Originally posted by Hornspieler
View Post
Prom 5 - 17.07.17: Sibelius, Rachmaninov and Shostakovich
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by ferneyhoughgeliebte View PostWell - if you put Rachmaninoff in "the premier league", where do you put Bach, Beethoven, Mozart, Haydn, Stravinsky, Monteverdi, Schönberg, Dunstable, Handel, Lachenmann, Wagner, Brahms, Byrd, Ferneyhough, Bruckner, Gesualdo, Machaut, Hildegard, Barrett (just to name the most obvious)?
It might be "old-fashioned", but it's none-the-less true - and with a Premier League like that, being in the "Second Division" is no shame. (Nor, seeing that we're talking about Rachmaninoff, the Third, for that matter.)
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by ferneyhoughgeliebte View PostI try my best.
I first heard this symphony in Koussevitsky's famous 78 set in the Sibelius Society album. To this day when I hear the symphony I recognise all the side changes!
The Rachmaninov was accurately played but fairly routine. Sadly, nobody offered to clear my eye from a bit of soot from the train.
Things seemed much better in the Shostakovich, a very good performance.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by Ferretfancy View PostIt seems to be a very difficult task to do justice to the Sibelius 7. Listening in the Arena last night I thought that there was a good performance in there struggling to come out. It all seemed sonorous but curiously blurred, and generally lacking in light and shade. Where was that wonderful sense of growth which the best performances have?
I first heard this symphony in Koussevitsky's famous 78 set in the Sibelius Society album. To this day when I hear the symphony I recognise all the side changes!
The Rachmaninov was accurately played but fairly routine. Sadly, nobody offered to clear my eye from a bit of soot from the train.
Things seemed much better in the Shostakovich, a very good performance.
HS (E OE)Last edited by Hornspieler; 18-07-17, 08:46.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by ferneyhoughgeliebte View PostWell - if you put Rachmaninoff in "the premier league", where do you put Bach, Beethoven, Mozart, Haydn, Stravinsky, Monteverdi, Schönberg, Dunstable, Handel, Lachenmann, Wagner, Brahms, Byrd, Ferneyhough, Bruckner, Gesualdo, Machaut, Hildegard, Barrett (just to name the most obvious)?
It might be "old-fashioned", but it's none-the-less true - and with a Premier League like that, being in the "Second Division" is no shame. (Nor, seeing that we're talking about Rachmaninoff, the Third, for that matter.)
Comment
-
-
In the hall, the performances (IMO) seemed to improve as the evening went on, though all were well played and none were less than good. I agree with Ferretfancy on the Sibelius, my reference performances are Koussevitsky and Maazel/LSO and last night's didn't achieve (or aspire to?) their sense of cumulative, organic growth. I felt the Rachmaninov started rather tamely but then got better with each movement, so that the last movement was exciting and earned the beautifully played encore. I enjoyed the Shostakovich very much, especially the solo wind contributions (excellent clarinet, flute and horn in particular) and the full-bodied string sound; the interpretation was an effective combination of expressive intensity, detailed attention to phrasing and powerful climaxes.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by edashtav View PostTonight's programme couples three of the better pieces by three of the 20th century's arch conservative composers.
The only problem (if it was a problem - I certainly don't view it as such) is that, in the face of extraordinary turmoil and conflicting views and styles, they stuck to their guns.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by Ferretfancy View PostIt seems to be a very difficult task to do justice to the Sibelius 7. Listening in the Arena last night I thought that there was a good performance in there struggling to come out. It all seemed sonorous but curiously blurred, and generally lacking in light and shade. Where was that wonderful sense of growth which the best performances have?
Things seemed much better in the Shostakovich, a very good performance.
It was all a tad careful -- unsurprising in the context of the band's first appearance at the RAH this season where they have to re-adapt to a tricky acoustic, as has been pointed out, but the conception was Søndergård's.
Didn't hear the DSCH 10, as I'm a bit Shostakovich'd out, but it was interesting to hear Marina Frolova-Walker at half-time say she was unconvinced by the the Testimony-inspired labelling of the second movt as a Stalin-Terror-Scherzo. Pre Volkov's tome I'd always imagined this hyperactive four-minuter as a wild Russian circus ballet of whirling Cossacks, dancing bears & fire-breathers, & was a mite disconcerted to find that I should have found it terrifying rather than exhilarating.....
Comment
-
-
Another view....
Another chance to hear Søndergård's Sibelius tonight of course, No.2.... I usually steer clear of it now, but was impressed enough with the 7th to be intrigued as to how he approaches such a different Sibelian vintage....Last edited by jayne lee wilson; 18-07-17, 15:42.
Comment
-
Comment