BAL 15/1/11 Tchaikovsky: Piano Trio, Op 50

[ardcarp]

now that it has its own sub-forum.

I really glad about the new sub-forum. I've always thought CD Review/BAL ought to have its own slot.

[Don Petter]

I must find the CD versions and have a mini-BaL before the 15th, if I have time. From memory my preferred versions are the earlier BAT and the Oistrakh, but it’s a robust work which can stand a variety of interpretations, all of which I have enjoyed.

I’ve just listened to the Oistrakh et al again, after some length of time. I had forgotten how poor the recording quality is. (It shows how memory can clean up a recording better than electronics.) I still like the performance, which is quite stunning towards the end of the work, but I don’t think I could suggest this as a first recommendation.

[BBMmk2]

It will be better if R3 Bal reviewed a Shosta PT.

[Nachtigall]

Hm, he's just dismissed the Naxos recording which is the only one I possess. I thought it rather enjoyable.

[Mr Pee]

Interesting final recommendation, but personally if I'm going to be living with a recording, I'd rather have one without wrong notes, so it'll be the Argerich for me, I think.

[Cellini]

I thought that was a very good review, and I was very impressed with the Barenboim/Zukermann/Du Pre interpretation - liked some of the Argerich/Kremer/? and loved Oistrakh/Oberin/? - mainly because of Oistrakh.

One of the later variations in mvt 2 sounded like pure Chopin (The mazurka mvt), and I believe Tchaikovsky came first! (NO, I'm wrong and of course Chopin was earler than Tchaik!!)

There were one or two other versions that sounded pretty good too, but in the end I agreed about Barenboim/Zukermann/Du Pre hitting the spot, and who cares about wrong notes and bars missing!!

Added: I hadn't realised what a fine work this trio is.

[mikealdren]

I don't think I could live with the errors, they're fine on first listening in a live performance but on repeated listening I find myself almost waiting for the slips and they become irritating. The sound wasn't great either.

If I'm going top live with poor sound, the playing has to be as good as Oistrakh, what a fantastic chamber player he was. Is the Brilliant Classics performance the same one it or a different live performance, does anyone know?

I heard the Heifetz playing in the background in a bookshop a few years ago and stayed to listen to the end, stunning playing, I must get it!

Mike

[aeolium]

I found it a slightly strange review in that the reviewer seemed to alternate between having his pedantic reviewer's hat on and allowing passion or enthusiasm to excuse all, in the end coming down in favour of the passionate performances. I'm not sure that Tchaikovsky needs extra passion in that there's so much already in the music. I liked a lot of the extracts I heard - apart from Lang Lang's opening for the 2nd movement - and agree with others about Oistrakh: wonderful playing. The only thing is that I don't think it's quite matched by Oborin and Koussevitzky and it almost turns the work into a Violin Trio.

No mention of Ashkenazy/Perlman/Harrell - I assume it must be unavailable.

[DracoM]

Yes, good review, but I have to confess that I am still a bit puzzled at the claims made for the work in the first place.

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

I'm not sure what claims these are, though I've always liked the work myself. Tchaikovsky way well have disliked the the piano tro as a medium earlier in his life, but he went as far as to include one in the slow movement of his 2nd Piano Concerto - something that has sparked considerable negative criticism over the years, though I don't see the problem.
In an earlier thread, I said this trio contained some of Tchaikovsky's better piano writing. However, this doesn't really answer the real problem - that it would have made an even better orchestral work.

[Nick Armstrong]

I enjoyed this BAL and surprised myself by liking the sound of the work (as the "really annoying music" thread shows, old Tchaik was responsible for some of my musical bêtes noires...)..

I agree with the above concerning over-expressive performances (Lang Lang ). On the extracts chosen, I'm not sure the Barenboim would be my choice. I liked the version the reviewer opened with, the Moscow Rachmaninov Trio on Helios. From a review of that disc, I just saw that Gilels and Rostropovich did a recording... am I right that it wasn't mentioned this moning? Unobtainable I suspect. Anyone know that performance?

[Basil]

Who else found his tendency to begin talking before the extract had finished very annoying, just me?

[Nick Armstrong]

Who else found his tendency to begin talking before the extract had finished very annoying, just me?

Have to say I didn't even notice that he did, Basil!

[Basil]

Have to say I didn't even notice that he did, Basil!

Really?

On the podcast, check at,

6' 14 seconds

9' 20s

11' 6s

14' 47s

21' 12s

29' 25s

31' 15s

37' 00s

38' 22s

[aka Calum Da Jazbo]

Gilels and Rostropovich did a recording... am I right that it wasn't mentioned this moning? Unobtainable I suspect. Anyone know that performance?

sort of, dld it a year ago and not remembered to give a good listen until today's programme [very enjoyable], it formed a part of my regular dld from emusic i believe.

Gilels Kogan and Rostropovich ...it will do me! [until i can get the BAT and Heifitz if i can find them online]