Search - Sibelius, Julian Rachlin, Pittsburgh Symphony Orchestra :: Sibelius: Symphonies, Violin Concerto, Orchestral Works

Sibelius revisited

R. C. Ross | Birmingham | 01/07/2003

(4 out of 5 stars)

"These performances sound natural. Maazel has a direct, objective manner in Sibelius and the natural, open sounding recording of the Pittsburgh Orchestra is suited to the music.Sibelius's symphonies aren't `theological' (like Bruckner's and, in a different way Mahler's too). These landscapes are unpopulated, often inhospitable, bleak and cold. There are moments when the broad land, sea and skyscapes open out into music that seems to belong to the transcendent vastnesses of deep-space (especially in the 4th and 7th Symphony). Maazel's objective and patient approach is ideally suited to these enigmatic and inscrutable works. It communicates a raw, physical energy. It also seems to hold at its core a stillness; a still, silent centre around which musical planets move and coalesce.There is a cogency about this cycle, a seamless consistency; widely varied scenes viewed from the same vantage-point.The excellent performance of the Violin Concerto is a treasure! The soloist, Julian Rachlin, plays with breadth; a fluent, rhapsodic freedom and a wonderful vitality and bite. The recorded balance is ideal, the solo violin superbly `present' but not unnaturally forward.The Pittsburgh Orchestra may lack velvety plushness - but that is no disadvantage in a Sibelian soundscape. They have the advantage of dark, articulate lower strings, delightfully grainy bassoons, trombones as black as a pine forest and brilliant, blazing horns. The simple microphone techniques used project the orchestra with honesty and impact. Climaxes are huge and heavy and detail well-focused."

Underpowered

John Grabowski | USA | 03/23/2004

(2 out of 5 stars)

"Chronic and severe constipation. That's the only reason I can imagine that Maazel conducted Sibelius like this with the Pittsburgh Symphony. His earlier cycle with the Vienna Philharmonic is still available and is far more vital--at least in it Maazel says something about the music, though I've never been as impressed even with that cycle as a lot of people. It has murky sound to boot. The present issue has glorious sound--it may be the best *sounding* Sibelius cycle I've ever heard--but Maazel says nothing in this music, and he says it so slowly and de-lib-er-ate-ly. I won't take the symphonies one by one, because they're all played exactly the same way and I have the same thing to say about all of them. At times it almost sounds like a rehearsal with Maazel having the orchestra play slowly to illustrate a point. I'm not unsympathetic to an "objective" or "bird's eye" view of the music--indeed, I feel this is how it works best. I don't think, after the 3rd Symphony, Sibelius was really a "Romantic" and I don't like conductors who treat him as a Finnish Tchaikovsky. But objective doesn't have to mean devoid of personality--listen to Boulez at his best.



What I miss in the Maazel performances is any understanding of build, of structure. Phrases are unconnected. When a phrase or section returns later in the movement, it is played the same way as the first time; there is no metamorphosis--fatal in Sibelius. And the tempi are incredibly slow. Some white-hot sections of the 7th, some of the most intense music ever written, are played with underemphasized accents, moderate dynamics and a dragging, plodding feeling. One can be "icy hot," one can even be "icy cold," but Maazel just sounds *bored,* despite having the wonderful Pittsburgh Symphony at his disposal. This is why classical music has started to die--bored conductors slogging their way through the repertoire. *Why* did this guy think he was a sure bet for Karajan's old job?



The best of the symphonies is the 6th and the first movement of the 1st, where some clarity that is rarely heard is introduced, but even here there are better recordings around. The violin concerto is interesting because of the soloist, but that's not enough to save the work. Maazel sounds like he is just beating time.



Sony's packaging is frustrating, as usual. They now put boxed CD sets in paper sleeves instead of those big, largely empty plastic cases that take up lots of room on your shelf. That's fine, but then they put all the sleeves *into a thick, largely empty cardboard box that takes up the same amount of room that the plastic cases would have!* Does anyone over there have a brain?!? There are no liner notes of any sort, just a booklet with track listings and timings."