SEEN AND HEARD INTERNATIONAL

Other Links

Editorial Board

Google Site Search

Internet MusicWeb

Wagner, Brahms and Sibelius: Boris Berezovsky (piano) Philharmonia Orcherstra Leif Segerstam (conductor) Royal Festival Hall 2.10.2008 (GD)

Wagner:  Die Meistersinger von Nürnberg Overture
Brahms:  Piano Concerto No.1 in D minor, Op 15
Sibelius:  Symphony No. 2 in D major, Op 43


I was looking forward to this concert. Leif Segerstam is still quite under-rated here but he has rercorded a wide ranging repertoire for various labels and has specialised in modern music and lesser known Finnish, Baltic and Scandinavian works. His marvellous cycle of Sibelius symphonies and orchestral works with the Helsinki Philharmonic rival those of Osmo Vänskä and Segerstam is an important composer in his own right.

Segerstam opened tonight’s concert with a broad but not sluggish account of the Meistersinger overture in which he allowed plenty of shade and light in the C major opening pronouncement of the Mastersingers Guild. Throughout, Segerstam obtained excellent balance between strings, brass and woodwind, especially in marvellous contrapuntal development section, and as a contrast in the lyrical E major section associated with the romance music of Walther and Eva. Although the brass were nicely balanced and well played, I noticed here and there a touch of stridency. This is probably to do with my predilection for the the more solid, burnished German brass tone associated with great German conductors like Abendroth, Klemperer and Knappertsbusch all so steeped in this most German of operas. But apart from a misplaced timpani entry in the triumphant coda, this performance provided an excellent concert rendition of Wagner’s superb prelude.

The concert continued with another very German work. Brahms composed this unique, distinctly symphonic, concerto between 1854 and 1856, in his early twenties. What a challenge for future works! Could the young Brahms improve on this? Of course he went on to advance the whole German orchestral canon with his symphonies and concertos, but the first piano concerto is unique for its drama and dark, austere orchestral texture. Segerstam gave a fully ‘Maestoso’ thrust to the orchestral opening but wisely played down the ponderous bombast sometimes heard. Berezovsky entered with the contrasting intimate theme (still in D minor) with note perfect immediacy. We know that after Brahms consulted with none other than Joachim on the first movement, the latter advised a contrasting lyricism in the solo part’s initial entry; and that’s what Brahms writes. But here I didn’t have a feeling of lyrical, song-like, intimacy and I heard none of the ‘p expressivo’ Brahms asks for. Berezovsky was much more at home in the dramatic sections where the piano adopts the muscular weight of the orchestra. And what tonal power he can achieve! Berezovsky’s trills, imitating the dramatic opening orchestral tutti of the introduction now carried over into the modulated F sharp minor of the climactic development section, were powerfully thrilling indeed. But I do wish he had made that pianistic lyrical contrast which informs so much of the musical essence of the piece.

Tovey called the great adagio a ‘Requiem for Schumann’ and the movement does have a solemn mourning quality unique in Brahms’ orchestral work. Tonight’s programme note writer erroneously calls it a…’serene, major-key adagio’; erroneous because Brahms modulates the opening D major with the remote tonal regions of B minor, and C minor, as well as the home key of D minor. Nor is there much that is ‘serene’ in the mid-section dialogue with piano and orchestra in B minor. The mysterious notes for muted timpani (silent throughout the rest of the movement) pre-figure the distant funereal tread of a requiem; perhaps even the German Requiem. Segerstam wisely refrained from taking this ‘adagio’ too slowly – Brahms’ adagios should never drag and throughout he elicited the hushed string tone that the composer asks for. Again Berezovsky played well with every detail audible, but I missed the restrained poetry and sense of tragedy one hears in pianists like Solomon, Arrau, Curzon and Gilels. Everything came off excellently in the rondo form C minor finale where the dramatic bravura passages brought out the best from Beerzovsky, in his element in the difficult D minor/D major cadenza. Segerstam let the central fugal section emerge naturally from the symphonic argument and both soloist and conductor/orchestra brought the performance to a suitably rousing major key coda.

In normal concert terms, the Sibelius second symphony was superbly crafted and often beautifully played but by the time we arrived at the symphony’s blazing triumphant coda I felt that I needed more; that sense of the kind of event that leaves one breathless. Earlier this year I heard a Sibelius 2 with the LPO and Gullberg Jensen. As I noted at the time the performance although not fautless, did have a sense of occasion. The LPO outstripping the Philharmonia here in terms of ensemble and resplendent fullness of tone which engulfed the whole hall. It is paradoxical that in that LPO account I held Segerstam's Helsinki recording as a benchmark in terms of comparison - paradoxical in the sense that Segerstam ‘live’ with the Philharmonia was simply no match to his Helsinki recording. Of course this has to do with Segerstam’s more close and enduring musical relationship with that orchestra and the fact that the Helsinki orchestra has a long Sibelius tradition which most non-Finnish orchestras cannot match. But there were other factors to consider; whereas the Helsinki recording has an inevitable surging sense of drive and expectancy,  here tonight Segerstam seemed more concerned in teasing out sectional nuances which, although revealing and beautifully contoured, interfered with overall span and contour of the work as a whole. Too often Segerstam slowed up to linger on a certain passage especially in the second movement. Also there were occasional ensemble problems indicating a lack of suitable rehearsal time. The third movement ‘Vivacissimo’ for the most part game off with great rhythmic finesse, but the lead up to the finale was too held back and failed to unleash the orchestral crescendo of power which inevitably leads into the great melodic flows of the finale. Beecham here used to hold back but he had the innate sense of timing, pacing and drama that left the audience awestruck, thrilled.

The finale itself lacked a sense of largesse and surging inevitability. This was partly to do with the Philharmonia’s string tone which although together and accurate lacks a certain bloom and weight. And, as noted, Segerstam held up any sense of inevitable surge by sudden shifts in tempo and lingering over detail. The resplendent brass 'amens' at the coda instead of rounding off the impact of occasion sounded a tad strident and lacking in full tonal weight. They were certainly playing fff but the overall effect was of well controlled loudness. Which left me feeling that this was another well played concert; it was over  and now I was planning the quickest exit route out of the hall to catch the tube home.

Geoff Diggines


^{Back to Top                                                    Cumulative Index Page}