 |
REVIEWRachev in Eugeneby Tom Manoff |
|
Danail Rachev, the new conductor at the Eugene Symphony, the orchestra that hired Marin Alsop and Giancarlo Guerrero, remains a puzzle
|
APRIL 2010. Garrick Ohlssohn playing Beethoven’s Emperor Concerto got me out finally to hear Danail Rachev, the new conductor of the Eugene Symphony. The March 2010 concert was at the Hult Center’s Silva Hall, the large venue of this small city with the fine history of hiring good conductors.
Backstory: In 1991 I reviewed Silva’s new electronic acoustic system for the New York Times. As part of the article, I compared Silva’s electronic system with those that been installed in concert halls at Anchorage and Nashville.
Garrick Ohlsson was playing a solo recital in Anchorage. Not only an outstanding artist, Ohlsson is a really nice fellow. I asked him for an extraordinary favor: Would he play the first half of his all-Chopin recital with the electronic system off, and second half with it on? This would allow me to compare the electronic system—on and off — with the same instrument and repertoire. He agreed. That favor turned out crucial for the article. It was, by the way, an extraordinary evening of Chopin. Ohlsson’s shades of piano tone, from lovely poetics to tumultuous outbursts sounded better without the electronics.
Two other crosscurrents were on my mind at Rachev’s program. I’d interviewed Marin Alsop, then the newly appointed conductor at Eugene, for the Times piece, . Alsop was opposed to the system and never used it. Eugene ‘s most recent conductor, the charismatic Giancarlo Guerrero refused to do without it and over-used it. That oft heard distorted sound kept me from hearing Guerrero as many times as I would want. He’s now at Nashville, an orchestra I reviewed for the Times article, their hall, at the time, the best of the electronically enhanced spaces.
Some years back, Silva Hall’s acoustics were redone. The electronics were upgraded and, most significantly, a reflective wooden shell was added to the stage. The hall is still problematic, but without the electronics, it’s at least natural and has character.
Soloist, conductors, acoustics and halls were on my radar when first listening to Rachev in Silva: Ohlssohn at the keys, Guerrero gone to Nashville, Alsop having become one of the most important conductors in the world.
Rachev’s appointment at Eugene puts him in a city that’s had a big- time ear for talent, an established audience for classical music, and the Oregon Bach Festival, conducted by Helmuth Rilling —one of the 20th century’s famous Bach conductors and champion of new and important works from living composers. But with no professional critic at the local paper, he will be reviewed mostly by amateurs, whose work leans to uninformed cheerleading. Rachev’s tenure at Eugene, it seems, will proceed without critical feedback. Not a good situation for the symphony, the audience, or the conductor.
Beethoven’s Emperor was disappointing. There are some concertos in which the conductor can almost get away with just accompanying the soloist, rather than being a full partner. It’s not desirable, but the soloist may shine. However, the Emperor is not one of them. This is Beethoven at full-blown symphonic form. Full engagement by the orchestra is essential.
Rachev seemed timid, fitting his orchestra into spaces when the pianist didn’t play, rather than participating in an interpretation. As a result, there was no interpretation.
Rachev seemed timid, fitting his orchestra into spaces when the pianist didn’t play rather than participating in an interpretation.
Ohlssohn played well, but in this shaky performance from the orchestra, he could only do so much. I suspect that experience kicked in, and he offered what he could. The evening sent me to my CD shelves for Ohlsson salvation.
I immediately noticed a basic flaw in Rachev’s conducting: He spends perhaps three quarters of his time conducting the first violins, while ignoring the rest of the orchestra.
Such conducting has many bad results. Too much attention to the first violins (one could argue that the seconds were also in his gaze, but musically they were not) results in weak sound and energy from the violas, cellos and the basses. Indeed, the sound from the entire right side of the stage (looking at it) seemed detached because the volume and energy was so much weaker.
Rarely does this conductor look at the winds and even rarer sends any interpretive signs. He cues the brass more often, though far less precisely than Alsop or Guerrero. Ragged brass entrances have returned to the orchestra. This was a special disappointment. Guerrero’s control of entrances — part of his musical demands on the orchestra— had brought much-needed precision, not only to the brass, but throughout all sections. Except for the strings, that precision was gone.
Guerrero’s control of entrances, as part of his musical demands on the orchestra, had brought much-needed precision, not only to the brass, but throughout all sections. With Rachev that precision was gone.
Over focus on the firsts leads to surface music-making. The conductor is too involved with the obvious, the “main melody” for example. The inner-workings of the music are left out of the interpretative equation. Without attention to the inside elements such as counter melodies, accompaniment passages and harmonic structure, any long-range interpretation is at risk. When Rachev’s over-phrases the firsts, not only is the result heavy and halting, there is little or no phrasing from the rest of the orchestra.
All these problems were in evidence at the symphony’s season closer, a program titled Mahler’s Titan.
Programming counts for plenty. These days that means a good mix of standard fare with contemporary works. Thus far, Rachev’s programming is quite stodgy. The Titan concert was poorly planned, even as 19th century programming. While the audience had been drawn into an expectation for excitement by the word “Titan,” one look at the composers and pieces indicated a slow and tedious evening.
Frederick Delius’s The Walk to the Paradise Garden and Richard Wagner’s Siefried Idyll constituted the first half of the program. Talk about slow pacing.
Although the Delius was well-played, it’s still a mediocre piece. Its slow paced 19th Century style was hardly a good opener with Wagner and Mahler to follow. The audience was noticeably unenthusiastic. Rachev barely got off the stage when the clapping stopped.
Even a wonderful performance of Wagner’s Siefgried Idyll wouldn’t have worked in the next spot. Too much of the same thing. And it wasn’t wonderful. The audience got more restless. But they had all the “Titan excitement” ahead — so they thought.
Mahler’s Titan had just been played by the orchestra three years back. Its return was too soon for respectable programming, when so many important works —even warhorses—remain unheard in Eugene. Having reviewed Guerrero’s Titan, I had a precise reference point for the performance. That’s one reason I went. Here was the chance to compare conductor and orchestra in specifics with its previous level.
Rachev’s constant attention to the firsts not only looked bad, but once again, the Mahler was played at the surface of the music, without rhythmic character or phrasing detail from the rest of the orchestra.
This Mahler was a step back from Guerrero’s, who always demanded distinct results in sound and form. The orchestra ambled through the work without musical intent. The famous solo bass opening of the third movement was so tentative and out-of-tune, it was painful and embarrassing. The Titan had become the Titanic.
Mahler was played at the surface of the music, without rhythmic character or phrasing…
The restless audience got a shot at excitement in the last movement, but it had been a long schlep.
Danail Rachev conducting the Eugene Symphony
Can it be that Rachev just isn’t ready for this job? He seems unsure on the podium. Except when indulging the obvious, his head is too often in the score. I kept thinking “does he know this work?” How can a conductor at this stage of his career pay so much attention to the score during the closing pages of the Mahler Titan ? Shouldn’t such a famous piece be virtually memorized ? Use the score, sure— but bury your head in it?
I had spoken with some of the orchestra before these concerts. The image of Rachev that emerged was the “anti-Guerrero”— a non-authoritarian and easy going fellow who would prove more to the orchestra’s liking than their previous conductor. But after these two concerts, I wanted specifics. I asked someone close to the orchestra about Rachev’s specific qualities that got him the job. Qualities the orchestra liked about Rachev were:
More encouraging than demanding.
More collaborative than dictatorial.
More improvisational than planned.
More dynamic than staid.
His rehearsal technique also appeals to the orchestra (very much). He knows how to talk to string players in a way that enables fuller expression (whether or not that results in better music). He makes the orchestra comfortable.
Considering the musical results, the very qualities the orchestra likes may be the problem.
None of this makes sense. Rachev has been associate conductor at Philadelphia and directed the Juilliard Preparatory Orchestra. On paper, this guy can conduct. Could it be that he’s only worked with higher levels of players who arrive at rehearsals with parts down pat or have the sight-reading skills to handle technical problems?
Could Rachev for the first time be facing the problems of conducting an orchestra which is not fully prepared?
Eugene is a regional orchestra and its players show a somewhat wide range of technique and willingness to put in time before rehearsals. Could Rachev for the first time be facing the problems of conducting an orchestra which is not fully prepared? That might explain over conducting the first violin section in an expressive effort in performance. If Rachev read about himself (or saw a video) conducting one side of the orchestra, wouldn’t he make a change? He must be unaware of this problem. No top-notch conductor would make the mistake.
The image of Rachev that emerged was the ‘anti-Guerrero’— a non-authoritarian and easy going fellow who would prove more to the orchestra’s liking..
I’ve just seen Gustavo Dudamel in Los Angeles, the 29-year-old wunderkind and game- changer for classical music. Fair or not, all new conductors face comparison. Dudamel is in the big league of conductors. Marin Alsop, who got her start in Eugene, has long been too. Giancarlo Guerrero is fast on his way. Dudamel and Alsop are champions of new music. Guerrero is strong with 20th and 21st century music too, conducting at Eugene such works as Berg’s Violin Concerto and Adam’s Harmonielehre.
Now the Eugene Symphony has hired a conductor with no apparent commitment to contemporary music. Programming Mahler with Delius and Wagner, a program that called out for a contemporary work instead, was telling. I’d just head Dudamel pair the Titan with Adam’s newly commissioned City Noir. Alsop programs it with Bernstein’s Jeremiah Symphony. Alsop will conduct this summer a program called “The Music of Zappa and Glass.”
Compared with his predecessors, Rachev just isn’t in their league. Alsop and Guerrero were clearly big talents from the start. And Guerrero, especially, raised the technical level of playing dramatically. This step backward from Alsop and Guerrero will hurt this orchestra. Their audience had become accustomed to Guerrero’s snappy energy and higher level of performance. Coming seasons may offer answers and, hopefully, considerable change, but at the moment, Rachev in Eugene remains a puzzle.
Email this post