Bartok\ Philharmonia - 27 Oct 2011

[amcluesent]

I failed to hear why Bott was in raptures. Whatever the merits were in the playing, these were comprehensively negated by the long, long interludes of prattle between each 'bleeding chunk'. What must it have been like in the RFH, as minutes dragged past between each movement until R2.5 nodded the conductor on? Did the music make up even 50% of the broadcast time? A concert comprehensively wrecked by unwanted blethering at the behest of 'wrecker' Wright. And next week it's Trelawny!

[Bryn]

What nonsense. The timings of the interregna will have been dictated not by Ms. Bott's commentary but by platform changes, etc. Do think before posting. The first work involved but three players and the subsequent performances each involved reorganisation of the platform. I have just listened to the concerto again, this time via domestic hifi and bookshelf speakers. I was again suitably impressed with the audio engineering (listening to the iPlayer's HD Sound offering). The hushed night music of the second movement was beautifully clear, and the audience, in the main, very well behaved. A pity the piano and timps were not somewhat better coordinated, however.

[Ferretfancy]

Astonishing playing in the hall in The Wooden Prince,altogether excellent. Philharmonia audiences seem a bit resistant to Bartok after only eighty years or so, there were lots of empty seats, but more younger listeners than usual to compensate. What wonderful music this is !

My only gripe is that the Festival Hall doesn't really sound all that better, just different, and not in a wholly beneficial way. Yes, there is a warmer bass, but this is offset by a very upfront sound which seems to exaggerate the winds and brass. Of course, last night's music was of a kind to emphasise that effect. I'd like to hear comments from others, as I'm beginning to find that I prefer the Barbican.

[BBMmk2]

Excellant concert last night. An original idea to have Contrasts on at the beginning! The Wooden Prince very good! Too tired to hear the second half though!

[aeolium]

I thought it was an excellent concert, especially in the first half. I was lucky enough to see the Philharmonia and Salonen perform Bluebeard's Castle in the Symphony Hall in Birmingham a week ago (with John Tomlinson and Michelle DeYoung) - this was quite superb playing and brought out so much of the wonderful quality of the score. There were also quite a lot of students at that concert, perhaps partly because of the video installation which was used to provide images accompanying the opera.

[3rd Viennese School]

I can never recall Bartok like I can with Mahler, Shoshty, Prokofiev, Schnittke etc. I dont know why this is. I still listen and try to explore Bartok however.

Only heard the last bits of the wooden prince then the whole piano concerto which I havent got. Never knew that mvt 1 has no strings and they dont all paly together until the finale!

Anyway, a refreshing change to the usual concerts that we get so well done all. And it appeared that putting the piano concert last did work!

3VS

[Serial_Apologist]

Fine performance, but really disappointing that the magical opening and closing string passages of the second movement of the Piano Concerto, moving contrarywise in open fifths, were rendered totally inaudible by whoever was in charge of the sound mixing - especially given the richness and clarity of The Wooden Prince.

[Bryn]

Again this nonsense. I can hear the night music with great clarity, hushed as intended. Just use your ears. Perhaps you are too used to FM's Optimod treatment?

For those not familiar with the hushed intensity of this movement's opening and close, here's an alternative performance:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iQbozcINoPs&feature=related

[Simon B]

I failed to hear why Bott was in raptures. Whatever the merits were in the playing, these were comprehensively negated by the long, long interludes of prattle between each 'bleeding chunk'. What must it have been like in the RFH, as minutes dragged past between each movement until R2.5 nodded the conductor on? Did the music make up even 50% of the broadcast time? A concert comprehensively wrecked by unwanted blethering at the behest of 'wrecker' Wright. And next week it's Trelawny!

Whatever the rights and wrongs of the radio presentation, there was no awareness of it (beyond the presence of microphones) in the RFH.

As has already been noted, this was a complicated programme in terms of stage arrangements. In Contrasts the piano was centre-stage, with positions for the violin and clarinet to either side. Prior to the Wooden Prince, the piano had to be removed, seating for the entire string section re-laid and the members of a pretty enormous orchestra (4 harps, 6 trumpets, 6 percussion etc) had to take the stage. There was a similarly fundamental process in reverse prior to the Piano Concerto. In one of these resettings there was some mildly comical messing about with a desk of violins ending up with no chairs, then the wrong chairs and/or a broken chair, wrong sets of music being swapped around etc. Presumably the radio announcer would have had to cover during all this faffing about, some of which took longer than expected. This was the price we paid for a rather interesting collection of works. There was actually 92 minutes of music scheduled which with a 20 minute interval, some extended applause and a finish time such that I was on the tube at Embankment by 21:45 doesn't seem unreasonable...

Ferret - I think you and I have exchanged the same views about the "new" RFH acoustic (summary: an improvement, but no banana) before. Last night I was in a seat (stalls R) slightly further back than I normally aim for. Result - a bit muddy/vague and surprisingly distant sounding given how close the stage actually is. I think we've agreed before - it varies almost from seat to seat. The contrast with Birmingham's Symphony Hall (where I went to see Duke Bluebeard's Castle last Friday) was fairly stark. Even if the RFH performance on the 3rd (which I'm also going to) is as good as the one they gave in Brum, I doubt the effect will be the same with the RFH's inferior acoustic and currently hopelessly feeble organ.

I can't say I prefer the Barbican much, or at all. E.g., it worked surprisingly well for the LSO/Elder Elgar The Kingdom in January, less so for the LSO/Noseda Britten War Requiem a few weeks ago. Both were excellent concerts, but somewhat in spite of the acoustic (and lack of a real organ). Again, I get the feeling it varies remarkably with small changes in seating position and orchestral layout. It'll never be resolved until someone builds a decent concert hall in London - and let's face it, that's not going to happen any time soon.

Yes, the attendance last night wasn't brilliant, but it wasn't bad really for a concert of mostly somewhat obscure Bartok. Meanwhile, Bluebeard's Castle is essentially sold out. I've been to all the other Philharmonia concerts in the Bartok series at the RFH, and last night's was the only one where I noticed significant gaps in the audience. Considering even the better-known Bartok is mostly very risky box-office in most places, I've been pleasantly surprised overall. It's probably been helped by Salonen and the Philharmonia being the business in this kind of repertoire.

[Ferretfancy]

Fine performance, but really disappointing that the magical opening and closing string passages of the second movement of the Piano Concerto, moving contrarywise in open fifths, were rendered totally inaudible by whoever was in charge of the sound mixing - especially given the richness and clarity of The Wooden Prince.

Serial_Apologist

The opening of the slow movement of the concerto had superbly quiet string playing, the engineer might have taken too much of a chance with the dynamics, but they certainly reflected what we heard in the hall.

[Ventilhorn]

What nonsense. The timings of the interregna will have been dictated not by Ms. Bott's commentary but by platform changes, etc. Do think before posting. The first work involved but three players and the subsequent performances each involved reorganisation of the platform. I have just listened to the concerto again, this time via domestic hifi and bookshelf speakers. I was again suitably impressed with the audio engineering (listening to the iPlayer's HD Sound offering). The hushed night music of the second movement was beautifully clear, and the audience, in the main, very well behaved. A pity the piano and timps were not somewhat better coordinated, however.

It is quite possible to say "I disagree" and then give your explanation for the long pauses.

The moment that you say "What nonsense" or "Rubbish", you have lost the respect of other message boarders - even when they might be interested in what you have to offer.

Unfortunately though, to quote the words of my old band sergeant: "You can't not make a leopard change 'is spots"

Ventilhorn

[Ventilhorn]

Whatever the rights and wrongs of the radio presentation, there was no awareness of it (beyond the presence of microphones) in the RFH.

Ferret - I think you and I have exchanged the same views about the "new" RFH acoustic (summary: an improvement, but no banana) before. Last night I was in a seat (stalls R) slightly further back than I normally aim for. Result - a bit muddy/vague and surprisingly distant sounding given how close the stage actually is. I think we've agreed before - it varies almost from seat to seat. The contrast with Birmingham's Symphony Hall (where I went to see Duke Bluebeard's Castle last Friday) was fairly stark. Even if the RFH performance on the 3rd (which I'm also going to) is as good as the one they gave in Brum, I doubt the effect will be the same with the RFH's inferior acoustic and currently hopelessly feeble organ.

I can't say I prefer the Barbican much, or at all. E.g., it worked surprisingly well for the LSO/Elder Elgar The Kingdom in January, less so for the LSO/Noseda Britten War Requiem a few weeks ago. Both were excellent concerts, but somewhat in spite of the acoustic (and lack of a real organ). Again, I get the feeling it varies remarkably with small changes in seating position and orchestral layout. It'll never be resolved until someone builds a decent concert hall in London - and let's face it, that's not going to happen any time soon.

Yes, the attendance last night wasn't brilliant, but it wasn't bad really for a concert of mostly somewhat obscure Bartok. Meanwhile, Bluebeard's Castle is essentially sold out. I've been to all the other Philharmonia concerts in the Bartok series at the RFH, and last night's was the only one where I noticed significant gaps in the audience. Considering even the better-known Bartok is mostly very risky box-office in most places, I've been pleasantly surprised overall. It's probably been helped by Salonen and the Philharmonia being the business in this kind of repertoire.

A reasoned appraisal and explanation well stated. What a pity that messages #2 and #8 on this thread was not as reasonable and polite in its content.

VH

[Bryn]

VH, there is much that may be laid at the door of Roger Wright, and at that of the audio engineers used by the BBC these days. However, to seek to blame them for supposed failings when any such 'blame' belongs either elsewhere, or is otherwise unwarranted, weakens the impact of valid criticisms raised here regarding those targets. I suggest your efforts would be better spent repudiating the false attribution of blame than in getting on your high horse. While you are at it, you might pay better attention to avoiding the confounding of singular and plural, as the second sentence of #12. The attacks on RW and the Audio Engineers I described as nonsense were just that, and I make no apology for so describing them.