Last week, two very familiar faces returned to the New York Philharmonic; and the program consisted of two very familiar pieces. Those faces? They belonged to Zubin Mehta, conductor, and Pinchas Zukerman, violinist. It’s hard to remember a time when they weren’t big on the musical scene.

You have perhaps seen a famous film of youthful musicians in Schubert’s “Trout” Quintet. Mr. Mehta is the double bassist, and Mr. Zukerman the violist. The others are Daniel Barenboim, Itzhak Perlman, and Jacqueline du Pré. And the year was 1969.

Seems like only yesterday. Or does it?

Of course, Mr. Mehta went on to be music director of the New York Philharmonic, from 1978 to 1991. His tenure was a controversial one, and the charges were many: that the orchestra wouldn’t play for him; that performances were slipshod; that the conductor was weak in the central repertory. All of this seems ancient now — we might as well be talking about the Peloponnesian War.

And Mr. Mehta conducted very well on Friday morning. The orchestra played very well, too.

The program began with the Beethoven Violin Concerto, one of that composer’s best pieces, and one of the best pieces that anyone ever wrote. Mr. Mehta’s handling of the opening was extraordinary: The music was leisurely, but not flabby. The playing was free, but not undisciplined. A high standard would be maintained throughout the concerto. Mr. Mehta sculpted the music superbly.

And everything was exceptionally clear, from the first beats of the timpani on. In fact, I heard notes, rhythms, and harmonies in this very familiar score that I had never quite noticed before. Best of all, Mr. Mehta seemed thoroughly engaged and unbored by the concerto. He must have conducted it a thousand times.

Then again, if you’re tired of this piece, you might as well pack it in, immediately.

And the soloist, Mr. Zukerman? The overall effect of his performance was better than its details — which is infinitely preferable to the opposite. In the first movement, he missed notes, made squeaks, offended pitch. And his phrasing could be very stiff: For example, some of his pauses came off as full-blown fermatas.

But Mr. Zukerman is a worthy musician, and he knew what he was doing. He emphasized the beauty in this concerto, producing one of the most beautiful accounts you will ever hear. His conception was slightly Romantic, and occasionally he lapsed into soup. But this was justifiable and likable Beethoven.

The slow movement, which is marked Larghetto, was not too slow, thankfully — Messrs. Zukerman and Mehta seemed to honor the difference between Largo and Larghetto. And the soloist demonstrated a pleasant, musical matter-of-factness. In his phrasing, he was far more natural than in the first movement.

In the third — that delicious Rondo — Mr. Zukerman was just a little thick-fingered, and short on playfulness. But he did creditably.

I have a beef, however, against both soloist and conductor: The final two notes of the concerto were very slow, and very drawn out. This struck me as terribly illadvised, and I wish they would reconsider.

Final notes — and other notes — aside, this was a deeply satisfying performance of the Beethoven Violin Concerto, as I have indicated. And, when it was over, the Avery Fisher Hall audience exploded in applause. This is not supposed to happen at a Fridaymorning concert. The reputation of these audiences is for sleepiness.

And, after intermission, Mr. Mehta led the Philharmonic in Stravinsky’s “Rite of Spring.” Now, this is not exactly a morning piece (although it was about 12:15 when the orchestra got to it). This is more a nighttime piece, full of wildness and savagery (to go with quietude and mystery).

But, at any time of day, Mr. Mehta knows his way around “Rite,” and he returns to it often. One of the best accounts I have ever heard came from Mr. Mehta and the Israel Philharmonic Orchestra, in Washington, something like 10 years ago.

And he was surefooted on Friday; so was the New York Phil. This is a virtuosic piece, and the players were up to the task. You have heard more exciting, more dazzling, and more throttling performances. Mr. Mehta avoided extremes, and you might say that this is a piece that calls for extremes. But, though Mr. Mehta was measured and sane, he wasn’t dull. Not even close. “Rite” was in its glory.

By the way, Mr. Mehta had the Israelis play an encore, on that day in Washington. It was one of the most interesting encore choices I have ever witnessed. After a tumultuous “Rite of Spring,” Mr. Mehta came out and led the orchestra in a waltz from Tchaikovsky’s “Swan Lake.” The playing was exquisite, and the effect was stunning. Mr. Mehta should do it again.