Alexey Osipov, Christoph Croisé, Oxana Shevchenko — Bern, 2024-10-13
Schubert / Brahms
Villa Morillon, Bern, 2024-10-13
2024-10-25 — Original posting
Kammermusik im Morillon — Zusammenfassung
Schubert und Brahms im Morillon
Die Musik
Table of Contents
Introduction
Venue, Date & Time | Villa Morillon, Bern, 2024-10-13 11:00h |
Series / Title | Musik im Morillon — Klaviertrio-Matinée |
Organizer | Morillon Park, Bern |
Related Concert & Media Reviews | Concerts featuring Christoph Croisé Concerts featuring Oxana Shevchenko Media featuring Christoph Croisé Media featuring Oxana Shevchenko Reviews featuring Schubert’s Piano Trio No.2, D.929 Reviews featuring Brahms’ Piano Trio No.1, op.8 |
Framework / Context
By Swiss standards, Morillon is a large country estate on the southern outskirts of the city of Bern. It was first established in 1736. The Villa Morillon, a stately mansion, built between 1832 and 1834, is the central part of a complex of several buildings set in a large park. The complex passed through the hands of various Bernese aristocratic families. In 2021, the heirs of the last owner sold the property to the wealthy entrepreneur, investor, philanthropist and patron Hans Widmer (*1941). The new owner restored / renovated the complex in cooperation with the authorities for the protection of historic buildings and monuments.
The upper floor of the mansion (along with one of the annexes) will now be rented out as offices. The ground floor, on the other hand, is devoted to cultural events, such as exhibitions, concerts and other performances. These activities are typically with free admission. The patron does not see this as commercial enterprise. The venue cannot be rented by third parties. This concert was part of the first season of cultural activities at Villa Morillon.
Building and Concert Venue
The architecture of the building was inspired by the Villa la Rotonda near Vicenza, a famous Renaissance villa, one of the prominent masterworks by Andrea Palladio (1508 – 1580). Just like that model (although in smaller dimensions), the Villa Morillon features a square symmetrical plan with a projecting portico on each of the four facades.
The mansion is surrounded by a large English garden, with extensive lawns and a population of respectable trees of various species. The two outbuildings have also been restored/renovated (one of which now houses the architectural firm responsible for the renovation/preservation). Outside the tree population, on the edge of the park, Hans Widmer plans to add residential buildings and space for commercial use.
Naturally, the interior of the building reflects the external symmetry. From the central hall, a beautiful symmetrical staircase leads to the first floor gallery. In the center, the ceiling opens to a square stained glass panel at the base of the glass pyramid at the top of the roof.
The concert hall extends into the southwestern portico. A bright room with Renaissance stucco decoration and a beautiful, well-preserved ancient parquet floor, sealed with beeswax. For this concert, the hall had about 70 seats in 6 rows.
The Artists
Alexey Osipov, Violin
The violinist Alexey Osipov (*1993) grew up in St.Petersburg, Russia. He graduated from the Special Music School of the St.Petersburg Conservatory, where his main teachers were Vladimir Ovcharek (1927 – 2007) and Vera Dobrinina. Alexey Osipov completed his education with Bachelor and Master degrees at the HEMU – Haute Ecole de Musique in Lausanne. There, he studied with Pierre Amoyal (*1949) and Svetlana Makarova Vernikov (*1981).
In Switzerland, Alexey Osipov met the Kazakh / Russian pianist Oxana Shevchenko who was also studying in Lausanne at the time. The two artists married in early 1987 and settled in St.Petersburg, where Alexey Osipov accepted a position with the St.Petersburg Philharmonic Orchestra. For the following years in Alexey Osipov’s career and his (and his family’s) life full of surprises see below.
Christoph Croisé, Cello
The French-German-Swiss cellist Christoph Croisé (*1993) does not need to be introduced in this blog — I have written several reviews featuring this artist, see the links above. In recent years, Christoph Croisé has pursued a career as soloist and chamber musician. At the same time, he has begun to compose, broadening the scope of his activities. He plays an Italian instrument built in 1680. One of Christoph Croisé’s most important chamber music partners over the past 10 years has been Oxana Shevchenko:
Oxana Shevchenko, Piano
Oxana Shevchenko (*1987) was born in Almaty, Kazakhstan where she also received her first piano lessons. She continued her education and graduated in Moscow. Further studies took her to London, Lausanne, and Rome (see her Web biography for details). In 2017, she got married and settled in St.Petersburg, where she gave birth to two children. When I re-introduced her in a review on a solo recital two years ago, the last previous review dated back 4.5 years. And the world looked very different already then—a lot had happened, and this inevitably had its severe effect on the artist and her family.
Because of the war in Ukraine, the young family fled St.Petersburg. After a journey through Estonia and Turkey, they ended up in Haifa, Israel. Alexey Osipov was appointed Associate Concertmaster of the Haifa Symphony Orchestra, and the family became Israeli citizens. Little did they know that two years after the Russian invasion of Ukraine, they would once again be living in a country that was caught in the grip of a war. In the long run, however, Haifa was essentially a temporary shelter, and Alexey Osipov sought new opportunities in Europe. Indeed, he found a position with the Philharmonie Baden-Baden. In the spring of this year, the family moved to Baden-Baden, hoping to gain some distance and safety from the perils of our turbulent times.
The piano in this concert was a mid-size Bösendorfer grand.
Program
- Franz Schubert (1797 – 1828): Piano Trio No.2 in E♭ major, op.100, D.929
- Johannes Brahms (1833 – 1897): Piano Trio No.1 in B major, op.8
Setting, etc.
There were close to 70 people at this concert. I took a seat in the middle of row #5 (out of 6), in the back of the hall, next to the entrance. I wanted to have a balanced, unbiased view and soundscape. Not being familiar with the venue, I did not bring my “real” photo equipment. Not wanting to disturb the people in the audience, I only took pictures before and after the concert and (mostly) during the applause.
Concert & Review
Before the performance started, the patron, Hans Widmer greeted the audience with a short speech, introducing the musicians and their biography.
Schubert: Piano Trio No.2 in E♭ major, op.100, D.929
Composer & Work
Franz Schubert (1797 – 1828) did not turn to the genre of the piano trio until near the end of his life. He must have felt that this type of chamber music had been exhaustively covered by Franz Joseph Haydn (1732 – 1809), Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart (1756 – 1791), and Ludwig van Beethoven (1770 – 1827). The confirmation for this: only after Beethoven’s death in March 1827, Schubert wrote his two piano trios. The Piano Trio No.1 in B♭ major, op.99, D.898, was completed in 1828 and published only in 1836, long after the composer’s death. The Piano Trio No.2 in E♭ major, op.100, D.929, dates from November 1827 and was published in late 1828, shortly before Schubert’s death. Apparently, it was one of the few of his late compositions that Schubert heard performed before his death. The work is in four movements:
- Allegro
- Andante con moto
- Scherzo: Allegro moderato — Trio
- Allegro moderato
The Performance
I. Allegro
Clarity, a natural (not ambitious) tempo, and an equally natural attitude characterized the entire first movement, right from Schubert’s “grand opening statement”, the main theme: one immediately felt “at home” in this interpretation. An excellent start to the trio recital!
Piano
In many ways, the interpretation of the Allegro proved to be representative of the entire first half of the concert. Oxana’s Shevchenko was the clear leader at the piano: there was never any doubt that she was in control, effortlessly mastering the brilliant runs / parades of her part, demonstrating excellent clarity and precision in articulation while remaining differentiated in dynamics. These are qualities I have admired in her playing ever since I first heard her 10 years ago. This leading role is written into the work: Schubert clearly composed it “from the piano part”. There is more to be said about the choice and role of the piano—see below.
Cello
As Oxana Shevchenko’s long-time chamber music partner, Christoph Croisé fit naturally into the ensemble. He was never pushing the sound or trying to dominate, but maintaining a proper balance, especially with the violin. Still, from the back of the room, I occasionally felt that the cello deserved a little more presence in relation to the piano. Perhaps I was just a little disappointed that we (obviously) did not hear the beautiful Goffriller instrument that Christoph Croisé played a few years ago?
Violin
This was my first direct encounter with Alexey Osipov in a live performance. With his experience as an orchestra musician and his spouse playing the piano, it was to be expected that Alexey Osipov would integrate seamlessly into the ensemble. Indeed, throughout the concert, there were hardly any (even very minor) coordination issues. In the Schubert Trio, however, he gave the impression of being a bit shy, his playing sounded slightly defensive in tone and articulation, and especially in the p / pp his vibrato occasionally sounded somewhat nervous. I felt that the violin part often deserved a stronger presence in the ensemble. The lack of volume was not a matter of not using enough bow. Rather, the violinist applied very little bow pressure, hence the violin sound sometimes lacked firmness, especially in p and pp.
In the aftermath, I learned that this was the first public performance of Schubert’s Trio D.929 by these musicians, which probably explains the somewhat cautious approach in the string parts.
Finally: the musicians did not repeat the exposition. I always find this regrettable: the repetition helps the listener to “understand” the form. But OK, it also lengthens the concert, and I don’t know if the musicians were under a time limit.
★★★½
II. Andante con moto
Above the calmly pacing piano part, Christoph Croisé introduced the melancholic, slightly sad C minor theme with a soft, gentle sotto voce tone. The vibrato was perhaps a little too prominent. In my opinion, extra vibrato adds little to expressiveness and can even be distracting. Where the strings took on an accompanying role, the piano exhibited perfect tuning in the cantilena in octave parallels. But although Oxana Shevchenko definitely played p / pp, the instrument produced at best mf (see again the note below), and the strings sounded underrepresented, fragile. The imbalance was equally pronounced when the piano part consisted of repeated semiquaver chords in the descant.
A highlight of the interpretation was in the middle part in C major, where the piano builds to a climax in hemidemisemiquaver tremolo, the strings now in octaves and f. There were some very slight intonation problems in the octaves (a consequence of the prominent vibrato?), but one could almost see this as fitting the dramatic expression at the climax.
★★★
III. Scherzo: Allegro moderato — Trio
Here too, the strings often move in octave parallels. The intonation was largely flawless—yet the two instruments didn’t always sound like one voice. I suspect that this was largely due to a very subtle lack of coordination. There were also instances where the cello produced “belly accents” in staccato crotchets that made it sound as if the voice was lagging behind.
As noted above, this was the first public performance of this piece for the ensemble. The interpretation will surely grow with future performances. This probably prevented the movement from being approached with more calm, coolness and sovereignty (and coherence). This also would have made it possible to bring out the humor, the wit (or is it perhaps bittersweet sarcasm born of despair?) in the Scherzo.
I really liked the Trio: atmospheric, disciplined, moody, perhaps a little grumpy, played with “one single voice”—a first highlight of this concert!
★★★½
IV. Allegro moderato
Excellent tempo choice in this movement! Oxana Shevchenko opened the movement at a refreshing pace (allegro), engaged, concise, with acuity, maintaining tension (moderato!) from the first notes. The strings followed suit in the same spirit—and Schubert’s piano textures in the theme allowed the strings to maintain their presence even with this (oversized) piano.
In the C minor variation (L’istesso tempo, Alla breve), the strings were very subtle and diligent in the pp leggieramente. Unfortunately, the Bösendorfer proved to be too dominant and prevented an adequate pp accompaniment. This was not the case in the last part of the variation, where the roles are reversed. In the second variation (E♭ major, 6/8) the balance remained slightly tilted toward the piano. However, this allowed the listener to enjoy Oxana Shevchenko’s flawless, brilliant “Mendelssohnian” semiquaver runs up and down the keyboard. Where the strings take over these runs, the cello sounded somewhat underrepresented, but Alexey Osipov (finally) had a chance to take a leading role and demonstrate his agility.
Variations or a Hidden, “Inverted” Rondo?
In the second theme (minor key, split time) with the repeated quavers, the tempo was slightly faster. This made me take note of the ensemble’s excellent tempo management and handling of rubato. I liked the sudden darkening of the mood, the sense of menace in the B minor (!) variation. There, Alexey Osipov again took the opportunity to assume the lead role with his expressive playing. A few bars later, Christoph Croisé’s equally expressive, somber and melancholic cantilena caught the listener’s attention. Unfortunately, the violin’s pizzicato was largely overshadowed, making this a duo for cello and piano with descending quaver figures.
The balance issues (dominance of the piano) continued through most of the following virtuosic episodes. After a dramatic transition section (6/8) with staccato quavers, the second theme (Alle breve with repeated quavers in the right hand and the strings) returned. Oxana Shevchenko maintained the tension by switching to a faster pace again. I felt that Alexey Osipov had left behind his reserve, the initial signs of shyness. He was now playing much more (pro-)actively. Only occasionally, in p / pp passages, his tone deserved a little more firmness, presence (not primarily volume!) and definition.
Of course, the final instance of the second (Rondo) theme was again slightly faster. The return to the original tempo for the coda was unnoticeable and natural. The music seemed to relax, to withdraw temporarily, only to release all energy in the brief, grandiose closing gesture. This was undoubtedly the best movement in the performance.
★★★½
The Right Kind of Piano?
The Bösendorfer grand was undoubtedly in excellent condition in terms of tuning, internal balance, response and projection. For this music, however, this instrument was clearly inadequate, its sound often too bulky (in relative terms). Schubert’s writing assumes and requires a period instrument, an early 19th century fortepiano. This would offer more color, a more intimate sound, and the ability to play proper pp and sotto voce. With such an instrument, a proper acoustic balance (especially in a chamber music setting) can easily be achieved without the string instruments pushing the volume. In other words, with the given instrument, the only (partial) remedy is for the strings to increase the volume.
In this performance, however, the piano was a given, and with it the relative dominance of the instrument. This meant that the “burden” of the interpretation rested largely in Oxana Shevchenko’s hands—and she filled that role masterfully, to the point where the listener was tempted to focus exclusively on her playing! Her artistry allows her to cope with far greater adversities.
Overall Rating: ★★★½
Brahms: Piano Trio No.1 in B major, op.8
Composer & Work
Johannes Brahms (1833 – 1897) was 21 when he composed his Piano Trio No.1 in B major, op.8. The premiere was in 1855, in Danzig. Many years later, 1889, the composer reworked the trio to a degree that it is often regarded its own work (No.4). This second version premiered 1891 in Budapest. That’s the version we heard. The differences between the versions are obvious already from the annotation and the number of bars:
Original version (1854):
- Allegro con moto – Tempo un poco più Moderato – Schnell (494 bars)
- Scherzo: Allegro molto – Trio: Più lento – Tempo primo (459 bars)
- Adagio non troppo – Allegro – Tempo primo (157 bars)
- Finale: Allegro molto agitato – Un poco più lento – Tempo primo (518 bars)
Revised version (Neue Ausgabe, 1889):
- Allegro con brio – Tranquillo – In tempo ma sempre sostenuto (289 bars)
- Scherzo: Allegro molto – Meno allegro – Tempo primo (460 bars)
- Adagio (100 bars)
- Finale: Allegro (322 bars)
The Performance
Not surprisingly, the artists followed the tradition observed by most ensembles today by choosing Brahms’ second, revised version of the Trio in B major, op.8. Christoph Croisé addressed the audience with a few words. He mentioned that the ensemble had rehearsed not only in Oxana Shevchenko’s and Alexey Osipov’s new home town of Baden-Baden, but actually in the very building (Brahms House, Lichtental No.8, now a museum) where the composer spent his long summers between 1865 and 1874.
Right from the first notes, the warm, rounded sonority of the Bösendorfer grand, the textures and harmonies so typical of this composer immediately transported the listener into Brahms’ spheres. The piano proved to be far more appropriate for this music. Brahms’ pianos had a rather different sound, but in volume and general characteristics, they were much closer to Oxana Shevchenko’s instrument than the pianos Schubert was familiar with. This made it much easier for the ensemble to maintain an internal balance with the instrument at hand.
I. Allegro con brio – Tranquillo – In tempo ma sempre sostenuto
What a different experience this was from the Schubert Trio! It was as if the artists had been directly inspired by Brahms’ summer retreat in Baden-Baden. Aside from the aforementioned favorable configuration, it soon became clear that the artists felt “at home” with this music. The balance was indeed much better—not only because of the piano, but also because Alexey Osipov’s tone was firmer, his playing more proactive, and he now seemed more confident. The two string instruments worked in mutual agreement, well matched and in excellent harmony with Oxana Shevchenko’s piano playing. The overall impression was one of excellent ensemble playing. While the piano remained essential, it didn’t seem to take the same dominant leading role as in Schubert’s trio.
Christoph Croisé was the first to take up the theme from the piano, and it was also thanks to Brahms’ circumspect writing that the warm (occasionally slightly nasal) tone of his cello came to full fruition. For my taste, his vibrato was rather strong—but in the late 19th century the use of vibrato was quite common (unlike in Schubert’s time).
The same can be said of Alexey Osipov’s vibrato. The violin projected well over the entire range—in the upper register the tone was occasionally a little hard. My main concern, however, was a tendency to produce Nachdrücken (an undesirable swelling at the end of a long note as the right hand accelerates to reach the end of the bow).
Unfortunately, as in Schubert’s first movement, the ensemble skipped the repeat of the exposition.
★★★★
II. Scherzo: Allegro molto – Meno allegro – Tempo primo
Here, it’s the cello that opens the movement—and Christoph Croisé presented the Scherzo theme at a rather ambitious tempo. The problem was not with the coordination, but with the frequent pairs of upbeat quavers, which were often (at least for the audience) barely discernible as such. This affected not only the strings, but also the piano: these quavers seemed to be at the limit of what the piano’s mechanics would allow.
In the Meno allegro, it is the piano that sets the pace, and Oxana Shevchenko opted for a pronounced contrast—the “meno” leaves plenty of room for interpretation. Together with the strings playing in the descant register, the Bösendorfer sounded rather bulky, “thick”, at least in the bass. After the concert, Oxana Shevchenko told me that she would have preferred a different instrument, such as a Fazioli.
After the Meno allegro, Christoph Croisé’s entry into the Tempo primo seemed even faster than the beginning of the movement. In fact, the tempo relaxed very slightly in the following bars. Still, the Allegro molto felt slightly pushed. I would have preferred a more playful, relaxed approach.
★★★½
III. Adagio
Such beautiful, serene, peaceful music! The piano plays the solemn, chorale-like theme with chords at both extremes of the keyboard. The strings form a close duet, at first without accompaniment (between chorale episodes), later on top of the piano part. Their part seems simple—but the mutual accord and intonation are very demanding, as this duet is very exposed. I can only say that this part was excellent—unperturbed pleasure and enjoyment!
In the following section Christoph Croisé presented the very expressive melody (G♯ minor) with a lot of vibrato—to the point where the vibrating became a distraction. When Alexey Osipov joined the cello part, however, the vibrato was more acceptable. Again, the Bösendorfer sounded rather dark, if not somber. However, its sonority was undeniably beautiful, very well balanced and rounded, melodious.
The challenge in this movement is not technical, but musical. Namely, keeping the tempo while maintaining the tension. In this respect, the performance in this concert was excellent, even exemplary.
★★★★
IV. Finale: Allegro
For once in the Brahms Trio, the piano (pp) seemed too dominant in relation to the cello part (p). The pp on the piano was what the instrument could produce—but the cello could, should have shown more presence. This was just an impression from the beginning of the movement. Later, even when the piano part became very expressive and rhapsodic, I felt that the strings had definitely “found their voice” compared to the beginning of the concert (Schubert). This movement was, of course, ideally suited to Oxana Shevchenko’s virtuosity and expressiveness, her immense technical reserves.
★★★★
Overall Rating: ★★★★
Conclusions
The performance of Johannes Brahms’ op.8 was truly impressive, coherent, consistent. The interpretation of the Schubert Trio in the first part of the concert could not compete with the second half of the concert. There are two main reasons for this. First, the ensemble’s lack of experience with this work, but also the acoustic imbalance caused by the Bösendorfer grand piano, which is far too massive for Schubert’s textures and style.
Acknowledgement
The author would like to thank Oxana Shevchenko for the invitation to this concert, and to the organizer, Morillon Park, for free admission to this concert.