist, and he wanted to retract his dedication of the piece to Marguerite Long so he could do the premiere himself. At the end, Long performed the premiere because of Ravel’s health and scheduling issues (not enough time to practice his own composition, evidently.) The Program Notes also say Ravel started Conservatory as a piano student but was asked to withdraw because he wasn’t deemed to have enough panache to be an outstanding concert pianist. I am being harsh here, but these words seem to describe David Fray quite well. His technique and sound seem very good, but somehow one doesn’t get much spirit from the performance.

By some account Lar Mer is one of Debussy’s two best know orchestral compositions. The other one is The Fawn Afternoon which we heard the Boston Symphony Orchestra play last week in Symphony Hall. I heard La Mer at New York Philharmonic not too long ago, and had to admit that I couldn’t quite make heads or tails from it. Today it was much better though. Although I don’t think the composition evokes the sea as much as Wagner’s The Flying Dutchman (the overture is still one of the best seascapes I have heard), one can definitely tell how the music is painting the pictures.

The three sketches are: From Dawn till Noon on the Sea; Play of the Waves; and Dialogue of the Wind and the Sea.

When I lived in Los Angeles in the early 2000s, Salonen was the conductor of Los Angeles Symphony, so I am sure I heard him conduct several times, although I don’t remember any particular concert. We had a chance to hear him a couple of years ago but he had to withdraw because of health reasons. Today’s performance was overall a bit flat for me. The applause from the audience, enthusiastic at times, wasn’t sustained.

It was basically a simple trip for us to make via New Jersey Transit. Today still turns out to be a full day as we had to catch a 6:15 pm flight to San Francisco. I am actually en-route as I type (most of) this review.

The New York Times reviewer loved the conductor and the solosist. Actually it is one of the least negative reviews (not quite the same as the most positive) I have read in that paper.

Metropolitan Opera – Puccini’s Il Trittico. December 1, 2009.

Metropolitan Opera at Lincoln Center – Grand Tier Seat G13 ($102.50).

Story – Il Tabarro. Setting: Paris 1927. After their son dies, Giorgetta grows apart from her husband Michele and has an affair with Luigi. When Luigi rushes to the barge, mistakenly thinking it is a signal from Giorgetta, Michele kills him. When Giorgetta comes on deck of the barge, Michele reveals the dead body to her.
Story – Suor Angelica. Setting: Tuscany 1938. Angelica is banished by her family to a convent after she gave birth to an illegitimate child. After seven years, her aunt comes to visit to settle the estate of Angelica’s parents. She also tells Angelica that her son died two years ago. Angelica, overcome with grief, commits suicide. After she ingests the poison, she prays that her mortal sin be forgiven. Her child welcomes her to heaven.
Story – Gianni Schicchi. Setting: Florence 1959. The wealthy Buoso Donati dies and his relatives retains Schicchi to try to get at the inheritance. Schicchi’s daughter Lauretta is in love with Rinuccio, one of the relatives. Schicchi pretends to be the dead man and has the will rewritten, in the process also benefitting himself.

Conductor – Stefano Ranzani.
Cast Il Tabarro: Giorgetta – Patricia Racette, Michele – Reljko Lucic, Luigi – Aleksandrs Antonenko.
Cast Suor Angelica: Angelica – Patricia Racette, The Princess – Stephanie Blythe.
Cast Gianni Schicchi: Zita – Stephanie Blythe, Rinuccio – Saimir Pirgu, Gianni Schicchi – Alessandro Corbelli, Lauretta – Patricia Racette.

It took me a while to realize that Il Trittico has something to do with the number “three”. Indeed tonight’s performance comprises of three one-hour one-act operas with half-hour intermissions in between.

Patricia Racette, whom we see for the first time, sings in all three operas. This, per the Program Notes, isn’t done all that often. That may explain why the intermissions are that long as she probably needs the time to rest her voice. Not being a singer, I don’t know how difficult the singing roles are. Certainly she does a lot of it during Suor Angelica. Her role in Gianni Schicchi is quite limited, though, even though she has one of the most famous arias in opera: the short “O mio babbino caro.” I am sure Isolde’s role is much more demanding. Nonetheless, she manages to fill the roles well.

Stephanie Blythe, a mezzo-soprano, whom we have seen quite a few times (recently in Rusalka and the Ring cycle), did an excellent job. She has a great voice but is usually limited to secondary roles, undoubtedly due to her voice range and her weight. One wonders how far she could go if she shed some weight.

Somehow all the women singers are American-born while the men singers, and the conductor, are Europeans, many from Eastern Europe. I wonder whether that reflects on the state of American Opera talent.

The sets are all quite impressive. With Il Tabarro it is a large barge on the River Seine; the setting for Suor Angelica is the courtyard of a convent; for Gianni Schicchi it is the bedroom of Buoso Donati. From where we were sitting, they looked extremely well-done with great details. I find how the crest on the wall of the convent very interesting: it morphs from a painting to a three-dimensional statue. Towards the end of Gianni Schicchi, the entire bedroom drops to reveal a garden overlooking Florence. While it is quite impressive, one wonders if it is too much for the last several minutes of the program.

The Program Notes says that many consider Suor Angelica the weakest of the three operas. The story, however, is most compelling. Gianni Schicchi is a comedy, and is one of the few that works for me. Even though we know how the story is going to end, the acting still makes it funny to watch. Despite the Program Notes claim that the three operas together will give the audience a unique experience, I am not sure how.

Puccini died in 1924, and all these operas have settings that are dated after his death. I wonder why; and the Program Notes doesn’t seem to mention it. Out of the three hours of performance, there is only one aria that is easily singable, which is a pity in my opinion. There are some very atonal passages that I wonder if the singers are at the correct pitch. The applause during and after the show is surprising reserved; the fact that the show concluded close to midnight definitedly contributed. Also, there were quite a few empty seats. Perhaps weekdays crowds are different?

We were a little worried about driving into the city during the holiday period. The traffic reports were not encouraging. We left a little after 5 (for an 8 pm start), taking the Holland Tunnel. It wasn’t too bad, and the trip home was quick – we got home at 12:45 am.

The New York Times review is quite favorable. The reviewer also thinks Racette resonates well with Angelica.

Boston Symphony - Yan Pascal Tortelia, conductor; Joshua Bell, violin. November 28, 2009.

Symphony Hall, Second Balcony Center (Seat E32, $57.50).

Program
Prelude to The Afternoon of a Faun (1894) by Claude Debussy (1862-1918).
Ballet Suite from The Firebird (1945 version) by Igor Stravinsky (1882-1971).
Violin Concerto in D, Opus 77 (1878-1879) by Johannes Brahms (1833-1897).

[Note: I am jotting down my thoughts on the concert now, and will add in more information about the program later. Done 12/3/2009.]

Anne & I were made aware of this concerto by Joe who attended it on Tuesday together with Jessica and her family. Turns out we didn't have much to do during this Thanksgiving trip anyway, and there were still some tickets that were reasonably priced.

This is the first "real" concert we attended at Symphony Hall (I recall seeing the Boston Pops and the Von Trapp Singers). The main floor was configured in a traditional way (rows of seats). Although the auditorium looked small, I estimated it could still hold close to 3000 people, and attendance tonight was very good.

We were able to find street parking with enough time left on the meter until 8 pm (beginning of concert). Be thankful of small things: in this case it saved us considerable time looking for parking and $12.

The conductor was a last minute stand-in for Sir Andrew Davis (who apparently isn't related to the other famous British conductor Sir Colin Davis). I had never heard of him. He must be over 60 and conducted quite energetically, without a baton. He didn't need the music for the Debussy and Stravinsky pieces, but needed it for the Brahms. A bit odd considering he is a violinist himself.

The Debussy piece was quite pleasant despite the tentative beginning by the flutist (Elizabeth Rowe). I don't know how to judge a piece like this except it felt soothing. Debussy is in general easy to like, and this is one of his more well-known pieces.

I am still not very familiar with The Firebird Suite. The last time I heard it was in April 2008 with Leonard Slatkin conducting the New York Philharmonic. The version played today supposedly had two movements that were cut out in other versions. In any case, there were twenty or so minutes of rather quiet music followed by a sudden awakening with ensuing (enjoyable) chaos for fifteen or so minutes. Quite a few fell into the trap of thinking the piece ended after the first flourish, only to be embarrassed when they found out others were not applauding. The conductor seemed extremely energetic despite his age, and in general I thought the orchestra responded very well.

The concertmaster didn't show up after the intermission as the orchestra prepared for the Brahms Violin Concerto; the assistant principal sat in "his" chair instead. This is similar to the practice we observe regularly with the New York Philharmonic. Right now my guess is it's done in deference to the soloist, even though I can't imagine why that would be the case.

We heard Joshua Bell about six months ago in New York playing Saint-Saen's Third Violin Concerto; and the Brahms Violin Concerto played by Frank Zimmerman a couple of months ago. I also enjoyed this performance. The Cadenza was written by Bell himself, and it is a showcase of his virtuosity (what else would it be) with a proliferation of harmonics and left-hand pizzicatos. Although I find nothing wrong with the usual Candenza (by Joachim?). The violin sounded weak during the last movement, though. I assume it is a Strad.

After several curtain calls, Bell joked he wasn't going to do Bach. Instead he played a piece based on "Yankee Doodle Dandy." Perhaps appropriate for Boston (at least the Boston of 200 years ago). In any case, reminds me of Zimmerman playing variations on "My Country Tis of Thee." While he seemed to have fun with it, the piece actually is a very difficult technical exercise.

The Firebird Suite (1945 version) consists of (i) Introduction, (ii) Prelude and Dance of the Firebird, (iii) Variations (Firebird); (iv) Pantomime I; (v) Pas de deux: Firebird and Ivan Tsarevich; (vi) Pantomime II; (vii) Scherzo: Dance of the Princesses; (viii) Pantomime III; (ix) Rondo (Khorovod); (x) Infernal Dance; (xi) Lullaby (Firebird); and (xii) Final Hymn. Indeed the "movements" listed here are different from the one I heard before. The three movements of the Violin Concerto are Allegro non troppo, Adagio, and Allegro giocoso, ma non troppo vivace.

Before I went to the concert, Jessica said she had read a review at boston.com that had two points: Tortelia didn't work well as the conductor, and the reviewer liked Bell's Cadenza. My immediate reaction was that it was a lazy review given what I knew. Of course one would expect some miscues, especially if the conductor is the "leading the beat" type (and turns out Tortelia is), and the Cadenza being unusal would make it easy to make intelligent remarks about it. Also, an orchestra like the BSO can do quite well without a conductor, and it certainly would not suffer much because of unfamiliarlity with the guest. I think that assessment is by-and-large correct. It was a light-weight review.

New York Philharmonic - Alan Gilbert, conductor; Emmanuel Ax, piano. October 3, 2009.

Avery Fisher Hall at Lincoln Center, First Tier Center (Seat CC9, $61).

Program
EXPO (2009) by Magnus Lindberg (b. 1958).
Symphony No. 2 (ca. 1900-02?; rev. ca. 1907-10) by Ives (1874-1954).
The Unanswered Question (1906 - ca. 1941) by Ives.
Piano Concerto No. 4 in G major, Op. 58 (1806) by Beethoven (1770-1827).

We went to this concert with Chung Shu and Shirley. Ate at Josephina's at Lincoln Square, reasonably good food (I had the scallops) but a bit slow; we had only time for the main course.

The piece by Lindberg was commissioned by New York Philharmonic. The piece is about 9 minutes long, and the program notes took longer than that to read. Lindberg is a Finnish composer, a contemporary of Esa-Pekka Salonen, and can trace his academic lineage to Sibelius. Supposedly he went through a phase of writing very complex music but now is back to "simpler" music. Gilbert and he had a 10- or so minute dialog at the beginning demonstrating what harmony and melody meant in the Lindberg context. Frankly it was a bit uninteresting despite being different from the first two concerts as Gilbert didn't want to rest on his laurels. I suspect he hasn't quite found his groove in this opening dialog business yet. In any case, the piece didn't sound too complicated, nor was it memorable. There were - as advertised - many tempo changes.

I don't recall having heard any of Charles Ives' work before. And I suspect in short order I will forget that I have ever heard him either. I guess he was an "all-American" composer, went to Yale, was a successful insurance agent, and had so much reservations about his own work in that he would eventually break his promise about going to the premiere performance of his Second Symphony even though it was played by the New York Philharmonic with Leonard Bernstein conducting in Carnegie Hall. It also explains why the dates of his composition are so uncertain since he often put his work-in-progress aside for a long time.

The Symphony has five tempo markings: Andante moderato; Allegro; Adagio cantabile; Lento (maestoso); and Allegro molto vivace. However, I could sense only two distinct breaks in the 35 minute work. The first movement started melodically and gently, but spent most of the next 20 or so minutes drifting. During the last 15 or so seconds the music came to life, but it wasn't enough to salvage the performance to that point. Uncharacteristically the audience applauded: not your oops I goofed type applause but a rather sustained one. The second section was a bit more interesting. The third section contains a lot of borrowed tunes. Chung Shu said it sounded very Americana, I just found it pedestrian. The program notes claim that Ives didn't think much of his contemporaries, describing Stravinsky's The Firebird as "morbid and monotonous," and Ravel's music as "of a kind I cannot stand: weak, morbid, and monotonous; pleasing enough, if you want to be pleased." I am sure I am not the first one to remark many probably find Ives' work also "pleasing enough, if you want to be pleased."

We were a bit puzzled after the intermission. The piano was already set up, the full orchestra was there despite The Unanswered Question has a score that calls for four flutes, a trumpet, and strings. And to add to the confusion, Emmanuel Ax came out at the outset!

Anyway, what they did was play the Ives piece immediately followed by the Beethoven piece, with bridging done with a short downward scale. The Question was short at about 6 minutes and somewhat interesting. I am not sure what the question was, perhaps the meaning of life? I didn't notice that the trumpet and flutes were in the balcony - Anne noticed it.

There are a few things about Beethoven's Piano Concerto No. 4 that's worth recording. It began with several cords played by the piano, followed by the orchestra's response in B major, which was ahead of its time. Some think the concerto follows the story line of an Orpheus legend, with the second movement describing Orpheus's using music to tame wild beasts.

Ax's performance tonight was flawless. He put together an architectural masterpiece, and it was thoroughly enjoyable. The runs were spotless, the melodies were well executed, the cooperation was the orchestra was seamless, the harmonies were exquisite. I admired how he played last time I heard him (even with a few mistakes), that admiration grew even more today. I do think the cadenzas (by Beethoven) were a bit on the long side, though.

Gilbert is still a bit of an unknown to me after these two concerts. The selection of Lindberg and Ives was a bit too eclectic for me. The Beethoven concerto began well enough, but the orchestra got a bit sloppy towards the end. And I really think if they want to teach the audience how to listen, do that in the program instead of during the concert.

It was an enjoyable concert on the strength of the Beethoven piece. The New York Times reviewer continues to adore Gilbert.

The Brentano Quartet. October 1, 2009.

Richardson Auditorium in Alexander Hall, Princeton University. Balcony, Row 1, Center Left.

Members
Mark Steinberg, violin; Serena Canin, violin; Misha Amory, viola; Nina Maria Lee, cello.

Program
String Quartet in G minor, Op. 20, No. 3 by Joseph Haydn (1732-1809).
String Quartet in G major, D. 887 by Franz Schubert (1797-1828).

This was again David's suggestion. Anne had a class on ESL teaching, so I went by myself. The group was David, Vivien, Peter, Melinda, Jim, and myself.

Tonight's attendance was not good at all. The balcony was only half full. We heard the same group at the same location on Oct 18, 2005, and the auditorium was full. So both concerts happened during the school year, I wonder why.

I remarked in the blog for the earlier concert that I wasn't a fan of the quartet. So I consciously tried to listen to the viola every now and then. It is a tiring endeavor: you need to concentrate, and you lose track of the other voices. Let's hope this improves with additional attempts.

Overall I enjoyed the concert. Perhaps it was my active listening, I found the balance between the instruments to be much better than I expected. Not that the first violin wasn't the domineering voice, it was just less so. And every now and then another voice (for tonight it was mostly the cello) would break out into the lead.

The Haydn quartet was written quite early in Haydn's career (Op. 20, when he was about 40 years old). The four movements are: Allegro con spirito; Menuet: Allegretto; Poco adagio; and Finale: Allegro di molto. The note on the piece (written by the violist Misha Amory). This was a relatively short quartet at about 30 minutes. David remarked that it was because they didn't do the repeats. I am not sure whether they did them or not. (They did they in 2005, according to the complaint in my blog.)

The Schubert quartet was a brilliant piece, requiring a lot technically from the players. On top of that they needed to appear as one harmonic group. I thought they did quite well in that regard, Peter thought the cello was hoarding the stage. However, there was confusion every now and then, and I am quite sure the first violin missed his notes and misbowed on a few occasions. I don't have much quarrel with the performance, though.

Mark Steinberg wrote the note on this piece, and (like the last one) it was quite long. He used Schubert writing ("My Dream") to illustrate the composition. What isn't clear to me was whether Schubert was referring to this particular quartet, or Steinberg was trying to fit the quartet into that sort of thinking. In any case, the thesis is that "love" and "pain" are not exclusive. Per Steinberg, there are many "issues" with the music that Schubert decided not to resolve, but instead the music just continued to go on. In that sense it illustrates life: settle, and move on. Interesting, even though it might be made up.

The four movements of this quartet are: Allegro molto moderato; Andante un poco mosso; Scherzo: Allegro vivace; and Allegro assai. The Scherzo and Trio were particularly interesting in the contrast between the two: the scherzo has the usual chaos while the trio is very calm.

This program was put out by the Department of Music of Princeton University.

New York Philharmonic – Alan Gilbert, Conductor; Frank Peter Zimmerman, violin. September 26, 2009.

Avery Fisher Hall at Lincoln Center, First Tier Center (Seat DD9, $58).

Program
Concerto in D major for Violin and Orchestra (1878-79), Op. 77 by Brahms (1833-97).
Pelleas und Melisande (After the Drama by Maurice Maeterlinck): Symphonic Poem for Orchestra, Op. 5 (1902-03) by Schoenberg (1874-1951).

This is Alan Gilbert's first season. And this was one of the earlier concerts. I have not paid attention to what the critics think of him so far, and will search for a review after I finish my own.

The first thing you notice is the orchestra seating arrangement is different. With Maazel it was (left to right) violin 1, violin 2, cello, and viola. The new arrangement is violin 1, cello, viola, and violin 2. So now the double basses are now on the left part of the stage (from audience's viewpoint) rather than the right. I guess every conductor has the right to seat the sections that he is comfortable with. Nonetheless, when Gilbert guest-conducted he didn't seem to need his usual seating arrangement. Also, the concertmaster Dicterow yielded his position to Sheryl Maples, and reappeared when the Schoenberg piece was played. So it wasn't just a Maazel thing.

On the way over, I was frustrated that I couldn't hum the Brahms tunes. I was sure I was very familiar with it. Of course they all came back to me after listening to the playing.

Zimmerman is relatively young. Somehow the Stradivarious he played (made in 1711 and owned by Kreisler at one point) didn't carry as well as I thought it should. Nonetheless the performance was quite enjoyable. In contrast to Brahms' violin sonatas, the concerto is a very virtuoso piece. Zimmerman knocked them out with ease. The concerto was on the long side at about 40 minutes, and the first movement was a good 20 minutes in duration. The performance was crisp, coherent, and quite thrilling.

The violin concerto consists of three movements: Allegro non troppo; Adagio; and Allegro giocoso, ma non troppo vivace - Poco piu presto. The second movement famously begins with an oboe melody. Quite similar to one of his piano concertos.

Zimmerman did do an encore piece. I couldn't hear him well, but he described it as what Paganini might have written if he had visited America. Turns out it was variations (quite a few of them) on "My country tis of thee" (or "God save our gracious queen" if one is from the UK.) While entertaining (and impressive), it was a bit long.

Gilbert started the second half by demonstrating with the orchestra the different leitmotifs used in Schoenberg's piece. As Schoenberg himself remarked, there were just too many of them: each of the main characters in the story, love and a range of other emotions, murder, conversations (usually depicted by intertwining motifs), and so on. Since none of them would prove easily hummable, I found them difficult to follow during the actual performance. One motif (I wish I remember whom/what it depicted) kept repeating itself throughout the piece.

The story is simple enough. Melisande marries Golaud but loves his stepbrother Pelleas. Pelleas wants to do the honorable thing and leave but is drawn to Melisande instead. Golaud kills Pelleas, Melisande dies after giving birth.

This work was composed when Schoenberg was 28 years old, before he firmly established his 12-tone music, and in that sense didn't sound like him at all. I may end up enjoying it more if I remember the leitmotifs. As it was I was rather lost. Without that storyline the music just sounded so-so.

Gilbert plans to introduce quite a bit of "unpopular" music to the season, and this was one of them. So far I am not getting it. Let's hope it gets better.

For completeness, the piece (about 40 minutes) consists of four movements played without pauses: opening sonata-form expanse, scherzo, slow movement, and a finale.

The New York Times reviewer loved it.

Seattle Opera - Wagner’s Gotterdammerung, August 14, 2009.

Story. Hagen, son of Alberich, gets Gunther and Gutrune to give Siegfried a magic potion that erases his memory of Brunnhilde. For Siegfried to marry Gutrune, he has to get Brunnhilde for Gunther. Brunnhilde is warned by Waltraute, one of the Valkyries, to give up the ring. She will not do it as it is an emblem of love Siegfried has given her. Siegfried uses the Tarnhelm to disguise himself as Gunther, goes to the fiery rock, and takes Brunnhilde and the ring. Brunnhilde sees the ring and calls Siegfried on his deception. Enraged by Siegried's betrayal, she plots with Hagen and Gunther the murder of Siegfried and points out that the backside of Siegfried is unprotected. Siegfried is asked by the Rhine maidens to return the ring but refuses. Distracted by two ravens, Siegfried is killed by Hagen during the hunt. Everyone eventually catches on that it is the poison that started the chain of events, Gunther is killed, Guthrune commits suicide, and Brunnhilde immolates herself by walking into the funeral pyre of Siegfried. The Rhine maidens reclaim the ring and the story ends with an image of Wotan with his family.

Conductor – Robert Spano; Norns – Luretta Bybee, Stephanie Blythe, Margaret Jane Wray, Brunnhilde, Siegfried, Guther – Gordon Hawkins, Gutrune – Marie Plette, Alberich, Hagen – Daniel Sumegi, Waltraute – Stephanie Blythe, Flosshilde – Jennifer Hines, Wellgunde – Michele Losier, Woglinde – Julianne Gearhart.

All good things have to come to an end. Actually, all things have to come to an end. The ring cycle concludes with tonight's performance that lasted 5 ½ hours. The three acts are of durations 117, 64, and 77 minutes per the board by the entrance, and there are two 30-minute intermissions.

Technical problems prevented the curtains to be raised at the right time (twice) and the orchestra had to do a re-start. The explanation given by Speight Jenkins was a computer glitch, true or convenient, I don't know. At least he had the courage and decency to take responsibility, which is good.

This is the most interesting of the 4 operas. The story goes along at a good pace, and the singing was generally good. Stephanie Bythe, who played Fricka in earlier episodes, came back as a Norn and Walttraute (one of the Valkyries) and did an excellent job. She would be a most famous diva if she were a bit lighter and has another 3 notes or so in her range. I recall enjoying her singing as a witch in Rusalka.

I was expecting a lot of fire for the last scene and looked forward to it with anticipation. Alas, it was images of fires offstage and projected onto the curtain. The overall effect was interesting but at the end disappointing. The singing during this last scene was powerful, but failed to move the audience that a scene of such emotion generally would.

However, they did save the best for last.

Indeed the Ring is a challenge for everyone involved. I found myself drifting off every now and then (no doubt in part due to our doing other things during the week), but the artists couldn't do so. The conductor, who had to be “on” during the whole time, probably had the hardest mental job. Everyone else gets to relax here and there, but the conductor had no rest. The orchestra generally did okay, but there were some serious lapses. Tonight there were many passages that sounded very confused.

Countless books have been written and lectures have been given on the Ring. And I imagine there is a lot to study and learn about the topic. Wagner, after all, spent over 30 years (including the 12-year hiatus) composing the work. However, I suspect the story isn't really completely nailed down, and no amount of scholarly study would fix that problem. Another inevitability is comparison with Lord of the Rings. The Tolkien epic hangs together much better in terms of character development. The reader knows whom he should be rooting for.

Wagner may have decided to write his characters in such a way that they all have their strong points and character flaws. Instead of good triumphing over evil, everything gets destroyed at the end. (That doesn't explain why we see Wotan and family at the end, though.) The lecturer said the title could be translated “Gods' Gloaming”, thus not distinguishing between dawn or twilight. I don't see how Valhalla's destruction can be read as anything but “Twilight of the Gods.” In the end, there is not much moral to this story.

So, my feelings are mixed. I admire the effort in putting the Ring together, and am glad I sat through it (even though I dozed off a few times.) Beyond that I don't have much to say. Perhaps my appreciation will increase with time, or with additional attendance in other Ring cycles. Not sure how likely that would be, though.

Note added 9/20/2009. I couldn't find a review of the performances after I returned to NJ. However, today I saw a New York Times Article that talks about the Ring in general and the Seattle performances in particular. Rather interesting take on the subject, not a review though.

Seattle Opera - Wagner’s Siegfried, August 12, 2009.

Story. Siegfried's mother Sieglinde dies after giving birth to him, and he is raised by Alberich's brother Mime to be a brave young man. Siegfried manages to restore the sword Nothung and uses it to slay Fafner who has turned into a dragon to guard the ring and the gold. After tasting the dragon's blood, Siegfried can understand the woodbird which leads him to the fiery rock where Brunnhilde is sleeping. He wakes her up by kissing her and the two eventually fall in love.

Conductor – Robert Spano; Mime – Dennis Petersen, Siegfried – Stig Andersen, The Bear – JC Casiano, The Wanderer – Greer Grimsley, Alberich, Fafner, Forest Bird – Julianne Gearhart, Erda, Brunnhilde, Horn Call – Mark Robins.

This is a rather simple story, and at no time do they have more than three actors on the stage (as far as I can remember). And somehow Wagner manages to write a 4-hour opera (plus an hour of intermission) out of it.

Someone said it best about how simple the story was: Siegfried grows up, kills his foster father Mime, restores the sword, kills the dragon, revives Brunnhilde and marries her. So I should be excused to find the opera a bit drawn out (I am sure Anne fell asleep during the show) and a bit tough to focus at times.

Yesterday was a day off for the Ring. Anne and I flew down to San Francisco to have dinner with Ellie, Joe and Jessica. This morning we woke up at 6 am, had breakfast with Joe and Jessica, flew back up to Seattle, checked in at the hotel, and walked to Seattle Center to catch the 4:30 pm lecture. That craziness may have contributed to how tired I feel also. Perhaps the lesson here is: focus on going to the concerts and don’t try to squeeze so many other things. Fat chance.

A few words on some interesting facts we learned from the lectures so far. Wagner wrote the libretti first (beginning around 1848), starting with Gotterdammerung and working backwards to Das Rheingold. Music, however, was written in “chronological” order. But between Acts II and III of this third opera were 12 or so years during which Wagner worked on other projects including Tristan and Isolde and Der Meistersinger von Nurnberg. His style supposed changed considerably during this time. I frankly would be hard pressed to tell the difference.

Before the opera began, a gentleman (Speight Jenkins) came on stage to make a short announcement: Stig Andersen had been sick but felt good enough to sing the role of Siegfried. I had never heard Andersen before so didn’t know how he would sound if he was 100% healthy; as it was, he sounded quite weak.

Given the prominent role of Siegfried in this and the last opera, it was a surprise to us that he was basically a young and somewhat crude boy. The notes did say Wagner probably didn’t realize it would be difficult to get a young tenor to sing such a demanding role. While there was nothing “wrong” with Siegfried, he wasn’t a sympathetic figure as he went about his bumbling ways. Perhaps we would get a deeper insight if we see the opera for a second time?

While Wagner had well-defined leitmotifs (Valhalla’s is particularly distinct), most of the time they appear in the orchestral music, the singing is usually part of the “accompaniment” (for lack of a better word.) I am sure people with better knowledge of Wagner’s music would appreciate this arrangement, but to me it is a bit hard to follow. I get the same reaction with his other operas such as The Flying Dutchman and Tristan & Isolde.

A rather disappointing opera that I might have appreciated more if I had not tired myself out.

Seattle Opera – Wagner’s Die Walkure. August 10, 2009.

Story. See previous blog.

Conductor – Robert Spano; Siegmund – Stuart Skelton, Sieglinde – Margaret Jane Wray, Hunding, Wotan, Brunnhilde – Janice Baird, Fricka, Gerhilde – Miriam Murphy, Helmwige – Sally Wolf, Waltraute – Luretta Bybee, Schwertleite – Jennifer Hines, Ortlinde – Marie Plette, Siegrune – Sarah Heltzel, Grimgerde – Michele Losier, Rossweisse – Maria Streijffert.

During the pre-concert talk, Jonathan Dean drew parallels between characters in Das Rheingold and Die Walkuries. Indeed some singers take on other roles in other operas. For instance, Michele Rosier, Jennifer Hines and Maria Streijffert are cast as Valkyries.

We saw the same opera at the Met in February, 2008, and comparison with that performance - with Lorin Maazel conducting, and Deborah Voight in the role of Sieglinde – unavoidable. I remember enjoying that concert very much (such memory is confirmed by re-reading the blog), and Seattle Opera comes up considerably short in comparison. The only aspect Seattle excels in comparison is the fire scene, they do better pyrotechnics here. My complaints regarding Das Rheingold apply here. Janice Baird, singing Brunnhilde, will figure prominently in this and subsequent operas. Her singing is fine, albeit unsteady at times.

In seeing this opera for the second time, more issues come into focus. Fricka, for example, expressed her reservations about Sigmund and Sieglinde getting married since they are twins. I understand a bit better how Wotan felt about Brunnhilde’s betrayal. Perhaps the English subtitles are clearer, or just because seeing something a second time always helps.

I overheard someone saying this is his third Ring. I wonder if I would have the urge to do that. Certainly not now!

Seattle Opera - Wagner’s Das Rheingold, August 9, 2009.

McCaw Hall, Second Tier, Aisle S (Seat N3, $118.50)

Anne and I are on our own “quest” for the Ring. Not that we love Wagner so much, but we are rather curious about the stamina required (both of the artists and the audience) and would like to experience it for ourselves. The four operas in the series total about 14 hours (17 hours with intermissions). We initially booked tickets to the series at the Washington DC Opera for later this summer, but that got canceled because of financial problems at that organization. Turns out the Met announced its own Ring series right about we bought tickets to the DC series, and all the moderately priced seats were gone by the time we looked. That left Seattle, which still had reasonably priced tickets left. We also bought tickets to the pre-concert talks for $8 a session.

When we bought the tickets, we thought it would be nice to spend a week during the summer in Seattle anyway. Despite it notorious always-overcast reputation, our prior visits to Seattle have been enjoyable. As things turn out, Ellie is now in San Francisco on her fellowship, and Joe and Jessica will be there on August 11. So we decided to fly down on the day “off” to SFO to meet up with them for dinner. (I am on UA133 SEA-SFO as I type this.) It was rainy as we drove to the airport this morning, and it was overcast yesterday, so perhaps we are not missing much on the touring end.

I unfortunately caught a cold just before I left New Jersey, the coughing hasn't been so bad (and manageable with OTC drugs), but the sinus problem is causing my right ear to feel really clogged up. While bearable, it does make me a bit grumpy.

All said and done, this trip is going to cost quite a bit of money. Much more than just biting the bullet and buying the better seats at the Met. I wonder how I would feel when it is all said and done.

On with the review ...

Story. Alberich the Nibelung steals the Rheingold from the Rhine, and forges a ring from it that gives him a lot of power. He also has a Tranhelm (helmet) made that can turn him into any form he chooses. Wotan asks the giants Fafner and Fasolt to complete Valhalla for him in exchange for Friea. Wotan's wife Fricka gets Wotan to try to “renegotiate” the deal. Wotan and Loge manage to trick Alberich to turn himself into a toad, capture him, and wrest the gold and ring away from him. Alberich curses anyone who would subsequently possess the ring. The giants agree to take the gold and the ring, and immediately Fafner kills Fasolt. Wotan then retreats to Valhalla.

Conductor – Robert Spano; Woglinde – Julianne Gearhart, Wellgunde – Michele Losier, Flosshilde – Jennifer Hines, Alberich – Richard Paul Fink, Fricka – Stephanie Blythe, Wotan – Greer Grimsley, Freia – Marie Plette, Fasolt – Andrea Silvestrelli, Fafner – Daniel Sumegi, Froh – Jason Collins, Donner – Gordon Hawkins, Loge – Kobie van Rensburg, Mime – Dennis Petersen, Erda – Maria Streijffert.

The lecture was given by Jonathan Dean, who provided the translation for the subtitles. His talk was a bit long at an hour or so, leaving no time to do anything between the talk and the concert (e.g., to get some decent food.) Since we are not here to gorge ourselves on food, the sandwich we shared afterwards was okay (we bought some cup of noodles after the concert.)

One would expect from these pre-concert talks some historical background, why the music is significant, and in the case of the Ring, a description of the leitmotifs. We get that. However, the speaker felt the need to add a considerable amount of post-modern and green-crazy editorial remarks to his speech that I find unnecessary and contrived. The set for the Seattle Ring is called “green” I think mainly due to the heavy use of trees and woods. Ecology conscious, perhaps, but certainly not ecological.

He did have a few interesting observations. One was how Wagner weaved together old Germanic myths, Greek tragedies, heavy romantic music, and philosophical questions into the operas. The other was how the characters can be grouped into water, earth, air, and fire (today's analogy would be liquid, solid, gas, and plasma, according to him). Whether he is merely quoting others, or he arrived at the insight himself, I do not know. But I find his remark that there are no/few pure good and bad characters to be very true. (I have seen two operas as I type this.)

Onto the performance. Overall the two I have seen so far are just so-so. I will make the Walkurie-specific comments in the blog on that opera.

The Hall was plunged into darkness (except for the Exit signs) for quite a while when the concert started. Then a soft sound emanated from the orchestra. A very interesting way to begin, and I have no idea how the members communicated with one another.

The beginning scene with the Rhine maidens was technically interesting. The three maidens are on harnesses that make them “swim” in the river quite effortlessly. They have to sing while being moved about in three dimensions, and move their tail fins (feet) all the time. Somehow they can keep their postures straight, spin around, and do some rather difficult passages.

As McCaw Hall was opened in 2003 or so, the poor acoustics was a surprise to me. The sound was generally muffled. This is particularly true of the orchestra which just sounded chaotic. I am sure the orchestra's playing contributed some, but the acoustics must bear some of the blame. The horns were quite unsteady, especially at the beginning. The overall playing improved as the concert went on, though. This was opening night, after all.

Most of the singing was just so-so. Wotan figures prominently in the advertising, but his voice didn't project well at all. The one notable exception is Fricka, sung by Blythe. Her voice was great and carried very well. Anne had particular problems with the giants, although I found their style quite appropriate for the roles.

Dean pointed out in this opera there are no human beings. Other than broad brushes, I don't find it very important to distinguish one type of being from another (gods, demi-gods, giants, Nibelungs, humans, etc.) Books have been written about the Ring on issues that Wagner probably wouldn't have imagined,

This opera is the shortest of the four at 2 hours 30 minutes, no intermission. It was generally okay. I wonder how we would feel about the series after our last concert Friday.

Mostly Mozart Festival Orchestra - Edward Gardner, conductor. August 1, 2009.

Avery Fisher Hall at Lincoln Center, Orchestra (Seat U116, $30).

Program
Overture to Die Zauberflote, K. 620 (1791) by Mozart.
Piano Concerto No. 18 in B-flat major, K. 456 (1784) by Mozart.
Serande for Tenor, Horn, and Strings, Op. 31 (1943) by Britten.
Symphony No. 39 in E-flat major, K. 543 (1788) by Mozart.

Artists
Toby Spence, Tenor; Lawrence DiBello, Horn; Piotr Anderszewski, Piano.

This was the first MM concert we attended despite having lived in the area for 30 years. I guess there were no compelling reasons to go to one; the concerts occur during the summer and we are usually too tired from the regular season to want to make it into NYC. While the programs tend to contain works by other composers, an all-Mozart concert is a bit much for me: another reason for my general lack of excitement.

We got half-price tickets from Goldstar.com (we did have to pay $6.50 each for processing fee). The concert was quite well attended, there were many people outside looking to buy tickets. Our seats were quite good. They also had seats on the stage.

The overture was well-done and (unfortunately) set expectations that were not met by the rest of the program. The orchestra was precise, the dynamic range was good, and the music had a bounciness to it that was enjoyable.

I was not familiar with the piano concerto. At 30 minutes it is on the long side for Mozart. Anderszewski's performance is okay but not inspiring. Anne and I agree he pounds on the instrument a bit much. The performance reminds me of the one by Mustonen, described as quirky by a critic. The concerto contains the traditional movements Allegro vivace, Andante un poco sostenuto, and Allegro vivace.

Britten's Seranade was written with his companion Peter Pears in mind. It is an interesting construction utilizing diverse poems written by different authors. The piece is bookended by a prologue and epilogue played by the horn, with the epilogue played off stage. The horn player left during the last movement (the Sonnet), bringing with him the mute that we never saw him use. The movements of the work are (i) Pastoral, text by Charles Cotton; (ii) Nocturne, Lord Tennyson; (iii) Elegy, William Blake; (iv) Dirge, anonymous "Lyke-Wake" Dirge; (v) Hymn, Ben Jonson; and (vi) Sonnet, John Keats. One feels that the horn player (the principal horn of the orchestra) was out of his league. While he probably got most/all of the notes, the sound was quite muddled. The tenor is a young Englishman. His voice projected quite well, but the falsetto was a bit too obvious.

The Symphony was also unfamiliar. The program notes describes this as the least commonly played of the "Final Trilogy" written by Mozart during the summer of 1788. By this time the orchestra's playing was not nearly as precise as it was at the beginning. Sounds were muddled, precision was off, and the crispness that one would like to hear had by-and-large disappeared. Perhaps the program (three 30-minutes pieces and the overture) was a bit long and the artists' couldn't hold their concentration that long? The symphony's four movements are Adagio - Allegro; Andante con moto; Menuetto: Allegreto; and Finale: Allegro.

I don't have much to say about the conductor other than he is another young Englishman.

At the end of the day, what matters is that it was still an enjoyable evening. However, this concert is definitely in the take-it-or-leave-it category. Despite our plans to travel during the month, we may still be able to make a couple of additional concerts. Will we? Stay tuned.