MIT Symphony Orchestra’s second fall concert is a veritable display of technique
Adam Boyles conducts MITSO through Shostakovich and Tchaikovsky, with Justin Yamaguchi ’28 as violin soloist
Photo provided by Adam Boyles
★★★★☆
Shostakovich’s Violin Concerto No. 1, Tchaikovsky’s Symphony No. 5 in E Minor
Conducted by Adam Boyles
Justin Yamaguchi ’28 on violin
Kresge Auditorium
Nov. 21, 2025
For its second concert this fall semester, the MIT Symphony Orchestra (MITSO) presented “Dark Fates,” a show outlining two independent journeys from darkness to light. Indeed, Shostakovich and Tchaikovsky have similar principles at their core; while separated by a wide stylistic gulf, both composers are united in the intense drama of their works and in their full-bodied character associated with the Russian style of composition. In Shostakovich’s essay entitled “Thoughts about Tchaikovsky,” he cited Tchaikovsky among his influences, remarking on the “definite and profound purpose in everything he wrote.”
Of course, differences still pervade — most notably, the Violin Concerto’s fourth movement is laden with tumult. Although the concerto ends in A major, the piece is not nearly as valedictory as the ending of Tchaikovsky’s Symphony.
Justin Yamaguchi ’28 deftly brought out the immense weight and tragedy of the Violin Concerto. Alternating between plaintive and burlesque, he skillfully demonstrated a wide gamut of timbres, from the husky triple and quadruple stops of the second and fourth movement to the pure high tones of the first and third. In particular, his blending was superb, in the most meditative and plaintive passages as well as in the most virtuosic of runs. Yamaguchi did these effortlessly, blowing through measure upon measure of sixteenth notes and double stops. Yet, throughout the concerto, he stopped just short of fully letting the music run free; the well-projected climaxes felt somewhat restrained even when the music was at its most intense and leering moments.
On the other hand, conductor Adam Boyles brought out the accompanying textures well. The shining string and wind hazes of the first movement and the powerful Klezmer-like climax of the second movement stood out as two of the orchestra’s finest moments. Only slight tensions between the orchestra and the soloist could be felt, as certain anticipations and uncertainties in transitions and balance occasionally popped up. Fortunately, these did not significantly affect the overall gravity of the work.
After an uplifting encore and a short intermission, Boyles returned to conduct Tchaikovsky’s Symphony No. 5. He finely steered the orchestra through challenge after challenge, from the substantial runs, expressive cross-rhythms, and melodic pile-ups to the delicate soli, while consistently bringing out the famous “fate” motif. The grand climaxes filled the entire hall with a reverberant sound, and the orchestra delivered melody after melody with moving and profound effect.
However, just like Yamaguchi in the first act, the orchestra seemed to have held back, as certain climaxes were restrained. Some of the humor was lost to a focus on precision, with only the timpani going headlong and thus drowning the orchestra out. Nevertheless, Boyles effectively imparts to all listeners the beautiful and expansive fairy tale latent in the work — something that is always a welcome diversion from the tedium of the Institute.