Richard Strauss, Beethoven, Schumann: Lars Vogt (piano). Philharmonia Orchestra Sir Charles Mackerras (conductor) Royal Festival Hall London 3.4.2008 (GD)

Richard Strauss: Till Eulenspiegel
Beethoven: Piano Concerto No 4 in G, Op.58
Robert Schumann: Symphony No 3 in E flat, Op 97, ‘Rhenish’


Till Eulenspiegel, with its tricky cross-rhythms and diverse rondo form, has presented all kinds of difficulties for even the most virtuosic  conductors: none other than Toscanini had great difficulty in securing the right kind of rhythmic focus and contrast. I have not previously encountered much Richard Strauss from Sir Charles Mackerras and was therefore looking forward to ‘his’ Till. Overall Sir Charles demonstrated his famed (and rare) ability to convey the musical character and idiom of a particular work - getting to the ‘heart’ of a piece to use old fashioned humanist rhetoric! There was a predictable mercurial lightness of touch and a natural feeling for the dynamic/lyrical contour of the work. But also there was a quite uncharateristic sense that the Philharmonia was not quite up to the conductors demands. There were quite frequent late entries in the brass and woodwind, and the timpanist, who should have had his zeal for playing loudly checked at several points, not only came in late at important cross-rhythm counterpoint sections with celli and basses, but on several occasions got into a rhythmic cul-de-sac and obviously found it difficult to get back on track. It was difficult to discern the exact causes of all this; Sir Charles deployed his usual gestural economy and exactitude in matters of phrasing and cueing and it is highly improbable that rehearsal time was to blame as Sir Charles is also a most economic musician in this department too. Perhaps the orchestra was kind of ‘warming-up’ so to speak? And it must be said on a more positive note, that the mock seriousness and wit/irony towards the coda at the rogue's trial and execution was delivered with a sense of burlesque parody, with some particularly cutting trombones and with woodwind squawks and squeaks. I have rarely heard these bettered.

As has frequently, and recently, been demonstrated Mackerras is a superb concerto conductor especially in the classical repertoire; he never simply accompanies but looks for,  and usually achieves,  that sense of dialogue with the soloist which is surprisingly rare. Tonight Lars Vogt, although very adroit in terms of tempo emulation and phrasing, didn’t come over as the ideal Bethoven exponent. As was recently revealed by Maria João Pires at the Barbican with the LSO under Eliot Gardiner,  this concerto requires from the soloist a  contrast of rhythmic focus and diversity matched with a poetic sense of lyrical finesse; the ‘velvet glove in the iron gauntlet’ to use an old fashioned expression. Added to this was the Festival Hall's restricted acoustics. In this hall a pianist really has to ‘project’ his or her tone if it is to make any kind of musical impact. Here I frequently found Vogt’s tone, his arpeggios and dynamic contrasts, virtually inaudible -and I was sitting in a centered position in the stalls where everything should be clear and focused. Overall Vogt played too delicately; in parts of his first movement cadenza his phrasing had a lightness and poise more suited to Chopin. All this was quite frustrating as Sir Charles conducted with astonishing insight in terms of orchestral balance and choice of the ‘right-sounding’ tempo: there was never any sense of tempo rigidity as was encountered in the recent Eliot Gardiner rendition mentioned above. In particular the B major/G major/G minor modulations and sonorities in celli and basses in quasi canonic dialogue, in the first movement's development section, were as clear and affecting as I have heard them. And at the end of the second movement's ‘orphic’ string recitatives in dialogue with the piano, Mackerras achieved that sense of haunting mystery subtended by suspense  - Orpheus never quite sure he has totally tamed the furies, or lions! -  to perfection. Apart from a few muddled woodwind entries,  the final ‘vivace’ rondo sprang along splendidly. Even the timpanist's triplet interjections towards the coda were played with just the right touch of rhythmic élan and buoyancy without ever sounding merely loud.

As with Richard Strauss,  I have not heard much Schumann from Sir Charles. But if tonight's performance is anything to go by, he should perform and record more of it; perhaps one of the neglected quasi-theatrical works like the incidental music from Byron’s ‘Manfred’? Mackerras’s eye was very much on the ‘lebhaft’ (lively) aspect of the work. The first movement (marked ‘Lebhaft’)  was swiftly taken through with a focus on the chorale like brass writing - especially horns and trombones -  which was totally central to the festive almost ceremonial tone of the movement (and indeed virtually the whole symphony)  but which is often obscured in most performances. Although the second and third movements are marked ‘very moderately’ and ‘not too fast’ Mackerras took them both very swiftly indeed; even Toscanini allowed more time and space for expressive phrasing here.  But despite this, tonight's performance never sounded rushed. Indeed these two movements gained a sense of flow and progression with very subtle rubato incorporation that  never neglected the song-like poetic element implicit in much of Schumann’s music. Again, as mentioned above, the timpanist initially played too loudly but was soon reined in to balance with the whole.

The fourth movement marked ‘Feierlich’ (solemn) is an invocation of the great late Gothic Cathedral in Cologne and is one of Schumann’s most economical and expansive creations; not expansive in terms of duration at just over five minutes in tonight’s performance, but more in its harmonic pacing and contrapuntal development and contour.  All of this was splendidly realised tonight again with special accentuation of narrow-bore trombones at the climax of the movement. The ‘Lebhaft’ final movement was an exultant joy from beginning to triumphant end, with everything cohering perfectly with Mackerras’s conception of the complete work. A slight ritenuto to initiate the noble but joyous coda was superbly judged to cohere neatly with the musical pulse of the whole.

One last and marginal point. Throughout tonight’s concert Sir Charles had all his first and second violins bunched together on his left. This is odd, as on many occasions he deploys the much more effective divided antiphonal violin placement.  I couldn’t discern any particular reason for this arrangement in terms of the works on the programme which  all positively gain from  antiphonal seating. I can only conclude that Sir Charles takes a rather laissez-faire approach on such matters.

Geoff Diggines


Back to Top                                                    Cumulative Index Page