I've seen Ozawa conduct the Shin Nihon Philharmonic twice now, and he,
and the band under his leadership, have been tremendous both times.  This
leads me to believe that perhaps, given that most of those criticizing him
seem to be referring to his performance with the Boston Symphony (or is it
Philharmonic?) that maybe,for reasons of history, bad chemistry, boredom or
what have you, he's no good *with that orchestra*, but that he's still able
to make sparks fly when working with other groups.

Ozawa and the Shin Nihon Philharmonic opened tonight's concert with Haydn's
Symphony Number 39.  Ozawa didn't wait for the orchestra to get settled
before making a grand entrance, but rather strolled in along with the small
group of musicians, very much one off the gang.  This set the tone that was
to be carried over into the music which had very much the intimate feel of
a chamber symphony as it might be performed in a chamber in one's house
(assuming one had a large chamber).  Ozawa did not use a baton and did
not stand on a box.  The band used modern instruments, and the sound was
mellifluous, but at the same time had a crispness which I've come to
associate (and enjoy) with period instruments.  Each movement of the
symphony was tight and bristling with wit.

The Haydn was just an appetizer, though, for Bruckner's second symphony.
I entered the hall as one to whom Bruckner has yet to speak (my fault,
not Bruckner's).  Ozawa's account, however, had this non-believer riveted;
I enjoyed it as much as any Bruckner I've heard, and more than most.  In
fact, this concert is my first Bruckner experience to date which made me
feel that I might like to devote more time this composer.

In preparation for the concert I listened to Georg Tintner's version of the
second on Naxos They tell me this is one of the best versions out there,
but I don't think it bettered the account I heard this evening.  The two
performances are not, however, strictly comparable because, of course,
one was live, and the other was a recording, and also because Tintner's
performance is of the 1872 version, edited by Carrigan, while Ozawa chose
to use the 1877 version, edited by Nowak.  It's probably blasphemy to say
so, but I felt the Nowak's placement of the Andante before the Scherzo
worked well.  Putting the scherzo in front of the Finale allows the
excitement to build from the beginning of the third into the massive fourth
movement rather than taking a break for the more sedate andante.  Is one
version thought to be closer to Bruckner's intentions than the other?

Has anyone had a chance to see Ozawa with the Saito Kinen Orchestra or with
any of the other ensembles he regularly works with? What did you think? All
I know is that the Ozawa I've seen with the Shin Nihon Philharmonic appears
to be a different artist from the one who performs with the Bostons.

Footnote:  The more critical friend with whom I attended the concert,though
very impressed with Ozawa's renderings, felt that one of the cellists was
"off" (I'm not quite sure what he meant) and also that one of the flutists
was also subpar.

Another Footnote: Tying this in with another thread, neither time I've seen
Ozawa has he used a baton (though he did stand on a box for the Bruckner).

Yours,

David Cozy
mailto:[log in to unmask]