As Adams House prepared for its annual stab at Dionysiac frenzy, more Apollonian-minded students--or, perhaps, just those whose parents were in town for freshman parents' weekend--assembled at Sanders Theatre for an evening with the Harvard-Radcliffe Orchestra (HRO). The attendance at the two events was probably about equal--Sanders was packed to capacity with at least 800 attendees, a number that even Martin Feldstein would envy--but the average age at HRO was probably a good 30 years older, as beaming parents and plain old Cantabridgians turned out for an evening of aesthetic elevation.

At least, that's what they thought they were in for. In fact, thanks to a distinctly odd choice of works for this first concert of the season, HRO presented more of a caricature of the Apollonian: lots of tuxedos, not much excitement. The program lacked a major, wellbeloved anchor work; the closest thing to a classical Top 40 hit was Beethoven's Leonore No. 3 Overture, which is popular but too short to build a concert around. It was followed by the distinctly sub-average Triple Concerto of Beethoven, and the interesting but comparatively obscure Symphony No. 1 of Shostakovich. In a word, this concert was not going to make any converts to Classical Music.

Things got off to a good start with the Leonore Overture, as HRO displayed some of the strengths which mark it as a serious ensemble: excellent tone and dynamics from the strings, shown to good advantage in the mysterious, scale-like string passages at the beginning; fine soloists, especially in the trumpet and flute sections; and an overall coordination, allowing for intelligent phrasing and pacing. It's evidently more difficult to find a whole section full of excellent wind and brass players, since these sections often strained to achieve an even tone and unified entries.

Then came the Triple Concerto. An alert reader of the program notes might have been put on guard by the admission that the piece "received negative criticism in its premier (1808), and to some extent to the present day." And understandably so, since it has a deadly combination of mediocre themes and an unncessary number of soloists; this means that each theme is heard at least three times in a row, from the cellist, the violinist, and the pianist, before it is allowed to die. The certainty of this repetition quickly becomes tedious, especially in the first and third movements. Indeed, the third movement, a jaunty Rondo alla polacca, repeatedly tests the listener's patience with cadences that sound like a conclusion, only to keep going and going.

What makes this programming choice even more eccentric is the fact that all three soloists were professional musicians, imported especially for the occasion. It would be at least understandable if HRO had chosen the piece to spotlight three student musicians: the division of labor, and the relative simplicity of the solo parts, would make it ideal for students. Indeed, it should have been possible to find a student pianist, cellist and violinist who were more than equal to the task--concertmaster Salley Koo '97, for example, who was outstanding in the Shostakovich symphpony.

Instead, the soloists were ringers: BSO cellist Martha Babcock, Boston Chamber Music Society violinist Lynn Chang, and pianist Luisa Vosgerchian, Harvard music professor emerita. The soloists were, of course, quite good, especially Babcock, whose lovely tone compensated for the poverty of her themes. Chang was, if anything, a bit too thin--though this effect may well have been due to Sanders' acoustics, which make it difficult to hear at the extreme edges of each tier of seats. Vosgerchian, meanwhile, was a beatific presence, smiling and swaying joyously throughout; even what appeared to be a nasty fall, on the way to receiving her applause, didn't change her expression.

After a first half that seemed to stretch on too long, it was perhaps wise to choose Shostakovich's brief, energetic First Synphony to round out the program. The piece's vocabulary was quite different than the Beethoven which had come before, with angular themes, surreptitious-sounding pizzicati, and highly percussive tutti throughout. This idiom seemed to bring out a better side of the orchestra, which took the difficult rhythms in stride, found the wit in some of Shostakovich's jazz-inflected themes, and produced an impressive tone in the louder passages. Maybe HRO felt some affinity with the piece, which the composer wrote as a senior project at the age of 18 (and you think you work too hard on your thesis). Or maybe the orchestra is just more comfortable in the twentieth century; in one concert last year, it seemed to do better in Petrushka than in a simpler piece by Wagner.

So if it wasn't the most stellar evening in HRO's history, it was by no means a black mark, either. Let's be thankful for the sheer potential of the orchestra, and keep our fingers crossed for a more appealing program next time out: perhaps something for the Brahms centenary next year? He did write a Double Concerto, after all.