★★★★☆ Ashkenazy and Ohlsson’s Emperor strikes in back-to-back Beethoven.

As part of a series of six all-Beethoven concerts this year, their former Chief Conductor, Vladimir Ashkenazy, makes a welcome return to the Sydney Symphony Orchestra. This latest concert, entitled Beethoven Triumphant involved an element of wistfulness for this reviewer, as Ashkenazy’s was the first version I ever heard of the Piano Concerto No 5 (Emperor). It almost felt like Ashkenazy – one of the greatest pianists of the 20th century – could have directed the first half from the piano, though the internationally acclaimed Garrick Ohlsson’s rendition was quite superb.

It is always curious when epithets such as Emperor are applied to musical numbers. As Toscanini said of the Eroica symphony, “To some it is Napoleon, to some it is philosophical struggle; to me it is Allegro con brio.” The great Viennese music critic Eduard Hanslick was equally scathing of programmatic titles and interpretations of “absolute music”. Beethoven himself was unaware that this moniker would be used for his concerto, though all the imperial elements are there: the E Flat Major key; the rippling arpeggios with which the piano opens the work; and the heavy string passages that define the exposition of the first and third movements, to name a few. That said, the first movement (Allegro) felt less like Napoleon’s headlong rush east than his army getting bogged down in the Russian winter. While Ohlsson was keen to press on imperiously, at times it felt like the orchestra was content to rest on its laurels, creating an off-putting lag between soloist and orchestra. The second movement was majestic, with Ohlsson’s interpretation affectionate and measured. His control of the walking trill passages was well synchronised with the accompaniment in the lower strings. The Rondo finale was again a little on the sluggish side, though Ohlsson’s virtuosity in the running flourishes more than compensated for this.

After interval the audience were treated to a second instalment of “triumphant” Beethoven, though it’s not altogether clear what makes the Fourth Symphony particularly triumphant. For some, almost every Classical and Romantic symphony is triumphant to the extent that it meets with resolution, consistent with the 19th-century vision of an arrival in heaven. It’s not really until Mahler’s nihilistic Sixth Symphony that a symphony can truly be described as un-triumphant. The other point is this: Schumann described the Fourth Symphony as “the Greek slender one”, seated as it is between the truly triumphant and revolutionary Third Symphony and the sturm und drang Fifth. If anything, the Fourth is notably restrained.

Triumph and defeat aside, Ashkenazy admirably steered the orchestra through the beguiling B Flat Minor introduction. The second movement was notable for the exchanges between clarinet, flute and strings, and the clarity of the horn playing. Ashkenazy here was able to extract a precise and exquisite sound from the orchestra; this really was some of the best playing of a slow movement I have heard from the SSO. The third movement was again a little on the slow side, though the Finale’s perpetuum mobile was riveting. It was said of the fourth movement of Beethoven’s Seventh Symphony that he must have been drunk when he penned it, such is its repetition and impetuousness. There are clear similarities between that movement and the Fourth’s Finale, and it provided for a highly entertaining denouement to the evening.