Emo-Fan
02-12-2009, 05:01 PM
At Scorpion's behest, here is the first of what I hope will be many reviews of our Williamsport Symphony Orchestra and of other symphony orchestras as well!
On Tuesday, 10 February, 2009 I had the pleasure of hearing what was to my ears one of the very best concerts our fine orchestra has yet given. The conductor, Tomasz Golka, a very personable chap whom I have met several times, did a wonderful job. His choice of works to be performed does much to broaden the horizons of our somewhat small mountain town inasmuch as those choices appeal to average musical tastes and those who do not know their way around a symphony orchestra whilst simultaneously appealing to the musical needs of the more experienced.
The evening began with Jacques Offenbach's Overture to Orpheus in the Underworld. While the work was, to my ears, very competently performed, it is something of a workhorse: Nearly anyone with even cursory exposure to classical music would recognize the toe-tapping melodies. My "benchmark recording," if I may call it that, is Karajan's with the BPO (which, unfortunately has a somewhat dry digital sound). I thought Golka's compared very favorably with the recording. A very rousing piece indeed. (I certainly invite other criticism from fellow TH members, but, I don't know if there is really much more to say about this work. Perhaps a discussion of the underlying Greek Mythology would be in order, but such a discussion is, I believe, better placed elsewhere.)
A lesser known work is Ravel's Mother Goose. I had been unaware that this work began life as a duet for two pianos. (Can anyone recommend a good recording?) The orchestration is to my mind the epitome of French Impressionism, with long melodic lines that don't develop the way earlier music under the influence of the German and Austrian schools dictated. I'm always reminded of the paintings of Monet, that seem to depict motion in a still life. The music goes on and on, seemingly endlessly. I went to the concert looking forward to this piece most of all. My familiarity with the piece owes to Charles Munch and the Boston Symphony on an older recording from RCA Victor, 1963. Golka's tonal balance compared well to Munch's, but his tempi were just slightly slower. Isn't it funny: You're used to hearing a work a certain way, and when you hear it played differently, you tend to think of the new way as a deviation and therefore somehow wrong or incorrect? Your first hearing wasn't necessarily the "correct" one to begin with, but psycho-acoustically, it's hard to remove that notion. I think, with subsequent hearings, I could actually get to like Golka's better! (That phenomenon has happened: Reiner is my favorite conductor and I love his version of Rhapsodie Espagnole; but, having heard Paul Paray's, the Reiner version now spends a lot of time on the shelf and the Paray has a frequent spin on the Dual!)
The Concert Master violinist certainly had his work cut out for him here and he did a fine job indeed!
The WSO also featured Gershwin's An American in Paris. Golka's claim to fame here owed to the fact that each of his saxophone players had three saxophones (alto, baritone, and tenor), for a total of nine! Gershwin's publisher, so the story goes, deleted so many saxophones, believing that the work would not be publishable or playable. Most versions use a total of three saxes; I got to hear it as it was originally written and, according to Golka, Gershwin's preferred version. I have two recordings: One with Seizi Ozawa and the San Francisco SO; and with Arthur Fiedler and the Boston Pops. The latter version seems to be missing some of the percussion. Ozawa's, on the other hand, swings and sways with rubato as jazz should. Golka conducted it with a European flair. That's his background showing, which I do admire. For me, though, as a jazz piano player (who wouldn't presume to correct Maestro Golka!), the left hand keeps strict time while the right hand "robs" the tempo a bit. (Thus the term rubato.) I missed that sway somewhat, but overall the symphony had strict discipline and musicianship under his baton and he has raised our symphony to new levels with his musical expertise.
Finally to the work I most wanted to write about:
Percussion Concerto by David Stock.
We were fortunate to have as guest soloist a wonderful lady by the name of Lisa Pegher. I aksed for her permission to write about her here and am glad for her consent.
She played skillfully. It was mesmerizing to listen to the second movement as she played the marimba and I watched the mallots blurr in the air as she played. She had, on stage, a full complement of percussion instruments, and she made use of all of them. She has--and really needed it for this work--a keen sense of timing and rhythm. We all need to practice with metronomes; but I almost believe metronomes' accuracy could be measured against her playing skill! And she has a real presence on stage: Many musicians do not--they're just there somehow...
I must confess, however, that the work itself left me a bit unsettled. I believe it was probably supposed to: No key signature (Was it serial, or dodecophonic or exactly what?) no constant time signature (I thought Mike Oldfield's Tubular Bells' constantly alternating time signatures at the beginning were tough enough to play) and no real sense of development like a traditional symphony in Sonata Allegro form. But then, Mother Goose had no such development, either. Still, as I say, I think I need to hear the work a few more times to fully appreciate what the composer's point was. I cannot, however, imagine that anyone could play it better or more skillfully than Lisa Pegher had.
Chatting with Lisa, I learned that drum machines have their proper place (something many percussionists are not happy to admit), and she likes Carl Palmer. Any fan of Keith Emerson has to smile!
So here's my TH classical music review. Who's next? (No pun intended for that now classic album!) I'm interested to hear others' reactions to my comments and to keep the thread going. I'm forwarding the TH website address to LP so she can read my comments. Maybe she'll join?!?
Thanks for reading!
On Tuesday, 10 February, 2009 I had the pleasure of hearing what was to my ears one of the very best concerts our fine orchestra has yet given. The conductor, Tomasz Golka, a very personable chap whom I have met several times, did a wonderful job. His choice of works to be performed does much to broaden the horizons of our somewhat small mountain town inasmuch as those choices appeal to average musical tastes and those who do not know their way around a symphony orchestra whilst simultaneously appealing to the musical needs of the more experienced.
The evening began with Jacques Offenbach's Overture to Orpheus in the Underworld. While the work was, to my ears, very competently performed, it is something of a workhorse: Nearly anyone with even cursory exposure to classical music would recognize the toe-tapping melodies. My "benchmark recording," if I may call it that, is Karajan's with the BPO (which, unfortunately has a somewhat dry digital sound). I thought Golka's compared very favorably with the recording. A very rousing piece indeed. (I certainly invite other criticism from fellow TH members, but, I don't know if there is really much more to say about this work. Perhaps a discussion of the underlying Greek Mythology would be in order, but such a discussion is, I believe, better placed elsewhere.)
A lesser known work is Ravel's Mother Goose. I had been unaware that this work began life as a duet for two pianos. (Can anyone recommend a good recording?) The orchestration is to my mind the epitome of French Impressionism, with long melodic lines that don't develop the way earlier music under the influence of the German and Austrian schools dictated. I'm always reminded of the paintings of Monet, that seem to depict motion in a still life. The music goes on and on, seemingly endlessly. I went to the concert looking forward to this piece most of all. My familiarity with the piece owes to Charles Munch and the Boston Symphony on an older recording from RCA Victor, 1963. Golka's tonal balance compared well to Munch's, but his tempi were just slightly slower. Isn't it funny: You're used to hearing a work a certain way, and when you hear it played differently, you tend to think of the new way as a deviation and therefore somehow wrong or incorrect? Your first hearing wasn't necessarily the "correct" one to begin with, but psycho-acoustically, it's hard to remove that notion. I think, with subsequent hearings, I could actually get to like Golka's better! (That phenomenon has happened: Reiner is my favorite conductor and I love his version of Rhapsodie Espagnole; but, having heard Paul Paray's, the Reiner version now spends a lot of time on the shelf and the Paray has a frequent spin on the Dual!)
The Concert Master violinist certainly had his work cut out for him here and he did a fine job indeed!
The WSO also featured Gershwin's An American in Paris. Golka's claim to fame here owed to the fact that each of his saxophone players had three saxophones (alto, baritone, and tenor), for a total of nine! Gershwin's publisher, so the story goes, deleted so many saxophones, believing that the work would not be publishable or playable. Most versions use a total of three saxes; I got to hear it as it was originally written and, according to Golka, Gershwin's preferred version. I have two recordings: One with Seizi Ozawa and the San Francisco SO; and with Arthur Fiedler and the Boston Pops. The latter version seems to be missing some of the percussion. Ozawa's, on the other hand, swings and sways with rubato as jazz should. Golka conducted it with a European flair. That's his background showing, which I do admire. For me, though, as a jazz piano player (who wouldn't presume to correct Maestro Golka!), the left hand keeps strict time while the right hand "robs" the tempo a bit. (Thus the term rubato.) I missed that sway somewhat, but overall the symphony had strict discipline and musicianship under his baton and he has raised our symphony to new levels with his musical expertise.
Finally to the work I most wanted to write about:
Percussion Concerto by David Stock.
We were fortunate to have as guest soloist a wonderful lady by the name of Lisa Pegher. I aksed for her permission to write about her here and am glad for her consent.
She played skillfully. It was mesmerizing to listen to the second movement as she played the marimba and I watched the mallots blurr in the air as she played. She had, on stage, a full complement of percussion instruments, and she made use of all of them. She has--and really needed it for this work--a keen sense of timing and rhythm. We all need to practice with metronomes; but I almost believe metronomes' accuracy could be measured against her playing skill! And she has a real presence on stage: Many musicians do not--they're just there somehow...
I must confess, however, that the work itself left me a bit unsettled. I believe it was probably supposed to: No key signature (Was it serial, or dodecophonic or exactly what?) no constant time signature (I thought Mike Oldfield's Tubular Bells' constantly alternating time signatures at the beginning were tough enough to play) and no real sense of development like a traditional symphony in Sonata Allegro form. But then, Mother Goose had no such development, either. Still, as I say, I think I need to hear the work a few more times to fully appreciate what the composer's point was. I cannot, however, imagine that anyone could play it better or more skillfully than Lisa Pegher had.
Chatting with Lisa, I learned that drum machines have their proper place (something many percussionists are not happy to admit), and she likes Carl Palmer. Any fan of Keith Emerson has to smile!
So here's my TH classical music review. Who's next? (No pun intended for that now classic album!) I'm interested to hear others' reactions to my comments and to keep the thread going. I'm forwarding the TH website address to LP so she can read my comments. Maybe she'll join?!?
Thanks for reading!