Recordings: Concerto No. 2 for String Orchestra

Just like the Concerto No. 1 for String Orchestra, this piece has done surprisingly well on disc, even though this piece is, similar to its predecessor, anything but popular. What I would give for a third recording of the Symphony No. 6 (Mr. Lindberg?).

As I mentioned in my previous post, I find this piece less than convincing as a whole, and I have found it rather difficult to put together a meaningful comparison of the recordings available. I guess in my young “career” as a classical music writer I’m not sure how to compare performances of music that do not entirely click with me.

Nevertheless, I encourage readers to explore this work and share their comments. Here goes…

Concerto No. 2 for String Orchestra

Nordic Chamber Orchestra

Christian Lindberg, conductor

BIS-CD-1690

This really is a tough one. Similar to their performance of the Concerto No. 1 for String Orchestra, I think Lindberg and the NCO are almost victims of how good they are. This performance is highly polished and very well played. However, given the relative reduction in conflict in this music (and isn’t Pettersson all about conflict in the orchestral works?) I wonder if Lindberg’s approach is just too “nice.” This is especially apparent in the 1^st movement, which to me almost sounds like it was played with classical-era lightness and transparency. The fragile beauty of the 2^nd movement is sensitively executed in Lindberg’s hands (just listen to the pianissimo he gets from this band). In the 3^rd movement Lindberg does start to dig in a bit, giving the music gruffness when required. Among the three recordings here, his Bartokian folk dance probably comes off the best. In the lyrical sections Lindberg also does well here, which is unsurprising given the high level of polish he brings to this music.

I cannot comfortably say that Lindberg’s take on this music really rises above or falls below his competition. As you will see below, each conductor brings particular strengths to this music, which differs from the others. Keep reading…

Concerto No. 2 for String Orchestra

Deutsche Kammerakademie Neuss

Johannes Goritzki, conductor

CPO 999225

Unlike the performance of the Concerto No. 1 for String Orchestra by these same forces, here Goritzki does dig in, making this music sound more “Petterssonian” than it actually may be. For example, listen to how the cellos attack the F#-C-B-F# lick (1:17) in the first movement, which allows a greater contrast when the same gesture is repeated shortly after. The 2^nd movement goes as well as Lindberg’s take. The 3^rd movement, surprisingly, doesn’t work for me here. For one thing, Goritzki takes the longest compared to the others, and this movement lasts too long to begin with. Despite the fact that Goritzki isn’t afraid to dig into this music, his folk dance actually seems pretty tame compared to Lindberg.

Concerto No. 2 for String Orchestra

Musica Vitae

Petter Sundkvist, conductor

Caprice CAP21739

Although Sundkvist brings a similar level of polish to this music as Lindberg, one thing which really sticks out in this performance is the timing. It is hands down the quickest performance compared to the others (Sundkvist shaves off at least a minute and a half in the 2^nd movement), which is a good thing considering how this music can sound unfocused at times. In the orchestral literature there are pieces which just need to be played short and sweet, and this approach yields dividends here.

Take the 2^nd movement for example. Although there is an elusive beauty to this movement, and one may want to savor the many harmonic turns and subtle dissonances, the music does meander a bit. Here Sundkvist doesn’t waste any time and conducts as if the whole movement is just a giant prelude to that wonderful final resolution. The 3^rd movement also benefits from this approach, although I wouldn’t mind him going a bit faster, but I can understand that the lyrical sections do need room to breathe.

Overall, I think Sundkvist has a slight edge here over the competition, but the other options mentioned above do adequate justice to this work, which is not necessarily Pettersson’s most inspired.

Concerto No. 2 for String Orchestra (1956)

By the time Pettersson wrote this piece he already had a fair amount of experience composing in large forms for orchestral forces—two completed symphonies (three if you include the first) and the Concerto for String Orchestra No.1. However, unlike the completed symphonies and the concerto, Pettersson had to wait over a decade for the first performance. In the summer of 1967, Pettersson was awarded a work scholarship from the Swedish Building Workers’ Union. In gratitude, the composer dedicated this piece to the union, as he had nothing else suitable at the moment. The premiere took place in December 1968 by Stig Westerberg and the Swedish Radio SO, just weeks after the successful premiere of the Symphony No. 7.

I find this concerto to be rather elusive compared to the other two, and after repeated listening this piece has grown on me a bit. Regardless, at this point I would readily take the other concertos over this one. One particularly striking feature of this concerto compared to the previous one is the lack of surface tension. Whereas the music in the first concerto always seemed to be in a state of conflict, Pettersson seems concerned with other issues here. One hears development and repetition of motives and rhythms, but not nearly to the same brutal insistence as say, the Seven Sonatas.

This work has a performance time of approximately 27 minutes, and like the other two concertos, is divided into three movements. The first movement, Allegro, begins with a downward angular gesture from the violins. Immediately after we get some Petterssonian repeated-note motives, but not of the violently insistent variety. Listen carefully and you can hear shadows of the coda of the opening movement of Sibelius’ icy Symphony No. 4. We are taken to a small lyrical island followed by chamber-music textures by solo strings. A song is heard among the busy counterpoint.

The second movement, Dolce e molto tranquillo, has a cold, distant beauty to it. Fragile pianissimo lines slow weave between each other in a shifting web of resolutions and quietly grinding dissonances. The final resolution to Eb minor (followed by a rather surprising morph into Ab major) is both beautiful and effectively done.

In the third movement, Allegro, Pettersson turns up the conflict meter, but also gives us plenty of rich lyricism. I hear a little Shostakovich (to me I hear the third movement of the Symphony No. 15) and also in the repeated major triads towards the end (String Quartet No. 3? Last movement of the Michaelangelo suite?). Listen for the gruff, rustic Bartokian folk dance. And of course, many listeners will notice Pettersson’s near direct quote of Barber’s Adagio for Strings. Immediately before this one can also hear the opening gesture from Barber’s Canzonetta for Oboe and Strings, which was actually written over two decades later (Could Barber have known about Pettersson??? Nah.) Unfortunately, this movement doesn’t sound very cohesive to me, and it does overstay its welcome a little, despite the many beautiful and interesting moments.

All in all, I find this work to be less than entirely convincing compared to the rest of the composer’s output. Nevertheless, as ANY Pettersson is worth your time, I encourage you to listen to this work and decide for yourself.

Vouz parlez Français? Ou vous pouvez lire Français?

Special thanks to Jean-Christophe Le Toquin for this one.

Like another knife to the heart of us anglophone Pettersson fans, here is yet another great non-English Pettersson resource at ResMusica.com, a French classical music website. Armed with my rusty French skills (several years of high school French, and a month living in Strasbourg studying at the Alliance Française) and my favorite French-English internet dictionary, here I go...