Prom 61: Yannick Nézet-Séguin & Rotterdam Philharmonic – 28.08.18

[edashtav]

A very enjoyable Prom this evening. YNS has been with this(Rotterdam Philharmonic), for ten years? Did'nt even know he was there! Still, the RPO does sound very good indeed. I suppose the RCO steals the limelight!

I found YNS’s Bruckner to be neat,refined,tidy, and, frankly, boring. All the small things were in place and the Rotterdam Philharmonic played well but the sweep, the glory, the reaching out towards the Unknown Region that
Bruckner needs if his music is to take flight were missing. The slow movement was dull and modular. Did I fall asleep? Probably. This performance was earthbound and the opposite of “Romantic”: everything was expected, free of risk, full of life without edge or excitement.

This evening will not feature I’m my list of favourite Proms (2018).

[Beef Oven!]

A fabulous evening. My first attendance due to being abroad followed by an ear infection.

I'm not crazy about either of the two Liszt piano concertos but, played like this, I could easily become a fan. Conductor and soloist walking on together, radiating a passionate intention to deliver something special with this underrated orchestra. And that they certainly did!

There was nothing splashy or exhibitionist about this performance and the beauty and coherence of form were exemplified. This concerto seems so fluid and cultivated compared to the first, which I find showy. The second is an obvious precursor to the tone poems that Liszt later wrote. The synergy between the conductor and soloist was illustrated by the very animated 180 degree turns YNS made often towards Yefim Bronfman and the huge smiles. The encore was wonderful to watch - YNS and YB sitting side by side at the piano wafting beautiful Mendelssohn (?) tones across the hall.

I've attended so many Bruckner 4s down the years and I wondered if this one might not match up. I needn't have worried. The Rotterdam orchestra is really a most accomplished orchestra (I've seen them a few times including conducted by Rattle and other big names). What struck me tonight was how rich, but light the strings are. I did not expect that. Nor did I expect the sheer beauty and virtuosity of the woodwinds - absolutely wonderful sounds and playing. Same from the brass, but I expected that! All credit to YNS, the balance between all sections was, in my humble opinion, Brucknerian excellence.

I'm fond of YNS's Bruckner recordings and I agree with Jayne as to the exceptional ones. And I agree with Goon525, in that to my ears the finale did not let the rest of the symphony down on this occasion (well not very much!). To me, YNS is one of those younger conductors who delivers a more modern and less grandiose Bruckner symphony than many people expect, without all those 'cathedrals in sound', 'granite-hewn sonorities', touching the hand of God, and so on. In both works the by-word was subtlety.

Was it a top Bruckner concert? No, the bar has been set too high!!! (although the adagio was one of the best I've witnessed). But I'd take a lot of convincing that there's a better way to play the Liszt.



Edit. There was no applause between movements and no chance of any. You could hear a cockroach fart. And at the end, there was no bozo yelping before the final note died. I hate to admit it, and perhaps I shouldn't say, but between movement applause would have been totally inappropriate and ruined the intense, rapt collective emotion in the hall.

[jayne lee wilson]

PROM 61/II. BRUCKNER 4, ROTTERDAM PHIL/Yannick Nézet-Séguin. RADIO 3 HDs. Sound balance a little distant, unspectacularly truthful to a slightly lightweight orchestra. Still, pleasingly spacious and detailed.

Truly fascinating Bruckner 4, built with the longer term in mind as, after somewhat restrained and inward accounts of the first two movements, orchestral brilliance, power and intensity increased through the scherzo and finale.
But YNS played this eagle-eye view off against a very wide, expressive, at times almost moment-to-moment rubato, daringly so in the finale, where the flexible tempi carved out the structure, emphasising its cumulative impact. This reminded me of that earlier volatile Bruckner tradition of Knappertsbusch, Andreae - and latterly Venzago. To some extent this tempo variabile is written-in to the score by Bruckner himself - at least in the authorised 1st Published edition of 1888, which you can hear in the sole BIS/Vanska recording. It has been remarked of this 1888 score, that it contains little in its many expression, phrase or tempo indications that a sensitive conductor wouldn’t consider independently. It at least allows for much greater flexibility than we often hear, and YNS clearly reveals his awareness of it.

The swift first movement began with a very moulded first section and reined-in climax, but with lovely pastorally-evocative wind solos at the development’s beginning; I was craving more ruggedness, especially at the very restrained peak of the development; even in the coda the orchestral sonority still seemed a little too contained and blended for the hall space (but at this point, I didn’t know what lay ahead; in retrospective context it seems carefully judged …). Similarly, into the andante, so beautifully played (if occasionally becoming sleepy in the forest depths), and with a nobly sonorous, if not overwhelming, climax….I wondered again about a lack of “earthier” passions.
But the scherzo quickly revealed YNS’ hand, waspishly quick and brilliant, with delightfully exposed birdsong wind figures and a very open texture. The natural world was waking up, bright and lively around us! I loved the way the excitability increased still further in the repeat.

Yes, the 4th’s finale, even in 1878/80, has its imperfections. It picks up its themes as necessary, sometimes moving on a little too brusquely once the sectional business is finished (even by Bruckner’s transition-free standards); one or two climactic passages seem oddly placed, losing symphonic momentum. (But try seeing it as a sonata-rondo with three thematic groups, all subject to constant variation and transformation).
A creatively flexible approach like Nézet-Séguin's seems to get the best from its stark dynamic contrasts and sudden changes of direction (monumentality and stiffness the worst), and it finds its uniquely Brucknerian way to build all those ideas into its tonal plateaux with unpredictable, cumulative inevitability, gathering its subtle strengths for that glowing coda: wonderfully done tonight, never too grandiose or intense for the character of the music.

The dynamic restraint of the 1st movement and YNS’ adagio-style tendency to dwell too long on the andante’s paragraphs of contemplation could lead one to underrate this reading’s virtues. These first two movements may get a more focussed presentation on a different night.
But this Bruckner 4 was, above all, a journey: growing and intensifying through all of its span, exploratory and adventurous yet patient, never giving up its mysteries too soon.

[bluestateprommer]

YNS tends to produce a tight, disciplined and polished sound, especially with this orchestra; Bronfman magisterial initially though later seemed to match his tone to theirs; but perhaps this Liszt wasn't the last word for excitement?

No, it wasn't, and this was exactly the reason why I enjoyed this performance of Liszt 2 :) . No trash or flash, and that was extremely refreshing.

Given again my personal lack of affinity for Bruckner, YNS' reading with the RPhO struck me as a good performance. True, it didn't have the depth of sound of Barenboim's reading 2 summers ago (at which I was fortunate to be present in the RAH) with the Staatskapelle Berlin, but that seems an unfair comparison on that. Some of the quieter moments did sound a bit distant over iPlayer, granted that I was listening on earbuds. But the scherzo had a fresh feeling from YNS taking it more briskly than I've ever heard it.

FWIW, IMHO, YNS' pre-encore mini-speech was pretty classy, including his shout-out to Bernard Haitink (Prom 64 from 2004 was the Prom that YNS referred to as his having attended back in the day).

[Darkbloom]

I was struck by the difference between the two Bruckners heard over the last few days. N-S was clearly working with a band who had this symphony under their fingers and didn't have to work as hard as Oramo to keep it on track. Often, N-S was just shaping the music and lightly guiding it rather than anything else. I was greatly impressed with the sound of the RP, a step up from the BBCSO. They certainly didn't sound lightweight in the hall.

[jonfan]

I was struck by the difference between the two Bruckners heard over the last few days. N-S was clearly working with a band who had this symphony under their fingers and didn't have to work as hard as Oramo to keep it on track. Often, N-S was just shaping the music and lightly guiding it rather than anything else. I was greatly impressed with the sound of the RP, a step up from the BBCSO. They certainly didn't sound lightweight in the hall.

Agree, but I enjoyed both these performances immensely. A bit hard on the home band here as they have an enormous programme to get through in 8 weeks whereas RP have the luxury of peddling the same pieces around for several performances allowing everything to bed down. Interesting that Bruckner elicits no applause between movements, a spiritual thing maybe?
I found the engineered sound well up to standard and beautifully rounded. RAH must be a top venue for Bruckner in the world. It would be good to know what the engineers are doing differently this year as the sound is top drawer every day. There seem to be more spot mics about the players than normal so just perhaps more artificial balancing going on? Very effective and convincing whatever it is.

[silvestrione]

Well, I thought the scherzo was thrilling, delightful, stirring, moving, just wonderful....all those things! If you didn't like it, then, as Edward Greenfield once said after an excerpt from the Klemperer version on Record Review, 'clearly Bruckner is not your man!'


Less taken with first two movements, for reasons JLW sets out. Finale? Ashamed to say I had to go away and do something else. Catch up later.

[BBMmk2]

The whole concert was just sublime, imo. The Liszt was just amazing, the Bruckner, one of the best I’ve heard.

[Darkbloom]

Agree, but I enjoyed both these performances immensely. A bit hard on the home band here as they have an enormous programme to get through in 8 weeks whereas RP have the luxury of peddling the same pieces around for several performances allowing everything to bed down. Interesting that Bruckner elicits no applause between movements, a spiritual thing maybe?
I found the engineered sound well up to standard and beautifully rounded. RAH must be a top venue for Bruckner in the world. It would be good to know what the engineers are doing differently this year as the sound is top drawer every day. There seem to be more spot mics about the players than normal so just perhaps more artificial balancing going on? Very effective and convincing whatever it is.

I feel privileged to have attended both. That I preferred one to the other is certainly no slight on the BBCSO, who were excellent that night and have been all season. Pulling off a performance as good as the Bruckner spoke volumes for their professionalism and musicianship. But yesterday we heard Bruckner performed on another level. I don't want to push the comparison too far, but their combination of weight and lightness reminded me of the VPO. Maybe the end wasn't quite as overwhelming as I would like but overall it was a triumph.

[Darkbloom]

I have just been looking at N-S's calendar of performances for this year. It's insane. I don't know how someone can keep up this level of activity without burning out. And that doesn't include rehearsal time and all the other commitments that go with being a high profile conductor. And now he's taken on the Met job. Even a workaholic like Nelsons has gaps in his schedule but N-S keeps on going.