Gaspard de la nuit

Posted by: Todd A on 07 April 2002

What an unusual piece this. When first I heard it, I did not know what to make of it. It was virtuosic and colorful, but it did not seem particularly interesting. Maybe the artist got it wrong, I thought. But the artist in question was Martha Argerich (the DG version) so it had to be top-notch. Right? Well, later on I picked up Robert Casadesus doing the same work – along with all of Ravel’s piano music – and then I was convinced. The piece has merit. Ondine is notably more mysterious, Le Gibet darker, Scarbo more capricious and frightening. Most recently I bought Gieseking’s traversal of Ravel’s solo piano music, and his rendition, too surpasses Argerich’s, and rivals that of Casadesus. But two other, more recent versions by younger artists really capture my fancy.

Naida Cole’s recent version outclasses the older recordings, combining the interpretive insight of Casadesus with a technique almost as glittering as Argerich’s. As I’ve only heard it on the radio thus far, I can only go off of musical memories (though it was only a couple of months ago), though I can say with certainty that I will buy her debut disc.

The finest version, though, comes from a possibly surprising source: Ivo Pogorelich. His is the most descriptive version I have heard. In particular, Le Gibet evokes a gruesome image so befitting the subject. Scarbo displays near-perfect dynamic control and a particularly frightening little imp. Tremendous. My favorite version.

Opinions or suggestions?

Posted on: 07 April 2002 by Cheese

Don't know whether Samson François's recording is available in the US, but it's so mervellously msyterious that it's definitely worth a listen

Cheese

Posted on: 08 April 2002 by herm

Pogorelich's Ravel

The LP with Gaspard de le Nuit on the A-side and Prokofiev's Sixth Sonata was a revelation, back in 1983. I remember where I bought it, who I was with at the time, and how, for days on end, all you did was flip from Ravel to Prokofiev and back. (And don't forget the I'm - too - sexy - for - my - very - expensive - jacket artist picture. Needless to say I got myself a jacket like that. Nothing happened.)

But seriously, both performances on this record cleared the deck. For Prokofiev 6 you didn't need Richter any longer, because this kid got the mood of the piece much better. Same for Gaspard.

Funny thing is, I don't think Pogorelich ever matched this glorious disc. Ever since there's always been some kind of contrivance in his interpretations.

Other good Gaspards are Pascal Roge, Thibaudet and, indeed, Samson Francais. But they won't do it after you've gotten to know Pogo's Gaspard. There's just not the same level of decadence and excitement - which is what this piece is about.

(Actually I like Ravel's later piano pieces better.)

Herman

Posted on: 09 April 2002 by garth

I have Argerich, Pogorelich, and Louis Lortie and some others but these are all great in my opinion. I would never describe myself as a big Ivo fan but his Gaspard is amazing.

I had a tape of Pogorelich's Prok. 6th Sonata done when he was a student and I much prefer it to the later one paired with Gasperd. It is much drier and percussive, I find the later one over pedalled and abit romanticized by comparison over which I prefer Richter.

Cheers,
Garthb

Posted on: 10 April 2002 by herm

Hi Garth,

Interesting, that early Pogorelich tape. However, why should Prokofiev be dry and percussive all the time? Isn't that just a received idea? There's quite a bit of romanticism in Prokofiev, and wallowing in the beauty of sound. Listen to the late symphonies.

Are you familiar with Kissin's Carnegie debut recording? - there's another Prokofiev 6 not to be sneezed at. (And, possibly, another pianist peaking a little to early in life.)

Herman

Posted on: 10 April 2002 by garth

Hi Herm,

Yes definitely, Prokofief should not be dry and percussive all the time, their are many romantic moments in most of works including the 6th. The slow mvt. of the 7th is positively sappy and I love it. the war sonatas particularly seem to be a battle between the lyric and the percussive, the dark and the light, etc.

I should have said that the earlier recording is drier, more aggresive, percusive etc. in certain places, where it is really quite obvious from the score, and here I think the earlier recording is more faithful and effective. I.E. The double thirds of the opening statement really shouldn't be pedalled, whereas the lyric second subject of the exposition obviously must be rendered with great warmth, legato, etc... I am sure if you heard that earlier recording You'd agree.

To be fair the later recording really is pretty great, - it is flawlessly executed and played with great conviction, verve, virtuosity, sensitivity, and passion - probably one of the better more recent versions. I must also say that I am relying on my memory as the earlier tape I had was a friends which I should definitely have duped as I have been keeping an eye out for it unsuccesfully for over 15 years! If you like scarlatti sonatas and do nothave Pogorelich's recording its brilliant.

Cheers,
Garth

P.S. If you are ever in Victoria, come on over for a listening session. Seems like we have some similar musical loves as we keep bumping into each other here.ˇ

Posted on: 11 April 2002 by Edot

Getting back to Ravel. I'm fond of Vlado Perlemuter's readings. There is a mid fifties recording on Vox and a much later one on Nimbus. Each are two disk sets. The Nimbus is only solo piano and the Vox has the concertos (also among my favourite readings) conducted by Horenstein. Like Robert Casadesus, Perlemuter knew Ravel personally and brings that insight to this great music. History may have forgotten him but these discs are worth a listen.