Paul Lewis and the Late Beethoven sonatas

ALso listen to stephen kovacevich! I have his whole set of Beethoven sonatas and although it is a bit too fast sometimes and the late sonatas maybe is not 100% as good as Pollini (lovely late sonatas!) it is very good!
In fact I can recommend the whole set!
Look at this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=optpOjeyXOo
And this, click "preview": http://www.medici.tv/#/movie/27/

quote:

I was bored. There was 'something' missing.

Boredom is usually a condition or state possibly showing ones own shortcomings. As one ages and matures, hopefully, one grows into being able to see the value in things based on a far wider, broader set of values. Most times, it takes hard work and commitment to spend the necessary time with someone in order to get to know them. (ie. Don't judge a book by its cover).

I'm speaking in general terms about this whole thread. Everyone is entitled to like or dislike something but I am always surprised by how quickly and easily it is to sway many peoples choices based only on narrow, uninformed rhetoric and especially negative opinions.

Mike, it may well be that the Lewis' recordings are not for you. That's fine. I just feel that tossing a performer after barely a listen isn't rational and it doesn't necessarily prove anything. Leave it on the shelf with the intention of coming back to it when you are ready for it. Remember, in the Naim world, timing is everything You might be pleasantly surprised in a year or two when you have become tired of "only" Pollini or "only" Zimerman (as good as they are!). You will grow by sharing in someone else's perspective too. I have many things in my library that I wrote off when I was young and decades later come back to only to find remarkable joy in the recordings and experience. What has changed? An increase in my awareness and knowledge along with a change in my perception and attitude.

In my opinion, every performer has something valid to say. Out of 32 sonatas, for instance, there are treasures to be found a plenty and no single person has ever nailed them all. I've lost track of how many sets of sonatas I own and their is no way I'd give up on any of them. Music is so much more enjoyable when you search for the intrinsic value in it rather than the labels or hype associated with the marketing aspect.

Best Regards,
Doug

Your point is valid Florestan, but Brendel doesn't ring my bell either.

It's a natural thing to have preferences in performers; it's all part of the game.

For me, the Lewis Beethoven lacks the crucial quality of forward momentum, without which the music is lifeless. He shares this quality with Brendel. Some listeners will find much to admire in Lewis and Brendel, but I will never be in that number.

Some performers are just better than others.

As life is short, and there are so many choices, it is important to invest your time with performers you enjoy.

Lewis did get gifted yesterday. I have no more time for him. After over 40 years of listening, I know what I will grow to love and what will make me listless. That's part of the process too.

It is impossible to listen and not develop preferences, and those preferences become clearer over time. If you don't develop preferences, you're not really listening.

That's how taste grows and changes.

One final thought on the Lewis. His voicing is good, but his interpretation of rhythm bores me. That's my honest reaction. It's a fault I cannot abide, as I consider a vibrant sense of rhythm to be the most fundamental and essential quality for any musical performer to possess, trumping every other quality, regardless of what music it might be.

I concurr with Florestan. I have spent many years listening to the Beethoven sonatas, and I am amazed at the variety of styles and approaches that can provide many hours of enjoyment in these great works, at least to a layman. I enjoy Lewis' playing, even if his more romantic style differs from many other pianists. For a complete contrast, Ronald Brautigam's dynamic performances on fortepiano have also provided much pleasure. Quite frankly, most of the pianists who have the technique and imagination to record a whole cycle offer many moments of enjoyment. Unless one is a peer of these pianists or a very, very knowledgable critic (of which there arn't many)I find much of the criticism leveled at a particular cycle to be mostly hot air.

There is a big difference between being a critic and developing preferences for one performer or another.

It is interesting to hear people say why they developed some preference.

I find Lewis' rhythm to be unconvincing. I don't find him to be more romantic than the Pollini, in fact, quite the opposite.

So it goes. Others' mileage may vary.

So Oldnslow, please tell us what you admire in the Lewis :-)

I listened to two different performance yesterday of the 109,110 and 111 sonatas and well, I thought the Lewis was superb. I suppose I am not looking for the "forward momentum" - I have plenty of other music that has momentum. To me, I look to the somatas for some relaxation (maybe I should not be) and I find that with the Lewis. The Uchidas did not get me in that frame of mind.

I await the Pollini sonatas to understand what Mike refers to. I do like Lewis though and his style fits with a lot of other music that I like (ECM).

Doug - great write up and think you hit the spot there.

Mike - 10 weeks or so until I see Pollini for an evening of Chopin

quote:

Originally posted by Lontano:
Mike - 10 weeks or so until I see Pollini for an evening of Chopin

You could bathe in the ocean of envy I feel towards you, enjoy the Pollini performance :-)

quote:

Originally posted by mikeeschman:

quote:

Originally posted by Lontano:
Mike - 10 weeks or so until I see Pollini for an evening of Chopin

You could bathe in the ocean of envy I feel towards you, enjoy the Pollini performance :-)

I'll let you know how it goes

Lontano,

Is that the RFH gig? If so, I tried to get tickets... and failed! However, I'm going to the Zimerman (Chopin Sonatas).

Florestan,

It may well be a shortcoming, but I sincerely doubt it. I have heard a very large number of renditions of the 32, and from this I'm able to judge the performances of others. After all, that's how we compare. Are you suggesting that we ought to like EVERYTHING? And if we don't, it's our own shortcomings?

I'm a fan of some Brendel, but find Lewis to be no more than a 'diluted' clone. Having seen him both Brendel and Lewis live, I can confirm that they have very similar mannerisms. I feel that Lewis is not really interpreting Beethoven for himself, but just replicating his 'master'.

Have you heard both Lewis and Brendel in live concert?

It is unfair to compare Lewis with Pollini as they are in completely different leagues. Lewis will never be as good. By Lewis' age, Pollini was already conquering the world's musical scene. Lewis is scratching the surface.

Life is too short to spend time trying to appreciate substandard material. I simply don't feel that Lewis brings anything to the music. One shouldn't release a recording unless they have something new to 'say'.

I agree with you that no single person can nail every moment of the 32. I think that between all of my sets of the 32, 'we' have it nailed. I have:

Bernard Roberts,
Daniel Barenboim,
Claudio Arrau,
Stephen Kovacevich,
Maurizio Pollini.

I just don't see how Lewis can even inch his way in.

quote:

Originally posted by Dan Carney:
Lontano,

Is that the RFH gig? If so, I tried to get tickets... and failed! However, I'm going to the Zimerman (Chopin Sonatas).

Yes it is and I have a good seat in row 7, and I think right location in row for good view of the keyboard. Enjoy the Zimerman.

quote:

Originally posted by Dan Carney:
I agree with you that no single person can nail every moment of the 32. I think that between all of my sets of the 32, 'we' have it nailed. I have:

Daniel Barenboim,
Claudio Arrau,
Maurizio Pollini.

I have these three, and enjoy all of them enormously, but the Pollini is the standout.

Dan,
Interesting points. In many respects, I agree with some of what you are saying. In fact, at some point in my life it wouldn't be hard to see myself taking the exact same stance on certain issues. We have a lot in common on this but I am still very much am looking for answers to the big questions myself. Time and living has a way of shaping us (and I'm still a work in progress too) but in many respects we have a choice in what direction we will head.


Remember (and I want to stress this) that I too have my personal favorites and I, on a daily basis, pick this guy over that guy to listen to and rate my favorites etc. I do this for the very reason you state in that "life is short." What I do question though, in myself, is to why or how I make choices especially when my criticism is pointed toward another person? In a strict logical sense I can often find no justification for my reasoning in doing this. In fact, when looked at closely, I often realize that my sentiments can usually and easily be dismissed based on some form of logical fallacy or personal shortcomings (ie. pride, jealousy etc). In other words, I may listen to performer X now more than others because I currently feel very connected to what they are doing and saying (given the limited resource of time). But why would I need to say Performer Y or Z is completely wrong and invalid and therefore I will only listen to or accept Performer X? This is only an opinion that serves no purpose. If one feels this way I suppose the best thing would be for that person to instead start performing and/or start recording themselves and show us all how it is done. I suppose then when Critics would say this person is useless and can't play worth a $&!# the obvious defense is to believe that the Critic is now the one that doesn't know anything and on and on everything just goes around in circles...

quote:

Are you suggesting that we ought to like EVERYTHING?

Certainly not. What I am suggesting is that to like something doesn't require me to attack my opponent personally to argue my point successfully. Whether I like something or not the other person still deserves my utmost respect (more on this later). We are, after all, talking about music, art, literature, philosophy etc. It is supposed to be an exchange of ideas and a search for answers to questions that can never be answered. Furthermore, one of the hardest things to do is separate opinion from fact. Remember that opinions / feelings will (and do) change: facts do not change.

What loses the argument for me is when one uses the "my team" logic to debate about subjects that should never be approached in the same way. If, for example, we are talking about football, then I would likely pick a team (for whatever reason-it simply doesn't matter) and declare my guy(s) are better because 1)....2)....3).... and your guy(s) suck and are a bunch of losers because 1)....2)....3).... etc. Where is the logic here? You just arbitrarily pick a team (and lucky for you if you pick the winning one) and hurl insults at your opponents. The psychology in this fascinates me as it seems many people base their self-worth solely on some association with a winning team (performer). OK, I'm now guilty of stereotyping, oversimplifying, overgeneralizing etc. here as well but hopefully you see my point. I'd like to think that in matters of music and the like that we are really all on the same team. We don't have to agree and hopefully we don't but at least we should be humble enough to allow others to express their ideas freely. This way we can learn something new from someone else's perspective.

Examples of Typical Logical Fallacies (ie. illogical, meaningless statements that are hardly persuasive and easy to disprove):

Lewis will never be as good. Fact or opinion? How can one speak into the future? (Ad Hominem?)
I bet Bach would've hated Angela Hewitt! Fact or opinion? How can one speak into the past? (Ad Hominem?)
The music was written for the harpsichord, not the piano. Fact or opinion? Sounds legalistic? Music should be played and enjoyed! (Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc / Red Herring?)
Bach could never have intended such a tempo Fact or opinion? We cannot and should not speak for Bach! (Oversimplification?)

quote:

It may well be a shortcoming, but I sincerely doubt it.

In life we seem to always have two choices, namely, the easy way (which takes little effort and gives us only short term satisfaction) and the hard way (which takes effort but usually lead to long term satisfaction). In the former example, I think of my five year old son. If he had his way he would never go to bed nor make it, he would never eat his vegetables first but only cookies and ice-cream. With a house full of toys he still claims he is bored and has nothing to do. My point is that discipline is hard work. Creativity is difficult in a fast food world. Empathy means we might have to give up the spotlight over ourselves. Most of us choose the path of least resistance only because it is easier. Listening to someone else's point of view (recordings or performances) is hard work too. It is much easier to say, "I don't get it" or "It was boring" and just move on in a state of binary choices (yes/no). Often, this short attention span and inability to focus means that you can miss many of the beautiful details in life.

quote:

Lewis is not really interpreting Beethoven for himself, but just replicating his 'master'

To this I ask how you may be different? We are all just merely interpreters of something (in this case it is music). Are you not a product of the influence of your teachers and peers? Do you not stake your position on similar values to what your teacher told you or what Zimerman or Pollini might be doing? How original is that? By your own definition then I wonder why you play the piano at all since it can't be possible that you would add anything to what is already available to us.

Dan, I play piano as well. Believe me, I've spent years wrestling with these same aspects. If you think in black and white terms only or if you really believe that you will be playing Bach or Beethoven the same way when you are 20 as when you are 40 or even 60 you may be in for a surprise. Quite frankly, when you are in your 20's you are still simply only learning notes. A lot of water must pass under the bridge before anyone can even begin to claim some understanding in regards to what the great composers have left for us. I'm of the opinion that a lifetime is still not enough time.

By the way, I haven't been fortunate enough to see either Brendel or Lewis in a live concert but only on video. You are fortunate to live where you do and very lucky to have seen these guys as well as pretty much anyone of the current great living performers. My comments here should be taken as generic and all encompassing in focus. I am not specifically defending Brendel or Lewis other than that these names were mentioned by you. I do respect these guys though and anyone else who commits there whole life to the service of music.

As a pianist, I wonder if you really believe their is only one way to perform/interpret a piece? Have your teachers never challenged you or taken you out of your comfort zone to give you different views? I believe one must have some sort of intellectual basis for justifying the direction you might ultimately head into but within reason do you not think their is room to manoeuvre with some degree of latitude?

Regards,
Doug

Listening to the fundamentals of what a player does, rhythm, harmony, melody, dynamics, phrasing, if all of that is good, then it is worth multiple listens.

Flaws in these areas disrupts the music making to no good effect.

And these simple things are capable of almost infinite refinement, constantly moving forward and becoming more perfect.

It's like pulling a good negative into an ever-sharper focus.

quote:

Listening to the fundamentals of what a player does, rhythm, harmony, melody, dynamics, phrasing, if all of that is good, then it is worth multiple listens.

Yes, Mike, but is this not a rather subjective, ambiguous statement? It presumes that you are in a better position to know about "rhythm, harmony, melody, dynamics, phrasing" than the performer, himself. Which composer or which recordings actually lack any of these qualities? It should be clear that varying one aspect will only come at the expense of adjusting the other aspects. There are a limitless number of outcomes. Not all music is meant to have all these things happening full tilt all the time.

Some people never want to hear melody or dynamics. Others might only want rhythm and phrasing. Others still may only listen to the harmony. Who is right? "Knowing" and "doing" are two different things. I'd rather put my trust in those who have studied most of their lives in this field while at the same time realize that it is impossible to claim one knows the answers to unanswerable questions. I want to listen to what they are trying to say and make an effort to understand why and accept it for what it is.

quote:

Originally posted by Florestan:

quote:

Listening to the fundamentals of what a player does, rhythm, harmony, melody, dynamics, phrasing, if all of that is good, then it is worth multiple listens.

Yes, Mike, but is this not a rather subjective, ambiguous statement? It presumes that you are in a better position to know about "rhythm, harmony, melody, dynamics, phrasing" than the performer, himself. Which composer or which recordings actually lack any of these qualities? It should be clear that varying one aspect will only come at the expense of adjusting the other aspects. There are a limitless number of outcomes. Not all music is meant to have all these things happening full tilt all the time.

Some people never want to hear melody or dynamics. Others might only want rhythm and phrasing. Others still may only listen to the harmony. Who is right? "Knowing" and "doing" are two different things. I'd rather put my trust in those who have studied most of their lives in this field while at the same time realize that it is impossible to claim one knows the answers to unanswerable questions. I want to listen to what they are trying to say and make an effort to understand why and accept it for what it is.

All of these things are always present in the Pollini Late Beethoven Sonatas.

They are the necessary preconditions to interpretation in any music.

They are the basic fundamentals of a good voice.

It is also something easily heard, if listened for.

You need attend the stuff of which music is made.

Accept no substitutes.

quote:

Originally posted by mikeeschman:
Listening to the fundamentals of what a player does, rhythm, harmony, melody, dynamics, phrasing, if all of that is good, then it is worth multiple listens.

All of these things are always present in the Pollini Late Beethoven Sonatas.

They are the necessary preconditions to interpretation in any music.

They are the basic fundamentals of a good voice.

It is also something easily heard, if listened for.

You need attend the stuff of which music is made.

Accept no substitutes.

I mean to say that these things are universal and fundamental, and the first duty of every performer is to get them all right, and also that these things are easily heard.

I suppose one of the good things about other genres of music that I like is that mostly you are listening to a one off, unique recording played by the artist that invented it. There are no other interpretations of it and so the decision is rather simple. You either like it or you do not.

quote:

Originally posted by Lontano:
I suppose one of the good things about other genres of music that I like is that mostly you are listening to a one off, unique recording played by the artist that invented it. There are no other interpretations of it and so the decision is rather simple. You either like it or you do not.

If I go to a club and the trumpet player is a bit flat, or the bass and drums aren't together with the rhythm, I'm usually out of there before the first drink is gone.

Most jazz and R & B musicians I know that are any good learned their craft by memorization and imitation, then new ideas grow from that.

What's amazing about classical music is how often players get things right. It can be a lot to manage.

quote:

Originally posted by mikeeschman:

quote:

Originally posted by Lontano:
I suppose one of the good things about other genres of music that I like is that mostly you are listening to a one off, unique recording played by the artist that invented it. There are no other interpretations of it and so the decision is rather simple. You either like it or you do not.

If I go to a club and the trumpet player is a bit flat, or the bass and drums aren't together with the rhythm, I'm usually out of there before the first drink is gone.

As I said you either like it or you don't.

My point is, say one of my favourite bands, E.S.T. There was only ever one band that made the album Seven Days of Falling. I can only listen to that music on that one recording. No one else is likely to ever play that music - Pollini, Lewis, Fred Simon etc etc - so I do not have to worry about different interpretations of it. I either like it or I do not.

I suppose as far as the Beethoven Piano Sonatas go, there is only one person who knows how they should be really played and Ludwig is long gone.

At the end of the day for me, I do not want to over analyse. If it makes me feel good, in the right mood, or my foot is tapping along to the tune, well that says it all.

The late Beethoven Sonatas have a bit more to offer than foot tapping goodness :-)

There are certainly many different ways each of them have been played.

Nothing in them is a stretch for Pollini, they are all within his grasp. I can't say that for anyone else I have heard play them.

quote:

Originally posted by mikeeschman:
The late Beethoven Sonatas have a bit more to offer than foot tapping goodness :-)

I understand. For me, the late Sonatas are a long way down my list of favourite pieces of music. As you like them so much, I have bought the Pollinis and look forward to listening.

If they get my foot tapping, well that's a good start for them. Maybe, just maybe, over time they might work their way into my true favourites list. Time will tell.

Florestan,

I don't fully understand your analogy of the 'team'. Could you be a little more specific?

I wholeheartedly believe that Lewis is an inferior musician to Pollini. However, most musicians are! This is my personal opinion, of course, but is based on extensive listening to both pianists. Although I feel that my list of pianists encompasses a great and vivid spectra of the 32, we can't predict if the 32 will become any 'better' - until they actually do - i.e. someone produces a set of recordings that highlight something in a different light. Lewis has, sadly, failed to give us anything new. You may not agree, or you may - that is the joy of personal opinions !

In terms of music, there isn't an easy way. If you want to be successful, there is only the hard way. I have spent the last 14 years practising - and to some extent, performing, of course. It is not through ease that I described Lewis as boring, it is through regret. I love to hear interpretations, but Lewis failed to deliver. Again, this is my personal opinion.

I'm unaware of myself saying there is only one way to perform a piece... However, the basic principals of interpreting/performing a piece is: accuracy and individuality. Accuracy is textual, rhythmical, the ability to voice, to phrase and articulate, to underpin a structure, to control the dynamic level of sound, the colour. The individualities are how a musician deals with these variables. Which Edition they play from, their ability to spell out rhythms (and how regimented they want them to be), which notes, if any, to voice in a particular chord, their treatment of development (harmonic and motific to aid the sense of structure) etc...

As regards to age, I somewhat disagree. Although, I've never once said that I'll play in the same manner in ten, twenty, thirty years time. Look it like this:

A pianist who is 60, sits down and learns a Schubert Sonata. However, Schubert wrote this sonata when he was 19. I think the younger pianist will have the upper-hand in grasping the 'spirit' of the piece in a much more convincing way. Why? Because they are in similar places emotionally. Obviously, an older, wiser pianist will more than likely play something like Brahms Op. 119 and grasp the maturity in a more appropriate manner than a much younger pianist.

You say that a lifetime is not enough. Whilst I understand your point, I feel it is rather cliched. Why not try to get as much packed-in as you can? - practice, practice, practice.

You also say that you 'play piano'. Are you a pianist? (There is a difference).

quote:

Originally posted by Lontano:

quote:

Originally posted by mikeeschman:
The late Beethoven Sonatas have a bit more to offer than foot tapping goodness :-)

I understand. For me, the late Sonatas are a long way down my list of favourite pieces of music. As you like them so much, I have bought the Pollini and look forward to listening.

If they get my foot tapping, well that's a good start for them. Maybe, just maybe, over time they might work their way into my true favorites list. Time will tell.

I hope you come to enjoy them, Lotano.

Actually, if you hang on to the beautiful little melodies and melodic fragments, I think you'll have a good time with them.

Good luck :-)

Florestan, I simply find Lewis' rhythm lacking in resilience and unconvincing, which ruins his performance for me.

No team, no us and them, I just don't feel the magic, because his rhythm lacks forward momentum, in other words, it does not "flow".

It's like having a meal. You don't have to be able to cook it, in order to eat and enjoy it. And you always have an opinion on how well it was salted.

Any performer who gets all of the fundamentals absolutely correct at the appropriate tempi gave a great performance. Lewis didn't hit that mark in the late Beethoven Sonatas, in my opinion.

My Pollini set arrived this morning and I have been playing it and quickly comparing it against the Lewis and Uchida set. Been playing it on itunes and imac with Harmon Kardon Soundsticks (sounds very good), not the main rig, as it makes comparison easier and ease my way into it.

I certainly understand what you like about the Pollini and the thing that strikes me most is the clear sound of the piano - so well recorded. The Lewis piano is more muffled.

More, detailed listening to come on the main rig tomorrow. I think the interesting comparison may be versus the Uchida (which gets a lot of great feedback on Amazon.com).