An interesting mixture of styles make this a particularly attractive 
        programme. What they have in common is that fundamentally the three works 
        are all piano concertos and, as one might expect, all place great demands 
        on the technique and personality of the pianist. Alexei Lubimov emerges 
        from the challenge with great credit; but on reflection, would he have 
        taken it on in the first place if he was not worthy to do so? 
         
        
Rachmaninov's Fourth Concerto is the most conventional 
          of these pieces, for the simple reason that it is the only one which 
          uses the normal concerto combination of piano and orchestra. The music 
          does not have quite the compelling sweep of the celebrated Second and 
          Third Concertos, and Rachmaninov himself was aware of that, since he 
          spent the better part of ten years working on it and refining it. But 
          Lubimov and Saraste have the work's measure, and their control of the 
          larger scale issues of construction and direction is exemplary. The 
          recorded sound is good though not outstanding, and there are competitors 
          (notably Vladimir Ashkenazy on Decca) who benefit from a wider and richer 
          sound spectrum. 
        
 
        
I particularly enjoyed Lubimov's sensitivity to phrase 
          shaping, which allows the heroic sweeping gestures of the first movement 
          to make their impression without becoming unduly indulgent. The more 
          intimate moments in the slow movement also avoid sounding too much like 
          a parody of 'Three Blind Mice' (always a tricky problem with this piece). 
          In all, then, this can be rated a successful interpretation. 
        
 
        
The sour chords which open Stravinsky's Concerto reveal 
          a composer who was creating a very different kind of music at precisely 
          the same time as Rachmaninov was composing his grand and romantic Fourth 
          Concerto. Therefore the priorities of the performance have to be very 
          different, and it is surely more than a matter of just playing the notes. 
          Once the lively tempo gets under way there are occasion when just a 
          little more attack would have brought that touch of incisiveness that 
          makes all the difference in this music. The strengths of the performance 
          lie more in the subtleties of shading and instrumental balances than 
          they do in terms of physical excitement. Again the recording is accurate 
          without having enormous impact. 
        
 
        
Scriabin's Prometheus is one of the composer's 
          most grandiose and ambitious projects. He conceived the idea as a gigantic 
          experience ending with a massive tutti chord and a colour light show 
          which resolved to a blinding white light. The composer regarded himself 
          as a mystic visionary, who would reveal new truths to those who followed 
          him (he was a kind of musical Rasputin). His initial idea was that this 
          experience should take place in India; but after a visit to London, 
          he thought that an alternative option might be the Royal Albert Hall. 
        
 
        
So to hear the music on CD is several degrees removed 
          from Scriabin's vision. The music clearly requires a big, richly sonorous 
          sound, which it does not quite have in this recording. Perhaps it is 
          for that reason that the performance feels somewhat earthbound, even 
          after the chorus enters. The best approach is to turn up the volume 
          and indulge, but to really believe in this piece you need a lively imagination. 
          As in the Rachmaninov concerto, Ashkenazy's Decca performance of the 
          Scriabin is just a little more vivid. 
        
 
        
        
Terry Barfoot