|
|
Post by julesd68 on Aug 1, 2019 9:29:33 GMT
Let's play a game children! As we have been recently reminded in our discussions on the various merits of 'certain' female pianists  we've all got slightly different tastes in what constitutes the most 'musical' performance, assuming the same level of technical mastery. So I thought we could look at one of my favourite piano works, Rachmaninov Prelude in G Minor, which is short enough to easily compare a number of different pianists. It's a thundering work that calls for power, perfect technique, married to great emotional empathy and depth of feeling. Pretty much everything then, so who can deliver an unforgettable performance? The work has a very distinct start, middle and end to refer to. Have a listen and then let's hear your thoughts on any great hits and misses. Take your time, I certainly needed to listen to a few of these more than once. Obviously everyone here is a world class pianist, the idea is to highlight what we are each looking for in terms of musicality. I have included both contemporary and classic performances to get the most diversity. |
|
|
|
Post by MikeMusic on Aug 1, 2019 9:58:56 GMT
That's quite a few !
Will have a go when I'm in my office
|
|
|
|
Post by julesd68 on Aug 1, 2019 10:04:03 GMT
They are just under 4 mins each Mike so not a gargantuan task and not compulsory to do it in one sitting! Thanks for looking. |
|
|
|
Post by jandl100 on Aug 1, 2019 10:48:13 GMT
I love Luganski's steely power - woof! What fingers! Nicely done romantic middle bit, too. I'll return to this one. 9/10 for now. Kissin hams it up too much for me, the tempo is all over the place in a search for an emotional impact that eludes me here. He'd be better off not playing silly buggers, imo. 2/10. Gilels I often have trouble with, he usually plays things too straight for me. And yet, I can hear him putting his heart into it in a way, but not in a way that really appeals to me. His playing is clearly very powerful but I don't get excited by it in the same as I do with Luganski. Hits the median 5/10. Yuja Wang. Hmm, not too bad - if only Luganski hadn't have been the first up! A very hard act to follow for me. Her romantic middle section is the most Rachmaninovian so far, I could easily imagine it in one of his piano sonatas or concertos, which I can't say for the others so far. But in the outer sections she doesn't convey the sheer dynamic excitement and power of Luganski. 7/10. More later!  |
|
|
|
Post by julesd68 on Aug 1, 2019 12:50:51 GMT
Great stuff J.
My go with provisional marks.
Luganski - sublime. For the start and end, a virtuoso performance with quite wonderful timing, rhythm & dynamics - the chords are so sharply delineated, a fabulous cohesion to everything. Explosive finale.
The middle section is good, but there is better to come! I just want this section to transport me a little closer to heaven, but still very fine indeed.
9/10
Kissin - beginning section 'ok' without being as precise in its timing as many here, could be much sharper; some might call it sloppy. Loses it completely in the middle section, the tempo and flow just all wrong, it stutters and starts. Final section feels scrappy in parts, everything slightly smoothed off again and the chords aren't cutting through in the way Lunganski does. Just not sure his heart is really in this performance?
3/10
Gilels - just love the YT description - 'Gilels attacks the piano like it owes him money' and they are right! He goes at it hammer and tongs. Tempo just a fraction slow to my taste.
But again, it's all lost in the middle section, just doesn't connect and flow as it should. Not feeling the romance here - some very pedestrian phrasing and even slightly bizarre accents at times!
The finale is full on, still a trifle slow and he rather throws away the final phrases which is a shame. Still, if I had heard this as an encore I would have lapped it up.
6/10
Wang - fine sense of percussive timing as you would expect. A fraction slow? Builds very nicely at the end of the first section. But here's a surprise - the middle section is charming with some lovely phrasing!
The finale is keenly attacked and again, I love some of her phrasing but for a pianist with her astonishing reserves of power I just wonder if she holds back a fraction for some reason? This is available on an album called 'The Berlin Recital' which I have bookmarked for future listening. Perhaps if she was playing it for an encore she might have gone out all guns blazing??
7 to 8/10
|
|
|
|
Post by Pinch on Aug 1, 2019 13:18:00 GMT
Here's my boy...
|
|
|
|
Post by jandl100 on Aug 1, 2019 14:28:29 GMT
Oh dear, Jules - something is terribly wrong - your scores are pretty much identical to mine.  Of course, the Bouncing Boob Babe isn't among those present, we may well have diverged in our opinions there!  |
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on Aug 1, 2019 14:57:24 GMT
My notes so far (I could only listen to three at work):
Lugansky: thundering, confident, lyrical. Holds my attention. A very fine performance with no downside. 9/10
Kissin: pushes and pulls timing. Wayward. Too mannered and stamping his own persona too much. 5/10
Gilels: well-paced, fine overall performance, communicates the music well. 8/10
|
|
|
|
Post by julesd68 on Aug 1, 2019 17:50:51 GMT
Oh dear, Jules - something is terribly wrong - your scores are pretty much identical to mine. Of course, the Bouncing Boob Babe isn't among those present, we may well have diverged in our opinions there! L-O-L. I am confident that Khatia B would have nailed this, especially the middle section. Of course I did look for a recording ... |
|
|
|
Post by John on Aug 1, 2019 18:52:12 GMT
Okay I am going to be a bit different from you
I thought Luganski was very technical But for whatever reason, it leaves me a bit cold maybe it is all that technical brilliance but well it just a bit too technically perfect for me
I give it a 7
Kissin I am not enjoying this at all. The playing seems all over the place.
2
Wang
I like this a lot. It has the most feel I heard so far. The second session she just nails this for me. Beautiful playing and love how she controlling the piano in terms of dynamics. For me a great combination of technique and feel
9
For me, it was the second section that I really started to judge what I was hearing. Interesting how they all put their own spin on this
I still find it easier to listen to that four-letter word I am afraid, especially when it comes to the piano.
|
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on Aug 1, 2019 19:19:25 GMT
Wang: plays it percussively, as if Lupu was playing it. Technically masterful but she makes it sound wonderful, too. 9/10
Horowitz: starts well but I didn't enjoy his 2nd section as much. Somehow not as flowing. 6/10
Matsuev: somewhat rushes the opening section, going for heroics? The piano sounds a bit of a mess as a consequence. 5/10
Ashkenazy: lyrical, percussive although not as much as Wang, clearly feels the music deeply. 8/10
|
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on Aug 2, 2019 5:40:41 GMT
Richter: brings out the melodic flow, a good performance. 8/10
Sudbin: starts off well but speeds up and appears to be in a race at the end. 6/10
Lisitsa: highly defined dynamics, fast throughout but holds it together better than Sudbin: 7/10
|
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on Aug 2, 2019 5:51:09 GMT
Giltburg: steady, metronomic, romantic but is it missing something? 7/10
Rachmaninov: is this a piano roll? What a lesson in how the man played it himself, real pyrotechnics in places. 9/10
So my overall top three players are Lugansky, Wang, Rachmaninov.
|
|
|
|
Post by jandl100 on Aug 2, 2019 6:52:53 GMT
Horowitz - another one who hams it up a bit, but nowhere near the extent of Kissin.
But dynamics and timing are at the service of the player rather than the composer. He's constantly slipping and sliding in tempo. Irritating.
I get the feeling he had played it too many times in his long career and was rather bored by it so felt the need to jazz it up.
Good power and dynamic control.
5/10
Matsuev - Wow, superb. I really liked this. Didn't show the steely power of Luganski, but tempo variations were slowly applied and to great effect. Lovely romantic middle, less Rach-like than Wang but far more affecting. I loved the race to the end! Wonderful.
Equal but different to Luganski.
I'd not heard of Matsuev before, I will def follow him up.
9/10
Ashkenazy - a bit skittish in pacing. Sounds a bit like an uninspired studio recording - I think doing this piece live in front of an audience can really help.
Practically goes to sleep in the middle section.
Hard to make this piece boring, but he manages.
2/10
Richter - for quite a few pianophiles, the ultimate pianist.
Whoo - interesting following Ashkenazy - he really shows him up! The piece is exciting again!
Gorgeous middle section - sounds like the score of a 1940s romantic film. A bit OTT, but who cares!!
He doesn't really let himself go (as he does, jaw droppingly, in some of his recordings) the final section is a bit of a letdown.
7/10 here, but probably capable of 10.
More later!
|
|
|
|
Post by julesd68 on Aug 2, 2019 11:13:53 GMT
Horowitz - I like this better on second listening but something is missing for me, it doesn’t flow in quite the same way as Lugansky or Wang. Sounds a little crude and bombastic in parts of the opening. I know it's an old recording but doesn’t sound like the best piano either. He tries to bring out the emotion of the second section but some of the pacing is all wrong as Martin says, it nearly grinds to a halt! The final section is more successful, but without the same precision as many of the contemporary pianists. If I give this 5, I think Giles is a smidgeon better so will revise him to 6.
5/10
Matsuev - An efficient performance all round, fine sense of timing and rhythm. A particularly ‘Russian’ approach to the middle section which I appreciate, very wistful and charming phrasing. The finale finely crafted, ratcheting up the tension for the pyrotechnics. Quite stunning delicacy in the final few bars!
8 or 9/10
Ashkenazy - What a lost opportunity for the Rach master! Gorgeous middle section, the empathy and emotion is second to none for me. But the first section is somewhat disappointing and could have been much tauter - as Jerry says, a concert environment would have helped. Fabulous finale, one of the very best - why couldn’t he play the opening like this??
7/10
Richter - Lots of power in the opening, but rather sledgehammer like in the phrasing! I was expecting more from the middle - really lacking some subtlety in the right hand phrasing. I just don’t like his phrasing in the finale either - no ‘guile’ to the power compared to the likes of Matsuev! Very throwaway at the ending.
5/10
|
|
we've all got slightly different tastes in what constitutes the most 'musical' performance, assuming the same level of technical mastery.
