MiV Home
Phillip T Young Recital Hall
July 30, 2013
In 1832, some eight years after composing three piano quartets and a sextet, Felix Mendelssohn admitted to his sister Fanny, "I should like to compose a couple of good trios".
In the event, it was not until 1839 that he composed his first piano trio, in D minor, Op.49. (The second had to wait a further seven years.)
It was with a fine performance of the D minor, which remains one of Mendelssohn's most popular chamber works, that the trio of William Preucil, Eric Kim and Arthur Rowe closed their concert on Tuesday, in a welcome return for one of last year's most popular ensembles.
In a way, the trio exemplifies the best (and almost none of the worst) of Mendelssohn: memorable themes, structural cohesion and emotional warmth, although the emotion is always constrained, by the composer's classical leanings and by his own character which, we know from contemporary accounts, had a tendency to aloofness - he was sometimes referred to by the nickname "the discontented Polish count". Although this aloofness was moderated (if that is the word) by alarming outbursts of temper.
Much of the main thematic work of the trio is given, initially, to the cello and Eric Kim's noble lyricism was the perfect vehicle. Even more delicious were those moments when violin and cello played in harmony, with Rowe's beautifully articulated pianism providing a wonderful backdrop. (The more-than-usually virtuosic piano writing was a result of Moscheles' urging Mendelssohn to use some of the recent technical innovations of Schumann and Liszt).
Perhaps the highlight of the trio is the slow movement, which has the character of one of Mendelssohn's Songs without Words - a ravishing statement of the theme by Rowe was followed by an exquisite violin and cello duet. The minor key section reminded at least one listener of Beethoven, Mendelssohn's early inspiration.
A skipping scherzo preceded the lively, passionate finale - although one never feels that the passion is likely to submerge the music. The trio played superbly, as they did throughout the evening.
The contrast between the Mendelssohn and the trio by Brahms which preceded the interval was most enlightening.
Both composer's thought of themselves as classicists, in contrast to Schumann and Liszt in the case of Mendelssohn, and to Wagner in the case of Brahms (although Wagner was an almost exact contemporary of Mendelssohn, Schumann and Liszt, his work had little impact until after Mendelssohn's untimely death).
But, whereas with Mendelssohn this classicism is immediately evident, with Brahms the emotional turmoil which is, superficially, the music's most noticeable attribute tends to disguise his formal methods from the casual listener.
I should state right away that Brahms' Piano Trio Op.87 is far from being my favourite Brahms. In fact I could happily live without (most of) the first two movements.
Having said which, if I have to listen to those movements, I should certainly want to hear them played like this: forcefully, when appropriate, but never allowing tone quality to suffer. It was also fascinating, and instructive, to notice how Brahms in the major can be so much more turbulent than Mendelssohn in the minor.
For me, the opening movement is somewhat discursive, whereas the slow movement seemingly strains for effect, although the more lyrical moments, such as the minor-key variation, featured some quite gorgeous playing from all three musicians.
The scherzo, and for once Brahms' use of the word is eminently justifiable, is an extraordinary movement, fleet and lithe in a way that one rarely encounters in his music. One could even detect the influence of Mendelssohn's "fairy" scherzos, although these were somewhat more serious creatures, perhaps Tolkien's elves. In contrast, the trio is Brahmsian in the best sense of the word: slow, lyrical and played with marvellously rich tones.
The finale strode exuberantly to its triumphal close, summoning a thoroughly-deserved storm of applause.
Joseph Haydn was not merely the "father" of the symphony and string quartet, but also of the piano trio, of which he wrote over forty.
The "Gypsy" trio has long been the most popular and, some years ago, seemed so popular among both local and visiting musicians that I would almost go out of my way to avoid it.
Happily, this was the sort of performance that nobody should avoid: delicate, yet strong, elegant and civilised, with excellent balances between the instruments - even when doubling Rowe's left hand, Kim's cello was still quite audible.
The second movement was close to perfection, with the wonderful cantabile shifting from one instrument to another.
The finale, from which the work gets its nickname, was quick but not overly so, and articulation was as clear as one could wish for. The lovely bits of - fairly extreme - rubato were handled with humour and complete precision.
A marvellous evening's musicmaking.
MiV Home