Recordings of all
four Dvořák piano trios abound, as well as recordings
of individual trios, especially the third and fourth. At present
we have, among others, complete sets by the Borodin Trio, the
Beaux Arts - a singularly beautiful set - the Suk Trio and
the Guarneri of Prague, the latter two sets both on Supraphon.
There are a number of others. In looking at a newly recorded
set we must look at what makes these performances inherently
interesting as well as at the more ordinary review features.
As can be seen
above, Dvořák’s piano trios cover much of his career,
the first two dating from the same period as the famous Serenade
op. 22, the third contemporary with many of Dvořák’s greatest
chamber and orchestral works, and the last, the famous “Dumky”,
dating from just before his years in the U.S. They also cover
a wide range of emotions - the thoughtfulness and comparative
gaiety of the first, the tragedy of the second, the tragedy
plus profundity of the third and the varied feelings of the
famous fourth. Similarly the various versions of the Trios
listed above cover a wide variety of approaches. The Beaux
Arts set is mentioned above, but might be too traditional for
some tastes. The two different versions on Supraphon could
be assumed to be echt Czech, but differ strongly from
each other. We haven’t mentioned the versions by the Vienna
Piano Trio, the Grieg Trio or the estimable recordings on Naxos
by the fine Joachim Trio. In terms of nationality, one could
say that the recording under review, by a French trio, in spite
of their name, does betray certain characteristics that might
be described as French - an emphasis on clarity and precision
of performance. But here is also plenty of regard for the Czech
origins of the music and there is a motor power, especially
in the third and fourth trios, that one would not associate
with a French approach to chamber music.
The B-Flat Major
trio is the only one in a major key and marks a sort of resting
point in the life of the composer before the events that would
produce the more tragic trio in G-minor. The first trio is
mostly mellow and friendly, displaying the sunnier parts of
Dvořák’s personality. The Dumky excel at differentiating
between the various emotions of the first and second movements,
but I found that the latter half of the second movement dragged.
In the scherzo the cello is given some pride of place and the
Dumky shows excellent cohesion here, just as each member shows
off in turn in the last movement. This is a performance that
shows excellent ensemble playing and an understanding of the
emotional content, but at the same time the emotions are a
little more distant than what one may be used to.
Although written
only eight months later, the Trio No.2 in G-Minor presents
a very different emotional landscape. This work was Dvořák’s
reaction the death of his two day-old daughter Josefa. The
first movement shows the composer using the same material to
embody widely varying emotions, but the preponderant tone is
tragic. Again the Dumky Trio shows excellent ensemble work
and wonderful playing by the cellist, but again I felt as if
the performers could have placed greater emphasis on the tragic
elements. The players do better in the monothematic slow movement
with their performance the servant of Dvořák’s manipulation
of his one theme. The scherzo movement is more frenetic than
humorous and the frenzy also alternates with tragedy, yet again
Dvořák manipulates the same basic material in a variety
of ways. In this movement the Dumky Trio excel. The tragedy
really is evident and the frenzy is genuine. The trio section
is almost childlike and the players bring out the contrast
with what has come before beautifully. The final allegro is
in polka rhythm. The frenzy of the third movement has changed
to purposeful activity. There is beautiful playing by the violinist-
I found this movement contained some of the best playing of
the entire set. The work seems to be ending on a slightly happier
note from what has gone before, but sadness reemerges at the
very end-a sudden transition that the players manage quite
well.
The Trio No. 3
is even sadder than No. 2, following the death of Dvořák’s
mother and another of his children. But this work dates from
eight years later than the second trio and betrays a far more
mature attitude towards grief, one that is shown both structurally
and emotionally in this trio. The opening allegro mixes grief
and defiance somewhat as in the opening of the G-minor trio,
but these emotions are expressed both more deeply and more
succinctly, with the composer using the home key as a constant
mixing agent of the two emotions to show ever more profound
sides of both. In this movement the musicians are at their
best with the expressive qualities of Dvořák’s music.
In this F-minor work the scherzo comes second, Dvořák
building tonally from the first movement. The scherzo and trio
derive from related material, which is very effective structurally,
but I felt that the Dumky players were not totally successful
in their effort to distinguish between the two sections. Lagarde’s
piano playing is truly incisive here, although he is slightly
let down by the over-reverberant recording. The extended largo
that follows the scherzo is a very long-lined movement in which
Dvořák uses the violin and the cello to weave ever sadder
and more sincere developmental strands, leading to a magical
coda. Queyras exceeds his playing in the rest of the set in
this movement, developing the main theme in a progressively
more moving manner. The final allegro is in a dance form used
by Dvořák a number of times, the furiant. At first the
sense of tragedy that has gone before seems to have given way
completely to a sense of rebellion, but sadness returns with
the second theme, one of Dvořák’s most beautiful. There
are alternations between the furiant rhythm with its accompanying
sense of purpose and the ever-increasing sadness of the second
theme, with the latter gradually subsuming the former before
a rather perfunctory coda. The playing in this movement is
notable for the ease with which the musicians alternate between
the two contrasting thematic and rhythmic components. Their
furiant is very authentic-sounding. Queyras’ violin is a little
shrill here, but again Marin more than makes up for this.
Another eight years
passed before Dvořák produced his best-known trio, the “Dumky”.
The title derives from the old Slavic word “dumati”, which
means to brood or ponder. Dvořák had written several
works with this title (singular “dumka”) before he encountered
the folk song collector Ludovik Huba in a coffee shop and asked
him “What exactly is a dumka”? By the time of this trio
it had become for Dvořák a piece that is pensive and melancholy
with alternating lighter or at least faster sections. This
trio is not in the regular four movements of the others, but
is a sort of suite of six “dumkas”, hence the plural title “Dumky”.
The first “dumky” has a much attenuated opening, with beautiful
playing by the cellist. The pianist is a bit rough in the alternating
fast section, but he too does very well with the slow sections.
The second “dumky” is even more melancholy than the first and
would probably be the slow movement in a work of more traditional
format (cf. those critics who perceive this trio as a classical
four movement work). This movement really belongs to Marin, ably
assisted by Lagarde. The violinist also gets into the Slavic
spirit, though in a slightly plodding way. The third
movement opens with what should be folksy plucked notes on
the cello. But in Dvořák‘s hands they become hollow-sounding
and sinister-this is well brought out by the players. The fourth “dumka” is
less melancholy than the preceding one, though it is plodding
and has a resigned ending-again the group moves through the
movement towards this coda in exemplary fashion. The following
movement (No. 5) is the only one in the trio that begins in
a “fast” tempo, well played by the cellist. The movement eventually
becomes more sad, but not to the degree of the previous movements.
Queyras is excellent here. From the beginning the final movement
seems to be fading away, a use of E-minor reminiscent of Tchaikovsky
and Elgar, although it sounds totally like Dvořák. The
fast sections are played very dynamically, before the coda
suddenly cuts off the energy.
In terms of recording,
the Church of Saint Marcel is quite reverberant, as so many
churches are. The piano suffers most from this, while the cello
escapes almost unscathed. The violinist has the problem of
screechy high notes produced by the venue and a few times his
low notes are totally lost. However, when the group is playing
at medium volume these caveats do not apply and the recording
fully captures their excellent ensemble.
The Dumky Trio,
that is, the group of musicians, was until recently known as
the Trio des Iscles and as one of the best French trios. I
am not aware of the reason for the change in name, but it is
not due to personnel issues, as the same three players who
started the group in 1988 still make up the group. It is appropriate
that if they needed a new name it should be that of one of
Dvořák’s most famous chamber works as they have shown
a great sympathy for Czech music in both performance and in
their Martinů recordings,. Having said that, I must return
to my question about national stereotyping at the beginning
of this essay - the Dumky Trio plays this music with great
attention to structure and thematic development, but there
is still a certain neo-classical restraint (sorry about that)
to their performances, especially in the first two trios. If
this style is not what you find compelling in chamber music,
this is not the set of the Dvořák piano trios to obtain.
If it is not a drawback, then this set contains wonderful ensemble
playing and lots of energy, as well as solo work by Véronique
Marin that is truly inspired.
William Kreindler
Dumky Trio:
Pierre-Olivier Queyras (violin), Véronique Marin
(cello), Frédéric Lagarde (piano) 
