New York Law School

Art Leonard Observations

Posts Tagged ‘Orchestra of St. Luke’s’

A Concert Diary for the First Half of March 2014 – Metropolitan Opera, Carnegie Hall, Peoples’s Symphony Concerts, Houston Symphony

Posted on: March 14th, 2014 by Art Leonard No Comments

The first two weeks of March have been quite busy, and again I’ve fallen behind in posting about my concert-going experiences. So here is a quick catch-up.

I had a double-header on Saturday, March 1, attending the Metropolitan Opera’s production of Prince Igor in the afternoon, and a piano recital by Alexandre Tharaud at Peoples’ Symphony Concerts in the evening.

The Met’s new production of Prince Igor, produced an designed by Dmitri Tcherniakov, takes a new approach to this unfinished opera by Alexander Borodin. When Borodin died, Nikolai Rimsky-Korsakov picked up the pieces and, with the assistance of Alexander Glazunov, put together an opera using much of Borodin’s material and some that Rimsky and Glazunov composed. The overture, for example, was reconstructed by Glazunov from memories of Borodin playing it at the piano, in the absence of any surviving manuscript. In this form the opera made its appearance around the world, but never really won full status in the standard operative repertory, although the Polovtsian Dances, extracted by Rimsky as a concert suite, achieved wide performance in symphony concerts, and the opera was heavily raided for the Broadway musical, Kismet. For this new Met production, Tcherniakov, in collaboration with conductor Gianandrea Noseda and composer Pavel Smelkov (who handled new orchestrations) went back to Borodin’s original and put together an opera that leaves behind the new material composed by Rimsky and Glazunov. We are assured in the program book that virtually all the music we were hearing was by Borodin, although he had some help in fleshing things out orchestrally. This process required dropping some scenes that had become familiar, and reordering the remainder. Tcherniakov imposed on the work a new logic and sequence of action, making it more of an interior exploration of the mind of Prince Igor, a minor noble whose attempt to vanquish the Polovtsian tribe’s invasion of Russian space was unsuccessful.

It is an interesting experiment. Borodin’s music continues to cast its spell, in whatever order it is played, and Noseda conducts a compelling performance by an illustrious Russian cast, with Ildar Abdrazakov an outstanding Igor and Oksana Dyka stunning as his long-suffering wife. As to the production itself, I register my continuing protest against taking historically based operas and resetting them in times other than those contemplated by the composer. Borodin would have expected, as a 19th century composer, that performances of his opera would be staged with sets and costumes suitable for a story taking place in 12th century Eurasia. But here we had on stage soldiers in early 20th century uniforms carrying rifles. We had officers dressed in uniforms that seemed to be from various periods from the late 19th century through Soviet-style uniforms of what might be the 1930s. We had electric light bulbs hanging from the ceiling. We had industrial fixtures suggesting an early 20th century setting. And we had some confusion as well, with a plot summary in the program that is not entirely helpful in explaining what is flashback, what is present, what is taking place in Igor’s imagination or dreams, what is actually happening. I found the third act particularly confusing, as one unit set was apparently intended as the interior of Igor’s palace in Putivl, but some of the action seems to be taking place elsewhere. Is this in Igor’s mind? That occurs to me as an explanation, but didn’t as I was watching the scene unfold.

I think the production is a musical success, but I hope that if the Met decides to restage it in the future, they might try to clarify things a bit in the plot summary and maybe even add some explanatory material to the surtitles displayed on the seatbacks.

Despite the odd decisions about how to costume them, I thought the Met chorus (and interloping supernumeraries) were superbly deployed, and the dancers in the Act II dream sequence ballet, played to the Polovtsian Dances, were superb as well.

On to Peoples’ Symphony Concerts at Washington Irving High School for Alexandre Tharaud’s March 1 recital of music by Schumann, Schubert, Mahler and Beethoven. This was a real attempt at casting against type. Tharaud is mainly known from his recordings and prior appearances as an expert performer in the French piano repertory, with some excursions into Chopin and Scarlatti. But on this occasion he focused on completely different repertory – Austro-German romanticism – with Schumann’s “Scenes from Childhood” suite, Op. 15, Schubert’s 4 Impromptus, D. 899, Tharaud’s solo piano arrangement of the Adagietto movement from Mahler’s Symphony No. 5, and Beethoven’s Appassionata Sonata (Op. 57). It’s two weeks later as I write this and I can remember all the encores, but I recall that one was a sonata by Scarlatti. Tharaud played with the expected clarity and authority, but I felt that some of his interpretive choices were a bit off, including some overemphasis of inner voices and bass lines at the expense of stylistic coherence. The Mahler transcription didn’t work for me. Mahler thought orchestrally in his symphonies and the Adagietto in a keyboard arrangement came across to me as clunky and percussive, totally out of character. Maybe I was just tired after the long afternoon with Borodin, but I was not as enthusiastic as I expected to be. I am a huge admirer of Tharaud’s work from his recordings, but the recital let me down a bit.

It was back to the Metropolitan Opera on March 5 for the revival of The Enchanted Island, a Baroque pastiche opera assembled especially for the Met by Jeremy Sams, drawing plot elements from Shakespeare’s The Tempest and A Midsummer Night’s Dream, and music drawn mainly from works of Handel with interpolated material by Vivaldi, Rameau, Campra, Leclair, Purcell, Rebel and Ferrandini. I loved this when I attended the world premiere on New Year’s Eve 2011 with William Christie conducting, but I thought the current revival fell a bit flat with Patrick Summers on the podium and slight changes in the cast. One thing that did not change was the excellent supporting part of Neptune sung by Placido Domingo, who really commands the stage. David Daniels’ voice seemed a bit submerged by the orchestra. I had particularly bought a ticket of this to see Anthony Roth Costanzo, one of my favorite young countertenors, but I had forgotten how tiny the role of Ferdinand is in this production. One waits for hours, and then Costanzo pops up right towards the end, singing briefly, but beautifully costumed. Indeed, the triumph of this production is in the sets and costumes. But this time around the production didn’t hold my interest to the degree it had at the premiere. In light of the many empty seats I saw on a Wednesday night, I suspect the Met will not be in a hurry to bring this one back.

The next night, March 6, I was in Carnegie Hall for a performance of Beethoven’s Missa Solemnis by the Orchestra of St. Luke’s and the Oratorio Society of New York, with vocal soloists Susan Gritton, Julie Boulianne, Michael Schade and Nathan Berg, conducted by Sir Roger Norrington, whose specialty is historically informed performance of Baroque, Classical and early Romantic music. In line with Norrington’s approach, the string players large eschewed vibrato, tempi veered towards extremes of slow and (more frequently fast), phrasing was a bit clipped at times, dynamics a bit exaggerated. Nothing can really sink the Missa Solemnis, one of the greatest creations of one of the greatest musical geniuses, but I did not feel and lift and thrill that I had experienced when I heard John Eliot Gardner lead period forces in a performance at Avery Fisher Hall several years ago. It felt like Norrington had some emotional distance from the music — music that was very emotional on Beethoven’s part, and that his performing forces — that is, chorus and orchestra, not soloists — were a bit overmatched by the challenges this piece presents. The chorus was, in short, too large — either that, or the orchestra was too small. Well over 100 choristers were listed in the program, and it was quite a crowd assembled on the stage. This is not a full-time professional chorus, and Beethoven’s writing for the chorus in this piece is generally acknowledged to be very demanding. They gave it a good try, but they lacked the polish to carry it all off convincingly. St. Luke’s is a highly proficient group, but one cannot adequately balance such a huge chorus with a chamber orchestra in this piece and expect to make the desired effects. The string body was just too small, and sounded even smaller than usual without using vibrato to thicken the tone. They also seemed quite scrappy in the big fugal passages. Not even a near miss, in my opinion.

Now for something completely different. I was visiting in Houston, Texas, on the weekend, to spend time with my Mom and my Houston relatives (brother and sister-in-law, nephew and his growing family with two toddlers in tow, and niece). Arrangements were made by my brother for us to attend the Houston Symphony Orchestra’s March 8 program at Jesse Jones Hall. I’d never been in that hall before, to the best of my recollection, and I was very impressed. Better sight-lines than Avery Fisher, and acoustics to rival Carnegie. We were sitting in the rear orchestra, under the balcony overhang, but I felt no diminution of high pitched sounds (as one experiences in the Dress Circle at Carnegie or rear orchestra in Avery Fisher). This room fans out rather than being the severe rectangle of Avery Fisher or the traditional shape of Carnegie, and the result is sonically distinguished.

The Houston Symphony is currently “between” music directors, Hans Graf having retired and a new young man slated to begin next fall. The season includes a progression of guests, but they decided to experiment with something different for this concert, dispensing with a conductor, although concertmaster Frank Huang supervised the preparations and led from the first chair (or, in the Piazzolla, standing in the center as soloist). Apart from a handful of woodwind players and a harpsichordist in the opening Haydn Symphony No. 39, all the musicians on stage were string players. The experiment was a success; they played well together without a conductor. The Haydn is a nondescript early symphony that received a vigorous but forgettable performance. But then, with Astor Piazzolla’s 4 Seasons of Buenos Aires concerti, we were in memorable territory. The composer incorporates tango rhythms into classical forms for four brief concerti intended to suggest the various seasons in a South American city. Although most of the solo work was assigned to concertmaster Huang, there were brief solos allotted to some of the other musicians as well. The players obviously enjoyed this piece, getting into the swing of things and sporting wide grins at times reflecting their pleasure in the music. After intermission came a sumptuous performance of Tchaikovsky’s Serenade for Strings. I’ve heard several performances of this in recent years, but always played by chamber orchestras, and it was a completely different and agreeable experience to hear it played by a large, well-disciplined orchestra string section. The Houston Symphony strings sounded great.

Upon returning to New York, I found myself in the midst of Carnegie Hall’s Vienna City of Dreams Festival, with my subscription ticket for the Vienna Philharmonic’s March 13 concert, led by guest conductor Andris Nelsons, who is scheduled to take over as music director of the Boston Symphony in the fall. In keeping with the Festival theme, the program was entirely made up of music associated with Vienna – a symphony by Haydn, two works by Brahms, and encore by Johann Strauss Jr. (The orchestra telegraphed the inevitability of an encore by having a harp on the stage during the second half, when the only work listed on the program did not require that instrument.) Joseph Haydn’s Symphony No. 90 incorporates a joke on the audience, which almost never fails to succeed. The last movement has a false ending followed by a pause, during which the audience applauds. The conductor waves to cut off the applause and starts things up again, leading to the real ending. It may seem obvious, but this symphony is not played with any great frequency, so audiences are always fooled, apart from a handful of those who correctly interpret the program notes or quickly register before they can applaus that the conductor has not dropped his arms. In a canny bit of linkage, the Haydn Symphony was followed by Brahms’s Variations on a Theme by Haydn, thus providing a stylistic bridge to the second half’s performance of Brahms’s Symphony No. 3. We don’t hear the Haydn Variations that much in concert, apart from the occasional all-Brahms festival, but it is a marvelous piece compromised by its length. (Modern U.S. symphony concert programs tend to eschew short orchestra pieces – this one runs just over a quarter hour – in favor of “big” symphonies and concerti, reserving the “short piece” slot for something contemporary. Our loss, since we miss out on hearing the huge repertory of romantic overtures, tone poems and suites that were common in programs from early in the 20th century.) The 3rd Symphony is the most difficult to bring off; tempo selection in the first movement is tricky, and it ends quietly so conductors don’t like to use it to end a concert. On the other hand, it is the most concise and intimate of the Brahms symphonies, and when it works, it’s just terrific.

I think it is difficult to judge an orchestra when it is not playing in its home hall and is being led by a guest conductor. It is hard to know whether what one is hearing has more to do with the leadership on the podium and the acoustic of a strange hall than with the intrinsic strengths and weaknesses of the ensemble. I had a sense throughout the concert that the VPO was a very talented orchestra that fell short of the highest standards we tend to expect from orchestras like the New York Philharmonic, the Boston Symphony, or the Philadelphia Orchestra, to name three major orchestra that perform frequently in New York. By contrast, the VPO sounded to me less precise, less colorful, less well-blended. I have trouble getting past the principal oboe sound (presented by different players in the two halves of the concert), which sets the tone for an orchestra, and which — perhaps by Vienna tradition — is thinner, more piercing, and less rich than the sound cultivated by principal oboe players in U.S. orchestras. Indeed, all the woodwinds have a distinctive sound that seems to me less rich, less legato, more idiosyncratic. Perhaps part of the issue for me is the lack of “hybrid vigor” in an orchestra like the VPO. This appeared to be an all-Caucasian group, overwhelmingly male, and by repute most of the players were students of VPO members before gaining admission to the orchestra. There is a feeling of an inbred traditional style of playing. Perhaps this means that what was presented last night sounded more like what Brahms would have heard at performances of his orchestra music in Vienna in the latter part of the 19th century than one would hear from the U.S. orchestra. But I couldn’t help noting the extraordinary contrast with the NY Philharmonic, where the string sections have a heavy representation of Asian musicians — mainly women — and women are also well-represented in the wind sections. Last night, there was only one woman on the stage playing a wind instrument, the second oboe during the Brahms Symphony, and during the first half of the concert, there could not have been more than 5 or 6 women on the stage, none in the basses or violas or cellos, and a handful in the violin sections. I found myself thinking several times that this orchestra needed some livening up!! They played well, they gave the conductor what he was asking for, but I was not totally enthusiastic about the results.

Probably the best playing of the night came with the encore, “Seid umschlunger Millionen” Waltzes, Op. 443, by Johann Strauss II. No announcement was made, leaving audience members around me puzzled, apart from guessing that it was by Johann Strauss, as this is not one of the more familiar Strauss waltz sequences. Of course, Carnegie identifies encores after the event on their website under the calendar entry for the concert….

It is also difficult to judge a conductor based on a guest-conducting stint, and I’ve little past experience with Maestro Nelsons, who has generated a big reputation from his work on European podiums and recordings. He produced a coherent statement in the Brahms symphony, and that is an achievement, since it is the most difficult of the four. The Haydn Variations were well-characterized, the Haydn symphony was memorable. We will hear more of him when he is regularly conducting the Boston Symphony in its Carnegie Hall visits, and I’m looking forward to that opportunity.

My second half of March begins tonight with a 5 Boroughs Music Festival concert of French baroque music in Queens, tomorrow’s NY Philharmonic Nielsen concert, a Peoples’ Symphony program Sunday afternoon with the Dover Quarter and Leon Fleisher, and a return to Carnegie Sunday night for the grand finale of the Vienna Philharmonic’s Festival residency – a three-hour marathon survey of Viennese music led by Zubin Mehta, centered on Gil Shaham playing the Korngold Violin Concerto. It will be quite a music-heavy weekend, on which I will report when it is all over.

Recent theatrical and concert doings – “Little Miss Sunshine”, Orchestra of St. Luke’s & Ivan Fischer, “And Away We Go”

Posted on: November 25th, 2013 by Art Leonard No Comments

Last Wednesday I attended a perform of William Finn and James Lapine’s new musical show, “Little Miss Sunshine,” at the Second Stage Theatre off-Broadway.  This show as inspired by the movie of the same name from several years back.  Mr. Lapine directed.   I thought the production was well-designed, given the limitations of the small stage, but I did not think this story was crying out for musical treatment.  It seemed more like a play with songs than a musical, and the music was not up to the high standard Mr. Finn has set in some of his earlier shows.  The cast seemed to be working very hard, but without much real effect.  I was delighted, however, to see in the supporting case Wesley Tailor, one of my favorites from the TV series “Smash.”  (He played “Bobby,” a member of the musical ensemble.)  One of my sadnesses at learning that “Smash” was not renewed for a third season was not getting to see more of the entertaining supporting characters such as Mr. Tailor, so I was happy to see him in this show, although I think his talents could be better used in a more substantial role.

On Thursday evening I was at Carnegie Hall for a subscription concert by the Orchestra of St. Luke’s with guest conductor Ivan Fischer and piano soloist Jonathan Biss in the Schumann Piano Concerto.  St. Luke’s was playing up to their high standard.  The program opened with Leo Weiner’s Serenade for Small Orchestra, Op. 3, composed during his first year of study at the Budapest Conservatory.  It is a reasonably well-made student piece, but not distinctive enough to hold my attention through-out its four brief movements, and despite my general interest in exploring new repertory, I’m not sure this is a piece that deserved exposure at Carnegie Hall.  The Schumann Concerto came next.  I’ve found that this piece, rather low-key for a romantic period piano concerto, works best when the pianist and conductor adopt an interventionist approach, putting some flair and punch into the music.  But that’s not really Biss’s style (although it is clearly Fischer’s style).  I found a mismatch here.  Biss’s playing was very smooth, flowing, technically immaculate, but not particularly dramatic in terms of accents, phrasing and dynamics.  Fischer, on the other hand, was wont to pump things up again, so the tuttis and the solo passages seemed to be coming from different universes, or so it struck me that way.  After intermission, Fischer led an absolutely delightful rendition of Bartok’s Hungarian Sketches, a collection of five short pieces channeling the spirit of Hungarian folk music without actually quoting folk tunes.  I thought this performance was really inspired, especially Fischer’s rendition of the fourth, usually translated as “Slightly Tipsy” but called “A Bit Tipsy” in the printed program.  Most of the recordings I’ve heard of this music have been rather straight-forward, the conductor evidently believing that just playing what was written was sufficient to convey the intended mood, but Fischer exaggerated the lurching tempos, which was great fun.  Bartok intended this movement to be funny, and Fischer clearly shares that sense of humor.  Finally, a performance of Mozart’s Symphony in C, No. 40, K. 551 (“The Jupiter”), which really knocked my socks off.  I am used to hearing this as a very majestic essay in classical form, but Fischer hears it as a very dramatic, romantic piece, and got the orchestra to play it that way.  From the first sharp chords at the opening, I knew I was in for something different, and I came away convinced that this symphony is much better than I had previously thought.  My own rankings of the final three Mozart symphonies composed in 1788 has been to put the G Minor [#40] in first place, followed by the Eb (No. 39) with the old Jupiter bringing up the rear.  Now I’m rethinking that order.

Finally, on Saturday I caught a matinee preview performance of Terrence McNally’s latest, “And Away We Go,” at the Pearl Theatre Company, again off-Broadway.  Since this is a preview, I won’t say very much because a review would be inappropriate while the author and director are still making adjustments.  But I can say that I didn’t find the overall concept very convincing, although I was intermittently amused and even moved.  The rapid changes of time and place (all on the same unit-set with the performers in the same modern street clothes) did not work for me.  But it may work for others.  And perhaps by the time it opens it will be tightened up some.  This performance ran rather longer than advertised, without an intermission, which became a bit wearying.

Orchestra of St. Luke’s Begins Carnegie Hall Season for 2013-14

Posted on: October 24th, 2013 by Art Leonard No Comments

I had a mixed reaction to tonight’s concert by the Orchestra of St. Luke’s, led by Principal Conductor Pablo Heras-Casado, at Carnegie Hall.

The centerpiece of the concert was Benjamin Britten’s Serenade for Tenor, Horn, and Strings, Op. 31, with soloists Ian Bostridge (tenor) and Stewart Rose (horn).  As prelude, the orchestra performed Mendelssohn’s Overture to A Midsummer Night’s Dream.  After intermission, they played Shostakovich’s Symphony No. 9.

The Britten was splendid, as one could predict with Bostridge involved, since he is now the “go to” person for Britten’s song cycles, having well inherited the mantle from Peter Pears, for whom these songs were written.  Bostridge’s tone no longer has quite the youthful innocence and energy that entranced me so many years ago when I heard his first recording of Schubert’s Beautiful Maid of the Mill, but there is a well-earned maturity and thoughtfulness that adds great meaning to Britten’s profound settings of this collection of poems.  Stewart Rose’s horn solos were more than adequate to the occasion, if not quite of the calibre one recalls from Barry Tuckwell or the Dennis Brain recording.

But the rest of the concert was on a lower level of accomplishment, I felt, and I blame conductor Heras-Casado in part for taking some fast tempi that were beyond the ability of his orchestra to articulate cleaning and were probably the cause of some of the sloppiness in wind solos and scrambling in strings.  Surely I enjoy a brisk Mendelssohn overture, but there are human limits to be observed.  I had the same reaction to the first movement of the Shostakovich, where several of the solos were played less than cleanly at the excessively fast tempo.  The second movement was adequately restrained, with a beautiful clarinet solo, and the third movement presto went well.  The bassoon cadenzas and trombone interjections in the fourth movement were also excellent, but then I was surprised, in light of the speedy tempi earlier on, that the final allegretto was restrained by comparison, except for the very fast (and excellently played) coda.

This makes sense, as a matter of terminology, since an allegretto shouldn’t be quite as fast as an allegro, and the composer gives metronome markings for this movement that suggest a more moderate pace than many of the performances I’ve heard.  Indeed, at this tempo, I was really impressed at how Shostakovich seemed to be thumbing his nose at Soviet authority when the full orchestra burst into the trivial “triumphal march” towards the end, right before the coda.  At this tempo, the sacrcasm really came through, as if the composer was mocking the idea that he should be presenting a triumphal march to commemorate the end of World War II and the great Soviet victory over fascism.  Hearing this performance, I could almost understand the ferocious condemnation he suffered as a result of this piece — it’s almost as if he was asking for it with this mocking march tune.  But I’ve never quite heard it that way before, so I have to thank Maestro Heras-Casado for this insight. 

I hope that as he settles in further to his position as principal conductor, his working relationship with the orchestra will deepen and perhaps he will be more sensitive to the need to adopt tempi that are workable.  (One gets spoiled listening to the NY Philharmonic, whose wind players probably could produce flawless renditions at these tempi if called upon to do so.)  Some of the playing tonight just struck me as not quite prime time Carnegie Hall calibre, but from what I’ve heard in past seasons, I wouldn’t put all the blame on the instrumentalists.

Orchestra of St. Luke’s – Heras-Casado Debut at Carnegie Hall

Posted on: February 8th, 2013 by Art Leonard No Comments

Last night I attended the Orchestra of St. Luke’s subscription concert at Carnegie Hall.  Pablo Heras-Casado was making his first appearance at Carnegie Hall as principal conductor of the orchestra.  Christian Zacharias was the piano soloist in Chopin’s Concerto No. 2, Op. 21.  The program began with Beethoven’s Egmont Overture, and continued after intermission with Hans Zender’s orchestration of five piano preludes by Debussy, concluding with the original 1841 version of Robert Schumann’s Symphony No. 4, Op. 120.

I had previously attended a concert conducted by Maestro Heras-Casado at the Lincoln Center Mostly Mozart festival, and enjoyed his conducting, so I was looking forward to this.  He began the Egmont Overture with a more vigorous attack of the opening chords than I have heard in the past, and the entire performance was intensely dramatic, urgently forward-moving, whipping up quite a frenzy in the final section.  He had the orchestra playing with great precision and color.

The Chopin, I thought, provided quite a contrast.  I have enjoyed Christian Zacharias’s playing in the past, but I did not find him particularly inspired last night.  Technically his performance was superb, but I found it to be a bit subdued, quite a letdown after the dramatic Beethoven opening.  The Chopin piano concerti are early efforts by the teenage composer, sounding a bit like late-classical period piano sonatas with a surrounding of orchestral music of secondary importance.  (Indeed, I’ve heard recordings of one or the other Chopin concerto without the orchestra or with just a string quartet accompaniment, leaving the impression that the orchestra, apart from the first movement introductions, is not all that important in the scheme of things.)  Zacharias’s playing was very fluent, very smooth, lacking in dramatic highs — or at least this was my impression.  I found it hard to focus my attention on it.

Things were quite different after intermission.  Zender’s Debussy arrangements, said to be receiving their U.S. premiere on this concert, are almost cartoonish in their bright, primary colors, and he employs some unusual instruments, including the “musical saw”, to create odd sonic effect.  The harmonic language remains distinctly Debussyian, but the soundworld of these arrangements goes beyond Debussy without sounding unduly modernistic.  The orchestra played with sparkling finesse, and Heras-Casado showed a tender side, an ability to secure light, agile playing, that contrasted with his opening Beethoven.

Heras-Casado chose to end the program with Schumann’s original version of what was finally published as his 4th Symphony.  According to the program notes, Schumann shelved the piece after a “disastrous performance” and let it sit in the drawer for ten years, coming back to rework it after having written what are now known as his second and third symphonies.  The revised version from 1851 is the one that was published and absorbed into the standard orchestral repertory.  Hearing the original struck me as akin to hearing a “parody” of the familiar piece.  I think Schumann was wise to revise it.  The original first movement has a clunky transition from the introduction to the main allegro, and the orchestration is ineffective in spots.  The same might be said of the other movements, where there were some unfamiliar chord progressions, awkwardly orchestrated moments, and strange dynamics.  To someone who knows the standard version of this piece well, the experience of hearing this original version is like a trip to the funhouse with those odd mirrors that distort your image.  I certainly think it is worth taking this version our for a spin now and then, but I think the revised version — which incorporates the lessons Schumann learned in writing the next two symphonies — is entitled to its status as the preferred version.

One of the difficulties in judging the work in this version is that, never having heard Heras-Casado conduct the revised version, I found it hard to separate out the inherent scoring differences from possible interpretive differences from the performances I know by this conductor.  To judge by his Beethoven conducting in Egmont, one might not be surprised at some of the phrasing and dynamic decisions that the conductor made in the Schumann, departing from the performing tradition.  But how much of that was the conductor’s own view of this music, and how much was faithfulness to the earlier score?  Impossible to judge without comparing the scores side by side.

That said, the performance was superb.  The orchestra was charged-up, fully-engaged, and producing a bigger sound than one might expect from a slightly oversized chamber orchestra (12 first violins, 10 second, and on down the line for the strings).  One must presume that the conductor was getting the performance he asked for, making no attempt to hide or play down the gauche aspects of the original score.  At times it was quite exhilarating, and interesting to discover an old friend in a new dress, quashing the revised version’s resemblance — at least as to the “sound world” of the piece — to the third symphony, which is so pronounced in the revised edition.

So, while I would prefer the composer’s final thoughts on the 4th, this performance of the original version gave a fascinating aural glimpse into the composer’s workshop.  It was claimed as a Carnegie Hall premiere of this version of the piece.

On balance, this was an excellent debut concert for Heras-Casado.  I hope he’s back again soon with this orchestra.