The second half of Jan Lisiecki’s Wigmore Hall recital demonstrated the finest qualities of this much admired pianist; a keen poetic sense, good taste and an unflashy technical strength. His navigation of Chopin’s Op.28 set of 24 Preludes, one of the composer's greatest achievements, was truly impressive. Each of these shards of aural brilliance was characterised and coloured by Lisiecki using all the qualities listed above. Most miraculous was how he managed to project the whole set as a satisfying story. None of the individual pieces stood out or had the spotlight put on them, even the famous so-called “Raindrop” Prelude or the lyrical jewel in B minor. Every element in the performance was in balance, without ever feeling that it had smoothed out the brilliance of the writing. A landmark performance of a work that has received so many wonderful interpretations.
However, the opening curated sequence of works – all preludes running continuously – was less successful. The current trend for mixing a series of diverse works carries with it some risks. To achieve anything meaningful, the choice of works and their relationship to each other, needs to produce something that is more than the sum of its parts. For the performer, similar challenges abound, moving from style to style and trying to create some level of storytelling. The decision to focus on the prelude as a form, usually short and introductory, while an interesting concept, proved to lack substance without the continuity of one compositional voice.
The sequence began promisingly with the Chopin “Raindrop” Prelude, repeated later in it’s usual context, and the early standalone A flat Prelude. Moving on from there, Bach's C major Prelude that opens The Well-tempered Clavier was refreshingly pointed, but the segue into Rachmaninov's powerful D minor Prelude from the Op.23 set was less successful. Lisiecki’s Rachmaninov playing in all three of the works included were less impressive than his Chopin. Good taste and subtlety are not an ideal seasoning for the Russian master and the works were at times underpowered.
The early Szymanowski preludes betray their debt to Chopin and Liszt, fitting well under Lisiecki’s hands and into the sequence. His performance of three early preludes by Messiean was the least successful. The passionate mystery in these pieces was absent and the colouration in the first two was rather too wan. Their placement at the centre of the set becalmed proceedings. The later inclusion of the two spiky preludes by Henryk Górecki offered up some contrast, well projected.