Review: Alexander Shelley Conducts Tchaikovsky (and Tchaikovsky)

Alexander Shelley

Patrons who attend the Houston Symphony this week are in for a surprise and a treat. But the treat ought come as no surprise.

The surprise is that Augustin Hadelich was unable to travel to Houston to perform the Bartok violin concerto that had been scheduled. We get an all Tchaikovsky performance conducted by Alexander Shelley. Buy a ticket and go.

The treat is that our soloist, for the second week in a row, comes from the ranks of the orchestra. Concertmaster Frank Huang steps out front on short notice and pulls a War Horse from his hip pocket.

As I said, this treat should come as no surprise. If the orchestra decided to do so, it could program an entire season of concerti performed by members of the orchestra. Lots of people play golf and lots of people make music. But to be in an orchestra on the level of our Houston Symphony is the musical equivalent of aspiring to play on the PGA Tour.

"These guys are good."

(Ladies too, obviously, but the PGA marketing tag line is not a good fit for them.)

Shelley's performance in this mini-crisis was much more solid and impressive than his visit last spring. After the jump, a detailed review.




My last review of Mr. Shelley's conducting bemoaned an impression that he and the orchestra could not seem to get on the same page, causing the orchestra to play defensively and without confidence.

Well, nothing like a canceling soloist and a programming crisis to make people pull together.

Frank Huang

Tchaikovsky Violin Concerto

All performers alike pulled together on short notice to perform the Tchaikovsky Violin Concerto, and from my vantage point all performers shared a unity of purpose.

This is no small thing given the circumstances. It is not every violinist who can whip out a Tchaikovsky. And while understandably not flawlessly perfect, that is exactly what Mr. Huang did. His musicality, expression and tone were convincing, well-conceived and a pleasure to listen to.

Similarly, Shelley responded well to the change of program. No doubt he had spent many weeks in preparing and studying the Bartok, but he seemed completely untroubled in changing horses.

To be sure, there is no War Horse more well-traveled than the Tchaikovsky, but this is no guarantee that a conductor of Mr. Shelley's age and experience will have done it, or that it will be fresh and sharp enough to perform on only a few days' study.

None of that showed in the conducting. Mr. Shelley was a very attentive accompanist, and in this piece that is saying something. There is almost no part of the Tchaikovsky where one can simply "set it and forget it."

There are so many full stops and tempo changes and expressive rubato even within sections. Even though the piece is well known to the orchestra players, absent a good connection with the group, a piece like this can easily go off the rails.

It did not go off the rails. A couple of examples.

The opening bars to the piece require simplicity and naivety, but also nuance and a bit of rubato.

The strings, being so exposed, can easily sound sloppy or, failing that, wooden and hyper rhythmical in trying to stay together. But the opening here had nice character, lilt and relaxation, without sacrificing simplicity.

Another example. The third movement is furiously fast (especially as ably played by Mr. Huang) with sudden tempo changes like this:

And lots of hand-offs of the pulse between soloist and orchestra such as this:

A lesser conductor will be seen to beat time like crazy to try to keep all the trains running on time. But more often than not, such excessive gesticulation is an interference rather than a help. Less is more. And to his credit. that is what Mr. Shelley did.

Was it perfect? Transcendent? The whole performance? No. But was it good? Most certainly.

Tchaikovsky Symphony No. 5

The second half of the performance was taken up with Tchaikovsky's Fifth Symphony. Mr. Shelley, conducting without a score, showed thorough preparation and a solid understanding of how Tchaikovsky stitched the piece together.

From where I sat, the conducting seemed fine, Mr. Shelley being able to communicate exactly what he wanted and the orchestra being able to understand the gestures and provide it. Nevertheless, the performance was a somewhat mixed in its conception.

The opening to the first movement was very well paced and the clarinet soli very well played. Likewise, the waltz of the third movement was a proper dance, the tutti strings providing refined lilt and nuanced phrasing.

The main conducting hiccup happened at the first tempo change in the first movement, where it took a bit of time to get the strings all on the same pulse:

The tempi in the climactic passages of the first movement like this were quite fast:

Perhaps this is a matter of taste, but perhaps not.

The brass did a magnificent job of staying on top of the pulse and making Tchaikovsky's two-bar hemiolas work. With tempi that fast, all but the finest musicians will be late late late.  But "these guys are good."

Still, the hemiola works so much better at a slightly slower tempo. Similarly, brass has a tendency to become too clipped at breakneck speed, losing weight and heft and power. To my taste, that happened here as well as in the finale.

If I could presume for a moment, this brings me to a point of criticism for the orchestra. The string choir gave a satisfying and rich sound when Tchaikovsky called upon them for tutti melody, unencumbered by the brass section. But they seemed to me to go on holiday when the brass played with power.

Berlin Philharmonic Viola Section

I don't think it was a sonic illusion. I think their intensity dropped while the brass carried the ball. In my view they ought to be playing up to the brass, more intense, not less. The brass tended to cover them overly much, and the brass were not over blowing. It need not be so.

Watch the Berlin Philharmonic. One gets the impression that the musicians most likely to get into a fist fight in a bar sit in the interior string sections.

They tear. it. up.

Would that this were true here. I think they can play up--deeper and louder--than they often do. Consider this my vote of encouragement that they do so.

Dig in and play up. Bar fight if necessary.

But I digress.

Mr. Shelley's excessively fast tempi from the first movement continued in the second movement. Mr. Shelley can certainly justify his interpretation given that Tchaikovsky only marked the movement andante cantabile, and his tempo certainly was a walking and singing tempo. Still, there is a tempo change or expressive marking every bar, sometimes several, and the melody Tchaikovsky gave us wants more time for the sostenuto markings in the horn solo.
Bravo to Mr. Vermeulen on solo horn for some cantabile horn playing and for bending his own preferences to the desires of the conductor--not an easy thing to do with a piece of music like that.

Conclusion

I found Mr. Shelley a much more convincing candidate on his second visit. The performance was much more secure and musically satisfying. He is obviously an authentic musician and a conductor with a future.

So should he stay on the list?

Very very hard to say, and probably a closer call than with Orozco-Estrada. The mixed nature of his performances here as well as his age and experience level should justifiably give the search committee pause, as should his commitments in Nuremberg.

My vote (which does not count): listen to the musicians.

The musicians are the best source of information on whether Mr. Shelley is ready for a job like this. Depending upon what they say, maybe give him another look. If he's the one, have the courage and foresight to arrange a situation, perhaps with a principal guest conductor and mentor, where someone like Mr. Shelley is given the best possible conditions and chances for success.