San Francisco Classical Voice

The playing vacillated between precise clarity and heavy pedal smears. The few mistouched notes and minor memory slips were of no importance. Everyone has them. (I've heard Rubinstein, Gilels and Cliburn have to stop and start a Concerto movement over again.) But the lack of dynamic contrasts and largely misjudged tempos were indeed a bother. Ilic tended to play slow movements impatiently, and many fast sections sounded too relaxed. Even so, the Chopin Preludes were by far the best thing he offered.

My overall impression was of a young pianist who loves music and yearns for a career, diligence at the ready. Depressing the keys in the correct order is one thing. Making music of that while doing so is quite another. What was on offer Friday evening simply did not sound ready for a prime time music career.

Rachmanov's Sunday recital was, on the other hand, a thing of virtuosity, concept and total professionalism. He began his studies in Moscow's Gnesins School, then moved to New York in 1977, obtaining two degrees from Juilliard, and his doctorate at the Manhattan School of Music. He has taught there for 15 years, but switched to Chicago's Roosevelt University two years ago.

His big program opened with an elegant performance of Mozart's Sonata in A Minor, K. 301 — which amounts to Mozart's “Appassionata.” That was followed by Schumann's “Carnaval,” Op. 9, Tchaikovsky's Theme and (13) Variations in F Major, finale to the composer's Six morceaux, Op. 19. For a finale, Rachmanov presented a sensational account of Rachmaninoff's flashy Variations of a theme of Corelli, Op. 42. It simply cannot be better played. The entire program was first rate, but the finale was awe inspiring.

The notes, yes, but the depth of concept was Rachmanov's main attraction. Tempos were right on the button — dynamics beautifully observed, timbre varied to the need of each composition — and his technical dexterity used only to serve the scores. The Mozart, for example, is uncommonly passionate among his piano works. Rachmanov filled that need with fire aplenty, but with a blaze always kept in check. This Sonata is passionate, yes, but it also needs to remain true to Mozart inner graces. That balance is tricky, and Rachmanov managed this with keen intelligence.

When necessary, Rachmanov also delighted in the pixy elements of the other three composers. The playful shyness in Schumann's Eusebius or the swooning flow of his homage to Chopin went well, as did the heroics in the finale march. My one disappointment was the rather dry-eyed playing of the “Chiarina” movement. It is, after all, a little love note to the composer's wife, Clara.

Tchaikovsky's set of variations on a tiny folksy tune, seemed programmed for curio value. It's a very rudimentary set of figuration studies over a tune which hardly varies at all. Still, Rachmanov made a good case for it, making it sound more important than it truly is.

Based on Corelli's chaconne on the famous La Folia, a tune that's been used for variations since the 15th Century, Rachmaninoff's 1931 set constitutes his farewell to solo piano writing. All sorts of composers used La Folia, from the famous, such as Bach, Liszt and Respighi, to obscure figures, such as D'Anglebert, Alessandro Scarlatti or Gretry. But Rachmaninoff took first place at table with his set, which is possibly his finest masterpiece. I have heard performances as fine as Rachmanov's in the past, but none better.