Time for Three (Nick Kendall, Zach de Pue, and Ranaan Meyer) -- they must be cool |
The group's shtick is crossover, fiddling around with bluegrass and country-western music, and Higdon went with that, seasoning the piece with a few blue notes, some folksy bends and open 5th drones, some down-home tunes. This harmless piece, uncomfortably close in feel to countless Windham Hill recordings and the film scores of Howard Shore, should be a huge hit on NPR although it was not as awful as Mark O'Connor. For some reason the trio played with amplification, although for the most part Higdon's large orchestra is kept to a minimum of sound while the soloists play. One of the risks for this kind of group dabbling in other music is that you have less time to keep your classical work honed -- I have noted it before and so have other critics. The trio's performance was viscerally exciting, cool and full of flair, but troubled by less than flawless intonation. They apparently played an encore after I left the hall to get an early start on intermission.
Tim Smith, BSO opens subscription concerts with fiery Tchaikovsky and crossover concerto by Higdon (Baltimore Sun, September 25) T. L. Ponick, Higdon's BSO triumph (Washington Times, September 28, 2009) Joe Banno, The BSO and TF3: Time for Energy (Washington Post, September 28) |
This concert will be repeated tonight (September 25, 8 pm) in Baltimore and tomorrow night (September 26, 8 pm) at Strathmore.
The encore you missed was more of the same fiddle work, just like the concerto, just minus the orchestra. The Tchaik was certainly the high point of the evening, although "I think the bass drum won", but that kept it exciting.
ReplyDeletepretty irresponsible for a critic to walk out before an encore. Next time perhaps consider doing your job well in stead of almost complete. I guess you should be credited however with not lying about the fact that you walked out. Oh and by the way, thanks once again for spreading more negativity in your writing - you should be proud.
ReplyDeleteActually, many critics never even mention encores, considering them as gifts to the audience and therefore not to be reviewed. There are some critics who always (or almost always) walk out at the end of the announced program so as not to hear the encores. I do generally stay for encores, writing about them sometimes but not always, and generally treating them differently as far as how I write about them.
ReplyDeleteSpreading more negativity? Should one never write anything negative in a review, for heaven's sake? Generally, a critic who finds only things to praise in what he reviews is not to be trusted. Either he is so poorly informed as not to know when something is bad, he has wishy-washy opinions about what he reviews and is not really sure what he thinks is good or bad, or he knows something is bad and is too spineless to say it.