Schubert by Volodos: Recording of the Year?
Posted by: Todd A on 01 July 2002
By way of beginning, let me state that I was not a Volodos fan until recently. When I first heard his playing of some Horowitz transcriptions I thought "another soulless keyboard wizard" playing tripe. Sure, his technique is transcendental, but so what. All the accolades he received for these types of works, and then for his Rachmaninov Third, led me to believe he was a showman.
Then about two or three months ago I heard a broadcast of him playing Prokofiev's Second Piano Concerto with the Detroit Symphony Orchestra. In a few moments my opinion changed. His technique was brought to bear on one of the finest 20th century concertos. His playing was simply amazing, the performance easily beating the formidable Krainev set. He conlcuded his appearance with the Carmern transcription, but I was hooked from the Prokofiev.
It was with some interest that I eyeballed his new recording of Schubert. Still, I had reservations. Volodos playing Schubert? A leading virtuoso playing the least virtuosic of the great Viennese composers? How would he fare? Bryce Morrison's glowing review and the fact that the disc was disc of the month in Gramophone helped. The recent sale at Tower cinched it: I bought the disc.
I should not have waited.
This disc is easily the best (new) disc I have purchased this year. I love Kissin's Pictures and Perahia's second set of Bach concertos, but this disc is in an altogether different category. It is the finest digital Schubert I have heard. Period.
The opening work is the D157 sonata, and even it is great, or as close as it can get. Volodos has absolute command of the piece and never lets his technique be imposing. The concluding Der Muller und der Bach is likewise wonderful; the Lisztian-Schubertian lyricism shines through. So far so good.
I saved the G Major sonata, D894 for last. Put simply, this is a monumental performance. Virtuosity for show is never a concern; music making of the highest order is. The opening movement is of near-Richter length at almost 19 minutes. The time literally melts away in beauty and subdued intensity. The next two movements are as sublime. Only in the finale, with some almost showy playing (I stress the word almost) and a perhaps too-fast approach is the piece less than heavenly. This is in comparison to the rest of the performance, mind you: most recordings are shallow compared to this. I simply cannot recommend this disc highly enough. As an added bonus, the sound is truly SOTA, almost setting new standards in piano reproduction.
Perhaps I wax too poetic? Well, I decided to do a comparison to a couple giant Schubertians of old to see how Volodos stacks up. I chose Walter Klien and Wilhelm Kempff. Both versions are noticeably shorter (7 minutes for the Klien, 9 for the Kempff), due mostly to the opening. Klien's Schubert has an urgency and darkness that is so appropriate to the music that I simply love his playing. (Klien's D537 and D845 are without question my favorites in those two works.) Here, however, Volodos has the edge. The whole piece makes a little more sense. When I spun the Kempff again, however, it became clear that as good as Volodos is, he still has some learnin' to do. Kempff's playing is other-worldly and beyond reproach. It's not that much better, but it is slightly better. No surprise. I've written it before: Kempff's Schubert is one of the greatest artistic achievements in recorded music history.
Comparisons aside, Volodos' new disc is a masterpiece. I've already spun it a half dozen times, and I deperately want to hear him play the last Schubert sonatas. Go forth and get this one.
Posted on: 01 July 2002 by herm
Hi Todd,
Perhaps Schubert sounds as the least virtuosic of the Vienna four, but in reality he's the hardest to play. Every single Mozart or Haydn sonata is doable at an amateur level, though with Mozart you need interpretive skills for the sentiment. Beethoven is hard work but still doable (excepting of course the late great ones). Schubert however is both hard work, demanding seven fingers a hand, but also these interpetive skills. It's a no win situation.
I was at a concert where Volodos played the pieces you discuss. I was not as much impressed by his incursions into echt germanic repertoire (I also saw / heard a Kreisleriana), as by his Rachmaninov and Scriabin. I would have loved to hear his Prokofiev. I can't help but feel that's his path: putting the song back into those usually pianistically interpreted Russians. I recommend the previous Volodos recording. It features a great Bunte Blätter by Schumann (the Gernman composer who had the biggest impact on Russian composing), and Scriabin 10.
However, I will go and look for this Schubert disc. Volodos usually sells at a discount here; apparently the young man lives in this neck of the woods.
One more thing. A while back I purchased the Vladimir Feltsman Carnegie Hall debut (1987). This recital features the lovely Schubert A major sonata, D 664. Another Russian interpreting Schubert, and completely successful. The 664 was composed for a young lady Schubert met and taught on a summer vacation, and this rather Austenian situation is not pondered away by Feltsman. Lovely piece, lovely playing (probably unavailable, tough).
Herman
Posted on: 02 July 2002 by David Hobbs-Mallyon
Todd,
Thanks for the review. HMV in London currently have this on sale for £6.99 - I wavered, but decided against on the basis of having bought too many CDs already. Looks like another visit is in the offing.
David
Posted on: 05 July 2002 by rch
Todd,
If you love piano works of Schubert you should try to get something by Alfred Brendel. For me he IS the best Schubert interpret, although I like Gavrilov or Perahia too.
Cheers
Christian
Posted on: 20 July 2002 by herm
By now I've had Volodos' Schubert disc for a week, and it is a recording that one can recommend to anyone.
Todd characterized the way Volodos approaches the big G major sonata as monumental, and that is the apt term.
The 894 is a very strange sonata. Obviously every major Schubert work is very strange, in that FS was breaking boundaries all the time. The strange thing about the 894 is the starkness of its musical proceedings; there's much less of the ever changing modulations we look for in Schubert, there's a lot of knocking and stalling pedal points; there's a lot of Beethoven, but without the Beethoven drive. The original publisher tried to sell the first movement as a single piece Fantasia: he just didn't get it.
The challenge of this piece - and a lot of pianists love this piece for its challenges - is how do you perform it? Is it a symphony, with those big outdoorsy textures in the first two movements? A sort of Alpensymphony on the keyboard? Is it maybe a disguised string quartet - after all, it's the first major work after the last string quartet FS wrote, and in the same key. Especially the sonata's finale is easily resolved into a piece for four voices, along the same lines as the SQs finale. Or is it just a piano sonata?
The way I hear it Volodos (and the sound engineers) approaches the piece, he goes for the symphonic approach. The slow, weighty introduction, the big sound, the way rythms are not too lightly sprung (even in the scherzo): the suggestion is: my piano is an orchestra. I have to say it wouldn't be my approach.
894 is not a symphony because the material's spareness is meant to imply intimacy. It's a non-public piece. That's why he's not putting out.
So I would opt for the piano approach. Unfortunately I am not familiar with the Kempff - I guess I should rectify this situation soon. As yet I would favor the Brendel. There's a lot of problems with Brendel: he's much more a Haydn player, a wit, an intellectual, than a brooding moody type like Schubert. However, his love for Schubert, and his decades of study into Schubert sources, does pay dividends with a hard piece like this. I'd wish Lupu had recorded this piece. He's a great Schubert performer.
The best Volodos did till now, for me, is the Schumann Bünte Blätter on the Carnegie recital disc. I can't help but feel he was advised to do something different from the Rach, Scriabin and Schumann stuff, to broaden out, and so he did this without having the full wherewithal. This doesn't mean it's not a splendid performance; it's just we won't be listening to it twenty years later, is my guess.
Herman
Posted on: 26 July 2002 by Todd A
I was so impressed by the Schubert disc that I decided to buy all three previous Volodos discs. (I got cheap, so I figured what the hell.) Let me start immediately by writing that not one of the previous discs is anywhere near as good as the Schubert disc. That written, there are inspired moments of genius. The Rachmaninov disc is a tale of two halves for me, the concerto dispatched expertly, but as it is a Rachmaninov concerto, it is dispensable for me. The only versions I take as worthy of repeated listening are those with Rachmaninov himself at the keyboard. He just seems to play them so right! Now Volodos' playing is truly spectacular, but it still can make me sleepy. The solo works are the real show here. All of them are truly top-notch Rach playing. I cannot decide which work is best, but I thoroughly enjoyed listening to them and will return to them in the future.
As for the other two discs, well, the Carnegie Hall recital has those fabulous Scriabin works (excepting a weak 'n' flabby 10th sonata - he cannot even approach John Ogdon's recording) and that brilliant recording of Schumann's Bunte Blatter to consider. These are some worthwhile performances that I will listen to time and again. The rest of the disc is somewhat forgettable for me. The debut disc is also a tale of two discs. There are the needlessly showy, sometimes vulgar transcriptions that sometimes annoy - did Mozart's "turkish march" really need a new transcription? Did we need to hear a Cziffra transcription? - but there are some nice moments. The Rachmaninov solo pieces and Liszt transcriptions of Schubert songs were totally enjoyable, which somewhat surprised me (at least the Rach). And then there is an amazingly effective transcription of the scherzo to Tchaikovsky's Pathetique by Samuel Feinberg. I was truly impressed by this piece. The highlight was undoubtedly the Prokofiev pieces from Cinderella. This was not surprising. Hearing Volodos' truly great performance of Prokofiev's Second Piano Concerto made me think the Prokofiev would be special. It is.
All told, then, the three prior discs have perhaps one jam-packed CD's worth of great music, and when those fine performances are considered along with the Schubert disc, one can only salivate at the possibilites. More late Schubert? More Prokofiev - Oh, please deliver the War Sonatas? Perhaps some Chopin? Why not more substantive Liszt? So many choices. Such a talent. Let's hope it is not squandered.
Posted on: 26 July 2002 by herm
Glad we appear to agree about the Schumann Bunte Blätter, Todd. I seem to recall David H-M liked it, too.
Herman
[This message was edited by herm on SATURDAY 27 July 2002 at 03:17.]
Posted on: 05 August 2002 by David Hobbs-Mallyon
I've been listening to this disc for a couple of weeks now. I have to admit to being unfamiliar with D894 prior to this recording - although I will be checking out some alternatives.
Although, I've enjoyed listening to this disc I find myself agreeing more with Herman's assessment. One of the things that struck me was that Volodos may have some great late Beethoven to come. To me his approach is just too 'big' and episodic for the work. For my taste I think Volodos focuses just too much on the drama and not enough on the musical flow. It's a close call and there are some truly breathtaking moments on the disc so still a strong recommendation.
Not sure about the recording though - sounds a bit bright at the top end on my system.
David
Posted on: 05 August 2002 by herm
Quote of self: "I'd wish Lupu had recorded this piece. He's a great Schubert performer."
It turns out Radu Lupu did record the 894 for Decca. It's not in the catalogue right now, but if you see a copy of it, get hold of it fast. It's bound to be interesting.
Herman
Posted on: 13 August 2002 by herm
Happy birthday, Ross (I just cast a glance at your profile).
You already treated us (and yourself) to a great piece of satire on Mick's homocide / real estate thread!
Herman
Posted on: 15 August 2002 by Todd A
quote:
I just picked up the Volodos Schubert disc. It sounds like very ordinary playing to me; a little on the slow and mannered side, the cantabile melodies in the 894 sound stilted. Kempff and, for the 894, Brendel, are preferable to my ears.
Ross, you heathen. I agree that Kempff is better, but Brendel? Alfred Brendel? That pianist from the B&W ads? Hell, he hasn't made a good recording in, what, 30 years? Bah!
Posted on: 15 August 2002 by herm
He's just very different from a lot of star pianists. Even though he's a Liszt specialist (he even wrote a book about Liszt
), he's anti-virtuosity. And what makes his Schubert cycle so different from what Volodos wants to do: Brendel is not very much into cultivating cantabile either. My guess is (and correct me if I'm wrong) Brendel's aim is to
show the score to the best of his knowledge, as if you're reading it with your ears. He's not that big on
transporting you to a different realm - unless it's the land of the chuckle. I like him, but in some pieces he leaves me totally cold. The more artless the music is, the less he can do with it, it seems to me.
Herman
Posted on: 15 August 2002 by Todd A
All this praise for Brendel, and now Uchida, too? I just don't get it. My exposure to Uchida is admittedly limited, but what I have heard has left me completely unconvinced. For her Schubert, I own the Impromptus and have listened to them thrice in four years. I'll choose the Kempff set any day over her (and I always do). Her 958 and Mozart piano concertos (I just heard the 11th concerto on the long drive cited elsewhere) have left me similarly perplexed. She plays all the notes but it sounds wrong.
As for Brendel, my dislike of him is borne of more experience. I own a number of discs by him, and the only ones I regularly spin are his late Beethoven sonatas on Vox and his Schoenberg Concerto with Gielen on Philips. He is just too quirky. (And in Mussorgsky just too weak - Great Gate of Kiev, my ass.) The only Schubert that I have heard by him was the 959 from his last twofer of live performances recorded in '99 (I think). He's just so bland and quirky, by turns. Perhaps I should delve further back to hear his earlier Schubert, but I just remain skeptical. I'd rather spend my money on completing Andras Schiff's cycle - when Decca gets around to reissuing the discs in the States. Maybe Stephen Kovacevich could be persuaded to record more Schubert, his 959 and 960 showing him to be a supremely talented Schubertian.
I appreciate a non-virtuoso approach to much piano music (though not in Liszt, I must write), but there's more to insight than such an approach. I guess I'm just destined to dislike some artists for whatever reason. Of course, I'd rather listen to either Brendel or Uchida rather than that clod Horowitz.
Posted on: 16 August 2002 by herm
Why don't I add to the confusion by saying that to me Kovacevich is a completely boring pianist? Perhaps it's a sort of good cop - bad cop dynamic with his wife Argerich, who, obviously, couldn't hit an unexpressive note if she tried, but to me Kovacevich sounds totally correct but never suprising. I suspect much of his reputation is based on the continuous support from Gramophone magazine.
Uchida is a very interesting pianist. I happen to like her Mozart; both among the concertos and the sonatas are many favorites of mine (notably 449 and 482 and the 533 / 494 sonata). Apart from that I would prefer her in 20th century stuff, Debussy and the recent Schoenberg disc. The romantics in between (including Schubert) make her go over the top unfortunately. The Chopin 3 I heard was borderline sentimental.
Brendel one more time: perhaps he's one of those artists who is a rather different performer in the studio. (But then of course virtually all are.) His aim is to make us experience the Viennese classics as if they are new and fresh. Hence his quirkiness: these composers were really into novelty and suprises rather than soul plumbing and grand effects. In Beethoven his Diabelli Variations are virtually unbeatable, while there are better Hammerklaviers than his. Haydn is just his thing: witty and neat music that goes for the jugular by disarming us first. It's actually strange to think he hasn't done any C. Ph. E. Bach - most likely this means I'm talking nonsense.
I recall someone in another Room on this forum saying that he never went to the Music Room because talking about music was silly, and especially about something as dead as classical. You either listen to it or you don't. A thread like this shows why this is a misunderstanding. There are so many ways of looking at Schubert you can talk about, while with most popular music there's just the one recording and you either buy it or you don't - excepting of course 'My Way' and its many renditions.
Oh, Ross, talking about back burners. You wouldn't happen to have the Shostakovich set by the Emerson S Quartet, do you? Weirdly the penultimate disc in my set is missing for some time now, perhaps the CDP ate it.
Herman
Posted on: 16 August 2002 by David Hobbs-Mallyon
Well it's good to see that we can't agree on anything.
Uchida was interviewed on Radio 3 a few weeks back - her view was that Schubert was the most difficult music to get right, which was why some pieces she had been playing over 20 years before feeling willing to commit to disc. Having not heard much of her playing, and going on the reputation alone, I expected not to like her Schubert much, but the excerpts they played from the new disc were spell-binding. Whether that holds for a whole performance I don't know. The interview itself was also facinating. Coincidentally, I also sat close to her at a recent performance of Bruckner 8 - watching her facial expressions and body movement during the performance was worth the ticket.
Brendel - 'quirky and bland' - I agree he's quirky. What I don't like is the sound he produces - always sounds so 'earthbound' - which I think is why he never transports me to a different realm.
Which is exactly what Kovacevich does for me - 'completely boring'? Yes he has his faults, but.... Herman shame on you.
Ross is the Hyperion D960 THAT much better than the EMI?
David
Posted on: 16 August 2002 by David Hobbs-Mallyon
Ross,
Many thanks - have sent you a mail.
No luck with the Buffy
David
Posted on: 28 October 2002 by herm
Hi John,
while you're at it, treat yourself to Schubert's late piano sonatas, too (D 958-960). They are the best.
Herman
