Grigory Sokolov

Hi Oldsnow!
The only two cds i own are printed by Opus111 label.
You find it on www.naiveclassique.net
Cheers!

Great artist btw!
Good search!

I remember seeing him in a storming Brahms D minor at Victoria Hall in Hanley, I think with the BBC Phil. I don't have any of his records though...

EW

I wish I could share a number of people’s enthusiasm for Sokolov, but I don’t care for his style. His technique is amazing, of that there can be no doubt, but I find he often focuses too much on the technical aspects. Granted, I’ve only heard a couple discs worth of various composers’ works (LvB, Bach, Ravel, Rachmaninov, Chopin, and one or two others) so I may have just heard some of his lesser recordings. His LvB 110, for instance, is superficial and distinctive (for me) mostly because of the huge dynamic extremes. There’s more to the piece than that.

--

Todd--Thanks for your input on Sokolov. I suppose in some ways he is a little like Michelangeli, another of my favorites. I mean, I even like Michelangeli's Op. 111 on Decca from years ago, which most Beethoven experts detest! To each his own.

By the way, did you see Krystian Zimerman in concert last night at Benaroya Hall in Seattle? If so, what were your thoughts?

quote:

Originally posted by Oldnslow:
I suppose in some ways he is a little like Michelangeli

Maybe is some minor ways, but Michelangeli would willingly (and wonderfully!) make his technique of secondary importance to bring out any number of details ina piece. Michelangeli is one of my favorites, too, and when I listen to his way with, say, Ravel or Debussy, it makes Sokolov seem like a showboat.

(I've not heard ABM's Decca 111, though I do have the one on BBC and his last performance of the work on Aura - the latter of which is quite good.)

I missed Mr Zimerman (Though I would have liked to be there!). I live in Oregon rather than Washington and can't make an 8-hour round trip drive for any pianist. Well, maybe Pollini . . .


--

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Arola:
His LvB 110, for instance, is superficial

.. rather like Pollini's, whose depressingly slick and limpid late Beethoven set I had the misfortune to hear the other day...

EW

quote:

Originally posted by Earwicker:
.. rather like Pollini's, whose depressingly slick and limpid late Beethoven set I had the misfortune to hear the other day...

Oh dear . . .


--

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Arola:

quote:

Originally posted by Earwicker:
.. rather like Pollini's, whose depressingly slick and limpid late Beethoven set I had the misfortune to hear the other day...

Oh dear . . .


--

Oh dear indeed! Not the most inspired view of Beethoven I've ever heard! Mind you, with a 50p hire charge it was interesting I suppose...

quote:

Originally posted by Earwicker:
Oh dear indeed! ...

Good EW strikes again!
Did you listen to last Pollini's Chopin's Nocturnes?
If yes what's your opinion?

Thanks!
Gianluigi

Haven't heard Pollini's nocturnes, but did obtain the recent CD by D'Ascoli---wonderful. Although I am such a sucker for these pieces I enjoy most everyone playing the nocturnes....

quote:

Originally posted by Gianluigi Mazzorana:
Good EW strikes again!
Did you listen to last Pollini's Chopin's Nocturnes?
If yes what's your opinion?

No, I haven't heard that recording. There's a copy of it in one of my local record libraries, but I've just skipped over it for years!

Pollini's not an artist who's ever really interested me to be honest. He's a good pianist, but his pared-down-to-nothing, limpid, crystal-clear-at-all-cost approach seems pointless to me - especially since all the great works in the repertoire require considerable interpretation and "input" to really bring them off.

He's musical and succinct, and his clarity and technique are to be admired I suppose, but there's not much art to him. As I say, I was listeing to his '70s late Beethoven set the other day, but after Brendel's recent survey, it left me stone cold. I've got some digital Schumann of his somewhere, but the CDs are now coffee mats.

EW

Thank you all!
Last Pollini Cd was in my hand this afternoon and i was about to get it.
But this reissues leave me doubtful.

quote:

Originally posted by Earwicker:
Oh dear indeed! Not the most inspired view of Beethoven I've ever heard!

I'm not quite sure what "inspired" means in this context. Pollini's take on late Beethoven in his 70s recording is meant to be idealized, architecturally driven, and lucid and clear. At that he succeeds marvelously. Throw in technical ability matched by very few, and his late Beethoven, in particular, is truly awe-inspiring, and far superior to, say, Brendel. Sticking with LvB, when Pollini plays the great ending fugue to the 106, clarity is of paramount importance, and few other pianists deliver it with the clarity Pollini does, and his sense of timing and control place his reading in the very top tier. I can think of none that are better. Not even Annie Fischer or Rudolf Serkin best him, let alone a decidedly less taleneted pianist like the aforementioned Brendel. (No, I've not heard his last recording of the piece, but I have heard his first two, and he's simply not up to the challenge. From what I have heard from his last cycle, his technique had declined somewhat, and his mannersims had become distracting, so I'm extremely skeptical that he managed to pull off a great reading in his 60s. One day soon I will find out.)

I'm also not sure that Viennese classics, in particular, require a lot of "input," whatever exactly that is, to sound good. Later romantic works, maybe, depending on what one defines as "input." Sticking with LvB, consider Emil Gilels: some of his DG recordings are largely devoid of idiosyncracy and personalized "input" when compared to many pianists, but some of the recordings are simply wonderful. Excess "input" can and often does distort the original intent of the music.

To Pollini's Nocturnes - they are clear, direct, and somewhat quick readings, and Pollini plays with a more attractive tone than he usually does. Better sets are available. Moravec, say, or Rubinstein.

--

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Arola:

quote:

Originally posted by Earwicker:
Oh dear indeed! Not the most inspired view of Beethoven I've ever heard!

Pollini's take on late Beethoven in his 70s recording is meant to be idealized, architecturally driven, and lucid and clear.

It's lucid and clear I'll grant you, and very slick. To be honest, he played as though he didn't particularly like the music!

As for Brendel's digital survey, it is streets ahead of his earlier recordings for Vox and Philips; the last live Hammerklavier and the 109 - 111 discs are quite essential. Try to put your dislike of Brendel out of your mind before you press play, and your life will change...!

EW

I'd take Pollini's last five LvB sonatas, plus Emil Gilels' almost complete LvB DG sonata recordings over any others. Not much mannerism, I agree, but these are performances of immense stature and authority, besides which (say) Brendel sounds garden-gnomeish.

Graham

It's really not fair to dismiss either Pollini or Brendel, as both have strengths and weaknesses. I've enjoyed some of Brendel's Schubert, Mozart and Haydn, and I still consider the Pollini/Kletski Chopin E-Minor Concerto a treasure, with beautiful solo playing, including several nocturnes. I don't favor either of them in Beethoven sonatas, but that doesn't mean they aren't fine artists.

.. although there's a strange anti-Brendel ethos in a good many classical circles; I am quite unable to explain this perverse opposition to one of the most inspired, charismatic, probing and talented - not to mention articulate - atists of our times. He is a truly elite musician... which I suppose might explain why certain types find him unpalatable!

EW

Back on topic, I have now listened several times to the Sokolov CD sets and I must say I find his playing very interesting. The Art of the Fuge, Diabelli Variations, Schubert Sonatas, and Chopin Preludes are especially fine. This fellow is a monster pianist, even if he isn't Brendel or Pollini!

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Arola:
Pollini's take on late Beethoven in his 70s recording is meant to be idealized, architecturally driven, and lucid and clear. At that he succeeds marvelously.

Certainly, but the reverse side of the picture is, that it also is ice-cold and clinical, almost inhuman. A sort of anti-interpretation.

quote:

Originally posted by pe-zulu:
Certainly, but the reverse side of the picture is, that it also is ice-cold and clinical, almost inhuman. A sort of anti-interpretation.

Exactly. Pollini is clearly (pun intended!) of the view that all one has to do is play the notes. That helps, I'll grant you, but that way you can only tell half the story...

EW