Symphonies by Sibelius for piano solo? There can’t be many composers 
                  you could imagine being less suitable for such treatment, such 
                  is the richness and colour of Sibelius’s orchestration; an aspect 
                  which is part of the very essence of these pieces. Indeed, the 
                  booklet notes are headed ‘The art of the impossible’, and go 
                  on to mention how important orchestration was to Sibelius: “My 
                  music comes to me fully orchestrated. Orchestration as a separate 
                  process is completely alien to me.” 
                    
                  Henri Sigfridsson is known for exploring less familiar composers 
                  and more unusual musical byways, 
                  so it’s not such a surprise to see his name attached to such 
                  a venture. Inspired by Karl Ekman’s transcription of the Symphony 
                  No.5, it is Sigfridsson’s own brand new piano version of 
                  the Symphony No.2 we hear on this CD, and very intriguing 
                  it is too. 
                    
                  The booklet describes how the pianist has “followed in the tradition 
                  of Liszt’s Beethoven transcriptions, writing a version which 
                  is faithful to the original yet exploits the potential of the 
                  piano…” What else, indeed. The problem is always of what to 
                  leave out, as much as how to transform an orchestral piece into 
                  an effective work for piano solo. In my view, it’s better to 
                  listen in these terms, rather than point-score as to whether 
                  one moment has more or less impact from a full orchestra or 
                  a solo piano. In other words, the symphony almost becomes a 
                  new piece, and the question becomes more one of ‘is this a good 
                  work for piano?’ rather than ‘does this symphony sound good 
                  on a piano?’ 
                    
                  Having said this, there can me no doubt that the composer in 
                  me would be itching to ‘orchestrate’ such a work were it, like 
                  Mussorgsky’s Pictures at an Exhibition, to have been 
                  written as a piano original. There is a good deal of repetition, 
                  sustains achieved through tremuli, certain passages which become 
                  over-long and static through lack of contrast in atmosphere 
                  and that sense of tension you can achieve with orchestral effects. 
                  I was perhaps expecting to be less impressed by the great Symphony 
                  No.2 on piano, but I have been more than pleasantly surprised 
                  at how effective a piano piece it makes. Sibelius’s work is 
                  full of rich themes and intensely gorgeous harmonic progressions, 
                  and the piano has a way of exposing and clarifying ideas – letting 
                  them speak with a voice of absolute honesty, rather than having 
                  our ears swept along with the even richer diet of the full orchestra. 
                  The first movement works well in this regard. The opening of 
                  the second movement is more problematic, with voices diving 
                  and rising through textures through which the unity of piano 
                  strings is not ideal. What we do hear is more how Sibelius is 
                  working with a kind of counterpoint which reminds me of late 
                  Beethoven – deaf and a trifle manic, but still carrying great 
                  power. As the texture thins we have that clarity once again, 
                  and Sibelius’s monumental gathering and releasing of energy 
                  is done well by Sigfridsson. The Finale is a romantic 
                  tour de force, and would probably sound good on a barrel-organ 
                  let alone a full concert grand. Not only are the thematic developments 
                  given absolute clarity, but the sheer architecture of this movement 
                  is something at which we can stand and boggle in this performance. 
                  Having it played by a single performer gives the music an extra 
                  element of heroism which is quite moving. 
                    
                  The Symphony No.2 is rightly famous, and, while the Symphony 
                  No.5 is equally powerful its less overt thematic character 
                  is more of a problem for popular audiences. The task of transcription 
                  is also a great challenge, and pianist and friend of Sibelius 
                  Karl Ekman’s version was made in 1922. Karl Ekman’s wife Ida 
                  was a renowned singer and interpreter of Sibelius, and his son 
                  wrote a well-known biography of the composer. Some elements 
                  which were omitted by Ekman due to technical considerations 
                  have been filled out by Henri Sigfridsson, so this is in effect 
                  a new ‘edition’. The only other recordings of piano transcriptions 
                  of Sibelius symphonies I could find were those by the composer 
                  himself of parts of the Symphony No.1 as part of the 
                  BIS label’s complete edition. As far as I can tell this is a 
                  world premičre recording. 
                    
                  Given the more enigmatic nature of the music with the 5th 
                  symphony as compared to the 2nd, I actually prefer 
                  it as music for piano to the Symphony No.2. The quality 
                  of the piece generates a work which asks as many questions as 
                  it delivers answers, and the atmosphere is at times one which 
                  possesses a kind of quirkiness which reminds me of Janáček. 
                  Again, there are passages which linger perhaps a little too 
                  long to be sustained by piano alone, but there is always yet 
                  another fascinating event just around the corner, and I really 
                  found myself listening to the Symphony No.5 as if discovering 
                  it for the first time. The final Allegro molto becomes 
                  a real white-knuckle ride, the layering of textures turning 
                  into something rather awesome. Given the technical problems 
                  and demands it is perhaps something of a wonder that Ekman didn’t 
                  write for four-hands in this piece, but this solo performance 
                  is one with stretches the performer to extreme limits, and while 
                  it’s not a catch-all version of Sibelius’s remarkable music 
                  it is certainly something at which us mere mortals can gasp. 
                  Henri Sigfridsson’s technique is well up to the challenge while 
                  not sounding entirely effortless as you might expect. The heroic 
                  aspect is present and heightened, and the final section should 
                  have you tearing up the soft furnishings with excitement. 
                    
                  So, if you are a fan of Sibelius – I mean a real genuine warts-and-all 
                  fan – then this is a must-have recording which will only enhance 
                  your appreciation of the great composer’s genius. If you only 
                  like Finlandia and find some of the symphonies a bit 
                  heavy going then this is unlikely to convert you. This CD doesn’t 
                  challenge the best of orchestral recordings. These performances 
                  exist in a different sphere, and to make comparisons would be 
                  to miss the points already made. The recording is very good, 
                  but demands a quality system to make sense of the densest material. 
                  All in all, I have to say this is a magnificent success, which 
                  was by no means my assumption in advance. 
                    
                  Dominy Clements