Hilliard Ensemble, classical review

Shoreditch Church, London

Michael Church
Tuesday 17 December 2013 13:53 GMT
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

Best known for their recordings of Arvo Part and their collaborations with Jan Garbarek, the Hilliard Ensemble are disbanding after four decades, but they are prefacing this full-stop with a year of concerts which began – 40 years to the day since their debut performance - in Shoreditch Church.

And they used that event to premiere “Poor Yorick”, an intriguing a cappella work by the British composer Roger Marsh. The text was a literary jeu d’esprit, the word-setting was deceptively clever, and the musical effects were muted but oddly entrancing: floating harmonies over a mournful walking bass, and all in a modal idiom with a medieval tinge.

But medieval music is what this group have always excelled at and, with their current membership of four augmented by four returners from previous incarnations, they presented a lovely panorama, beginning with organum by Perotin and continuing – with dips into plainchant - through music’s liberation into polyphony with Victoria and Byrd. The vibrant freshness of their singing, particularly in the lullabys, had Chaucerian charm; the only false note came with a Britten Canticle, whose conscious artiness jarred with the heartfelt directness and simplicity of everything else. Why didn’t they include some Part instead?

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in