The Well Tempered Klavier

I am patiently waiting for you to correct my impressions of the Pollini (I hope). In this, I want to be convinced I am wrong.

We finished the Hewitt Master Class DVD last night.

I would like to remark on something I find stupendous.

Hewitt demonstrates many examples of a single hand carrying 2, and sometimes even 3, voices.
She is able to play a round where each of these voices is made primary to the other(s), on each repeated playing. She is able to use a different articulation for each voice. She can have voices at different loudness levels.

Her command of the beat, and her treatment of rhythm, is exceptionally evolved. In this, she has reached new heights in expressing the lines in Bach. This is especially so in her ornaments.

Her voices are completely independent of each other. Whatever spirit might move her in performance, that voice has already been studied and worked out.

Such an absolutely comprehensive study is liberating in music, as in the other arts.
It is the only way to express your feelings without stuttering. Having a clear and certain voice allows the performer everything in communicating with an audience.

No expression is out of bounds, within the confines of the composition.

This ability to voice is a striking feat of muscle control, and requires an intellect of astounding proportions.

In my listening experience, Pollini established a benchmark for this "part playing" i.e. "voicing" in his late Beethoven piano sonatas.

Now I feel that Hewitt has embraced this aspect of performance, and extended and refined it in ways unexpected.

This DVD will get a few more viewings.

I don't want Florestan to forget about evaluating the Pollini WTC Book 1, so here's a bump :-)

I missed most of this thread, but listening to a lot of Hewitt WTC these days. I have to say her playing does remind me of Dinu Lupatti. I played her Toccatas today and understood much better after listening to the WTC.

George, it's a big claim, but I want to equate Hewitt's Bach to Fischer's Beethoven, but more stable, more reliable and more satisfying.

Mike, thanks for the reports of the DVDs. Never mind voices, I hear Hewitt going far beyond to pioneer a new interpretation of the famous Bach voices. It's like a demonstration. It's almost as if she is saying, here are two musical lines, they were separate, but the more I separate them the more harmonious they become. Exciting and eclipsing Richter for example that we were comparing at music club last night.

Hi Mike and other WTC enthusiasts:

My copy of Pollini playing the WTC Book 1 finally arrived late Friday! I’ve waited probably 6 weeks for it and I could hardly contain myself when I finally had it in my hands. I think my package got stuck in Customs and those bums obviously do not listen to Bach. I don’t think I could have lasted much longer though. The vendor was actually going to send my complete order again (assuming it was lost/stolen) but asked me to wait until November 20. So despite the pain of waiting all is well now.

How do Pollini and Hewitt compare? They couldn’t be more different! I would even venture to say they are closer to being opposite poles. Their philosophy is clearly different but more importantly is the fact that they are two different people with different experiences and outlooks on life (at the time of recording). I would have been very disappointed had the two recordings been the same or very similar. There is a place in my heart for both of these styles and interpretations and many more for that matter. This music is far too important to me to be happy with only one or two points of view. How could something so profound be limited to a binary response as simplistic as that one is correct and all others are unworthy?

I realize that I may well stand alone with this concept in this neck of the woods but, if I may, I would like to explain why I hold these views. Furthermore, I do not believe that this reasoning should differ whether we are talking about Bach or Beethoven or even Schumann or Debussy, for that matter. Great music is great music no matter from who or where it comes.

I was very fortunate to have a teacher or two along the way that left me with a few kernels of wisdom that have literally changed my life and perspective on things. They never gave me an answer and said, “Here, this is it. Stop thinking and just stay with this view.” On the contrary, they gently pointed me in a direction and left it up to me to find the answer for myself. One, in particular, challenged me in ways that couldn’t have happened on my own (by just taking an intellectual approach and staking my claim somewhere). In fact, this teacher always made my juvenile brain angry and boiling with rage. He would proceed to teach me a piece of music in a certain way, all the way along giving me confidence that this was the way. Then weeks later when I thought I had it licked, I would play the piece, (in my own satisfaction), thinking I had accomplished what he taught me. Then quite suddenly he would say, “No, no, no, you’ve got it all wrong; this is the way it should go.” Then he would proceed to give me a whole different angle and approach and I essentially had to start from scratch and relearn everything.

I was never amused by this and I didn’t think so at the time but now many years removed I realize how valuable these lessons were for me. In music or art and so on, we should never start with the presumption that we know the answer. We need to be open minded enough to see things through many perspectives. Yes, do your research and due diligence but in the end go with your own convictions. Always give due respect to others as their view is just as valid. Individual views should guide you but they will be different for each individual and will change throughout ones life.

Now the difficulty is to describe the differences. For me it is very difficult to listen to one and then the other in quick succession. I need to not only dip my toe in the water but I need to fully immerse myself in one alone for a time (and not compare). After several listens, I keep asking myself honestly what is the performer trying to say or express. Empathy is very difficult but it is the only way to approach a meaningful conversation and understanding of something.

Pollini will appeal to those who do not believe emotion has any place in music (or at least be overtly apparent), especially that of Johann Sebastian Bach. It is very straight and metrically precise. In fact, it is so much so that it could almost be leaning towards hypnotic. It is clear that Pollini believes the music (the notes or texture / structure) itself is the valuable aspect and going concern. So if you have three voices, every last one will enter at every different point throughout the extent of the piece with exactly the same tone quality (much like a Harpsichord is constrained or limited too). For the more complex Fugues, for instance, this makes the listener’s task very much harder and complicated. You need to be very familiar with this music to go to the limits. My preliminary sense is that we are listening in on Pollini’s private meditation with this music. The playing is very profound but in its own way on a highly personal level. I do respect this very much. There is nothing harsh about the playing or recorded sound. Very, very subtle changes throughout and huge, long arches frame the works in. Pollini does know what he is doing and what he intends on doing as well (I couldn’t believe he is sight reading this as I think someone said). Remarkably skilled playing at a level we’ve come to expect from him. What we are hearing is thoughts of a man who has 60+ years of life behind him. I’m sure if he had recorded these in his 30’s or 40’s we would have heard a little more aggression or forwardness that goes more suitably with a younger persons view.

Hewitt, on the other hand, is a conductor of this music. Her playing is about telling an interesting story. Individual voices bring life to characters as they dance around. She pushes and pulls the music and uses tempo, dynamics, and rhythm, to name a few devices, to get us where she wants us to go. She’s inviting us all to the dance and she wants to share with us her joy in this music. It is anything but boring and her playing is fabulously warm, inviting, creative, and engaging. Her technique is such that she could convincingly play the music in any myriad number of ways. A remarkable skill in this day and age where the art of playing music for enjoyment to ones friends in your own home seems to be a lost art and thing of the past. (this was why improvising and creating variations on a theme were such a big thing in the 18th and 19th centuries). Music was about creativity and matching emotion with particular feelings.) This was Bach’s intention with this music and this is why this is such a valuable recording to have.

So, if you are a nut like me, get both and enjoy both for what they are. I wouldn’t part with either version now and they will join the many other interpretations I have the privilege of owning or have heard along the way.

Best Regards,
Doug

quote:

Pollini will appeal to those who do not believe emotion has any place in music (or at least be overtly apparent), especially that of Johann Sebastian Bach. It is very straight and metrically precise. In fact, it is so much so that it could almost be leaning towards hypnotic. It is clear that Pollini believes the music (the notes or texture / structure) itself is the valuable aspect and going concern. So if you have three voices, every last one will enter at every different point throughout the extent of the piece with exactly the same tone quality (much like a Harpsichord is constrained or limited too). For the more complex Fugues, for instance, this makes the listener’s task very much harder and complicated. You need to be very familiar with this music to go to the limits. My preliminary sense is that we are listening in on Pollini’s private meditation with this music. The playing is very profound but in its own way on a highly personal level. I do respect this very much. There is nothing harsh about the playing or recorded sound. Very, very subtle changes throughout and huge, long arches frame the works in. Pollini does know what he is doing and what he intends on doing as well (I couldn’t believe he is sight reading this as I think someone said). Remarkably skilled playing at a level we’ve come to expect from him. What we are hearing is thoughts of a man who has 60+ years of life behind him. I’m sure if he had recorded these in his 30’s or 40’s we would have heard a little more aggression or forwardness that goes more suitably with a younger persons view.

So if I were to get a recording of the music play'd on the piano, then he follows Schnabel. And this would suit me. Direct and without obvious intervention or advocacy from the performer!

Bravo for the the player who will not insist on intervening between the composer and the audience.

That is indeed the mark of recreative artistic integrity and genius.

I have listened to the Hewitt set and found it not exactly to my taste.

Perhaps I shall investigate the Polini recording one day. As the day passes, I still find the two harpsichord sets from Walcha are sublime.


ATB from George

Florestan, thanks for the nudge! I will give the Pollini another listen.

I learned the WTC from Hewitt which is a powerful bias, as the readings are so different.
I gusee I interpret the lack of expressive phrasing in the Pollini as sight reading, but I am going to make a real effort to listen past that.

After all, Pollini is my favorite Beethoven interperter for decades.

One final note. I find the Pollini recording more distant, and not as clear and well focused, as the Hewitt 2009 recording.

I feel the Hewitt recording does a better job of putting the piano in the room with you.