New York Philharmonic – Rafael Fruhbeck de Burgos, conductor; Augustin Hadelich, violin. October 20, 2012.

Avery Fisher Hall at Lincoln Center.  First Tier (Seat CC101, $69.50.)

Program

Symphonie espangnole for Violin and Orchestra, Op. 21 (1874) by Lalo (1823-92).

Symphonie fantastique: Episode de la vie d’un artiste (Fantastic Symphony: Episode in the Life of an Artist), Op. 14 (1830) by Berlioz (1803-69).

This concert wasn’t in our original subscription for the season.  Because we changed our plans for October 4 (we saw Il Travotore), we switched our tickets for tonight’s concert.  I was surprised to see my name on the "Repeat Subscribers" insert, how efficient of them.

Anne was in Flushing earlier in the afternoon, and left a bit after 5 pm.  Traffic on the Queensboro Bridge and the East Side was so bad that by the time she got to the Lincoln Center area it was past 7:30 pm.  We put the takeout food I got from Ollie’s in the car, and instead each had a small sandwich (slider) at Avery Fisher Hall before the concert started.  We ate the takeout after we got home; nothing got wasted.

The Lalo piece is familiar to most violin students, and I have known it since high school.  As a show piece written with Sarasate in mind, it is not impossibly difficult to play, but sounds just great.  The Program Annotator remarks that the best Spanish music is written by French composers.  Lalo’s ancestry was Spanish but the family had settled in France for a long time by the time Edouard was born.

I had not heard of Hadelich before, so didn’t know what to expect.  He was born in Germany and raised in Italy, but got the bulk of his music education in the United States, and has had a very successful career, including winning the 2006 International Violin Competition of Indianapolis, and being a recipient of the Avery Fisher Career Grant in 2009.

The sound (from the 1723 “ex-Kiesewetter” Strad) was beautiful and clear, but a bit weak at where we were seated (First Tier).  We had not sit in this section for a while, so I am not sure if that’s the acoustics.  In any case, the passion that I usually associate with this piece did not come through.  The expression on Hadelich’s face oftentimes evoked the image of the joker in batman movies, which adds a dash of curiosity to the performance.

The orchestra turned in an effective performance.  Given my statement earlier about the weak violin sound, I found it amazing that the orchestra didn’t overwhelm the soloist, especially given its size.  I would attribute this to the conductor knowing how to work together with the violinist, especially given that the sound volume problem disappeared with the Berlioz piece.

Most listeners would call this a violin concerto, but not Lalo.  In any case, the piece has five movements: Allegro non troppo, Scherzando: Allegro molto, Intermezzo: Allegretto non troppo, Andante, and Rondo: Allegro.

Per the Program Notes, Fruhbeck has been a regular guest at the New York Philharmonic for the last few years, yet tonight was the first time I saw him.  He is in his early eighties, and conducts from a seated position.  However, he conducted energetically, often leaving his chair.

Prior to tonight, my exposure to the Berlioz piece had been only through CDs, but I do know that Berlioz was driven to write this because of his (at that time unrequited) love for Harriet Smithson.  The Program Notes added a lot to my sketchy knowledge, including the composer imagining himself to be in a drug-induced trance where he sees himself executed.

The Symphony is quite long at around 55  minutes, and consists of five parts.   Part One: Reveries, Passions; Part Two: A Ball; Part Three: A Scene in the Fields; Part Four: March to the Scaffold; and Part Five: Dream of a Witches’ Sabbath.

Given the nature of the music, things could easily get out of control.  Tonight’s performance reminds me of an earlier performance of Tchaikovsky’s Fifth Symphony conductor by the 80+ year old conductor Blomstedt where he allowed things to gallop forward without restraint, to great effect.  In Fruhbeck’ case he turned in a well-executed, lucid and controlled rendition of the story, which the audience could tag along and observe.  Perhaps having a storyline helped; I enjoyed the performance greatly.

A couple of interesting things one wouldn’t get from a CD.  First is the dialog between the oboe and the English horn (Part Three) had the oboe player played from the side of the stage.  The other is these two giant bells that were custom-made but had to be played off-stage because they were too loud.  (Too bad we didn’t get to see them.)

Berlioz did get to meet and eventually marry Smithson in 1833.  Unfortunately the marriage fell on hard times and they separated in 1844.  Smithson succumbed to alcoholism and died in 1854.  The music, however, will remain a tribute to this story.

In any case, I am glad we got to go to this concert, even though it was somewhat by chance.  I told Ellie on Sunday that she probably would have enjoyed it also.  Our friend (who shall remain nameless in this blog as he is on probation) certainly seemed to enjoy performing in it.

The New York Times reviewer was critical of the New York Philharmonic’s performance of the Lalo piece, but loved the Berlioz one, calling the overall performance “Jekyll and Hyde.”

Metropolitan Opera - Verdi's Il Trovatore. October 4, 2012.

Metropolitan Opera at Lincoln Center - Balcony, Seat E124 ($92.50).

Conductor - Daniele Callegari; Leonora - Carmen Giannattasio, Count di Luna - Franco Vassallo, Manrico - Gwyn Hughes-Jones, Azucena - Dolora Zajick.

Story.  See previous post.

A couple of weeks ago we returned the Il Trovatore tickets for another opera.  We got them as part of our subscription (Thursdays) with the intention of the exchange since we had seen it before.

The McNallys are in town, and when we were having dinner on our boat on Sunday I asked them if they wanted to go to New York Thursday to see a concert.  Our original intention was to buy two additional tickets for the New York Philharmonic concert we already had tickets for.  We decided to exchange those for several reasons: it contains a Schoenberg piece which may be a bit inscrutable, the McNallys had never seen a live opera, and we wanted to make the evening an enjoyable one rather than an intellectually challenging one. The “downside” is they don’t get to meet the new bass player in New York Phil, although it is unlikely that he would be in this concert with a more “intimate” program. In any case, with all these exchanges, I hope I have kept good records of what concerts we will end up going to!

We met up with our guests at East Szechuan Garden and had a quick and (relatively) light dinner before the concert.

Since we saw this before, we thought we would remember the story.  Both Anne and I found it very difficult to read the synopsis written in the Program Notes.  There are just too many things happening outside of the opera to make the reading straightforward.  Luckily I think I finally understood what was going on by the end of the performance, but there were quite a few instances where I simply wanted to give up.  As with some other Verdi operas (Ernani comes to mind), this is an opera whose story line could use some additional development.

This is Carmen Giannattasio’s debut at the Met.  And what a debut it is.  It makes me wonder how deep Met’s talent pool is, there are just so many of these young impressive sopranos: Meade and Machaidze are two others that come to mind.  Her voice could use some refinement at the “soft high” end of the spectrum, but otherwise it was just great.  All the other singers did very well also.  We saw the same Azecuna (Zajick).

Looking back at my writeup, I wasn’t that impressed with the 2009 performance – and we had better seats then.  Since I would like to think I have gotten a bit better at analyzing these things, I would conclude tonight’s was a much better performance.  It was good to know I was equally puzzled by the story.

In any case, we are happy the McNallys could come along.

The New York Times reviewer saw a different Leonora, and he like the performance very much.

New York Philharmonic - Alan Gilbert, conductor; Daniil Trifonov, Piano. October 2, 2012.

Avery Fisher Hall at Lincoln Center.  Orchestra (Seat U11, $69.50.)

Program
Night on Bald Mountain (1867; arr Rimsky-Korsakov, 1886) by Musorgsky (1839-81).
Piano Concerto No. 3 in C manor, Op 26 (1917-21) by Prokofiev (1891-1953).
Scheherazade, Symphonic Suite, Op. 35 (1888) by Rimsky-Korsakov (1844-1908).

I am writing this review about a week after the event, so I have probably forgotten most of it.  So let me at least get to the details of the program.  The Prokofiev concerto consists of three movements: (1) Andante – Allegro; (2) Tema con variazone, Tema: Andantino, Var I: L’istesso tempo, Var II: Allegro; Var III: Allegro moderato (poco meno mosso); Var IV: Andante meditative; Var V: Allegro giusto; Tema: L’istesso tempo; (3) Allegro ma non troppo.  Scheherazade consists of four movements: (1) Largo e maestoso – Allegro non troppo; (2) Lento – Andantino; (3) ndantino quasi allegretto; (4) Allegro molto.  Glenn Dicterow plays the violin solo passages.

If I remember correctly, Musorgsky (that’s how it is spelled in the Program, I had always thought it was Mussorgsky, and MS Word doesn’t tag the latter as a spelling error) had problems with alcoholism and died relatively young.  His work was usually modified by his contemporaries.  Night on Bald Mountain is no exception, there are many versions of it, and tonight’s version was arranged by Rimsky-Korsakov, and is the one most familiar with the listening public.

The Program Notes emphasizes the symphonic nature of Scheharazade and doesn’t use the familiar descriptions of (1) The Sea and Sinbad; (2) The Story of the Claendar Prince; (3) The Young Prince and the Young Princess; (4) Festival at Baghdad, The Sea, The Ship Goes to Pieces on a Rock Surrounded by a Bronze Warrior, Conclusion.  As far I am concerned, it is completely okay to have a narrative associated with the music; it actually keeps the listener’s mind more active.

My comment on the Rite of Spring performance last week was that it was too loud.  I thought the loudness was much more appropriate for tonight’s two orchestral pieces.  Both were done very well by the orchestra.

Gilbert in his introduction to the Program talks about how Glenn Dicterow taught his sister Jenny how to play the violin solo part in Scheharazade.  I hope she does better than her teacher.  Some passages are quite difficult, and Dicterow pulled them off, but the overall result was on the uninspired side.

There is a saying that talent is God’s way of being unfair.  In Trifonov’s case, one could make the case that God is very much so.  He was just amazing, both musically and technically.  I totally enjoyed the music.  Not being a pianist, I usually can’t tell how technically challenging a particular work is.  There was no doubt tonight that this is a virtuoso piece in its extreme.  And he pulled it off effortlessly.  I sat there amazed, and interestingly not worried that he would make a mistake – his playing was just that confident.  At the tender age of 21, he has a long career ahead of him.  Let’s hope he continues to get his audiences excited about his performances.

By the way, he sat in the audience for the second half.  He had to rush out afterwards, warding off the hordes of well-wishers pursuing him.

Overall, this was a much more enjoyable concert that that of the opening week.

The New York Times review is very postive.  Trifonov played an encore at that performance the reviewer attended.

Metropolitan Opera – Donizetti’s L’Elisir d’Amore. September 27, 2012.

Metropolitan Opera at Lincoln Center – Balcony, Seat C111 ($97.50).

Conductor – Maurizio Benini; Adina – Anna Netrebko, Nemorino – Matthew Polanzani, Belcore – Mariusz Kwiecien, Dulcamar – Ambrogio Maestri, Giannetta – Anne-Carolyn Bird.

Story.  See previous post.

There are a few singers whose appearance on a program would get me to buy a ticket for the performance.  Anna Netrebko is one of them.  While her voice isn’t the smoothest, it is always radiant, carries well, and enjoyable.  Her acting skills could still use some improvement, though.

Great acting skills aren’t necessary for this opera.  It is a comedy with interesting dialog and a ton of pleasant tunes.  As long as you don’t give it too much scrutiny, the story moves forward at fast enough a pace, and there are enough comedic moments to propel the relatively short program forward (2 hours 15 minutes, plus an intermission).

We saw a New York City Opera performance in 2006, so I don’t remember much about that occasion.  I do remember the setting was relatively modern (say 1940s) and all the action happened inside and around a diner.  Tonight’s performance was set in 1836.  I don’t understand why it needs to be so precise, except perhaps to explain why the soldiers have these interesting caps.  The sets are a bit more complicated than what we saw at the NYC Opera performance, and they work quite well.

The last Met opera we saw was in April, and I don’t remember the acoustics at our seats for being this good.  Most of the singing came across clearly, and both Netrebko and Polanzani put in great performances.  The other two men (Kwiecien and Maestri) were a bit spottier.  There were some high notes that Netrebko barely made, though.

Donizetti put in quite a few quartets in the opera.  I recall in Lucia he also had quite a few ensemble pieces – including the famous sextet.  Now I wonder if this is something he did regularly in his operas.  He wrote about 60 operas, and I have seen about five of them, so we have a ways to go yet.

Of course the best known aria is “Una furtiva lagrima” sung by Nemorino.  As far as I can tell, it isn’t the most technically challenging tune in the opera.  And when placed in the context of the opera’s plot, it is a bit out of place.  But by golly, it is just a great tune.  The wistfulness expressed is just perfect against the bassoon accompaniment.  The downside is it may end up being the opera, thus overshadowing all the other arias.  I have to say Polanzani did a superb job, the last few notes just floated across softly and effortlessly into the hall.

Before the concert, Anne and I met up with my former boss Marc and his wife Ellen for dinner at Atlantic Seafood Grill.  I certainly enjoyed catching up with him after all these years (although we do see each other every now and then), and the food was great.

The New York Times reviewer describes the story in quite a bit of detail.  He pans the Met for putting out Netrebko and Donizetti as the season opener, but then proceeds to sing praises about every aspect of the performance.  He has some interesting observations about Netrebko and Polanzani’s voices.

New York Philharmonic – Alan Gilbert, conductor; Leif Ove Andsnes, piano. September 22, 2012.

Avery Fisher Hall at Lincoln Center, Orchestra 1 (Seat T106, $69.50.)

Program

… quasi una fantasia … for Piano and Groups of Instruments, Op. 27, No. 1 (1987-88) by Gyorgy Kurtag (b. 1926).

Piano Concerto No. 3 in C minor, Op. 37 (1796-1803) by Beethoven (1770-1827).

Le Sacre du printemps (The Rite of Spring) (1911-13) by Stravinsky (1882-1971).

This is the first week of the New York Philharmonic season.  Adding to that excitement is that the son-in-law of our friends will be starting his season with the orchestra, which is a big deal: hundreds of musicians audition for a spot on the roster.  I am sure quite a few tickets were sold to this cheering section.  Ellie and Kuau came along for the occasion also.  The four of us had dinner at LUCE prior to the concert, reasonably priced entrees that were quite good.  The restaurant is a stone’s throw from Lincoln Center; somehow we never noticed it before.

A few days prior I met up with my former boss Marc, another regular at these New York concert events.  We were talking about the “new” music that Gilbert is trying to introduce into the Philharmonic’s repertoire, and Marc said he doesn’t get it.  My response is I don’t appreciate it very much either.

Today’s opening piece is an example.  First of all, I have problem with these fancy titles coined by these modern artists.  Instead of simply calling it a fantasy, he had to call it by a more complicated Italian name, with dot-dot-dots in front and after the title.  The piece consists of four movements played without pause: (i) Introduzione (Largo); (ii) Presto minaccioso e lamentoso (Wie ein Traumeswirren) [Like a Nightmare]) (Molto agitato, sempre ppp); (iii) Recitativo (Grave, disperato); (iv) Aria – molto adagio (Lontano, calmo appena sentito [Distant, calm barely perceived]).  Why they need Italian, German, and English, I don’t know. The instrumentation consists of a long list of instruments, including several “echo” percussion pieces – whatever that means.  When we walked into the hall, we noticed two groups of percussion instruments at the rear, each with four chairs: evidently they hired many extras. There are other instruments on the first and second tiers also, in fact the only people on stage were the conductor, the solo pianist, and the timpanist.  I think there were like six or seven drums, some tuned closely in pitch (a semitone, maybe.)

In the Program Notes there is a reference to a poem being introduced by the fourth movement.  As if that isn’t bad enough, the last line of the poem isn’t complete!  I am embarrassed to say I didn’t get any of it.

There are a couple of redeeming features to the piece.  Foremost among them is the brevity, at only ten or so minutes.  My remark that for some pieces it takes longer to read up on than listening to applies here also.  The second is the music generally follows the markings listed in the program, so there wasn’t a lot of head scratching.  Third is the “stereo effect” generated by the placement of the instruments was interesting at times.  I wonder if these modern compositions (and composers) would ever get anywhere beyond an occasional performance here or there.  I would not actively avoid going to a concert if this piece is on the program again, but I suspect even if I wanted to, it would be difficult to find another performance.  [To provide a counter-argument, an obscure piece I heard in Hong Kong was actually played in Carnegie Hall.  In that instance there is a common element: Edo de Waart.]

The Beethoven piece was quite enjoyable, as any good rendition of the work would be.  The balance between the soloist and the orchestra was great at our seats.  The three movements are Allegro con brio, Largo, and Rondo: Allegro.  Ah, the simplicity.  For some reason Beethoven took a long time to complete this work, and the cadenza wasn’t completed until 1809.

A few days ago Chung Shu sent me several Youtube links to a Rite of Spring performance conducted by Boulez, with the assignment to delineate where each of the “movements” begins and ends.  The piece is thirty-some minutes in length, and is in two parts.  Part One: The Adoration of the Earth consists of Introduction, Augurs of Spring (Dance of the Adolescent Girls), Mock Abduction, Spring Rounds, Ritual of Rival Tribes, Procession of the Sage, The Adoration of the Earth (The Sage), and Dance of the Earth.  The Second Part (The Sacrifice) consists of Introduction, Mystical Cycle of the Young Girls, Glorification of the Chosen One, Evocation of the Ancestors, Ritual Action of the Ancestors, and Sacrificial Dance (The Chosen One).  I also found a Boulez performance of the ballet on Youtube.  After working on it for a morning, I did manage to complete the assignment.  The ballet performance is interesting in that there was some spectacular horsemanship, but puzzling as you wouldn’t think it follows the plot at all – such as it is.

To my great dismay, I couldn’t quite follow the music during the actual concert itself.  What I should have done is to bring my homework write up with me.

Chung Shu posted a link to the New York Times review on an earlier performance, which I haven’t yet read: I don’t want to be biased by these influential critics.  I couldn’t avoid his posting saying the Rite of Spring was the highlight of the evening, though.

My experience isn’t nearly as sanguine.  The piece started okay, with the lovely mysterious tune played by the bassoon that made this piece so famous.  It however eventually degenerated into simply a competition between the sections to see who could play louder.  And given where we sit, they were pretty loud.  I had mentioned in a prior blog (when they were playing a Tchaikovsky symphony) that Gilbert seemed to be able to put an appropriate restraint on things.  He either couldn’t, or wouldn’t, do that tonight.  This is the third time I have blogged about this piece, and I thought the other two times, conducted by Harding and Mehta, were better (this is from my blog entries, I certainly don’t remember the specific performances.)

So, the season for me isn’t off to a great start, although I am sure it’ll improve.

The New York Times review goes into a detailed description of Kurtag’s piece.  It is one of the most positive pieces ever written by a Times reviewer in recent memory.  We evidently listen for very different things.

Mostly Mozart Festival Orchestra – Andrew Manze, conductor; Stephen Hough, piano. August 22, 2012.

Avery Fisher Hall at Lincoln Center, Orchestra Left (Seat B3, $52.50).

Program

Orchestra Suite No. 3 in D major (1731) (arr. Mendelssohn, Ed. David) by Bach.

Piano Concerto No. 1 in G minor (1831) by Mendelssohn.

Symphony No. 41 in C major, K.551 (“Jupiter”) (1788) by Mozart.

We left our house at around 4:45 pm, having heard news that President Obama was going to be at Alice Tully Hall for a fundraiser this evening.  There were tons of problems with GWB (up to 2 hours delay) which overflowed into Lincoln Tunnel (1 hour).  Our way in through Holland Tunnel wasn’t too problematic, even with lingering effects from a stalled vehicle earlier.  We got to Ollie’s at around 6:15 pm.  Anne left right after dinner to collect the tickets while I took care of the bill.  We thought we would have time to make the 7 pm pre-concert recital, even though I wasn’t particularly enthusiastic since it was going to be Hough’s own 2010 composition.

But that wasn’t to be.  Traffic (vehicle and pedestrian) was blocked off for many of the intersections between Ollie’s and Lincoln Center so the President’s motorcade could zip right by, which it did at around 7:05 pm.  There was a lot of grumbling in the waiting crowd about how the fundraising event is wreaking havoc on people’s lives (the motorcade evidently started from JFK airport), so I assume some votes were lost.  To be fair, there was some scattered applause in the crowd also.  I was amazed how many police officers showed up, some in full combat gear, and I suspect there were snipers perched on all the corner rooftops – too bad I didn’t look up.

The upshot is we didn’t make it to the pre-concert.  I suspect many didn’t since approach from the north was not possible.  I actually reconnected with Anne at the corner I was stuck at: she was on the other side.

Our seats were in the first row (despite its B label), and we were a few yards away from the last row of the first violin section.  Human perception is an interesting thing, when I try to listen to the full orchestra (i.e., didn’t think about the individual musicians) that instrument would be dominant, but I managed to hear the three or four different first violins if I concentrated on doing so.  One would think loudness is inversely proportional to the square of the distance between the source and the listener, but (for instance) the second violins could oftentimes be clearly heard.

That was a lot of pre-amble, onto the program for the evening.

The write-up (by Paul Schiavo) on the Bach Suite would be a dream for our friend David Y, it contains some rather interesting observations, some I excerpt below: (i) Mendelssohn did a lot to revive Bach; (ii) Mendelssohn made a lot of changes to the original score; (iii) There is debate whether it should be played by a solo violin; (iv) the trumpet in Bach’s day was more difficult to play; (iv) Ferdinand David was the principal violinist at the Gewandhaus Orchestra.  The movements of the Suite are quite typical: Overture, Air, Gavotte I and II, Bourree, and Gigue.  I enjoyed the performance very much.

Anne and I had a debate on whether we have seen Stephen Hough before.  I thought not, she was sure.  A review of this blog says at least not since 2005.  Our seats actually were quite good, we could hear him quite well without the piano’s sound being the dominant one, and we could see his hands flying over the keyboard.  The concerto is rather short, and consists of three movements played without stop: Molto allegro con fuoco, Andante, and Presto – Molto allegro e vivace.  The fast movements were quite demanding, my worry that he would slip a note kept me on the edge of my seat.  Just a beautiful performance of a beautiful concerto – and Mendelssohn wrote it when he was about 22.

Hough played a Chopin Nocturne as an encore.  As we read the program, we actually found out Hough’s composition actually has an interesting story behind it.  It is called “broken branches” and evokes Hough’s catholic faith.

Mozart’s last symphony must be one of his longest at about 40 minutes.  According to the program notes, Mozart discovered Bach’s music when he went to Vienna at age 25.  One could argue there was indeed a lot of Bach influence in this composition; or one could just say Mozart’s wrote more complicated music as he got older.  I did hear this in the “final trilogy” New York Philharmonic concert more than six years ago.  It is interesting how context makes something look.  My remark at the New York Philharmonic concert was that the music sounded “simple.”  Tonight, however, it sounded much more complex when compared against the Bach and Mendelssohn pieces.  Again, human perception is an interesting phenomenon.  The four movements are Allegro vivace, Andante cantabile, Menuetto, and Molto allegro.

Anne’s conclusion is: the Mostly Mozart performances are definitely better than those of Orpheus’s.  I tend to agree, although the Orpheus Orchestra does Mozart quite well.

A few words on the conductor Manze.  He is quite animated, and we could hear him grunt quite often. I think the orchestra responded very well, although sometimes not as crisply as I would like.

By the time we left, the President was long gone.  There were still quite a few officers milling around the area.  We got back at about 11 pm.

Mostly Mozart Festival Orchestra – Osmo Vanska, conductor; Rudolf Buchbinder, piano. August 15, 2012.

Avery Fisher Hall at Lincoln Center, Orchestra Left (Seat J5, $46.50).

Pre-concert Recital

Sonata No. 8 in C minor (“Pathetique”) (1797) by Beethoven.

Program

Symphony No. 32 in G major, K.318 (1779) by Mozart.

Piano Concerto No. 3 in C minor (c. 1800-03) by Beethoven.

Symphony in C major (“Great”) (c. 1825-28) by Schubert (1797-1828).

This time we got our discount tickets at the Atrium.  While they sent out an email the day before saying tickets were available, we weren’t sure there would be any left since we would get there only a couple of hours before the concert.  We were prepared to just have dinner and then go back to NJ, though.  The seats we got actually were very good, with a good view of the piano but not so close that it would be the dominant instrument we would hear, as we did at the last concert.  We also made it to the preconcert recital, that meant we only had about 15 minutes to purchase and gulp down a sandwich at the Expresso Bar.

The Pathetique sonata probably ranks as the top 5 most popular work of that genre by Beethoven.  (Let me guess, Moonlight, Waldstein, and Appassionata being another 3.)  What I didn’t realize was that it was written relatively early in Beethoven’s life.  It has three movements: Grave – Allegro di molto e con brio; Adagio cantabile; and Rondo: Allegro.  To my ears, the piece is so familiar that there probably aren’t that many new and inventive ways to play it.  That is mostly true of tonight’s performance, except the soloist sometimes placed a stronger than usual emphaisis on the left hand when it had the melody, a bit much perhaps.  A good rendition of a Beethoven sonata is always enjoyable, as was this performance.

Mozart’s Symphony No. 32 may have been intended as an overture to the opera Zaide, which Mozart never finished, and was instead used as an overture for an opera by Bianchi (evidently with Mozart’s blessing.)  That may explain why it was relatively short at an advertised nine minutes, and that it was played without a break, although there were several sections.  The piece has a symmetry to it that was rather easy to catch, and rather interesting.  The other noteworthy aspect was the use of a relatively large orchestra, including flutes, trumpets, and four horns.  There is some doubt if Mozart wrote the part for the timpani, though.  I got all this from David Wright’s informative notes, which helped in my appreciation of this composition.

The piece turned out to be shorter than I expected.  The gentleman sitting next to me observed that I was looking at my watch and asked me how long it was.  Seven minutes, I think.

Beethoven’s Third Piano Concerto is quite popular, and the best thing to do is just to sit back and enjoy it.  Its three movements are Allegro con brio, Largo, and Rondo: Allegro.  Buchbinder took it at a relatively fast pace, and the orchestra sometime had trouble keeping up.  By and large I did manage to sit back and enjoy it.

If I were asked how long Schubert’s longest symphony was, I would have guessed (with no basis) forty minutes.  Turns out tonight’s symphony is close to an hour in length; it is not called “Great” for no reason.  It has four movements: (i) Andante – Allegro ma non troppo – Piu moto; (ii) Andante con moto; (iii) Scherzo: Allegro vivace – Trio; and (iv) Finale: Allegro vivace.  Usually I think of Mahler or Bruckner when a symphony of this duration is mentioned, and those would be written decades later.  While no doubt considered epic in its day – indeed it might have been rejected by the Vienna Philharmonic for its length and difficulty, and Schubert substituted the “Little” in its stead – it is relatively easy to follow.  You don’t hear the complex harmonies or the wanderings that characterize the “modern” symphonies, instead the signature Schubert techniques of propulsion (my term for moving the music along) and key changes are abundantly clear.  It is interesting to listen for these techniques, and I am still in awe of how adeptly themes in major and minor keys are woven together.  Despite the Annotator’s claim that not one note can be taken out of this tightly written piece, it felt a bit long.

A couple of additional observations (added after this blog was first posted).  One is the conductor took all the repeats, and sometimes had to fumble through the score to find the right place.  No worries though, he managed to get through without any problems.  The other more serious comment is there didn't seem to be much breathing in this symphony.  Every movement seems to be one long breath, which for a 14-minute movement can be a bit exasperating for people like me.  I listened to another Schubert symphony on my iPod, certainly there were breaks in the phrasing.  I am listening to "The Great" by the Vienna Philharmonic as I type this paragraph.  So far (about 6 minutes into  the first movement) there hasn't been any yet.

I do have a small issue with the otherwise excellent Notes, again written by David Wright.  There seems to be an obsession with the key signatures, especially in the case of Beethoven.  This kind of analysis may be appreciated by someone with perfect pitch.  My pitch is pretty good (often perfect when it comes to tuning a violin), yet phrases like “the remote key of E major” do not mean much to me.

This year’s Mostly Mozart series of concerts has worked out quite well.  Ticket prices (after discount) are reasonable, traffic into and out of town not that bad, and the performances have been enjoyable.  We have tickets to another one next week.  If they are offering more discounted concerts …

Mostly Mozart Festival Orchestra – Louis Langree, conductor; Jean-Efflam Bavouzet, piano. August 10, 2012.

Avery Fisher Hall at Lincoln Center, Orchestra Center (Seat D111, $50).

Musique funebre (Muzyka zalobna) (1958) by Witold Lutoslawski (1931-1994).

Piano Concerto No. 3 (1945) by Bartok (1881-1945).

Symphony No. 39 in E-flat major, K.543 (1788) by Mozart (1756-1791).

We wanted to get into the city early for the pre-concert recital, but missed it by about five minutes, the usual summer Friday afternoon traffic being the culprit this time.  That is too bad as I was looking forward to hearing Brahms' Intermezzos (Op. 117).  On the plus side, we did find off street parking on 65^th, for free.

Our seats in Row D gave us a great view of the musicians in the front, but not much visibility beyond that.  We could hear the individual instruments in the orchestra (or most of them, anyway), which is a good thing.  My comment on the concert we heard on Wednesday was that the orchestra sounded soft, being closer made it better, but the volume was still on the soft side.  The downside is with the solo piano, the orchestra was completely overwhelmed.

The first two pieces of the program were all written in the mid 20^th century, which doesn’t make a lot of sense for a Mostly Mozart concert.  The only connection I could possibly made is the there is supposedly some birds and crickets effects in the Bartok piece (more on that later.)  The Program Annotator for tonight’s program is Paul Schiavo.  He also did a good job with the write-ups.

I had not encountered Lutoslawski’s music before (not having heard of him probably was a primary reason,) and didn’t know what to expect.  He conceived the work as a memorial to Bela Bartok, and the music – basically for a string orchestra – does fit the bill.  I would agree with the Program Notes’ statement that he succeeded splendidly in using modern compositional methods in a clear and readily apprehended way.  The four parts of the piece were played without interruption: Prologue, Metamorphoses, Apogee, and Epilogue, with the first and last parts like an arc encasing the middle sections.  In any case, the music was indeed quite accessible to a first-time listener, in my case using Schiavo’s write-up as a guide.

Bela Bartok completed the piano concerto shortly before his death, hoping his wife could earn some money performing it: there is probably a poignant story behind the matter-of-fact narrative in the Program Notes.  The first two movements (Allegretto and Andante religioso) are on the relatively straightforward side, making me wonder what Bartok was thinking when he wrote this.  The lack of virtuosic requirement on the performer is negated in the third movement (Allegro vivace) which includes many difficult passages with a lot of flourish thrown in.  The annotation in this instance has a couple of comments on the second movement that I find a bit puzzling: it calls the second movement “in every way the heart of the Concerto” which I would take issue with (admittedly after hearing it only once.)  The other comment about its A-B-A design while technically correct is close to non-informative, since the second A is very different from the first A.  I didn’t get the evocations of bird and insect sounds in the B section; Anne did.

As I said earlier, the piano dominated the performance, probably because of the acoustics at our seats.  The soloist certainly enjoyed himself, and he put in a delightful performance.

To me, Bartok’s music is generally easy to understand, and this one is particularly so.  I suppose the program design folks at Mostly Mozart picked these two pieces for their ease to understand.  If that is so, kudos to them.

We have heard the Mozart symphony several times before, including the time New York Philharmonic played all three in the “final trilogy,” of which this symphony is the first.  I still remember using the phrase “Mozart-fatique” to describe the experience of listening to three symphonies in a row.  There was no such problem tonight, the orchestra put in a spirited and crisp performance.  The four movements of the symphony are: Adagio – Allegro, Andante con coto, Menuetto: Allegretto, and Allegro.

I did notice a violinist who also plays in the Orpheus Chamber Orchestra, a group I have mixed feelings about.  Going over my prior blog entries, I find an entry where the Orpheus Orchestra also performed this piece.  My remark was that the performance “was not particularly noteworthy.”  I can’t help but wonder if this particular violinist enjoys playing the piece with or without a conductor.  She did pay a lot of attention to the conductor, though.

Langree certainly did his job with gusto; a bit much at times, in my opinion.  I couldn't help but notice how crisp his pants looked: the "Maestro" episode of Seinfeld kept flashing in my head.

Our trip home was uneventful.  We got back at around 10:45 pm, and that included a side-trip to fill up the gas tank.

Mostly Mozart Festival Orchestra – Susanna Malkki, conductor; Garrick Ohlsson, piano. August 8, 2012.

Avery Fisher Hall at Lincoln Center, Orchestra Left (Seat S104, $50).

Program

Rendering (1989) by Schubert/Luciano Berio.

Piano Concerto No. 5 in E-flat major (“Emperor”) (1810) by Beethoven.

We came back from Hong Kong on Monday, so I was a bit apprehensive whether we could stay awake for the concert.  The fear was compounded by my lingering cough which kept me up both nights I have been home.  It turned out okay, though.  I was tired, but managed to stay awake during the entire concert.  Anne did doze off towards the end of the first half.

We read in the Program Notes a description by Berio of the piece Rendering: “This restoration is made along the lines of the modern restoration of frescoes that aims at reviving the old colors without however trying to disguise the damage that time has caused, often leaving inevitable empty patches in the composition (for instance as in the case of Giotto in Assisi).” Fair enough, and I can indeed picture what such a restored painting would look like.

Alas, it is not that straightforward when it comes to music.  Foremost amongst the many reasons why it is different with music is when it comes to restoration of a painting, we are talking about a completed work that faded with time, and the restorer’s objective is to bring back as much as she can while leaving blank the portions she isn’t sure of.  What is done with the Schubert piece wasn’t quite that: Schubert didn’t finish the piece and we therefore do not have a case of lost notes a restorer is trying to reconstruct.  A better equivalent would be someone taking Giotto’s sketches and trying to make a complete painting out of it.  Here I have to take a bit of issue with how it was done: in filling in the missing pieces, Berio did it with his own style.  When a restorer sees two disjoint segments, the thing to do is to draw a straight line between them rather than create a new idea to link them together.  And we have a lot of that here.

Enough analysis, let’s move on to the performance.  Given our seats, I expected great acoustics (or at least relatively good acoustics, this is Avery Fisher Hall, after all) but was surprised at how thin the orchestra sounded.  Perhaps it was due to the placement of the group: the stage was brought forward a bit to allow for seating behind the orchestra; perhaps it was due to this decorative “thing” hanging over the orchestra (come to think of it, it may be an acoustic thing, and if so it certainly didn’t do the job.)

The music itself is quite interesting.  To the uninitiated, which I imagine would be most of the audience, the music can either be considered a modern piece with classical elements thrown in, or a classical piece with modern elements thrown in, and it is more than just a juxtaposition of the two genres.  In my opinion, the first two movements (Allegro, Andante) are more the former, and the last movement (Allegro) the latter.  I wonder if this is due to the availability of original Schubert material with regard to the three movements.  The main contrast between Schubert and Berio, as I hear it, is that Schubert’s segments are much more solid compared to the shimmering effect of Berio’s segments.

While it is fun to analyze music this way, I would much rather hear material that appeals directly to whichever part of my brain appreciates music.  Of course many would say it’s the same part of the brain that does analysis and appreciates music.  In any case, most people would have only limited exposure to this piece – I can’t imagine going to another performance of this piece even if I wanted to – and would soon forget about it.

The Beethoven concerto certainly didn’t suffer from these issues.  It is straightforward, familiar, and always enjoyable.  The music speaks for itself, appeals to the listener directly, and moves forward at a pace that doesn’t allow time for a deep analysis.  Its three movements are: Allegro, Adagio un poco moto, and Rondo: Allegro ma non troppo.

If you consider the elements of Ohlsson’s performance - tempo, dynamics, phrasing, and overall architecture – you would rate them all high.  When taken together, however, they do not quite translate to a memorable performance.  That seems to be my beef with him in my prior write-ups on his performance.  The other blemish would be in tonight’s performance the piano playing dominated the orchestra, which I found somewhat surprising, and attribute it to more than simply acoustics.

Which leads to the subject of the conductor.  Susanna Malkki is Finnish, a former cellist who started doing full time conducting about 15 years ago.  One would root for woman conductors (two others come to mind: Marin Alsop and Xian Zhang) in this male-dominated profession.  She seems very mechanical in her movements, and at times I worried if she was in total control – this is a statement about her and the orchestra.  She has worked with some big name orchestras, though.

A couple of additional remarks.  Ohlsson played as encore a very familiar Chopin piece – Waltz No. 1, Op. 18.  Also, the annotator David Wright’s write-ups are enjoyable to read and sheds considerable light on the music, especially for the Schubert/Berio piece.  He writes for the audience, not for his peers.

Vienna Piano Trio. 7/18/2012.

Richardson Auditorium in Alexander Hall, Princeton University, Row 1, Balcony Center (free).

Trio members: Wolfgang Redik, violin; Matthias Gredler, cello; Stefan Mendl, piano.

Program

Piano Trio in A Major, Hob XV/18 by Franz Joseph Haydn (1732-1809).

Piano Trio in A Minor by Maurice Ravel (1875-1937).

Piano Trio in B flat Major D. 898, Op. 99 by Franz Schubert (1797-1828).

I again met up with David and Vivien for this concert.  Anne is overseas so I went to Princeton by myself.  It was raining hard, with the area drenched by a thunderstorm caused a temperature drop (per reading inside my car) from over 100F to the mid 70s in less than 30 minutes earlier in the afternoon.  Traffic was bad, but not particularly so for this time of the day.  David and Vivien got to Princeton early and picked up the (free) tickets, and we had dinner at Panera Bread before going over to the venue.

There were quite a few empty seats in the balcony, probably because some people decided not to venture out due to the heavy rain.  Which is a pity as this was a great concert.  There was a lot of music squeezed into the program, which, including the encore, lasted more than two hours.

I don’t go to chamber music events that often – I joke with David that 80% have been with him at these Princeton events – I certainly don’t feel I understand the “genre” well.  Regardless, I thought there was something un-Haydnesque about the Haydn piece: the techniques, the dynamics, the harmonies, are not what I would usually associate with Haydn.  Of course my knowledge of Haydn is limited by-and-large to his symphonies, string quartets, and a few choral pieces, but nonetheless … The three movements of the piece are: Allegro moderato, Andante, and Allegro.  It was brilliantly played, and got the evening off to a great start.

The Ravel piece, in my opinion was the most interesting of the three performed tonight.  It has four movements: Modere, Pantoum – Assez Vif, Passacaille – Tres Large, Final – Anime.  I don’t know French, and can only guess at the meaning.  No matter, it appears to be a rather difficult piece, and again was beautifully played by the trio.

Ravel supposedly was a bit frustrated people called Bolero his most famous work.  That complaint probably had a lot of merit to it.  I did a quick review of my blog entries, and over the last few years I have heard quite a few pieces of his, and – per my notes – I enjoyed quite a few of them (notable except being “Mother Goose.”)  If you ask me what I remember of yesterday’s piece, not much – as evidenced by what I have written about it so far.  But, if you ask me what Bolero sounds like, I can probably tap out the snare drum rat-tat-tat correctly.

Schubert’s Trio is the longest at a bit over 40 minutes.  It is very classical in structure, complete with theme, development, and modulation.  The four movements are: (i) Allegro moderato, (ii) Andante, un poco mosso, (iii) Scherzo: Allegro, and (iv) Rondo: Allegro vivace.   In and of itself it is a great piece, however, it felt a bit light-weight when compared to Ravel’s work.  Which probably makes for an interesting programming question: why not flip the two halves of the program around, and have the concert end on the more exciting Ravel.  Not that the energy level of the performers was sapped by the time they got to the end, but the music did come across somewhat that way.

While writing this blog, I looked at my iTunes library and found out to my surprise (dismay) that I actually have a recording of the Schubert piece.  Didn’t I say I don’t listen to chamber music that much?  In fairness, the first movement did sound a bit familiar …

The audience applause was very enthusiastic, justifiably so.  The Trio played an encore: a slow movement from a piece by Schumann.

A few words about the Trio, gleamed from the short writeup in the handout for the evening.  It has been around for about 20 years, and has an active performance calendar.  The members – all male – are all middle-aged, not the usual age of chamber music players that perform at these Princeton summer concerts.  The two string instruments are Guadagninis (1772 violin, 1752 cello.)  One would think the tone and volume should be quite similar.  Not so, at least to my ears, the violin’s sound is much more brilliant, and the cello is at times overwhelmed.  I wonder if my hearing is what it used to be, or that there is quite a bit of learning to do …

One of those days I will be able to write a “real” chamber music review, but not today.

Paris Opera Ballet – Adolphe Adam’s Giselle. July 14, 2012.

David H. Koch Theater at Lincoln Center – Orchestra (Seat L102, $82).

Libretto by Theophile Gautier, Jules-Henri Vernoy de Saint Georges

Music by Adolphe Adam

Choreography by Jean Coralli, Jules Perrot (1841)

Original Staging by Marius Petipa (1887); restaged by Patrice Bart, Eugene Polyakov (1991)

Origianl Set and Costume Design by Alexandre Benois (1924); Sets Realized by Silvano Mattei; Costumes Realized by Claudie Gastine

Story.  See prior blog.

Conductor – Koen Kessels; Giselle – Isabella Ciaravola, Count Albrecht – Karl Paquette, Hilarion – Audric Bezard, Berthe – Christine Peltzer, Peasants (Pas de Deux) – Heloise Bourdon & Axel Ibot, Myrta – Marie-Agnes Gillot, Two Wilis – Amandine Albisson, Sarah Kora Dayanova.

I do not understand ballet, I have seen this before, I didn’t plan on it (actually I literally flipped a coin), so why did I come see this again?  I am still trying to understand ballet; I also wonder how ABT compares with other ballet troupes; the tickets are on sale for a substantial discount; and with Anne away overseas I am by myself.  These were reasonably good reasons to go.  I decided not to get the supercheap fourth ring ticket and got a seat in the orchestra section instead.  Given the smallish size of Koch theater, I was seated quite close to the stage.  With the use of binoculars, I actually could see the expressions (and sweat) on the dancers’ face.

It is a bit ironic that you can’t see the orchestra while seated in the orchestra section.  And the slope of the seating section is too gentle so if you have a tall person in front of you, then you are out of luck.  Alas, that is the situation I found myself in.

When the music began, I found to my dismay that I didn’t remember it – I heard it in May 2011.  The orchestra – NYC Opera – played quite well.  I have the same opinion of the music as I did after the first hearing – sugary, oft-repeated, serves mostly as accompaniment – but to my surprise I found it to work quite well in this instance.  The sets are not elaborate, and I am sure some of that was just trees painted on fabric.  I do appreciate the simplicity, especially of the second act – just a simple cross over a tomb in the forest with a church in the background.

I have always wondered if the group dances at ABT can or should be more precise.  Well, I am not going to get the answer from this group, because they certainly didn't move with the precision of a marching band.  (Or perhaps that is not something to look for to begin with.)  In general I thought the dancing was very good.  The choreography for the group dances called for rather difficult moves on the individual dancer, to do that collectively would be quite an achievement, and the troupe did that on multiple occasions.  Some of the vignettes (segments? I don’t know what they are called) are a bit drawn out, but I suppose the intent is to give dancers the opportunity to show off their skills.  The beginning of Act II was quite convincing, the spirits first came out with veils on their faces, these veils were yanked off together by people off-stage, creating an interesting effect.  I actually caught myself thinking “this is giving me the willies!”

The individual dancers were impressive also.  When one sits up close, one can see some of the hesitation and mistakes (for example, not nailing a landing), but one also appreciates how difficult some of the movements are.  The foot movements look awfully difficult, and impressive, and boy, can Albrecht jump.  And it is amazing to see how Giselle transforms from a happy-go-lucky village lass to a somber ghost.

A few words about the Paris Opera Ballet.  It is the oldest national ballet in the world, dating back to the days of Louis XIV, and was formed under the name of the Royal Academy of Music.  It apparently draws most of its performers from the Paris Opera Ballet School.  Which makes me wonder if the dancers are mostly French, or the school enrolls a lot of foreign students.  They didn’t have a performance on during our few days in Paris in late May, and I wonder how they would look on their home turf.  (They will probably have an advantage over the Opera since there is no language barrier.)

Looking back at my writeup on the last time I saw this ballet, I discovered I was okay with it.  I am sure I enjoyed today's a lot more, since I don’t recall liking the music and appreciating the dancers’ virtuosity that much.  Maybe this is due to my proximity to the stage?  Maybe the ballet is the “oldest continually-performed ballet” for a reason?  Or maybe the Paris Opera Ballet is simply better at this then American Ballet Theater?  If it is the last reason, then – like my remark about some concert reviewers – perhaps I need to go out more.

The troupe will be at Lincoln Center for about a month, this was the second performance of this ballet during the troupe’s visit.  As of now (late evening, July 14) I have not found a review.

I found on 7/15 this New York Times review.  The reviewer succeeds in talking from both sides of his mouth and sounding sophisticated at the same time, praising and condemning the performance in alternate sentences.  He did make an interesting observation about the necks of the French dancers and alluded to the fact that they are mostly French without sounding too politically incorrect.  He also likes the music here more than ABT's; evidently they are different scores.  It's a pity that he didn't provide a head-to-head ABT and Paris Opera Ballet comparison, perhaps his courage does have a limit, afterall.

American Ballet Theater – Mendelssohn’s The Dream; Stravinsky’s Firebird. June 23, 2012.

Metropolitan Opera House at Lincoln Center – Dress Circle (Seat C125, $75.)

The Dream

Choreography by Frederick Ashton

Music by Felix Mendelssohn-Bartholdy, arranged by John Lanchbery

Staged by Anthony Dowell with Christopher Carr

Sets and costumes by David Walker

Lighting design by John B. Read

Conductor – Ormsby Wilkins; Titania – Xiomara Reyes, Oberon – Cory Stearns, Puck – Herman Cornejo, Bottom – Alexei Agoudine, Helena – Marica Riccetto, Hermia – Stella Abrera, Demetrius – Sascha Radetsky, Lysander – Jared Matthewsa.

The Young People’s Chorus of New York City, Francisco J. Nunez, artistic director.

Jody Sheinbaum, solo soprano; Lindsay Bogaty, solo mezzo-soprano.

Firebird

Choreography by Alexei Ratmansky

Music by Igor Stravinsky (“L’Oiseau de Feu”)

Scenery by Simon Pastukh

Costumes by Galina Solovyeva, costume consultant: Holly Hynes

Lighting by Brad Fields

Projections designed by Wendall Harrington

Conductor – Charles Barker; Firebird – Natalia Osipova, Ivan – Marcelo Gomes, Maiden – Simone Messmer, Kaschei – David Hallberg

Firebird story.  Ivan is looking for his lost love and hides when he sees a flock of firebirds.  He captures one and gets a magical feather to be used to summon the firebird when he is in danger.  A group of maidens under spell then appears, and Ivan is drawn to one of them.  As they come together the evil sorcerer Kaschei appears to harm them.  Ivan uses the feather to summon the firebird, who leads everyone to dance until they collapse.  The firebird then struggles with Kaschei, who seduces the maiden.  The firebird helps Ivan break the spell by shattering an egg that contains Kaschei’s soul and power, and Kaschei dies.  The maidens awake and are liberated.

We got a double-header today.  Both on paper should be quite interesting, Mendelssohn’s Midsummer Night’s Dream and Stravinsky’s Firebird.  The cast and the conductor were different, the same orchestra performed in both ballets.

First, The Dream.  I couldn’t find any synopsis or reference to the story.  “Luckily” we saw The Enchanted Island recently, so we were somewhat familiar with the characters (although sometimes it is difficult to decide who belongs in The Dream or The Tempest.)  My conjecture is that the ballet isn’t trying to tell the whole Shakespeare story, and I found it difficult to guess what scenes were being depicted during the performance.  You know there are these two pairs of lovers who may or may not be getting married (well, the wedding march is included), you wonder what this cupid-like character (Puck, and boy, could he jump) and little child (Changeling) are doing there, and you cringe at how Mendelssohn’s music is botched in the arrangement.  To boot, the dances didn’t look all that compelling.  Perhaps ABT expects its audience knows their Shakespeare, or perhaps it thinks the staging and dances are compelling enough that no explanation is necessary, or perhaps it is just incompetent.  I probably would have trouble keeping up when I am at my sharpest; and today isn’t one of them since I just returned from Hong Kong two days ago and have not been getting enough sleep.

The Firebird worked out much better for me.  I learned from Prokofiev’s Romeo and Juliet that a composer would extract Orchestral Suites from music he wrote for the ballet.  That tidbit came in handy today since I didn’t have to wonder why the ballet music sounded different from what I remembered of prior orchestral performances I heard.  (For the record, I did hear the complete ballet in April, 2008.)  While we are on this subject, the music for this ballet sounded much fuller than The Dream, perhaps due to its not having been tainted by the ubiquitous arranger.

The colors were certainly nice.  The costumes for the firebirds, the maidens, and Koschei evoke the appropriate images.  Anne also remarked the scenery reminds one of Chagall, who actually did the scenery and costumes by Marc Chagall.

With a story to follow, things certainly made a lot more sense.  Hallberg, whom we saw two weeks ago as Onegin, played the role of the evil Kaschei very well.  Ivan, however, didn’t leave a lasting impression, as I write this two days after the performance.

Overall, the evening had a lot of potential to showcase what great ballet can be: choreography, scenery, costumes, and music.  Despite some of the highlights, it failed.

The New York Times Review goes into great detail about The Dream, which it raves about, and pans in a few short paragraphs The Firebird, going as far as calling it “Alexei Ratmansky’s new comic psychodrama.”

New York Philharmonic – Alan Gilbert, conductor; Emanuel Ax, piano; New York Choral Artists. June 22, 2012.

Avery Fisher Hall at Lincoln Center, Orchestra 1 (Seat P106, $70.)

Program

Piano Concerto No. 22 in E-flat major, K.482 (1785) by Mozart (1756-91).

Mass in C minor, Great, K.427 (1782-83) by Mozart.

Artists

Jennifer Zetlan, soprano; Jennifer Johnson Cano, Mezzo-soprano; Paul Appleby, Tenor; Joshua Hopkins, Baritone.

Joseph Flummerfelt, Director, New York Choral Artists

After dropping off some items at church for the garage sale on Saturday, we went to the Yangs and got a ride from them into the city.  Being a summer Friday afternoon, traffic was quite bad.  We navigated through side streets of Jersey City to get in the Holland Tunnel, and then had to crawl along for a while because of an accident on West Side Highway.  The trip took over two hours, and we only had 15 minutes or so to gulp down a sandwich purchased at the Expresso Bar in Avery Fisher Hall.

Other than a few “special events” scheduled for next week, this is the final series for the season.  Ax, being the artist-in-residence for next year, is a natural pick as the solo artist.  Most people think of a mass as choral music accompanied by an orchestra, thus I find it a bit interesting that the final program of the season does not have the orchestra play a dominant role.  One could psycho-analyze this in depth, or just sit back and enjoy the program, which I chose to do.

I have always enjoyed Ax’s playing.  Technically flawed sometimes, but the musicality always came across.  This is the first Mozart concerto I heard him play, though.  The Program Notes mentions this interesting correlation between Mozart’s popularity and the number of piano concertos he wrote during any given year.  Makes sense as Mozart wrote the concertos mostly with himself as the soloist in mind.  Three were written in 1785, a decline from prior years – and Mozart was not quite 30 years old.  I often make the remark that Mozart’s music comes across as a bit repetitious, this concerto does not.  Actually the first two movements (Allegro and Andante) sounded downright un-Mozartian to me.  The Allegro [Rondo] third movement did exhibit a lot of Mozart characteristics; however, it was a delight, especially at the relatively fast tempo taken.  Ax played his own cadenzas, since none that Mozart wrote survived.

Of all the piano concertos I recall having heard in Avery Fisher Hall, this one had the best balance between the soloist and the orchestra.  That probably had more to do with the seats we got rather than the actual performance itself.  Anne at first complained the piano was too loud, but I convinced her that this was one of the few times a live performance sounded like a CD playing.  Overall it was a great performance: the audience certainly thought so, with the enthusiastic applause at the conclusion, and the attempt of some to do so after the first movement.  If this had happened a few years ago, I would have doubted myself and wondered what did they hear that was so remarkable that I didn’t.  Now I am more confident in attributing their behavior to being star-struck.  The sound was nice and crisp (the way I like Mozart being played), the balance was great (perhaps due to our seats), the virtuosity impressive (especially for a Mozart concerto), the orchestra was competent (I even remarked all they had to do was to come in early and go over a few passages, and they would be ready), so what’s not to like?  For me the disappointment was the overall architecture that Ax was so good at didn’t come across as clearly as I had wished.

The Program Notes had some interesting background about the mass.  It posited that Mozart wrote it to get on the good side of his father Leopold since Mozart married Constanze without Leopold’s blessing.  He did not complete the work either because Leopold seemed to accept Constanze, or because Mozart was too busy.  Evidently many scholars tried to complete the work by splicing in the missing parts; tonight’s performance, however, mostly kept to the original.  Thus we have Kyrie, Gloria, Credo, Sanctus, and Benedictus qui venit; and some of the sections are incomplete.  A expert in masses may complain, but it worked fine as far as I am concerned, even though the ending seemed a bit abrupt.

The soloists are all on the young side, and a couple of them are products of the Lindemann Young Artist Development Program.  It turns out we had seen several of them at the Metropolitan Opera: Zetland as Xenia in Boris Godunov,  Johnson Cano as Wellunde (a Rhinemaiden) in Das Rheingold and Gotterdammerung, and Appleby as Demetrius in The Enchanted Island.  Hopkins actually didn't have a solo part: he only sang as part of the quartet at the end.   I didn’t remember any of them, probably because they didn’t have the lead roles, and also because I am not familiar with the vocal artists scene.  The balance between soloists, chorus, and orchestra was great; the soprano choir voice sounded a bit strained at times, though.  The only detraction was Johnson Cano tended to move around a lot more than the other soloists, which was slightly disconcerting.  One expects a bit more harmony in stage presence as well, and wonders if the movements are intended to upstage others.  It is especially unfortunate when this is the first thing about the performance that comes to mind.

I came away relatively pleased with the overall program, Anne came away saying she really enjoyed it.  Perhaps I should listen to Mozart more often.  In any case, we were glad Shirley made the trip with us.

The relatively straightforward New York Times Review spent as much ink on the length of the New York Philharmonic season as it did on the performance.

Hong Kong Philharmonic – Oleg Caetani, conductor; Johannes Moser, cello. June 16, 2012.

Hong Kong Cultural Center Concert Hall, Stalls 2 (Seat HH62, HK$240).

Program – Russian Shakespeare

Hamlet – Fantasy Overture after Shakespeare, Op, 67, by Tchaikovsky (1840-1893).

Variations on a Rococo Theme, Op. 33, by Tchaikovsky.

Romeo and Juliet Suite by Prokofiev (1891-1953).

I think to call the program by the name of “Russian Shakespeare” is too clever by half.  Yes, the composers are Russian, and yes, most of the music references Shakespeare.  On the other hand, the title would make people hesitate to attempt something so esoteric.  Cases in point: I couldn’t get anyone to go with me, so I ended up going along; and the attendance at this concert is one of the lowest at any HKPO concert I have been to.  I am not only saying the program title is too sophisticated for a Hong Kong audience, I am saying it is too sophisticated even for a New York audience.  (For proof, see my rumblings about NY Phil’s Modern Beethoven series.)

Which is a real pity.  All the pieces on the program are interesting, they were done on the whole well, and one would get to see this (undoubtedly) up and coming young cellist Johannes Moser.

The concert didn’t start out that great.  In the past I have always remarked that the Hong Kong Philharmonic is a surprisingly competent orchestra.  For the first piece they seemed lackluster and a big dragging.  To me Tchaikovsky doesn’t bother with a lot of mystery, he just tells the story the way it enfolds, with great musical themes, lively tempo, and dramatic dynamics.  And Hamlet is great drama, what with murder, insanity, and ghosts.  While not the entire story is told in this 18 or so minute piece, there should be enough drama in it to make it riveting.  All I heard was a competent reading of the score.

Things got considerable better with the Variations.  They are described in considerable detail in the Program Notes (which are free, by the way) and are quite easy to follow.  What is impressive is the young cellist Moser (he was born in 1979.)  The auditorium is small, so I am sure it helps: but I was simply amazed at how he made the instrument sing with clarity and feeling.  Other than the high register notes, I don’t know how challenging the piece is for a virtuoso cellist, but Moser seems to know the piece like the back of his hand, and seems to relish playing it.  He should: per the Program Notes he won a Special Prize at the 2002 Tchaikovsky Competition for the piece.

He played two encore pieces.  The first one is the Andante Cantabile adapted from Tchaikovsky’s String Quartet.  Even I could tell it was technically not difficult, but the piece highlighted how pleasant good cello playing could sound.  The second encore was a selection from Bach’s Cello Suite No. 1 (the Sarabande, I think).  That piece unfortunately didn’t do much for me, except to think “too much of a good thing.”  Paraphrasing what George said in a Seinfeld episode, you should leave with the audience wishing for more, rather than have them think enough already.

In any case, I am sure we will hear a lot more from him (or about him, at least.)

We have seen the ballet Romeo and Juliet a couple of times, and enjoyed both the choreography and the music.  Prokofiev took 20 numbers from the original score and formed them into two orchestral suites; he liked the idea so much that he added a third suite some ten years later.  (The ballet must be about 2 hours, so there was enough material to draw from.)  On top of that, conductors have compiled their own suites by picking from these three, and to add back some numbers that didn’t make its way into them.  Evidently tonight’s performance is one of those.

First let me list what was performed tonight: 

• Introduction (from the ballet).  Suggestion of early morning and beginning of play.
• Juliet as a young girl (Suite 2, No. 2).  Young, but beginning to come of age.
• Montagues aned Capulets (Suite 2, No. 1).  Hints at the upcoming tragedy.  One of the more memorable numbers in the ballet depicting the two families.
• Masks (Suite 1, No. 5).  Romeo and his friends gate-crashing a ball wearing masks.
• Gavotte (from the ballet).  Departure of guests from the masked ball.
• Romeo and Juliet (Suite 1, No. 6).  The famous balcony scene.
• Friar Laurence (Suite 2, No. 3).  The priest who tried to help the young lovers.
• Tybalt’s Death (Suite 1, No. 7).  Romeo kills Tybalt in anger, contributing to the on-going feud.

 The selection of the numbers does not make much sense if one wants to tell a story.  It works reasonably well as a musical number.  Of course, the Notes does not help as the listener would inevitably ask why it would conclude with Tybalt’s Death, other than this number's dramatic ending.  (I don’t remember how the ballet ends musically, but wonder it would provide an equally dramatic end to the Suite.)

I enjoyed it, and I am sure that knowing what the selection is trying to depict helped.  The applause afterwards was as enthusiastic as I ever heard from a Hong Kong audience.

This is the first time I heard (or heard of) the conductor Oleg Caetani.  He seemed a bit mechanical in his interpretation, and had to refer to his music constantly.  The thought that the HKPO is unfamiliar with his style crossed my mind initially – perhaps there is a ways for the orchestra to go yet, as I can’t imagine expressing similar sentiments with the New York Philharmonic or Boston Symphony.

One other curious fact.  The orchestra is quite large (10 cellos and 8 basses for the Prokofiev), and the concert hall is on the small side, yet the sound isn’t as deep as one would expect.  I wonder why.

Sebastian Chamber Players. June 9, 2012.

All Angel's Episcopal Church, New York City - Hall ($15.)

Yi-heng Yang, fortepiano
Daniel S. Lee, violin
Ezra Seltzer, cello

Program: The Composer's Instrument
Trio in E minor, Hob. XV/12 (1788-89) by Joseph Haydn (1732-1809).
   Allegro moderato
   Andante; Rondo
   Presto
Sonata for violin and piano in C, K. 296 (1778) by Mozart (1756-1791).
   Allegro vivace
   Andante sostenuto
   Rondeau: Allegro
Sonata for piano in E minor, Wq. 59/1, H. 281 (1785-1788) by
          Carl Philipp Emanuel Bach (1714-1788).
   Presto -
   Andantino
   Rondo: Andante un poco
Trio in G, Op. 1, No. 2 (1793-94) by Beethoven (1770-1827).
   Adagio - Allegro vivace
   Largo con espressione
   Scherzo: Allegro - Trio
   Finale: Presto
Encore trio piece by Haydn.

After the ballet we met up with with Yi-heng's parents at Gennaro's for dinner, after which we went to All Angel's Church for the recital by the Sebastian Chamber Players, with Yi-heng at the fortepiano.  She explained a bit how the fortepiano differs from the modern day piano.  The one used at the concert was borrowed from Julliard, and is a replica of an instrument used at Mozart's time.

The instrument was quite out of tune, the tuner frantically worked on it before the concert, and during the intermission.

There is a collection of paintings and lithographs by Ben Zion and Marc Chagall at the church which we got to see before the performance.

American Ballet Theater – Tchaikovsky’s Onegin. June 9, 2012.

Metropolitan Opera House at Lincoln Center – Dress Circle (Seat C101, $73).

Choreography by John Cranko

Music by Peter Tchaikovsky, arranged and orchestrated by Kurt-Heinz Stolze

Conductor – David LaMarche; Eugene Onegin – David Hallberg, Lensky – Joseph Gorak, Tatiana – Hee Seo, Olga – Yuriko Kajiya, Madame Larina their mother – Sarah Smith, Their nurse – Kelly Boyd, Prince Gremin – Roddy Doble.

Story.  Lensky brings his friend Onegin from St. Petersburg to visit the area since Onegin is bored with the big city.  Tatiana falls in love with Onegin, writes him a love note, but Onegin rejects her and tears the note up.  As the provincial gentry come to celebrate Tatiana’s birthday, Onegin flirts with Lensky’s fiancé Olga which causes Lensky to challenge him to a duel, at which Lensky is killed.  Onegin continues with his search for meaning, when he returns to St. Petersburg and is honored at a ball host by Prince Gremin, Onegin finds to his surprise that he is actually in love with Tatiana.  He writes Tatiana a love letter, but is rejected by Tatiana the same way he rejected her years ago: with the love note torn up.

We saw the opera quite a few years ago, also at the Met Opera House, by a Russian group (I think it is actually from St. Petersburg, but not sure.)  I don’t remember much of the music, or the story, or how well it was done, except that the sets were quite Spartan, with a white piece of cloth serving as the river where the duel took place.  Today’s sets were a great improvement over that, although they would not be what one would call elaborate, with the possible exception of the third act where the ballroom had three huge chandeliers.  The costumes were also quite well designed.  Not overtly Russian, but do evoke images of the countryside.

I suspect the score arranger did a lot to Tchaikovsky’s original score for the ballet.  I wouldn’t even have guessed it was written by Tchaikovsky without my prior knowledge.  The melodies sounded nice enough, but the saccharine music mostly served the choreography and probably won’t stand up well on its own.  The choreography when not predictable is confusing.  Most of the pas de deux (what’s the plural form?) and the one pas de trois are quite disjoint.  Remember my earlier remark about the music as being inadequate?  I actually felt it was wasted when Olga and Lensky had their pas de deux.  I find the dream of Tatiana particularly disappointing: it is a series of jerky movements with a muddled message.  When I make this remark to Anne, she said I just don’t understand what romantic means.

On the other hand, there are some moments that are quite well done.  The group dances look very nice with well-coordinated movements; some, such as the leaps by the females dances while running, are quite difficult.  And I have never seen someone go backwards on point the entire width of the stage, as Tatiana did when rejected by Onegin.

When Onegin first came on the stage, he had this haughty look about him that eventually gave way to a more subdued stance, even though he didn’t slump as I predicted he would.  His blonde hair actually got a bit darker as he turned gray – not sure if that happens in real life.  Both Tatiana and Olga were played by Asian dancers, probably a first at ABT, and they acquitted themselves very well, garnering enthusiastic applause at curtain call.

The New York Times reviewer saw a different cast.  While he manages to find good things to say about the dancers, he certainly shares my same discomfort with the music and the choreography.  He points out the score has other Tchaikovsky’s works interwoven into it.  Actually the one tune (a waltz) Anne remember from the opera isn’t in the ballet score at all.

Despite all my misgivings, the story still came through.  That may speak to the original creative power of the original artists (the story is based on a poem by Pushkin), or the simple fact that regret is such a common emotion.

Tonhalle Orchestra - Giovanni Antonini, conductor. June 6, 2012.

Tonhalle, Zurich, Switzerland.  Main Floor (Row 25, Seat 586, CHF 85.)

Program

Concerto in G minor RV 576 for Violin, Oboe and Orchestra by Vivaldi (1678-1741).

Artists: George-Cosmin Banica, violin; Simon Fuchs, oboe; Giovanni Antonini, recorder; Elaine Frankhauser, alto-recorder; Emanuele Forni, lute.

Concerto in E minor RV464 for Bassoon and Orchestra by Vivaldi.

Artists: Matthew Racz, bassoon; Emanuele Forni, lute.

Symphony in G minor KV183 by Mozart (1756-1791).

Symphony No. 1 in C major Op. 21 by Beethoven (1770-1827).

We actually tried to go for another Zurich performance (La Boheme) on June 5, 2012.  We knew we wouldn’t have a lot of spare time, coming back from Zermatt that afternoon.  Indeed we missed the 1:49 pm train and thus had to take the 2:49 pm which got in at around 6 pm.  It became quite impossible, what with trying to find our bearings in the city, and checking into the hotel.  Well …

Tonhalle is reasonably easy to get to from the hotel, two tram rides and a short walk at both ends, about 30 minutes in total.  It is ornately decorated, seats 1455, and was inaugurated in 1895 by Brahms.  For tonight the hall was perhaps 85% to 90% full.  Considering Zurich is a city of about 350,000 (metropolitan area about 1 million), and that this program is repeated three times (one abbreviated), this is not bad at all.

The acoustics turned out to be quite good.  The orchestra size for the Vivaldi pieces was small, so the thought “Orpheus” came immediately to mind.  Even though Antonini played the recorder, he also doubled as the conductor for the piece.  The balance was quite good, except the two recorders by nature sound quite soft, so sometimes difficult to hear.  The performance was quite animated, and quite enjoyable.  The three movements are Allegro, Larghetto, and Allegro.

A program costs CHF 5, which is not unreasonable, but we didn’t get one since it is in Swiss (that would be German for this part of Switzerland).  What is unreasonable is they didn’t even hand out a small flyer listing the program and the musicians.  I also think the artists should protest as it takes a lot to get onto an international stage, and people end up saying “I really enjoyed the music but I don’t know who played in the concert.”

I did know from the posters I saw that Mozart and Beethoven were also on the program.  So I naturally thought the next piece was by Mozart.  After a while I decided it sounded too baroque, and without repeated notes, so it had to be Vivaldi again.  The bassoonist was certainly very energetic, and there are some very difficult passages that he nailed – most of the time anyway.  What I found surprising was how low the bassoon sounded.  The definitive bassoon passage for me is the one from “The Rite of Spring,” which sounds at least an octave higher.  The movements are Allegro poco, Andante, and Allegro.

The symphony by Mozart (his 25^th) was reasonably familiar, and the orchestra played it well.  From my college days I have thought of Mozart as “Master of the Repeated Note,” not necessary a term of praise.  After listening to this symphony I must add the title “Master of the Repetition.”  Definitely not a term of praise.  The symphony itself is quite short at 25 or so minutes, so without the repeats it may only be 15 minutes long.  The four movements are Allegro con brio, Andante, Menuetto – Trio, and Allegro.  Evidently I was wrong in thinking Beethoven invented the term “Allegro con brio.”  Of course there is “con brio” and there is “CON BRIO.”

We heard Beethoven’s Symphony No. 1 recently, as part of the New York Philharmonic “Modern Beethoven” series, conducted by of all people Tonhalle’s Music Director David Zinman.  Since I went to three of these concerts at two different locations, I don’t remember if I heard it in NJPAC or Avery Fisher (I am in a plane as I type this.)  I don’t remember enjoying that performance as much as this one.  One possible reason is that I was “Beethovened-out” by the time I heard this with the New York Philharmonic, even though I didn’t feel it at the time; or tonight’s was simply a better performance.  In any case, for me this reconfirms my earlier observation that Beethoven defined himself as a romantic composer with this work instead of showing signs of transitioning into a romantic composer.  For the record, the movements are (i) Adagio molto – Allegro con brio; (ii) Andante cantabile con moto; (iii) Menuetto: Allegro molto e vivace; and (iv) Finale: Adagio – Allegro molto e vivace. [Note: We heard it in Avery Fisher.]

There were eight first violins and two double basses used in this symphony.  The orchestra’s roster lists 21 first violins and 8 double basses, which actually shocked me a little bit.  My understanding is a lot of European countries heavily subsidize their artistic organizations, perhaps this is a symptom of that?

In any event, we got out at around 9:30 pm and it was still light outside.  We were back in our hotel at around 10 pm.

Frohsinn-Cacilia Choir of Interlaken, Switzerland. Erich Roth – Conductor. June 3, 2012.

Schlosskirche Interlaken, Switzerland (Seat Rear Right Bench CHF20.)

Program

Triumphszene aus der Oper AIDA by Verdi (1813-1901).

Messa di Gloria by Rossini (1792-1868).

Artists

Orchestra ad hoc.  Concertmaster: Daniela Ianos-Latsch.

Beatrice Ruchti, Soprano; Pascal Marti, Tenor; Christoph Meinen, Tenor; Martin Weidmann, Bass.

We saw a poster for this concert at the Interlaken West train station the day before, and after asking the front desk person at our hotel we figured out where it was going to happen.  We got back from our tour early (it was cloudy) and got to the church 10 minutes before start time.  All the seats were sold out, but they put out benches at CHF 20 each.  Those were soon all gone.  I estimate about 400 people attended the concert.  The total number of musicians was at least a hundred.  They did perform this the day before though.

I didn’t know what to expect, but thought the Aida piece is always a crowd pleaser, and Rossini always wrote enjoyable operas, so he may do equally well with Masses.  We just saw his opera a few days before in Paris.

Overall the performance was very satisfying.  The most notable passage in the Aida piece is the trumpet announcement, and it was done with confidence.  The choir voices were not always done with precision or balance, but that is to be expected with (what I assume to be) an amateur choir.  The Mass sounded happy – even for the passage on Christ’s suffering.  The composition concluded with a rather complex movement by the choir, which they couldn’t quite get (I think even the conductor didn’t know how to get them back on track).  For tonight I was ready to ignore details like that, and simply enjoyed the concert.

The soloists – needed for the Mass - all had adequate voices; the church is on the small side after all.  Their dynamic range is quite good, although I would have like some softer passages.  Particularly worthy of mention are the English horn and the clarinet, they sounded great when accompanying a couple of soloists.

With my limited knowledge of Italian, Latin, and German, I actually could make out most of the libretto, which was very satisfying after my Paris experience.  I assume many conductors are left-handed, but had never seen one who held the baton in his left hand, until today.  Worked okay, except he dropped it during the last few minutes.

I believe most if not all of the musicians are from the surrounding area which doesn’t boast a very large population.  In that regard comparison with the Bach Choir of Bethlehem is inescapable in my mind.  I certainly enjoyed tonight much more than I did back in May.

Then I only have to drive about 2 hours from New Jersey to Bethlehem, PA.

Opera Paris – Rossini’s Le Barbier de Seville. May 29, 2012.

Opera Bastille, Paris, France.  Section Parterre (Seat E44, E115).

Story.  See before.

Conductor – Marco Armiliato.  Il Conte D’Almaviva – Antonino Sirgusa, Bartolo – Maurizio Muraro, Rosina – Karine Deshayes, Figaro – Tassis Christoyannis, Basilio – Carlo Cigni, Fiorello – Vladmimir Kapshuk, Berta – Jeannette Fisher, Un ufficiale – Lucio Prete.

We met up with Kin and his family in Paris, but couldn’t get them interested to see an opera; so Anne and I ended up going by ourselves.  The weather in Paris has been nice for the three days we have been here (today is May 30), shirt-sleeves weather, generally not too hot.

The building is relatively new (I don’t have reliable web access in the hotel I’m at, so can’t do the research), and is now the main venue for operas for Opera Paris.  The traditional opera house is still in use, and we saw a display at Musee d’Orsay, and can usually pick it out if we are at a high point (Basilicia Sacre Coeur, e.g.).  It remains impressive, I wonder if we will get to visit it the next couple of days.

I got tickets mostly because I wanted to try the opera at a different location, and because Paris has had a long opera tradition.  I also read somewhere that subtitles are available in both French and English.  Turns out tonight they had it only in French, which made the story basically unintelligible, even though I had some idea of what the storyline is.  Suffering from a huge jet-lag (or lack of sleep, sometimes they are the same), I just had a hard time keeping awake and had trouble concentrating while awake.

The sets are about the same level of complexity as what I remember of the Met production we saw a few years ago.  Certainly the rotating stage aspect was the same.  The costume and building designs were basically middle-eastern, which generally worked for this production.  Only problem is how many people from the area have “Count” in their titles.  The only possible reason is there is this “off script” segment they put in where Lindoro (Count Almaviva) became Football (Soccer) Player No. 10 and hammed it up a bit with his football techniques.  My son told Anne the actually person wearing No. 10 is Moroccan French – that would explain the many flags on stage at one point also.  While it certainly was interesting, I didn’t think the overall quality of the opera needed the division.

The acoustics of the hall is great.  Perhaps that’s because of our seats, or because the main hall is on the small side.  While sometimes I wish the voices would be a bit more sonorous, they generally projected clearly into our seats.  The orchestra seems a bit on the small side, but it produced a good sound.  The overture was quite enjoyable, the conducting having given it a slightly different interpretation.

There were these two men who, soon after they sat down in their seats, began to move to other empty seats, climbing over rows of seats at times.  The seats they had during the first half were claimed by their rightful owners after the intermission, so they ended up in their original seats.  While they are atypical (after all, they were two out of thousands), their behavior somehow adds to my view of Parisienne’s rudeness.

We didn’t get out of the concert until about 10:40 pm.  It was about 11:30 pm when we got back.  The metro was surprising busy this time of day.  Also, we happened to pass by the old opera house (Garnier) the next day.  It is an extremely imposing and ornate building.  I don’t know what the acoustics and seats are like, but certainly would like to be able to pay it a visit some time.