|
OVERALL NOISE RATING: 1 (Just a bit of rustling plastic.) The Noise Rating Index is a partially-objective measurement of pager and handphone blasts, 9pm and 10pm watch beeps, coughing-during-the-pianissimo-bits, intra-audience conversation and other mind-bogglingly inept noises emitted in the concert hall during actual performance of music. It is measured on a scale of 0 to 5, in increasing annoyance.
by Chia Han-Leon & Johann D'Souza There is probably a point to the fact that 1) the music we heard tonight spanned a mere 47 years of history, and 2) Howard Shelley's take on them all were more or less even and consistent. (The Mozart was written 1779, the concerto 1794 and the symphony is of 1816 vintage). But this period is also considered a transitionary period between the "Great Classics" and the pioneer Romantics. Perhaps it would have been useful if the performances could reflect on this cultural atmosphere; but by and large, Shelley seemed content to lie in the sweet embrace of the Classical period. But of course, this concert is titled "The Great Classicists". The two symphonies programmed are a point in musical evolution themselves. The Mozart 32nd "Symphony" really is more of a "Sinfonia" of older days, a symphonic overture which stems from the time of the Baroque Suite. The Schubert Fourth on the other hand, is a fully-fledged model of the modern symphony in the manner of Papa Haydn. And yet, to a listener, what is the difference?
The performances featured aristocratic and clean conducting, graceful and pleasant. Shelley's style of conducting is directly reflected in the performance (unpretentious, honest, maybe a little matter-of-fact). He prefers phrasal conducting, not the beat. Smooth and lyrical guidance of the curving lines are his focus, and he trusts the orchestra to play by itself in passages where conducting is "unnecessary" - and herein lies a point, I think, about conductor-pianists who dare to return to the good old days of conducting from the keyboard. Everything is sweet, level, cool-headed, transitions well-judged. There is even no attempt to (over?-) fortify the fortissimi. Loud sections of music were evenly and unobstrusively controlled. There is a cost - I did not feel the "suspense" supposedly created by the Mannheim crescendi in the Mozart piece. Level and sweet, but where is the contrast? The final two movements of the Schubert saw some energetic and spirited playing. The results were compelling, full of volume and conviction. Though the sound of the orchestra remains a little cloudy, this is not unacceptable to the style Shelley chose. For example, where the winds do appear above the strings, some very well-fused chords were effected (never mind the occasional ugly entry). In the final analysis, I must admit that I did not enjoy the concert, despite all the old-fashioned goodness. This even style, overdone, is an overdose. Surely, even among the great Classicists, some degree of individual personality can be found in each of Mozart, Beethoven and Schubert. But tonight, it all sounded like the same composer (except perhaps the concerto) rehashing the same thing over and over again. Oh no, isn't that one of the faults levelled at the Classicists? - Chia Han-Leon Taking on the role of conductor-cum-pianist presents itself with a different set of problems. A pianist left to his own devices is able to fully concentrate on his art while getting full support from the conductor. However when a pianist takes on a dual role, the difficulties are suddenly doubled. Balance between both roles is vital and in no way must each one be compromised.
Shelley seemed to be a bit too caught up in getting the orchestra to come in on time; at points some of his phrasing was abruptly cut off while at other times slight slips in the runs occurred due to his concentration being shared with his conducting. I do not fault him on this however, I just felt that the orchestra only seemed to pay close attention to his conducting during the portions when he was conducting but seemed to slip away when he was at the keyboard. The balance that was needed was surely lacking. The timpani for instance seemed to be a bit harsh in certain sections while the woodwinds were a bit weak, especially in the first movement. I felt that they could have played a greater, more assertive role. The second movement suffered
the same fate as the first, being slightly too slow. Shelley’s playing
was not as sharp as previously seen, when he played the Rachmaninov No.4
with the SSO -
Johann D'Souza
Chia
Han-Leon and Johann
D'Souza were two of the lucky people who managed to find themselves
copies of the underprinted programme booklets.
742: 23.7.2000
©Chia Han-Leon, Johann D'Souza Readers' CommentsFrom: ( / Thursday, July 27, 2000 at 12:25:14) mmmmmm l From: rkpcazhg (rxvrkiuj@ngybgfhj.com / Thursday, October 4, 2007 at 03:39:15) labyxzoq http://dfnybtff.com ezbotazf cjixlulv qrdyzlzp [URL=http://bbchskqg.com]qthdxvbk[/URL] From: hlnbfyms (mzdrjppy@wwrqnxee.com / Thursday, January 3, 2008 at 17:59:17) xdvzoqzk lczqdsue http://rgdshfli.com yyjunvfq oqvvtzcm [URL=http://covuxaxz.com]wzwplkax[/URL]
Explore the Flying Inkpot They're
Alive!
Bit deadish: Other
Resources at The Flying Inkpot
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
Do you have a website relating to classical music performance in Singapore? Tell us about it! Email classical@inkpot.com |