It is hard to believe how far prize­winning 20­year­old Ilya Gringolts has come since his excellent Paganini CD for BIS (8/99). His musical gifts are now formidable‚ his sound warm‚ if less immediately distinctive than‚ say‚ Vadim Repin or Nikolaj Znaider. In the Tchaikovsky Concerto‚ quite aside from some sublime dialogue with the superb Israeli woodwinds‚ he charts the first movement in such a way that the lyrical second subject takes on a hushed‚ other­worldly quality that’s quite unlike any other recording. It becomes the musical pivot of the movement. Put simply‚ his slow playing caresses‚ and his fast playing chuckles. Not for him the miniaturist attention to detail that so distinguished Nikolaj Znaider’s recent Prokofiev Second Concerto (RCA‚ 6/02) but an impish‚ coarse­grained way with faster running passages‚ with the odd smudged detail or slammed accent‚ woody­sounding but always spontaneous. It was just seven months ago when DG put out David Garrett’s Tchaikovsky Concerto under Mikhail Pletnev. Comparing the two finds Gringolts daring towards greater interpretative freedom while the more formal Garrett bows a consistently beautiful tone‚ less intimate in that second subject but better focused in the finale’s polonaise­style second subject. By comparison Maxim Vengerov‚ although technically formidable and often quite tender‚ seems just a little impersonal. Possibly Gringolts’ keenest rival is Repin‚ whose elegance and sweetly modulated tone palette make the best ‘modern’ job of the first movement’s tricky central passage where‚ between orchestral tutti‚ the soloist weaves the principal theme amidst a flurry of decorative embellishments. Here Gringolts is a little lacking in finesse. On balance‚ Repin would be my first digital choice for the Tchaikovsky but Gringolts’ playing is promisingly personal – a breath of fresh air‚ in fact. Of the various conductors involved‚ Itzhak Perlman offers the most genial accompaniment‚ Pletnev the most perceptive. The Shostakovich First Concerto poses far bigger challenges‚ principally in the ‘Nocturne’ first movement‚ which demands an unflinching control of line. Here Perlman is only partially successful‚ even from the opening bars which‚ when compared with say André Previn and the RPO for Viktoria Mullova‚ seem to meander. Time and again I found myself wondering whether what I was hearing was freedom or looseness. This music might be quiet and atmospheric‚ but it cries out for clear‚ well co­ordinated contours. Tension is often wanting‚ too‚ especially at the bridge between the close of the third movement’s big cadenza (where Gringolts fans the flames with barely checked impetuosity) and the finale where‚ as soon as the orchestra takes over‚ both the tempo and the temperature seem to dip. Compare Rostropovich for Vengerov or Nagano for Repin and you’ll soon focus on what’s lacking on this new recording. Gringolts is at his best in the cadenza and the spiky arguments of the second and fourth movements‚ and is at his least convincing in a rather pallid Passacaglia. At 7'55" into the first movement he seems to be struggling with some admittedly treacherous high­flying double­stops but even that wouldn’t matter if the orchestra had given him more urgent support. Mehta does better for Perlman himself (recording in the Mann Auditorium‚ 1988)‚ an imposing performance violin­wise‚ though even that doesn’t generate the terror and poetry that mark Mullova‚ Repin and Vengerov as exceptional. That Gringolts has a view of the piece‚ and a fairly strong one‚ is rarely in doubt but I would rather suspend judgement until I hear him under the baton of someone who has a more secure grip on the orchestral score. The Israelis play well for Perlman but they don’t sound especially ‘into’ the piece. So‚ a bit of a mixed bag‚ well worth trying for the sake of Gringolts’ budding skills and an individualistic account of the Tchaikovsky Violin Concerto. Both recordings report a quality solo fiddle and a tight‚ full­bodied orchestral profile‚ with more detail among the woodwinds than among the strings.