Conductor Accompanying Soloist

[kernelbogey]

I always find that the phrase 'accompanied by' Orchestra X and Conductor Y grates. I can scarcely think of a concerto where the orchestra is in any sense secondary to the soloist, which is what the phrase suggests to me. (The Chopin Piano Concertos come close, though.)

Edit: I had somehow missed reading posts 13-15 before writing this. I will let it stand, however, with thanks to Ardcarp for that wonderful exegesis of the performance issues.

[ardcarp]

Thanks kb. I should maybe have added that there are instances when the soloist is only too glad for the conductor to take charge AND to keep his beat clear and conventioal. I've done the Poulenc Concerto for Organ (+ timps) a few times, and when the organist is in some remote gallery in a resonant building there is nothing he/she will like better.

[Barbirollians]

Thanks kb. I should maybe have added that there are instances when the soloist is only too glad for the conductor to take charge AND to keep his beat clear and conventioal. I've done the Poulenc Concerto for Organ (+ timps) a few times, and when the organist is in some remote gallery in a resonant building there is nothing he/she will like better.

Thanks for those insights ardcarp.

Barbirolli was of course a great conductor for concertos and singers but apparently after the war as he had become so associated with Heifetz, Kreisler , Rubinstein etc as their conductor of choice he refused to conduct concerto recordings until the 1960s ( with the exception I think of Mindru Katz's Emperor Concerto ) . Eventually . with Baker, Barenboim and du Pre he relented .