Q&A

REBECCA FRANKS talks to the German violinist about the unexpected secrets of Shostakovich’s autograph score

Why did you record the concertos on two different violins?

Back in 1998 EMI wanted me to record these concertos but for financial reasons the project was put on ice. I only returned to the First Concerto in 2012, and then came the idea to record it with Alan Gilbert. But we couldn’t find a date to do the Second until three years later. In February 2015 I had to give back my beloved ‘Lady Inchiquin’ 1711 Stradivarius [the bank that owned it failed]. That year I played ten different violins. It made me crazy, but that particular week I had the ‘ex Rodewalt’ Stradivarius, which suited the gloomy, kind of rough sound for Concerto No. 2

How did your view of the First Concerto change over the years?

I was a bit scared to release this recording. I had a microfilm of the autograph score and I found so many new things that were different from the famous David Oistrakh published edition. I’m his greatest fan, and I grew up with his recording. But there’s not this biting, dark, angry, fearful death-dance feeling that the symphonies or quartets have; he’s a great, very romantic violinist. In certain moments that’s not so fitting, especially in the cadenza and Passacaglia. Other players who played it afterwards were probably afraid of changing what he did. But with this new view you feel the incredible pressure, as Shostakovich knew that if this piece was found he would have gone to the gulag or prison.

How does the Second Concerto compare to the First?

You cannot compare as the First is a towering masterpiece and one of the best pieces Shostakovich ever wrote. Even the cadenza is a masterpiece. Yet the Second is still a great concerto and it has some incredible singing, lyrical things. It’s late Shostakovich and it’s a different atmosphere. In the First Concerto there’s hope and fear, in the Second there’s no hope. It’s gone forever. He’s already dead.