Music
RSNO
Glasgow Royal Concert Hall
Michael Tumelty
Four Stars
I DON’T think I’ve ever met two people who felt precisely the same about a musical event, so this could be a minority opinion: for me, and my perception of Verdi’s Requiem, one of the colossal masterpieces of the choral repertoire, the RSNO’s performance on Saturday night, with its chorus in fine form, and the evening garlanded with outstanding soloists, was a blazing success, within a well-known limitation.
There were many factors in that success. Key among them was the pacing of the work by Mexican conductor Carlos Miguel Prieto. It was, overall, a nippy performance with a fast and fleet feel to it. There was no indulgence with opulence, even though I longed for Time to stop in the Offertorio at the soprano’s endless Sed Signifer and the tenor’s heartfelt Hostias. Prieto’s ceaseless sense of momentum also generated a tremendous feeling of integrity to the performance: despite its multiple sections within sections, this Requiem felt integrated and unified, from the battering impact of the Dies Irae to the utter calm of the Agnus Dei.
The singing throughout was tremendous, though, 26 years on, we have to admit that the Royal will simply never be a rewarding hall for choral singing: the sonorities and articulation on which the RSNO Chorus clearly worked so hard did not pay much in the way of dividends in this thankless vocal acoustic.
The soloists, soprano Evelina Doraceva, mezzo Elizabeth DeShong, tenor Edgaras Montvidas and bass-baritone Hanno Muller-Brachmann, were phenomenal, adding real top-drawer status to the event. It was a great night, and I came home heady, my favourite choral work ringing in the mind.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article