Prom 4 (1.08.21) - An Evening of Mozart with the Scottish Chamber Orchestra

[french frank]

Look out for a PM with a download link. I have done a crafty edit to the aac file, using mp3directcut.

[Bryn]

See what you think. I could try pasting in a short hiatus from between movements.

[jayne lee wilson]

For a more rounded view of Emelyanychev - young but very achieved, thoughtful and considered beyond his years - have a listen to some of these...

https://www.qobuz.com/gb-en/search?i=boutique&q=maxim%20emelyanychev%20&qref=dac_1

Don't die of shock but he likes to play Mozart etc on....various fortepianos (see Qobuz notes). And does it very well too.
And his Eroica is fascinating, if less musically compelling or as thought-through than the Mozart trilogy here.

I find some of the above comments very OTT about this specific prom, but see my earlier review (#33) about that. Creativity in performance has been an essential part of music-making, going back centuries: elongated pauses, agogic hesitations and rubato, subtle or emphatic, all an essential part of that. Mozart never played his concertos the same way twice.
As Mahler said, "the most important part of the music is not in the notes". Just so. Performers are Creators.
Above all.... listen again, and keep listening. In the best sound you can (currently on R3 the AAC 320kbps webcasts). Don't be tempted to just react on a first (shocked or outraged) impulse.

Second hearings, let alone thirds, can reveal things about yourself and your own reflexive responses. It is in fact enjoyable to challenge those. It may even encourage a certain breadth, a certain generosity of spirit.
(And so easy to implement now...)

[LMcD]

I didn't think the Jupiter came off as successfully as its 2 predecessors - not such a smooth performance, and one which sounded rushed at some points and rather sluggish at others.

[Westfield999]

For a more rounded view of Emelyanychev - young but very achieved, thoughtful and considered beyond his years - have a listen to some of these...

https://www.qobuz.com/gb-en/search?i=boutique&q=maxim%20emelyanychev%20&qref=dac_1

Don't die of shock but he likes to play Mozart etc on....various fortepianos (see Qobuz notes). And does it very well too.
And his Eroica is fascinating, if less musically compelling or as thought-through than the Mozart trilogy here.

I find some of the above comments very OTT about this specific prom, but see my earlier review (#33) about that. Creativity in performance has been an essential part of music-making, going back centuries: elongated pauses, agogic hesitations and rubato, subtle or emphatic, all an essential part of that. Mozart never played his concertos the same way twice.
As Mahler said, "the most important part of the music is not in the notes". Just so. Performers are Creators.
Above all.... listen again, and keep listening. In the best sound you can (currently on R3 the AAC 320kbps webcasts). Don't be tempted to just react on a first (shocked or outraged) impulse.

Second hearings, let alone thirds, can reveal things about yourself and your own reflexive responses. It is in fact enjoyable to challenge those. It may even encourage a certain breadth, a certain generosity of spirit.
(And so easy to implement now...)

I was taught that a conductor's job is "to occasion a response". And far better, surely, for that response to be "shocked or outrage" than indifferent or apathetic? I plead guilty as charged, but on the other hand, having conducted #41 I do know the piece very well indeed and I'm sorry: I just hated it. But yes, I might go back and dip into it again on iPlayer and see whether I can work my way round some of those self indulgences, as I saw them, but I bow sincerely to your obviously greater expertise and withdraw "train wreck"! :)

[Westfield999]

For a more rounded view of Emelyanychev - young but very achieved, thoughtful and considered beyond his years - have a listen to some of these...

https://www.qobuz.com/gb-en/search?i=boutique&q=maxim%20emelyanychev%20&qref=dac_1

Don't die of shock but he likes to play Mozart etc on....various fortepianos (see Qobuz notes). And does it very well too.
And his Eroica is fascinating, if less musically compelling or as thought-through than the Mozart trilogy here.

I find some of the above comments very OTT about this specific prom, but see my earlier review (#33) about that. Creativity in performance has been an essential part of music-making, going back centuries: elongated pauses, agogic hesitations and rubato, subtle or emphatic, all an essential part of that. Mozart never played his concertos the same way twice.
As Mahler said, "the most important part of the music is not in the notes". Just so. Performers are Creators.
Above all.... listen again, and keep listening. In the best sound you can (currently on R3 the AAC 320kbps webcasts). Don't be tempted to just react on a first (shocked or outraged) impulse.

Second hearings, let alone thirds, can reveal things about yourself and your own reflexive responses. It is in fact enjoyable to challenge those. It may even encourage a certain breadth, a certain generosity of spirit.
(And so easy to implement now...)

I was taught that a conductor's job is "to occasion a response". And far better, surely, for that response to be "shocked or outrage" than indifferent or apathetic? I plead guilty as charged, but on the other hand, having conducted #41 I do know the piece very well indeed and I'm sorry: I just hated it. But yes, I might go back and dip into it again on iPlayer and see whether I can work my way round some of those self indulgences, as I saw them, but I bow sincerely to your obviously greater expertise and withdraw "train wreck"! :)

[jayne lee wilson]

I was taught that a conductor's job is "to occasion a response". And far better, surely, for that response to be "shocked or outrage" than indifferent or apathetic? I plead guilty as charged, but on the other hand, having conducted #41 I do know the piece very well indeed and I'm sorry: I just hated it. But yes, I might go back and dip into it again on iPlayer and see whether I can work my way round some of those self indulgences, as I saw them, but I bow sincerely to your obviously greater expertise and withdraw "train wreck"! :)

We can certainly agree on that.........

I guess we all have our internal models, rehearsed responses, idées reçues, especially if we know a familiar classical piece well; often based on recordings. But to escape those limitations, fly away from those nets, look back and realise how restricting they often are, can be very exhilarating....(even if also unnerving...)....

But the great thing is to keep listening, listen closely, listen again....."so we beat on, boats against the current, borne back ceaselessly into the past..."

[oddoneout]

I was taught that a conductor's job is "to occasion a response". And far better, surely, for that response to be "shocked or outrage" than indifferent or apathetic? I plead guilty as charged, but on the other hand, having conducted #41 I do know the piece very well indeed and I'm sorry: I just hated it. But yes, I might go back and dip into it again on iPlayer and see whether I can work my way round some of those self indulgences, as I saw them, but I bow sincerely to your obviously greater expertise and withdraw "train wreck"! :)

It's been interesting to see opinions batted to and fro and I think these two points sum up why ultimately it isn't so much right or wrong as personal preferences, which could range in origin from gut instinct to extensively researched. It can be a good thing to hear a well-loved/known work played in a way that doesn't suit those personal preferences, an opportunity to review pros and cons.
I thoroughly enjoyed the whole concert but especially #41 because it wasn't a routine rendition of a rather over-exposed work - but then I am a simple higorant soul and just enjoy listening to music, mostly at face value; any analysis is at the level of "don't think that went well/ that was interesting/remember playing [singing]that", as I don't have the music theory knowledge to go beyond that.

[Westfield999]

We can certainly agree on that.........

I guess we all have our internal models, rehearsed responses, idées reçues, especially if we know a familiar classical piece well; often based on recordings. But to escape those limitations, fly away from those nets, look back and realise how restricting they often are, can be very exhilarating....(even if also unnerving...)....

But the great thing is to keep listening, listen closely, listen again....."so we beat on, boats against the current, borne back ceaselessly into the past..."

OK.... I withdraw "Train Wreck"! As you suggested, I spent some time selectively dipping back into this concert, this time on BBC Sounds so that I could focus on what I was hearing.

The first thing I would say is that the sound quality difference between BBC Sounds and BBC4 (at least on our satellite TV set-up) was simply astonishing. And I much prefer it being introduced as a concert rather than as a 'programme with musical bits' which is how I view the current flavour of the BBCs televised broadcasting of music. That, incidentally, is why i would hope that we will see far more of Anna Lapwood as one of the TV presenters since, as BBC Young Musicians showed, she is a musician first and a broadcaster second. The trouble is that the holy grail of ratings and competing with Classic fm creates different imperatives. Anyway...

I listened again to the slow movement of No 40, in the light of hearing the delicious delayed resolutions, amongst other wonderful colouring, in the BBC SSO's Pergolesi the other night, looking to see how the plangency in both compared. Chalk and cheese! From time to time there were portamenti that presumably the conductor had asked for which just felt wrong and out of place, especially given the almost exaggerated woodwind dotting in places that added a brightness that the movement doesn't call for. Yes, it was a way of doing it. Just not to my taste.

And I listened again to the first movement of No 41. And here I still could not be doing with the fractionally too long pauses and rits that are not in the music and which - sorry! - still seemed to draw attention to the conductor and away from the music. But again, it's a point of view.

I do take on board the somewhat pedagogic (!) encouragement to listen again and not jump to immediate conclusions, but I would counter that with the fact that before 'listen again' broadcasting came along, we had one go at hearing the performance and drawing our conclusions. But I was glad not to have the distraction of the conductor's antics this time round.

Sufficient contrition or is more needed?!

[LMcD]

OK.... I withdraw "Train Wreck"! As you suggested, I spent some time selectively dipping back into this concert, this time on BBC Sounds so that I could focus on what I was hearing.

The first thing I would say is that the sound quality difference between BBC Sounds and BBC4 (at least on our satellite TV set-up) was simply astonishing. And I much prefer it being introduced as a concert rather than as a 'programme with musical bits' which is how I view the current flavour of the BBCs televised broadcasting of music. That, incidentally, is why i would hope that we will see far more of Anna Lapwood as one of the TV presenters since, as BBC Young Musicians showed, she is a musician first and a broadcaster second. The trouble is that the holy grail of ratings and competing with Classic fm creates different imperatives. Anyway...

I listened again to the slow movement of No 40, in the light of hearing the delicious delayed resolutions, amongst other wonderful colouring, in the BBC SSO's Pergolesi the other night, looking to see how the plangency in both compared. Chalk and cheese! From time to time there were portamenti that presumably the conductor had asked for which just felt wrong and out of place, especially given the almost exaggerated woodwind dotting in places that added a brightness that the movement doesn't call for. Yes, it was a way of doing it. Just not to my taste.

And I listened again to the first movement of No 41. And here I still could not be doing with the fractionally too long pauses and rits that are not in the music and which - sorry! - still seemed to draw attention to the conductor and away from the music. But again, it's a point of view.

I do take on board the somewhat pedagogic (!) encouragement to listen again and not jump to immediate conclusions, but I would counter that with the fact that before 'listen again' broadcasting came along, we had one go at hearing the performance and drawing our conclusions. But I was glad not to have the distraction of the conductor's antics this time round.

Sufficient contrition or is more needed?!

Which sound was better?
Rightly or wrongly, one's view of a performance may be influenced by whether or not what can see what the conductor is up to! I didn't have a problem with his movements and gestures, and shared his obvious enthusiasm for these great works, but can well imagine that they might irritate others.

[kernelbogey]

...the almost exaggerated woodwind dotting in places that added a brightness that the movement doesn't call for.

By the dotting, do you mean playing the note shorter than the score indicates? (It's a long time since I first learned to read music!) So, IIRC, the dot would be over the note (if it were there).

[Dave Payn]

By the dotting, do you mean playing the note shorter than the score indicates? (It's a long time since I first learned to read music!) So, IIRC, the dot would be over the note (if it were there).

Or is he/she referring to the demi-semis in the second movement? If so, that was the first time I'd heard them played correctly

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

By the dotting, do you mean playing the note shorter than the score indicates? (It's a long time since I first learned to read music!) So, IIRC, the dot would be over the note (if it were there).

Placing a dot over or under a note head indicates the need to play each note short and detached.
Placing a dot immediately to the right of the note has a quite different effect, increasing the note’s duration by 50%. Two dots after a note increases its duration by 75%.
It gets a lot more complicated when HIPP scholars get their teeth into it, but the above rule applies in most instances.

[kernelbogey]

Placing a dot over or under a note head indicates the need to play each note short and detached.
Placing a dot immediately to the right of the note has a quite different effect, increasing the note’s duration by 50%. Two dots after a note increases its duration by 75%.
It gets a lot more complicated when HIPP scholars get their teeth into it, but the above rule applies in most instances.

Thanks Alpie. Amazingly I had remembered most of that from (gulp) about 65 years ago! though not the double dotting.

I therefore take it that this

(Westfield999) the almost exaggerated woodwind dotting in places that added a brightness that the movement doesn't call for

refers to woodwind players being (presumably) asked by the conductor to play the phrases as though dotted over/under...?

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

I therefore take it that this...

refers to woodwind players being (presumably) asked by the conductor to play the phrases as though dotted over/under...?

I presume that what was meant was something akin to double dotting when single dotting was indicated.