Pyotr Ilyich TCHAIKOVSKY (1840-1893)
Symphony No. 4 [43:17]
Symphony No. 5 [41:30]
London Philharmonic Orchestra/Vladimir Jurowski
rec. live. Royal Festival Hall, 19 March (No. 4) and 4 May (No. 5) 2011
LPO LIVE LPO-0064 [43:17 + 41:30]
Partnered with his own orchestra, you’d expect to find Vladimir Jurowski
completely happy with this core Russian repertoire. In the event I found these
performances rather flat and uninteresting. No. 4 benefits from very good
playing but, for me at any rate, rather bland direction. The LPO strings are
full and authoritative, the brass clear and unforced, and the winds perky
and distinctive; but Jurowski’s direction feels as though it has been
telephoned in. The brass fanfare at the opening doesn’t pin you to the
back of your seat in the way that you would hope, and the main theme of the
first movement just “happens” without conveying the pain and stress
that it should. Even as it rises to its climax at the first movement’s
coda, it feels routine and lacks excitement, certainly when put next to the
likes of Jansons or Abbado. Likewise, I didn’t feel any sense of depth
in the Andantino. This slow movement needs to convey something soulful
and deeply Russian, particularly in the string playing, but I sensed an almost
complete lack of empathy in the LPO strings. To be fair to them, they play
the notes very capably, but they lack direction and, thus, they lack emotional
impact. The Scherzo has a healthy dose of humour to it, and the perky winds
display a good dose of Slavonic cheek, the only time the symphony sounds genuinely
Russian. Even into the finale, however, Jurowski seems to keep his players
on the leash until the coda when he lets them off and, to be fair, the results
are exciting when they come, perhaps all the more valuable because so looked
for. It’s a solid enough performance of Tchaikovsky 4, but much less
interesting than we have the right to expect from someone of Jurowski’s
standing and reputation, especially when you compare his recording with established
greats like Abbado, Jansons or Gergiev.
The Fifth is better, but still not remarkable. For one thing, the string tone
is richer and more evocative, lending some much needed feeling to the first
movement’s second subject, and they sound fantastic when the fate theme
is transformed at the opening of the finale. Jurowski’s choice of tempi
seems more apposite too, the first movement moving forward with drama and
urgency. This is a double-edged sword in the slow movement, though: the faster
tempo injects more drama into the tutti passages but doesn’t
give the gorgeous horn theme enough space to breathe or to evolve naturally.
The pacing of the waltz is just right, however, as is most of the finale,
though the brass don’t come across particularly well here, with the
edge taken off the fanfares that punctuate the finale’s action, perhaps
a consequence of the recording.
The engineers retain applause at the end of the Fifth, but not the Fourth.
These performances may have been greeted with enthusiasm in the RFH, but for
me they don’t stand up to repeated listening on record. Go to Jansons
or Gergiev to really tap into some Slavonic fire.
Simon Thompson
These don’t stand up to repeated listening on record.
Masterwork Index: Tchaikovsky 4 ~~ Tchaikovsky 5