Prom 37: Thursday 11th August 2011 at 7.30 p.m. (Bridge, Brahms, Holst, Elgar)

[PJPJ]

Excellent Holst, I agree. I can't get worked up about the Brahms - it just seems rather pointless.

[Roehre]

Brahms himself did not think that (his) music was by definition restricted to one instrument to realize an idiomatic performance.

Apart from Brahms himself composing identical music for either piano+piano or piano+string quartet (I refer here to the 2-piano-sonata aka piano quintet op.34, published simultaneously), or string sextet for piano solo (variations [from] op.18, again nearly simultaneously published), he also published an own arrangement of Bach's solo-violin Chaconne for piano.

I cannot comment on tonight's performance as I was unable to listen with due attention -and therefore preferred not to listen at all-, but I do think Lazic didn't do a bad job with this transcription. At least it is a more pianistically idiomatic one than Beethoven's arrangement of his violin concerto (provided Beethoven actually was the arrangeur and not only just the corrector of an arrangement made by somemone else with his approval - given the very cliche left hand figurations in op.61a).

[amac4165]

Just got back from the Hall (still a lot of Police around !)

Overall a good concert. Not sure what to make of the Brahms - probably a novelty piece that will run its course and keep a concert pianist in funds for a few years ! I don't think it added anything to the work but it certainly wasn't a disaster.

amac

ps not sure what the Elgar 3 has to do with this ?! firstly it was a completion of an unfinished work and in any case a lot of the work was already in short score only the finale was largely incomplete and almost all of which is payne.

[BudgieJane]

I've heard some crap in my time, but this "arrangement" must rank as the worst I've ever heard. It was quite obviously a violin concerto, as the "melody" didn't once move out of the violin register. If you're going to enlarge a violin concerto to fit the piano, surely you want to use the lower octaves of the piano for melody occasionally? Surely also you want to continue descending arpeggios below the G below middle C, inserting extra bars into the score if necessary. The accompaniment played on the piano seemed to be doubling the orchestral parts, so why not leave out the orchestra in those bits? Perhaps he thought he was saving money by having the orchestra play from the parts for the original violin concerto!

Aren't there enough genuine piano concertos already? Why ruin a perfectly good violin concerto to make a new one?

The pianist was very quick to sit at the piano and play his encore. It's as though he thought the applause was flagging and would die away before he got a chance to play something decent (to help us forget the travesty he had created?). Any other pianist would have judged the mood of the audience and left things as they were. And ... I didn't think much of his playing of the encore, either.

Julian Lloyd-Webber was much better.

[Keybawd]

I had already heard the Brahms some months ago on the BBC and thought it a waste of time. I was shocked to see it was to be performed at the proms. It adds nothing to the original, no insights. It is merely a vanity arrangement. The piano playing (or is it the arrangement) just sounds lumpy.

There are wonderful concertos for the piano that rarely get a hearing, why not programme one of those eg the Rawsthorne concertos, the Busoni concerto, Prokofiev's 4th .... there are also lovely pieces for pno & orch such as Cyril Scott's Early One Morning Variations, Fauré's Ballade and Fantasie......

This Brahms transcription is a travesty.

[salymap]

I agree with everyone who disliked the Brahms 'arrangement' and wish I could have expressed myself better.
The violin part is so much a part of the whole work, echoing and rising above the orchestral strings that it was a travesty I hope I never hear again. I quite liked the Holst but gave up listening before the Enigmas. Not the best Prom ever.

[antongould]

Not the best Prom ever.

Dare one ask, so early in the morning, what was your best ever Prom?

[Ventilhorn]

I've heard some crap in my time, but this "arrangement" must rank as the worst I've ever heard. It was quite obviously a violin concerto, as the "melody" didn't once move out of the violin register.

You've taken the words right out of my mouth, Jane.

If you're going to enlarge a violin concerto to fit the piano, surely you want to use the lower octaves of the piano for melody occasionally? Surely also you want to continue descending arpeggios below the G below middle C, inserting extra bars into the score if necessary. The accompaniment played on the piano seemed to be doubling the orchestral parts, so why not leave out the orchestra in those bits? Perhaps he thought he was saving money by having the orchestra play from the parts for the original violin concerto!

Aren't there enough genuine piano concertos already? Why ruin a perfectly good violin concerto to make a new one?

The pianist was very quick to sit at the piano and play his encore. It's as though he thought the applause was flagging and would die away before he got a chance to play something decent (to help us forget the travesty he had created?). Any other pianist would have judged the mood of the audience and left things as they were. And ... I didn't think much of his playing of the encore, either.

Yes, the pianist's rush to play an encore simply indicated to me that he wanted to leave on a good note. Unfortunately, he failed.

* * *

As for the rest of the concert, I quite enjoyed the Bridge, would have preferred the Holst to be included in a different prom, where the pianistic catastrophy had not preceded it, and thought that the Elgar was neatly played but lacking in substance.

Thinking of the interpretations of Boult, Sargent, del Mar and (of course) Barbirolli, I am reminded that Russian and Scandinavian conductors, good though they are, have little understanding of British music.

Salymap and Jane sum it up for me. I understand E-A's defence, but simply cannot agree. Interesting to note that the word "travesty" in my original post has reappeared in nearly everyone else's.

VH

[salymap]

Dare one ask, so early in the morning, what was your best ever Prom?

Good morning anton, you dare ask but I have no idea after so long. I started attending Proms in 1948 and it's all one long concert to me now. Probably one where a composer conducted something of his own, they were always special. My mum insisted that I put my notebooks and programmes in the shed as they filled
my room and they all rotted away in the damp. Never dump programmes, however much room they take up.

[antongould]

Good morning to you - very sad and probably not the wisest decision your Mum ever made - so much wonderful, dare I say, history!

[amateur51]

Thinking of the interpretations of Boult, Sargent, del Mar and (of course) Barbirolli, I am reminded that Russian and Scandinavian conductors, good though they are, have little understanding of British music.


VH

How odd - I recall Maestro Sinaisky causing a stir at Proms 2009 with Moeran's Symphony in G minor And Rozhdestvensky's fairly recent Enigma variations was widely praised

[Ventilhorn]

How odd - I recall Maestro Sinaisky causing a stir at Proms 2009 with Moeran's Symphony in G minor And Rozhdestvensky's fairly recent Enigma variations was widely praised

There will always be exceptions to any generalised statement and I would agree that Rozhdestvensky is one them.
I would suggest that Constantin Silvestri (Romanian) on the evidence of his Elgar recordings is another.

However, based on what I heard last night, Maestro Sinaisky (a conductor whom I greatly admire), is not one of those exceptions.

BTW Did you think last night's Enigma lacked substance, or do you enjoy hearing it played that way?

VH

[amateur51]

There will always be exceptions to any generalised statement and I would agree that Rozhdestvensky is one them.
I would suggest that Constantin Silvestri (Romanian) on the evidence of his Elgar recordings is another.

However, based on what I heard last night, Maestro Sinaisky (a conductor whom I greatly admire), is not one of those exceptions.

BTW Did you think last night's Enigma lacked substance, or do you enjoy hearing it played that way?

VH

I'm going to listen this morning VH and I shall report back, as you have so kindly enquired

[barber olly]

ps not sure what the Elgar 3 has to do with this ?! firstly it was a completion of an unfinished work and in any case a lot of the work was already in short score only the finale was largely incomplete and almost all of which is payne.

My reference to Elgar 3 was purely an example of what not to call a work. As for the Brahms I thought it was an interesting, if not totally successful experiment. There appears to be criticism of Sinaisky's handling of British music. He has over the past few years given us very good Elgar 1 and 2. As a foreign conductor taking on a British orchestra he would have been failing in his duties not to take on the local repertoire. Not only has he done so but to my ears done it very well!

[Bryn]

What's all this 'British music' stuff? Elgar was mainstream European, surely?