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

[Bryn]

Ah, found the Denk CD. I had filed it under Ligeti and it had also managed to find its way back a bit on the shelf, so it was not immediately obvious it was there. Worth mentioning that the disc does not include all the Ligeti studies, just Book 1 and the first six of Book 2. Denk writes that that is where he stops in recitals too. So if you want the last study of Book 2, and those in Book 3, then it looks like a couple of Aimard CDs are in order, or you could go to Hell (Thomas, that is) for them all on one disc.

[amateur51]

Ah, found the Denk CD. I had filed it under Ligeti and it had also managed to find its way back a bit on the shelf, so it was not immediately obvious it was there. Worth mentioning that the disc does not include all the Ligeti studies, just Book 1 and the first six of Book 2. Denk writes that that is where he stops in recitals too. So if you want the last study of Book 2, and those in Book 3, then it looks like a couple of Aimard CDs are in order, or you could go to Hell (Thomas, that is) for them all on one disc.

Great leads, Bryn - feeling denk as they say auf Deutsch (approximately )

[Bryn]

Milly grassy.

[Bryn]

I can't access the iPlayer for BaL at the moment (listening to Rienzi via HD Sound option). When discussing Backhaus, was the 1960 Lugano recorded performance mentioned? That was played on a Bechstein and can be found (with a bit of searching around) on a Hermitage disc. The disc also has performances by Arrau (1963, on a Steinway) and Badura-Skoda (1987, Bösendorfer). All worthy of attention.

http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/CD-BEETHOVEN-Sonata-do-min-opus-111-BACKHAUS-ARRAU-BADURA-SKODA-lp-mc-dvd-/230970099921?pt=CD&hash=item35c6e408d1

[Andrew Preview]

I'm tempted to add to the above, blow the Beethoven! This BAL was a DON tour de force and not to be missed!

But seriously, can't wait to hear the whole sonata on the Graf on Monday.

Just caught up with this via the podcast. An interesting BaL for sure, and undoubtedly an entertaining one. But, to borrow from the presenter himself, did he really find meaning through his analysis, or just apply meaning with it? To put it another way, did he help the listener to find some sort of Beethovenian "truth", or did he point us towards David O-N's version of Beethovenian truth? Like Brautigam's interpretation of the sonata, DON's guide left me impressed, but unmoved.

For a contrasting view, this is what Misha Donat had to say about Brautigam's recording:

"...there are no holds barred in his impressively passionate account of Op. 111’s opening Allegro. However, Brautigam’s account of the same sonata’s concluding ‘Arietta’ variations is likely to prove a stumbling block for many listeners. Most pianists view the major portion of the piece as the most profoundly serene and other-worldly music Beethoven ever wrote for piano, but Brautigam’s surprisingly flowing underlying tempo engenders some hectic activity in the central variations as the note-values progressively decrease, and his performance as a whole sounds disappointingly down-to-earth."

[Bryn]

Just caught up with this via the podcast. An interesting BaL for sure, and undoubtedly an entertaining one. But, to borrow from the presenter himself, did he really find meaning through his analysis, or just apply meaning with it? To put it another way, did he help the listener to find some sort of Beethovenian "truth", or did he point us towards David O-N's version of Beethovenian truth? Like Brautigam's interpretation of the sonata, DON's guide left me impressed, but unmoved.

For a contrasting view, this is what Misha Donat had to say about Brautigam's recording:

"...there are no holds barred in his impressively passionate account of Op. 111’s opening Allegro. However, Brautigam’s account of the same sonata’s concluding ‘Arietta’ variations is likely to prove a stumbling block for many listeners. Most pianists view the major portion of the piece as the most profoundly serene and other-worldly music Beethoven ever wrote for piano, but Brautigam’s surprisingly flowing underlying tempo engenders some hectic activity in the central variations as the note-values progressively decrease, and his performance as a whole sounds disappointingly down-to-earth."

But surely, that is MD's own teleological imposition? At least Brautigam is closer to the composers notation than most, as D O-N made clear.

[Barbirollians]

I always find BAL's where an instrumentalist is asked to BAL a piece for his or her own instrument difficult .

There is this tendency -to my ears - for the pianist to choose the performance that they would have liked to have recorded .

His dismissal of the Brendel to my ears was quite bizarre - the Brautigam was interesting but I agree that the Arietta is not all that well served by the tempo he chose - the Denk sounded very dull to me.

[Bryn]

Looks like D O-N is on the same wavelength as Fuse's Jonathan Blumhofer:

Sandwiched in between the Ligeti selections is Beethoven’s spectacularly unconventional op. 111 piano sonata. If there’s any nineteenth-century composer whose music doesn’t need to be paired with a major twentieth-century score in order to sound unique, it’s the perpetually fresh Beethoven. And, indeed, Mr. Denk turns in an interpretation of this peculiar score that is fully attuned to Beethoven’s expressive extremes, with a driven account of its neo-Baroque first movement and a sensitively paced reading of the finale. Mr. Denk’s ability to draw out the long melodic phrase is on full display in this last movement, too, where he manages a powerful reading of one of Beethoven’s most deeply felt, spiritual essays.

I'm with the pair of them re. Denk's reading, and very much with D O-M regarding Brautigam's. I fail to understand how one might miss what Blumhofer describes re. Denk in the Arietta.

[Thropplenoggin]

I always find BAL's where an instrumentalist is asked to BAL a piece for his or her own instrument difficult .

There is this tendency -to my ears - for the pianist to choose the performance that they would have liked to have recorded .

His dismissal of the Brendel to my ears was quite bozarre - the Brautigam was interesting but I agree that the Arietta is not all that well served by the tempo he chose - the Denk sounded very dull to me.

This could be the most fatuous comment I've ever read on these boards, so much so that you force my hand to interrupt my hiatus of these boards.

Your second assertion is patently false in this instance. DON chose recordings that are rarely heard, were often imperfect (Schnabel) to highlight the historical readings of the work on record, or to highlight interpretative possibility of the piece even where he disagreed with it. I can't think of a fairer review, and the fact he knew the work as well as, say, Serial_Apologist, in being able to discern A Flats played with G Majors where E Flat Majors were expected ( ), made for utterly enthralling listening (especially when he peppered the critique with anecdotes from his day-to-day life (lucky students, to have a teacher such as he))...

Each week, you seem to want the reviewer to pick the recording you approve of, because either you own it, heard them live, or whatever. It seems a ludicrous way to listen to the programme.

The Denk is on an ingeniously programmed CD - programmed in the middle of a selection of Ligeti etudes, played superbly, and I didn't even think I liked Ligeti. Perhaps you should listen with less prejudiced ears... with knobs on

--

For those interested, I found this comment on one of Gulda's recording of op. 111 fascinating: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Beethoven-Pi...owViewpoints=1

[Andrew Preview]

But surely, that is MD's own teleological imposition? At least Brautigam is closer to the composers notation than most, as D O-N made clear.

Perhaps, but I didn't suggest that MD had a monopoly on Beethovenian truth - merely that he offered a different view. I took DON's point about tempo relationships within the second movement, but does Brautigam really play Adagio molto? More importantly, whether he is faithful to the text or not, his performance leaves me unmoved. If others find otherwise, then that's fine.

[Barbirollians]

This could be the most fatuous comment I've ever read on these boards, so much so that you force my hand to interrupt my hiatus of these boards.

Your second assertion is patently false in this instance. DON chose recordings that are rarely heard, were often imperfect (Schnabel) to highlight the historical readings of the work on record, or to highlight interpretative possibility of the piece even where he disagreed with it. I can't think of a fairer review, and the fact he knew the work as well as, say, Serial_Apologist, in being able to discern A Flats played with G Majors where E Flat Majors were expected ( ), made for utterly enthralling listening (especially when he peppered the critique with anecdotes from his day-to-day life (lucky students, to have a teacher such as he))...

Each week, you seem to want the reviewer to pick the recording you approve of, because either you own it, heard them live, or whatever. It seems a ludicrous way to listen to the programme.

The Denk is on an ingeniously programmed CD - programmed in the middle of a selection of Ligeti etudes, played superbly, and I didn't even think I liked Ligeti. Perhaps you should listen with less prejudiced ears... with knobs on

--

For those interested, I found this comment on one of Gulda's recording of op. 111 fascinating: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Beethoven-Pi...owViewpoints=1

I can only assume that the heat has got to you for you to post something so gratuitously offensive.

1 DON like other instrumentalists who have prepared BAL's in the past ( for all his erudition) clearly dislikes performances that do not concur with the way he would choose to play it. The most egregious example being Lucy Parham's dismissal of Richter's Rachmaninov 2 recording . In my view , the reviewers who do not specialise in the instrument in question appear to have a more open mind . It was an illuminating BAL but some of his dismissals were self-evidently based on no more than that prejudice .

2 The examples from the Denk I found dull as ditchwater . No doubt it is my problem to find I prefer Brendel. Uchida and Solomon.

3 Your arrogance in presuming that I do not like or appreciate Ligeti says a great deal more about you than me . I have always found his works fascinating and his Violin Concerto dazzles me every time I hear it .

I suggest that you look at the beam in your own eye rather than the mote in others .

[Barbirollians]

I thought I better go and listen to the BAl again on iplayer - and for crying out loud Norris admits that he dismisses some - such as Solomon for playing " their " Beethoven on very subjective grounds . That admission , makes my point . They are not DON's way of playing Beethoven .

The two excerpts of the Denk he played sounded mechanical and dull to my ears . The Brautigam fascinating but his Arietta sounded rather choppy to me .

The approach whereby one pianist accuses others of producing performances of their Beethoven rather than the composer's intentions - strikes me as common when instrumentalists review recordings of their own instrument . The reviews of Michael Jameson in IRR and before in BBC MM are the most obvious expression of this tenancy but he is not alone.

[Sir Velo]

I don't think there's any doubt that the DON revels in selecting controversial choices as his BAL recommendation. It doesn't take much imagination to see him rubbing his hands with glee as another sacred cow is dispatched with gusto. I recall a typically eccentric BAL on the Suites Bergamasques a few years back when he seemed to take half the programme over an endless disquisition into the way the opening notes were played! His final choice, an "unknown" French pianist, would not have been a problem had he not recklessly cast aside marvellous performances by the likes of Richter, Roge, Michelangeli et al. By all means listen to him for entertainment value, but a cellar of salt is recommended in taking his choices on trust.

[Bryn]

To anyone even slightly familiar with Debussy's piano music, the name Daniel Erincourt (an American of French birth) is no '"unknown" French pianist'. He is a legend. If you have not explored his recordings of Debussy's complete works for piano solo, it's your loss, and in a big way.

[Sir Velo]

To anyone even slightly familiar with Debussy's piano music, the name Daniel Erincourt (an American of French birth) is no '"unknown" French pianist'. He is a legend. If you have not explored his recordings of Debussy's complete works for piano solo, it's your loss, and in a big way.

So much of a legend that some people can't even spell his name correctly. Tis Daniel Ericourt!