One of the valuable things about RMCR is that you can get
recommendations for unfamiliar works and performers. Sure, there are
plenty of of other resources - Gramophone, BBC, Fanfare, Hurwitz etc,
but I appreciate getting the perspective of other enthusiastic amateurs
like me.
The other big advantage is the possibility here of having a dialog - opinions expressed often engender “lively” discussion - which can be very interesting.
But one issue is that when pianists are discussed there is often no elaboration as to why a particular performer is special - or is lacking. Obviously it is easy to say “pianist xxx is the best interpreter of Liszt” or “yyy doesn’t have a clue with Bach works” while it takes more
time to provide some details explaining why.
That brings up a subject - of which it is said “there is no accounting for” - taste. While words may fail to provide a complete explanation of
a person’s taste, they still can provide valuable input to help guide
our listening. If people here would provide some details about the
factors influencing their opinions, that would be helpful in determining whether to listen to particular performers.
First, of course one factor is that age-old controversy about
interpretation - should “the music speak for itself” or should the performer provide an individual perspective? Some might prefer a
version that is phrased to emphasize particular aspects, while others
might consider that excessively “mannered”.
Then there are issues relating to a performer’s technique. I don’t play the piano and I am therefore blissfully unaware of the technical
challenges. This may lead me to overlook versions where difficult
passages are fudged, or for me to hold in less esteem note perfect performances.
There are also issues relating to tempo and dynamics. We all get used to specific ways of pacing an interpretation - starting from our “imprint” version - and I find that this has an extremely strong influence on our preferences.
I’m sure none of this is new to anyone here, but what doesn’t seem to appear in recent threads is the specifics I’ve mentioned. I’ve heard it said that H. J. Lim is a special artist - but is it due to her unique phrasing, technical mastery, or some other factor? Alfred Brendel is
said to be “dull”, but would it be possible to point to a specific performance that is lacking?
I hope to get responses from the more knowledgable pianophiles here with
at least a few words about their favorites, ideally pointing to specific examples on YouTube. I'll also provide my perspective shortly.
I hope this will be useful- thanks in advance!
But one issue is that when pianists are discussed there is often no elaboration as to why a particular performer is special - or is lacking.
First, of course one factor is that age-old controversy about interpretation - should “the music speak for itself” or should the performer provide an individual perspective? Some might prefer
a version that is phrased to emphasize particular aspects, while
others might consider that excessively “mannered”.
Thanks for the quick replies and the partial answers! It would be great
now if you could pick a YT video of a familiar work and point out specifically how, for example, Ms. Lim is a superior interpreter.
On Sunday, November 6, 2022 at 7:04:10 PM UTC-8, Notsure01 wrote:
First, of course one factor is that age-old controversy about
interpretation - should “the music speak for itself” or should the
performer provide an individual perspective? Some might prefer
a version that is phrased to emphasize particular aspects, while
others might consider that excessively “mannered”.
The music cannot speak for itself any more than the printed text
of Shakespeare's Hamlet can speak for itself...
I hope this helps provide at least a partial answer to the
question.
dk
Shouldn't worthwhile judgments be explicit, justified and shared?
On Sunday, November 6, 2022 at 7:07:35 PM UTC-8, gggg gggg wrote:
Shouldn't worthwhile judgments be explicit, justified and shared?Nope. Stop trying to make rules for the rest of the universe.
Stick to your quotes.
dk
On Sunday, November 6, 2022 at 7:07:35 PM UTC-8, gggg gggg wrote:
Shouldn't worthwhile judgments be explicit, justified and shared?Nope. Stop trying to make rules for the rest of the universe.
Stick to your quotes.
dk
On Sunday, November 6, 2022 at 10:27:41 PM UTC-8, dan....@gmail.com wrote:
On Sunday, November 6, 2022 at 7:07:35 PM UTC-8, gggg gggg wrote:
Shouldn't worthwhile judgments be explicit, justified and shared?Nope. Stop trying to make rules for the rest of the universe.
Stick to your quotes.
dkYou asked for it:
- The true barbarian is he who thinks everything barbarous but his own tastes and prejudices.
William Hazlitt
On Sunday, November 6, 2022 at 10:27:41 PM UTC-8, dan....@gmail.com wrote:
On Sunday, November 6, 2022 at 7:07:35 PM UTC-8, gggg gggg wrote:
Shouldn't worthwhile judgments be explicit, justified and shared?Nope. Stop trying to make rules for the rest of the universe.
Stick to your quotes.
dkYou asked for it:
- The true barbarian is he who thinks everything barbarous but his own tastes and prejudices.
William Hazlitt
One can listen to the opus 68 Mazurkas all day, and yet, they're really not very good. They're scraps Chopin was unhappy with and after his death they were assembled under this opus number.
Some pianists (like Sokolov) play these pieces as if they are Chopin's famous last words, but they are on the contrary of a much earlier era.
The Mazurkas opus 17, 24, 30 up to the big monumental pieces op 59 are what it's at.
Also, what I don't quite understand, but I guess I'm not a pianophile; you listened extensively to these late mazurkas, found what you like and what you admire less. So why ask for guidance? You're your own guide.
My only qualification is that I love music, and have been collecting recordings since the 1960's.
Why even try to get others to like the things you like? How could that be anything other than egotism?
On Monday, November 7, 2022 at 10:00:49 AM UTC+1, Notsure01 wrote:
My only qualification is that I love music, and have been collecting recordings since the 1960's.
In that case you're as qualified as anyone here, perhaps even more, because you don't seem to be burdened with too many prejudices.
I then listened to Ashkenazy - and he was worse - little adherence to
the dynamic markings - not much contrast in the middle section. Other versions were better - Rubinstein(RCA), Kapell, Moravec, and
particularly Witold Malcuzynski was very good.
Here is an example of what would be ideal. I'm not expecting anything
this lengthy, but ideally there would be some detail. Thanks again!!
I’ll start with someone who has come in for criticism here -
Michelangeli. I don’t own many of his recordings as I am not a
pianophile (yet...), but I do have a live BBC recital and a Steinway
Legends album, The BBC includes an encore of the Chopin op. 68 no. 4
Mazurka (and this performance appears also on that great, enormous
Diapason collection of “greatest Chopin recordings” - 12 hr 49 min - download $19 - https://www.prestomusic.com/classical/products/8083151--chopin-piano-works
)
I thought since this mazurka is short - and a favorite of mine - I’d use it as an example. It is here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VL4_uD0Vp5U It seemed well played, with
a beautiful tone. I listened with the score and saw that he followed the markings. But in the end it seemed... unremarkable.
I then listened to Ashkenazy - and he was worse - little adherence to
the dynamic markings - not much contrast in the middle section. Other versions were better - Rubinstein(RCA), Kapell, Moravec, and
particularly Witold Malcuzynski was very good. (And the finer versios followed most closely the expression marks in the score. Curiously
enough the editor of the score I used, Jan Ekier, has a version on YT
where he mostly disregards (his own?) markings: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8jA848iMTlc )
Compare all these to Rachmaninoff’s version: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xuaax311aLY
It almost seems like a different piece - he plays it so expressively. Or
try the one that - acccording to my taste - is the best: Sokolov https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HuPVOMH8NsQ
While Ashkenazy makes the work seem to be trivial, almost banal, Sokolov
is so expressive, hypnotic, beautiful that it sounds like a masterpiece!
Based on this, it may appear that I don’t think very highly of ABM. I
do like his Scarlatti sonatas, but one other recording of his makes me
into an admirer - Debussy’s Childrens Corner. I have this version: https://smile.amazon.com/Steinway-Legends-Arturo-Benedetti-Michelangeli/dp/B000HEZBUS/
Golliwog is on YT in a similar performance: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pFkqVmIfPuo
To my taste this is energetic, perfectly phrased, exactly the right tempo…
On Monday, November 7, 2022 at 1:00:49 AM UTC-8, Notsure01 wrote:22&f=false
On 11/7/22 2:59 AM, Herman wrote:
One can listen to the opus 68 Mazurkas all day, and yet, they're really not very good. They're scraps Chopin was unhappy with and after his death they were assembled under this opus number.
Some pianists (like Sokolov) play these pieces as if they are Chopin's famous last words, but they are on the contrary of a much earlier era.
The Mazurkas opus 17, 24, 30 up to the big monumental pieces op 59 are what it's at.
Also, what I don't quite understand, but I guess I'm not a pianophile; you listened extensively to these late mazurkas, found what you like and what you admire less. So why ask for guidance? You're your own guide.I agree with much of what you are saying! I do realize that op 68 is an opus posthumous, and also feel that the (51!) mazurkas are not all the most interesting of Chopin's work. Op 68 no 2 was chosen by both ABM and Sokolov as an encore - so it apparently has some merit.
As for looking for guidance, I'm very well aware that although I write like a know-it-all blowhard, I'm not actually that knowledgeable about music.
Unlike many folks here I play no instrument, can't sing, and have no formal musical training!
My only qualification is that I love music, and have been collecting recordings since the 1960's.
I have definitely learned a lot of helpful information about music over all those years, and one way that this has happened is that I ask for advice from people like you that might know a performer or genre better.
Certainly in the end I will form my own opinions - but I still periodically question them - I'm NotSure...
(Here is one of my favorites of the many quotes I have found on RMCR: "I am sure of very little, and I shouldn't be surprised if those things were wrong." - Clarence DarrowAlthough Morin's book is almost 20 years old, what it has to say about Chopin's solo piano works may be of interest:
https://books.google.com/books?id=ayT5T59ckzIC&pg=PA222&dq=%22complete+recorded+editions+of+Chopin%27s%22&hl=en&newbks=1&newbks_redir=0&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiY9KTT9pz7AhWfM0QIHayNC_8Q6AF6BAgHEAI#v=onepage&q=%22complete%20recorded%20editions%20of%20Chopin's%
On 11/7/22 2:59 AM, Herman wrote:
One can listen to the opus 68 Mazurkas all day, and yet, they're really not very good. They're scraps Chopin was unhappy with and after his death they were assembled under this opus number.
Some pianists (like Sokolov) play these pieces as if they are Chopin's famous last words, but they are on the contrary of a much earlier era.
The Mazurkas opus 17, 24, 30 up to the big monumental pieces op 59 are what it's at.
Also, what I don't quite understand, but I guess I'm not a pianophile; you listened extensively to these late mazurkas, found what you like and what you admire less. So why ask for guidance? You're your own guide.I agree with much of what you are saying! I do realize that op 68 is an
opus posthumous, and also feel that the (51!) mazurkas are not all the
most interesting of Chopin's work. Op 68 no 2 was chosen by both ABM and Sokolov as an encore - so it apparently has some merit.
As for looking for guidance, I'm very well aware that although I write
like a know-it-all blowhard, I'm not actually that knowledgeable about music.
Unlike many folks here I play no instrument, can't sing, and have no
formal musical training!
My only qualification is that I love music, and have been collecting recordings since the 1960's.
I have definitely learned a lot of helpful information about music over
all those years, and one way that this has happened is that I ask for
advice from people like you that might know a performer or genre better.
Certainly in the end I will form my own opinions - but I still
periodically question them - I'm NotSure...
(Here is one of my favorites of the many quotes I have found on RMCR: "I
am sure of very little, and I shouldn't be surprised if those things were wrong." - Clarence Darrow
On Monday, November 7, 2022 at 6:26:00 AM UTC, Notsure01 wrote:just reveals a certain conception of masterpiece, one which involves complexity, expressiveness. This may not be shared. And the comment about "hypnotic" just shows that you were hypnotised when you listened to it, there's nothing generalisable. Remarks
Here is an example of what would be ideal. I'm not expecting anything
this lengthy, but ideally there would be some detail. Thanks again!!
I’ll start with someone who has come in for criticism here -
Michelangeli.
I thought since this mazurka is short - and a favorite of mine - I’d use >> it as an example.
To my taste this is energetic, perfectly phrased, exactly the right tempo…
Re the mazurka, I think your post is self centred.
All you have in the mazurka are a handful of different performances, with different characteristics. In some moods I may enjoy one more than another, some people may always enjoy one more than the other. Your comment about "sounds like a masterpiece"
On Monday, November 7, 2022 at 12:40:16 PM UTC-8, gggg gggg wrote:s%22&f=false
On Monday, November 7, 2022 at 1:00:49 AM UTC-8, Notsure01 wrote:
On 11/7/22 2:59 AM, Herman wrote:
One can listen to the opus 68 Mazurkas all day, and yet, they're really not very good. They're scraps Chopin was unhappy with and after his death they were assembled under this opus number.
Some pianists (like Sokolov) play these pieces as if they are Chopin's famous last words, but they are on the contrary of a much earlier era.
The Mazurkas opus 17, 24, 30 up to the big monumental pieces op 59 are what it's at.
Also, what I don't quite understand, but I guess I'm not a pianophile; you listened extensively to these late mazurkas, found what you like and what you admire less. So why ask for guidance? You're your own guide.I agree with much of what you are saying! I do realize that op 68 is an opus posthumous, and also feel that the (51!) mazurkas are not all the most interesting of Chopin's work. Op 68 no 2 was chosen by both ABM and Sokolov as an encore - so it apparently has some merit.
As for looking for guidance, I'm very well aware that although I write like a know-it-all blowhard, I'm not actually that knowledgeable about music.
Unlike many folks here I play no instrument, can't sing, and have no formal musical training!
My only qualification is that I love music, and have been collecting recordings since the 1960's.
I have definitely learned a lot of helpful information about music over all those years, and one way that this has happened is that I ask for advice from people like you that might know a performer or genre better.
Certainly in the end I will form my own opinions - but I still periodically question them - I'm NotSure...
(Here is one of my favorites of the many quotes I have found on RMCR: "I am sure of very little, and I shouldn't be surprised if those things wereAlthough Morin's book is almost 20 years old, what it has to say about Chopin's solo piano works may be of interest:
wrong." - Clarence Darrow
https://books.google.com/books?id=ayT5T59ckzIC&pg=PA222&dq=%22complete+recorded+editions+of+Chopin%27s%22&hl=en&newbks=1&newbks_redir=0&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiY9KTT9pz7AhWfM0QIHayNC_8Q6AF6BAgHEAI#v=onepage&q=%22complete%20recorded%20editions%20of%20Chopin'
What Morin said about Chopin's mazurkas:
https://books.google.com/books?id=ayT5T59ckzIC&pg=PA222&dq=%22complete+recorded+editions+of+Chopin%27s%22&hl=en&newbks=1&newbks_redir=0&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiY9KTT9pz7AhWfM0QIHayNC_8Q6AF6BAgHEAI#v=onepage&q=chopin%20mazurkas&f=false
On Monday, November 7, 2022 at 12:42:39 PM UTC-8, gggg gggg wrote:20Chopin's%22&f=false
On Monday, November 7, 2022 at 12:40:16 PM UTC-8, gggg gggg wrote:
On Monday, November 7, 2022 at 1:00:49 AM UTC-8, Notsure01 wrote:
On 11/7/22 2:59 AM, Herman wrote:
One can listen to the opus 68 Mazurkas all day, and yet, they're really not very good. They're scraps Chopin was unhappy with and after his death they were assembled under this opus number.
Some pianists (like Sokolov) play these pieces as if they are Chopin's famous last words, but they are on the contrary of a much earlier era.
The Mazurkas opus 17, 24, 30 up to the big monumental pieces op 59 are what it's at.
Also, what I don't quite understand, but I guess I'm not a pianophile; you listened extensively to these late mazurkas, found what you like and what you admire less. So why ask for guidance? You're your own guide.I agree with much of what you are saying! I do realize that op 68 is an
opus posthumous, and also feel that the (51!) mazurkas are not all the most interesting of Chopin's work. Op 68 no 2 was chosen by both ABM and
Sokolov as an encore - so it apparently has some merit.
As for looking for guidance, I'm very well aware that although I write like a know-it-all blowhard, I'm not actually that knowledgeable about music.
Unlike many folks here I play no instrument, can't sing, and have no formal musical training!
My only qualification is that I love music, and have been collecting recordings since the 1960's.
I have definitely learned a lot of helpful information about music over
all those years, and one way that this has happened is that I ask for advice from people like you that might know a performer or genre better.
Certainly in the end I will form my own opinions - but I still periodically question them - I'm NotSure...
(Here is one of my favorites of the many quotes I have found on RMCR: "IAlthough Morin's book is almost 20 years old, what it has to say about Chopin's solo piano works may be of interest:
am sure of very little, and I shouldn't be surprised if those things were
wrong." - Clarence Darrow
https://books.google.com/books?id=ayT5T59ckzIC&pg=PA222&dq=%22complete+recorded+editions+of+Chopin%27s%22&hl=en&newbks=1&newbks_redir=0&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiY9KTT9pz7AhWfM0QIHayNC_8Q6AF6BAgHEAI#v=onepage&q=%22complete%20recorded%20editions%20of%
What Morin said about Chopin's mazurkas:
https://books.google.com/books?id=ayT5T59ckzIC&pg=PA222&dq=%22complete+recorded+editions+of+Chopin%27s%22&hl=en&newbks=1&newbks_redir=0&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiY9KTT9pz7AhWfM0QIHayNC_8Q6AF6BAgHEAI#v=onepage&q=chopin%20mazurkas&f=falseThis 2018 article on recommended Chopin recordings may be of interest:
https://www.wqxr.org/story/20-essential-chopin-recordings/
On 11/7/22 12:43 PM, Mandryka wrote:just reveals a certain conception of masterpiece, one which involves complexity, expressiveness. This may not be shared. And the comment about "hypnotic" just shows that you were hypnotised when you listened to it, there's nothing generalisable. Remarks
On Monday, November 7, 2022 at 6:26:00 AM UTC, Notsure01 wrote:
Here is an example of what would be ideal. I'm not expecting anything
this lengthy, but ideally there would be some detail. Thanks again!!
I’ll start with someone who has come in for criticism here -
Michelangeli.
I thought since this mazurka is short - and a favorite of mine - I’d use
it as an example.
To my taste this is energetic, perfectly phrased, exactly the right tempo…
Re the mazurka, I think your post is self centred.
All you have in the mazurka are a handful of different performances, with different characteristics. In some moods I may enjoy one more than another, some people may always enjoy one more than the other. Your comment about "sounds like a masterpiece"
I think my post might be being misunderstood, so it may help to take a
step back. My hope in starting this thread was to request that folks
move beyond the way preferences for performers are being expressed here
by providing more details and ideally specific examples. (As I said in
my original post "Obviously it is easy to say “pianist xxx is the best interpreter of Liszt” or “yyy doesn’t have a clue with Bach works” while
it takes more time to provide some details explaining why".
The reason this is important to me - and I think helpful for others as
well - is that with the really enormous variety of performances readily available on YouTube, Spotify, etc, and with the limited amount of time available for listening, choices need to be made.
While I'm reasonably familiar with Beethoven sonatas, there are a few I don't know well. When I decide to listen to one of the unfamiliar ones,
do I choose Ashkenazy - or Lim - or Yves Nat - Backhaus - Gilels - or Brendel??
For most of them I know generally what to expect, but I know nothing
about Lim. One of the great things about RMCR is that when piano
recordings are being discussed we have the active participation of
really knowledgeable people like you, Dan, Arri and many others. When possible it would be great if when specific performances are being
discussed that some detail be provided.
But what motivated this specific thread is the opinions that Dan has expressed - quite frequently - about H. J. Lim's artistry and
"Brendull's" lack thereof. After I mentioned that more specifics would
be helpful, I thought I'd provide an example of what I had in mind.
In a different thread ABM got quite a bit of criticism:"..a perfect
soulless pianistic machine. Nothing more,
nothing less, and nothing else. No emotion,
no imagination, everything in the score, and
nothing beyond the score".
This seemed a bit .. harsh, so I thought I'd use it **as an example** of what I feel would be helpful in justifying such a strong opinion. As
I've shamefully admitted, I have no qualifications for assessing
pianists - I was hoping instead that the attempt on my part would
motivate the experts here to do their assessment.
My post about ABM is certainly "self-centered" but I did provide an
example supporting the notion that ABM (sometimes) plays "nothing beyond
the score" and then a -specific- counter example of an imaginative performance. When strong opinions are being expressed, my hope is that
Dan or you could provide something similar.
Look, I realize in the end our preferences cannot be expressed in words
- but what is the purpose of RMCR - if we don't at least try...
But what motivated this specific thread is the opinions that Dan has expressed - quite frequently - about H. J. Lim's artistry and
"Brendull's" lack thereof. After I mentioned that more specifics would
be helpful, I thought I'd provide an example of what I had in mind.
On Monday, November 7, 2022 at 10:06:02 PM UTC+1, Notsure01 wrote:
one way of looking at these matters is that DK just has no idea what he's talking about, doesn't matter what the subject is.
But what motivated this specific thread is the opinions that Dan has
expressed - quite frequently - about H. J. Lim's artistry and
"Brendull's" lack thereof. After I mentioned that more specifics would
be helpful, I thought I'd provide an example of what I had in mind.
Once you've figured that out, everything falls into place.
one way of looking at these matters is that DK just has no idea
what he's talking about, doesn't matter what the subject is.
But what motivated this specific thread is the opinions that Dan
has expressed - quite frequently - about H. J. Lim's artistry and "Brendull's" lack thereof. After I mentioned that more specifics
would be helpful, I thought I'd provide an example of what I had
in mind.
On 11/7/2022 4:55 PM, Herman wrote:
On Monday, November 7, 2022 at 10:06:02 PM UTC+1, Notsure01 wrote:
one way of looking at these matters is that DK just has no idea what
But what motivated this specific thread is the opinions that Dan has
expressed - quite frequently - about H. J. Lim's artistry and
"Brendull's" lack thereof. After I mentioned that more specifics would
be helpful, I thought I'd provide an example of what I had in mind.
he's talking about, doesn't matter what the subject is.
Once you've figured that out, everything falls into place.
How is a disinterested third party to decide whether
Dan doesn't know what he is talking about or you don't?
I know with certainty what Dan would, or will
say, which is that it doesn't matter, just use
your own ears.
But what motivated this specific thread is the opinions that Dan has expressed - quite frequently - about H. J. Lim's artistry and
"Brendull's" lack thereof. After I mentioned that more specifics would
be helpful, I thought I'd provide an example of what I had in mind.
On Monday, November 7, 2022 at 10:06:02 PM UTC+1, Notsure01 wrote:
"Brendull"? Are you sure you want to adopt that kind of vocab?
But what motivated this specific thread is the opinions that Dan has
expressed - quite frequently - about H. J. Lim's artistry and
"Brendull's" lack thereof. After I mentioned that more specifics would
be helpful, I thought I'd provide an example of what I had in mind.
Do you think racist slurs are funny?
DK doesn't like Alfred Brendel because Brendel is not Jewish. He hates all non-Jewish musicians.
DK is a failed pianist who blames non-Jews for his lack of talent.
Do you feel okay with that kind of racist bigotry? You want to adopt that language?
The only exception are young Asian female performers, who appeal to DK's geisha fantasies.
There are no female performers older than forty in DK's world.
On Monday, November 7, 2022 at 9:06:02 PM UTC, Notsure01 wrote:masterpiece" just reveals a certain conception of masterpiece, one which involves complexity, expressiveness. This may not be shared. And the comment about "hypnotic" just shows that you were hypnotised when you listened to it, there's nothing
On 11/7/22 12:43 PM, Mandryka wrote:
On Monday, November 7, 2022 at 6:26:00 AM UTC, Notsure01 wrote:
Here is an example of what would be ideal. I'm not expecting anything >> this lengthy, but ideally there would be some detail. Thanks again!!
I’ll start with someone who has come in for criticism here -
Michelangeli.
I thought since this mazurka is short - and a favorite of mine - I’d use
it as an example.
To my taste this is energetic, perfectly phrased, exactly the right tempo…
Re the mazurka, I think your post is self centred.
All you have in the mazurka are a handful of different performances, with different characteristics. In some moods I may enjoy one more than another, some people may always enjoy one more than the other. Your comment about "sounds like a
I think my post might be being misunderstood, so it may help to take a step back. My hope in starting this thread was to request that folks
move beyond the way preferences for performers are being expressed here
by providing more details and ideally specific examples. (As I said in
my original post "Obviously it is easy to say “pianist xxx is the best interpreter of Liszt” or “yyy doesn’t have a clue with Bach works” while
it takes more time to provide some details explaining why".
The reason this is important to me - and I think helpful for others as well - is that with the really enormous variety of performances readily available on YouTube, Spotify, etc, and with the limited amount of time available for listening, choices need to be made.
While I'm reasonably familiar with Beethoven sonatas, there are a few I don't know well. When I decide to listen to one of the unfamiliar ones,
do I choose Ashkenazy - or Lim - or Yves Nat - Backhaus - Gilels - or Brendel??
For most of them I know generally what to expect, but I know nothing
about Lim. One of the great things about RMCR is that when piano recordings are being discussed we have the active participation of
really knowledgeable people like you, Dan, Arri and many others. When possible it would be great if when specific performances are being discussed that some detail be provided.
But what motivated this specific thread is the opinions that Dan has expressed - quite frequently - about H. J. Lim's artistry and
"Brendull's" lack thereof. After I mentioned that more specifics would
be helpful, I thought I'd provide an example of what I had in mind.
In a different thread ABM got quite a bit of criticism:"..a perfect soulless pianistic machine. Nothing more,
nothing less, and nothing else. No emotion,
no imagination, everything in the score, and
nothing beyond the score".
This seemed a bit .. harsh, so I thought I'd use it **as an example** of what I feel would be helpful in justifying such a strong opinion. As
I've shamefully admitted, I have no qualifications for assessing
pianists - I was hoping instead that the attempt on my part would
motivate the experts here to do their assessment.
My post about ABM is certainly "self-centered" but I did provide an example supporting the notion that ABM (sometimes) plays "nothing beyond the score" and then a -specific- counter example of an imaginative performance. When strong opinions are being expressed, my hope is that
Dan or you could provide something similar.
Look, I realize in the end our preferences cannot be expressed in wordsSome nice things by Brendel
- but what is the purpose of RMCR - if we don't at least try...
Schubert D850 rondo - great piano sound and listen to the change in mood at the end
Schubert op 142/4 impromptu - lively, delicate
Schubert wanderer adagio - nuanced textures
Liszt totentanz - nuance again
The Liszt bagatelle sans tonalité also worth a listen, Haydn possibly (not my sort of music really) and the live Hammerklavier. One of the many Diabelli Variations was memorable, the one on his selected radio broadcasts recording. And schwangesangwith FoDi had its piano moments.
On 11/7/22 12:43 PM, Mandryka wrote:just reveals a certain conception of masterpiece, one which involves complexity, expressiveness. This may not be shared. And the comment about "hypnotic" just shows that you were hypnotised when you listened to it, there's nothing generalisable. Remarks
On Monday, November 7, 2022 at 6:26:00 AM UTC, Notsure01 wrote:
Here is an example of what would be ideal. I'm not expecting anything
this lengthy, but ideally there would be some detail. Thanks again!!
I’ll start with someone who has come in for criticism here -
Michelangeli.
I thought since this mazurka is short - and a favorite of mine - I’d use
it as an example.
To my taste this is energetic, perfectly phrased, exactly the right tempo…
Re the mazurka, I think your post is self centred.
All you have in the mazurka are a handful of different performances, with different characteristics. In some moods I may enjoy one more than another, some people may always enjoy one more than the other. Your comment about "sounds like a masterpiece"
I think my post might be being misunderstood, so it may help to take a
step back. My hope in starting this thread was to request that folks
move beyond the way preferences for performers are being expressed here
by providing more details and ideally specific examples. (As I said in
my original post "Obviously it is easy to say “pianist xxx is the best interpreter of Liszt” or “yyy doesn’t have a clue with Bach works” while
it takes more time to provide some details explaining why".
The reason this is important to me - and I think helpful for others as
well - is that with the really enormous variety of performances readily available on YouTube, Spotify, etc, and with the limited amount of time available for listening, choices need to be made.
While I'm reasonably familiar with Beethoven sonatas, there are a few I don't know well. When I decide to listen to one of the unfamiliar ones,
do I choose Ashkenazy - or Lim - or Yves Nat - Backhaus - Gilels - or Brendel??
For most of them I know generally what to expect, but I know nothing
about Lim. One of the great things about RMCR is that when piano
recordings are being discussed we have the active participation of
really knowledgeable people like you, Dan, Arri and many others. When possible it would be great if when specific performances are being
discussed that some detail be provided.
But what motivated this specific thread is the opinions that Dan has expressed - quite frequently - about H. J. Lim's artistry and
"Brendull's" lack thereof. After I mentioned that more specifics would
be helpful, I thought I'd provide an example of what I had in mind.
In a different thread ABM got quite a bit of criticism:"..a perfect
soulless pianistic machine. Nothing more,
nothing less, and nothing else. No emotion,
no imagination, everything in the score, and
nothing beyond the score".
This seemed a bit .. harsh, so I thought I'd use it **as an example** of what I feel would be helpful in justifying such a strong opinion. As
I've shamefully admitted, I have no qualifications for assessing
pianists - I was hoping instead that the attempt on my part would
motivate the experts here to do their assessment.
My post about ABM is certainly "self-centered" but I did provide an
example supporting the notion that ABM (sometimes) plays "nothing beyond
the score" and then a -specific- counter example of an imaginative performance. When strong opinions are being expressed, my hope is that
Dan or you could provide something similar.
Look, I realize in the end our preferences cannot be expressed in words
- but what is the purpose of RMCR - if we don't at least try...
You state that "Writing about music is very much like writing restaurant reviews". Imagine a review, for example, of a new restaurant: "the food
is mediocre, monotonous, tasteless, and pseudo-authentic". This
certainly communicates vividly that the critic didn't care for it. But wouldn't it be better if there were a few examples of specific dishes - pointing out where they were lacking?
On Monday, November 7, 2022 at 1:06:02 PM UTC-8, Notsure01 wrote:
But what motivated this specific thread is the opinions that Dan
has expressed - quite frequently - about H. J. Lim's artistry and
"Brendull's" lack thereof. After I mentioned that more specifics
would be helpful, I thought I'd provide an example of what I had
in mind.
It appears that what you have in mind is some kind of reasoned
discourse about "specifics", including quasi rational arguments
derived from shared belief systems.
Writing about music is very much like writing restaurant reviews.
This is a performance by a genius:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rB4KS4dCh7E
and this is a mechanical, metronomic, academic,
pseudo-intellectual reading:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-r59wSuCTA
You are obviously welcome to disagree, and so is
everyone else. Your ears can certainly tell there is
a difference between the two, even though one
may not always be able to describe it in words.
I do not see how the matter even lends itself to
discussion: how the food tastes on one's tongue
is independent of how it tastes on anyone else's
tongue.
dk
To belabor my point, statements simply praising or
disparaging a performer don't help foster discussion
or motivate someone to explore their work.
My tiresome attempts to suggest the providing of
examples and specifics stemmed from the recent
comment criticizing ABM.
The example I provided was meant to show that
while the comment may be somewhat justified,
it is oversimplified.
Do you really think
we all have the time and the patience to write up
essays about what we listen to and what we hear?
Can you show us anyone who does this regularly
in this ng? I doubt it.
On Tuesday, November 8, 2022 at 7:56:58 AM UTC+1, dan....@gmail.com wrote:
Do you really think
we all have the time and the patience to write up
essays about what we listen to and what we hear?
Can you show us anyone who does this regularly
in this ng? I doubt it.
That why the statistics come in handy to show
you're a big liar.
They show that you not only post three or four
times as many topics than any other member,
swamping the entire group.
You also write way more lengthy posts, more text
than anyone else.
You have nothing else to do all day.
You just don't want anyone else to write their thoughts,
Sadly all these thoughts amount to is racial bigotry and
Fifties' style ethnic slurs, like forever talking about 'escargots'
in relation to Melmoth, who for all we know has never even
come close to such a dish.
On Monday, November 7, 2022 at 11:59:13 PM UTC-8, Herman wrote:
On Tuesday, November 8, 2022 at 7:56:58 AM UTC+1, dan....@gmail.com wrote:
Do you really think
we all have the time and the patience to write up
essays about what we listen to and what we hear?
Can you show us anyone who does this regularly
in this ng? I doubt it.
That why the statistics come in handy to showNot nearly as big as you are.
you're a big liar.
They show that you not only post three or fourNothing and no one prevents you nor anyone else
times as many topics than any other member,
swamping the entire group.
from posting as much or more.
You also write way more lengthy posts, more textFunny, NotSure01 was precisely complaining I (and
than anyone else.
others) do not write enough to justify our likes and
dislikes.
You have nothing else to do all day.I only post at night.
You just don't want anyone else to write their thoughts,I never prevented anyone else from writing anything they
like. You seem to be overly pre-occupied with conspiracy
theories.
because your thoughts are better than anyone else's. In your mind.
Sadly all these thoughts amount to is racial bigotry and?!? He mentioned them more than once -- where do you
Fifties' style ethnic slurs, like forever talking about 'escargots'
in relation to Melmoth, who for all we know has never even
come close to such a dish.
think I got the idea from ?!?
dk
On Tuesday, November 8, 2022 at 7:56:58 AM UTC+1, dan....@gmail.com wrote:You have nothing else to do all day.
Do you really think
we all have the time and the patience to write up
essays about what we listen to and what we hear?
Can you show us anyone who does this regularly
in this ng? I doubt it.
That why the statistics come in handy to show you're a big liar. They show that you not only post three or four times as many topics than any other member, swamping the entire group. You also write way more lengthy posts, more text than anyone else.
You just don't want anyone else to write their thoughts, because your thoughts are better than anyone else's. In your mind.
Sadly all these thoughts amount to is racial bigotry and Fifties' style ethnic slurs, like forever talking about 'escargots' in relation to Melmoth, who for all we know has never even come close to such a dish.
On Tuesday, November 8, 2022 at 7:56:58 AM UTC+1, dan....@gmail.com wrote:You have nothing else to do all day.
Do you really think
we all have the time and the patience to write up
essays about what we listen to and what we hear?
Can you show us anyone who does this regularly
in this ng? I doubt it.
That why the statistics come in handy to show you're a big liar. They show that you not only post three or four times as many topics than any other member, swamping the entire group. You also write way more lengthy posts, more text than anyone else.
You just don't want anyone else to write their thoughts, because your thoughts are better than anyone else's. In your mind.
Sadly all these thoughts amount to is racial bigotry and Fifties' style ethnic slurs, like forever talking about 'escargots' in relation to Melmoth, who for all we know has never even come close to such a dish.
I thought I understood political correctness. But when you can't even joke about escargot! Tell me, is there a manual?
Herman, are you under a doctor's care? You need more meds.
On Tuesday, November 8, 2022 at 1:56:38 PM UTC+1, Frank Berger wrote:
I thought I understood political correctness. But when you can't even joke about escargot! Tell me, is there a manual?
Add to that one or two topics with the title "I Hate The French", Frank.
Yes, and I know this is all done under the guise of "humor'.
The way you're always defending the bully is textbook, by the way.
This has nothing to do with PC.
Just with basic human good behavior, which this evil guy threw out the window with his "we're living in a post-etiquette, post-pretense era". I.e be boorish, nasty and evil if it makes you feel good.
On Tuesday, November 8, 2022 at 1:58:28 PM UTC+1, Frank Berger wrote:
Herman, are you under a doctor's care? You need more meds.
Knowing you're the one who is "under a doctor's care" (you just told the group) I'll let you have the satisfaction and pride of sticking your nose up the bully's ass as deep as you can.
All these words describe Dan's behavior, at least sometimes (ok, often): insensitive, derogatory, defamatory, belittling, pejorative, disdainful, deprecatory, rude, scurrilous, vituperative.
Having said that you can not possible construe this as a defense of his behavior.
On Tuesday, November 8, 2022 at 3:53:02 PM UTC+1, Frank Berger wrote:
All these words describe Dan's behavior, at least sometimes (ok, often): insensitive, derogatory, defamatory, belittling, pejorative, disdainful, deprecatory, rude, scurrilous, vituperative.
Having said that you can not possible construe this as a defense of his behavior.
Okay, fine. I see. Peace.
Obviously I think this 'post-etiquette' idea is a very bad idea, but I can't stop people from being nasty online.
I would strongly want to discourage you to ask any farmaceutical / medical advice on a music group, but of course you were just kidding.
I don't take any medicine, not even aspirin.
I don't take any medicine, not even aspirin. I don't drink or smoke either. And IRL I'm generally a rather happy person.
Not entirely. I suspect that a person going berserk
over someone else's on-line behavior might really
be in need of medical assistance.
I don't drink or smoke either.
Here is an example of what would be ideal. I'm not expecting anything
this lengthy, but ideally there would be some detail. Thanks again!!
I’ll start with someone who has come in for criticism here -
Michelangeli. I don’t own many of his recordings as I am not a
pianophile (yet...), but I do have a live BBC recital and a Steinway
Legends album, The BBC includes an encore of the Chopin op. 68 no. 4
Mazurka (and this performance appears also on that great, enormous
Diapason collection of “greatest Chopin recordings” - 12 hr 49 min - download $19 - https://www.prestomusic.com/classical/products/8083151--chopin-piano-works
)
I thought since this mazurka is short - and a favorite of mine - I’d use it as an example. It is here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VL4_uD0Vp5U It seemed well played, with
a beautiful tone. I listened with the score and saw that he followed the markings. But in the end it seemed... unremarkable.
I then listened to Ashkenazy - and he was worse - little adherence to
the dynamic markings - not much contrast in the middle section. Other versions were better - Rubinstein(RCA), Kapell, Moravec, and
particularly Witold Malcuzynski was very good. (And the finer versios followed most closely the expression marks in the score. Curiously
enough the editor of the score I used, Jan Ekier, has a version on YT
where he mostly disregards (his own?) markings: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8jA848iMTlc )
Compare all these to Rachmaninoff’s version: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xuaax311aLY
It almost seems like a different piece - he plays it so expressively. Or
try the one that - acccording to my taste - is the best: Sokolov https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HuPVOMH8NsQ
While Ashkenazy makes the work seem to be trivial, almost banal, Sokolov
is so expressive, hypnotic, beautiful that it sounds like a masterpiece!
On Sunday, November 6, 2022 at 10:26:00 PM UTC-8, Notsure01 wrote:
Here is an example of what would be ideal. I'm not expecting anything
this lengthy, but ideally there would be some detail. Thanks again!!
I’ll start with someone who has come in for criticism here -
Michelangeli. I don’t own many of his recordings as I am not a
pianophile (yet...), but I do have a live BBC recital and a Steinway
Legends album, The BBC includes an encore of the Chopin op. 68 no. 4
Mazurka (and this performance appears also on that great, enormous
Diapason collection of “greatest Chopin recordings” - 12 hr 49 min -
download $19 -
https://www.prestomusic.com/classical/products/8083151--chopin-piano-works >> )
I thought since this mazurka is short - and a favorite of mine - I’d use >> it as an example. It is here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VL4_uD0Vp5U It seemed well played, with
a beautiful tone. I listened with the score and saw that he followed the
markings. But in the end it seemed... unremarkable.
I then listened to Ashkenazy - and he was worse - little adherence to
the dynamic markings - not much contrast in the middle section. Other
versions were better - Rubinstein(RCA), Kapell, Moravec, and
particularly Witold Malcuzynski was very good. (And the finer versios
followed most closely the expression marks in the score. Curiously
enough the editor of the score I used, Jan Ekier, has a version on YT
where he mostly disregards (his own?) markings:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8jA848iMTlc )
Compare all these to Rachmaninoff’s version:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xuaax311aLY
It almost seems like a different piece - he plays it so expressively. Or
try the one that - acccording to my taste - is the best: Sokolov
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HuPVOMH8NsQ
While Ashkenazy makes the work seem to be trivial, almost banal, Sokolov
is so expressive, hypnotic, beautiful that it sounds like a masterpiece!
Unnecessary verbiage. Most readings of op 68/4 sound
like dirges -- Michelangeli and Sokolov in particular.
Listen to Maryla Jonas to uderstand how mazurkas
can, and should be played -- yes it is a masterpiece:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vpGjQiYYTKI
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCyzM_m4YeU3IaPv-JYfy2Jg
dk
On Sunday, November 6, 2022 at 10:26:00 PM UTC-8, Notsure01 wrote:
Here is an example of what would be ideal. I'm not expecting anythingUnnecessary verbiage. Most readings of op 68/4 sound
this lengthy, but ideally there would be some detail. Thanks again!!
I’ll start with someone who has come in for criticism here -
Michelangeli... an encore of the Chopin op. 68 no. 4
Mazurka... this mazurka is short - and a favorite of mine
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VL4_uD0Vp5U It seemed well played, with
a beautiful tone. I listened with the score and saw that he followed the
markings. But in the end it seemed... unremarkable.
the best: Sokolov
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HuPVOMH8NsQ
like dirges -- Michelangeli and Sokolov in particular.
Listen to Maryla Jonas to uderstand how mazurkas
can, and should be played -- yes it is a masterpiece:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vpGjQiYYTKI
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCyzM_m4YeU3IaPv-JYfy2Jg
dk
Did a lot of listening on YT and no pianist was truly inspirational. Samson Francois, Youra Guller, Fou Tsong, Maryla Jonas, Malcuzynski, Neuhaus and Rubinstein were the ones I liked. Another that was quite interesting was this one, no pianist given
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IrboksWHAwE
Sofronitsky is interesting and very personal. Not his best but I'd prefer to listen to it over most of the others. A lot of well-known pianists were quite bad in this elusive piece.
Thanks for the feedback! In looking this over, I see that in my original
post I stupidly had a typo - the Mazurka I was discussing is not op 68/4
but op 68/2!! It is now very clear that I don't know what I'm talking about!
My links at least are correct - and you (rightly) included in your post
a link to Jonas doing no. 4. I actually have many of her versions in my collection - but not no. 2.
I find that Jonas - and Andrzej Wasowski - has an individual way with
the rhythm of mazurkas - I remember reading somewhere about the
original Polish dance - so I'll seek out their versions.
On Tuesday, November 8, 2022 at 9:41:49 PM UTC, Andy Evans wrote:
Did a lot of listening on YT and no pianist was truly inspirational. Samson Francois, Youra Guller, Fou Tsong, Maryla Jonas, Malcuzynski, Neuhaus and Rubinstein were the ones I liked. Another that was quite interesting was this one, no pianist given
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IrboksWHAwE
Sofronitsky is interesting and very personal. Not his best but I'd prefer to listen to it over most of the others. A lot of well-known pianists were quite bad in this elusive piece.I thought ABM was pretty good actually. Nice and simple.
On Tuesday, November 8, 2022 at 1:03:56 PM UTC-8, Notsure01 wrote:
Thanks for the feedback! In looking this over, I see that in my original post I stupidly had a typo - the Mazurka I was discussing is not op 68/4 but op 68/2!! It is now very clear that I don't know what I'm talking about!
My links at least are correct - and you (rightly) included in your post
a link to Jonas doing no. 4. I actually have many of her versions in my collection - but not no. 2.
I find that Jonas - and Andrzej Wasowski - has an individual way withI don't/didn't like Wasowski because of his technical limitations as a pianist. He does sound more idiomatic in the mazurkas than many
the rhythm of mazurkas - I remember reading somewhere about the
original Polish dance - so I'll seek out their versions.
other bigger name pianists. Same goes for Ekier.
IMHO the mazurkists to listen to are Maryla Jonas, Malcuzinski,
Friedman, Ekier, Koczalski. Unfortunately none of them recorded
complete sets.
HJ Lim comes directly from Friedman's laboratory through her
teacher Henri Barda who studied with Ignace Tiegerman sho
studied with Friedman. She has 2 mazurka encores on YT:
Op. 24/4:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K7J3pQT8mBo
Op. 63/3:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FFnGr-BMFQk
IMHO both are superb.
Her teacher Henri Barda has a few mazurkas on YT:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=syL0VkxhHZE
Ignaz Friedman has a dozen or so on YT:
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL_-zrhZVF69NS5DXmagEMV6uoRw2X2SXU
The lineage should be obvious to anyone who can hear.
dk
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 339 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 05:13:14 |
| Calls: | 7,467 |
| Calls today: | 3 |
| Files: | 12,691 |
| Messages: | 5,628,213 |