Congratulations to whoever programmed
this concert. Instead of more obviously popular fare, we were given
Rachmaninov’s First Piano Concerto, Mussorgsky’s Prelude to Act 1 of
Khovanshchina and Tchaikovsky’s Manfred Symphony. Each
work could have been substituted by a pot-boiler by its composer to
bring in the crowds. Instead, what as on offer was a chance to hear
an authentic Russian orchestra on not so well trodden home turf.
Vladimir
Fedoseyev has been at the helm of this
orchestra since 1974. His predecessors include Gennadi Rozhdestvensky,
Alexander Gauk and Nikolai Golovanov. Quite a tradition. And one we
should respect: so why were late-comers allowed in as the baton came
down, disturbing Khovanshchina’s magical Prelude to Act 1 (‘Dawn
on the Moscow River’)? RFH policy needs looking at here, or is this
part of a misguided London-wide trend? (similar disturbances occurred
during this year’s Proms).
The orchestra’s sound is intrinsically
Russian, from the acidic oboe (no bad thing) to the subtly vibratoed
solo horn. The lower registers had a fair amount of heft, due in no
small measure to the orchestral layout: double-basses were positioned
all along the back of the stage, behind the woodwind. Melodies emerged
as impassioned (there was also some glorious clarinet playing at a true
pianissimo). A gripping beginning.
Nice to hear Nikolai Demidenko
on form, also. Mr Demidenko plays a Fazioli piano, quite bright of sound
and seemingly lacking the depth of a Steinway. Certainly it was quite
harsh in the upper registers. Despite this, Demidenko delivered a strong
interpretation of Rachmaninov’s early masterpiece (written in 1891 when
the composer was but a teenager, revised in 1917). Demidenko has the
iron fingers so necessary for any medallist in the Tchaikovsky competition,
and is capable of remarkable definition at speed. He is also able to
indulge in much interior musing (a great amount of care was lavished
on the Andante) as well as raising a smile with his ‘laughing’ staccati
in the finale. Agility is no problem for him. A particular highlight
was the first movement cadenza, in which Demidenko highlighted Rachmaninov’s
debt to Chopin. The orchestral layout paid dividends in the total clarity
of the double-bass pizzicati (so easily lost usually). This was
a most persuasive performance – only an over-projected right hand at
the opening of the slow movement detracted.
Tchaikovsky’s Manfred Symphony
is woefully neglected (perhaps he should have given it a number…). There
is no doubting Fedoseyev’s advocacy, though. Throughout this performance,
it was impossible to doubt the stature of Tchaikovsky’s Byron-inspired
masterpiece. The dynamic range was hugely impressive (does Tchaikovsky
mark fffff for one climax in the first movement?) Expressive
but never indulgent, the ebb and flow seemed like a miraculous, fervent
outpouring. This was due in no small part to Fedoseyev’s choice of tempi,
which made the entire first movement seem like one huge, natural progression.
The Scherzo hinted at a Russian Mendelssohn (perhaps a shade lighter
would have sealed the comparison) while the third movement, marked ‘Pastoral’,
was a peaceful idyll only slightly marred by some scrappy upper strings.
The finale, grimly determined yet with great verve, was noteworthy particularly
for its rhythmic expertise: off-beat accents from the brass were preternaturally
together. Grandeur and dark Tchaikovskian angst made this an overwhelmingly
powerful experience.
If they did an encore, this reviewer
does not know. To disturb the effect of Manfred would have been
a sin.
Colin Clarke
Return to:
Music on the Web