Favorite Pianists

Posted by: Todd A on 21 June 2001

What is it about the piano? I have been pondering that question lately as I have found myself listening to a higher proportion of solo piano recordings. Is it the uniquely broad range of both tonal and colors output by this magnificent instrument? (Okay, okay, the organ has a broader range, but, well, I would have to listen to organ music.) Is it the percussive nature of the music it produces, or the attempts to tame the percussiveness? Is it the fact that one hears a single artist interpreting a composer’s work in the most intimate musical fashion possible? Hmmm . . .

So, whose digital expressions do you most enjoy? Of course, you may still prefer to hear said digital expressions in analog, but that is beside the point. Now, I’m not only interested in who you like, but also, at least in a few instances, why you like them. Here’s my list. It is subject to change over time, of course, and I may inadvertently omit one or two names, so please forgive me.

Annie Fischer – Annie is the embodiment of Art itself. Too much praise, you may be wondering? I most emphatically think not. Granted, her repertoire is limited – to the finest piano music ever written – and there are woefully too few recordings by her (just where is that recording of Beethoven’s 3rd Piano Concerto with Fricsay playing the role of accompanist?! Calling the DG Originals planning staff!), but what is there is undeniably great. Transcendental, even. The notes may not all be perfectly executed, and she does not always adhere strictly to the markings, but who cares. Ultimately it is only the music that matters. That is what she does best.

Dinu Lipatti – When first I heard his playing of one of Bach’s partitas, I was hooked. When I then heard those wonderful renditions of two of Schubert’s Impromptus I was convinced he was great. The clincher was that most wonderful recording of Chopin’s waltzes. Truly masterful playing that I have not heard equaled, let alone bettered. Was Dinu Lipatti the greatest pianist who ever lived? Probably not, but he certainly ranks among the top 1% of the elite pianists. (There is no greatest single pianist, of course.) One of the most tragic losses in recorded music history, there is no doubt. I have read elsewhere that ones assessment of his playing can be colored by the knowledge that he died so young. I disagree. When I first heard his playing I did not know of his fate. When I did learn it, it made me appreciate what I heard that much more.

Maurizio Pollini – Truly awesome technique. His interpretations can be a little chilly, so to write, but notes are presented with absolute clarity and assurance. At his monumental best – Liszt’s Sonata, Beethoven’s Emperor (with Bohm, not Abbado), Stravinky’s Petrushka and Boulez’s Second Sonata* – he is almost unapproachable. He is not my favorite pianist in terms of inspirational musicianship, but he is so mesmerizing when he plays that I am compelled to stop all other activities and listen.

Wilhelm Kempff – The foil to Pollini. His later recordings are so full of light touches and interpretive insights that his lack of muscular playing goes unnoticed and unmissed. His Schubert is beyond reproach. His Schumann is wonderful, in the truest sense of that word. I must confess that his rendition on Beethoven’s Emperor with Leitner is, well, um, crappy, but when he plays the right works, Kempff delivers ‘da goods.

Walter Giesking – Not too much to write about him. His Debussy provides the benchmark against which all other recordings must be measured. His Beethoven is intriguing at least and among the greatest in some cases. Everything he recorded is worth hearing. Regularly.

Murray Perahia – His playing is a recently acquired taste for me. His Bach is quite something. His Schumann ain’t too shabby, neither. I’m not quite convinced he is suited to heavier fare, but what I’ve heard is excellent. His recent recording of the Goldberg Variations is a wondrous achievement, perhaps the finest recording ever of that work. (Keep in mind that I think Gould’s version ain’t as great as so many people claim it is. Oh, the Blasphemy!)

Thelonius Monk – A different idiom, to be certain, but how can one not admire and love this man’s music? I’m not sure if it’s his playing or his compositions, or a combination of both. I can just sit listening in a blissfully mesmerized state through entire discs.

Some others:

John Ogdon
Andras Schiff
Gyorgy Sandor
Bill Evans


*On the strength of the Boulez sonatas as played by Claude Helffer, I decided to get the very highly praised Pollini disc with the Second Sonata, Stravinsky’s Petrushka, Prokofiev’s Seventh Sonata, and Webern’s Variations. This is one of the greatest CDs ever compiled. If you do not own this disc, I implore you to go buy it. And that means you!

Posted on: 21 June 2001 by John C
Mc Coy Tyner. Everyone namechecks Jarrett or Evans as highly influential pianists but I love Mc Coy Tyner and hear echoes of his sound in almost everyone these days. His extraordinary work with Coltrane is obvious but I think he perfectly marries the percussive element you mention with a beautiful melodic inventive approach.Just listen to The Real McCoy to hear the greatness of the man.

Herbie Hancock. Played in Miles quintet as part the greatest rhythmn section ever assembled and his brilliant spare, witty playing eg on the Plugged Nickel is a delight.His own records and compositions are classics.

Andrew Hill The true heir to Monk. Complex intricate and rooted in blues tradition to my ears. Point of Departure a landmark great record.

Monk .No explanation needed (or really possible)

Honourable mentions as Im listening to them this week
Cecil Taylor
Mal Waldron
and a host of others

John

I really hope someone mentions Herbie Nicholls as hes my next buy.

Posted on: 21 June 2001 by Peter Litwack
He's definitely cool.

Also:

Art Tatum
Elmo Hope
Alfred Cortot (esp. his Schumann)
Solomon
Lazar Berman
Gieseking's Schubert Impromptus
Schnabel

I could go on forever. More later.
big grin

Posted on: 22 June 2001 by Cheese
quote:
Was Dinu Lipatti the greatest pianist who ever lived? Probably not, but he certainly ranks among the top 1% of the elite pianists. (There is no greatest single pianist, of course.)
There is indeed no such thing as a 'greatest pianist' – but I fear that of all the people who have heard one of his recordings once in their lifetime, only a few wouldn't consider him 'something special'. There were better techniques, better sounds, better understanding of this or that composer, but IMO there has never been any bigger musician on the piano – revealing the endless beauty of the world without any flashy effects or fake rubatos. Nothing is immediately spectacular, still nothing is boring. Pure artistry, period. The cadenza at the end of the first movement of Schumann's concerto – it changes your views on life. Phew.

Not actually in the same category, Vladimir Horowitz taught us all what a piano was made for – his 'church bell sound' is instantly recognisable, and every interpretation becomes magical, even in works that didn't suit him at all. He turned Beethoven concertos into Horowitz concertos, lots of people complained, but all of them ended up listening to it when nobody was around. And if he plays Russian stuff like Rachmaninow or Scriabin – can you also hear the culture and the endless spaces of this proud country ?

Wilhelm Kempff– remained a child all his life, that's what it takes to play Schumann. Or Schubert. And, well, when he plays Liszt … any child has the right to be forgiven, eh ?

Sviatoslav Richter – not everyone's taste, and very different from one day to another. No funny pianist - deeply melancholic, almost depressing at times, but you just leave the concert hall spellbound. For carefully chosen moments, but keep your hands off during your midlife crisis.

quote:
Keep in mind that I think Gould’s version ain’t as great as so many people claim it is. Oh, the Blasphemy
No Blasphemy at all, but I've still never heard any such thing elsewhere, and twenty years later I still love it. Don't know Perahia's version, but why not ?!

Julius Katchen – at least in Brahms, the most underrated musician ever.

Chick Corea (I mean his Jazz stuff) – sounds as if he's permanently been on acid for years, and his mind-blowing creativity is always good for a surprise

Marco Westendorp – you don't know him, he's a friend of mine, and he barely knows what a piano is. But once he's had a couple of whiskys he often ends up playing (and, oh, singing) utter crap on the old grand of his mother but in such a funny way that you're off for a great laugh every time it happens big grin

Cheese - may all beings be happy smile

[This message was edited by Cheese on SATURDAY 23 June 2001 at 00:11.]

Posted on: 22 June 2001 by ken c
"Sviatoslav Richter – not everyone's taste, and very different from one day to another. No funny pianist - deeply melancholic, almost depressing at times, but you just leave the concert hall spellbound. "

i got spell bound listening to him play schubert as i reported in an earlier post. i was wondering when someone was going to mention richter. thanks cheese and for all the other information you have passed on to me on piano music...

enjoy

ken

Posted on: 23 June 2001 by Cheese
quote:
i was wondering when someone was going to mention richter
Sorry, but there's indeed just me ... guess you have expected it.

Reading you, it warms up my heart to know that I'm not alone in the world smile

Cheese - may all beings be happy smile

Posted on: 28 June 2001 by woodface
I cannot really comment on the classical choices as it is not really my thing - but I'm sure the choices put forward are good ones! My favourite players are Monk and Evans. With the former I don't think you can separate the music from his playing, but who cares. Evans is just sublime, is there anyone who can swing so hard while barely touching the keys? Honourable mentions go to Herbie Hancock (his playing on the Davis 'My Funny Valentine - Live' album steals the show) and Wynton Kelly (Freddie Freeloader on 'that album'!).
Posted on: 29 June 2001 by Phil Barry
Marta Argerich must be mentioned here.

Schnabel and Kempff have already been mentioned, and can be named again.

I bow my head in awe.

Phil

Posted on: 29 June 2001 by richard goldsmith
These are a few of my favourite things, piano wise:

Wynton Kelly - gorgeous optimism, swings
Bud Powell - poor Bud!
Sonny Clark - cool Blue Note type
Bobby Timmons - underrated, stylish player
Herbie Hancock - brilliance personified!

I also agree that Herbie steals Valentine (honourable mention to George Coleman - one of Miles' great [often overlooked] tenor players).

Now Martha Argerich - I don't know much about classical, but I have that Ravel in G thing. The second movement KILLS me every time!

Posted on: 04 July 2001 by JamH
John Ogden -- Messiaen: Vingt Regards ...

Lazar Berman -- Moussoursky: Pictures at ...


James H

Posted on: 04 July 2001 by JamH
Glenn Gould -- anything
Kantarsky brothers -- Stravinsky [and Stockhausen]


James H

Posted on: 04 July 2001 by Cheese
Glad to read that you also like Glenn Gould - FMOP, I like his Bach, Byrd, Gibbons, and Schoenberg.

But do you really like everything ? I've really got some difficulties with his Beethoven, e.g. his sonatas and his transcription of the Pastorale. eek confused

Can you explain your point ? IMO especially the tempi are most questionable.

Cheese - may all beings be happy smile

Posted on: 05 July 2001 by JamH
Hello Cheese,

I suppose Gould should not be anyone's first choice since he is committed and you get a lot of Gould rather than the composer. Also I hate how he sings [As I buy better hi-fi I hear him more].

A digression ....
A few years ago -- since I am fan of Bach -- I bought Naxos 'Bach : Goldberg Variations' since its in all lists of Bach's greatest works. It did not move me but eventually bought [in CD sale for 2-pounds] Martin's version [Martin's is Brazillian and if you think Gould ignores score markings try Martins ...] and suddently found I really liked it. Then got Gould's version[s] [both the non-live recordings] and really like them.

I have the Harmonia Mundi Lizst/Beethoven symphonies on piano but also the Gould No.6 [Pastoral] and I think it [the Gould] works.

Of Beethoven have only heard Gould's Moonlight [I suspect he claims he follows original Metronome markings -- I also have version by Roger Woodward from about 1974 ?? on vinyl that makes similar claim] but it's fun.

Probably agree that some of his performances are strange [and not my favourites] but he does give a new insight.

Best wishes

James H.

Posted on: 20 July 2001 by Keith Wu
Clara Haskil deserves mention here as well. I love her playing of Mozart piano concerto no.27 (on DG with Fricsay), Beethoven piano concerto no.3 and the sonata "tempest" (on Philips). Splendid playing.
Posted on: 23 July 2001 by John
I am not that knowledgable about the technical aspects of playing a piano but no other piano artists have touched me more than:

1. Keith Jarrett
2. Glen Gould

John

Posted on: 23 July 2001 by Cheese
quote:
I am not that knowledgable about the technical aspects of playing a piano
Good. Artur Schnabel, Elly Ney, Edwin Fischer, Sviatoslav Richter, Alfred Cortot (in his last years) were among the greatest musicians of their time and remain unique, even though most of the young conservatory graduates have a far better technique than these giants.

I still prefer the pianists quoted above - technique is impressive for 10 minutes, musicianship is immortal.

BTW, every piano teacher would fire you instantly if you started playing like Glenn Gould and his low position on his old wooden chair. Even Horowitz got criticised for his imperfect technique, using the wrong fingers all the time.

In fact, he didn't have to worry about technique - he was just too good !!

Cheese - may all beings be happy smile

Posted on: 23 July 2001 by samo7
Dianna Krall (a fellow canuck)...
Posted on: 03 August 2001 by Cheese
quote:
in which people are encouraged to think of Liszt as merely a set of showy exercises
Agree with you that it's pure bollocks, Liszt was IMO a really great musician.

His "Années de Pélerinage" are among the finest piano works ever written, without mentioning his obscure but epic Sonata in B minor (Sviatoslav Richter again !)

Cheese - may all beings be happy smile

Posted on: 08 August 2001 by ken c
quote:
What is it about the piano? I have been pondering that question lately as I have found myself listening to a higher proportion of solo piano recordings. Is it the uniquely broad range of both tonal and colors output by this magnificent instrument?

same here. to the extent i am actually toying with the idea that its probably the best music to use to evaluate equipment. broad range of tonal colours??? perhaps, i simply dont know...

as i am a real novice in this area, the various postings in this thread are going to be very useful for me in establishing my piano collection. i already have richter and lipatti and i think a curzon somewhere.

i enjoy patrick noland "ascending" too. its got an interesting track called "twisted aro, julians mission". some "in-joke" i guess??

enjoy

ken

Posted on: 08 August 2001 by Cheese
quote:
i am actually toying with the idea that its probably the best music to use to evaluate equipment
At least for round-earth parameters, certainly. There's nothing worse than a badly recorded piano, and possible flaws hit you badly - OTOH you instantly hear the beauty of the sound of this or that pianist. In my case, when I audition something, the first test is always an old Chopin LP by Rubinstein, and if this doesn't sound good, I know that I will never like the speakers or whatever I am listening to.

I've heard several times from competent people that it was also utterly difficult to record a steinway, partly because of the "echo" effect of the wooden box around it. And getting the tonal balance right seems to be a major hassle as too many (even recent) piano recordings are just dreadful in that matter.

quote:
broad range of tonal colours???
It's an understatement, apart from the human voice there's nothing to compare IMO.

Cheese - may all beings be happy smile

Posted on: 08 August 2001 by ken c
cheese:

when I audition something, the first test is always an old Chopin LP by Rubinstein, and if this doesn't sound good, I know that I will never like the speakers or whatever I am listening to.

precisely. something to calibrate the system and steamline the auditioning process somewhat.

ah, that reminds me, i need to get a chopin played by rubinstein -- someone here -- i think fred simon -- recommended him?

why do you think using the piano music only exercises the round earth aspects (to the extent that i understand what 'round earth' means)?

enjoy

ken

Posted on: 08 August 2001 by Cheese
quote:
why do you think using the piano music only exercises the round earth aspects
I was maybe exaggerating a little - a Tchaikovsky piano concerto can indeed reveal lots of flat-earth qualities. But when I wrote that remark, I was somewhat focused on that particular Rubinstein record - they are actually the Chopin Nocturnes. Now, this kind of music (as well as lots of other romantic works) is not physical at all, and "beauty", "colour" and "mood" matter much more than PRaT.

To me, the ultimate PRaT test is Dave Brubeck's "Take Five" on 180 gr. vinyl. Miles' Live around the World is good too - especially track 8 "Tutu" (POW!!!)

Cheese - may all beings be happy smile

Posted on: 09 August 2001 by ken c
many thanks.

Chopin Nocturnes. Now, this kind of music (as well as lots of other romantic works) is not physical at all, and "beauty", "colour" and "mood" matter much more than PRaT.

i dont really understand the flat/round earth business -- i actually value "beauty", "colour" and "mood" very highly indeed, but i dont see that as being at all distinct from pace, rhythm and timing. ah, well, no hope for me here...

enjoy

ken

Posted on: 09 August 2001 by Sproggle
quote:
i dont really understand the flat/round earth business -- i actually value "beauty", "colour" and "mood" very highly indeed, but i dont see that as being at all distinct from pace, rhythm and timing. ah, well, no hope for me here...

I also dislike the flat/round Earth thing. When a distinction is useful I prefer to think in terms of the broad, if fuzzy, distinction that can be made between the purely musical and the purely sonic aspects of a recording/performance. Essentially, I think of the musical aspects of the performance/recording as being those which are dependent on what is being played [instruments and music], who is playing it and how they're playing it. I think of the "sonic" aspects as being those which are dependent on the recording environment, the positions of the players, the recording equipment and its set-up etc.

I dislike using the term PR&T because it supposedly specifies the most important musical parameters but, for me, it fails to do so. I'd rather use a more inclusive if less precise acronym - perhaps E3T [Expression, Tune, Time, Timbre]? smile

--Jeremy

Posted on: 09 August 2001 by ken c
thanks for your thoughts on this.

...perhaps E3T [Expression, Tune, Time, Timbre]?

sounds good to me. i would guess i would also add "involvement" -- i find that if this is missing i lose interest. whether "expression" includes this already is i guess debatable.

so, at last, we have something that i think captures what keeps us listening to our naim systems --- its EI3T, i.e. "emotion" "involvement" and the 3 T's. i am using emotion instead of your "expression" here --now i think of it, this may not be a valid thing to do. ah, well, what the hell...

sad that someone is listening to a Krell system right now as we e-talk, isnt it??

wish you good music.


enjoy

ken

Posted on: 10 August 2001 by John Schmidt
I love Diana Krall, but as a pianist she's not in the same league as Oscar Peterson or Oliver Jones. I'm suprised that some other maple-leaf waving Canadian hasn't mentioned them yet!

Cheers,

John Schmidt
"90% of everything is crud" - Theodore Sturgeon