Sarah Chang is 
          the sort of violinist about whom rumours of greatness abound; then again, 
          in her case, many of these rumours are true. The late Dorothy de Lay 
          was so impressed when she heard her play that she immediately offered 
          to teach her for free.
        
        The Brahms was, then, one of those performances that 
          was always going to be amazing, and Chang’s was indeed beautiful; her 
          tone had an endearing sweetness whilst her technical ability and intonation 
          were impeccable. Her style can be quite aggressive, however, and it 
          didn’t allow for the tenderness found in either Vengerov’s or Sitkovetsky’s 
          playing, yet her skillful interpretation was not weakened by this.
        
        However, as a performance of a ‘concerto’, I was unconvinced. 
          The programme notes took great pains to describe how Brahms intended 
          his concerto to be a dialogue between soloist and orchestra; indeed 
          this is evident itself in the music – for example, the long oboe solo 
          at the beginning of the second movement which the violin does not ever 
          exactly repeat but instead develops. Yet this was a dialogue in which 
          one side – the orchestra - had been gagged. The violinist must have, 
          of course, a certain prerogative but I don’t believe this should be 
          mistaken for total dominance over the orchestra: it is the music that 
          is the most important element and the melody should be asserted whilst 
          any accompaniment plays a lesser role, irrelevant of instrumentation. 
        
        Yet time and time again during this performance, orchestral 
          melodic lines were drowned out by accompanying figures on the solo violin 
          and, to my frustration, Davis acted to encourage Chang and further hushed 
          the orchestra. A dialogue cannot occur when one side is singing but 
          the other whispering.
        
        The most enjoyable element of the second half was simply 
          the opportunity to hear The Planets – usually found in youth 
          orchestra programmes - in the hands of the LSO.
         ‘Mars’ was unapologetically fast (Davis almost having 
          to conduct in two rather than five) and blissfully malevolent, and an 
          unusual orchestral layout - which seated the violas, ‘cellos and basses 
          all together on the left of the orchestra (behind the firsts) -made 
          for a forceful bass line.
        
         ‘Jupiter’ had its anthems well and truly milked and 
          although ‘Mercury’ was a little staid and clumsy, each planet was well-characterized, 
          from a serene ‘Venus’ to a disconcerting ‘Neptune’. I could not help 
          feeling, however, that for all the vivacity of the performance, the 
          orchestra would rather have been playing something else.
        
        Christa Norton