Other Links
Editorial Board
- Editor - Bill Kenny
- Founder - Len Mullenger
Google Site Search
SEEN AND HEARD UK CONCERT REVIEW
J.C. Bach, Mozart, J.S. Bach:
Murray Perahia (piano,
conductor), Academy of St. Martin in the Fields (Kenneth Sillito (director,
leader), St. David’s Hall, Cardiff, 14.11.2009
(GPu)
J.C. Bach, Sinfonia Concertante in E flat major (Notturno), T.288/7
Mozart, Piano Concerto No.17 in G major, K543
J.S. Bach, Keyboard Concerto No.3 in D, BWV 1054
Mozart, Symphony No.
38 in D (Prague), K504
Concertgoers in Cardiff have
been treated to some very good concerts in recent months. This was another.
It benefited from the sheer quality of the performers, both soloist and
orchestra, and also from a thoroughly well-conceived programme, in which
the works performed invited thoughts about a variety of interconnections.
One interesting way of looking at them/listening to them, for example, is
in terms of the ways in which their sound-worlds reflect the different kinds
of venues for which they were written. J.C. Bach’s Sinfonia was surely
conceived with performance outdoors in mind, the way that the horns are
used reflecting this; the Mozart Piano Concerto was written for ‘domestic’
performance (albeit on a large scale), premiered as it was by his pupil
Barbara (‘Babette’) Ployer and premiered (by her) at her father’s
house in the Viennese suburb of Döbling in 1784, while the Prague Symphony
was written for performance in the Opera House there, played by Mozart,
in January of 1787. Or one might like to think of the different ways in
which the works by the two Bachs exist virtually on the borderline between
chamber music and orchestral music (and one might mike a case for placing
them on the chamber side of the border), while of the two works by Mozart
the Symphony occupies a place much further over that border than the piano
concerto does. Or, of course, the sequence provoked thoughts of a musical-historical
kind. A line of descent from J.S. Bach through J.C. Bach (who, then aged
29, befriended the 8 year old Mozart in London in 1764) was made attractively
audible.
The Sinfonia by J.C. Bach which opened
the programme was played conductorless and was – apart from its own
very real merits and interest – an effective demonstration of just
how perfectly ‘together’ the Academy of St. Martin in the Fields
is, how well its members watch and listen to one another, how clear its
orchestral textures are and how precise its rhythms are. The way in which
Bach deploys his team of solo instruments – two horns, two oboes,
two violins, two violas and one cello – made for remarkable variety
and many subtle effects. In some passages as few as three instruments are
deployed, in some more or less the whole of the solo force was in dialogue
with the other members of the orchestra; the permutations were constantly
varied, and enabled one to appreciate how uniformly excellent was the intonation
of the Academy’s soloists, as well as making for delightful listening
as it demonstrated the composer’s familiarity with Italian and French
manners, as well as the thorough grounding in the Germanic tradition that
he had received from his father.
Murray Perahia joined the
academy for K453, directing them from the keyboard. The opening allegro
of this concerto abounds in thematic ideas and both orchestra and soloist
relished that abundance without lingering self-indulgently over any one
of the many ideas. Murray Perahia’s striking clarity of line was immediately
obvious, his playing here (and elsewhere) marked by a grasp of larger structure
and pattern that he was able to communicate in ways that not too many modern
players of Mozart can. In a feature which appeared in the BBC Music Magazine
in July of 2009, Perahia was quoted as saying “When you’re young,
you can be taken with the impulse of the moment and the beauty of a phrase,
but the older you get, the more you see that the phrase is only beautiful
because of the context within which it works. The melody is only the outward
manifestation of something quite deep inside and it’s to come to terms
with this that one studies”. Perahia’s reading of this concerto
certainly contained some beautifully shaped phrases, but one was never allowed
to imagine that such phrases were an end in themselves; this was a reading
that eloquently communicated many of those ‘deeper’ structures
on which the beauty of the phrases was persuasively shown to depend. Throughout
there was a quasi-chamber-music sense of conversation between soloist and
orchestra, nowhere more so than in the andante, in which the piano seems,
very gently, to dictate changes of harmonic direction; on this occasion
one was aware that the soloist ‘persuaded’ rather than commanded
such shifts. Perahia’s stage manner is unassuming, all excessive demonstrativeness
or showiness eschewed, and even in a concerto such as this (and even more
so in the Bach concerto which followed) he is very much part of the ensemble.
By almost eliding the gap between andante and succeeding allegretto, allowing
only the briefest of pauses, Perahia effected a magical transition, from
the sentiment of the slow movement to the dancing variations of the last
movement, making what can seem like an odd or forced contrast utterly convincing,
a natural expression of a natural volatility of mood. Performances of Mozart
piano concertos don’t come much better than this.
Post-interval Perahia again
directed from the piano in J.S. Bach’s BWV 1054, an arrangement of
the Violin Concerto BWV 1042. There was very much a sense here of the keyboard
as part of the larger structure and texture of the work, Perahia attempting
none of the artificial foregrounding or highlighting of the piano that one
sometimes meets in performances of Bach’s keyboard concertos. Here
the keyboard sank into and emerged from the larger orchestral sound in an
easy and natural fashion. As one would expect from his recordings of Bach’s
solo keyboard works, Perahia’s command of Bach’s counterpoint
was absolute and, in the best, sense wholly unacademic. The first movement
was infectiously vigorous, the second – marked ‘adagio and piano
sempre’ – had a kind of secular reverence and was full of compassion
and tenderness. Perahia is capable of a profoundly evocative poetry (produced
without the slightest flamboyance or exaggeration) and his reading of this
central movement combined poetry and clarity of structure to very moving
effect. The insistent rhythms of short closing allegro spoke of a kind of
holy clockwork, vivacious, full of life and yet almost (only almost)
mechanical in their precision. The whole performance was exhilarating.
I didn’t feel that the
same could quite be said of the performance of the Prague Symphony that
followed. Of course, given the sheer quality of the Academy of St Martin
in the Fields, playing under the baton of Perahia, this was very far from
being a bad or a weak performance. But it lacked the electricity of what
had gone before, and though the opening of the first movement was properly
full of ominous menace, there were moments later in the movement when one
felt the need for a little more attack, a little more emotional intensity;
perhaps even a little more grandiloquence – I am not sure that we
left chamber music far enough behind here. In the central andante there
was much that was limpidly beautiful and serene, but sometimes tempi were
so slow as to allow a dissipation of musical tension. The horns were, though,
particularly fine here – every section of the orchestra (the woodwinds
were uniformly excellent) made a very favourable impression during the evening.
In the closing presto finale, again, the performance, for all its clarity
and assurance, didn’t quite scale the joyous heights of the most outstanding
performances of the work. Perhaps my reservations are overdone – the
first three quarters of the programme was of such a uniformly high quality
that it was perhaps expecting too much to expect the level to be sustained
to the very end of the evening.
In fact, however, the Prague
wasn’t the very end of the evening. As an encore Perahia conducted
the Academy in a splendidly fleet-footed performance of the closing presto
from Haydn’s Oxford symphony. This was a glass of sparkling wine to
round off the evening, a splendid display of the orchestra’s unanimity
of sound and of Perahia’s ability, so often, to get their best out
of them.
Glyn Pursglove