Press
press
30.05.2026
Expansiveness and restraint: Vengerov and Osetinskaya at Carnegie Hall
Maxim Vengerov (violin) and Polina Osetinskaya (piano). Photo by © Chris Lee
United States Various: Maxim Vengerov (violin), Polina Osetinskaya (piano). Isaac Stern Auditorium, Carnegie Hall, New York, 27.5.2026.
Schubert – Violin Sonata in G minor, D.408
Shostakovich – Violin Sonata in G major, Op.134
Brahms – Violin Sonata No.3 in D minor, Op.108
Encores:
Brahms – Hungarian Dance No.17 in F-sharp minor (arr.Kreisler)
Tchaikovsky – Mélodie in E-flat major, Op.42, No.3
Prokofiev – March from The Love for Three Oranges
Kreisler – Miniature Viennese March
Fauré – ‘Après un rêve’, Op.7, No.1
In their fourth Carnegie Hall recital together since 2020, Maxim Vengerov and Polina Osetinskaya once again offered a characteristically well-considered program, juxtaposing the restrained lyricism of Schubert’s early Violin Sonata D.408 with the desolation of Shostakovich’s late Violin Sonata and the turbulent world of Brahms’s Sonata No.3.
Published posthumously as a ‘Sonatina’ for piano with violin accompaniment, Schubert’s D.408 inhabits a more restrained expressive world than the composer’s later essays in the genre. Vengerov and Osetinskaya nevertheless found considerable depth in the work. Vengerov’s dark sound and expansive phrasing brought a degree of restlessness to the opening movement, while Osetinskaya’s lean, transparent articulation preserved the work’s classical poise and sense of proportion. In the second movement, both performers favored restraint over sentimentality, Vengerov narrowing the violin line into something more fragile and withdrawn as the pianist shaped the accompaniment with understated elegance. The finale retained a light rhythmic buoyancy, though Schubert’s characteristic shifts between lyric grace and harmonic unease remained evident beneath the surface.
The recital’s central work, Shostakovich’s Violin Sonata, composed for David Oistrakh in 1968, belongs to the same late creative world as the final quartets and the Viola Sonata. It unfolds in a stark and unforgiving soundscape, its tense, often isolated gestures bound together by a sense of persistent unease. In the opening Andante, Vengerov employed a pared-down tonal palette, the violin line often appearing suspended in space, emerging from silence only to retreat back into it. Osetinskaya’s bare octaves and hollow sonorities created a sense of harmonic emptiness without ever sacrificing clarity of texture.
The central Allegretto shattered the restraint. Vengerov’s attacks bit harshly into the strings, while the movement’s grotesque dance rhythms and pounding piano chords took on the character of a danse macabre. Osetinskaya was especially impressive in the movement’s massive chordal writing, producing orchestral weight without heaviness, while Vengerov matched her intensity in the frenetic violin writing.
The final Largo, constructed as a vast passacaglia, became the work’s culmination. Osetinskaya introduced the ground bass with dark, almost ritualistic gravity before the music expanded into increasingly complex variations. Vengerov maintained a tense, concentrated line, even as the texture slowly thinned. The extended cadenzas for piano and violin functioned less as displays of virtuosity than as moments of isolation, each instrument briefly left alone before being reabsorbed into the passacaglia’s steady progression. By the closing pages, where fragments from the opening movement returned in ghostly suspension, the music no longer seemed to conclude so much as dissolve into ambiguity. The final tremolos and fading harmonics left the hall in an unsettling silence.
After the emotional severity of Shostakovich’s music, Brahms’s Violin Sonata No.3 arrived as a release of accumulated tension. Vengerov and Osetinskaya treated the work not as intimate chamber music but as a drama of compressed symphonic scale. The sottovoce opening of the first movement quickly gave way to Vengerov’s expanded sound, with a richer vibrato and broader dynamic range. Osetinskaya’s darkly weighted left hand gave the piano writing unusual breadth, anchoring the movement even as its tensions steadily mounted. In the restless development section, where Brahms fragments his material into unstable exchanges between the instruments, the pressure accumulated through constantly deferred resolution. Yet the same expansiveness that gave the performance its momentum occasionally came at the expense of transparency, obscuring details of Brahms’s intricate interplay.
The Adagio revealed the strengths of the duo’s approach most convincingly. Vengerov’s tone acquired a burnished warmth, particularly in the lower register, while Osetinskaya responded with playing of remarkable suppleness and control. Brahms’s long melodic lines were given space to breathe and expand.
The brief third movement offered a moment of respite, Osetinskaya bringing elegance and rhythmic precision to its lighter textures. The inale launched forward with restless urgency, its jagged rhythms and abrupt changes of character sustaining a relentless drive. Vengerov embraced the turbulent rhetoric with characteristic abandon while Osetinskaya provided a firm structural foundation beneath the surging climaxes.
Several encores offered a final survey of the duo’s expressive range, from the exuberance of Brahms’s Hungarian DanceNo.17 and Prokofiev’s March from The Love for Three Oranges to the lyrical warmth of a Tchaikovsky Mélodie and Fauré’s ‘Après un rêve’.
By Edward Sava-Segal for Seenandheard-international.com
All materials of the “Press” section →
Schubert – Violin Sonata in G minor, D.408
Shostakovich – Violin Sonata in G major, Op.134
Brahms – Violin Sonata No.3 in D minor, Op.108
Encores:
Brahms – Hungarian Dance No.17 in F-sharp minor (arr.Kreisler)
Tchaikovsky – Mélodie in E-flat major, Op.42, No.3
Prokofiev – March from The Love for Three Oranges
Kreisler – Miniature Viennese March
Fauré – ‘Après un rêve’, Op.7, No.1
In their fourth Carnegie Hall recital together since 2020, Maxim Vengerov and Polina Osetinskaya once again offered a characteristically well-considered program, juxtaposing the restrained lyricism of Schubert’s early Violin Sonata D.408 with the desolation of Shostakovich’s late Violin Sonata and the turbulent world of Brahms’s Sonata No.3.
Published posthumously as a ‘Sonatina’ for piano with violin accompaniment, Schubert’s D.408 inhabits a more restrained expressive world than the composer’s later essays in the genre. Vengerov and Osetinskaya nevertheless found considerable depth in the work. Vengerov’s dark sound and expansive phrasing brought a degree of restlessness to the opening movement, while Osetinskaya’s lean, transparent articulation preserved the work’s classical poise and sense of proportion. In the second movement, both performers favored restraint over sentimentality, Vengerov narrowing the violin line into something more fragile and withdrawn as the pianist shaped the accompaniment with understated elegance. The finale retained a light rhythmic buoyancy, though Schubert’s characteristic shifts between lyric grace and harmonic unease remained evident beneath the surface.
The recital’s central work, Shostakovich’s Violin Sonata, composed for David Oistrakh in 1968, belongs to the same late creative world as the final quartets and the Viola Sonata. It unfolds in a stark and unforgiving soundscape, its tense, often isolated gestures bound together by a sense of persistent unease. In the opening Andante, Vengerov employed a pared-down tonal palette, the violin line often appearing suspended in space, emerging from silence only to retreat back into it. Osetinskaya’s bare octaves and hollow sonorities created a sense of harmonic emptiness without ever sacrificing clarity of texture.
The central Allegretto shattered the restraint. Vengerov’s attacks bit harshly into the strings, while the movement’s grotesque dance rhythms and pounding piano chords took on the character of a danse macabre. Osetinskaya was especially impressive in the movement’s massive chordal writing, producing orchestral weight without heaviness, while Vengerov matched her intensity in the frenetic violin writing.
The final Largo, constructed as a vast passacaglia, became the work’s culmination. Osetinskaya introduced the ground bass with dark, almost ritualistic gravity before the music expanded into increasingly complex variations. Vengerov maintained a tense, concentrated line, even as the texture slowly thinned. The extended cadenzas for piano and violin functioned less as displays of virtuosity than as moments of isolation, each instrument briefly left alone before being reabsorbed into the passacaglia’s steady progression. By the closing pages, where fragments from the opening movement returned in ghostly suspension, the music no longer seemed to conclude so much as dissolve into ambiguity. The final tremolos and fading harmonics left the hall in an unsettling silence.
After the emotional severity of Shostakovich’s music, Brahms’s Violin Sonata No.3 arrived as a release of accumulated tension. Vengerov and Osetinskaya treated the work not as intimate chamber music but as a drama of compressed symphonic scale. The sottovoce opening of the first movement quickly gave way to Vengerov’s expanded sound, with a richer vibrato and broader dynamic range. Osetinskaya’s darkly weighted left hand gave the piano writing unusual breadth, anchoring the movement even as its tensions steadily mounted. In the restless development section, where Brahms fragments his material into unstable exchanges between the instruments, the pressure accumulated through constantly deferred resolution. Yet the same expansiveness that gave the performance its momentum occasionally came at the expense of transparency, obscuring details of Brahms’s intricate interplay.
The Adagio revealed the strengths of the duo’s approach most convincingly. Vengerov’s tone acquired a burnished warmth, particularly in the lower register, while Osetinskaya responded with playing of remarkable suppleness and control. Brahms’s long melodic lines were given space to breathe and expand.
The brief third movement offered a moment of respite, Osetinskaya bringing elegance and rhythmic precision to its lighter textures. The inale launched forward with restless urgency, its jagged rhythms and abrupt changes of character sustaining a relentless drive. Vengerov embraced the turbulent rhetoric with characteristic abandon while Osetinskaya provided a firm structural foundation beneath the surging climaxes.
Several encores offered a final survey of the duo’s expressive range, from the exuberance of Brahms’s Hungarian DanceNo.17 and Prokofiev’s March from The Love for Three Oranges to the lyrical warmth of a Tchaikovsky Mélodie and Fauré’s ‘Après un rêve’.
By Edward Sava-Segal for Seenandheard-international.com
All materials of the “Press” section →