United States Shostakovich, Mahler: Kirill Gerstein (piano), San Francisco Symphony / Paavo Järvi (conductor). Davies Symphony Hall, San Francisco, 6.2.2025. (HS)
Shostakovich – Piano Concerto No.2 in F major
Mahler – Symphony No.7 in E minor
Paavo Järvi has not conducted the San Francisco Symphony for twenty years, which may explain why it took a while for two rarely performed works by A-list composers to find their footing. On Thursday evening, the first of three performances of Shostakovich’s Piano Concerto No.2 and Mahler’s Symphony No.7 turned out well enough to make for a pretty juicy concert, even if technical details did not always fall into place.
Credit the musicians, in particular pianist Kirill Gerstein playing the concerto and superb contributions from members of the orchestra in an eye-opening, glorious finale to the symphony, especially the entire brass section and timpanist Edward Stephan.
Shostakovich wrote his Second Piano Concerto to show off the technical abilities of his son Maxim as the eighteen-year-old lad was concluding studies in Moscow. With its compendium of technical challenges, the piece has been characterized as ‘a series of études’, and it can sparkle with its vigor and the composer’s signature snark. It worked for Maxim, and it did so for Gerstein here.
The opening movement marked Allegro but taken at a breakneck pace, spotlighted Gerstein’s technical command and buoyant sense of rhythm. The orchestra galloped after the soloist gallantly, if somewhat fuzzily; the pulse would not have been easy to discern were it not for the soloist’s crisp attack.
The second movement (Andante) conjures up echoes of Tchaikovsky and Rachmaninoff in its stillness, its gentle sense of motion and the lovely melody. Gerstein’s touch and the balances with the orchestra made it into soothing respite. The rambunctious finale, also marked Allegro, charged ahead even faster than the opener. Once again, Gerstein was up to the task but Järvi couldn’t quite get the orchestra together until nearly the end. A section in seven beats to the measure finally got the rhythms in sync, perhaps because it is a bit unusual. The piece sailed to the finish crisply.
As an encore, Gerstein offered smooth legatos and supple phrasing in Rachmaninoff’s Melodie in E major, a nice referral to the slow movement of the concerto and a welcome change of pace.
The Seventh Symphony, the least performed of Mahler’s (even the posthumous Symphony No.10 gets more performances), had its moments. Although Järvi did not convey a clear arc in his conducting of this episodic, five-movement work; though he executed each segment, each turn of the corner, with fealty to the score.
In the lengthy first movement, Mahler’s signature marches and impressions of nature emerge asymmetrically to make it feel unsettling. The tunes, intoned by a baritone horn, cellos and woodwinds as they move through the orchestra, were intriguingly executed. The momentum may have lumbered, but it came to a chillingly quiet finish.
Previous performances by this orchestra may have brought out more of the spectral shadows of the Scherzo and differentiated the effects of the two ‘night music’ movements surrounding it, but Järvi painted gauzy pictures. Especially good was the Andante amoroso, which serenaded nicely.
The finale took off with a bang – literally. Edward Stephan’s enthusiastic execution of the vigorous opening measures was almost a mini concerto for timpani, and it launched the movement into high gear. The brass had a blast too, delivering a series of bracing fanfares and sardonic flourishes. Percussion added to the build-up with chimes and cymbals galore. More to the point, there was serious momentum to the pace, as the movement edged toward its big climax.
Even the tricky ending, which seems to hesitate, surge forward and then stop again, fell into a place. It hit the right feeling. It was like a hard-earned victory.
Harvey Steiman