Stevens Cooperative School Middle School Spring Concert. May 13, 2025.

Gym at Hoboken Campus.  General seating.

Program

Students started doing various instruments starting at fifth grade.  Reid picked the violin.  This was his first concert playing a musical instrument.

Because of limited space, only 2 audience members were admitted for each student.  Kuau gave up his spot as he had two more events involving Reid the next couple of days.  We were advised we could just show up and no one would object, which we did, with Ellie.

The concert was quite long, at over an hour.  Both the students and the audience were enthusiastic throughout.  Seventh and eighth graders are teenagers, so it was not surprising some of them - actually surprisingly few - acted cool sometimes.  Being the biased grandparents that we are, we are glad we went.

Afterwards Anne and I had a simple meal at the corner Vietnamese restaurant.

"What the World Needs Now."  Haven't heard it for a long long while.

Boston Symphony Orchestra. Andris Nelsons, conductor; Baiba Skride, violin. May 3, 2025.

Boston Symphony Hall.  Center Balcony (Seat F28, $76).

Program - Decoding Shostakovich, Orchestra Program 5.

Violin Concerto No. 1 in A minor, Op. 77[99] (1948) by Shostakovich (1906-1975).

Symphony No. 8 in C minor, Op. 65 (1943).

Why does the violin concerto have two opus numbers?

We were in the area for the NEC Prep concert earlier today, so we also bought tickets for this evening's BSO concert.  It was the conclusion of their "Decoding Shostakovich" Festival.  In addition to the five BSO concerts (this would be the last), there were also ensemble performances, and talks.  Associating Shostakovich with "Festival" is a bit strange (so is Mahler), the talks and concerts (and their accompanying notes) probably would add a lot of appreciation to the hitherto casual listener.  The entire festival can be overwhelming: in my case, two concerts 4 pieces were more than enough to keep track of.  It still does not explain why in one program Uchida played Beethoven's 4th piano concerto.  Great performance, no doubt, but how did they hang together?  (Perhaps Program Notes for that concert would explain, and didn't even need six degrees of separation.  I skimmed over the Notes for that program - still available on line on 5/8/2025 - and didn't see any connection mentioned.)

I remember the name Baiba Skride from a concert in Taipei I attended.  That was many years ago (2014), she played Brahms's violin concerto.  Checking on my blog entry for that event, I enjoyed that performance.

Rightly or wrongly, whenever I hear a Shostakovich piece I want to know if Shostakovich was being "patriotic," or was he expressing dissent, and whether the expressed patriotism is actually mockery in disguise.  It is hard to tell for the piece.  That it was first performed in 1955, several years before it was written, resulted in many musicologists (or even historians) to think there was a political message that could only be publicized after Stalin's death in 1953.  Some attribute the delay to Oistrakh, to whom the concerto was dedicated.  Today's Program Notes added the possibility that the Jewish flavor of the piece caused the delay as the USSR turned quite antisemitic at that time.

Indeed I noted quite a bit of Jewishness in the concerto.  Shostakovich reportedly said "the distinguishing feature of Jewish music is the ability to build a jolly melody on sad intonations."  I can convince myself I experienced that; but nothing like what one gets with "Fiddler on the Roof".

The theme DSCH is in the concerto; but I didn't get it.  It has four movements: (1) Nocturne.  Moderato (2) Scherzo.  Allegro (3) Passacaglia.  Andante; and (4) Burlesque.  Allegro con brio.  And a technically difficult cadenza between the last movements.  The Program Notes also described the moods and techniques involved.  While useful in appreciating the virtuosity of the soloist and the orchestra (perhaps even the composer), I found them not very helping for a first time listener.

But I am not a first time listener.  There are three other entries in this blog, the most recent one being two years ago.  While I wasn't blown away by that one, I was quite impressed with the prior ones (2009 and 2014).  My experience with the violin concerto thus contrasts unfavorably with that with the first cello concerto.  And I am a lot more familiar with the violin.

In contrast, the message of the eighth symphony was much clearer.  It has five movements: Adagio; Allegretto; Allegro non troppo - Largo - Allegretto.  As the dashes indicate, there are no pauses between the last three movements.  The long first movement represents the evil power of militarism, and a string motive reappears in subsequent movements to give coherence to the music.  The second movement provides music for a march, but one devoid of humanity.  The third movement is a dance of death, with its "theme" a descending octave shriek.  The fourth movement evokes a requiem for the countless dead with some ideas from the first movement reprised over a passacaglia repeated 11 times.  (All this paraphrased from a few paragraphs in the Program Notes.)

Even though I didn't get all the specifics, the description helped tremendously my appreciation the performance.  Some hints on what the composer was trying to say go a long way.  I couldn't find a prior reference to this symphony in this blog; this makes it even more amazing.  Since the descriptions of the concerto and symphony were written by the same author, it could be it's difficult to make such associations with the violin concerto.  (I am assuming Shostakovich didn't provide any notes to interpret the symphony.)

Nelsons is quite good with acknowledging the contributions of the musicians in the orchestra.  Here it was the first violin section.

The Program says the symphony is 66 minutes long.  It ended up being 75.  The concert started only a few minutes late (7:38pm?), and ended at 10:30 pm or so.

We stopped by the Charlestown soccer field to watch part of Emmie's game, and took an Uber to the Symphony Hall area, and had dinner before the concert started.  Joe came by to pick us up afterwards.  The afternoon saw rain on and off, sometimes heavy, we managed to dodge most of it.

NEC Prep: String Training Orchestras 9 & 8 & Prep String Orchestra 8:30. May 3, 2025. Peter Jarvis, Marta Zurad - conductors.

Jordan Hall, New England Conservatory.  Auditorium (Free).

Emmie seems to enjoy playing in the orchestra.  She gets up early Saturdays for practices that start at 8.

Program for STO 8:00

A Knight's Quest by Soon Hee Newbold (b. 1974).

Nimrod (from Enigma Variations) by Edward Elgar (1857-1934).

Symphony No. 1, GMW 11, II. Andante allegretto by Gustav Mahler (1860-1911)

     arr. Sandra Dackow

Conductors: STO 9 and 8 - Peter Jarvis; PSO - Marta Zurad.

This is the second concert of the year for these people.  Instead of having separate concerts for each groups, a combined concert was offered.

The performance certainly sounded better than the one in December last year.  Also, I was quite impressed with how well the Prep String Orchestra did.

STO 9.  No double bass.

STO 8.  Emmie is in the cello section.

PSO.

Zurad pointed out how few violists there were in the ensemble, and that the double bass was a "ringer" (my term) from NEC.  I think most kids choose the viola at an older age, so I don't think it is an issue, at least not yet.  I was a bit surprised with double bassists though.  Fifty years ago bassists were welcome into many orchestras; today hundreds apply for one opening in a world-class orchestra.  Some disconnect here.

New York Philharmonic. Simone Young, conductor; Steven Isserlis, cello. May 1, 2025.

David Geffen Hall at Lincoln Center.  Orchestra (Seat FF102, $89).

Isserlis after performance Schumann's Cello Concerto.

Program

Notturno for Strings and Harp (1895) by Schoenberg (1874-1951).

Cello Concerto in A minor, Op. 129 (1850) by R. Schumann (1810-56).

Symphony No. 6 in A major (1879-81; ed. L. Nowak, 1952) by Bruckner (1824-96).

Both the Schoenberg and the Bruckner pieces are not often heard live in concert nowadays.  To underscore this point: for the NY Phil this is the first performance of the Schoenberg piece, and it was in January 2016 that Bruckner 6th was last performed.  I have no recollection of ever listening to it (turns out I have, multiple times).  The Bruckner piece is also remarkable as one of his few works that have (had?) not been heavily modified after its completion, either by himself, or by one of his students.

Nocturne was written before Schoenberg developed his 12-tone technique (1923), and when he was about 20.  The music equivalent of Picasso's neoclassical period?  Given that he probably had been self-taught, it is a rather impressive piece.  Indeed, both Strauss and Mahler thought highly of him as a "classical" composer.  The short 4-minute piece called for long passages by the solo violin (and Frank Huang's name is listed in the program), and the title has "for Strings and Harp."  The harp, however, did not figure as prominently as the violin; it mostly was part of the orchestra ensemble.  While the piece wasn't particularly captivating, it did pique my interest in Schoenberg's early compositions.  I do wonder if he had an early style that is easily recognizable to one familiar with that body of work.

Notturno is a short 4-minute piece composed by Schoenberg before atonality set in.  The concertmaster had quite a workout in the piece.

The Program Notes mentions that Bruckner's Symphony No. 6 isn't as popular as some of his other works.  Indeed, I wasn't familiar with it.  To me, Bruckner tends to stay on his themes a long time, develop them fully before moving to the next passage.  I didn't get that at all this evening.  While I heard precision, dynamics, and a great sound, I simply couldn't figure out what the symphony was saying.  I expected a lot more, because of the orchestra, the conductor, and my memories of prior encounters with Bruckner.  Perhaps unfamiliarity had something to do with it?  Well, I found several entries on this symphony in this blog, and while many writeups reflect my head-scratching, I did enjoy the piece very much at least on one occasion, and that was performed by the NJ Symphony (yay!).  I also observe that Bruckner has somewhat lost his popularity recently.  [I am typing this after I went to the BSO concert a couple of days later, and I enjoyed Shostakovich's Symphony No. 8, a work that was/is also quite unfamiliar.  More on that when I work on that blog entry.]

It turns out I went to the last time NY Phil programmed this symphony.  I went to the January 27, 2016 concert, and the last concert of that series was on January 30.  And the one before that at NY Phil was in January, 2013.  Not sure what to think of it.  Indeed the symphony is programmed less frequently recently? And/or I go to too many NY Phil concerts?

A large orchestra was used in the performance of Bruckner's Sixth Symphony.

The Schumann piece in comparison felt like a pair of well-worn shoes (I mean this as a compliment).  The cellist delivered exactly what I expected.  His cello - a Strad - could have sounded a bit louder.  I also amaze at how a cellist's left fingers seem to dance all over the fingerboard in an elegant manner.  Isserlis played an encore piece, Google returned the title of "The Song of the Birds" performed by Isserlis, so I have to trust the result.  It can best be characterized as an ephemeral piece.  One can find many references to the piece on the web.  It was a Catalan folk song adapted into a cello piece, performed often by Pablo Casals in recognition of refugees all over the world.

What Google returned as the encore piece.

The concert lasted two hours, so we couldn't make the 9:38 pm train back to NJ (not helped by subways run every 10 minutes at night).  We would be going to Boston the next day.

Stevens Cooperative School. Finding Nemo Kids. April 28, 2025.

Stevens Cooperative School, Jersey City.

Maisie was in this production with cast members from the 3rd and 4th grades.  Maisie did this play in November, 2023 (with Hoboken Children's Theater), and it was quite different from tonight's show.

Reid as a 6th grader helped with some props and costumes.

Boston Symphony Orchestra. Andris Nelsons, conductor; Yo-Yo Ma, cello. April 11, 2025.

Symphony Hall, Boston, MA.  Orchestra (Seat JJ9, $127).

After the performance of Shostakovich's First Cello Concerto.

Program - Decoding Shostakovich

Cello Concerto No. 1 in E-flat, Op. 107.

Symphony No. 11 in G minor, Op. 103, The Year 1905.

BSO is running a "Decoding Shostakovich" Festival (my term) from early April to early May.  During this time there will be five Shostakovich-focused concerts by the organization, and several other concerts also related to the theme.

I have enjoyed this Shostakovich cello concerto since I first heard it performed in 2011.  Looking over the entries in the blog, this was the fifth or sixth time I listened to the piece.  Despite the prominence of the soloist, and that I had always enjoyed his performances, tonight the piece sounded surprisingly flat.  I often lost the cello, especially during the harmonics passage in the second movement.  One has to understand the disappointment is against my expectations of perfection from a master at his craft, a world-renowned orchestra, and a concert hall known for its acoustics; measured on its own this was a great performance.  For example, there was much energy at the start, and the mood changes were clear and infectious.  And Ma looked very serious during the entire piece.  (To those who think my assessment is too harsh, please read till the end.)

For encore Ma joined the cello section to perform (probably) a compilation of pieces adapted for a group of cellos.  Google couldn't determine what the music was.

The Program Notes points out many consider the uprisings of 1905 to be the dress rehearsal for the 1917 revolution that saw the overturn of the Russian Tsar (Nicholas II).  A march of as many as 100,000 peaceful protestors in St. Petersburg was met with gunfire by Cossack guards, and about 200 were killed.  In 1957, when the 40th anniversary of the successful Bolshevik revolution was celebrated, a lot of artists produced work to mark the events that led up to 1917.  Shostakovich wrote his 11th symphony, and subtitled it "The Year 1905."  Quoting the Program Notes, this was "an emotional, cinematic, accessible, and frankly programmatic work with close links to Soviet popular culture of the revolutionary and post-revolutionary period."

In the symphony Shostakovich incorporated the tunes of seven different revolutionary folk songs, and made use of some of his earlier compositions and quoted work from others.  He seldom did that with his earlier symphonies.  (All this taken from the Program Notes, which are quite extensive.)

The first movement took up about half the time.  Its title "Palace Square" describes the harsh inhumanity of dictatorship.  The second movement ("The Ninth of January") depicts the assault by the Cossack guards.  The third movement ("Eternal Memories") is a tribute to those who died.  The final movement ("The Tocsin") contains many percussion passages.  I gather that "Tocsin" is the title of a revolutionary magazine, and Shostakovich used the movement to anticipate the success of 1917.

Some musicologists and historians believe by this time Shostakovich was suitably disillusioned by the likes of Stalin that the piece was written to reflect how the Soviets were mistreating others to remain in power.

The movements were played without pause, so every now and then I would lose the plot.  In general, however, it was quite easy to associate what I heard with the outline provided in the Program Notes.

A large ensemble was used for the Symphony.  I counted 6 cello stands (thus at least 11 cellists) and 10 double basses.

The next day (April 12) I was driving in the Boston area, and caught the end of the Shostakovich cello concerto over WCRB.  Both Anne and I thought it sounded very good.  Then the announcer came on, and said it was a recording we heard live the day before.  The cello certainly was in great balance with the orchestra, and the jumps from low to high notes were done with precision.  Wonders of engineering?  Or poor acoustics at our seats?  (Note that I wasn't particularly impressed with the acoustics when I heard the H+H Messiah last year either.)

I bought tickets for this concert because Joe P wanted to take Emmie to see a famous cellist at work.  His ticket price (as part of a 3-concert subscription) was $82, ours bought separately were priced at $127 each.

It drizzled this evening, so Joe P dropped us off before he looked for parking.  He just made it before the concert began.

Julia Fischer, violin; Jan Lisiecki, piano. April 1, 2025.

David Geffen Hall at Lincoln Center.  Orchestra (Seat Y105, $67).

Program

Sonata for Piano and Violin in B-flat major, K.378 (317d) (1779) by Mozart (1756-91).

Sonata in F major for Piano and Violin, Op. 24, Spring (1800-01) by Beethoven (1770-1827).

Sonata in D minor for Piano and Violin, Op. 121 (1851) by R. Schumann (1810-56).

What is this "NY Phil Artist Spotlight?"

Most violin students at the intermediate/advanced level would have learned several of Mozart's and Beethoven's sonatas, and then move on to Brahms.  At least that was the case when I was learning the instrument many decades ago.  Indeed I don't recall encountering any Schumann violin concertos or sonatas before today (he wrote one concerto and two sonatas).  Fischer describes the concertos as a progression from where the piano takes the lead to the instruments are equal partners to where the violin comes on its own.  One can debate how correct her assessment is; I note in the Program they are all called sonatas for piano and violin.  It must be noted Fischer is also a concert pianist, although I believe she is better known as a violinist.

To most people the sound of the violin dominates in a "violin sonata," regardless of which instrument is carrying the load, so to speak.  That is even true of the Mozart sonata, even though it is from Mozart's mature period.

It was a delight to see how the two artists work together, at times challenging each other, at times simply enjoying the banter between the instruments.  Of the three pieces on the Program, I am most familiar with the Spring sonata, and I appreciated how clean and refreshing the two artists sounded - just as spring should be.

The movements of the sonatas are as follows.

Mozart.  Allegro moderato; Andantino sostenuto e cantabile; Rondo: Allegro.

Beethoven.  Allegro; Adagio molto expressivo; Scherzo: Allegro molto; Rondo: Allegro ma non troppo.

Schumann.  Ziemlich langsam - lebhaft (Rather slowly - lively); Sehr lebhalt (Very lively); Leise, einfach (Gentle, simply); Bewegt (Agitated).

I bought this ticket when I was in Hong Kong and found out it was on sale.  Anne had class commitments so she couldn't join - and she was no keen on doing it between trips anyway.  I took the train in, and caught the 9:38 pm train back to NJ.

Photo from Lisiecki's Instagram page.  From a concert in Chicago a couple of days prior.   Some soloists would change during the intermission.  Fischer is more practical.

Julliard String Quartet. March 30, 2025.

Town Hall, New York City.  Orchestra ($15).

Program

Selections from Cypresses, B. 152 (1865/1887) by Dvorak (1841-1904).

String Quartet No. 2 "Intimate Letters" (1928) by Janacek (1854-1928).

String Quartet in E Minor "From My Life" (1876) by Smetana (1824-1884).

Quartet members

Areta Zhulia, violin; Ronald Copes, violin; Molly Carr, viola; Astrid Schween, cello.

This concert would be the last in the series of Peoples' Symphony Concerts subscription I got for this season.  Attendance was a lot better than usual.  As usual, I sat in one of the last rows so I could make a swift exit after the concert.

All the composers were Czech.  Dvorak of course still has a huge repertoire performed often.  I know a couple of compositions by Smetana, most notably Ma Vlast, and other than the opera Janufa, I can't recall a single work of Janacek's.  (Well, I can find a couple of additional entries in this blog.)

Sure enough, Dvorak was quite easy to get, Smetana was okay, and Janacek was a bit puzzling.  Particularly if one bears in mind the titles given to the compositions by the composers themselves.

Dvorak wrote 18 love songs for the voice and piano under the collective name "Cypresses" in 1865 (there is a story there) and arranged twelve of them for a string quartet in 1887.  The ones selected for today's performance are V. The Old Letter in My Book; II.  Death Reigns in Many a Human Breast; VII.  I Wander Often Past Yonder House; XII.  You Ask Why My Songs; and III.  When Thy Sweet Glances Fall on Me.  I guess one can use one's imagination to associate the music with the titles, but I found it quite difficult.  Perhaps if I had read up on the lyrics I would have appreciated it more.  As far as I could tell, the string players played close to the bridge (sul pontecello) to produce an eerie sound.

Smetana's "From My Life" has four movements: I.  Allegro vivo appassionato; II.  Allegro moderato a la Polka; III. Largo sostenuto; and IV. Vivace.  Perhaps a biography?  Indeed the Wikipedia entry on this work describes it as an autographical work with nationalistic elements, and premiered with Dvorak as the violist.  The third movement was specifically written in memory of the composer's first wife.

Per Wikipedia, Janacek wrote his second string quartet to reflect his relationship with a married woman 38 years his junior.  The two exchanged over 700 letters, so Janacek probably had a lot of "source material" to draw on.  The love was unrequited, yet Stosslova was by his side when Janacek died.  Someone probably could compose an opera based on this story.

In any case, all three pieces have significant viola solos, which the violist Molly Carr brought out beautifully.  Overall the concert was very enjoyable.  The second violin was a substitute for Ronald Copes, who was sick.

I did left right after the concert, the train downtown pulled up just as I got to the subway station, and caught the 4:07 pm train back to South Amboy with a couple of minutes to spare.

New Jersey Symphony. Xian Zhang, Gregory D. McDaniel, conductors; Adam Tendler, piano. March 13, 2025.

At the conclusion of the concert.

NJPAC, Newark, NJ.  Orchestra (Seat P102, $75).

Program

Clair de Lune by Debussy/arr. Caplet.

Sounding for Piano and Orchestra by Nico Muhly.

Symphony No. 2 in E Minor, Op. 27 by Rachmaninoff.

Perhaps of her other engagements, Zhang's conducting of the NJ Symphony seems to be compressed within the last few months of the season.  We saw her first appearance with the orchestra last week, and have tickets for two additional concerts later this season.  As with last week, the audience seemed to be excited about having her back on the podium.

For this concert, however, they had to wait until the second half.  The first half was led by McDaniel, a Colton Conducting Fellow.  Clair de Lune is a familiar piano piece beloved by piano students, and there are many arrangements made for various ensembles.  Today's was a popular one arranged by Andre Caplet.  It amazes me how some composers can paint so well with music, as it is easy, even natural, to associate the music with the moon and its shimmering image over a body of water.

Nico Muhly is a rather well-known composer in his forties.  This piano concerto is dedicated to his fellow Vermonter Tendler, and was premiered last May in Burlington, Vermont.  Per the Program Notes, the work is based on four hymns by Justin Morgan, who settled in Vermont in the late 1780s.  The titles of the movements (so presumably the hymns) are Amanda, Montgomery, Huntington, and Sounding Joy, with Codetta: Montgomery appended at the end.  With the possible exception of Sounding Joy, these are certainly unusual hymn titles.  The pianist is supposed to range from headstrong to intimate to sparkling, and to bring out the lines from the hymns.  I didn't get any of that, partially due to the weak-sounding piano (I attribute that more to poor acoustics of the hall). I suppose if I had done more research on the piece I would have appreciated it some more.

Adam Tendler and Gregory D. McDaniel after the performance of Muhly's piano concerto.

Rachmaninoff is well-known for his works for the piano.  His first foray into symphony writing so traumatized him that he stopped composing for a few years, returning to it only after professional therapy.  The second symphony was completed in 1907, several years after Rachmaninoff had resumed composing music.

Rachmaninoff was an admirer of Tchaikovsky, and indeed the latter's death weighed on him considerably.  While the Program Notes compare this symphony to those of Tchaikovsky's, I could gather perhaps influence and evolution.  As I said about Brahms and Beethoven, there is likewise no mistaking Rachmaninoff for Tchaikovsky.  One clear distinction that comes to mind is the start of many of Rachmaninoff's works has the audience joining a program in progress, while Tchaikovsky tends to have more of a formal introduction before launching into his themes.  Another comparison is with Schubert's Great.  I would say Rachmaninoff handled his melodies in a way that always sounded fresh, while Schubert can sound repetitive, even when performed by a top-notch ensemble.

In general it was a pleasant performance.  I have not looked at the score, but I assume, as with Rachmaninoff's other pieces, it is quite challenging.  Today the "clean" sound was put to good use.  The unusually large orchestra produced a sound that was rich and delicate at needed.  The pace felt fast, yet the orchestra kept its composure, which is refreshing.  I did think the cymbals were a bit tentative at first.  As pointed to me a few weeks ago, the wind section could be more assertive.

The four movements of the Symphony are Largo - Allegro moderato, Allegro molto, Adagio, and Allegro vivace.  The adagio contained a beautiful memory that resonated with the Clair de Lune heard earlier in the program.

Today's attendance was not great.  The program is repeated four times: twice at NJPAC, once each in Princeton and Morristown.

There is a lot of construction going on, and the only car park available is the Military Park.  The attendants could be a bit more efficient, but it was relatively easy to find a space to park and didn't take very long to leave - that the attendance was low helped.

New Jersey Symphony. Xian Zhang, conductor. March 8, 2025.

Count Basie Theater, Red Bank, NJ.  Balcony (Seat F114, $30).

At the conclusion of the concert.

Program

Prelude from Suite No. 2 in D Minor, BWV 1008 by J.S. Bach.

Valencia by Shaw.

God Docks at Death Harbor for Piano Quintet by Nagvi/arr. Corrigan.

Divertimento from The Fairy's Kiss (1949 version) by Stravinsky.

Suite from The Firebird (1919 revision) by Stravinsky

Artists

Bach Prelude - Jonathan Spitz.

Valencia Quartet - members from NJ Symphony

God Docks at Death Harbor Quintet - members from NJ Symphony, Pianist?

        Nimbus Dance - Samuel Pott, artistic director and choreographer

The program for tonight's concert was quite unusual.  For the first half there were three pieces that don't usually appear in an orchestral performance: a cello solo, a quartet, and a quintet.  And dancers for the quintet.

As principal cello, Spitz is often called on to play solo passages, and I have always enjoyed them.  He tackled the Bach Prelude well, producing a clean sound from the cello.  The Program Notes describes the techniques Bach used in the composition of this piece, and points out chords for cellists are more difficult compared to the violinist.  Of course neither instrument can produce more than two bowed note at the same time, so triple- and quadruple-stops are combinations of 1-2 or 2-2 notes played one after another.  Certainly I didn't think these presented any difficulty for Spitz.  However, getting the techniques right wasn't quite enough to make the performance exciting; I am probably biased as I watched a YouTube video with Yo-Yo Ma playing the piece earlier in the day.

Caroline Shaw wanted to use Valencia to describe the eponymous fruits (orange and grapefruit?).  The techniques she used (per Program Notes again) were harmonics, glissandos, minimalism, and rhythmic games.  One certainly can catch that (although I didn't hear a lot of glissandos).  Indeed interesting sounds would come from the ensemble, but for much of that time it sounded like the instruments were being tuned, the double stops in the strings reinforcing the perception the strings were trying to get the fifths right.  Minimalism evokes Glass (whom Shaw "channeled," whatever that means).  Glass minimalism usually had a direction, but tonight I just thought the music was going around in circles.  Despite what the Program Notes said, "relief" rather "witty" was the term that came to mind when the piece concluded.  This was composed in 2012, before Shaw became well-known; and I must say her later music does try to go somewhere.

God Docks at Death Harbor was originally written in 2023 by the Pakistani-American composer Qasim Nagvi for an orchestra; it was arranged for a Piano Quintet by Ben Corrigan in 2025.  Nagyi describes the piece as he "imagined an earth many years into the future where we (note: I assume he means humans) no longer exist ... the quiet and peacefulness of this planet without us, as it restores itself ... the piece is about our end, but not in an apocalyptic sense  ... its tone is one of hope, for a planet that is getting a second chance in our absence."  The music itself, per the Notes, "is a reverent, shimmering work, suffused with chimes, ... that grow more complex.  A repeated bass line anchors the seamless flow of this atmospheric pieces."  One can debate if what I transcribed makes any sense.  For example, earth's beauty is defined by humans, so if humans don't exist, there is no subjective definition of what beauty should be.  We don't use such adjectives, even for our neighbor Mars - it is what it is, no good, or bad, or lessons learned.

The music itself felt very much like Shaw's Valencia.  Actually if the two had been played without a break I would have simply wondered why the piano was quiet for so long.  Now the visuals were more interesting as dancers came on the stage as the music was played.  To carry on the "humans disappear" theme, the first dance moves had a dancer walking out from a cloth screen with water images project on it; and it made me think of "Escape from the Planet of the Apes."  The props were simple (this cloth screen and two wide ribbons), but the effects were mesmerizing.  For the first couple of minutes, anyway.  As the music droned on, the choreography droned on as well.  What started as refreshing soon became repetitive.  The Program Notes has the duration at 8 minutes; it felt much longer.  (The photos I took were time-stamped at 8:39 pm, the previous piece's at 8:17 pm.  And there was only a short break in between.)

The quartet performed Shaw's Valencia.

Nimbus Dance and the Piano Quintet.  The gentleman in a suit is most likely Samuel Pott.  Unfortunately the names of the instrumentalists are not listed.  The person on the far right conducted the Naqvi piece - Gregory McDaniel?

The second half consisted of selections from two Stravinsky's ballets.  A very familiar suite from The Firebird, and a selection from The Fairy's Kiss called a divertimento.  As pointed out by the Program Annotator, Stravinsky is best known for his ballets, and his most popular ones (The Firebird, Petrushka, and The Rite of Spring) were written during the years 1910-1913, and Stravinsky lived for another 60 years.  

The Fairy's Kiss is based on Andersen's Ice Maiden which many would call this a horror story.  A Divertimento (usually associated with Mozart) is supposedly a light-hearted suite of movements composed to amuse.  Why Stravinsky chose this description is beyond me.  (In the Program Notes Stravinsky was quoted as providing a happy ending to the story.)  The movements are: Sinfonia, Danses suisses, Scherze, and Pas de deux.  Many of Tchaikovsky's lesser known melodies were referenced in the music; since I don't known Tchaikovsky's more obscure works, I didn't catch any of them, but could convince myself that it is so.  Indeed the piece contains a lot more classical melodies than a typical Stravinsky composition.

After performing Stravinsky's The Fairy's Kiss.

As to The Firebird performance, my one-phrase summary would be "I enjoyed it."  The dynamics of the piece concentrates the mind, and the nice melodies make it enjoyable.  Yes, one can complain about the balance of the different sections, but they all played beautifully, even though at times I had to strain to hear them.  The "1919" version consists of five movements, and lasts about 23 minutes.  The movements are Introduction and Dance of the Firebird; Dance of the Princesses; Infernal Dance of King Kastchei; Berceuse; and Finale.  The two performances at NJPAC were staged with Nimbus Dance, the asterisk on the Program tells the audience it won't appear in Red Bank.  I am sure I didn't see this when I was looking at the website.

For the second half of the program, the "clean sound" comment again applied to today's performance.  It is actually difficult to achieve with Stravinsky.  Today's performance also had a sense of urgency and much musicality to it, which was lacking last week.  Is it the music, or the conductor?

The principal bass was at her station today, and we ran into the organization's development VP during intermission.

Attendance, however, was not as good as last week's.

Hoboken Children's Theater. Journey of the Noble Gnarble. March 5, 2025.

Hoboken Children's Theater.  Stalls ($5).

The story of a small fish overcoming obstacles and cynicism to swim to the top of the ocean.  Maisie was one of the Warckles.

It was raining today, so Ellie decided to drive.  She couldn't find parking, so didn't see the show.  She will be seeing it on Friday.

New York Philharmonic. Matthias Pintscher, conductor; Hilary Hahn, violin. February 27, 2025.

David Geffen Hall at Lincoln Center.  Orchestra (Seat AA102, $136).

End of concert.  Pintscher and Huang shaking hands as Hahn looks on after the Brahms Violin Concerto.

Program

Symphony No. 7 in A major, Op. 92 (1811-12) by Beethoven (1770-1827).

Concerto in D major for Violin and Orchestra, Op. 77 (1878-79) by Brahms (1833-97).

The original program for the concert.

One buys a ticket to a concert led by Blomstedt for many reasons.  One is that at 97 he is breaking the age record every time he conducts, the other is that he is a master at the craft.  And Hilary Hahn is on the program too.  Those factors made the ticket price a lot more palatable.

That Blomstedt did a BSO concert recently also made me very hopeful, so I was disappointed when I got a notification that Blomstedt had to withdraw due to an ear infection.  Disappointment aside, I hope he recovers quickly, and returns to NY Phil soon.

Pintscher would be standing in as the conductor, and Beethoven's Seventh Symphony would replace the Schubert No. 6.  My attitude was let's just enjoy the concert for what it was.  Both pieces are easy to like, and quite familiar.

If one looks up Beethoven's 7th Symphony on YouTube, the durations of the returned videos typically run between 41 to 45 minutes, with the shortest one just short of 39 minutes.  (Results from a search I did just now.)  The revised Program Notes indicate a duration of about 36 minutes.  The actual performance was at most a couple of minutes longer.  A few salient features: the pace itself was very fast, and the orchestra simply did what it was asked to do; and there were basically no breaks between the movements - Pintscher kept his arms up for a couple of seconds after a movement ended, and launched right into the next one.  Overall it was a great performance, but I thought the audience could use a break every now and then, perhaps the orchestra also.

Of the four movements of the symphony (Poco sostenuto - Vivace, Allegretto, Presto, and Allegro con brio), the second movement is probably the best known.  Depending on the speed, it can be perceived as a funeral march or a stroll in the park.  Today it felt more like cantering on a meadow; a bit unusual, but okay.  For at least this audience member, the question changed from "Who is this Pintscher?" to (almost) "Who was supposed to be the conductor?"  I did wonder why they didn't simply call on the music director from across the Hudson.  One reason may be she was in Europe.

It was a fast reading of Beethoven's Seventh Symphony.  The orchestra used for the piece was smaller than the one used in the Brahms concerto.

Taken before the concert.  Against the huge stage of the auditorium the orchestra certainly looked small.

Hilary Hahn has been on the music stage for a long time, yet she is only 45.  She was in the news recently for having to cancel concerts because of an injury, but evidently has recovered enough to tackle the Brahms Violin Concerto.  Interestingly, she owns violins that are copies of a Guarnerius and a Stradivarius.  Whichever one she used for today's concert, she was powerful enough to go against a large orchestra (larger than the one for the Beethoven symphony).

Brahms's concerto is considered to be one of the most difficult in the violin repertoire, and knowing it well doesn't make the listener any less nervous.  Hahn produced an amazingly clean tone from her instrument, and I certainly wouldn't think there was any weakness in her playing.  And the concerto is long (at 40 minutes) and at times the soloist has to play against a full-throttled orchestra.  After all, a reviewer had dismissed the piece as "a concerto not for, but against the violin."  Per the Program Notes, the negative reception caused Brahms to destroy his draft for the second violin concerto.

Hilary Hahn is often praised for her musicality, and I certainly agree.  Today with my binoculars I had a good look at her fingers as they flew over the fingerboard.  The fingers are long, especially the pinky.  They actually looked like spider legs dancing around (no disrepect intended).  Of course many great artists overcome their physical limitations, but it helps if one is born with attributes that make things easier.

Before the concert began, I noticed that Anne was reading the description of the Schubert Symphony in the program notes.  When I told her about the change in the program, she said the description was so interesting that she was looking forward to hearing the Schubert piece.  I imagine there were people who were similarly disappointed also.

We again saw the NJ Symphony bassist in this performance.  With a roster of eight bassists, I was somewhat surprised that a temp was needed when only four or five players sat for the performance.

The concert was short enough that we decided to try the 9:38 pm train back to New Jersey.  So we left after the first applause, and we heard Hahn starting her encore piece just as we were leaving the building.

We made the train with a few minutes to spare.  The train didn't depart on time, and after about 20 minutes an announcement came on to say it was canceled as they couldn't resolve the mechanical problem.  So we could have stayed for the encore.

We took the 10:23 pm train, and it was not that crowded.

New Jersey Symphony. Christopher Konig, conductor; Tony Siqi Yun, piano. February 22, 2025.

Count Basie Theater, Red Bank, NJ.  Balcony (Seat F113, $30).

Yun shaking Wyrick's hand after the performance of the Chopin piano concerto.

Program

Can You See? by Allison Loggins-Hull.

Piano Concerto No. 1 in E Minor, Op. 11 by Chopin.

Symphony No. 1 in C Minor, Op. 68 by Brahms.

As one might suspect, "can you see?" is related to the national anthem.  The description in the Program says the anthem was deconstructed in the composition of this piece.  So I was expecting to hear the music equivalent of a Picasso.  Instead the piece was so deconstructed that I couldn't hear any part of the original song; well, some Picasso paintings are like that, and they leave me equally confused.  Nowadays it would be difficult to guess what a composer can do with the national anthem, this piece isn't grotesque at all, so there is that.

I heard Loggins-Hull's work at a People's Symphony Concert at the end of last year.  My writeup seems to indicate I enjoyed it considerable more than today's piece.

The piece was originally written in 2021 for a small ensemble.  Today's was an expanded version for an orchestra.  There was a passage where the violas hit the strings with a short stick; I suspect a simple "col legno" would have the same effect.  Loggins-Hull is the Symphony's new Resident Artistic Partner, so more of her work will find its way to concert programs.

Yun was a recent graduate of Julliard.  CS, who also attended the concert, mentioned that he had the same teacher as his daughter.  (Anne and I thought he could have been her student!)  The highly romantic piece is easy to like, but I don't know if one can appreciate the performance beyond the nice melodies and demanding techniques. The orchestra was unexpectedly precise, yet it sounded quite mechanical.

For encore Yun and the conductor Konig performed a Chopin's Op. 39/15 Waltz adapted for four hands.  Evidently Chopin wrote the solo piece in A-flat major, while the four-hand piece is in A.  So there was a bit of confusion - and a laugh - when the two began.  (Google returned with an A, quite amazing.)

Many sources consider Brahms's first symphony as Beethoven's Tenth, I never understand the comparison.  One would never mistake this with anything Beethoven wrote, as Brahms's approach to dynamics, melody, form, and harmony was very - shall we say - Brahmsian.  I must admit Symphony No. 1 is not one of my favorite symphonies, although in my experience Brahms's music can grow on you as you get more familiar with it.  The only movement I know well is the fourth, with its two well-known melodies.

After performance of "can you see?" by Loggins-Hull.  I was somewhat surprised that she wasn't in the audience.

A close of of the pianist.

At the conclusion of the concert.  Count Basie suffers from bad lighting.  Attendance tonight was better than usual.

Having attended a New York Philharmonic concert yesterday, I must say New Jersey Symphony isn't quite there yet, at least not today.  My biggest problem was how "mechanical" the ensemble sounded.  CS mentioned the woodwind section was weak.  That may be true, but I thought the trombones did a great job, I appreciated how precise they sounded (as opposed to my experience a day earlier with the New York Philharmonic).  The violinist who subs at New York Phil quite often played today (and I didn't see him in NY yesterday).  The principal bassist, however, was absent today.  She was with NY Phil yesterday.

My past blog entries seem to indicate Konig was a competent conductor.  If I used my adjectives consistently, things have just stayed the same.

Tonight's attendance was quite respectable, at least from what I could see from my seat in the balcony.

New York Philharmonic. Santtu-Matias Rouvali, conductor; Seong-Jin Cho, piano. February 21, 2025.

David Geffen Hall at Lincoln Center.  Orchestra (Seat W103, $75).

After the performance of Prokofiev's Piano Concerto.

Program

Selections from Moscow, Cheryomushki Suite (1957-58; arr. 1997) by Shostakovich (1906-75), arr. A. Cornall.

Piano Concerto No. 2 in G minor, Op. 16 (1912-13/1924) by Prokofiev (1891-1953).

Symphony No. 15 in A major, Op. 141 (1971) by Shostakovich.

Today's program was all-Russian.  The conductor is from Finland, the pianist from Korea (and now lives in Germany).  It could be dark and heavy with Finns and Russians, but it wasn't so today.

Up until today I had see only two of Shostakovich's operas: The Nose, and Lady Macbeth of Mtsensk (the latter in concert).  The Nose to me was surreal and inscrutable, and I enjoyed Lady Macbeth when I first saw it about a year ago in Carnegie Hall.  "Moscow, Cheryomushki," which simply means "Moscow, Bird Cherry Tree District," was a "satirical operetta [telling] the story of a group of prospective young tenants seeking places in the newly subsidized housing and of their skirmishes with corrupt bureaucrats."  (Quoting from the Program Notes.)  The Program Notes also contains a description of each of the three movements: A Spin through Moscow; Waltz; and Dances.

Indeed it was a rather comical composition.  On the other hand, the humor somewhat wore off after a while, and I was glad only three movements of the four-movement suite was played.  (The suite was extracted from the original music by Andrew Cornall in 1997.)

The fifteenth was Shostakovich's last symphony.  While I heard it back in 2011, in Hong Kong, I frankly don't remember any of it.  The Program Notes contains a reasonable description of how the work is structured, and the performance followed that "recipe" quite closely.  A few aspects worth noting.  First is the liberal use of the William Tell overture in the first movement (Allegretto): it was repeated multiple times.  The Program Notes describes the second movement (Adagio) as "another of the composer's many pieces haunted by death, beginning with a brass chorale ... and continuing with a series of 12-note melodies for solo cello, juxtaposing the tonal and atonal."  The real thing sounded even more complicated, and I had trouble marking out the different 12-note melodies in the cello, beautifully played by (most probably) the new Associate Principal Christakos.  While the brass chorale had a good sound, it could have sounded a bit more precise.  The third movement (allegretto) contains both the DSCH and BACH themes, I didn't catch either.  It is a rather short scherzo, with the Concertmaster tackling a "devilish violin solo."  The last movement (Adagio: Allegretto) started with the timpani pounding out a line reminiscent of Gotterdammerung, and later the strings played the first three notes of Tristan und Isolde (we caught that); it also referenced other works that we couldn't catch.  The coda of percussion against strings is also supposed to be a reminder of Shostakovich's fourth symphony, suppressed by the Soviet authorities.

All well and good, and the analysis makes listening to the music interesting.  But what is the symphony trying to tell us?  In the past I enjoyed how Shostakovich used these different techniques to bring images to his music, for today I felt he just enjoyed showing off his techniques.  Perhaps I need to get more familiar with this particular composition.  I do have to say while quoting William Tell may compare with Mahler quoting Frere Jacques, the latter did it in his first symphony.  If Mahler continued to quote other tunes in his later symphonies, he did it much more subtly.  And this was Shostakovich's last symphony.

After selections from Shostakovich's suite.

End of concert.  There was no need for the two harps in the symphony.

Prokofiev's second piano concerto was rewritten after the original one was lost in a fire, and there is much speculation how much the reworked version differs from the original.  Prokofiev premiered both, so he was fine with calling them both by the same designation; he did remark that he incorporated a lot of what he learned in the intervening years. The piece is difficult enough that Prokofiev complained about the need to practice, and thought he botched several passages during a 1927 performance.  I suspect only he could tell the performance was not up to his standards, and I felt the same way with Cho's performance tonight.

I did jot down a few notes right after the performance, which I will describe.  First, the four movements are (1) Andantino - Allegretto - Andantino; (2) Scherzo: Vivace; (3) Intermezzo: Allegro moderato; and (4) Finale: Allegro tempestoso.  The first movement lasts about 10 minutes, and half way into it the soloist had to launch into this difficult cadenza, the second movement is clearly a scherzo, and I had a hard time thinking the third movement is an intermezzo (at least in the Brahms sense).  The fourth movement consists of many different segments of different characters, and with a couple of cadenza-like passages thrown in for good measure.

For encore he played "A la maniere de Chabrier, M. 63 No. 2" by Ravel (per Google); there is a YouTube video with Cho playing the same piece.

This is the third time I saw Cho in concert.  I called his Chopin No. 2 with NJ Symphony (in 2018) respectable but not inspiring.  Today I thought of Trifonov during the performance.  The piece is complicated, yet the audience is not at the edge of their seats because they worry, but in admiration.  Was it my perception, or has Cho improved a lot over the last several years.

I am finishing this writeup on the 25th, and had gone to a NJ Symphony concert on Saturday.  (And I will have some thing to say about how the two concerts compare.)  We took the train in.