Lots of Sax (11/1/14)

Manhattan Saxophone Quartet | Adolphe Sax 200th Birthday Celebration

Dr. Jordan P. Smith, Andrew Steinberg, Daniel Kochersberger,
Jay Rattman

Premiere Quatuor (1857), IV. Allegretto – Jean-Baptiste Singelée (1812–1875)
Quartette (1879), I. Andante, II. Allegro – Caryl Florio (1843–1920)
Ragtime Suite (arr. 1974), I. Pan-Am Rag, Tom Turpin (c.1914), III. The Cascades, Scott Joplin (c.1904) – Arthur Frackenpohl (b. 1924)
Saxophone Quartet (1932), II. Canzona Variée Variation – Alexander Glazunov (1865–1936)
Andante et Scherzo (1938) – Eugene Bozza (1905–1991)
Rondo (1970) – Zdeněk Lukáš (1928–2007)
Saxophone Quartet (1995), IV. – Philip Glass (b. 1937)
The Revivalist (2012) – Alex Burtzos (b. 1985)

As we can see, the pieces were played in chronological order (by composition date, with the exception of the two rags). And this program was, in nature, a sampler—only selected movements from larger works—giving us a broad overview of the oeuvre for saxophone quartet. My notes for the first piece include, “Haydn-like but with a fuller, richer sound. Quite jaunty, classical but slightly oddly so.” And that can pretty much be said of all of the pieces, to some extent. Four saxes can create a powerful sound, especially when the chords are set to “ringing,” similar to ringing chords of a barbershop quartet (I know whereof I speak).

In the saxophone history department, the Florio was the first American quartet. In addition to its rich, fluid sound, it also introduced higher pitches (very pleasant) from the soprano sax. The rags were pure fun, creating a nice bridge from the classical era to the jazz era. They made me think of an old-time, outdoor bandstand or music gazebo. The Glazunov was, indeed, variations on a tune that was laid out chorale style and then embellished in different ways.

After intermission, the Bozza was more modern, with obvious nods to Debussy; it also included some of those creepy-crawly-French chords so often found in music coming out of the Paris Conservatory. And it took us into the realm of more modern woodwind writing, with rippling accompaniments and rhythmic burbles.

The jump to the Lukáš (1970) was extremely noticeable. It was solidly modern, with strikingly dissonant harmonies and intervals. The composition had harsh qualities and almost an “in your face” sensibility. The Glass that followed was minimalist, as expected. At first I thought it would be a toss-up between Lukáš and Glass, but I actually liked the Glass better—slightly more structure, and it was shorter.

Before the final piece (and the composer was in the house), we were thanked for coming to the concert, and, more so, for coming back for the second half. Not everyone did. The Revivalist’s seven movements were supposed to be representative of episodes in the life of an organist/choirmaster. Some of that came through, but not as fully as I would have wanted. There were some interesting ideas, still it was hard to take seriously (and maybe it wasn’t supposed to be?).

The playing all afternoon was really quite good, though a saxophone quartet is a bit of an acquired taste. This sampler-style concert made a lot of sense and gave us a view of the saxophone’s 200-year history. This may have been my maiden voyage with the Manhattan Saxophone Quartet (or the second time I’ve heard them). I’d probably attend again, especially if I had an opportunity to know a little bit more about what would be on the program. Once again, though, I’m glad I had this experience.

ConcertMeister