Chopin Nocturnes

[Henk]

Two new sets on the market:





I listened to samples of Chaplin. I don't like, it lacks depth and is quite monotone, although it has that typical atmosphere that suites the Nocturnes. It sound to me a bit of a bad copy of Arrau's version.

The recording by Perez is imo great. It's a modern interpretation, very elegant and has depth. I prefer it even above Arrau. I prefer more light interpretations, without losing depth.

Henk

[Verena]

The recording by Perez is imo great. It's a modern interpretation, very elegant and has depth. I prefer it even above Arrau. I prefer more light interpretations, without losing depth.

Good to hear, have to investigate. Thanks.

[Antoine Marchand]

Two new sets on the market:



I listened to samples of Chaplin. I don't like, it lacks depth and is quite monotone, although it has that typical atmosphere that suites the Nocturnes. It sound to me a bit of a bad copy of Arrau's version.

The recording by Perez is imo great. It's a modern interpretation, very elegant and has depth. I prefer it even above Arrau. I prefer more light interpretations, without losing depth.

Henk

Hi, Henk. I don't know that new version by Luis Fernando Pérez (incomplete, apparently), but some weeks ago I bought and listened to François Chaplin, almost by chance because I was searching his Debussy set, which has been highly praised in the past.

IMO his Chopin is a highly rewarding interpretation, quite on the slow side, as you have observed. My only quibble about it is the closely miked recorded sound and some excessive basses on the Yamaha piano used there; but I liked Chaplin's general conception/sensibility and the order in which the Nocturnes are presented.

Anyway, I prefer not to compare his version with Arrau, my absolute favorite in the Nocturnes.

Here a video on YouTube for the people interested in Chaplin:

http://www.youtube.com/v/pLcgQBIDvII

[Henk]

EDIT

Hi, Henk. I don't know that new version by Luis Fernando Pérez (incomplete, apparently), but some weeks ago I bought and listened to François Chaplin, almost by chance because I was searching his Debussy set, which has been highly praised in the past.

IMO his Chopin is a highly rewarding interpretation, quite on the slow side, as you have observed. My only quibble about it is the closely miked recorded sound and some excessive basses on the Yamaha piano used there; but I liked Chaplin's general conception/sensibility and the order in which the Nocturnes are presented.

Anyway, I would prefer don't compare his version with Arrau, my absolute favorite in the Nocturnes.

Here a video on YouTube for the people interested in Chaplin:

http://www.youtube.com/v/pLcgQBIDvII

Antoine, I checked the video. I'm still not impressed. It lacks depth for me, despite (not because of) the slowness. Maybe just a matter of taste. Also I don't prefer slow performances, because it quickly sounds too serious to me.

The comparison with Arrau can not be made, I agree. But why playing so slow and serious, that doesn't serve the music. It seems to me that performers who do so, think that the best interpretation can only be the most serious interpretation. To say it blandly: Chaplin wants to overpower other versions of the Nocturnes. But with Chaplin's version the Nocturnes become a monotone mass of music.

The recording by Perez is Vol. I.

Henk

[Antoine Marchand]

Maybe just a matter of taste.

Of course! As the vast majority of our discussions on this board. 

[Herman]

EDIT

Antoine, I checked the video. I'm still not impressed. It lacks depth for me, despite (not because of) the slowness. Maybe just a matter of taste. Also I don't prefer slow performances, because it quickly sounds too serious to me.

Hello? Why do you call this "slow"? It isn't slow at all, by any standards I know. Certainly Arrau would be slow in comparison.

One could say that Chaplin's toucher (or whatever) isn't particularly subtle, although the hall acoustics and the recording device may play a part in this, but as far as tempo is concerned it is positively on the nimble side.

[Holden]

Hello? Why do you call this "slow"? It isn't slow at all, by any standards I know. Certainly Arrau would be slow in comparison.

One could say that Chaplin's toucher (or whatever) isn't particularly subtle, although the hall acoustics and the recording device may play a part in this, but as far as tempo is concerned it is positively on the nimble side.

You are being generous Herman. There is a natural flow that all great Chopin interpreters achieve when playing this composer. I don't hear or feel the flow from Chaplin, It's extremely ordinary playing IMO.

[Antoine Marchand]

You are being generous Herman. There is a natural flow that all great Chopin interpreters achieve when playing this composer. I don't hear or feel the flow from Chaplin, It's extremely ordinary playing IMO.

I disagree with you, but I am probably "biased" by the repeated listen of the complete set. Anyway, here a very favorable review on Fanfare:

CHOPIN Nocturnes • François Chaplin (pn) • ZIG-ZAG 100203.2 (2 CDs: 110:58)

François Chaplin is a pianist who is new to me, although he has been recording for more than a decade. He is a professor at the Conservatoire de Rayonnement Régional in Versailles. His most prominent teacher was the estimable Jean-Claude Pennetier. Chaplin won prizes in two prominent piano competitions, but there has been no breakthrough event along his path leading to a major career. Rather, he is one of those pianists who has slowly built up esteem, especially through recordings. One such project was the complete piano music of Debussy, which seems like superb preparation for tackling Chopin's nocturnes, so similar are their sonic orbits. On the basis of this Chopin album, I would say that Chaplin has reached an artistic peak.

Chaplin possesses a rich, full tone, which he deploys with a great deal of subtlety. On the surface, his readings of the nocturnes remind me of Claudio Arrau's in their tonal sumptuousness. This aspect of the recording is enhanced by the use of a beautiful Yamaha piano, spaciously recorded in a Paris church. The Yamaha produces a gorgeous tonal blend throughout its frequency range, captured truthfully by the recorded sound. Chaplin's feeling for the architecture of the nocturnes is profound. In the ternary pieces, one never has the sense that any section is out of proportion to the others. Here is highly sophisticated playing, yet the overall interpretive effect is to produce readings that are central in the works' performance traditions. Nothing exotic happens, yet to paraphrase Charles Rosen, Chaplin accomplishes everything while appearing not to do anything remarkable at all.

Chaplin has decided not to play the nocturnes in their published order. He keeps sets of the nocturnes together by opus number, but otherwise he arranges them, in his words, "to emphasize the diversity and modernity of the nocturnes." I find his ordering highly successful. Chaplin starts with op. 48/1, choosing a slow and stately tempo for the beginning with a pronounced bass. The B section has suitable grandeur. In op. 15/1, Chaplin's pedaling gives the A section an angelic quality. For op. 15/3, he employs subtle hesitations in his phrasing of the opening melody, giving it the rhythmic feel of a mazurka. Op. 27/2 receives a ravishing, inward performance. The darkness of the three posthumous nocturnes is mirrored in Chaplin's tonal shadings. Op. 32/2, as befits a selection from Les Sylphides, comes off as an ethereal yet passionate dance.

Op. 55/2 has a harp-like accompaniment in the left hand, accentuated tonally by a judicious use of pedal. Op. 37/1 has an unusually Polish aura, especially in the handling of its ornamentation. The delicacy in the performance of op. 9/1 reminds me of Guiomar Novaes's interpretation. The program ends with op. 62, presumably Chopin's last nocturnes. Here, in Chaplin's words, "the accommodation of the bel canto spirit to the keyboard reaches a fabulous peak." Indeed, op. 62/1 unfolds in large part like a long aria. Op. 62/2 has an almost orchestral variety of color.

I found this recording improved in power and nuance on each repeated hearing. With sets of the nocturnes available from such great figures as Rubinstein and Arrau, it may seem presumptuous to recommend a set by someone with the comparatively low profile of François Chaplin. Yet I think I honestly can say that I rarely have enjoyed these pieces so much, while the sound engineering is something to rejoice in. Clearly we need to hear more from François Chaplin, so compelling is his artistry.

FANFARE: Dave Saemann

[SonicMan46]

Michele Boegner's performances on an 1836 Pleyel piano is apparently being offered now as a 2-CD 'discount' package by Calliope (found the image below of their website) - not sure about the pricing or the availability at the moment; I've listened to a number of audio snippets and several complete tracks - a favorite of Brian who brought my attention to this offering a while back.

So, if anyone knows of a seller or source then please respond - Calliope does not seem to offer a purchase option on their website HERE - 

[George]

Hi Dave!

According to French amazon, looks like that set was released 5 years ago, but currently unavailable:

http://www.amazon.fr/Int%C3%A9grale-Nocturnes-Fr%C3%A9d%C3%A9ric-Mich%C3%A8le-Boegner/dp/B0007OQBYI/ref=sr_1_5?ie=UTF8&s=music&qid=1283192478&sr=8-5

No listing at MDT. 

[SonicMan46]

Hi Dave!

According to French amazon, looks like that set was released 5 years ago, but currently unavailable:

http://www.amazon.fr/Int%C3%A9grale-Nocturnes-Fr%C3%A9d%C3%A9ric-Mich%C3%A8le-Boegner/dp/B0007OQBYI/ref=sr_1_5?ie=UTF8&s=music&qid=1283192478&sr=8-5

No listing at MDT. 

Hello George - thanks for the information above; suspect the set is just OOP; I checked a half dozen sites this morning, both in the USA & across the pond - just found the older release for $68 on Amazon USA.

Well, will keep on my 'wish list' - also sent Calliope an e-mail about availability but have no idea yet if I'll get a response - Dave 

[Verena]

Two new sets on the market:





I listened to samples of Chaplin. I don't like, it lacks depth and is quite monotone, although it has that typical atmosphere that suites the Nocturnes. It sound to me a bit of a bad copy of Arrau's version.

The recording by Perez is imo great. It's a modern interpretation, very elegant and has depth. I prefer it even above Arrau. I prefer more light interpretations, without losing depth.

Henk

Just downloaded the Perez from emusic - beautiful!!

[SonicMan46]

Just left a post in the 'listening thread' - enthralled w/ the recording below - could not find the original offerings from Calliope for a decent price; the piano sound is different from a modern grand - apparently the key action was dependent on complete release of the key to repeat a note, plus the 'liner notes' said that Chopin felt that the pedal response was quite sensitive (although he seem to prefer the Pleyel pianos when in 'good form' - from the liner notes which were also scanned in this offering).  Dave 

Chopin - Nocturnes played by Michele Boegner on an original 1836 Pleyel piano restored by Anthony Sidey of Paris - an applauded recommendation from Brian - I've been trying to purchase the original CDs w/o success, so was able (w/ the help of one of my radiology residents) to obtain a MP3 disc (320 kbps) of these recordings - such a nice contrast to the versions I own on 'modern' piano - need to do some comparisons; the sound production is a little 'noisy' probably due in part to the piano (pedal, soundboard, etc.) and possibly the engineering - not sure 'where' these were recorded but there is a low rumbling sound on the tracks - this is a privately owned piano, so the location may not have been ideal (liner notes were available but of little help) - 

[Tapio Dimitriyevich Shostakovich]

I love this one, it's rather dark sounding (I'm not a piano expert, so my question is, is it because he uses the pedals more? Or is it the piano?) which goes pretty well with the nocturnes - but HE IS HUMMING pretty often, which is disturbing.
Except Chopin Nocturnes, I'm not knowing anything else in the piano genre btw.

[Lisztianwagner]

Chopin's Nocturnes are certainly among the most beautiful piano pieces I've ever heard; extremetely elegant, refined music which at the same time is so passionate and intense, with a poetical touch of melancholy. My favourite set is the Ashkenazy; after that, the Rubinstein, the Barenboim and the Pollini. Besides showing a wonderful technique and an excellent virtuosity, Ashkenazy really seems to be able to capture the deep mood of these works, the atmosphere he creates is absolutely thrilling.

[SonicMan46]

BOY! A tread revived after 2 years w/ the last post left by me on a fortepiano recording that received NO responses? 

BUT, my current modern versions are w/ Moravec & Ohlsson (in a complete box) - have always enjoyed the Moravec - really like these Chopin compositions; however, for those who want some historic perspective, please explore John Field's Nocturnes which likely influenced Chopin's composing in this genre -

 

[johndoe21ro]

I urge you not to make any bold statements before you listen to Nelson Freire's Nocturnes. Simply amazing...

[Holden]

I was listening to the Nocturnes from this on Spotify and was quite impressed with the approach and the playing. As per my original post in this thread, I don't like Nocturne recordings that put things into the music that aren't there. I can usually tell how a pianist is going to play the Nocturnes from the first two bars of the music.

Stefan Askenase adopts a simple unfussy approach that gets to the essence of the music. While Moravec and Rubinstein rate as tops for me this goes slightly below them alongside Ashkenazy and is well worth listening to.

[snyprrr]

I urge you not to make any bold statements before you listen to Nelson Freire's Nocturnes. Simply amazing...

Any seconds on this? i liked his Liszt recital.

[Todd]

Any seconds on this? i liked his Liszt recital.

I wanted to like it as much as his Liszt disc, if that counts.