Most Helpful Customer Reviews
|
|
12 of 16 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
The new standard for Shostakovich violin concertos, April 4, 2006
Daniel Hope and Maxim Shostakovich are on the same page with both concertos and make beautiful music together.
Interpretations are uptempo, vigorous and cutting. There is nothing soft or rounded about these performances.
If you're looking for some of the soul of Shostakovich, especially in the second concerto, look no further.
|
|
|
4 of 5 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
Pretty good, but too pretty, December 9, 2007
I claim to be no expert on the Second Concerto, but I know the First pretty well so I'll talk about that one.
Hope's playing is excellent on the whole. However I'm going to pick on his tone and interpretation now...
The Nocturne was on the gentle side, but nothing unusual going on in terms of interpretation. Overall, he uses a bit too much portato and not enough true lagato for my ears, and the vibrato was a little too Romantic for this eerie Nocturne.
The Scherzo is too chunky and scratchy, even harsher than Vengerov's, who is about as harsh as possible while still being tasteful. This leaves many of his notes a little inaudible, due to the distant-sounding quality of the recording. Just a bit distasteful to my ears. I really prefer Viktoria Mullovah's sound on this movement, and the last, best.
The Passacaglia is another animal. Here Hope pours his soul out, and it is very obvious, which is good because other violinists don't seem to recognize that this movement really requires some depth. His sound, though, is too sweet for my tastes this time. A little more pain would have been better. On the whole I like Oistrakh's or Vengerov's take on this movement best.
The Cadenza was little too start-and-stop and too bouncy, without the inevitability of Oistrakh or Mullovah's interpretation. This is obviously a very schizophrenic cadenza, but it can be accomplished without the extra off-the-string bounce to the bow, and the slightly bizarre tempi choices, with a few oddly placed rubatos.
The Burlesque is probably his best movement. It is still harsher than I like it, but this time it doesn't kill it completely.
|
|
|
1 of 1 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
An intriguing, highly personal view of the First Concerto, October 30, 2007
Daniel Hope is an English violinist in the Menuhin mold, an introspective musician of high integrity. Despite his membership in the venerable Beaux Arts Trio, he's not well known yet in the U.S. but is a rising star in the U.K. His previous CDs have been off-beat -- this Shostakovich album is his most conventional to date. His reading of Concerto #1 comes off as surprisingly abrasive tonally. After a razor-edged Scherzo, the central Pssacaglia and cadenza are turned into a wiry, almost screechy cry from the heart.
The rest of the performance is very personal and inward -- particularly in the quiet, haunted first movement -- but rather lacking in strength compard with the great accounts from Oistrakh, Vengerov, and Khachatryan. Hope's clarity and intelligence serve him well in the mournful, gray Concerto #2 but do not turn me into a fan of the work. For the time being, Hope will probably remain a talent known to a relative few rather than the many. Maxim Shostakovich's conducting is routine, which seems to be fairly standard with him, despite his credentials as the composer's son.
I don't want any reservations about this CD to detract from my judgment that Hope is the biggest violin talent to emerge from Britain since the teenage Nigel Kennedy three decades ago.
|
|
|
|
~ Kate Gould
~ Alban Berg
~ Arvo Part
~ Silvestre Revueltas
- the new music site from IMDb and Amazon.
