Sunday, October 30, 2011

Hardest Symphony to Start?

For the first time in some time, I put the Carlos Kleiber recording of Beethoven's 5th on the turntable thing morning; while listening, I was reminded of a Georg Solti comment about how difficult it is to start the symphony (I tried finding a direct quote, but to no avail).

If one looks at the score, one can see why:


Three problems.  The piece is very fast (Allegro con brio); the piece starts off the beat; and it is easy to turn those straight eighth-notes (or quavers, as they say in England) into triplets.  It would help to beat a silent measure before beginning, but I am sure that is not a cool thing for a professional conductor to do.


Monday, October 10, 2011

Favorite Symphonies not composed by Mozart, Beethoven, Brahms or Mahler

Schubert 9
Berlioz Symphonie Fantastique
Bruckner 7
Mendelssohn 3
Tchaikovsky 1
Shostakovich 10
Haydn 98
Haydn 104
Prokofiev 1
Sibelius 5

Sunday, July 31, 2011

Mozart C-minor Fantasy, K 475

I have been playing the piece since I was about 15, and it never ceases to amaze me.  It is not just that it is chromatic, it also shifts keys violently and seemlessly.  Sometimes, when people don't know Mozart very well, they will say that he is "pretty," but not as "profound" or "modern" as Bach and Beethoven.  The K475 all by itself refutes the point.


Monday, June 6, 2011

What makes an orchestra great

I was thinking about this while listening to Dudamel and the Los Angeles Philharmonic do Brahms 4th yesterday afternoon.  It was overall a thrilling performance--the first two movements were as good as anything I have heard, and third was great, and my only problem with the 4th was that I thought Dudamel's tempo was a little slow and he overplayed the contrasts a wee bit (of course, that is just a question of taste).

The playing, however, was awesome.  So why makes an orchestra great?  The following thoughts occur to me:

(1) They are completely in tune.

(2) They are precise and yet they also swing.  The LA Phil did the Mozart Haffner Symphony earlier this year, and the strings sounded as if they were one instrument.  Yesterday, when they played the great second subject of the first movement of the Brahms, they made it sound like a big, German Tango.  The pulse never wavered, but there was great flexibility.

(3) They are powerful and yet transparent: they can get loud without being ugly, and every individual voice remains clear.

(4) They can play a great variety of styles.  The Brahms 4 was very German yesterday, but when they did the famous Hungarian Dance 5 as an encore, it was pure Warner Brothers.

(5) Fine soloists.  I have been a fan of Michelle Zukovsky, the LA Phil's principal clarenet, since I came across an album called Philharmonic Solo when I was in college (which was the late 1970s).  I remember hearing her clarinet solo in the Beethoven 6 with Giulini when the LA Phil came to Boston many years ago, and she was terrific in the Brahms yesterday.  David Buck, the new principal flutist, made the haunting flute solo in the 4th movement (bars 97-104), well haunting.    First oboe Ariana Ghez produces consistently breathtaking sounds as well.

(6) The ability to be heterogeneous and homogeneous.  Sometimes, when one instrument takes over a melodic line from another, one likes to hear them meld: for the clarinet to sound just a little like the oboe; for the strings to sound a little like the winds.  Karajan's Berlin Philharmonic was miraculous at this, but Karajan liked that patricular characteristic a bit too much, so the orchestra sometimes sounded a little bit like how my mother-in-law's Cadillac would ride--it was just too cushy.  Part of the LA Phil's flexibility is that is is capable of producing Karajanesque smoothness, but can also make instruments stand out for what they are.

(7)  That they seem to care.  Unlike any other major league orchestra I have seen, the member of the LA Phil never look bored to me.  But maybe that is just me.








Thursday, April 14, 2011

Orchestra Seating.

For many years, my favorite Beethoven 9 set was the Karajan set from the early 1960s.  While it has some moments of Karajan slickness, and I don't like the 6th at all, the playing in general is so magnificent that I have gotten a great deal of pleasure from it over the years.

That set has been displaced by Haitink's recent LSO 9.  I like Haitink's interpretations better, and the playing is, to me, as good as the BPO's in the 60s.  But as I was listening to the set, a question occurred to me.

One thing that is quite noticible is the placement of the violins: the first violins are on the left, and the second on the right.  Violas are left center and cellos are right center.   Apparently, this was also the seating arrangement Toscanini used more than 60 years ago.  In between, orchestras were usually seated from high strings to low as one moved from left to right.  As it happens, I like the spatial arrangement used by Haitink now, and it leads me to be curious about what leads to changes in tradations about seating arrangements.