Chopin Nocturnes
Posted by: herm on 21 May 2003
three Rubinstein recordings
I have always loved Chopin's Nocturnes. Perhaps they are not as innovative as the Scherzos, the Preludes and the Etudes - arguably the most consistently brilliant works Chopin composed, but I'm sure if Chopin had composed nothing but the Nocturnes he'd still be up there among the best.
There seems to be no other form in which Chopin indulged his love for the opera soprano as much as in the Nocturnes. A wonderful piece like the second nocturne from Opus 55 (E flat) is one big aria on the keyboard, about passion and hesitation I suppose. And of course the famous D flat (Opus 27, nr 2) and the big C minor (Opus 48 nr 1) are other cases in point. You can try playing them (it's borderline possible) and you can try imagining what they would be about if they actually were arias.
I have been wondering about the Nocturnes for most of my life (my mother used to play one or two of 'em). I got my first recording when I was barely out of high school (Tamas Vasary) and ever since I have been enjoying them. I used to love the dark smoky Ashkenazy recording - his C minor is cloudier than clam chowder. When I drove to Paris recently I was listening to Rubinstein's EMI recordings from the late thirties (Rub Collection Vol 5) all the way, and was stunned by the way they were different from his mid-sixties recordings for RCA (RC 49), which I have loved for many years.
The really romantic pieces, like the three Opus 15 pieces, are so much better in the early recording. The G minor Nocturne (Op 15 / 3) is a strange piece; its rhythms are constantly stopping. Like the other G minor Nocturne (Opus 37 / 2) it's an insomniac's nocturne, tossing, turning, shall I, shan't I? They are unique pieces of music, but late Rubinstein didn't seem to deliver (remember he was in his seventies by that time), and I used to prefer (it happens) Maria-Joao Pires's recent recording, which certainly gets the 15 nr 3 right. She is operatic to the hilt.
Until I got Rubinstein's thirties recording. It's the best in these G minor pieces, and you never even notice Rubinstein skips a whole page in the Opus 37, because he makes it sound right. (BTW: the Rubinstein Collection has more hiss than the dirt cheap Classica d'Oro remastering, which however skips the last four or five pieces).
Then I got Rubinstein's forties recording (RC 26), which hadn't been available, until the big Rubinstein Collection was released. The plot thickens. Again there are pieces on this recording that were not so special on the early and late recordings, and suddenly Bingo! they are totally vindicated on this one - the Opus 55, nr 2 is a brilliant case, as is the ironic waltz in disguise Opus 32, nr 2.
So I'm not going to make any recommendations. You should get all three recordings. I'm just curious what (if any) recording of the Nocturnes you are listening to.
A concluding note. It's strange to think Pollini is getting ready to record these pieces. I have never heard him play a single piece, even as a beddy bye encore. It would seem at least thirty years too late in his career to do these pieces, doesn't it?
Herman
[This message was edited by herm on WEDNESDAY 21 May 2003 at 21:01.]
I have always loved Chopin's Nocturnes. Perhaps they are not as innovative as the Scherzos, the Preludes and the Etudes - arguably the most consistently brilliant works Chopin composed, but I'm sure if Chopin had composed nothing but the Nocturnes he'd still be up there among the best.
There seems to be no other form in which Chopin indulged his love for the opera soprano as much as in the Nocturnes. A wonderful piece like the second nocturne from Opus 55 (E flat) is one big aria on the keyboard, about passion and hesitation I suppose. And of course the famous D flat (Opus 27, nr 2) and the big C minor (Opus 48 nr 1) are other cases in point. You can try playing them (it's borderline possible) and you can try imagining what they would be about if they actually were arias.
I have been wondering about the Nocturnes for most of my life (my mother used to play one or two of 'em). I got my first recording when I was barely out of high school (Tamas Vasary) and ever since I have been enjoying them. I used to love the dark smoky Ashkenazy recording - his C minor is cloudier than clam chowder. When I drove to Paris recently I was listening to Rubinstein's EMI recordings from the late thirties (Rub Collection Vol 5) all the way, and was stunned by the way they were different from his mid-sixties recordings for RCA (RC 49), which I have loved for many years.
The really romantic pieces, like the three Opus 15 pieces, are so much better in the early recording. The G minor Nocturne (Op 15 / 3) is a strange piece; its rhythms are constantly stopping. Like the other G minor Nocturne (Opus 37 / 2) it's an insomniac's nocturne, tossing, turning, shall I, shan't I? They are unique pieces of music, but late Rubinstein didn't seem to deliver (remember he was in his seventies by that time), and I used to prefer (it happens) Maria-Joao Pires's recent recording, which certainly gets the 15 nr 3 right. She is operatic to the hilt.
Until I got Rubinstein's thirties recording. It's the best in these G minor pieces, and you never even notice Rubinstein skips a whole page in the Opus 37, because he makes it sound right. (BTW: the Rubinstein Collection has more hiss than the dirt cheap Classica d'Oro remastering, which however skips the last four or five pieces).
Then I got Rubinstein's forties recording (RC 26), which hadn't been available, until the big Rubinstein Collection was released. The plot thickens. Again there are pieces on this recording that were not so special on the early and late recordings, and suddenly Bingo! they are totally vindicated on this one - the Opus 55, nr 2 is a brilliant case, as is the ironic waltz in disguise Opus 32, nr 2.
So I'm not going to make any recommendations. You should get all three recordings. I'm just curious what (if any) recording of the Nocturnes you are listening to.
A concluding note. It's strange to think Pollini is getting ready to record these pieces. I have never heard him play a single piece, even as a beddy bye encore. It would seem at least thirty years too late in his career to do these pieces, doesn't it?
Herman
[This message was edited by herm on WEDNESDAY 21 May 2003 at 21:01.]
Posted on: 21 May 2003 by Todd A
quote:
Originally posted by herm:
So I'm not going to make any recommendations. You should get all three recordings. I'm just curious what (if any) recording of the Nocturnes you are listening to.
A concluding note. It's strange to think Pollini is getting ready to record these pieces. I have never heard him play a single piece, even as a beddy bye encore. It would seem at least thirty years too late in his career to do these pieces, doesn't it?
Herman
I like your idea about getting so many recordings. I am familiar with Rubinstein's stereo stuff and must admit I rather fancy them. Generally, though, I find myself listening to Ivan Moravec's recording of 19 Nocturnes on Nonesuch. (The recordings were made in the 60s and have been issued on a couple of labels.) His technique is perfectly controlled, and while some may find some of the playing too exact and maybe a little cold, I just love them. I also occasionally spin Moura Lympany's set on Dutton. Crisp, clean, more "classical" playing. It is definitely refreshing. Ashkenazy also gets an occasional spin, though if I do listen to his Chopin, it is usually for the Mazurkas. I have been meaning to buy Rubinstein's 30s stuff, in particular, but now I'll have to choose between the 30s and 40s. Damn.
Pollini did record four Nocturnes for EMI (they are on the GROC disc with the piano concerto) and they display all of those traits one associates with the man in his youth. I don't listen to them a lot, but they are worth a listen. They certainly make me want to listen to a larger selection by him.
Posted on: 21 May 2003 by DJH
Chopin's Nocturnes - along with Schubert's Impromptus - is some of the music that defined many of my teenage years, listening to battered LP's on an even more battered radiogram! I've always found Barenboim interesting in this music - I think it was one of the first CD's I ever bought.
I've always liked the B flat sonata - didn't Schumann describe the movements as four of Chopin's most unruly children under one roof ?
Of course, if you're looking for a hottie, then Katia Skanavi is probably your first choice.
I've always liked the B flat sonata - didn't Schumann describe the movements as four of Chopin's most unruly children under one roof ?
Of course, if you're looking for a hottie, then Katia Skanavi is probably your first choice.
Posted on: 21 May 2003 by herm
quote:
Originally posted by Todd Arola:
I am familiar with Rubinstein's stereo stuff and must admit I rather fancy them. I have been meaning to buy Rubinstein's 30s stuff, in particular, but now I'll have to choose between the 30s and 40s. Damn.
Well, if the Classical d'Oro disc happens to be available in the USA, you would have a ridiculously cheap way to get the thirties recording (and with less hiss). It's the one with a Gaugain woman on the cover. The forties recording is the blue one in the Rubinstein Collection, and in this case you want the late Nocturnes, too, because they are the best renditions. A piece like the Opus 55 / 2, with its endless melody and ecstatic soprano runs is revelatory. Best in the sixties recording are the D flat and the C minor, to mention a few obvious ones. You need the 30s recording for the Opus 15 pieces, to name three examples.
Ross, I wouldn't call Arrau's Chopin soft focus. It's very disciplined, meditative and slow. Perhaps it's because his Philips Chopin is recorded very very late in life, but clearly Arrau wants us to hear Chopin was a thinking romantic, rather than a sentimental romantic. Still there are great pieces. The Opus 48 / 2 is not one of the most inspired pieces (the theme does not sing naturally and it gets repeated over and over again), and yet Arrau manages to make the piece dramatic, with the wonderful sequences on the last page when that damn theme is taken apart and sent packing.
DJC: yeah, the Nocturnes are great music to get to know when you're a teenager. Even the title is alluring, and a piece like the grand C minor (another piece that really isn't Chopin at his very best, but the sentiment is unbeatable) is made for a moody teen. I have to confess I listen to Chopin Sonatas as rarely as to his Concertos. I think the form is not his style.
Herman
Posted on: 26 May 2003 by herm
It just so happened I got a review copy of a Chopin biography last week, Benita Eisler's Chopin's Funeral, which I read over the weekend. Even though Eisler is a serious bio-scholar of Romantic Era subjects (her previous book was a Byron bio) this book has some vie romancée characteristics, treating Chopin's life as seen through the prism of the years he spent with novelist / socialist / feminist George Sand.
It's an excellent idea, since this is one of the more unlikely unions in the history of the human race. Chopin was a natural conservative (in fact he was so anti-politics that he once screamed the Pope should govern the world), while Sand was into all kinds of politcal avantgarde. She was a sexpot; he was a rather detached and distant man who'd rather hear a beautiful woman sing than see her naked. Sand wrote and wrote without ever revising, having to write for a living; he was the arch perfectionist, not letting a piece go till it was absolutely perfect. She was healthy; he was sick.
It's an excruciatingly sad book. Maybe Eisler's writing doesn't help, but Chopin emerges as a man with little sense of humor. He lived to put this music on the planet, and that was it. (He rarely ever performed in public.) Apart from the painter Delacroix he seems to have had very few peer friends. Schumann was supposed to be a friend and champion of Chopin, but Chopin didn't really like Schumann's music. Chopin liked Bach, Mozart and Haydn - he didn't see the use of new music.
It's interesting to see how important his Mazurkas were to him. Those 51 pieces were a kind of musical sketchbook / diary. And when you're looking at the recordings the same problem occurs: there's the plush sixties recording Rubinstein made, but perhaps the 1952-1955 mono recordings are more interesting.
Herman
It's an excellent idea, since this is one of the more unlikely unions in the history of the human race. Chopin was a natural conservative (in fact he was so anti-politics that he once screamed the Pope should govern the world), while Sand was into all kinds of politcal avantgarde. She was a sexpot; he was a rather detached and distant man who'd rather hear a beautiful woman sing than see her naked. Sand wrote and wrote without ever revising, having to write for a living; he was the arch perfectionist, not letting a piece go till it was absolutely perfect. She was healthy; he was sick.
It's an excruciatingly sad book. Maybe Eisler's writing doesn't help, but Chopin emerges as a man with little sense of humor. He lived to put this music on the planet, and that was it. (He rarely ever performed in public.) Apart from the painter Delacroix he seems to have had very few peer friends. Schumann was supposed to be a friend and champion of Chopin, but Chopin didn't really like Schumann's music. Chopin liked Bach, Mozart and Haydn - he didn't see the use of new music.
It's interesting to see how important his Mazurkas were to him. Those 51 pieces were a kind of musical sketchbook / diary. And when you're looking at the recordings the same problem occurs: there's the plush sixties recording Rubinstein made, but perhaps the 1952-1955 mono recordings are more interesting.
Herman
Posted on: 26 May 2003 by Todd A
quote:
Originally posted by herm:
And when you're looking at the recordings the same problem occurs: there's the plush sixties recording Rubinstein made, but perhaps the 1952-1955 mono recordings are more interesting.
STOP! Now you're going to make me want to listen to n versions of the Mazurkas. It's just not right! Maybe Rubinstein's 50s Mazurkas are better, maybe just different, but I must stop collecting everything. And with Chopin, collecting is a serious problem! So just STOP!
Posted on: 26 May 2003 by herm
Come on, Todd,
What are you getting so upset about? What's one or two double discs to you?
In fact it's fairly simple. The Mazurkas are a no brainer. The fifties recording is more attractive (it's number 27 in the Rubinstein Collection).
As in the nocturnes the bass notes in the left hand are a little more resiliently sprung in the mono recording. In the Mazurkas this is very important.
In the Nocturnes it's more complicated: sometimes the stereo wins, sometimes mono does. And sometimes the 78s do. There you need three double discs - teehee!
Good luck, Todd. Try explain this to your family, friends and completely bewildered neighbours. (Well, at least it's not opera.)
Herman
What are you getting so upset about? What's one or two double discs to you?
In fact it's fairly simple. The Mazurkas are a no brainer. The fifties recording is more attractive (it's number 27 in the Rubinstein Collection).
As in the nocturnes the bass notes in the left hand are a little more resiliently sprung in the mono recording. In the Mazurkas this is very important.
In the Nocturnes it's more complicated: sometimes the stereo wins, sometimes mono does. And sometimes the 78s do. There you need three double discs - teehee!
Good luck, Todd. Try explain this to your family, friends and completely bewildered neighbours. (Well, at least it's not opera.)
Herman
Posted on: 26 May 2003 by Todd A
quote:
Originally posted by herm:
There you need three double discs - teehee!
But you see Herman, three two-disc sets are not sufficient. With Chopin, like with Beethoven and Bartok, I go on 6, 9, even 12 disc benders. When two-discs are needed just to get a survey of the works, the risk is that a 12+ disc binge is in the offing. I just cannot afford that right now, what having just upgraded my gear. So, again, I implore you, please stop!
Posted on: 26 May 2003 by herm
quote:
Originally posted by watchamacallit:
Good luck, Todd. Try explain this to your family, friends and completely bewildered neighbours. (Well, at least it's not opera.)
Did I say neighbours? I meant postman.
Just do it, Todd.
You don't want your family to think you're just in it for the hardware.
It's about the music. So you need to keep the music supply up.
Herman
Posted on: 28 May 2003 by herm
RdS: "I must confess I have a lot of problems with Chopin." "my head is full of Bach and Buxtehude; in Chopin I miss the precision of the former and the manly otherwordliness of the later."
I believe we're running into the Germanic theorema of objective / abstract music (i.e. good German music) versus subjective music that values melody over counterpoint etc? Your post doesn't seem to be about music, but rather about musical ideology, in which good music is manly while the feminine is obscene and wrong. And somehow non-German music always winds up being feminine and wrong in this way of thinking. (Actually this ideology was part of Germany's nation building project.) I wonder whether you're doing yourself a favor by adhering to these ancient (i.e. late 19th and early 20th century) stereotypes, but it's your life.
However it is a bit weird to call Chopin inprecise. In the entire period between Beethoven and Brahms, Chopin is without a doubt the most precise and perfectionist composer - which is why he regarded J.S. Bach as his model. He played from the W.T. Clavier every single day. Chopin scores are great reading.
He is also a remarkable case of a composer who didn't like contemporary music, harked back to the old masters and in spite of all this invented a sensationally new and progressive idiom.
About the Pires recording of the Nocturnes. It's not my favorite (if only for the spatiality of the recording) but what she does is focus on the opera inspiration for these pieces. I think that's quite valid. Of course she's not trying to bare her soul. She's trying to show us how deeply Chopin identified with the operatic soprano. In some of these pieces he is that magnificent singer (Pauline Viardot and Delfine Potocka come to mind, great singers and very very sexy women, according to contemporary sources), and that makes the Nocturnes such a fascinating project. Occasionally the typical Chopinian reticence and detachment gets lost, but hey, it's not the last recording on earth.
Herman
I believe we're running into the Germanic theorema of objective / abstract music (i.e. good German music) versus subjective music that values melody over counterpoint etc? Your post doesn't seem to be about music, but rather about musical ideology, in which good music is manly while the feminine is obscene and wrong. And somehow non-German music always winds up being feminine and wrong in this way of thinking. (Actually this ideology was part of Germany's nation building project.) I wonder whether you're doing yourself a favor by adhering to these ancient (i.e. late 19th and early 20th century) stereotypes, but it's your life.
However it is a bit weird to call Chopin inprecise. In the entire period between Beethoven and Brahms, Chopin is without a doubt the most precise and perfectionist composer - which is why he regarded J.S. Bach as his model. He played from the W.T. Clavier every single day. Chopin scores are great reading.
He is also a remarkable case of a composer who didn't like contemporary music, harked back to the old masters and in spite of all this invented a sensationally new and progressive idiom.
About the Pires recording of the Nocturnes. It's not my favorite (if only for the spatiality of the recording) but what she does is focus on the opera inspiration for these pieces. I think that's quite valid. Of course she's not trying to bare her soul. She's trying to show us how deeply Chopin identified with the operatic soprano. In some of these pieces he is that magnificent singer (Pauline Viardot and Delfine Potocka come to mind, great singers and very very sexy women, according to contemporary sources), and that makes the Nocturnes such a fascinating project. Occasionally the typical Chopinian reticence and detachment gets lost, but hey, it's not the last recording on earth.
Herman
Posted on: 28 May 2003 by herm
Ross: It's too bad you (apparently) couldn't get hold of this cheapo Classical d'Oro release of Rubinstein's thirties recording. I don't know how come, but there's much less historical hiss on this one than on the official Rubinstein Collection disc (and the Naxos) - and I don't think there's any treble shaved off in the process. As I said the only downside is the lack of any documentation and the fact it stops at Nocturne nr. 16 - so you miss out on the Opus 62. But the reproduction is much more enjoyable.
RdS: agreed with most of what you say (including the Pires bit: I may have been a little rhetorically disingenuous there); I'm just puzzled that you deny yourself the pleasure of so much great music.
To use Ross's definition, perhaps Nocturnes like the g-minor ones, the ones I called the insomnia Nocturnes, are precise in their invocation of Romantic emotions and attitudes - though always with that precision, detachment and reticence that make Chopin so different from Schumann (whom I love to bits, too).
However, there's a different kind of Chopin, too, even though I hesitate to call it 'later' Chopin, his life being that short. I would firmly recommend you'd listen, and if possible read (or even attempt to play) later Nocturnes like the 48 / 2 in f sharp minor and the 55 / 2 in E flat major, the one starting with a high dominant and then rolling on in that never-ending soprano melody.
The emotion evoked here is as close as you'll get to a wonderful Bach piece, i.e. the pleasure of being saturated with music - musical invention and musical execution, with a structural beauty and neatness that generates its own chaste 'classical' emotion.
Herman
RdS: agreed with most of what you say (including the Pires bit: I may have been a little rhetorically disingenuous there); I'm just puzzled that you deny yourself the pleasure of so much great music.
To use Ross's definition, perhaps Nocturnes like the g-minor ones, the ones I called the insomnia Nocturnes, are precise in their invocation of Romantic emotions and attitudes - though always with that precision, detachment and reticence that make Chopin so different from Schumann (whom I love to bits, too).
However, there's a different kind of Chopin, too, even though I hesitate to call it 'later' Chopin, his life being that short. I would firmly recommend you'd listen, and if possible read (or even attempt to play) later Nocturnes like the 48 / 2 in f sharp minor and the 55 / 2 in E flat major, the one starting with a high dominant and then rolling on in that never-ending soprano melody.
The emotion evoked here is as close as you'll get to a wonderful Bach piece, i.e. the pleasure of being saturated with music - musical invention and musical execution, with a structural beauty and neatness that generates its own chaste 'classical' emotion.
Herman
Posted on: 02 June 2003 by garth
Chopin Feminine?!
I really don't get this. Chopin reflects the whole range of human emotion - not to mention gender. This "idea" may come from certain dated interpretations - although that certainly does not apply to the pianists mentioned here. Perhaps a listen to the 1st and 3rd scherzos, last ten preludes, polonaises, 2nd sonata, 1st and second ballades, etudes, etc. would be instructive.
P.S. love the Rubinstein and Moravec nocturnes, Malcucynski's mazurkas and polonaises, sonatas, and ballades, Horovitz's and Michelangeli's mazurkas, Argerich's preludes, and on and on. Also, re Bach, the later nocturnes, mazurkas, polonaise fantasie, and others, show increasing contrapuntal invention.
Cheers,
Garth
I really don't get this. Chopin reflects the whole range of human emotion - not to mention gender. This "idea" may come from certain dated interpretations - although that certainly does not apply to the pianists mentioned here. Perhaps a listen to the 1st and 3rd scherzos, last ten preludes, polonaises, 2nd sonata, 1st and second ballades, etudes, etc. would be instructive.
P.S. love the Rubinstein and Moravec nocturnes, Malcucynski's mazurkas and polonaises, sonatas, and ballades, Horovitz's and Michelangeli's mazurkas, Argerich's preludes, and on and on. Also, re Bach, the later nocturnes, mazurkas, polonaise fantasie, and others, show increasing contrapuntal invention.
Cheers,
Garth
Posted on: 05 June 2003 by garth
Hi Herm. Your totally right about late Chopin and pianists certainly do recognize much of this output as being quite different than earlier works and refer to it as "late Chopin". As I mentioned earlier - and as you note in your Bach Reference - there is much more contrapuntal interest. Favorite late Chopin. B and E flat nocturnes, 4th sherzo, polonaise fantasie, 4th ballade, assorted mazurkas.
Garth
Garth
Posted on: 06 June 2003 by herm
Hi Garth,
It's so good to see you're posting again in ye Olde Musick Room, and so expertly. Interesting to hear people really talk about Late Chopin. I'm of two minds about this, for one because I have a pet theory that great artists are just born with their material. All they need is time to reel off what they've got. They just become better in leaving out the superfluous.
As I look at it now (subject to change) Chopin couples evocative / romantic pieces with more intricate / purely musical pieces from Opus 48 onwards. Of course these distinctions are arbitrary to begin with, but it's very hard to hear the C minor and not picture some dark night scene, while with the F sharp minor you're much more drawn to wondering about the music itself, and the neatness of the construction. So, Tom, I'm kind of iffy about your suggestion the pieces get more nocturnal as the opus numbers progress. The opus 15 G minor is pretty dark, for one thing. I suspect Chopin was trying to offer a good mix - he was selling these pieces, after all.
It's interesting you mention the 62 / 1, B major, Garth. It's a very difficult piece to fully grasp. Are you sure this has the technical characteristics of Late Chopin? Couldn't this equally well be a reworking of a discarded middle mvt of the Piano Concertos? It's not, obviously, but I'm just wondering about your theory and mine. (It's interesting, too, Rubinstein does this one best by far in his early recording.) It's such a strange piece. From the first bars it seems to want to stop, and all those pedal points seem to hold it back too. If I'd have to pick a Romantic Age picture, I'd say the piece is an opium dream; it's about Chopinian reluctance crossing over into giving up.
I have always liked the Opus 62 companion piece in E major better (those everlasting trills in the B major bug me a lot, too). It's interesting, again, it's not a soprano piece. Both pieces sound like a man's voice talking, and this one's talking about peace of mind coming with age, perhaps, the left hand providing flashbacks of romantic turmoil. However I'm sure other people have other pictures with these pieces.
Herman
It's so good to see you're posting again in ye Olde Musick Room, and so expertly. Interesting to hear people really talk about Late Chopin. I'm of two minds about this, for one because I have a pet theory that great artists are just born with their material. All they need is time to reel off what they've got. They just become better in leaving out the superfluous.
As I look at it now (subject to change) Chopin couples evocative / romantic pieces with more intricate / purely musical pieces from Opus 48 onwards. Of course these distinctions are arbitrary to begin with, but it's very hard to hear the C minor and not picture some dark night scene, while with the F sharp minor you're much more drawn to wondering about the music itself, and the neatness of the construction. So, Tom, I'm kind of iffy about your suggestion the pieces get more nocturnal as the opus numbers progress. The opus 15 G minor is pretty dark, for one thing. I suspect Chopin was trying to offer a good mix - he was selling these pieces, after all.
It's interesting you mention the 62 / 1, B major, Garth. It's a very difficult piece to fully grasp. Are you sure this has the technical characteristics of Late Chopin? Couldn't this equally well be a reworking of a discarded middle mvt of the Piano Concertos? It's not, obviously, but I'm just wondering about your theory and mine. (It's interesting, too, Rubinstein does this one best by far in his early recording.) It's such a strange piece. From the first bars it seems to want to stop, and all those pedal points seem to hold it back too. If I'd have to pick a Romantic Age picture, I'd say the piece is an opium dream; it's about Chopinian reluctance crossing over into giving up.
I have always liked the Opus 62 companion piece in E major better (those everlasting trills in the B major bug me a lot, too). It's interesting, again, it's not a soprano piece. Both pieces sound like a man's voice talking, and this one's talking about peace of mind coming with age, perhaps, the left hand providing flashbacks of romantic turmoil. However I'm sure other people have other pictures with these pieces.
Herman
Posted on: 11 June 2003 by Edot
I have Rubinstein's mid-60' s set and really love it. But now that you've got my curiosity up Herm, I may have to pick up one of the earlier recordings.
I think I remember reading that Rubinstein's 60's recordings were originally made with three mic's and that for the first CD release only two of the tracks were used and for the current release they went back to the three track mix. I could have this backwards and have never compared them but just thought this may be of interest.
One thing is for sure the packaging of the current discs is really lame. The spines are unreadable and those slip sleeves scratch the discs.
I think I remember reading that Rubinstein's 60's recordings were originally made with three mic's and that for the first CD release only two of the tracks were used and for the current release they went back to the three track mix. I could have this backwards and have never compared them but just thought this may be of interest.
One thing is for sure the packaging of the current discs is really lame. The spines are unreadable and those slip sleeves scratch the discs.
Posted on: 12 June 2003 by herm
Well, Phil, obviously I love Lipatti - how can one not? I used to have a girlfriend, with this enormous ass and a great gift for cooking (not entirely unconnected, come to think of it), and she had quite a bunch of Lipatti records. We also went to a few seventies Perahia recitals, when he was still performing, intensily, Schoenberg and Bartok.
However, isn't it interesting that Rubinstein, one of the last old-time pianists, did record entire oeuvres, rather than attractive tidbits, such as the lovely D flat major Nocturne? Correct me if I'm wrong, but before guys like Schnabel, Kempff and Rubinstein started recording the way they did, people barely had an idea what these composers were about.
Beethoven? Oh, the Pathetique or the Mondschein.
Chopin? The Funeral March sonata, and a bunch of little pieces.
Ed, do you mind terribly if I say I kind of like the edition with the little bookies, rather than the boxes? Sure, you can't read the spines, but the documentation ain't too bad. Get the middle recording of the Nocturnes, if you want another one - it's the blue one. And tell us what you think about it.
Herman
However, isn't it interesting that Rubinstein, one of the last old-time pianists, did record entire oeuvres, rather than attractive tidbits, such as the lovely D flat major Nocturne? Correct me if I'm wrong, but before guys like Schnabel, Kempff and Rubinstein started recording the way they did, people barely had an idea what these composers were about.
Beethoven? Oh, the Pathetique or the Mondschein.
Chopin? The Funeral March sonata, and a bunch of little pieces.
Ed, do you mind terribly if I say I kind of like the edition with the little bookies, rather than the boxes? Sure, you can't read the spines, but the documentation ain't too bad. Get the middle recording of the Nocturnes, if you want another one - it's the blue one. And tell us what you think about it.
Herman
Posted on: 13 June 2003 by JeremyD
A few weeks ago, on discovering a 1947 Lipatti recording of Chopin going for £2 in a discount store, I broke my rule of never buying classical music on CD and nabbed it before it was too late.
It seems to be called Dinu Lipatti Piano Chopin (but it's hard to tell).
It includes Sonata No. 3 (op. 58), Barcarolle (op. 60), Nocturne (op. 27/2) and Mazurka (op. 50/3), and it's on "Diem Classic".
It's well worth seeking out if you've never head Lipatti - especially for £2. But be prepared for poor sound quality and plenty of crackle.
--J
It seems to be called Dinu Lipatti Piano Chopin (but it's hard to tell).
It includes Sonata No. 3 (op. 58), Barcarolle (op. 60), Nocturne (op. 27/2) and Mazurka (op. 50/3), and it's on "Diem Classic".
It's well worth seeking out if you've never head Lipatti - especially for £2. But be prepared for poor sound quality and plenty of crackle.
--J
Posted on: 13 June 2003 by Todd A
quote:
Originally posted by P.F.L.Purser:
I should therefore be interested in your opinion of my final choice of the recorded versions of the complete Chopin Waltzes- Lipatti, even over Rubinstein after much pondering.
I can't speak for Herman, but I say that Lipatti laid down the greatest recorded interpretation yet of the Waltzes. Better than Rubinstein. Better than Cortot.
Posted on: 14 June 2003 by herm
The funny thing is the waltzes are the one group of Chopin works I wouldn’t want to hear a complete recording of - or is it just me? The ONE two three, ONE two three, just gets too relentless, and frankly I cannot help but think Chopin didn’t quite put his best ideas in these works. It's usually one great little idea, and the further you go down the page (with repeats and all) the less interesting it gets.
Obviously the composer did not intend us to hear more than one or two of these waltzes in a session.
Still, I love the way A.M. Benedetti plays the Opus 69 / 2 A flat major, although he uses the inauthentic Fontana version. Chopin often goes to A flat major for an insouciant salon mood (take the 32 / 2 Nocturne, a sort of waltz in the wrong meter), but here things are turned outside in, the major sounding like minor.
I love the A minor waltz (34 / 2) as recorded at Rubinstein's Moscow concert.
And I love Lipatti's F minor (70 / 2), perhaps the crowning Waltz piece (and, indeed, Garth, there's much more hand against hand counterpoint in these late Waltzes).
In comparison with the Nocturnes it's remarkable how 'narrow' the keyboard is in the Waltzes. There are very few really high or really low notes, and if the right hand goes up, usually the left hand follows. They are more talking pieces than singing pieces, with possible exception of the F minor.
Herman
Obviously the composer did not intend us to hear more than one or two of these waltzes in a session.
Still, I love the way A.M. Benedetti plays the Opus 69 / 2 A flat major, although he uses the inauthentic Fontana version. Chopin often goes to A flat major for an insouciant salon mood (take the 32 / 2 Nocturne, a sort of waltz in the wrong meter), but here things are turned outside in, the major sounding like minor.
I love the A minor waltz (34 / 2) as recorded at Rubinstein's Moscow concert.
And I love Lipatti's F minor (70 / 2), perhaps the crowning Waltz piece (and, indeed, Garth, there's much more hand against hand counterpoint in these late Waltzes).
In comparison with the Nocturnes it's remarkable how 'narrow' the keyboard is in the Waltzes. There are very few really high or really low notes, and if the right hand goes up, usually the left hand follows. They are more talking pieces than singing pieces, with possible exception of the F minor.
Herman
Posted on: 20 June 2003 by garth
Hi Folks,
I just dropped in since my last installment and note there's lots of great food for thought that has been added. Just a couple of quick thoughts before bed and hopefully I'll pull out some recording and music and get back on some other details.
Interesting how composers often tend to pare things down to the essential notes at the end. Late Beethoven of course, but Chopin, Brahms - all the intermezzi and capricios are late works - and others. I guess when time is precious you want to communicaye in as direct and economical a fashion as possible.
I don't know about the B+ opus 62 nocturne Herm, it just sounds late to me. Try playing the piece and those "everlasting trills" will really bug you. I love opus 62 #2 as well. Heard an exquisite performance of it by Shura Cherkasky in Toronto many years ago.
I'm also iffy about the idea of Chopin getting more nocturnal as the pices progress. For one thing Chopin was definitely not a writer of program music - in the way Liszt was - and I really think any extra-musical associations are "after the fact". Also the pieces are written over his entire life so I think that kind-of precludes any scheme or plan. I think he was just writing what he felt at that particular period in his life.
That Lipatti record is fantastic! I actually quite like the sound - as I do on many old piano recordings like the early horowitz Liszt Sonata - and this is my all time favorite performance of the 3rd Sonata and the opus 50 mazurka. Must say, my old piano teacher Peter Katin's live recording of the 3rd Sonata - from Malt Snappings or something? - is wonderful.
Time for some sleep.
Cheers,
Garth
I just dropped in since my last installment and note there's lots of great food for thought that has been added. Just a couple of quick thoughts before bed and hopefully I'll pull out some recording and music and get back on some other details.
Interesting how composers often tend to pare things down to the essential notes at the end. Late Beethoven of course, but Chopin, Brahms - all the intermezzi and capricios are late works - and others. I guess when time is precious you want to communicaye in as direct and economical a fashion as possible.
I don't know about the B+ opus 62 nocturne Herm, it just sounds late to me. Try playing the piece and those "everlasting trills" will really bug you. I love opus 62 #2 as well. Heard an exquisite performance of it by Shura Cherkasky in Toronto many years ago.
I'm also iffy about the idea of Chopin getting more nocturnal as the pices progress. For one thing Chopin was definitely not a writer of program music - in the way Liszt was - and I really think any extra-musical associations are "after the fact". Also the pieces are written over his entire life so I think that kind-of precludes any scheme or plan. I think he was just writing what he felt at that particular period in his life.
That Lipatti record is fantastic! I actually quite like the sound - as I do on many old piano recordings like the early horowitz Liszt Sonata - and this is my all time favorite performance of the 3rd Sonata and the opus 50 mazurka. Must say, my old piano teacher Peter Katin's live recording of the 3rd Sonata - from Malt Snappings or something? - is wonderful.
Time for some sleep.
Cheers,
Garth
Posted on: 19 October 2003 by herm
Godowski's Nocturnes
Tonight I got out the Leopold Godowski volume of "Great Pianists of the 20th Century" on which is a series of Nocturnes recorded in 1928. Hadn't listened to that one in a long while.
I was actually on my way to bed, but as this recital progressed I got more and more alert. Godowski's playing is so unassuming and yet absolutely sovereign. The best piece, perhaps, is the Opus 37 / 2, G major Nocturne. A very difficult piece (to play) with all those double digit arpeggios breaking up the melody, and then the horridly exposed middle section. Godowski's account is utterly spellbinding (Rosie came down from the bedroom to listen too). It's got to be the best I have ever heard.
Herman
Tonight I got out the Leopold Godowski volume of "Great Pianists of the 20th Century" on which is a series of Nocturnes recorded in 1928. Hadn't listened to that one in a long while.
I was actually on my way to bed, but as this recital progressed I got more and more alert. Godowski's playing is so unassuming and yet absolutely sovereign. The best piece, perhaps, is the Opus 37 / 2, G major Nocturne. A very difficult piece (to play) with all those double digit arpeggios breaking up the melody, and then the horridly exposed middle section. Godowski's account is utterly spellbinding (Rosie came down from the bedroom to listen too). It's got to be the best I have ever heard.
Herman
Posted on: 20 October 2003 by ken c
what noctunes am i listening to?
the hyperion "livia rev"
other chopins i have, i believe from recommendations on this forum:
14 valses (op 27/2, op 50/3) on emi great recordings of the century
and piano sonata no 3 in B minor, also an emi GROTC,
both by dinu lipatti
the nocturn in E op 15/1, on rubinsteins "the collection".
i have nothing clever to say about these recordings except that i enjoy them a lot. as i mentioned last time, piano music tells me a lot about my system performance.
there was a long thread that i started 2 years ago from which i got some good information -- and led me to rubinstein collection.
http://forums.naim-audio.com/eve/forums?a=tpc&s=67019385&f=38019385&m=8801901591
enjoy
ken
the hyperion "livia rev"
other chopins i have, i believe from recommendations on this forum:
14 valses (op 27/2, op 50/3) on emi great recordings of the century
and piano sonata no 3 in B minor, also an emi GROTC,
both by dinu lipatti
the nocturn in E op 15/1, on rubinsteins "the collection".
i have nothing clever to say about these recordings except that i enjoy them a lot. as i mentioned last time, piano music tells me a lot about my system performance.
there was a long thread that i started 2 years ago from which i got some good information -- and led me to rubinstein collection.
http://forums.naim-audio.com/eve/forums?a=tpc&s=67019385&f=38019385&m=8801901591
enjoy
ken
Posted on: 20 October 2003 by herm
quote:
Originally posted by ken c:
piano music tells me a lot about my system performance.
there was a long thread that i started 2 years ago from which i got some good information -- and led me to rubinstein collection.
Yeah, that was one of the first threads I joined in. The Rubinstein Collection is IMO one of the best things that happened to CDs.
I'm a little puzzled by your saying piano music is good way to check how a sistem performs. I'd say any sistem does a credible job at piano, with its well-defined notes etc. Isn't complex orchestral music, or the human voice, or even solo violin with it's long held notes much more demanding?
I can listen with great pleasure to Godowsky's beautiful burnished piano tone, even though it's a 1928 recording. Hardly ever do I feel the same way when I'm listening to thirties orchestral recordings - for the same reason.
Herman
Posted on: 20 October 2003 by Toksik
Herman,Chopin's music is always on/in my LP12 /Ikemi. Ashkenazy being my favourite performer in this respect.the Preludes/Etudes being especially pleasing.
the late John Ogdon was a fine romantic period player and i had the fortune of hearing him at the Inverness theater.
by the way i hope you made the time to visit him in PER LACHAISE?.
dennis
the late John Ogdon was a fine romantic period player and i had the fortune of hearing him at the Inverness theater.
by the way i hope you made the time to visit him in PER LACHAISE?.
dennis
Posted on: 20 October 2003 by ken c
I'd say any sistem does a credible job at piano, with its well-defined notes etc. Isn't complex orchestral music, or the human voice, or even solo violin with it's long held notes much more demanding?
i dont want to hijack this wonderful thread which is focussed on music rather than equipment. but i have definitely found that piano music tells me a LOT about my system -- probably for precisely the reason you give, i.e. "... with its well defined notes". i suppose in the final analysis, ANY music will do -- i just find it a LOT easier with piano -- especially the extreme right hand -- and the sustain of the pedal without losing the tune.
enjoy
ken
i dont want to hijack this wonderful thread which is focussed on music rather than equipment. but i have definitely found that piano music tells me a LOT about my system -- probably for precisely the reason you give, i.e. "... with its well defined notes". i suppose in the final analysis, ANY music will do -- i just find it a LOT easier with piano -- especially the extreme right hand -- and the sustain of the pedal without losing the tune.
enjoy
ken