You 
                  would expect Krzysztof Penderecki to draw the best out of his 
                  musicians in his own work, especially after an impressive track 
                  record in this field in the past. I listened to the re-release 
                  of his recordings 
                  for EMI from the 1970s, and these are still impressive even 
                  when compared with this new digital recording.
                
Taking 
                  the Capriccio, the earlier recording is a tad more compact 
                  at 11:38, but easily equals the new recording in terms of drama. 
                  The soloist is set closer with the new recording, so that the 
                  balance is less natural in terms of what you might experience 
                  in the concert hall, but in all other respects this new recording 
                  is an improvement. The detail in terms of instrumentation comes 
                  through far more clearly – percussion of course, but all of 
                  those other sliding and quivering exotic sounds from all quarters, 
                  like the bowed saw for instance, are revealed in all their glory. 
                  I’ll still listen to the earlier recording for its chilling 
                  atmosphere, but recommend the new one for sheer clarity. 
                
De 
                  Natura Sonoris No.2 is 
                  an early 1970s chiller classic, continuing and developing some 
                  of the textures in Capriccio in a purely orchestral context. 
                  Again comparing the EMI recording, made when the piece was brand 
                  new, this new Dux version has more immediacy and clarity, but 
                  more importantly shows up some of the ways in which Penderecki’s 
                  view on the work has changed over the years. There are some 
                  dynamic differences in the balance here and there, and those 
                  dry, choking clusters in the strings in the beginning are taken 
                  more slowly and with less of a sense of murderous drama. Strangely, 
                  even though the new recording is a good two minutes shorter 
                  than the old one, the new version seems slower: listening to 
                  the cacophonous brass and strings beyond four minutes into the 
                  piece, there is a greater sense of drive and urgency in the 
                  old EMI version. Where Penderecki saves time in the new recording 
                  is by compressing the longer stretches of static atmosphere 
                  earlier in the work, which are less of a novelty these days. 
                  Either way, the old analogue tape coped badly with those fireman’s 
                  bells and the sheer weight of noise from the massed brass and 
                  percussion in this work, making this new recording a welcome 
                  alternative. The sliding brass beyond 5:00, with its conversational 
                  interruptions, is a definite goose-bump moment, and the final 
                  held note under that scraped percussion is like a small chorus 
                  of drowned angels.
                
Penderecki’s 
                  more recent style, in any case since the ultra-romanticism of 
                  the early 1980s, has in some way proved even more controversial 
                  than his earlier avant-gardism, and the Piano Concerto 
                  does sit rather strangely with its ghostly forebears on this 
                  disc. The work was written after a great deal of procrastination 
                  by the composer, who “refrained from writing a piano concerto 
                  for many years because I was afraid [of the] many excellent 
                  concertos written in the 20th century.” The final 
                  push came from a commission from New York, with Emanuel Ax and 
                  the Philadelphia Orchestra in mind as performers. Started in 
                  June 2001, the work was originally to have followed the Capriccio 
                  design, but after the terrorist attacks of September 2001 
                  the light-hearted nature of such a title seemed inappropriate. 
                  The work took on a more serious character, and the non-religious 
                  title ‘resurrection’, which refers to mankind’s universal desire 
                  for renewal and re-birth after disaster and crisis. 
                
The 
                  style of the work is linked to Penderecki’s 1996 seventh Symphony, 
                  The 
                  Seven Gates of Jerusalem, but also integrates 
                  the grand stylistic gestures of Mahler and some of the romanticism 
                  of the great piano composers such as Rachmaninov. At over 30 
                  minutes in duration it certainly has a symphonic scale, and 
                  with no intermission between any of the sections the uninterrupted 
                  musical narrative is a ride of considerable intensity. If I 
                  have any problem with this work – and I do consider it a substantial 
                  masterpiece – it is the difficulty one has in establishing an 
                  individual character to either the source, the composer, or 
                  the intended message – the expressive aim. I don’t claim that 
                  all music should have immediate clarity in either of these aspects, 
                  but I doubt if I have any colleagues even in the musical fraternity 
                  who would be able to put their finger on what is going on here. 
                  I don’t mean this in a technical sense – the work is about as 
                  difficult to listen to as Shostakovich’s 1st Symphony; 
                  but in terms of where, what, why, huh? 
                
The 
                  booklet notes may have something of an answer to give. ‘The 
                  piano part is treated in a very original way in as much as… 
                  it explores first and foremost the piano’s percussive qualities.’ 
                  Yes, but not ‘in contrast to the major works of the piano literature’ 
                  as far as the 20th century goes: composers since 
                  Bartók have been doing little else. In any case, there is plenty 
                  of running up and down the keyboard in fairly standard romantic 
                  style, so I don’t feel any great claims can be made for originality 
                  in the solo part. More telling is that ‘the sound idiom employed 
                  by the composer harks back to the great symphonic tradition 
                  of the turn on the 19th century’. This push-me-pull-you 
                  treatment results in something akin to Saint-Saëns and Busoni 
                  fighting under a duvet, with the eclectic spirit of John Adams 
                  and the hothouse mania of Scriabin acting as referees. One of 
                  the central elements in the piece is a chorale, whose introduction 
                  at 7:10 is sheer White-Christmas Hollywood. The whole thing 
                  quasi-concludes with a final massive statement of this main 
                  chorale ‘theme’ at 28:17, with recorded bells kicking in at 
                  29:23 which are as corny as hell. The only thing we miss at 
                  this point is a few blasts from a cannon, and the spirit of 
                  Tchaikovsky might be appeased as well: the title ‘resurrection’ 
                  might as well stand for a ‘revival’ of this way of expressing 
                  triumph of the human spirit over destructive forces. 
                
              
Despite all this the 
                Piano Concerto is strangely compelling – one of those works 
                you know you’ll be playing again, if only to remind yourself of 
                the strange conundrums it proposes – was it really like 
                that? Yes, it really is, and one has to stand in awe of 
                the way in which Penderecki rather audaciously and uniquely creates 
                a new work out of such a gallimaufry of antique recipes. I do 
                however wonder quite what place it will ultimately take in the 
                canon of 21st century musical art. 
                
                Dominy Clements