GMG Classical Music Forum

The Music Room => Great Recordings and Reviews => Topic started by: Holden on March 29, 2008, 03:55:03 PM

Title: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Holden on March 29, 2008, 03:55:03 PM
This doesn't seem to have been done before apart from a thread by Dirk that, unfortunately, didn't go very far. Let's hope this one does better as while recordings of this work are numerous, good recordings are not.

To me, Op 120 is Beethoven's pianistic masterpiece. What he creates from a very simple little tune leaves him as the undeniable master of the variations genre. What's more, all his sets of variations seem to have a coherency about them that make them appear to be an integral work with a beginning, middle and end that seem connected and this is what makes 'great recordings' of Op 120 so hard to accomplish. Only a few pianists have got there yet it does have it's 'aiming' points that can make this happen. Variations 1, 15 and 25 are so grotesque that they can only be some sort of sarcastic caricature that LvB is making on the main theme. So you can divide OP 120 into three sections; Var 1-14, 15-24 and 25 - 33. The placing of the two fugues is no accident either and also help to give closure to sections.  From here, a pianist has to use a combination of variable tempos and LvBs 'Sturm und Drang' to bring each set 'back home' to Diabelli's original Waltz theme. As a listener, I always find that theme is in my mind no matter what variation is being played and coming back to it (after straying well away) gives me a satisfying feeling.

The other major requirement is how the opening theme is played. Tempo and inflection are very important as this will shape the pianists approach to the rest of the work. I've heard versions of this where the opening has either been too fast or slow and while the following Var I does sound grotesque it also sounds out of place.

I have recordings of this work by the following pianists

Brendel (VOX)
Ciani
Kovacevich
Richter (Prague)
Richter (Amsterdam)
Schnabel
Sokolov

I have also heard (but didn't acquire)
Arrau
Barenboim
Brendel #2
Andrzewski
Ugorski

I would like to hear
Rudolf Serkin
William Kinderman
Maria Yudina

The No Show's

Ugorski's is the worst recording of any piano piece I've ever heard. Barenboim is ponderous as opposed to inspired and the same goes for Sokolov (acquired as part of a 5 CD set). Brendel's version two for Philips, while good, doesn't match his VOX box version and Andrzewski does things with the music that are were never intended and don't work. I found that it lacked any form of coherence and I might as well have been listening to 34 different pieces. Richter in Prague, while very good is definitely outshone by his 1986 recording in the Concertegebouw.

The Contenders

Dino Ciani's version is very good and though I think he takes the theme too fast he manages to pull things back together after Var IV and from there on it is a very satisfying performance.

Artur Schnabel owns this work and he manages to keep the whole work flowing. I wonder what would have happened if hadn't decided to champion it. When you compare Op 120 to LvBs other works there aren't really that many recordings out there. BTW, does anyone know of a Diabelli discography site?

Steven Kovacevich is in the Schnabel mold and the advantage of modern stereo sound almost makes getting the Schnabel superfluous - almost!

Sviatoslav Richter's greatest asset as a musician for me was not his awesome technical skills but his ability to portray the 'big picture', looking past the main moments of a work to link all it's parts and bring it to a satisfying conclusion. This is what makes him such a great Beethoven interpreter and you can see this gift quite clearly in his recordings of Schubert's D894 and D960 sonatas plus the 'Wanderer'. Also consider his Schumann Op 17 - I could go on. So when he manages to pull of the impossible in this late recording and make it all sound linked I'm not surprised.

Pianists who didn't record it who I would have liked to have heard

Solomon - who better?
Sergio Fiorentino
Kempff (or has he?)
Gilels

The Tragedy is that I don't have a copy of what I believe is the most coherently conceived recording of this work - Claudio Arrau on Philips from the 1970s(?). Holidaying in NZ I spent 2 weeks with this CD (from Wellington Library) and fell in love with it. However, none of the stores there had a copy and there were no burning facilities where I was staying so I'm still without it despite looking around here in Australia.

I'd be interested to hear your opinions on recordings and approaches to the Diabellis. Feel free to agree or disagree with me.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: orbital on March 29, 2008, 05:49:36 PM
Quote from: Holden on March 29, 2008, 03:55:03 PM

The Tragedy is that I don't have a copy of what I believe is the most coherently conceived recording of this work - Claudio Arrau on Philips from the 1970s(?).
Is that the recording that is included in the big Arrau Beethoven Philips box? If so, I have it and have not even listened to it I think  :-[
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Todd on March 29, 2008, 05:52:06 PM
When it comes to the Diabellis, I often prefer a more interventionist approach.  I can't quite explain why, but when a pianist obviously tinkers around with the tempi (especially) and dynamics (less so), I often enjoy the results, though not always.  Perhaps that's why unlike Holden I find Piotr Anderszewski very enjoyable.  Olli Mustonen is at least as interventionist, though he tends toward fast tempi and some repeat omissions, and I like him even more!  Geza Anda strips out every repeat, and brings the work in at under 40 minutes, but he infuses it with such energy and effective dynamic contrasts, that it's hard not to appreciate it on its own terms.  Even Anton Kuerti, whose sonata cycle I'm not too wild about, delivers a superb, highly individual (ie, idiosyncratic) take.  

But of course a more "straight-forward" approach can yield enormous dividends.  Exhibit A here is Rudolf Serkin, whose recording is still probably my favorite.  Sure, the sound is dated and a pesky cricket plays along in the background, but Serkin's unwavering drive and energy and total command of the work hits the spot.  I can easily see how some would find his take too austere or hard, but I love it.  Sviatoslav Richter's 1986 Amsterdam recording manages to mix both individuality and directness in equal measure.  Should the at times lumbering tempi and playing work as well as they do?  No – but they do.  Similarly, Stephen Kovacevich's lauded recording delivers the goods in a similar approach (more similar to Serkin, that is).  

Other fine performances include Brendel's digital studio recording of the work (I haven't heard the other two), Mieczyslaw Horszowski's take, and Robert Silverman's hard-hitting, unsentimental take.

Were I to group them into categories, the top tier would include Serkin, Mustonen, and Richter.  The next rung down would include Kuerti, Anderszewski, Kovacevich, Anda, and Brendel.  After that some good ones would be Arrau, Horszowski, and Silverman.  

Less compelling recordings for me (for various reasons) include Schnabel, Ashkenazy, Heisser, Perl, Pludermacher, Pollini (good, but somehow disappointing), and Yokoyama (not up to snuff).  I've never quite got into the Diabellis as much as the sonatas, but I'm slowly trying to rectify that.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Sean on March 29, 2008, 07:11:27 PM
This is a work I never bought a recording of and I got to know it from a taped recording I don't remember; I've heard a few great performances and the key thing I think is to get inside the work's extraordinary spirit of determination and ruthless triumph- it's a piece lending itself to masculine power and succeeds when the player finds an overall grip of the vast canvass. Along with Goldberg, and perhaps Strauss's Don Quixote it's the greatest set of variations.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Brian on March 29, 2008, 07:38:03 PM
Quote from: Holden on March 29, 2008, 03:55:03 PM
Ugorski's is the worst recording of any piano piece I've ever heard.
Really now? Where can I find it? Since your piano recommendations are always so well-considered and often spot-on, I'd rather like to hear "the worst recording ever". Is it so bad I might derive a perverse pleasure from it, or ... is it just bad?

Quote from: Sean on March 29, 2008, 07:11:27 PMAlong with Goldberg, and perhaps Strauss's Don Quixote it's the greatest set of variations.
Beethoven Op 111
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Don on March 29, 2008, 09:16:40 PM
Quote from: Todd on March 29, 2008, 05:52:06 PM
When it comes to the Diabellis, I often prefer a more interventionist approach.  I can't quite explain why, but when a pianist obviously tinkers around with the tempi (especially) and dynamics (less so), I often enjoy the results, though not always.  Perhaps that's why unlike Holden I find Piotr Anderszewski very enjoyable.  Olli Mustonen is at least as interventionist, though he tends toward fast tempi and some repeat omissions, and I like him even more!  


Anderszewski is my favorite.  I find Mustonen's lean textures very interesting.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Wanderer on March 29, 2008, 10:48:29 PM
This thread reminds me, I've been wanting to acquire Demidenko's recording for quite a long time. Anyone here heard it? Reviews have been most favourable.

(http://www.jpc.de/image/w600/front/0/0743625401721.jpg)
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Holden on March 30, 2008, 12:51:59 AM
Quote from: Brian on March 29, 2008, 07:38:03 PM
Really now? Where can I find it? Since your piano recommendations are always so well-considered and often spot-on, I'd rather like to hear "the worst recording ever". Is it so bad I might derive a perverse pleasure from it, or ... is it just bad?
Beethoven Op 111

It's so bizarre that I wondered whether Ugorski had just escaped from a 'home for the bewildered'. Maybe I'm doing the man an injustice but it totally threw me.

Thanks also for the accolade - I didn't realise that my piano recommendations were well-considered so that's nice to hear. I try to think things out before I post but sometimes I just can't find the right language.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: FideLeo on March 30, 2008, 02:31:51 AM
Give me a fortepiano recording anyday!  Paul Komen comes to mind.  :)
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Que on March 30, 2008, 03:30:07 AM
Quote from: fl.traverso on March 30, 2008, 02:31:51 AM
Give me a fortepiano recording anyday!  Paul Komen comes to mind.  :)

Same here!  ;D

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41ZJF0J89FL._SS400_.jpg)

A very succesful performance. Purchase here (http://www.weltklassisch.de/Musik-CD-bestellen.29.0.html) (with sample) or here (http://www.beethoven-haus-bonn.de/sixcms/detail.php?id=5627&template=ware_detail_shop_en&_mid=3582).

Other than that: fully agree with Holden on Artur Schnabel - legendary.

Q
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: The new erato on March 30, 2008, 06:20:38 AM
Quote from: Holden on March 30, 2008, 12:51:59 AM
I try to think things out before I post

Wow. But I guess it had to happen sooner or later.

My Diabelli experiences are limited to Bishop-Kovacevich and Andrzewski; guess I'm attracted to convoluted names.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Todd on March 30, 2008, 06:37:59 AM
Quote from: Brian on March 29, 2008, 07:38:03 PMReally now? Where can I find it?



Arkiv has it as part of their ArkivCD program.  They also have his Op 111, which stretches out to almost 40 minutes.  Perhaps that hints at why Holden has a low opinion of Ugorski's Diabellis.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Brian on March 30, 2008, 07:18:50 AM
Quote from: Todd on March 30, 2008, 06:37:59 AM


Arkiv has it as part of their ArkivCD program.  They also have his Op 111, which stretches out to almost 40 minutes.  Perhaps that hints at why Holden has a low opinion of Ugorski's Diabellis.
Oh dear! I always enjoy a little sampling of perverse music or downright awful film, but if the Op 111 runs to nearly 40 minutes ... methinks that the joke would get a little old after a while.  :P 
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: B_cereus on March 30, 2008, 05:50:32 PM
my vote unhesitatingly goes to Schnabel. His Diabelli was the best thing on his Philips Great Pianists edition.


Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: (poco) Sforzando on March 30, 2008, 06:38:01 PM
Don't give me a fortepiano anyday! (Unless the fortepianist shows the musicality of the great pianists of the past.) I really dislike the Anderzewski, which makes each variation sound like a miniature tone poem and loses the overall continuity in its mannered fussiness. Kindermann tries hard, but lacks either the technique or the imaginative abandon for the piece to take off; his plodding recording does not match the indispensable scholarly book he produced on the Diabellis. Yudina plows through the work like a Soviet tractor, banging mercilessly and unmusically, but her version is worth keeping as a party CD - that is if I ever throw a party.

Of the ones I know from records, a dark horse is Stefan Vladar's fresh and invigorating performance. Another one I will keep is Charles Rosen's. In fact, of the three live performances I have heard in the past ten years, Rosen's (at age 75 or so) was the one that best captured the work's comic elements; people in the audiencewere literally laughing at some of his tricks of phrasing. Pollini in live performance was magisterial, but humorless. Peter Serkin was just dull.

Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: val on March 31, 2008, 01:40:12 AM
I always preferred Brendel in this work. His first version for VOX was good, but the second (1970) for PHILIPS was the best. But I never found it on CD. The third version, also for PHILIPS is good but not as exceptional as the second.
One of the great qualities of Brendel's versions is that he gives a very coherent view of all the variations, with an ideal balance.

Serkin is much better in the last four or five variations, but his version sometimes seems almost didactic.

Bishop Kovacevitch would be my second choice, after Brendel.

Dino Ciani has moments of extraordinary inspiration but, as usual, doesn't seem to have a global perspective of the complete work.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: ragman1970 on March 31, 2008, 02:12:23 AM
Quote from: Wanderer on March 29, 2008, 10:48:29 PM
This thread reminds me, I've been wanting to acquire Demidenko's recording for quite a long time. Anyone here heard it? Reviews have been most favourable.

(http://www.jpc.de/image/w600/front/0/0743625401721.jpg)

yes, and the one from sokolov!
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: FideLeo on March 31, 2008, 03:43:04 AM
Quote from: Sforzando on March 30, 2008, 06:38:01 PM
Don't give me a fortepiano anyday! (Unless the fortepianist shows the musicality of the great pianists of the past.)

Oh give me a fortepiano recording anyday!  And rest assured that Komen has more musicality to spare than your generic
"great pianist of the past"!  Those interested can check out Edmund Batterby's double (modern steinway vs. Graf fp) recording
on Naxos.  ;D
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: (poco) Sforzando on March 31, 2008, 03:54:02 AM
Quote from: fl.traverso on March 31, 2008, 03:43:04 AM
Oh give me a fortepiano recording anyday!  And rest assured that Komen has more musicality to spare than your generic
"great pianist of the past"!  Those interested can check out Edmund Batterby's double (modern steinway vs. Graf fp) recording
on Naxos.  ;D

Your comment does nothing to "rest me assured." And to call pianists like Schnabel, Serkin, Rosen, and who knows how many others "generic," only makes me think you're being a dogmatic HIPster who is more interested in the hardware than the interpretation.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Don on March 31, 2008, 05:35:29 AM
Quote from: fl.traverso on March 31, 2008, 03:43:04 AM
Oh give me a fortepiano recording anyday!  And rest assured that Komen has more musicality to spare than your generic
"great pianist of the past"!  Those interested can check out Edmund Batterby's double (modern steinway vs. Graf fp) recording
on Naxos.  ;D

I've never warmed to Batterby's performances.  Changing the instrument is okay - the problem is the pianist.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: FideLeo on March 31, 2008, 07:01:27 AM
Quote from: Don on March 31, 2008, 05:35:29 AM
I've never warmed to Batterby's performances.  Changing the instrument is okay - the problem is the pianist.

Sometimes the problem can be faulty reception.  :D
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: FideLeo on March 31, 2008, 07:18:51 AM
Quote from: Sforzando on March 31, 2008, 03:54:02 AM
to call pianists like Schnabel, Serkin, Rosen, and who knows how many others "generic,"

I like Schnabel, but others are quite "generic" to these ears!   That goes to answer your "interpretation/hardware" (a false dichotomy if there is ever one)  question also.  :D
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Don on March 31, 2008, 07:20:04 AM
Quote from: fl.traverso on March 31, 2008, 07:01:27 AM
Sometimes the problem can be faulty reception.  :D

How long have you had this problem?
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: FideLeo on March 31, 2008, 07:20:27 AM
Quote from: James on March 31, 2008, 06:12:14 AM
Performing Beethoven and Haydn on period instruments and tinkly fortepianos is so...yesterday.


While listening to classical music is so...last century and before?  :D
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: FideLeo on March 31, 2008, 07:21:19 AM
Quote from: Don on March 31, 2008, 07:20:04 AM
How long have you had this problem?

The question is for you, my friend.  ;)
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Don on March 31, 2008, 07:25:43 AM
Quote from: fl.traverso on March 31, 2008, 07:21:19 AM
The question is for you, my friend.  ;)

Given your ridiculous comment about generic-sounding pianists, the question is in your court.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: FideLeo on March 31, 2008, 07:26:56 AM
Quote from: Don on March 31, 2008, 07:25:43 AM
Given your ridiculous comment about generic-sounding pianists, the question is in your court.

Well I don't find it ridiculous, so why should the question be in my court?  0:)
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: premont on March 31, 2008, 07:36:01 AM
Quote from: James on March 31, 2008, 06:12:14 AM
Performing Beethoven and Haydn on period instruments and tinkly fortepianos is so...yesterday.

I see no reason why we - of all ages - should glorify our own.

The next step might happen to be, that the music of yesterday is so.. old fashioned.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: (poco) Sforzando on March 31, 2008, 07:40:45 AM
Quote from: fl.traverso on March 31, 2008, 07:26:56 AM
Well I don't find it ridiculous, so why should the question be in my court?  0:)

Because it is ridiculous, whether you recognize as much or not. The posts above have shown quite clearly that among modern pianists who have recorded the Diabellis, there is considerable distinction in the playing styles of such artists as Schnabel, Pollini, Mustonen, Anderszewski, Rosen, the Serkins, et al.

It is somewhat reassuring to hear you like Schnabel, but while of course the interpretation/hardware question is a false dichotomy, your signature and other comments here (Oh give me a fortepiano recording anyday!") lead me to believe you are firmly in the HIP camp above all - while I and probably some others here are not as dogmatically bound to either modern or HIP performance as you seem to be.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: (poco) Sforzando on March 31, 2008, 07:46:27 AM
Quote from: premont on March 31, 2008, 07:36:01 AM
I see no reason why we - of all ages - should glorify our own.

The next step might happen to be, that the music of yesterday is so.. old fashioned.

The next step beyond that might be to perform Shakespeare only in outdoor replicas of the Globe Theatre, with boy actors in the female roles, standing room for the "groundlings" in the middle of the pit, Elizabethan costumes, and Elizabethan accents (which supposedly sound more than anything like the Appalachian speech of the southeastern USA). After all, if we insist on HIP Beethoven, why not HIP Shakespeare? Surely the sole goal of interpretation should be to reproduce the conditions and practices of the past.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: premont on March 31, 2008, 08:03:36 AM
Quote from: Sforzando on March 31, 2008, 07:46:27 AM
The next step beyond that might be to perform Shakespeare only in outdoor replicas of the Globe Theatre, with boy actors in the female roles, standing room for the "groundlings" in the middle of the pit, Elizabethan costumes, and Elizabethan accents (which supposedly sound more than anything like the Appalachian speech of the southeastern USA). After all, if we insist on HIP Beethoven, why not HIP Shakespeare? Surely the sole goal of interpretation should be to reproduce the conditions and practices of the past.

In principle you are right, but I would ask for a reasonable balance. I think you have to distinguish between the musically important measures (choice of instrument, style of playing) and the musically unimportant measures. I would e.g. never ask anyone to wear a wig when playing Händel, just for the sake of authenticity, since wigs have got no musical importance at all.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Don on March 31, 2008, 08:08:36 AM
Quote from: fl.traverso on March 31, 2008, 07:26:56 AM
Well I don't find it ridiculous, so why should the question be in my court?  0:)

If there's a basic complaint about early 20th century pianists, it's that they were overly individualistic.  You seem to be clueless about this.

Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: FideLeo on March 31, 2008, 08:09:18 AM
Quote from: premont on March 31, 2008, 08:03:36 AM
In principle you are right, but I would ask for a reasonable balance. I think you have to distinguish between the musically important measures (choice of instrument, style of playing) and the musically unimportant measures. I would e.g. never ask anyone to wear a wig when playing Händel, just for the sake of authenticity, since wigs have got no musical importance at all.

Some folks here go for hyperbole regularly - I wouldn't care so much about what they say.  ;)
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: (poco) Sforzando on March 31, 2008, 08:15:45 AM
Quote from: premont on March 31, 2008, 08:03:36 AM
In principle you are right, but I would ask for a reasonable balance. I think you have to distinguish between the musically important measures (choice of instrument, style of playing) and the musically unimportant measures. I would e.g. never ask anyone to wear a wig when playing Händel, just for the sake of authenticity, since wigs have got no musical importance at all.

But what is musically important (or dramatically important, as in the case of Shakespeare) may be subject to interpretation. Let's say for argument's sake, that the voice is an instrument. Would, for example, the use of boys in soprano/alto roles in Bach, as well as boys for female roles in Shakespeare, be obligatory in your view? (I leave out the question of whether castrati should be obligatory in Handelian opera. But if we're truly going to be HIP . . . .  :D) Would you reject an inspired reading of Lady Macbeth by a great actress, or an inspired reading of the Diabellis by a modern pianist, on the grounds that the "choice of instrument" is a musically important factor?
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: (poco) Sforzando on March 31, 2008, 08:16:16 AM
Quote from: fl.traverso on March 31, 2008, 08:09:18 AM
Some folks here go for hyperbole regularly - I wouldn't care so much about what they say.  ;)

Some do indeed. Case in point:
"HIP for all and all for HIP! Harpsichord for Bach, fortepiano for Beethoven and pianoforte for Brahms!"
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: MN Dave on March 31, 2008, 08:17:11 AM
Quote from: Don on March 31, 2008, 08:08:36 AM
If there's a basic complaint about early 20th century pianists, it's that they were overly individualistic.  You seem to be clueless about this.

No complaints here. :)

And I own Arrau and Sokolov. Should give those a listen sometime soon.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: FideLeo on March 31, 2008, 08:19:18 AM
Quote from: Sforzando on March 31, 2008, 08:16:16 AM
Some do indeed. Case in point:
"HIP for all and all for HIP! Harpsichord for Bach, fortepiano for Beethoven and pianoforte for Brahms!"

Sorry if you think so, but what you think may be hyperbole!  :D
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Don on March 31, 2008, 08:22:20 AM
I'm sorry to see that the argument is tending toward fortepiano vs. modern piano.  It's the performance that counts, not the instrument. 
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: MN Dave on March 31, 2008, 08:22:45 AM
Quote from: fl.traverso on March 31, 2008, 08:19:18 AM
Sorry if you think so, but what you think may be hyperbole!  :D

I never discuss religion, politics or HIP. ;)
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: FideLeo on March 31, 2008, 08:25:04 AM
Quote from: Don on March 31, 2008, 08:22:20 AM
I'm sorry to see that the argument is tending toward fortepiano vs. modern piano.  It's the performance that counts, not the instrument. 

Well the instrument does count for me -- and I imagine for someone like Malcolm Bilson or Robert Levin as well, who have written extensively about the musical benefits of using fortepianos.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: FideLeo on March 31, 2008, 08:28:49 AM
Quote from: MN Dave on March 31, 2008, 08:22:45 AM
I never discuss religion, politics or HIP. ;)

I discuss HIP with rational people.  ;D

(Ditto religion and politics.)
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Don on March 31, 2008, 08:30:02 AM
Quote from: fl.traverso on March 31, 2008, 08:25:04 AM
Well the instrument does count for me -- and I imagine for someone like Malcolm Bilson and Robert Levin as well, who wrote extensively about the benefits of using fortepianos.

You're no Bilson or Levin.  I'm very confident they greatly enjoy exceptional performances on the modern piano.  You likely will also as your musical insight deepens over the years.  In the meantime, try to keep an open mind on the subject.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: FideLeo on March 31, 2008, 08:31:51 AM
Quote from: Don on March 31, 2008, 08:30:02 AM
You're no Bilson or Levin.  I'm very confident they greatly enjoy exceptional performances on the modern piano.  You likely will also as your musical insight deepens over the years.  In the meantime, try to keep an open mind on the subject.

I am not Bilson or Levin and so instrument shouldn't matter to me?  I am not sure who needs to keep an open mind here.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Don on March 31, 2008, 08:37:28 AM
Quote from: fl.traverso on March 31, 2008, 08:31:51 AM
I am not Bilson or Levin and so instrument shouldn't matter to me?  I am not sure who needs to keep an open mind here.

Could be that you're not one of the brighter bulbs on the block, but I'd wager that your problem is just lack of maturity.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: FideLeo on March 31, 2008, 08:39:05 AM
Quote from: Don on March 31, 2008, 08:37:28 AM
Could be that you're not one of the brighter bulbs on the block, but I'd wager that your problem is just lack of maturity.

Don't wager anything, I am not interested in your bets.  :D
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Don on March 31, 2008, 08:58:28 AM
Quote from: fl.traverso on March 31, 2008, 08:39:05 AM
Don't wager anything, I am not interested in your bets.  :D

Don't you want to help me improve my financial situation?  After all, you did refer to me as your friend.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: premont on March 31, 2008, 08:59:40 AM
Quote from: Sforzando on March 31, 2008, 08:15:45 AM
But what is musically important (or dramatically important, as in the case of Shakespeare) may be subject to interpretation. Let's say for argument's sake, that the voice is an instrument. Would, for example, the use of boys in soprano/alto roles in Bach, as well as boys for female roles in Shakespeare, be obligatory in your view?

In priciple: Yes.

In practice: Not so sure.

Quote from: Sforzando on March 31, 2008, 08:15:45 AM
Would you reject an inspired reading of Lady Macbeth by a great actress, or an inspired reading of the Diabellis by a modern pianist, on the grounds that the "choice of instrument" is a musically important factor?

I am not a HIP fanatic. Opposed to many modern-instrument fanatics, who completely reject period practice (have a look at the other forum) , I do not reject modern instrument practice, - as Don writes above: It is the performance that counts. So if I want to hear Backhaus play Beethoven, I have to accept the instrument he is using. But generally I find, - if we forget about the performer for a short moment, that peroiod instruments suit the music better than modern instruments. Not surprising since the music was written with period instruments in mind.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Don on March 31, 2008, 09:23:10 AM
Quote from: premont on March 31, 2008, 08:59:40 AM
But generally I find, - if we forget about the performer for a short moment, that peroiod instruments suit the music better than modern instruments. Not surprising since the music was written with period instruments in mind.


And that's a perfectly reasonable attitude.  I prefer Bach on harpsichord, but that doesn't exclude my loving the performances of Gould, Gulda, Tureck, etc.

The Batterby Diabelli disc is a good example.  He delivers a generic performance on the modern piano - ditto when he plays the work on the fortepiano.  Batterby is Batterby no matter what type of instrument he employs.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: (poco) Sforzando on March 31, 2008, 09:54:48 AM
Quote from: Don on March 31, 2008, 09:23:10 AM
And that's a perfectly reasonable attitude.  I prefer Bach on harpsichord, but that doesn't exclude my loving the performances of Gould, Gulda, Tureck, etc.

I would agree.

Quote from: Don on March 31, 2008, 09:23:10 AM
The Batterby Diabelli disc is a good example.  He delivers a generic performance on the modern piano - ditto when he plays the work on the fortepiano.  Batterby is Batterby no matter what type of instrument he employs.

Then, to make a Melvillean pun, I would prefer not to listen to Batterby.

Premont says:
QuoteBut generally I find, - if we forget about the performer for a short moment, that peroiod instruments suit the music better than modern instruments. Not surprising since the music was written with period instruments in mind.

The range of the fortepiano was expanded during the last years of Beethoven's life, allowing for the extremes we see in a sonata like op. 111. In earlier works (e.g. the op. 10/3 sonata, the first concerto), Beethoven writes melodic lines that plainly demand the F# a semitone above the top note of his piano at the time. If a fortepiano is being used with the expanded range needed for 111, should we or should we not substitute the F# in the earlier cases?
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: BorisG on March 31, 2008, 09:59:14 AM
I dislike the work, so I have an easy decision. ;)
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: FideLeo on March 31, 2008, 10:00:12 AM
Quote from: Sforzando on March 31, 2008, 09:54:48 AM


Then, to make a Melvillean pun, I would prefer not to listen to Batterby.



I prefer to listen to Paul Komen than to Battersby, both on a Graf fortepiano.  ;D

(OK, Komen uses LvB's own instrument, while Battersby uses only a good copy.)
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Don on March 31, 2008, 10:04:09 AM
Quote from: fl.traverso on March 31, 2008, 10:00:12 AM
I prefer to listen to Paul Komen than to Battersby, both on a Graf fortepiano.  ;D

This is something we agree on.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: FideLeo on March 31, 2008, 10:04:44 AM
Quote from: BorisG on March 31, 2008, 09:59:14 AM
I dislike the work, so I have an easy decision. ;)

Will Uri Caine (also using a Graf fortepiano) change your mind?  ;D
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: PerfectWagnerite on March 31, 2008, 10:05:17 AM
Quote from: Sforzando on March 31, 2008, 09:54:48 AM
The range of the fortepiano was expanded during the last years of Beethoven's life, allowing for the extremes we see in a sonata like op. 111. In earlier works (e.g. the op. 10/3 sonata, the first concerto), Beethoven writes melodic lines that plainly demand the F# a semitone above the top note of his piano at the time. If a fortepiano is being used with the expanded range needed for 111, should we or should we not substitute the F# in the earlier cases?
Don't quite a number of performers substitute the F# or in some cases the low E which is also not available in some of the earlier pianos ?
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: FideLeo on March 31, 2008, 10:06:46 AM
Quote from: Don on March 31, 2008, 10:04:09 AM
This is something we agree on.

Is this due to your maturity or my maturity?   ;)
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: FideLeo on March 31, 2008, 10:09:01 AM
Quote from: PerfectWagnerite on March 31, 2008, 10:05:17 AM
Don't quite a number of performers substitute the F# or in some cases the low E which is also not available in some of the earlier pianos ?

This was a historically authentic performance practice but not part of HIP!  (Not sure the distinction is understood by all.)
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Don on March 31, 2008, 10:09:32 AM
Quote from: fl.traverso on March 31, 2008, 10:06:46 AM
Is this due to your maturity or my maturity?   ;)

Likely just coincidence.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: FideLeo on March 31, 2008, 10:10:34 AM
Quote from: Don on March 31, 2008, 10:09:32 AM
Likely just coincidence.

I don't want to wager anything, so no comment  :D
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: (poco) Sforzando on March 31, 2008, 10:29:25 AM
Quote from: fl.traverso on March 31, 2008, 10:09:01 AM
This was a historically authentic performance practice but not part of HIP!  (Not sure the distinction is understood by all.)

As what you are saying sounds like, "A is the initial letter of the alphabet but not the first letter," please expound.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: (poco) Sforzando on March 31, 2008, 10:32:03 AM
Quote from: PerfectWagnerite on March 31, 2008, 10:05:17 AM
Don't quite a number of performers substitute the F# or in some cases the low E which is also not available in some of the earlier pianos ?

I would think anyone would who has a grain of common sense.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: rickardg on March 31, 2008, 11:25:26 AM
Quote from: James on March 31, 2008, 10:52:35 AM
Trying to recreate the uncertainties of the past is tricky & we have tools today that are far superior in design and sonic/dynamic/color capability, and genius performers who shone NEW light-on and breathed NEW life-into the music, making it so exciting and vibrant for audiences today.

(http://g-ecx.images-amazon.com/images/G/01/ciu/09/b4/d19c225b9da0ce1145d6f010.L.jpg) (http://www.wendycarlos.com/+sob.html)
(Pic is link, I haven't heard this for years and then only very briefly)

Of course some would claim that a Moog is a historical instrument.  ;D

Edit: fixed broken image (hopefully)
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Brian on March 31, 2008, 12:03:24 PM
It is fascinating to hear Paul Komen play on period instruments because the period instruments yield very different-sounding works than the Beethoven with which we're familiar (my favorite example being the Arietta of Op 111 - revelatory) - BUT his performances are aided by the fact that Paul Komen happens to be a truly exceptional performer in his own right.

And by the way, it's Battersby.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Que on March 31, 2008, 12:09:22 PM
Quote from: Brian on March 31, 2008, 12:03:24 PM
It is fascinating to hear Paul Komen play on period instruments because the period instruments yield very different-sounding works than the Beethoven with which we're familiar (my favorite example being the Arietta of Op 111 - revelatory) - BUT his performances are aided by the fact that Paul Komen happens to be a truly exceptional performer in his own right.

Brian, thanks for pointing that out, and I wholeheartedly agree! :)
It would be a great pity indeed, if our fellow members got a different impression just on account of his recording being HIP or being advocated by HIPsters...

EDIT: reposted a sample below.

Q
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: MN Dave on March 31, 2008, 12:11:53 PM
I don't even check if something is HIP or not.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: premont on March 31, 2008, 12:25:58 PM
Quote from: Sforzando on March 31, 2008, 09:54:48 AM
The range of the fortepiano was expanded during the last years of Beethoven's life, allowing for the extremes we see in a sonata like op. 111. In earlier works (e.g. the op. 10/3 sonata, the first concerto), Beethoven writes melodic lines that plainly demand the F# a semitone above the top note of his piano at the time. If a fortepiano is being used with the expanded range needed for 111, should we or should we not substitute the F# in the earlier cases?

In my opinon we should substitute. It would be ridiculous to regard the adherence to the original score as a cardinal point in this question.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: premont on March 31, 2008, 12:32:30 PM
Quote from: James on March 31, 2008, 10:52:35 AM
Trying to recreate the uncertainties of the past is tricky & we have tools today that are far superior in design and sonic/dynamic/color capability, and genius performers who shone NEW light-on and breathed NEW life-into the music, making it so exciting and vibrant for audiences today. There is room for both but can you imagine if there was never any evolution and the music was still performed exactly as it was then, today? Ugh. Thank goodness for the variety!

It is tempting to say, that the music in question actually bores you, even if you certainly wouldn´t admit this. Why else should you need variety of the kind you suggest?
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Peregrine on March 31, 2008, 01:08:20 PM
I own Richter, Sokolov, Demidenko, Mustonen, Schnabel and Pollini.

I really couldn't pick a clear favourite out of those, they all communicate to me in some way.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: BorisG on March 31, 2008, 01:40:57 PM
Quote from: Peregrine on March 31, 2008, 01:08:20 PM
I own Richter, Sokolov, Demidenko, Mustonen, Schnabel and Pollini.

I really couldn't pick a clear favourite out of those, they all communicate to me in some way.

;D
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: (poco) Sforzando on March 31, 2008, 02:08:16 PM
Quote from: Que on March 31, 2008, 12:09:22 PM
Brian, thanks for pointing that out, and I wholeheartedly agree! :)
It would be a great pity indeed, if our fellow members got a different impression just on account of his recording being HIP or being advocated by HIPsters...

BTW, everybody interested is welcome to download this sample: Diabelli Variations - thema & var. 1-7 (http://www.mediafire.com/?4xdyp2nhyxm) (320 kbps)

(http://ec1.images-amazon.com/images/P/B000935U76.03._SCLZZZZZZZ_V44167576_AA240_.jpg)

Q

Thank you for doing this. Unfortunately, the file name is so long that the extension is truncated, and I can't play it. Can you try again?
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: not edward on March 31, 2008, 02:31:45 PM
Quote from: Sforzando on March 31, 2008, 02:08:16 PM
Thank you for doing this. Unfortunately, the file name is so long that the extension is truncated, and I can't play it. Can you try again?
You should be able to get around this by renaming it to something ending in .mp3
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: (poco) Sforzando on March 31, 2008, 04:38:42 PM
Quote from: edward on March 31, 2008, 02:31:45 PM
You should be able to get around this by renaming it to something ending in .mp3

That was my first thought as well, but Windows doesn't like that and claims .mp3 is not the file format being used.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: FideLeo on March 31, 2008, 05:58:20 PM
Quote from: Sforzando on March 31, 2008, 04:38:42 PM
That was my first thought as well, but Windows doesn't like that and claims .mp3 is not the file format being used.

Something is accursed in your system... ;D
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: FideLeo on March 31, 2008, 06:13:52 PM
Quote from: MN Dave on March 31, 2008, 12:11:53 PM
I don't even check if something is HIP or not.

Ah, but I happen to be interested in the matter of performing styles.


Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: (poco) Sforzando on March 31, 2008, 06:20:53 PM
Quote from: fl.traverso on March 31, 2008, 05:58:20 PM
Something is accursed in your system... ;D

Big help, you are.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Lethevich on March 31, 2008, 08:37:01 PM
Sforzando - won't play for me either, so I don't think it's an mp3 (or ogg). The implication is that it's probably Apple's format (aac or something or other), but as I have no interest in downloading or ever using iTunes, I can't confirm.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Que on March 31, 2008, 09:30:53 PM
Quote from: Lethe on March 31, 2008, 08:37:01 PM
Sforzando - won't play for me either, so I don't think it's an mp3 (or ogg). The implication is that it's probably Apple's format (aac or something or other), but as I have no interest in downloading or ever using iTunes, I can't confirm.

Yes Lethe, indeed it was AAC. My apologies for the (initial) dissapointment. :)

Hope this is better! (MP3 this time)

(http://ec1.images-amazon.com/images/P/B000935U76.03._SCLZZZZZZZ_V44167576_AA240_.jpg)
[mp3=200,20,0,left]http://www.fileden.com/files/2007/11/4/1562799/01%2033%20Veranderungen%20uber%20einen%20Walzer%20von%20Anton%20Diabelli%20op.120.mp3[/mp3]
Theme and the first seven variations, about 9 minutes.

Q
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Lethevich on March 31, 2008, 10:43:04 PM
Que - very kind of you :)
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Que on April 01, 2008, 01:53:33 PM
Quote from: Lethe on March 31, 2008, 10:43:04 PM
Que - very kind of you :)

Pleasure, would like to hear your (and anyone else's) impressions. :)

Q
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Don on April 01, 2008, 02:10:53 PM
Quote from: Que on April 01, 2008, 01:53:33 PM
Pleasure, would like to hear your (and anyone else's) impressions. :)

Q

I enjoyed it - very upbeat as should be.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: FideLeo on April 02, 2008, 01:21:48 AM
On a related note, Peter Serkin's 1980s recordings of LvB last sonatas (nos. 28-32) played on an original Graf fortepiano are now re-released on CD.  The Hammerklavier is outstanding, superior to his own remake on a modern piano even.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Que on April 14, 2008, 09:34:23 PM
Quote from: Don on April 01, 2008, 02:10:53 PM
I enjoyed it - very upbeat as should be.

Thanks for your comment, Don.

I'm "plugging" the sample once more for those who missed it:  8)

(http://ec1.images-amazon.com/images/P/B000935U76.03._SCLZZZZZZZ_V44167576_AA240_.jpg)
[mp3=200,20,0,left]http://www.fileden.com/files/2007/11/4/1562799/01%2033%20Veranderungen%20uber%20einen%20Walzer%20von%20Anton%20Diabelli%20op.120.mp3[/mp3]
Theme and the first seven variations, about 9 minutes.

Dutch pianist Paul Komen on a Conrad Graf fortepiano.

Q
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: FideLeo on April 15, 2008, 01:34:00 AM
Quote from: Que on April 14, 2008, 09:34:23 PM

(http://ec1.images-amazon.com/images/P/B000935U76.03._SCLZZZZZZZ_V44167576_AA240_.jpg)
[mp3=200,20,0,left]http://www.fileden.com/files/2007/11/4/1562799/01%2033%20Veranderungen%20uber%20einen%20Walzer%20von%20Anton%20Diabelli%20op.120.mp3[/mp3]

Dutch pianist Paul Komen on a Conrad Graf fortepiano.

Q

Currently the recording is a bit hard to get - except from French online vendors or from Beethoven-Haus itself.  There was once talk of Komen completing his Beethoven cycle.  Well it has been just talk so far.  ::)
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Mandryka on January 08, 2012, 08:07:23 AM
Quote from: (: premont :) on March 31, 2008, 12:32:30 PM
It is tempting to say, that the music in question actually bores you, even if you certainly wouldn´t admit this. Why else should you need variety of the kind you suggest?

LOL. You're deep.

Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: ccar on January 08, 2012, 04:06:29 PM

For years I listened to many interpretations of the Diabelli variations with unease.  Apart from Schnabel, Serkin and some Richter, I really couldn't feel touched by most of the readings I knew.


                                      (http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/418EKRQ8PNL._SL500_AA300_.jpg)  (http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41nWEQ8XbkL._SL500_AA300_.jpg)  (http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41MB5EHVZ6L._SL500_AA300_.jpg) 


But I still remember my awe at my first listening of the Diabelli played by Yudina. With her interpretative genius she led me through each of these variations with a renewed sense of discovery - by the freshness of the phrasing, her creative choice of tempi and the almost improvisational but amazing rhythmic drive.

Nowadays there are a number of transfers of the Yudina/Diabelli to choose – from the ones I know I may prefer the Philips -GPOC edition.         


                                       (http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41MAE9BTFCL._SL500_AA300_.jpg)      http://www.youtube.com/v/mJ0ofaeREuo


Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: PaulSC on March 31, 2012, 08:11:22 AM
Exciting times for lovers of Beethoven's piano music! Jean-Efflam Bavouzet and Stewart Goodyear have Sonata cycles underway, and now Harmonia Mundi have announced a new recording of the Diabelli Variations by Andreas Staier (due in early May, performed on a fortepiano after Conrad Graf and filled out with some of the individual variations on the same theme by other composers of the time).

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51PdreISenL._SS500_.jpg)

Meanwhile, Brautigam's Beethoven cycle continues to advance, but no sign of the Diabelli Variations as of yet...
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: North Star on March 31, 2012, 02:05:25 PM
Quote from: PaulSC on March 31, 2012, 08:11:22 AMand now Harmonia Mundi have announced a new recording of the Diabelli Variations by Andreas Staier (due in early May, performed on a fortepiano after Conrad Graf and filled out with some of the individual variations on the same theme by other composers of the time).

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51PdreISenL._SS500_.jpg)

Meanwhile, Brautigam's Beethoven cycle continues to advance, but no sign of the Diabelli Variations as of yet...
That is interesting, thanks, Paul.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Leon on June 13, 2012, 05:20:33 AM
I'm bumping this thread because I am presently at the outset of a concerted effort at listening to as many recordings of this work as I can get my hands on.  Spotify has a dozen or more so that should keep me busy initially, but I am really interested in the PI recordings, Staier and Komen but also there are many older recordings I would like to hear.

I've not purposely avoided this work, but by the same token, somehow I have never focused on it either.

I plan to rectify that in the coming days ... or weeks.

:)
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: mjwal on June 14, 2012, 11:16:56 AM
I don't know why I have hitherto missed this discussion. Anyway - I tend to agree with ccar and Mandryka on interpretations here - Schnabel, Serkin, Richter, Yudina, live Brendel - but would add (from memory, since it is somewhere else and I haven't listened to it for a long time) Gulda, which seems to have passed beneath everybody's radar on this thread. Very fast, drastic, one might say, more so even than the Amadeo/Brilliant sonatas. In August I intend to listen to this again. - I am most intrigued by your description of Pludermacher's performance, Mandryka - he is a pianist I have never (knowingly) listened to; I shall investigate.
PS. If you speak French there's an interesting comparison of various recordings of the Diabellis by a circle of critics here, including a consideration of the Pludermacher and the new Staier:
http://sites.radiofrance.fr/francemusique/em/jardin-critiques/emission.php?e_id=100000065&d_id=440000370&arch=1
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Mandryka on April 08, 2013, 09:49:34 AM
Sometimes in life you come across a performance that's so wonderful that it makes you remember why you invest so much time listening to music.

Well I think Charles Rosen's op 120 is an example of such a performance.

This is close to being exactly what I want from The Diabelli Variations, a sense of being on a long difficult journey, a journey which proceeds by fits and starts, from the mundane to the sublime and ineffable and, in the final variation, to something humane.

Available here either to just listen to or to download, this has never been released on a CD

http://archive.org/details/Beethoven-DiabelliVariationsrosen
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Mandryka on April 13, 2013, 09:39:06 AM
Quote from: (: premont :) on January 01, 2013, 12:50:58 PM
Having read this statement a bit closer I am surprised, that a well-educated Dutch organist can say this nonsense. The so called Dutch practice is not to play all notes unbound, but to group the notes in small unities or "cell´s", which can be played non-legato or strictly legato as well.  F.i. : in a group of three short notes played legato the first will seem to receive a small accent, even if this actually is impossible to do on an organ. But it feels so, it happens in our mind.  The "trick" is to be able to indicate the rhythm and distinguish between good and less good notes in this way. The first note under the bow also often receives a small agogoc accent (it is held a nanosec. too long) in order to support the impression of good note when wanted. The playing of Gustav Leonhardt among several others offers examples in abundance of this practice. Can Zwoferink be unaware of this? No, she can´t, and this is the reason why one has got to read her words with some reservation.

You're probably not interested in this, or don't have the time. But I think that Rosen articulated the Diabelli variations just like Leonhardt articulates Bach. Not necessarily the agogics, but he breaks up the music into small cells, and this gives the performance a unique spikey feel.

Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Geo Dude on April 17, 2013, 01:32:47 PM
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51z79IYzrkL._SX300_.jpg)

I can't speak to the quality of the piano side of this recording (not interested), but the fortepiano disc is quite nice, and the price is hard to beat.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Mandryka on April 17, 2013, 09:36:38 PM
Well if you're not going to listen to piano recordings then I think you're choice is pretty limited, and you're cutting off your nose to spite your face. The fortepiano doesn't contribute much important in this piece, does it?

Anyway, I've not heard Staier's. What's it like?
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Geo Dude on April 18, 2013, 08:03:52 AM
If it's a work I listen to on a regular basis and there are not many PI recordings available (or the PI recordings consist of unsatisfactory interpretations) then yes I'll listen to an MI recording here and there for variety.  I prefer the sound of a fortepiano, can't speak to what it adds other than that; we're not talking about harpsichord vs piano type differences, obviously.  f it's something that I pull out for the occasional listen like the Diabelli Variations then no, I don't feel like I'm doing myself any harm. :)

I too am curious about Staier's reading.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Mandryka on April 18, 2013, 10:59:31 AM
Anyone got any opinions about Sokolov's?


I know it's beautifully played and recorded. But somehow I can't get my head round why he's playing the music like that. Maybe I'm too tied to the idea of these variations as a quest, an arduous journey, something I picked up from Maynard Solomon's  book on late Beethoven. Maybe they mean something else to Sokolov. But without a clearer grasp of what he's seeing in the music I find the performance completely elusive.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Holden on April 18, 2013, 12:06:23 PM
Quote from: Mandryka on April 18, 2013, 10:59:31 AM
Anyone got any opinions about Sokolov's?


I know it's beautifully played and recorded. But somehow I can't get my head round why he's playing the music like that. Maybe I'm too tied to the idea of these variations as a quest, an arduous journey, something I picked up from Maynard Solomon's  book on late Beethoven. Maybe they mean something else to Sokolov. But without a clearer grasp of what he's seeing in the music I find the performance completely elusive.

I usually like what Sokolov does with Beethoven but his Diabelliis are ho hum as far as I'm concerned. I can't put my finger on it but they just sound very middle of the road.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Mandryka on April 18, 2013, 12:15:48 PM
Quote from: Holden on April 18, 2013, 12:06:23 PM
I usually like what Sokolov does with Beethoven but his Diabelliis are ho hum as far as I'm concerned. I can't put my finger on it but they just sound very middle of the road.

And yet each individual variation is played extremely well and often with brave orginality. The problem is in the vision of the thing as a whole, I'm convinced of it. The whole seems much much less than the sum of the parts. i think I'm just missing his point.

Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Sammy on April 18, 2013, 12:55:09 PM
Quote from: Geo Dude on April 17, 2013, 01:32:47 PM
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51z79IYzrkL._SX300_.jpg)

I can't speak to the quality of the piano side of this recording (not interested), but the fortepiano disc is quite nice, and the price is hard to beat.

As far as I'm concerned, neither the modern piano version nor the fortepiano version is interesting.  He plays both in a similar fashion - boring.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: kishnevi on April 18, 2013, 06:41:23 PM
Quote from: Mandryka on April 17, 2013, 09:36:38 PM
Well if you're not going to listen to piano recordings then I think you're choice is pretty limited, and you're cutting off your nose to spite your face. The fortepiano doesn't contribute much important in this piece, does it?

Anyway, I've not heard Staier's. What's it like?

In Staier's hands, the fortepiano contributes a whole bunch to the Diabellis.  Some of his playing is so individualistic that it might be called eccentric and/or idiosyncratic, but it's all well worth listening to.  (So is Cooper's, although the latter can't be called eccentric/idiosyncratic.)

Not that I adhere to the "arduous journey" view: to me the DVs are more a grand exercise of musical analysis and dissection, a master taking what might seem to be a humdrum line of music, putting it through its paces and showing the potentials for greatness.  The arduous journey fits well for the piano sonatas, the late quartets, etc.--but not everything Beethoven wrote fits under that category.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Brian on September 21, 2013, 08:22:59 PM
(http://www.arkivmusic.com/graphics/covers/non-muze2/large/1002843.jpg)

"András Schiff has now recorded - on two period instruments – remarkable, contrasting versions of the Diabelli Variations alongside major late works with intrinsic ties to them. The Sonata Op. 111 and the Diabelli Variations (CD 1) are played on an original Bechstein grand from 1921, and the second reading of the Diabelli Variations, (paired with the op. 126 Bagatelles on CD 2) on a Hammerflugel fortepiano from Beethoven's own day.

"In his liner note András Schiff acknowledges the value of having been able to consult the previously unknown original manuscript of the Variations which provided invaluable insight into Beethoven's compositional process and intentions."

Huh. I've never heard of the Hammerflugel workshop before.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Wakefield on September 21, 2013, 09:43:03 PM
Quote from: Brian on September 21, 2013, 08:22:59 PM
(http://www.arkivmusic.com/graphics/covers/non-muze2/large/1002843.jpg)
Huh. I've never heard of the Hammerflugel workshop before.
:D ;D :D

It's almost so famous like the harpsichord workshop Cembalo.  :)
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Mandryka on November 04, 2013, 01:33:06 AM
I just want to maintain a list of the performances I've listened to, and this seems like as good a place as any. I seem to be on a major DV journey at the moment. I'll just keep modifying the list

Top recordings

Leonard Shure (Epic)
Michael Oelbaum
Rosen
Kuerti
Sokolov
Pollini (live preferably)
Horszowski
Daria Rabotkina
Bernard Roberts
S Richter (Prague)
Mustonen
Nikolayeve 1979
Brendel 2001
Kovacevich (Onyx)
Hans Petermandl

Need to revisit to get my head round

Vieru
Arrau (2 recordings)
Cooper
Gulda (2 recordings)
Ciani
Katchen
R Serkin (live and.studio)
Pludermacher
Rangell
Sheppard
John Browning




Fine but not special for me

Schiff
Anderszewski
Lefébure
Frith
Lewis
Yudina
Ugorski



Don't much want to hear again

Schnabel
Backhaus
S Richter (1950s)
Komen
Afanassiev
Kinderman
Korstick
Richter-Haaser
Brendel 1977
Leonard Shure (audiofon)


Haven't heard and want to hear

Nikolayeva 1981
Koroliov
Kovacevich (Philips)
John Browning
Amadeus Webersinke
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Pat B on November 04, 2013, 09:18:18 AM
Has your opinion on Komen changed? You seemed fairly enthusiastic about it in the Beethoven in Period Performances thread (as did everybody else) but that's several years ago now.

I like it, though I haven't heard very many other recordings. Mustonen is available at my library so I'll be sure to check that out.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Mandryka on November 04, 2013, 09:52:14 AM
Quote from: Pat B on November 04, 2013, 09:18:18 AM
Has your opinion on Komen changed? You seemed fairly enthusiastic about it in the Beethoven in Period Performances thread (as did everybody else) but that's several years ago now.

I like it, though I haven't heard very many other recordings. Mustonen is available at my library so I'll be sure to check that out.

I have indeed changed my mind about Komen.  I just don't notice anything really insightful or remarkable about it, and that makes me not want to hear it again. Maybe others have seen what I've missed.  When I made positive comments years ago I really wan't aware of what this music can be. And what I look for now is different from what impressed me then.

The Mustonen. I dithered about whether to mention that, because it's just so quirky and smart arse, iconoclastic almost. But I played it again a couple of times and I decided that the sheer liveliness and colourfulness was irresistable, it's like he's constantly making you prick up your ears, Even if his musical decisions are really sometimes his whims, I like to hear what he does. And for me, that's enough. I'm not saying it's deep or revealing or anything, I just enjoy it.  Generally I enjoy Mustonen, in Shostakovich and Scriabin for example.

As you can see the list is really personal and probably useless to anyone else, I made it for me really - I seem to be listening to so many of these things I need a way of keeping some sort of track.

Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Pat B on November 04, 2013, 11:54:45 AM
Thanks for the elaborations. Of course you're correct that any such list is personal, but I have enjoyed some of the things you endorsed. In the case of Mustonen it won't cost me anything other than the time to listen to it. :)

As an aside I have Kovacevich '68 on order.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Todd on September 06, 2014, 04:28:58 PM
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/81t7lLY3tiL._SY425_.jpg)


Finished up a first go-round with Mr Goodyear's Diabelli's today.  The disc is in much better sound than his sonata cycle, with just the right perspective and clarity and weight.  Goodyear is not much of a colorist; instead he focuses clarity of voices, rhythm, and dynamics.  He also plays fast, often very fast, much of the time, though he does slow way down in variation 20, playing it more as an Adagio than Andante, and he offers maximum possible contrast by then playing variation 21 at super-human speed.  A most enjoyable recording.  I shall listen again soon, very soon.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Mandryka on September 29, 2014, 09:15:22 AM
I'm going to put my own transfer of Hans Petermandl's very successful, very classical, Diabelli Varitions on symphonyshare. If you want it directly you can PM me. There is a poor commercial mp3 transfer but it is something to avoid like the plague because of the enormous pauses they put between each variation.

Petermandl is my big pianist discovery of the past couple of years, along with Peter Hill, who has also recorded these variations.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: bigshot on September 29, 2014, 10:34:11 PM
A faithful transfer of Schnabel for once...
http://www.vintageip.com/xfers/schnabeldiabellis.mp3
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Mandryka on September 30, 2014, 09:26:35 PM
Sound quality apart, does anyone like Schnabel's Diabelli Variations? (I've never enjoyed it, it never seems to take off somehow.)
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Holden on September 30, 2014, 10:20:51 PM
Yes I do but it's nowhere near the top performance for me. A similar approach but far superior interpretation is by Kovacevich.

As I've said earlier in this thread the Philips Arrau is my favourite.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Mandryka on October 01, 2014, 07:46:35 AM
Quote from: Holden on September 30, 2014, 10:20:51 PM
Yes I do but it's nowhere near the top performance for me. A similar approach but far superior interpretation is by Kovacevich.


Kovacevich on Philips you mean?  I like both his later recordings.

One other very old one which I really should go back and reappraise is Backhaus's. Only yesterday I was listening him play op 110 and op 111 and I thought it was so quirky it was fascinating. It would be good to understand what Backhaus was up to in late Beethoven.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: torut on October 01, 2014, 08:49:19 AM
Quote from: Mandryka on October 01, 2014, 07:46:35 AM
One other very old one which I really should go back and reappraise is Backhaus's. Only yesterday I was listening him play op 110 and op 111 and I thought it was so quirky it was fascinating. It would be good to understand what Backhaus was up to in late Beethoven.
Backhaus's recording of Op. 109 was the very first classical music I listened to with great interest. It may be dry and cold, but still it's my favorite Op. 109 recording.
However, his performance of Diabelli Variations (included in the piano concertos set with Hans Schmidt-Isserstedt conducting Wiener Philharmoniker) was not memorable to me. (The piano concertos were good.)
Yesterday I got Staier's recording of Diabelli Variations, and I liked it a lot. The fortepiano's sound is rich and the performance is vivid. The other composers' variations are also interesting, especially Listz's and Schubert's.
I'll re-listen to Backhaus's Diabelli.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Mandryka on October 01, 2014, 01:30:15 PM
Yes, it's like materialist late Beethoven (Backhaus)

Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: bigshot on October 02, 2014, 02:13:46 PM
The unique thing about Schnabel is the tone he gets out of the notes, not the notes themselves. It isn't a technically perfect performance, but the variation in mood and tone is remarkable. If you listen carefully, each note seems to have a shape. I'm not sure how he achieved this, but the slightly distant recording acoustic flatters it. The only trick is getting all the surface noise out of the way so you can hear the shapes of the notes. Heavy handed noise reduction messes this up, so it's a fine line to tread.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: staxomega on November 04, 2019, 06:54:33 PM
Bumping this thread to see if anyone has recommendations for exceptional performances on fortepiano? I maybe need to give Andreas Staier another listen, I thought it was well played and he used a nice instrument, but didn't get anything much more than that.

Quote from: Mandryka on September 30, 2014, 09:26:35 PM
Sound quality apart, does anyone like Schnabel's Diabelli Variations? (I've never enjoyed it, it never seems to take off somehow.)

Coincidentally I was revisiting Schnabel tonight, I think he starts off a bit slow (not referring to tempo)/generic and even a bit plodding, but he really picks it up by the 4th variation and by the 6th he is in full swing playing with great color, rubato and making the music pretty exciting when it is called for.

I don't know if he recorded these in order, but I feel like from there on it does pick up and remain at a generally very high level of interpretation (outside of a handful of variations), like in Variation 8, he really brings out the profundity reflecting how it is almost reminiscent of Op. 111. I also like that you can't just make one generalization about his tempi.

I am listening to Naxos transfers, I haven't heard any others (might check out the Pearl), on these I feel like you get a very good feel for his artistry; the source sounds like it was seldom played and there is enough brilliance in the upper end without sacrificing piano body.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: JBS on November 04, 2019, 07:03:36 PM
Quote from: hvbias on November 04, 2019, 06:54:33 PM
Bumping this thread to see if anyone has recommendations for exceptional performances on fortepiano? I maybe need to give Andreas Staier another listen, I thought it was well played and he used a nice instrument, but didn't get anything much more than that.

Coincidentally I was revisiting Schnabel tonight, I think he starts off a bit slow (not referring to tempo)/generic and even a bit plodding, but I think he really picks it up by the 4th variation and by the 6th he is in full swing playing with great color, rubato and making the music pretty exciting when it is called for.

I don't know if he recorded these in order, but I feel like from there on it does pick up and remain at a generally very high level of interpretation (outside of a handful of variations), like in Variation 8, he really brings out the profundity reflecting how it is almost reminiscent of Op. 111. I also like that you can't just make one generalization about his tempi.

I am listening to Naxos transfers, I haven't heard any others (might check out the Pearl), on these I feel like you get a very good feel for his artistry; the source sounds like it was seldom played and there is enough of brilliance in the upper end without sacrificing piano body.

Schiff did an interesting one for ECM, one take on a modern instrument, one take on an historical.  But I don't know it can be called exceptional. I don't have much LvB on fortepiano,  and my favorite DV is probably the recording I first heard them on, Serkin's.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: staxomega on November 04, 2019, 07:15:13 PM
Quote from: JBS on November 04, 2019, 07:03:36 PM
Schiff did an interesting one for ECM, one take on a modern instrument, one take on an historical.  But I don't know it can be called exceptional. I don't have much LvB on fortepiano,  and my favorite DV is probably the recording I first heard them on, Serkin's.

I like both of Rudolf Serkin's recordings as well. I think I will try Peter Serkin for fortepiano given I liked most of what he played in the late sonatas. I became a bit enamored with fortepiano when I heard some Haydn Trios played on one and was able to play it afterward (I imagine a reproduction, unsure of the make) and quickly understood why Paul Badura-Skoda and Jorg Demus liked to collect them.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: JBS on November 04, 2019, 07:25:39 PM
Quote from: hvbias on November 04, 2019, 07:15:13 PM
I like both of Rudolf Serkin's recordings as well. I think I will try Peter Serkin for fortepiano given I liked most of what he played in the late sonatas. I became a bit enamored with fortepiano when I heard some Haydn Trios played on one and was able to play it afterward (I imagine a reproduction, unsure of the make) and quickly understood why Paul Badura-Skoda and Jorg Demus liked to collect them.

I think they are essential for anything pre LvB, but from Beethoven on, I think diminishing returns is the rule. That said, I think Tan's concerto cycle is very good. I have Brautigam's sonata set, and am gearing up to get his concerto and variations sets.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Mandryka on December 04, 2019, 11:34:59 PM
Very clear essay about structure in the variations by Filippo Gorini

QuoteIn 1819, Anton Diabelli, composer, publisher and copyist, asked a number of Viennese musicians
to contribute one variation each on a theme of his own composition. Beethoven, while at first
apparently disregarding this project, decided instead to compose a monumental cycle of 33
variations, a work now commonly compared to Bach's Goldberg Variations for its originality,
mastery and size. It was completed and published in 1823. Meanwhile, Beethoven had composed
such masterpieces as the last three piano sonatas and the Missa Solemnis, and was about to
finish the Ninth Symphony just one year later.

While the Goldberg Variations restate the Aria at the end, giving a cyclic, orphic shape to the
whole set, the Diabelli are more directional in their architecture, leading us from the mundane
foundations of the theme to the pinnacle of the celestial minuet. Throughout this journey,
Beethoven explores the human nature in its diversity, not disregarding the use of traditionally
incompatible modes of expression: from dance to frenzy, from mockery to sober contemplation,
from bold energy to mysterious depths, from grieving to joy. In this mixed tone, the variations
could also be taken as the supreme example of comedy in music, a comedy of positive (but not
necessarily light) character that ranges from humble to sublime. There is a redemptive quality to
this spiralling dance that seems to lift us to the heavens, and reminds us of Beethoven's love and
hope for humanity, emblematic in Schiller's Ode to Joy.

Beethoven approaches the theme with unparalleled audacity, at times maintaining only its most
basic structural elements in the variations. With the exception of one double variation, each of the pieces springs up with its particular character and function within an architecture that, in
our opinion, can be divided into four large arcs. The theme itself is a simple waltz, bold and
unpretentious. What characterizes it in particular are its upbeat figures, harmonic structure,
dance rhythm, repeated chords and division into two distinct halves, each with repeats – features
that are selectively used by Beethoven as a basis for the variations.
This first of these arcs is of a bright character that leaves little room for introverted thought. The
opening march (var. 1), immediately attacks the theme head-on, disregarding its metre, tempo
and temperament, and setting up the grandeur necessary to open such a large-scale work. The
subsequent variations start with the light, vibrant landscape of var. 2, and mutate slowly, becoming
first more expressive and then gradually more excited and energetic. After an intermezzo (nr. 8)
that breaks the accumulated tension with a softly sung melody over gentle, rocking arpeggios,
nr. 9 erupts in spectacular fashion: one of the rare c minor pieces, its brusque character is based
entirely on the upbeat figure of the theme. The explosive conclusion to this arc comes with nr. 10,
a virtuosic parade of staccato chords and octaves over suspended tremoli.

The second arc is very different from the first: instead of creating one long climactic series of
variations, it jolts with bursts of energy that are quickly interrupted by slower pieces, and ends
in complete mystery. It starts, as it were, from nothing, with the very soft and expressive var.
11 and a mobile, luminescent nr. 12, interrupted by the humoristic nr. 13, a parody of a waltz
stripped of its melody and left bare with only its rhythms, harmonies and silences. After a very
serious, sublime var. 14, the following pieces are at first lighthearted, then virtuosic and filled
with tremendous energy. An extremely expressive nr. 18 and the dazzling canon of nr. 19 give
room to the mysterious nr. 20: a slow piece made of grave chords with impenetrable harmonies.
It concludes this second arc in a shroud of enigma.

The third arc is the most capricious, with cunning parodies, a sublime fughetta and the tour de
force of variations 27 and 28. It begins, after the inner sanctuary of var. 20, with nr. 21 in a wellnigh comic alternation of energetic outbursts and plaintive elements. Nr. 22, the most obvious
parody within the Diabelli, turns Mozart's famous aria "Notte e giorno faticar" into a sneeze; on a
more subtle level, "working night and day for someone who appreciates nothing" is also a hidden
jab at Diabelli for pressuring him to finish the set. After var. 23, a stunning parody of technical
exercises, var. 24, a fughetta, makes a drastic leap in character and transports us into a spiritual
world. As refined as rigorous in craft, it is one of the most breathtaking events in the set. A lively
German dance (nr. 25) and an atmospheric var. 26 precede the frenetic nrs. 27 and 28 that
conclude this arc with incredible power.

The last arc is sublime, leading to the celestial conclusion. Var. 29 begins a series of three slow
variations in c minor: a faint but insistent sob is followed by a contemplative, flowing song of
dignified grief. Var. 31, the great Largo with its free and flourished singing, is a desperate prayer
in an hour of darkness, a veritable de profundis. Var. 32, a double fugue, then marks a stunning
rebirth: in E Flat, it comes as a dramatic surprise. Its insistent rhythm and bold nature accumulate
momentum before crashing on a dissonance. Following a few suspended chords, the minuet (var.
33) unfolds, a graceful dance filled with the voices of angels. Long gone is the rough enthusiasm
of the theme: we have arrived in a realm of spirit and beauty. The coda appears to peter out into
a void; however, as our voyage has finally found its destination, a sonorous chord brings us firmly
back to earth.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Holden on May 11, 2022, 01:28:18 AM
A new set of the Diabelli's by Uchida. The way she handles the opening theme sets the tone for the rest of the variations, especially the way she uses dynamics.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Mandryka on May 11, 2022, 08:22:21 AM
Quote from: Holden on May 11, 2022, 01:28:18 AM
A new set of the Diabelli's by Uchida. The way she handles the opening theme sets the tone for the rest of the variations, especially the way she uses dynamics.

She certainly does believe in lots of nuance, shading, refinement, elegance, seriousness, everything thoroughly considered, everything honed and polished.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: staxomega on May 11, 2022, 05:07:54 PM
Updated favorites (used to only like Serkin on Columbia or BBC), in no particular order:

R. Serkin (Columbia and BBC)
Brautigam
Kovacevich* live (Onyx)
Gulda (Harmonia Mundi France)
Schnabel - uneven but much to like, a smiling performance (edit: removed part on transfers, it was some of the Beethoven Piano Sonatas I found superior on Pearl, I will have to revisit the Pearl transfers for Diabelli Variations)

*never understood what was special about his Philips recording other than sounding much better than Serkin on Columbia when these might have been the two major label releases widely available to people.

Quote from: Mandryka on November 04, 2013, 01:33:06 AM
Hans Petermandl

Petermandl interests me most based off his AoF and leser extent Ludus Tonalis. Possibly a maverick outing with some ideas.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Holden on May 11, 2022, 05:34:55 PM
Quote from: hvbias on May 11, 2022, 05:07:54 PM
Updated favorites (used to only like Serkin on Columbia or BBC), in no particular order:

R. Serkin (Columbia and BBC)
Brautigam
Kovacevich* live (Onyx)
Gulda (Harmonia Mundi France)
Schnabel - uneven but much to like, a smiling performance (IMO still has to be heard on the Pearl transfer, the Naxos dampens the high end too much making this more forgettable than it really is)

*never understood what was special about his Philips recording other than sounding much better than Serkin on Columbia when these might have been the two major label releases widely available to people.



Whereas I prefer the Philips out of the two. It was a top choice for me for quite a while along with the Schnabel but at that stage there wasn't a wide choice of Diabelli recordings. As the CD catalog expanded to include some not previously released from LP to CD the choice expanded and my favourites changed.

I ended up adding Rudolf Serkin (Columbia Masterworks) that I found in a second hand bin and also his M&A recording from the 1954 Prades festival. I also added the Philips Arrau that I had to send away for on line. I also included Richter but I'm not sure I got the best one from a selection of recordings from both 1970 and 1986. He certainly has something to say in this work. I have a number of other recordings that I've listed in a previous post
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Jo498 on May 12, 2022, 12:16:49 AM
Quote from: hvbias on May 11, 2022, 05:07:54 PM
Updated favorites (used to only like Serkin on Columbia or BBC), in no particular order:

R. Serkin (Columbia and BBC)
The Columbia is also live, isn't it?

Did you try the "excentrics", like Mustonen, Ugorski, maybe (not quite as weird) Anderszewski? Or Sokolov who is not really excentric but rather slow and massive.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Holden on May 12, 2022, 01:31:50 AM
Quote from: Jo498 on May 12, 2022, 12:16:49 AM
The Columbia is also live, isn't it?

Did you try the "excentrics", like Mustonen, Ugorski, maybe (not quite as weird) Anderszewski? Or Sokolov who is not really excentric but rather slow and massive.

Yes, I just had a look - Serkin, Marlborough Festival 1957.

I've got the Sokolov and find it ponderous. The Ugorski left me with a "WTF"?
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: André on May 12, 2022, 05:05:08 AM
(https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/619cBmZhUYL._AC_SL362_.jpg)

Just purchased. Any opinion on this recording ? Thanks !
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: San Antone on May 12, 2022, 05:18:56 AM
Rudolf Buchbinder | The Diabelli Project

(https://static.universal-music.de/asset_new/492912/195/view/The-Diabelli-Project.jpg)

"Celebrated pianist and renowned Beethoven specialist Rudolf Buchbinder releases his first album on Deutsche Grammophon. The collaboration includes not only his own new interpretation of Beethoven's Diabelli Variations but he has also commissioned 12 new variations, just as Anton Diabelli did in 1819 and has recorded 8 variations of those that Diabelli received back from the composers he wrote to back then." (DG (https://www.deutschegrammophon.com/en/catalogue/products/the-diabelli-project-buchbinder-11690))

This is m latest recording of this work that I have been enjoying.  Buchbinder also released a book centered on the DV, as well as describe his musical journey.  Both the recording and the book are well worth listening to and reading.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: staxomega on May 12, 2022, 05:27:40 PM
Quote from: Jo498 on May 12, 2022, 12:16:49 AM
The Columbia is also live, isn't it?

Did you try the "excentrics", like Mustonen, Ugorski, maybe (not quite as weird) Anderszewski? Or Sokolov who is not really excentric but rather slow and massive.

Ugorski is too bizarre. I agree with Holden on Sokolov (Naïve, in case there is another), too ponderous. I haven't heard Mustonen or Anderszewski.

Quote from: Holden on May 11, 2022, 05:34:55 PM
Whereas I prefer the Philips out of the two. It was a top choice for me for quite a while along with the Schnabel but at that stage there wasn't a wide choice of Diabelli recordings. As the CD catalog expanded to include some not previously released from LP to CD the choice expanded and my favourites changed.

I ended up adding Rudolf Serkin (Columbia Masterworks) that I found in a second hand bin and also his M&A recording from the 1954 Prades festival. I also added the Philips Arrau that I had to send away for on line. I also included Richter but I'm not sure I got the best one from a selection of recordings from both 1970 and 1986. He certainly has something to say in this work. I have a number of other recordings that I've listed in a previous post

Thanks for mentioning Arrau Philips, I heard this some 20+ years ago in the Philips box but I don't think I've played it since then. My fuse is quite short with Diabelli Variations.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Todd on June 07, 2022, 04:58:49 AM
(https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/51UShLuaQLL._SY425_.jpg)


Mitsuko Uchida's pianism has never really worked for me.  There is absolutely no questioning her pianistic ability.  She belongs to the elite of the elite in terms of pretty much every aspect of playing.  On record she delivers what she wants to deliver, or at least that has been the case in what I have heard.  It's just that what she delivers doesn't click.  Which seems strange.  I generally prefer strongly individual pianists, ones who highlight specific aspects of well-known scores and who inject personal touches aplenty.  Uchida does that.  But for me, she often just sounds fussy.  Even that is not a problem, really.  András Schiff's earlier recordings often sound fussy, but I adore his fussiness.  All that's OK.  I don't have to like everything.  To be sure, her late Beethoven sonatas are pretty good, and her concerto cycle with Simon Rattle surprised me a bit with its overall musical quality.  But nothing prepared me for this

One hears what's special about this recording in the opening bars of the theme.  Uchida's control of dynamics approaches Volodosian quality, and it remains throughout the work.  Her ability to perfectly move from piano to forte in a smooth, perfectly controlled fashion, almost as though a perfect volume control is being used, amazes.  And it ain't no studio trick.  She does it all the time throughout the recording.  That's just one trick.  Another is her perfect delivery of sforzandi.  She'll cruise along playing in lovely, rounded fashion, then blam!, her playing hits the listener right between the eyes.  Each time, every time, start to finish in the work.  Damn, damn, damn. 

Uchida's super-fine tempo control and rhythmic delivery may be better yet.  She delicately front-loads or back-loads phrases to perfection, applying the minutest accelerations or decelerations to giddiness inducing effect.  An early culmination of this is the sixth variation, which undulates in a way such that one starts to bob one's head to the left hand playing only to be pleasantly interrupted by the right hand playing.  In the ninth variation, as she reaches the first climax and then abruptly and flawless backs off, one can't help but silently (or not) say "woo".  Uchida follows that up with a most playful yet serious tenth variation, perfectly measured, not sounding spontaneous, but not sounding not spontaneous. 

Then things get even better as her fussiness manifests itself in a gloriously micromanaged eleventh variation, where each individual note sounds absolutely flawless.  Lucky number thirteen, with its ridiculous pauses and thundering notes alternating with gentle playing, sounds informed by Opp 106 and 126.  I mean, yeah.  The refined to the Nth degree rough playing of the sixteenth and seventeenth variations charms in a faux gruff manner, and the latter presents a dilemma to the listener – follow the left hand or the right hand more closely?  The obvious answer is to listen again. 

The twentieth variation, in its serenity and depth, reminds the listener that this is late Beethoven, and the Notte e giorno faticar variation sounds so exaggerated yet so controlled that one can't help but be amused at its humor or notice its spiritual connection to the second movement of 31/1.  The late LvB soundworld reappears in force in the twenty-fourth variation, which reminds the listener of the Bachian/Handelian passage in the slow movement of Op 126.  And that left hand playing in the twenty-sixth variation!  The great, slow Largo (number thirty-six) stands as the apotheosis of late-LvB soundworld music in this recording, approaching Op 110 levels of rarefication.  The final variation almost seems to be Beethoven reminding everyone that he was at the time the master of the art of fugue.  The way Uchida rumbles out the lower register playing makes one blurt out, if only in one's head, YES!!  To end things, she replays the theme with such delicacy and tenderness, particularly in the melody, that one sits transfixed, almost ready to spring to one's feet and offer a standing ovation.

The theme and every variation have so much to hear, so many felicitous little touches, that it nearly overwhelms the listener.  What it most certainly does do is act as a stimulant at least equivalent to a couple shots of espresso.  The playing demands the utmost attention.  The mind mustn't wander.  It cannot wander.  It must focus.

Uchida's recording of the Diabelli Variations is, by some distance, her greatest recording, and it stands as one of the greatest recordings of the work.  Of course such a proclamation is heavily influenced by early enthusiasm, so I will revisit this recording in the coming months, and years, to see if it holds up.  I strongly suspect it will.

Were I to pick a nit, and I shall, it has nothing to do with the recording.  The liner note photo of her smiling doesn't work.  There, there's my gripe. 

Perfect sound.

Perfect recording.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Florestan on June 07, 2022, 08:03:02 AM
Quote from: Todd on June 07, 2022, 04:58:49 AM
(https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/51UShLuaQLL._SY425_.jpg)


Mitsuko Uchida's pianism has never really worked for me.  There is absolutely no questioning her pianistic ability.  She belongs to the elite of the elite in terms of pretty much every aspect of playing.  On record she delivers what she wants to deliver, or at least that has been the case in what I have heard.  It's just that what she delivers doesn't click.  Which seems strange.  I generally prefer strongly individual pianists, ones who highlight specific aspects of well-known scores and who inject personal touches aplenty.  Uchida does that.  But for me, she often just sounds fussy.  Even that is not a problem, really.  András Schiff's earlier recordings often sound fussy, but I adore his fussiness.  All that's OK.  I don't have to like everything.  To be sure, her late Beethoven sonatas are pretty good, and her concerto cycle with Simon Rattle surprised me a bit with its overall musical quality.  But nothing prepared me for this

One hears what's special about this recording in the opening bars of the theme.  Uchida's control of dynamics approaches Volodosian quality, and it remains throughout the work.  Her ability to perfectly move from piano to forte in a smooth, perfectly controlled fashion, almost as though a perfect volume control is being used, amazes.  And it ain't no studio trick.  She does it all the time throughout the recording.  That's just one trick.  Another is her perfect delivery of sforzandi.  She'll cruise along playing in lovely, rounded fashion, then blam!, her playing hits the listener right between the eyes.  Each time, every time, start to finish in the work.  Damn, damn, damn. 

Uchida's super-fine tempo control and rhythmic delivery may be better yet.  She delicately front-loads or back-loads phrases to perfection, applying the minutest accelerations or decelerations to giddiness inducing effect.  An early culmination of this is the sixth variation, which undulates in a way such that one starts to bob one's head to the left hand playing only to be pleasantly interrupted by the right hand playing.  In the ninth variation, as she reaches the first climax and then abruptly and flawless backs off, one can't help but silently (or not) say "woo".  Uchida follows that up with a most playful yet serious tenth variation, perfectly measured, not sounding spontaneous, but not sounding not spontaneous. 

Then things get even better as her fussiness manifests itself in a gloriously micromanaged eleventh variation, where each individual note sounds absolutely flawless.  Lucky number thirteen, with its ridiculous pauses and thundering notes alternating with gentle playing, sounds informed by Opp 106 and 126.  I mean, yeah.  The refined to the Nth degree rough playing of the sixteenth and seventeenth variations charms in a faux gruff manner, and the latter presents a dilemma to the listener – follow the left hand or the right hand more closely?  The obvious answer is to listen again. 

The twentieth variation, in its serenity and depth, reminds the listener that this is late Beethoven, and the Notte e giorno faticar variation sounds so exaggerated yet so controlled that one can't help but be amused at its humor or notice its spiritual connection to the second movement of 31/1.  The late LvB soundworld reappears in force in the twenty-fourth variation, which reminds the listener of the Bachian/Handelian passage in the slow movement of Op 126.  And that left hand playing in the twenty-sixth variation!  The great, slow Largo (number thirty-six) stands as the apotheosis of late-LvB soundworld music in this recording, approaching Op 110 levels of rarefication.  The final variation almost seems to be Beethoven reminding everyone that he was at the time the master of the art of fugue.  The way Uchida rumbles out the lower register playing makes one blurt out, if only in one's head, YES!!  To end things, she replays the theme with such delicacy and tenderness, particularly in the melody, that one sits transfixed, almost ready to spring to one's feet and offer a standing ovation.

The theme and every variation have so much to hear, so many felicitous little touches, that it nearly overwhelms the listener.  What it most certainly does do is act as a stimulant at least equivalent to a couple shots of espresso.  The playing demands the utmost attention.  The mind mustn't wander.  It cannot wander.  It must focus.

Uchida's recording of the Diabelli Variations is, by some distance, her greatest recording, and it stands as one of the greatest recordings of the work.  Of course such a proclamation is heavily influenced by early enthusiasm, so I will revisit this recording in the coming months, and years, to see if it holds up.  I strongly suspect it will.

Were I to pick a nit, and I shall, it has nothing to do with the recording.  The liner note photo of her smiling doesn't work.  There, there's my gripe. 

Perfect sound.

Perfect recording.

This must be the most enthusiastic review you ever wrote, Todd. Made me click the Buy button the very moment I finished reading it.  ;)

However, "playful yet serious " strikes me as maybe the oxymoron of the week.  ;D

Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Jo498 on June 07, 2022, 08:33:07 AM
The glass bead game (nobody named this in the other thread, too pretentious?) is both playful and serious, I guess.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Mandryka on June 07, 2022, 10:29:50 AM
She is so nuanced, and so reflective.

What I've noticed when I've talked to people about it is that some people who like Beethoven think that this amount of subtlety and refinement is somehow inappropriate. They want fire! They want stormy exuberance.

If I had one criticism of it it would be this: that to me, it sounded like a sequence of etudes. There wasn't a sense of élan running from Var 1 to the end. But I'm not sure whether this is just a reflection of me rather than something more intrinsic to her conception, her realisation.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Todd on June 07, 2022, 10:48:05 AM
Quote from: Mandryka on June 07, 2022, 10:29:50 AMWhat I've noticed when I've talked to people about it is that some people who like Beethoven think that this amount of subtlety and refinement is somehow inappropriate. They want fire! They want stormy exuberance.

Stormy exuberance is a legitimate way to play the piece, but so is something more refined.  I began looking at the piece a different way after hearing Anton Kuerti play it in person, after giving what amounts to a twenty-minute master class, where he explained several variations in painstaking detail, and then played examples on the spot.  There can be no one right way with this or any non-player piano piece.


Quote from: Mandryka on June 07, 2022, 10:29:50 AMIf I had one criticism of it it would be this: that to me, it sounded like a sequence of etudes. There wasn't a sense of élan running from Var 1 to the end. But I'm not sure whether this is just a reflection of me rather than something more intrinsic to her conception, her realisation.

Uchida's approach is so detail-oriented that the listener is drawn to those above all.  I should probably listen through eardbuds while walking to see if deprioritizing focus yields a different listening experience.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Holden on June 08, 2022, 12:13:33 AM
Quote from: Todd on June 07, 2022, 10:48:05 AM
Stormy exuberance is a legitimate way to play the piece, but so is something more refined.  I began looking at the piece a different way after hearing Anton Kuerti play it in person, after giving what amounts to a twenty-minute master class, where he explained several variations in painstaking detail, and then played examples on the spot.  There can be no one right way with this or any non-player piano piece.


Uchida's approach is so detail-oriented that the listener is drawn to those above all.  I should probably listen through eardbuds while walking to see if deprioritizing focus yields a different listening experience.

Yes, I totally agree. For a long time Schnabel and Kovacevich were my benchmarks then I heard Arrau and realised that there was different way to approach this monumental work. Uchida takes us into another realm again.

The one thing I've harped on about is how the theme is played defines what happens in subsequent variations. For example, dynamic shadings should be the same and adding to the range of the dynamics is just part of that. If it was played softly in the theme then it should be at least p or pp in the variations. If the left hand was emphasised (and Uchida has a magnificent left hand) then that should happen in the same part of the variations. Uchida does this superbly and you can see that she sees the longer view as opposed to producing 33 little vignettes.

Todd mentions her fussiness and I didn't like how she used this in her Mozart PS cycle. But, as part of that cycle the Fantasia in D minor was included and you suddenly realised that she had the ability to really bring slow movements to life - just not in the Mozart PS. You can hear this in those slow variations before the final fugue variation.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: André on June 08, 2022, 04:10:17 AM
Quote from: Jo498 on June 07, 2022, 08:33:07 AM
The glass bead game (nobody named this in the other thread, too pretentious?) is both playful and serious, I guess.

Referring to the Literary Works thread ?
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Jo498 on June 08, 2022, 04:53:43 AM
Quote from: André on June 08, 2022, 04:10:17 AM
Referring to the Literary Works thread ?
Yes, people named some Hesse novels but one of the few I never read (Narziss und Goldmund), not the Glass bead game or Steppenwolf.

As for the Diabelli variations I think they are actually quite humorous.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Mandryka on June 08, 2022, 01:25:21 PM
Actually I don't think I was being completely fair to Uchida. I just put in the hifi and it came on playing here Var 16, it must have been where I stopped last night. Well, there's fire aplenty! Refined fire, but fire nevertheless.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: amw on June 09, 2022, 01:48:52 PM
I listened to the Fugue and Menuetto. The former was fine, the latter struck me as heavily mannered, although the pianism is impressive. Her raw control of touch has improved since the recordings of the last five sonatas, but I'm not sure I like what she does with it. I was reminded to some extent of Zhu Xiao-Mei's Bach recordings for Accentus in that respect.

I'll have more thoughts once I listen to the whole thing but I'm doubtful this will end up a top recording for me. The Menuetto should be understated, charming and transcendent at the same time. To my ears it didn't achieve the first two, and aimed for the latter unsuccessfully. I can't blame an artist for not achieving transcendence—that's a difficult feat for anyone, especially in this piece—but lack of "grazioso e dolce" and a failure to follow "ma non tirarsi dietro" (Beethoven's two directions here) isn't promising.

At the same time I can't think of an ideal recording of the Menuetto, one that achieves the sense of all the harmonies of the world subsumed within the everyday, the sense of life returning to normal after a catastrophic disruption but in which normality itself is transfigured to "feel" far more eternal and heavenly than any of the moments of sublime awe and majesty in Beethoven's other work. Perhaps there isn't one.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Spotted Horses on June 09, 2022, 08:46:14 PM
I have several recordings of the Diabelli Variations and they all have one thing in common. I have not managed to listen through any of them. My general impression of Uchida from other recordings I have listened to is that she has impressive technique, but tends to give me the impression of being too mannered. Maybe I should listen to Pollini.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: amw on June 09, 2022, 09:42:11 PM
I have 17 recordings of the Diabelli Variations. I've never had an issue with listening all the way through. Traditionally, my reference was Serkin père but I guess I should do an actual comparison at some point. (On listening to all 17 versions of the Menuetto, the one on this occasion I most wanted to hear the other 32 variations of was András Schiff's Brodmann fortepiano recording, which seemed to best exemplify the qualities I mentioned above.)
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Mandryka on June 09, 2022, 10:48:06 PM
Quote from: amw on June 09, 2022, 01:48:52 PM


At the same time I can't think of an ideal recording of the Menuetto, one that achieves the sense of all the harmonies of the world subsumed within the everyday, the sense of life returning to normal after a catastrophic disruption but in which normality itself is transfigured to "feel" far more eternal and heavenly than any of the moments of sublime awe and majesty in Beethoven's other work. Perhaps there isn't one.

See what you think of Dino Ciani.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Spotted Horses on June 10, 2022, 05:53:47 AM
Quote from: amw on June 09, 2022, 09:42:11 PM
I have 17 recordings of the Diabelli Variations. I've never had an issue with listening all the way through. Traditionally, my reference was Serkin père but I guess I should do an actual comparison at some point. (On listening to all 17 versions of the Menuetto, the one on this occasion I most wanted to hear the other 32 variations of was András Schiff's Brodmann fortepiano recording, which seemed to best exemplify the qualities I mentioned above.)

Schiff sounds like a good place to start. My issue with the Diabelli's is generic. I don't do well with large collections of miniatures. I see people reporting listening to the Goldberg Variations, or the WTC, all the way through and I am amazed.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Florestan on June 10, 2022, 08:01:11 AM
Quote from: Spotted Horses on June 10, 2022, 05:53:47 AM
I see people reporting listening to the Goldberg Variations, or the WTC, all the way through and I am amazed.

Says Wikipedia:

In 1921, at age 17, [Rudolf Serkin] made his Berlin debut performing in [Adolf] Busch's ensemble as the keyboard soloist in the Brandenburg Concerto No. 5. At the end of the concert, Busch told Serkin to play an encore to the enthusiastic audience. Serkin later reported that he asked Busch, "What shall I play?" and Busch "as a joke" told him to play the Goldberg Variations "and I took him seriously. When I finished there were only four people left: Adolf Busch, Artur Schnabel, Alfred Einstein and me."

:D

Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Mandryka on June 10, 2022, 08:14:51 AM
Quote from: Spotted Horses on June 10, 2022, 05:53:47 AM
Schiff sounds like a good place to start. My issue with the Diabelli's is generic. I don't do well with large collections of miniatures. I see people reporting listening to the Goldberg Variations, or the WTC, all the way through and I am amazed.

In the Bach variations there's an inbuilt caesura midway with the French overture. I've seen it performed with the artist going offstage for a breather at that point. I'm not sure if there's a similar point in the Beethoven.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Brian on June 10, 2022, 09:26:44 AM
Quote from: Spotted Horses on June 10, 2022, 05:53:47 AM
Schiff sounds like a good place to start. My issue with the Diabelli's is generic. I don't do well with large collections of miniatures. I see people reporting listening to the Goldberg Variations, or the WTC, all the way through and I am amazed.
I have a lot of sympathy with this. A 15-minute variation movement is great. Even up to 25-30 minutes (Eroica, Enigma). After that, you really need a clear narrative arc or emotional progression. Some of those Reicha variation sets where he's just showing off how clever he is are really hard to tolerate.

I can do the Diabellis about once every six months. I usually favor faster, more classical versions but really enjoyed Uchida's. For the Goldbergs, I like the version Busoni did where he trimmed it down and sliced out repeats for non-boring concert performance.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Spotted Horses on June 10, 2022, 02:02:07 PM
Quote from: Mandryka on June 10, 2022, 08:14:51 AM
In the Bach variations there's an inbuilt caesura midway with the French overture. I've seen it performed with the artist going offstage for a breather at that point. I'm not sure if there's a similar point in the Beethoven.

I am more sensitive to the small scale structure of the Goldbergs. invention-showy piece-canon, invention-showy piece-canon. I usually do one or two cycles (three or six variations) to follow listening to a longer piece.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Jo498 on June 11, 2022, 01:02:03 AM
Goldbergs with all repeats and slowish tempi leading to 80 min. or more duration can stretch one's patience, so I think it can be advisable to skip repeats. I usually have no problems with (almost) repeat free Goldbergs of ~40-50 min length and neither with the usually 45-50 min (depending on tempo and repeats, I have one by Anda below 40 min and the excentric Ugorski takes 61 and Anderszewski 63 min) duration of the Diabellis. It's not much longer than many symphonies or longish sonatas (like Schubert's last or LvB op.106).
There are several suggestions for "arcs" in the Diabellis, some posted further above in this thread. I think one can also listen to parts instead of the whole but I'd much rather do this with the GBV (like the first half) than with the Diabellis.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Mandryka on October 06, 2022, 04:55:26 AM
(https://orpheusinstituut.imgix.net/https%3A%2F%2Forpheusinstituut.be%2Fassets%2Ffiles%2Fpublications%2Fdiabellimachines.jpg?auto=compress%2Cformat&crop=focalpoint&fit=crop&format=&fp-x=0.815&fp-y=0.2&h=735&ixlib=php-1.1.0&q=80&w=500&s=b00aa0e7d1cde888ff98f75c25f204f0)

https://orpheusinstituut.be/en/publications/diabelli-machines8


As everyone knows, Beethoven wrote some variations in 1819, and then left the project for a few years. The 1819 version -- if it can be called that -- is on record here on Track 9 disc 1

https://open.spotify.com/album/17QYKgs6GiFfZ05MY91Z79

It's very stylishly and elegantly and expressively and intimately played by Jan Michaels, a new name for me, but I intend to explore some of his other recordings.

https://www.michielsjan.be/

I can't help but think that The Diabelli Variations is like AoF in a way, in that the composer put the project aside for a considerable amount of time before returning to it. In the case of AoF I always feel that the best music came later, and recordings which just cover the earlier fugues leave out my favourite music.

I don't know if I feel like that about the Diabelli Variations.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: premont on October 06, 2022, 02:19:44 PM
Quote from: Mandryka on October 06, 2022, 04:55:26 AM
In the case of AoF I always feel that the best music came later, and recordings which just cover the earlier fugues leave out my favourite music.

I always felt that the manuscript version only has musicological interest compared to the later printed version, even if the printed version barely represents Bach's final thoughts concerning the work.

Quote from: Mandryka
I don't know if I feel like that about the Diabelli Variations.

In contrast to you I love the most of Beethoven's music, but there are a few of his works which I never have got on terms with. Among these are the Diabelli variations, Missa Solemnis and Fidelio.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Jo498 on October 07, 2022, 12:16:13 AM
Unlike the AoF which might technically be unfinished or other pieces with alternative versions, I don't really see a point using a supposed intermediate/workshop stage of a finished and published work like the Diabelli variations. (I am not sure if I see such a point in case of the AoF either, admittedly, but I don't know about the stages of that work to have an opinion. It's a collection anyway, so it hardly matters if there are 12 or 16 or whatever pieces or if there are smaller subcollections or the unfinished fugue a single separate piece...)
I have never seen or heard of anyone playing the Waldstein sonata with the Andante favori instead of the Introduzione or attaching the Kreutzer finale to the earlier sonata it was originally intended for.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Mandryka on October 07, 2022, 01:52:02 AM
Quote from: Jo498 on October 07, 2022, 12:16:13 AM
Unlike the AoF which might technically be unfinished or other pieces with alternative versions, I don't really see a point using a supposed intermediate/workshop stage of a finished and published work like the Diabelli variations. (I am not sure if I see such a point in case of the AoF either, admittedly, but I don't know about the stages of that work to have an opinion. It's a collection anyway, so it hardly matters if there are 12 or 16 or whatever pieces or if there are smaller subcollections or the unfinished fugue a single separate piece...)
I have never seen or heard of anyone playing the Waldstein sonata with the Andante favori instead of the Introduzione or attaching the Kreutzer finale to the earlier sonata it was originally intended for.

Here's the essay which accompanies the release, Joe. I think it's really interesting, but then I'm that way inclined, you may not be.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1utTnYnpMMypRaUFxwd3is5oN5E_YYRLv/view?usp=sharing

The bottom line is that they argue that the 1823 and the 1819 versions represent two very different conceptions of what the piece is "about", reflecting a shift in Beethoven's own thinking about the relation of his music to previous musics.  The paper argues for it, maybe not at Ph.D level, but it's more than journalism.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Leo K. on October 07, 2022, 06:25:49 AM
Quote from: Mandryka on October 07, 2022, 01:52:02 AM
Here's the essay which accompanies the release, Joe. I think it's really interesting, but then I'm that way inclined, you may not be.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1utTnYnpMMypRaUFxwd3is5oN5E_YYRLv/view?usp=sharing

The bottom line is that they argue that the 1823 and the 1819 versions represent two very fundamentally different conceptions of what the piece is "about", reflecting a shift in Beethoven's own thinking about the relation of his music to previous musics.  The paper argues for it, maybe not at Ph.D level, but it's more than journalism.
Thank you for this very interesting discussion and article!
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Mandryka on October 07, 2022, 11:05:20 AM
You can hear the audio recording here - I like Bart Vanhecke's contribution.

https://orpheusinstitute.bandcamp.com/album/diabelli-machines8
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Spotted Horses on October 09, 2022, 06:47:16 AM
Quote from: Jo498 on June 11, 2022, 01:02:03 AM
Goldbergs with all repeats and slowish tempi leading to 80 min. or more duration can stretch one's patience, so I think it can be advisable to skip repeats. I usually have no problems with (almost) repeat free Goldbergs of ~40-50 min length and neither with the usually 45-50 min (depending on tempo and repeats, I have one by Anda below 40 min and the excentric Ugorski takes 61 and Anderszewski 63 min) duration of the Diabellis. It's not much longer than many symphonies or longish sonatas (like Schubert's last or LvB op.106).
There are several suggestions for "arcs" in the Diabellis, some posted further above in this thread. I think one can also listen to parts instead of the whole but I'd much rather do this with the GBV (like the first half) than with the Diabellis.

The Goldberg Variations was, as I understand it, written for personal study and domestic performance, not as a concert experience. Listening to the entire thing at a go is inconceivable to me. I like the fact that it is organized and sets of three and I normally listen three or six at a time. And I like all of the repeats taken, and I like it when the performer takes advantage of this to play the second differently on repeat.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: vers la flamme on October 09, 2022, 09:26:48 AM
Sounds like I need to hear the Uchida Diabellis. A work I've never got on with. I have Arrau on Philips and, somewhere, Barenboim on Erato.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Holden on January 11, 2023, 11:17:00 PM
And now there's this recording. It appeared in my FB feed and is Arrau from 1952. I really like it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qRFdwZzKccg
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Mandryka on January 12, 2023, 12:58:27 AM
Quote from: Holden on January 11, 2023, 11:17:00 PMAnd now there's this recording. It appeared in my FB feed and is Arrau from 1952. I really like it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qRFdwZzKccg

Shame about the sound, I guess it's bad master tapes.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Jo498 on January 12, 2023, 01:41:32 AM
Does anyone know why Arrau did not re-record the Diabellis when he recorded some other variations and all piano sonatas in the mid-late 60s (or whenever exactly the "classic" Philips recording was done)?
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Mandryka on January 12, 2023, 06:10:45 AM
Some discussion here about the 1953, which I'd forgotten about. Tom Deacon managed Arrau for Philips, and thought highly of his musicianship, so I trust what he said to me there.

https://groups.google.com/g/rec.music.classical.recordings/c/5RXPDLsKpmk/m/mcCTd6gEu4QJ
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Jo498 on January 12, 2023, 08:52:10 AM
I have not re-rechecked, I only remember the sound of that early 1950s recordings to be pretty bad. That greyish/silver box (sonatas+ variations, no concertos) I have has one clearly botched job that concerns the disc with the variations op.34,35 WoO 80 where IIRC the beginning chord of the Eroica variations is clipped. I don't recall any problems with the sonatas. But the SQ of the Diabellis seems to me to be the fault of the source material.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Mandryka on January 12, 2023, 08:57:16 AM
Quote from: Jo498 on January 12, 2023, 08:52:10 AMI have not re-rechecked, I only remember the sound of that early 1950s recordings to be pretty bad. That greyish/silver box (sonatas+ variations, no concertos) I have has one clearly botched job that concerns the disc with the variations op.34,35 WoO 80 where IIRC the beginning chord of the Eroica variations is clipped. I don't recall any problems with the sonatas. But the SQ of the Diabellis seems to me to be the fault of the source material.

And annoyingly Tom in that discussion seems confident that there are very good master tapes in a safe in Hamburg, just no one can be bothered to get them out. He was a VP for Philips.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Mandryka on March 19, 2023, 12:52:13 AM
Listening to Geoffrey Douglas Madge, my ears started to prick up in var 6. Madge's idea seems to be that one of the strengths of the music is in the counterpoint, and that's interesting I think. For me this one was put in the shade a bit by Uchida's release, Madge's came out in Autumn 2022 when I was thinking most about Uchida.  That was a shame, because we have something original here.  It's a "thoughtful" interpretation - he definitely does not see the music as a vehicle for displaying the piano player's skills, or for wowing the listener with speed or colour.  It's streaming everywhere.

If anyone has the booklet - is there anything interesting in it?
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: San Antone on March 19, 2023, 04:06:37 AM
Rudolf Buchbinder : The Diabelli Project
March 6, 2020

(https://images.universal-music.de/img/assets/492/492912/4/720/the-diabelli-project.jpg)

A new series of works based on Beethoven's monumental Diabelli Variations

Composers include:
Beethoven
Liszt
Schubert
Czerny
Franz Xaver Mozart
Lera Auerbach
Brett Dean
Tan Dun
Toshio Hosokawa
Christian Jost
Brad Lubman
Philippe Manoury
Max Richter
Rodion Shchedrin
Johannes Maria Staud
Jörg Widmann

He also published a book in which he discusses each variation and brought out what I found to be interesting concepts about the construction of the work as a whole, as opposed to just a set of individual variations.

Along with some of the historical variations other than Beethoven's he invited a group of living composers to contribute new variations, all of which he included in the recording. 

I found the entire package very rewarding.
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Mandryka on March 19, 2023, 09:27:48 AM
Quote from: Mandryka on March 19, 2023, 12:52:13 AMListening to Geoffrey Douglas Madge, my ears started to prick up in var 6. Madge's idea seems to be that one of the strengths of the music is in the counterpoint, and that's interesting I think. For me this one was put in the shade a bit by Uchida's release, Madge's came out in Autumn 2022 when I was thinking most about Uchida.  That was a shame, because we have something original here.  It's a "thoughtful" interpretation - he definitely does not see the music as a vehicle for displaying the piano player's skills, or for wowing the listener with speed or colour.  It's streaming everywhere.

If anyone has the booklet - is there anything interesting in it?

The booklet for Madge's recording. Not very interesting as far as I can see, but here it is anyway.

https://static.qobuz.com/goodies/43/000152834.pdf
Title: Re: Diabelli Variations
Post by: Atriod on October 05, 2023, 02:57:17 PM
I generally prefer romantic era variations, but these last few years Diabelli Variations is one of my most played works from Beethoven.

Updated list from a couple of years ago, in no particular order

Charles Rosen
R. Serkin (Columbia and BBC, better sound on the latter)
Brautigam
Schiff (ECM Bechstein)
Kovacevich* live (Onyx)
Gulda (Harmonia Mundi France)
Schnabel - uneven but much to like, a smiling performance

*never cared for his Philips recording