BaL 6.07.13 - Beethoven's Piano Sonata no. 32 in C minor Op. 111

[waldo]

Thought this was the silliest BAL of all time. Absolutely useless, if you didn't already know who the real front-runners are. I know there are too many recordings to cover and I don't expect him to mention all my personal favourites, but this was just appallingly eccentric. No Barenboim, no Arrau, no Kempff, no Goode, no Kovacevich, no Richter. Brendel thrown to the wolves......

As for Brautigam being the first choice - well, it is laughable. Makes me long for the good old days when "historically informed" performances were lucky to get a dismissive parenthesis.

[BBMmk2]

Interesting you should say that, Waldo, becuase4 it was certainly quite a different prestation to what we are used to. Especially when he sort started to sing!?!?!?

[waldo]

I also didn't learn anything about the piece, Brassbandmaestro, which is quite unusual for a BAL. He commented on a few key relationships and discussed the tempo, but that was about it. That's the problem with too much debunking, perhaps: it leaves you with nothing interesting to say.

As for his singing, I quite liked that.......

[BBMmk2]

That was the best part!!(In hindisght!)

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

That's the problem with too much debunking, perhaps: it leaves you with nothing interesting to say.

So anything "interesting to say" is just "bunkham"?

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

... does Brautigam really play [I]Adagio molto[I]?

No, he doesn't: he plays Adagio molto semplice e cantabile ("Slowly very simply and songlike") as Beethoven tells him to do.

More importantly, whether he is faithful to the text or not, his performance leaves me unmoved. If others find otherwise, then that's fine.

Well, "more importantly" to you, of course - but then I don't think it's part of the reviewers' remit to consult each of their listeners when making their choices. They listen to the discs, decide which matches their own conception of what the composer expects (the performance they wish they'd given, if you like), then share this with the rest of us to accept or dismiss as we feel fit.


But what a TWONK, leaving out Pollini!!!

[aeolium]

But what a TWONK, leaving out Pollini!!!

(and Gulda!)

To be fair to DON, he did I think make it clear that this was really a hopeless task given the enormous number of recordings and he was only highlighting those that had made a particular impression on him either with their quality and fidelity to the text or their perverse departure from the text (as he conceived it). I liked the Brautigam, particularly in the first movement, but would definitely wish to have Pollini's version.

It was an entertaining BaL, but it does again raise the question (not for the first time on these boards) of whether such a work would be better served by a discussion, with a range of opinions. We could have had Misha Donat, for instance, debating his views of the work with DON.

[ardcarp]

Thought this was the silliest BAL of all time. Absolutely useless, if you didn't already know who the real front-runners are. I know there are too many recordings to cover and I don't expect him to mention all my personal favourites, but this was just appallingly eccentric. No Barenboim, no Arrau, no Kempff, no Goode, no Kovacevich, no Richter. Brendel thrown to the wolves......

As for Brautigam being the first choice - well, it is laughable. Makes me long for the good old days when "historically informed" performances were lucky to get a dismissive parenthesis.

Waldo. I find myself riding to the defence of DON. If "entertaining" = "silly" then I suppose I can understand your feelings. However DON is, par excellence, a communicator, and I for one enjoy his conversational style, singing too.

He himself admitted that it was an impossible task even to scratch the surface of the recordings out there, going back to the beginnings of recorded sound. It had to be a personal choice, and what I think he was trying to do was to strip away the accretions of a Romantic performance style (which maybe began with Liszt and which still persists). I have no problem with any sort of interpretational style, but DON had to choose a standpoint...and I think his dismissal of Brendel was on the grounds that there is sometimes more Brendel than Beethoven

On the subject of an instrumentalist reviewing his own instrument, I really don't think that is relevant here. DON is a very talented general practitioner of the piano, and a fine accompanist, but I'm sure he does not see himself as one of the "greats" in terms of Beethovenian performance.

[Bryn]

So anything "interesting to say" is just "bunkham"?

Clearly a Charles Ives fan.

[ardcarp]

but it does again raise the question (not for the first time on these boards) of whether such a work would be better served by a discussion, with a range of opinions. We could have had Misha Donat, for instance, debating his views of the work with DON.

Oh no! Please not the faux dialogue. Let's be careful what we wish for. BAL, in its 'one person's view' format, is just fine for me

[aeolium]

Oh no! Please not the faux dialogue. Let's be careful what we wish for. BAL, in it's 'one person's view' format, is just fine for me

Actually, I didn't mean the kind of discussion they have on CD Review - which I agree tends to be on the bland side - but more like the old Interpretations on Record, a longer programme. And I wouldn't see it as replacing BaL, but to be used for those works which can hardly be accommodated in BaL because of their 'size' and the huge number of recordings.

[waldo]

I agree that it was entertaining, ardcarp. Very much so.

I agree, too, that it has to be a personal choice. What other kind of choice is there? We can't expect anything else. I suppose what I am saying boils down to this: DON's taste lies so far outside the mainstream that his recommendations and judgments will only speak to a very small minority of listeners. From that point of view, it was not a very useful BAL. A more considerate reviewer might have recognised this and allowed himself to commend, or at least comment more fully on, recordings he himself did not actually appreciate.

As for stripping away the accretions of the Romantic style, is that it, then, for all the great pianists of the past fifty years? Out they all go - Pollini, Arrau, Barenboim et al - because they aren't "authentic?" All those recordings that so many of us have loved and revered - out the window. On the grounds, presumably, that DON knows just what style Beethoven ought to be played in and these all got it wrong.

That's another thing you often get with HIP fans: they like to imply that historical research had uncovered the one true way of playing this or that composer........but that is another issue.

[Bryn]

Surely the point is that D O-N was guiding the average listener, who might have overlooked the likes of Denk and Brautigam due to either the unfamiliar name or a distaste for the kind of instrument the composer wrote for, towards an understanding of what they had to offer that was closer to what Beethoven notated and intended?

I'm particularly grateful for the fillip towards digging out my Denk CD and listening more closely to the Beethoven than I did previously (have paid rather more attention to the Ligeti). The Brautigam was already a top contender for me. I did miss Pollini, Rosen, any of the Gulda, and the 1960 Lugano Backhaus recording (possibly the fastest Arietta of them all), however.

[amateur51]

I greatly enjoyed DON's brief sojourn into just how difficult this sonata is to play at all, giving examples of Edwin Fischer, Clara Haskil and Wilhelm Backhaus all proving momentarily fallible. Modern studio recordings are often light years away from what one might expect to hear in the concert hall. For me, Pollini's recording represents the opposite extreme - there is no hint of struggle, no suggestion that all control may be lost at any moment. I get that sense of struggle with Solomon.

But in a 45 minute programme you can do little more than skate over the surface. A newcomer to the piece would have been left with a tremendous respect for the ground-breaking nature of the piece and the different sorts of experiments/compromises pianists have made in attempting to play it. A newcomer would have a basic knowledge of the highlights and, I hope, an enthusiasm to learn more.

The other interesting idea I got from DON was that this is only Beethoven's last piano sonata in the sense that it is the last one he wrote before he died - Beethoven was taking the form on a journey and doubtless would have written differently again in sonata no. 33 but ... this is what we have, be respectful but don't be reverent.

[Richard Tarleton]

I greatly enjoyed DON's brief sojourn into just how difficult this sonata is to play at all, giving examples of Edwin Fischer, Clara Haskil and Wilhelm Backhaus

He did mention some Fischer pupils without mentioning Brendel. AB was never a formal or regular pupil but attended Fischer masterclasses and regards EF as a major influence. He was actually very rude about the great man, thinking about it. I remain unshakeable in my devotion to Brendel's Beethoven, DON notwithstanding, which goes back to the first time I heard him in an all-Beethoven recital in the late 60s, and my first Brendel record, the Turnabout Diabelli.

The other interesting idea I got from DON was that this is only Beethoven's last piano sonata in the sense that it is the last one he wrote before he died

Yes, I loved that reference to - was it a student essay - saying how fortunate it was that Beethoven completed his cycle of 32 sonatas before he died