What constitutes a perfect performance?

We've been here before Mike, you cheeky monkey.

I don't think such a thing exists, a great performance on the other hand is when a performer gives his all and connects with the audience in communicating whatever they're on about.

John Shuttleworth of course, being a master...
1st movement

Mike, you seem to suffer from performance issues...

Dear Mike,

I do not know if you enjoy the piano playing of Edwin Fischer or Artur Scnhabel?

Or even Annie Fischer?

The violin playing of Oistrakh, or Adolf Busch?

Some of the greatest musicians of the twentieth century but who would never be able to produce a perfect performance in your definition, because they suffered the usual human slips that any of us do - much more rarely, but just as certainly from time to time - and so you are left with people like Heifetz, whose note perfect technique was astonishing ...

Now if you prefer Heifetz to Oistrakh, I would say that is entirely fair enough. Probably Haifetz came the closest of any musician to your definition of perfection as far as I can tell from what you have written about it so far.

It is fortunate for me that I consider perfection not to exsist in music making, and to be a false aim even if it could ever be achieved, but I also agree that sufficiently strong technique to be able to control the musical presentation so that a lucid impression of the artist's or artists' undertanding of what he or they felt the composer was driving at is a prime requirement for great music making ...

I do not maintain that a few bum notes add to the impression of sublime music making, but neither do they necessarily have the significance to ruin a performence for me.

Though it may be a bit of a task, because our musical tastes don't overlap a huge amount, and you are going to have to meet me on my own favourite repertoire for this to work, but would you be so kind as to post a performance of Beethoven that you happen to think is perfect.

I guess you will send me to Gardiner, which is unfortunate as I actually do not enjoy his idea of Beethoven, but if you can think of another that might serve. I could never take Gardiner all that seriously in Beethoven when he could seem to so miss the point of that seminal work, the Missa Solemnis ...

Such an illustrative example might help me to really grasp what it is you see as being perfect or possible to actually be perfect in music making.

Equally examples from Haydn or Bach might help me comprehend this a little better.

ATB from George

quote:

Originally posted by GFFJ:
Dear Mike,

would you be so kind as to post a performance of Beethoven that you happen to think is perfect.

Pollini on DGG Piano Sonatas 30,31,32
OP. 109/110/111

I'll be serious for a second. George, I love your posts, I feel like I'm back in class again. I'm really glad you're on here. I have a lot of Heifitz's recordings, and he soars, he burns. Yet, my most favorite recordings are those of Oistrich, for he always grabs my emotional vein.
I am not into technical perfection (obviously). I go and hear many singers, and if they drop a line, who cares, when they're back at it and sweep me off my feet, that's all that counts. Same with an instrumentalist. I heard an Ivan Moravec recital once, and he flubbed one note, and you could see a few people gasp. Who cares, what and how he played that night, after listening to his records for years, I can't put into words. My friend and I were elated beyond words. Afterwards, an older gentlemen stopped us in the hall and stated that we really seemed to enjoy the show, with kind of a questioning tone. I told him it was one of the most breathtaking performances I've ever heard and will remember it till I die.
I'll be quiet now...sorry.

quote:

Originally posted by mikeeschman:

quote:

Originally posted by GFFJ:
Dear Mike,

would you be so kind as to post a performance of Beethoven that you happen to think is perfect.

Pollini on DGG Piano Sonatas 30,31,32
OP. 109/110/111

and I quite agree that Gardiner's Missa Solemnis is awful, but that doesn't make Gardiner/ORR Symphony No. 3 "Eroica" any less wonderful.

For the record, my favorite Missa Solemnis is Jochum/Concertgebouw which is full of clams, but the music comes through beautifully.

These "perfect" recordings I rave about are abberations that only come along every so often. I am taken with them because they stun me and reveal things in the music otherwise unremarkable.

One final note, for violin I pick Sholomo Mintz doing the Paganini Caprices on DGG, another perfect recording.

quote:

Originally posted by mikeeschman:
Pollini on DGG Piano Sonatas 30,31,32
OP. 109/110/111

... yes, although it is often argued that old steel fingers misses the spirit of these works completely.

Now, I should make it clear from the outset that I am not one of these "fistfuls of bum notes = profound performance" nuts - viz the kind who seem to think the likes of the Lindsay Quartet somehow plumb the depths just because they play out of tune all the time. That said, I quite agree about Pollini's Beethoven: if ever anyone wanted an example of how an obsession with perfection and the "invisible" performer can backfire, the recording you mention is probably one of the best examples I can think of!

As for Gardiner, I'm not sure I'd describe his Missa solemnis as "awful", but he does missa (!) lot of the musical points, possibly because he was so concerned with rhythm and pointing up certain orchestral effects. The choir though is bloody amazing! I like Klemperer for all his faults, there's a truly incredible live performance on BBC Legends of Toscanini with the BBC SO and choir in the 1930s - if you can stand old recordings, and his other recordings of the piece are all worth hearing. The joker in the Missa solemnis game, however, is Karajan. Hear him in his digital recording of the 1980s for a totally true perspective on this great work, captured in magnificent sound (in its remastered version anyway), or more especially, if you don't mind old recordings, hear him with the Vienna Phil live at the 1959 Salzburg Festival. No other performance grasps the great work in all its multifaceted glory than this - even Klemperer.



EW

quote:

Originally posted by Earwicker:

quote:

Originally posted by mikeeschman:
Pollini on DGG Piano Sonatas 30,31,32
OP. 109/110/111

... yes, although it is often argued that old steel fingers misses the spirit of these works completely.

I quite agree about Pollini's Beethoven: if ever anyone wanted an example of how an obsession with perfection and the "invisible" performer can backfire, the recording you mention is probably one of the best examples I can think of!

i don't think it backfires. it gets more of the music right than i have ever heard.

In what way do you think it backfires to play all the right notes, with the right inflection and tempo?

I went to amazon and hunted up another opinion on Pollini :


"This is very much the case with these performances, certainly the finest of Pollini's Beethoven recordings. The late sonatas require precisely the same gifts with which this pianist has been blessed like no other: lucidity, simplicity, an often terrifying intensity that yields to the most tender lyricism. There is no place in late Beethoven, nor in Pollini's sensibility, for generic expressivity of any kind. Every phrase is distilled to its essence, but without a trace of premeditation. Pollini gives us a remarkably clear window into the liberative spirituality of a composer for whom most egoic concerns had been subsumed in his artistic struggle. If the late sonatas are important to you, don't hesitate to buy this record - you'll hear the performances of a lifetime."

Yes, he has his fans!

Yeah, OK, his set of the late sonatas is in the library, I'm heading that way tomorrow so I'll borrow it again and have another listen. As I recall, he avoids every musical gesture like the plague and flattens the structure such that it resembles a kipper's todger. Not for him the metaphor nor the metaphysical, the deep mysteries of these sublime utterances, but I may have forgotten. I'll have another listen, you don't have to twist my arm very hard to make me listen to the last 3 sonatas! As I recall they're simply rattled off in a sort of bright, shimmering monochrome shorn of all depth or insight, but it's years since I've heard them.

quote:

Originally posted by Earwicker:
Yes, he has his fans!

Yeah, OK, his set of the late sonatas is in the library, I'm heading that way tomorrow so I'll borrow it again and have another listen. As I recall, he avoids every musical gesture like the plague and flattens the structure such that it resembles a kipper's todger. Not for him the metaphor nor the metaphysical, the deep mysteries of these sublime utterances, but I may have forgotten. I'll have another listen, you don't have to twist my arm very hard to make me listen to the last 3 sonatas! As I recall they're simply rattled off in a sort of bright, shimmering monochrome shorn of all depth or insight, but it's years since I've heard them.

i don't recognize the performances from your description at all. I think you have to get used to hearing a performer that can take any tempo he likes, rather than being hamstrung by a lack of technique. Following along with the sheet music will make you better appreciate Pollini and Beethoven.

Who do you prefer and why?

quote:

Originally posted by mikeeschman:
Who do you prefer and why?

In joint first place Brendel's digital recording and Kempff's 1950s mono. Both men capture the high poetry of these pieces and convey its otherworldliness but without any lack of drive and propulsion. Neither are in any way deficient in technique either, indeed in the 50s Kempff was a truly awesome master of the keyboard! Sadly Emil Gilels's doctor killed him before he could commit Op 111 to disc, but his 109 and 110 are of a very high order indeed, although I still prefer Brendel and Kempff. (By the way, avoid Brendel's earlier Philips recording, it is very dull!) All these guys offer lofty and totally complete views of the music.

I also like the musicianly efforts of Richard Goode and more recently Paul Lewis. The latter has a feel for these pieces that puts him above most, but his softly softly approach and caution makes him sound a bit nondescript compared with the best. Both these guys obviously apprehend the music behind the notes as it were though. I STILL don't know quite what to think of Kovacevich's deadly EMI set, I haven't played it for a while, but I do seem to recall liking it more than Pollini; at least it sounds Beethovnian... in a lethal sort of way! I must have another listen, but I'm going through a Bach phase at the moment.

quote:

Originally posted by Earwicker:
In joint first place Brendel's digital recording and Kempff's 1950s mono.

I love Brendel's Eroica Variations, but the sonatas I have heard by him don't ring my bell, though I've never heard him attempt the Op. 109/110/111.

Kempff is a pianist that never fails to leave me unmoved, but I've never heard his Beethoven.

Barenboim and Arrau both do very well with the Op. 109/110/111, but Pollini stands alone for his utter clarity of line.

quote:

Originally posted by mikeeschman:
Pollini stands alone for his utter clarity of line.

He has clarity, I'll give you that, just not much else! Yes, I forgot Arrau. I've got his 60s set although again I haven't listened to it for ages; Arrau is a real favourite of mine generally. I gather his digital recordings of the Beethoven last 3 surpass the 60s ones but I've never heard them. I certainly want to though!!

In these last three sonatas, it's clarity of line that is most needed and most fundamental. With it, the pieces are lyrical and full of musical import, and the themes dance with light. Without it, it's muddled and the themes disappear into a harmonic morass more like cold oatmeal than anything else.

One of the biggest shocks in music listening was to hear Rudolph Serkin let these sonatas get stuck in the mud exactly this way.

The trouble with Pollini is that like most Communists, he believes in the subjugation of the human being to the "idea". The idea being, in his case, that if one merely pays attention to the score, and presents everything in a rational and clear way,... everything else will follow in it's course.

Communism is the most rational form of Government, to each according to his needs and from each,... accordingly. Rational, but when applied to human beings on a large scale, a complete disaster. What about the spiritual irrational side of man, this is where human nature leaves off and artistic creation begins. So, in effect, the most perfect performance is,... the most human,...i.e. the least perfect.

As far as Serkin goes, yes, Late Beethoven requires a certain degree of technique which he lacks, but there are finer musicians than anyone posting here (past and present) who admired him,... despite his faults (or indeed, perhaps because of them)...

You might check out his Diabelli Variations (on Sony) if you are curious...


Noyes

Yes, it boils down in the last analysis to whether you think it's enough to simply play the notes as written, and that all you need to know (and hear) is written on the score.

quote:

Originally posted by Earwicker:
Yes, it boils down in the last analysis to whether you think it's enough to simply play the notes as written, and that all you need to know (and hear) is written on the score.

Nothing is undervalued as often as playing the notes perfectly. It is quite a feat to bring out all the lines in Beethoven's last three sonatas. It isn't often done, and never as successfully as in the Pollini.

It's like the difference between hearing multiple conversations as a dull, indistinct roar and hearing and understanding the words being spoken.

At some level, I think the Pollini is the only time I have heard what these sonatas contain.

Music is the only pastime I can think of at the moment where a lack of clarity might be defended in the name of art.

Many pianist have spend many thousands of hours studying the pages of these sonatas. Few have achieved clarity.

And I think Pollini does a great deal more than just play the notes. His starting point is to play perfectly. When you get past that, a world of emotion and insight awaits.

quote:

Originally posted by Noye's Fludde:
The trouble with Pollini is that like most Communists, he believes in the subjugation of the human being to the "idea". The idea being, in his case, that if one merely pays attention to the score, and presents everything in a rational and clear way,... everything else will follow in it's course.

Communism is the most rational form of Government, to each according to his needs and from each,... accordingly. Rational, but when applied to human beings on a large scale, a complete disaster. What about the spiritual irrational side of man, this is where human nature leaves off and artistic creation begins. So, in effect, the most perfect performance is,... the most human,...i.e. the least perfect.

As far as Serkin goes, yes, Late Beethoven requires a certain degree of technique which he lacks, but there are finer musicians than anyone posting here (past and present) who admired him,... despite his faults (or indeed, perhaps because of them)...

You might check out his Diabelli Variations (on Sony) if you are curious...


Noyes

I never thought to bring politics into Beethoven, and am unclear as to what value, if any, it brings to the table.

I am a long time lover of Serkin; I was just a bit let down by his Op. 109/110/111.

And yes, Pollini's Beethoven is rational and clear, as I am sure Beethoven's mind was when he penned these sonatas, overlooking his circumstance to see through life to create sublime music.

And for those willing to accept that calm, clear reason of composer and performer, a treasure awaits the listener in the Pollini recordings.

The irrational side of man has no place in these sonatas.

quote:

Originally posted by mikeeschman:

I never thought to bring politics into Beethoven, and am unclear as to what value, if any, it brings to the table.

None whatsoever. I was merely using Communism as a metaphor.

By the way, Pollini was a Communist ( at least when he made the recordings in question, and yes, I am aware that probably 60% of the Italian population was too,,... at this point in time...)



The man and his art are inseparable. At least in my (admittedly) irrational opinion.



ATB

Noyes

Well I shall grab them tomorrow unless some bugger else has borrowed them! Recent listening experiences to Pollini have not been enjoyable - a rather joyless Liszt B minor, and some recent recordings of some Mozart concertos with the Vienna Phil - all pretty depressing. Still, I've changed my mind about lots of performers over the years so I keep trying - I'm always willing to accept I may have missed the point, and sometimes when I come back to a recording I realise it was not as I remembered it. (Usually something I remembered as being great I return to only to find it was actually crap!)

quote:

Originally posted by Earwicker:
Well I shall grab them tomorrow unless some bugger else has borrowed them! Recent listening experiences to Pollini have not been enjoyable - a rather joyless Liszt B minor, and some recent recordings of some Mozart concertos with the Vienna Phil - all pretty depressing. Still, I've changed my mind about lots of performers over the years so I keep trying - I'm always willing to accept I may have missed the point, and sometimes when I come back to a recording I realise it was not as I remembered it. (Usually something I remembered as being great I return to only to find it was actually crap!)

I have heard his Liszt and didn't enjoy it, and I have some Schoenberg I can't bear to listen to.

Is there a pianist that gets it all right? :-)

quote:

Originally posted by Noye's Fludde:
The man and his art are inseparable.
ATB

Noyes

That's personal, not musical.

Brought face to face with it, I turn away.

quote:

Originally posted by mikeeschman:

quote:

Originally posted by Noye's Fludde:
The man and his art are inseparable.
ATB

Noyes

That's personal, not musical.

Brought face to face with it, I turn away.

No. The personal and the musical are one. This is not about voyeurism or making moral judgments it is just the truth.

So, to answer your question. There is no such thing as a perfect performance as there are no perfect people. The perfection you talk of suggests something mechanical. That's what bothers me about it.


Noye's

Is it not inevitable that the personality of the performer or performers must necessarily inform the resulting performance, however much the performer[s] might be selfless people of absolute integrity or absolute rotters.

I do avoid musical performances from some musicians I think are absolute rotters myself [or camp followers of other absolute rotters], even if the musical results might actually seem quite reasonable at first acquaintance.

I cannot get over such an artist or composer, though this is a personal response. Same with literature, though strangely it never seemed such an issue with sculpters to me, which is certainly not obviously rational! What were Rodin's politics and morals like? I have no idea, and never had enough interest to find out, but I do find a correlation with my long term satisfaction with a performing musician's recordings and their decency as a person.

ATB from George