Wilhelm Kempff

[George]

Interesting that you call some of his works "dark/heavy". I had never seen them in this light before. Now, come to think of it, D 958 is really dark and heavy, and D 959 is very dark indeed - though there is no interpretation of this work by Richter, I think. And in both cases, I actually don't like Kempff's interpretations (as a whole).

Heard Sokolov's D 959? It's in the Richter vein. There's a few live performances floating around. I think you already have access to one of them. 

As for the IMO greatest sonata

IMO, that honor is held by D 894 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xX4NH7yHFKI

I was pleased to learn recently that this was Richter's favorite Schubert sonata as well. I wasn't surprised, for his interpretations were molded with such loving care that his fondness for the work is immediately apparent.

, D960, I'd spontaneously characterise it as infinitely sad (most of the time), but not dark or heavy. In the hands of Richter, however, it is indeed dark and heavy. In the hands of Kempff, it is not; it is rather infinitely sad, but sadness transcended by beauty of melody. For me, that's kind of the essence of Schubert, and that's probably why I find his music comforting; on the other hand, I know people who find it difficult to listen to because they get depressed.

I never find depressing music depressing, in fact I find it comforting to hear difficult emotions conveyed with such honesty and beauty.

I find both Kempff and Richter great in D960, although they are completely different. I guess that's part of the greatness of that work that it lends itself to so many different interpretations.

My first pass through Kempff's D 960 did not impress me. In fact, I haven't really enjoyed any other interpretation of this work besides Richter. I've tried Haskil, Fiorentino and a few others. 

[Verena]

Heard Sokolov's D 959? It's in the Richter vein. There's a few live performances floating around. I think you already have access to one of them. 

Oh yes  I love that recording by Sokolov. It's my favorite recording of that sonata.

IMO, that honor is held by D 894 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xX4NH7yHFKI

I was pleased to learn recently that this was Richter's favorite Schubert sonata as well. I wasn't surprised, for his interpretations were molded with such loving care that his fondness for the work is immediately apparent.

Did not know about this video, thanks! Listening now.

My first pass through Kempff's D 960 did not impress me. In fact, I haven't really enjoyed any other interpretation of this work besides Richter. I've tried Haskil, Fiorentino and a few others. 

I never found Haskil's reading special. Perhaps you might like Afanassiev (on ECM, not the Denon), it is even slower than the Richter recording. There was a time I liked the Afanassiev very much, but at the moment I find it too extreme.

[George]

Oh yes  I love that recording by Sokolov. It's my favorite recording of that sonata.

Me too.

I never found Haskil's reading special.

Me neither.

[George]

I compared the Kempff mono and stereo recordings of the Beethoven Op. 2, No. 1 sonata this morning. I plan to go through all 32, doing about one per week.

Here's my thoughts on the two Op. 2, No. 1 Kempff performances.

First off, I see why others like the fuller sound of the mono, but the stereo has some of the high frequency info that's missing from the mono. As for the performance, I much prefer the stereo. More excitement in the outer movements, in fact, if I was blindfolded, I'd say the mono was the later version. He sounds older, less energetic in the mono, which is the opposite of most reviews I have read for Kempff's mono set. I liked the dynamic contast in the third movement more in the stereo and found the second movement to be a draw.

So far, stereo set 1, mono 0.

[Verena]

I compared the Kempff mono and stereo recordings of the Beethoven Op. 2, No. 1 sonata this morning. I plan to go through all 32, doing about one per week.

Here's my thoughts on the two Op. 2, No. 1 Kempff performances.

First off, I see why others like the fuller sound of the mono, but the stereo has some of the high frequency info that's missing from the mono. As for the performance, I much prefer the stereo. More excitement in the outer movements, in fact, if I was blindfolded, I'd say the mono was the later version. He sounds older, less energetic in the mono, which is the opposite of most reviews I have read for Kempff's mono set. I liked the dynamic contast in the third movement more in the stereo and found the second movement to be a draw.

So far, stereo set 1, mono 0.

Thanks very much for your review. Agree about the sound - never understood why most seem to prefer the mono sound-wise. Looking forward to your review of the other sonatas!

[david-jw]

I will also follow your comparisons with interest George.

I have never really "got" Kempff. I have his stereo LvB late sonatas, and also a stereo Appassionata/Waldstein/Les Adieux disc, but I am not over-enamoured with his sound, which is a bit hard, brittle and "glassy" for my liking- but this could be the DG recording engineers I suppose.

Have never heard the mono cycle.

[Verena]

I have never really "got" Kempff. I have his stereo LvB late sonatas, and also a stereo Appassionata/Waldstein/Les Adieux disc, but I am not over-enamoured with his sound, which is a bit hard, brittle and "glassy" for my liking- but this could be the DG recording engineers I suppose.

Have you tried his Schubert Impromptus, Moments Musicaux, or D960? I'm so specific because I think these are almost the only pieces where his "weaknesses" (lack of virtuosity) do not affect the quality of his interpretation. I was a great Kempff enthusiast once, but today, I mostly like his Schubert, though even here there are usually moments where his lack of virtuosity shows. With the exception of the works mentioned above, which IMO are among the greatest interpretations of these pieces (though they do not show the brooding/heavy side of Schubert).

[david-jw]

Have you tried his Schubert Impromptus, Moments Musicaux, or D960? I'm so specific because I think these are almost the only pieces where his "weaknesses" (lack of virtuosity) do not affect the quality of his interpretation. I was a great Kempff enthusiast once, but today, I mostly like his Schubert, though even here there are usually moments where his lack of virtuosity shows. With the exception of the works mentioned above, which IMO are among the greatest interpretations of these pieces (though they do not show the brooding/heavy side of Schubert).

Hi Verena,

thank you very much for your reccomendation- I have not heard any Kempff Schubert. I am currently enjoying the Uchida set which I bought recently, but will search out the works you mention.  As someone else mentioned she studied with Kempff- I think his influence certainly shows in her recordings of LvB 109/110/111.

[Verena]

Hi Verena,

thank you very much for your reccomendation- I have not heard any Kempff Schubert. I am currently enjoying the Uchida set which I bought recently, but will search out the works you mention.  As someone else mentioned she studied with Kempff- I think his influence certainly shows in her recordings of LvB 109/110/111.

Hi David,
You're welcome. That LvB sonata recording by Uchida sounds tempting.. BTW, speaking of these sonatas, these are the only Beethoven sonatas where I enjoy Kempff as much as in Schubert. Had completely forgotten for a moment. (But only the later version)

[George]

Hi David,
You're welcome. That LvB sonata recording by Uchida sounds tempting.. BTW, speaking of these sonatas, these are the only Beethoven sonatas where I enjoy Kempff as much as in Schubert. Had completely forgotten for a moment. (But only the later version)

Yes, Kempff's Op. 110 is superb!

[david-jw]

Hi David,
You're welcome. That LvB sonata recording by Uchida sounds tempting.. BTW, speaking of these sonatas, these are the only Beethoven sonatas where I enjoy Kempff as much as in Schubert. Had completely forgotten for a moment. (But only the later version)

guess its not a popular choice, but I rate Uchida's 109 and 111 very highly indeed. There seems to be a real balance between intelligence and emotion- they are deeply felt and I would put them in amoungst the first rank of late sonata performances. Not so sure about her 110 though.

Apart from not liking Kempff's tone in the DG stereo LvB that i have heared (which may just be the recording), I just find that there is sometimes something a little "flaccid" about his playing. For me, he also lacks fire a little in the allegros.

But I want to persevere because of his high reputation which is no doubt justified.

[George]

Apart from not liking Kempff's tone in the DG stereo LvB that i have heared (which may just be the recording), I just find that there is sometimes something a little "flaccid" about his playing. For me, he also lacks fire a little in the allegros.

Absolutely. But that's part of his appeal, I think. No one else plays them that way.

But I want to persevere because of his high reputation which is no doubt justified.

I can understand this. Though my appreciation for Kempff has grown over the years, he is still not among my favorite pianists. 

[david-jw]

Absolutely. But that's part of his appeal, I think. No one else plays them that way.

I can understand this. Though my appreciation for Kempff has grown over the years, he is still not among my favorite pianists.

Yes, when it comes to Beethoven, one feels that Kempff has to be explored 

Look forward to your comparisons.

[Mandryka]

I compared the Kempff mono and stereo recordings of the Beethoven Op. 2, No. 1 sonata this morning. I plan to go through all 32, doing about one per week.

Here's my thoughts on the two Op. 2, No. 1 Kempff performances.

First off, I see why others like the fuller sound of the mono, but the stereo has some of the high frequency info that's missing from the mono. As for the performance, I much prefer the stereo. More excitement in the outer movements, in fact, if I was blindfolded, I'd say the mono was the later version. He sounds older, less energetic in the mono, which is the opposite of most reviews I have read for Kempff's mono set. I liked the dynamic contast in the third movement more in the stereo and found the second movement to be a draw.

So far, stereo set 1, mono 0.

The problem with the stereo one  is with the vision. I mean, what's he trying to say? In so far as I can hear any ideas in the performance at all,  he's saying "this is a rather charming piece of ear candy, which I can play very nicely."

Contrast the great interpreters of this marvellous sonata – Richter and Gould. Richter's saying "This music is a complete break with the past. I'm bringing you into a new world. Smash – here I am" And Gould is saying "This is so fun, so funny, so light, so joyful. "

I don't have the mono.

[George]

The problem with the stereo one  is with the vision. I mean, what's he trying to say? In so far as I can hear any ideas in the performance at all,  he's saying "this is a rather charming piece of ear candy, which I can play very nicely."

Similarly, Harris Goldsmith had this to say about Kempff's stereo and mono versions - "Both Kempff versions are neat and dainty."

[Todd]

Similarly, Harris Goldsmith had this to say about Kempff's stereo and mono versions - "Both Kempff versions are neat and dainty."

There's certainly some truth to this, but in the mono cycle there's a bit more drive and control than the later set.  None of Kempff's output is marked by dazzling virtuosity or power.  It's more introspective in nature, and more about never making an ugly sound. 

I'm one of the people who prefers the mono cycle as a whole, though there are some cases where the later set is better.  Op 28 is a perfect example.

The few live recordings I've heard from Kempff reveal him to be more inspired, if perhaps less technically astute.  Perhaps more will surface in time.

[George]

Everything Todd mentioned above I heartily second as recommendations; and even though I can see many reasons they might not be recommendable, even his Goldbergs are a cherished piano recording in my collection.

I adore his Goldbergs. I just got them this week and I love his serene, joyful interpretation of these variations.

[Verena]

I adore his Goldbergs. I just got them this week and I love his serene, joyful interpretation of these variations.

I also quite like some of Kempff's Bach. I'd also be curious to listen to his Well-tempered Clavier. Perhaps it will be reissued complete some day.

[George]

I also quite like some of Kempff's Bach. I'd also be curious to listen to his Well-tempered Clavier. Perhaps it will be reissued complete some day.

Nice to see you, Vernena!

So Kempff recorded the whole thing?

[Coopmv]

Nice to see you, Vernena!

So Kempff recorded the whole thing?

I was able to find only WTC I on Amazon and it is clearly OOP as ArkivMusic is now offering the CDR version, though a few used ones are available ...