This concerto is only a little longer than the Vivaldi concertos and perhaps that's a good thing - it is not very interesting although Shaham plays it exceptionally well and does as much for it as can possibly be done.
"it is not very interesting TO ME", the "to me" was missing. "does as much as can possibly be done BASED ON MY TASTE IN MUSIC", the "based on my taste in music" was missing. To me, the violin sings beautifully in this concerto. Kabalevsky wrote the most beautiful orchestration to go with the solo violin part, in my view.
@@hjl1970-musica No,... if I am stating anything, it should be logical to understand that I am speaking from my perspective, my point of view. I am not here to state someone else's opinion other than my own. Why waste words? The thing is not interesting - I would not listen to it twice.
@@violinhunter2 I found this comment on another website: "In the Violin Concerto's discography, David Oistrakh is the dominant and mandatory figure. Kabalevsky wrote the work for Oistrakh to play, and his performance captures the colors and spirit of the music better than any other on record. To her credit, Mordkovitch is not far behind; she well identifies with the soulful 1st Movement, plays the 2nd Movement beautifully, and engages in a wealth of tonal shading. Järvi offers expert support, driving his orchestra one minute and luxuriating the next. With exceptional sound, this is a highly recommendable version. I have included the Shaham/Pletnev recording for comparison solely as an example of how not to play the work. Shaham's playing is rather boring with little characterization or variety of tone, and the 2nd Movement tempo is too fast to allow the music sufficient breathing room." You might want to listen to the other versions, Oistrakh and Mordkovitch. Just an idea. Got it from here: www.classical.net/music/recs/reviews/c/cha10011a.php
This concerto is only a little longer than the Vivaldi concertos and perhaps that's a good thing - it is not very interesting although Shaham plays it exceptionally well and does as much for it as can possibly be done.
"it is not very interesting TO ME", the "to me" was missing. "does as much as can possibly be done BASED ON MY TASTE IN MUSIC", the "based on my taste in music" was missing. To me, the violin sings beautifully in this concerto. Kabalevsky wrote the most beautiful orchestration to go with the solo violin part, in my view.
@@hjl1970-musica No,... if I am stating anything, it should be logical to understand that I am speaking from my perspective, my point of view. I am not here to state someone else's opinion other than my own. Why waste words? The thing is not interesting - I would not listen to it twice.
@@violinhunter2 I found this comment on another website:
"In the Violin Concerto's discography, David Oistrakh is the dominant and mandatory figure. Kabalevsky wrote the work for Oistrakh to play, and his performance captures the colors and spirit of the music better than any other on record. To her credit, Mordkovitch is not far behind; she well identifies with the soulful 1st Movement, plays the 2nd Movement beautifully, and engages in a wealth of tonal shading. Järvi offers expert support, driving his orchestra one minute and luxuriating the next. With exceptional sound, this is a highly recommendable version. I have included the Shaham/Pletnev recording for comparison solely as an example of how not to play the work. Shaham's playing is rather boring with little characterization or variety of tone, and the 2nd Movement tempo is too fast to allow the music sufficient breathing room."
You might want to listen to the other versions, Oistrakh and Mordkovitch. Just an idea.
Got it from here: www.classical.net/music/recs/reviews/c/cha10011a.php
@@hjl1970-musica Thank you!! I will do so.