My wife and I attended the performance of pianist Lang Lang with the New Jersey Symphony Orchestra at the New Jersey Performing Arts Center on Sunday, October 19, conducted by Neeme Järvi. The program was Weber’s Overture to Euryanthe and Chopin’s Concerto No. 1 in E minor for Piano and Orchestra and Concerto No. 2 in F minor for Piano and Orchestra, Op 21.
Before beginning this paper, I feel some background and perspective are in order. In my entire 45 plus (and we’ll leave it at that) years, I have never been to a Symphony Concert. I have never been to the New Jersey Performing Arts Center. I have had no interest in the past to attend a Symphony Concert because, quite frankly, I thought it would be boring. My musical tastes are more towards NewsRadio88 and the contemporary; however, I viewed this as being an opportunity to try something new. My wife attended with me and her feelings were generally the same. Our initial thoughts could not have been more wrong.
The overall concert experience from a logistics perspective far exceeded my expectations. Ordering tickets was simple via the internet. Access to NJ PAC from Northern New Jersey was quick and easy. Parking was directly across the street from NJ PAC and with the pre-paid voucher was no hassle. The local area in Newark seemed to be clean, safe and aesthetically pleasing. And on a Sunday the 20 mile trip took approximately 30 minutes door to door.
The venue was another part of the experience which exceeded expectations. As mentioned above, the local area is clean, safe and “nice”. The PAC is a beautiful brick and glass building with lovely landscaped grounds. When one steps inside, it’s almost like a continuation of being outside. The interior is designed with floor to ceiling glass through each level with the stairwells being on the inside core of the building. Each level has a small refreshment area with bistro style tables looking down on lower levels and again, outside. Servers were professional, courteous and efficient. During the concert we attended, there were large crowds yet everyone seemed to be served in a reasonable period.
The crowd movement and control was also very well thought out with ample access to the different levels. Staff was very helpful, professional and accommodating. One gets the sense that they are very welcome at the PAC, the staff make it seem like you are a guest in their home.
Once inside the venue, it looked just as I would have imagined a concert hall to be. Private balconies, the various levels, the richly toned woodwork surrounding the interior walls and the comfortable chairs all were as I would have expected. Lighting was perfect, the stage was very well illuminated with the rest of the interior softly lit so that the focus was on the stage but allowing the concertgoer not to lose sight of the entire hall. The stage was also as I had envisioned and just as we had learned in class. Each section was organized according to its intensity, neatly arranged around the conductor. The conductor, Neeme Järvi, was crisp and clear when directing the orchestra and very powerful. The orchestra seemed to be watching him and their instruments at the same time. Another interesting point was something I had noticed in the brass section. When the trombone player was complete with his piece, he placed his trombone in its case, closed the case and continued to sit in his chair, quite casually. It almost appeared as if he was done with his job and wanted to stay to watch the remainder of the performance. People in attendance at the concert were somewhat diverse in nationality and age and very similar in dress. Many spoke different languages, I recognized German, Polish, French and Yiddish or Hebrew along with others which I was not able to recognize. There were few minorities (non-white). I would estimate the age groups attending to be approximately 60% over 50, 25% between 30 and 50, 10% between 10 and 29 and the remaining 5% under 10 years old. There were even a few infants (less than 1 year old) in the audience. Dress was predominately business casual; men with slacks and sport coats, women in business suits or dresses. Younger adults were also neatly dressed, there were some (but very few) people wearing jeans.
The demeanor of the audience seemed to be one of enjoyment both pre, during and after the concert. I found it interesting that after the first section, some people started clapping and were instantly “hushed” by others in the crowd. I was advised pre-concert not to clap until after the work was totally complete and the best course of action was to wait for everyone else to start.
Members of the orchestra were not as I had expected regarding dress. The expectation was white tie and tails with evening dresses for the women. All the men had suits and tie which were all generally the same color. The women had black dresses, but again, the expectation was evening dresses, all the same. It’s important to note that this did not detract from the performance at all. The orchestra members were all rather relaxed prior to beginning each piece and when they were tuning their instruments they were speaking with each other and looked just generally relaxed. Just prior to and during the performance, however, it was amazing to see all of them focus on the conductor, bring their instruments (or bows for the string section) to the ready and just play all in perfect unison. The soloist, Lang Lang, was formally dressed, however, again I thought he would be in white tie and tails versus a suit with a turtleneck. He played with intensity and made broad motions with his hands, body and head while playing.
There were two compositions which I enjoyed just about equally. The Overture to Euryanthe by Carl Maria von Weber and the third movement in Concerto No. 1 by Chopin both struck me as being light, uplifting and moving.
The program states that the music in Euryanthe is based on Beethoven’s Leonore Overtures and is sonata-form based. It also points out that Weber was a cousin of Mozart’s (by marriage) so both Beethoven and Mozart would have influenced his work. Weber wrote the overture for a commissioned opera about Euryanthe in 1823, the beginning of the Romantic Period. It’s written in the Romantic style, but as noted, it seems like there is Classical influence. I believe I heard theme and variations in the overture which would give it some classical influence. I think there were variations in the dynamics and pitch which is from the Romantic so based on that and the time period the piece was written in, I would continue to support the piece being from the Romantic period.
The music was also almost terraced and had a skipping, adventurous and stately quality to it. I liked the soft and loud phrases also in the piece, the alternating held my attention and it seemed like this was not an easy thing to do. The conductor was also into the music at that point so it was an entire show vs. just music. It’s surprising that the overture is light because the basis of the opera is morose; cheating, poisoning and other killing is the basis. The music made me feel “good”, it was uplifting and powerful. It was like taking me on a journey – a happy one. The journey got a little rougher in the development where it made me feel like I didn’t know what was around the corner but it brought me back in the end.
I also enjoyed the ending or coda. It seemed like a traditional ending for a piece. It was in the tonic key, I have listened to the overture a number of times to see if I could determine the key tone from the beginning and end. I believe I was able to determine the distinct points in the piece where the exposition, development and recapitulation started and ended. Although I can’t read musical notation, I think I was also able to see that in the score. I think it was most evident in the development because there were new treatments of the themes, they were very different and there were “modulations to different keys” (Kamien 160).
The texture was homophonic; I thought that was clear because all the pieces moved together most of the time in harmony. I thought the piece moved together, with the exception of in the middle development. The rhythm was fast then slow then fast again. I didn’t catch any syncopation where there was a stress on a beat where there shouldn’t have been, it seemed like it all flowed very well.
The overture was performed by the entire symphony orchestra which consisted of approximately 68 people. There was no solo piece, it was all orchestra together. The score shows first violin, second violin, viola, cello, bassoon, contrabassoon, timpani, bass, trombone, obo, flute and clarinet. (Weber 1)
Regarding the performance, I enjoyed the entire third movement of Chopin’s Concerto No. 1 the most. The piece felt very energetic and light, something that one would want to listen to if they were in a good mood on a nice sunny day with little or no care. It almost had a bit of whimsy in it. One thing I did not understand was the one key (piano) which was struck twice seemingly off key. The orchestra in general, however, was in tune with each other. The members of the orchestra were very comfortable with playing, I particularly noticed the string players and they method in which they held their bows upright when they were not playing. The conductor was excellent in that he kept the sections in sync and to the layman it appeared to flow very smoothly and fluidly.
I enjoyed this performance the most because of Lang Lang. He was energetic and animated while playing Chopin, especially in this section and movement. The movement was Rondo (Vivace). The Rondo in the piece comes through loud and clear, the theme does return over and over. It was a bit hard to catch that however, I listened to the Harasiewicz CD a number of times to try to see the pattern and the best I could determine is that it was ABACABACA. It certainly is rich and was just very pleasant to listen to; one has to think that a pianist must have great skill in playing this music. I also thought I saw the conductor following the soloist versus the other way around (in both pieces in all movements).
In summary, I enjoyed the music of Weber’s overture the most and the performance of Chopin No. 1 the most. I think both were outstanding. I was also able to apply some of what we learned in class to the music, for example, I could follow the movements, I understood the texture to some degree, the rhythm and how the pianist was controlling the piano.
The composition I liked the least was the second movement in Chopin No 2 in F minor, Op 21. I thought it went a bit too slowly for my taste. It was done in the romantic style. Obvious evidence is that Chopin composed the work in 1830, 10 years into the Romantic Period. The work did not have any of the Baroque or Classical themes, i.e. I couldn’t discern a theme and it wasn’t “showy”. I did detect or “feel” the “unpredictability and melancholy” that our text references, again it just did not suit my taste. It felt like it dragged on for me, I didn’t really like the woodwinds as they played, however, I did like the piano and string sections in this movement.
This movement made me feel like I was kind of floating along, doing nothing. It didn’t evoke any strong emotion within me. That’s why I didn’t particularly care for the movement. I would surmise that if I was in a relaxed setting alone after a long day with a warm drink, I might enjoy this piece more than I did.
The above was also the performance I like the least. It appeared to me that more could have been done with all the members of the orchestra, they seemed to have a considerable amount of down time among all. The members of the orchestra did communicate well and were absolutely professional and in sync with each other and the conductor. As stated previously, I liked the fact that Lang Lang was animated in playing; in this piece he was more subdued. It almost seemed like this section was too easy for the orchestra members, it didn’t give them enough work to “show their stuff”.
This was the first symphony concert that I had attended as noted above. To summarize the entire experience, I absolutely and thoroughly enjoyed it. It was much more than I had expected and I believe the main reason is that I now understand (to some degree) what the music is about and how to listen to it. It’s interesting to try to discern the themes and music style and also to see how the composer tried to evoke emotions in people. For example; using crescendo and decrescendo bringing emotions up and down, using terracing to hold attention and logical endings are all ways that composers allow us to enjoy their works. I had mentioned that I liked Chopin’s No. 2, second movement the least. That is not to say that I didn’t enjoy it, I did. In fact, as I noted, in a different setting on a different day and different mood, I might have enjoyed that movement the most.
The symphony orchestra is simply amazing. All 70 some people playing perfectly together and not missing a beat is incredible along with the fact that there is no amplification. Our seats were in the fourth tier (they were the only ones left available) and we could hear the music clearly and plainly.
Logistics also play a role in the overall experience. The ease of getting to NJ PAC, it’s overall aesthetics inside and out and friendliness and helpfulness of the staff made the experience all that more enjoyable. Obviously the music is the main focus and the music is the music, everything else just makes the experience that much more pleasing.
I would and have recommended attending a symphony concert to everyone who will listen. I will be attending another concert in the near future, before the end of the year, and am certainly looking forward to it. Most importantly, I think that the idea of having the younger people in the class attend a performance by a symphony orchestra is excellent. If I had been exposed at an earlier age, I would have had a far greater appreciation for music. It does make one a more well rounded and balanced individual.