Founding Editor Rob Barnett Senior Editor
John Quinn Seen & Heard Editor Emeritus Bill Kenny Editor in Chief
Vacant MusicWeb Webmaster
David Barker MusicWeb Founder Len Mullenger
us financially by purchasing this from
Dmitri SHOSTAKOVICH (1906-1975) Symphony No. 9 in E
flat major, Op. 70 (1945) [26:35] Violin Concerto No. 1
in A minor, Op. 99 (1946-1947) [36:56]
Leonidas Kavakos (violin)
Mariinsky Orchestra/Valery Gergiev
rec. live, 16, 18 June 2012 (symphony), 17-18 June 2011 (concerto), Concert
Hall of the Mariinsky Theatre, St Petersburg, Russia
Reviewed as a 24/96 Studio Master from Hyperion
Pdf booklet included MARIINSKY MAR0524 [63:31]
In preparation for this review I revisited some of Valery Gergiev’s
earlier Shostakovich recordings with the then Kirov Orchestra. I was
struck by how communicative these performances are — how fallible
even. I know from the concert hall that this conductor has a special
way with these symphonies, so I must confess to being mildly disappointed
by some of his Mariinsky remakes. Not the Leningrad
though, which is as powerful and uncompromising a performance as you’ll
ever hear. His recording of TheNose
is a blockbuster too. By comparison his recent Mussorgsky
album seems rather cool and disengaged.
Gergiev’s Mariinsky cycle has taken a surprising turn in that
the latest instalment pairs a symphony and a concerto. That’s
most welcome, especially when the soloist in the latter is the distinguished
Greek violinist Leonidas Kavakos. As always there are many fine recordings
of both works to choose from. In the case of the symphony my go-to
versions are Kiril Kondrashin (Melodiya, HDTT),
Bernard Haitink (Decca) and Mark Wigglesworth (BIS). The last of these,
superbly recorded, is coupled with a very persuasive account of the
least-loved Twelfth (review).
The concerto is also well represented in the catalogue, with classic
versions ranging from the work’s dedicatee David Oistrakh through
to more recent ones from the likes of Christian Tetzlaff (Ondine)
and Hilary Hahn (Decca, Euroarts).
My own favourite is Maxim Vengerov’s 1994 recording with Mstislav
Rostropovich and the London Symphony Orchestra in splendid form (Teldec).
The latter was originally paired with a thoroughly satisfying account
of Prokofiev’s Op. 19 concerto.
Before listening to this new Mariinsky release I went back to Gergiev’s
Kirov recording of the symphony. Recorded by Philips in 2002 it’s
a warm and very approachable performance of a rather bluff - occasionally
opaque - piece. Even after all this time Shostakovich’s Ninth
retains an element of surprise – it wasn’t the post-war
tub thump the authorities were hoping for – and that makes for
a most entertaining ride. Haitink and the London Philharmonic bring
a clarity and snap to the music that’s invigorating; that couldn’t
be more different from Kondrashin’s boisterous, somewhat dishevelled
reading, which has a vitality and verve – especially in the
first movement – that’s irresistible. Subtle it isn’t,
but unmissable it is.
So, where do Gergiev and his Mariinsky players fit in? For starters
the Allegro is more closely recorded than his Kirov account;
superficially at least that seems impressive, but after a while I
began to question Gergiev's rather severe response to this jaunty
- even slightly manic - movement. Is this really the effect - the
mood - that Shostakovich intended? Kondrashin is bold and impulsive,
Haitink cool but without diminishing the music's quirky character;
in their very different ways these two approaches illuminate this
music in ways that Gergiev and his Mariinsky players fail to do. If
it’s a question of setting a particular tone then I think Gergiev
has misjudged it this time around. Ditto the superbly played Moderato,
which doesn't tweak the ear or engage the brain as readily as the
Kirov version does.
I certainly don’t want to impose some kind of template on either
the piece or Gergiev’s interpretation of it, but after just
two movements I’m much less persuaded by this new performance
than I'd hoped to be. And while the Mariinsky recording is more controlled
than the ageing Melodiya one the latter's rough edges suit Kondrashin’s
more volatile way with the score. At this juncture I began to wonder
whether, under Gergiev’s tutelage, these players have succumbed
to the svelte metropolitanism that's made so many orchestras sound
the same. Yes, they are very accomplished, but where’s the distinctive,
idiomatic sound we tend to associate with Russian bands?
Take the Presto, for instance; propulsive and cleanly articulated
it seldom acknowledges the possibility of a subtext. And that’s
the nub of it: one doesn’t have to be obsessed about decoding
Shostakovich’s music – a pastime I tend to avoid –
to want something more than just the bare, unvarnished notes. Gergiev
Mark 1 digs a lot deeper and discovers a binding narrative in the
process. Of course this could be down to less-than-satisfactory performances
on these two nights rather than a conscious change of interpretation.
Most likely it's a combination of the two, for it's the conductor
who engenders so much bluster and banality in the finale. Once again
the general tenor of this performance is at odds with what one expects
from this symphony. Gergiev's grunts and goads are very distracting
That’s unsettled me, but for all the wrong reasons. Is it a
question of over-familiarity, even of imprinting on old favourites?
I doubt it, for I’ve heard many contrasting accounts of the
Ninth that still ‘work’ in the end. They cajole, even
infuriate, but they seldom fail to cohere and communicate. Incidentally,
there's no mention of Classic Sound Ltd in the booklet, athough James
Mallinson is credited as the producer on the symphony; Vladimir Ryabenko
is listed as both the producer and engineer on the concerto. Indeed,
it’s a measure of how good the Philips engineers were that the
sound of the Kirov Ninth is far more satisfying than that of this
Shostakovich’s First Violin Concerto dates from 1946-1947, but
as the composer was still out of favour post-Zhdanov the work was
only premiered in 1955. It’s one of Shostakovich’s most
hauntingly beautiful works and Vengerov’s full, rather melancholy
tone in the Nocturne seems entirely apt. As if that weren't
beguiling enough Rostropovich and the LSO offer rapt support throughout.
The Teldec recording, made at London's Abbey Road Studios, is both
detailed and refined. Goodness, I’d quite forgotten what a luminous
performance this is, and how beautifully shaped.
I'm delighted to report that Gergiev captures the sad, equivocal mood
of that opening movement, and Kavakos, although more ethereal than
Vengerov, spins a light, singing line that can’t fail to impress.
Gergiev’s reading is more strongly contrasted than Rostropovich’s,
and that creates a compelling sense of variety and purpose. Indeed,
there’s a depth of feeling here that’s most welcome, and
for the first time in this review I felt completely engaged by the
Mariinsky's music-making. Even the recording is more finely calibrated,
with timbres nicely rendered; that's especially true of the strange,
darkly dancing Scherzo. Kavakos is wonderfully involved and
This is shaping up to be a very good performance. The majestic elements
of the Passacaglia – a movement that's prone to plodding
– are well managed, and the Mariinsky team capture the orchestra’s
Stygian bass lines better than Teldec’s do. Moreover, the Mariinsky's
Passacaglia has a breadth - and a more pronounced pulse -
that help to shape and propel this slow-moving music rather well.
Vengerov and Rostropovich are at their nimble best in the Burlesque,
but Gergiev and Kavakos are every bit as stylish and entertaining.
At this point I realised my loyalty to Vengerov and Rostropovich –
although still intact – had been sorely tested.
It’s always a relief when a review takes a turn for the better,
especially when a number of lukewarm reviews might suggest I’ve
got it in for Mr Gergiev. These are both live recordings – sans
applause – yet it’s the concerto that has that elusive
caught-on-the-wing quality that only a live event tends to offer.
If I were being charitable – and why not, after that terrific
second half? – I’d say Gergiev's Mariinsky Ninth just
didn't gel on the nights in question. Of course the beauty of downloads
is that you can cherry-pick from a given album. No prizes for guessing
which bits I’d choose here.
A perplexing symphony and an exhilarating concerto; Gergiev’s
as unpredictable as ever.