Nelson Freire Plays Beethoven

[Todd]

Why buy only one new LvB sonata disc when you can buy two?  When I snapped up the latest Schiff offering, I also picked up the new Decca recording of Nelson Freire playing four sonatas, including the Mondschein, so I could do a direct comparison between the two pianists.  The Schiff disc was a disappointment, but surely Freire would do better I thought.  He does, sort of, but with caveats.

The disc opens with the Waldstein, and some of my misgivings show up here.  The opening Allegro con brio is taken at blazing speed, and Freire plays with immense flexibility, precision, and dynamic gradations.  He hits all the marks that Richard Goode misses in a similarly fast take.  There's more than enough brio, and one detects either a whiff of nonchalance or a very well crafted imitation thereof.  Richness and texture are both lacking, but it seems a fair trade-off.  The Introduzione is where the first hints of problems arise.  The playing is clear and lucid and even feels a bit impatient – which isn't a bad thing – but it also sounds a bit too detached.  The Rondo opens similarly coolly, though the nuances Freire brings out in the upper registers makes up for that.  The long transitional trill is well done, but the music that is supposed to swell around it seems a bit restrained.  But then, look out: it's back to blazing fast playing.  There is something refreshing about hearing a pianist cruise along so easily and make such a virtuosic meal of the work, but the downside is that it's not as emotionally engaging as I ultimately prefer.

The next work is the Les Adieux, and here the same basic traits hold true.  The opening Adagio is superbly played, but sounds too cool.  One hears resignation rather than sadness.  That's fine in itself, but it doesn't grip this listener.  The Allegro portion of the first movement is freer and more flexible in terms of fingerwork, but it's even less engaging.  The Andante espressivo is beautiful on the surface, but again is just too cool.  It should come as no surprise that the Vivacissimamente is much the same, though here Freire turns the piece into a dazzling virtuoso display, with notes dispatched with lightening speed and swelling dynamics.  As an emotionally engaging performance it falls flat, but as a display of pianistic prowess it thrills.

Fortunately things pick up with Op 110.  The opening Moderato cantabile, molto espressivo is taken at a relatively quick speed, but what stands out is the gossamer light playing, which creates a wonderful, suitably ethereal atmosphere.  A few times things might sound rushed, but then again maybe not.  The Allegro molto sounds fast but never rushed, exhibits superb dynamic contrasts, and has a somewhat, well, "youthful" feel to it.  The Adagio ma non troppo, though, is where it's at.  As it opens, it sounds unmoored, moody, desolate, and lovely.  The fugue is slow, precise, and pristine to open and Freire remains in absolute control throughout, imparting admirable clarity.  The return of the slow music has a more resigned feel to it that just feels right, and the chord build up to the inverted fugue in wonderfully terraced and controlled.  The inverted fugue sounds much like the original fugue, though now there's even more late-LvB goodness.  The coda is fast and strong and caps off a very fine reading.

The disc closes with the Mondschein, which I was hoping would be better than Schiff's.  It's not.  The Adagio sostenuto finds Freire returning to his cool ways.  There's little haze or solemnity or darkness.  The Allegretto sounds better, with a supremely well-judged overall tempo and some lively playing.  The Presto agitato, not at all surprisingly, is agile and fast, though it lacks intensity.  Perhaps even more than Schiff, this ends up being a surface reading, though it's less fussy.  It's not a world-beater, that's for sure.

Nelson Freire's recent recordings for Decca have all been excellent, so I'm somewhat disappointed with this disc.  It never catches fire for me.  Yes, Freire displays a technique that ranks him among the best in that regard in these works, but I want more than that.  Not helping matters is a somewhat boomy, cloudy acoustic that hampers detail.  A missed opportunity it seems.

[12tone.]

I'm not trying to offend, but arn't you sick of these by now?  I can't believe your still at it!   

Wow-wee!

[BorisG]

I'm not trying to offend, but arn't you sick of these by now?  I can't believe your still at it!   

Wow-wee!

My sentiments exactly, including the Wow-wee!

[Todd]

I'm not trying to offend, but arn't you sick of these by now?

I'll respond with my own question: Why ask the question when the answer is obvious?

[Bunny]

Todd, have you a top 10 or better yet a top 5 Beethoven sonata cycle list?  Do you find that some cycles rise in your esteem over time as others fall?

[Todd]

Todd, have you a top 10 or better yet a top 5 Beethoven sonata cycle list?  Do you find that some cycles rise in your esteem over time as others fall?

The second question is easier to answer: Yes.

The first is harder.  A top five I cannot do.  A top ten - it might be something like this (in approximate order):

Annie Fischer
Friedrich Gulda (Amadeo)
Wilhelm Backhaus (mono)
Wilhelm Kempff (mono)
Robert Silverman
Eric Heidsieck
Emil Gilels
Artur Schnabel
Russell Sherman
Claude Frank

(It's iffy because Kempff and Backhaus have two top-notch cycles, and there are some other fines sets that may, on a given day, appeal to me more than some listed.)

[Bunny]

Thanks for the list, Todd.

Would it be easier to list all of the cycles which you feel are not first rate?  Also, have you ever found that when you hear a cycle again after a long period of time that your original opinion was too high, or that for some reason you now find a cycle is much better than you had originally thought?

[sidoze]

Time for the Arrau cycle old boy

[Iago]

Freire played Beethoven.

Beethoven LOST!!

[Todd]

Would it be easier to list all of the cycles which you feel are not first rate?  Also, have you ever found that when you hear a cycle again after a long period of time that your original opinion was too high, or that for some reason you now find a cycle is much better than you had originally thought?

Second question first again: Generally, my initial impressions don't change much.  I may like something a bit more or a bit less than I did before, but I can't recall any case where I hated something then later loved it, or vice versa.


Some of the clunkers:

Anne Øland tops the list (or bottoms it) by a wide margin
Richard Goode
Abdel Rahman El Bacha
Dino Ciani
Anton Kuerti
Georges Pludermacher
Vladimir Ashkenazy
Jean Bernard Pommier

Time for the Arrau cycle old boy

I've had it for a while; there are several reasons it doesn't crack the top ten.  First among them is that I prefer the ten I listed.

[sidoze]

I've had it for a while; there are several reasons it doesn't crack the top ten.  First among them is that I prefer the ten I listed.

Ah okay, I didn't know you had it.

Too bad the Ciani is in such poor sound.

[Todd]

Too bad the Ciani is in such poor sound.

The sound isn't the reason he's in my bottom eight.

[sidoze]

The sound isn't the reason he's in my bottom eight.

Yes I know, but some of us like the performances

[George]

Nelson Freire's recent recordings for Decca have all been excellent, so I'm somewhat disappointed with this disc.  It never catches fire for me.  Yes, Freire displays a technique that ranks him among the best in that regard in these works, but I want more than that.  Not helping matters is a somewhat boomy, cloudy acoustic that hampers detail.  A missed opportunity it seems.

I got this recently too, Todd. The Waldstein did little for me, though I have yet to hear the rest. I'll post my thoughts once I have heard it.

[George]

Why buy only one new LvB sonata disc when you can buy two?  When I snapped up the latest Schiff offering, I also picked up the new Decca recording of Nelson Freire playing four sonatas, including the Mondschein, so I could do a direct comparison between the two pianists.  The Schiff disc was a disappointment, but surely Freire would do better I thought.  He does, sort of, but with caveats.

The disc opens with the Waldstein, and some of my misgivings show up here.  The opening Allegro con brio is taken at blazing speed, and Freire plays with immense flexibility, precision, and dynamic gradations.  He hits all the marks that Richard Goode misses in a similarly fast take.  There's more than enough brio, and one detects either a whiff of nonchalance or a very well crafted imitation thereof.  Richness and texture are both lacking, but it seems a fair trade-off.  The Introduzione is where the first hints of problems arise.  The playing is clear and lucid and even feels a bit impatient – which isn't a bad thing – but it also sounds a bit too detached.  The Rondo opens similarly coolly, though the nuances Freire brings out in the upper registers makes up for that.  The long transitional trill is well done, but the music that is supposed to swell around it seems a bit restrained.  But then, look out: it's back to blazing fast playing.  There is something refreshing about hearing a pianist cruise along so easily and make such a virtuosic meal of the work, but the downside is that it's not as emotionally engaging as I ultimately prefer.

I've often wondered if there is perhaps a tradeoff when something is played with technical brilliance, does it then lose some emotional impact? I see this is often true (like with Freire, Pollini, etc.), but then there's Richter...is he the exception?

Just thinking aloud. 

[sidoze]

I've often wondered if there is perhaps a tradeoff when something is played with technical brilliance, does it then lose some emotional impact? I see this is often true (like with Freire, Pollini, etc.), but then there's Richter...is he the exception?

No I don't think so. You could name nearly all the Russian piano school as technically brilliant and emotionally powerful.

[Bunny]

Second question first again: Generally, my initial impressions don't change much.  I may like something a bit more or a bit less than I did before, but I can't recall any case where I hated something then later loved it, or vice versa.


Some of the clunkers:

Anne Øland tops the list (or bottoms it) by a wide margin
Richard Goode
Abdel Rahman El Bacha
Dino Ciani
Anton Kuerti
Georges Pludermacher
Vladimir Ashkenazy
Jean Bernard Pommier




I've had it for a while; there are several reasons it doesn't crack the top ten.  First among them is that I prefer the ten I listed.

Again, thanks for taking the time to think about this.

I'm curious about these things for two reasons: First, I've always been interested in the critical (analytical) process, especially when it comes to connoisseurship (what a mouthful that word is  ); and second: I'm always wondering how to rate old favorites when something newer really blows them out of the water.  There have been too many times when either my taste has shifted or my knowledge has increased so that something I rated highly has slipped in my esteem because a newer recording is "better."  Again, it's easier for me to identify things which fall short.  The Arrau, which was one of the first cycles I ever owned comes to mind.  Not that it's not worthy, but it no longer "floats my boat" the way it used to.

One more question (and I suppose this will be the hardest one): Have you ever thought of compiling a list of the best recording of each sonata?  That's something I know I would love to see. Please.

[Todd]

Have you ever thought of compiling a list of the best recording of each sonata?  That's something I know I would love to see. Please.

Yes, I've thought of it, and done it, though not recently.  Can't happen today, but maybe in the future.

[George]

One more question (and I suppose this will be the hardest one): Have you ever thought of compiling a list of the best recording of each sonata?  That's something I know I would love to see. Please.

I realize that you asked Todd this question, but if you'd like another take, I can email you my list. I haven't heard a number of things that I have bought recently, but I could send you what I have if you PM your email. I have it as a Word Document. 

[Bunny]

Yes, I've thought of it, and done it, though not recently.  Can't happen today, but maybe in the future.

Thank you again.  I'll look forward to seeing that one day.

I've often wondered if there is perhaps a tradeoff when something is played with technical brilliance, does it then lose some emotional impact? I see this is often true (like with Freire, Pollini, etc.), but then there's Richter...is he the exception?

Just thinking aloud. 

This question is always in my mind when I listen to something recorded by Earl Wild whose technique was so astounding when he was younger, and still is amazing considering his age.  When I was very young, a musician friend of my dad's termed a famous musician (and I don't really remember whom they were discussing) a "virtuoso hack."  That term has stuck in my mind, especially when I listen to some of Lang Lang's recordings.  Clearly there are many who have technique to burn but much less insight into the music. Looking through BMG music yesterday I came across this review of Evgeny Kissin's Chopin:The Verbier Recital:

[...]But while Kissin's stature as a great pianist is assured, he has always had his critics. At first, they complained of his facile technique and willful interpretations. Later, some disparaged what they called his too bland interpretations, while others disdained what they called his too histrionic interpretations. Wherever the truth may be between those charges, in this 2004 live recital of Chopin's Impromptus and four Polonaises, Kissin's technique is stupendous. Everything from the lightest leggerio passagework in the Fantaisie-Impromptu to the heaviest fortissimo sonorities of the A Flat Major Polonaise sounds easy for him. But as for Kissin's interpretations, while the debate may rage over whether he's too bland or merely reserved, too histrionic or merely dramatic, it's certain he's no longer sparkling or sprightly. In piece after piece here, Kissin's tempos are on the slow side, his rhythms on the weighty side, his sonorities on the heavy side, and his melodies way over on the over-interpreted side. Whether this is a good or bad thing is up to the individual listener, but it does leave open the question of how slow and heavy Kissin might get by the time he reaches his forties.

(Yes BMG inserted a scathing review with a recording they are trying to sell! No wonder it showed up as a "free" selection.  )

Clearly, another example of technique without insight.  It's rare to have such ease and facility playing, it's rarer still to have great musical insight.  The rarest is the artist who combines that technical prowess with the intelligence to really know the nature of the music he or she is playing.  That's why we keep buying Richter and Serkin and Haskil and Fischer to name a few.