Star rating: ****
There is a straightforward reporting job to do on one aspect of the performance on Saturday night of Mahler's Third Symphony by Stephane Deneve and the RSNO. That is simply to record some extremely ropey playing from surprising quarters of the orchestra, notably the brass sections, including the principals.
This is not music criticism, nor even a matter of opinion. It was an audible and undeniable fact. I have not the faintest idea of the cause, whether it lay within the piece, Deneve's direction, or some other factor of which I'm unaware. Let's be clear, however: it is important. Contrary to popular opinion, we don't sit and count mistakes, or measure inaccuracy of intonation; but to hear this quality of playing from some of the most highly regarded musicians in Scotland was alarming.
That said, the gargantuan symphony, which runs at almost two hours without a break, was otherwise an unmitigated triumph for principal conductor Deneve and his Scottish brigade. Why? Two specific reasons: Honesty and integrity. Deneve neither overcooked nor over-dramatised the six-movement symphonic monster.
Moreover, he successfully reconciled the antithetical elements in the colossal first movement: its cellular fragmentation (not to put too fine a point on it) and its symphonic structure. He consistently refused to let the music, in any of its movements, wallow or sentimentalise. Personally, I'm of a wallowing disposition in Mahler, but I can't deny the effectiveness of Deneve's delivery, establishing a continuum of momentum through Elena Manistina's richly-sung Midnight Song, into the chiming purity of the RSNO Ladies and Junior Choruses, then, without pause, into a flowing and non-indulgent performance of the cathartic finale. Much for Mahlerians to think about.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article