The Romantics in Period Performances

[milk]

I was listening to some Chopin  Op 48/1 recordings today. There are some really special ones on a modern instrument. Listen to how Sofronitsky played it in 1949 for example -- the way he disrupts the singing line with a threatening rumble in the bass, right from the start. Not a moment of solace in this interpretation. And listen to Moravec -- the tragedy when his disarmingly innocent plea in the central section is crushed, destroyed, annihilated by a machine gun's rapid rattle.

But the HIP recordings I have are all bland by comparison -- I have Boegner and Van Oort. As far as I can hear these guys have zilch to say with the music -- they just type it out. And, more importantly maybe,  you gain zilch by the sonorities of the old  instrument.  You might prefer the sound of their old pianos to Sofronitsky's or Moravec's. If so, fair enough. But the tonal qualities of their pianos don't and anything to the poetry, the meaning,  of the music. It's just a different tone.

The only HIP Chopin recording I have heard where I remember thinking "wow, this is something new and special; this is something where the piano is making a real imprtant difference to the meaning of the music" is Lubimov's Berceuse.

Maybe I've missed something though.

I have a recording of this piece by Alain Planès on a Pleyel. I can't say anything about it (except that I enjoy it).

[Mandryka]

Perhaps the player's affinities really lie elsewhere.  I have very little in the way of mid 19th century HIP--some chamber music and one CD of orchestral Liszt that includes Totentanz with a period appropriate Erard.  The differences from modern instruments to me are not important enough to justify them as anything except a change of pace.

OTOH, fortepiano performances of works before, say, 1825,  do  have a substantial impact.    I was listening to  some of van Oort's Mozart set last night--impressed so much that  I abandoned my earlier listening plans for the evening and played three CDs straight through; would have played a fourth one except it was getting to be too late.   Done so well it made me wonder if I even want to hear these works on a modern piano.

I think 1825 or thereabouts is a good cut off point.  By the mid 19th century  the large differences between period and modern keyboards evident in Mozart recordings are long gone.

[milk]

I think 1825 or thereabouts is a good cut off point.  By the mid 19th century  the large differences between period and modern keyboards evident in Mozart recordings are long gone.

I enjoy my romantic HIP recordings and, to my ears, the instruments have a very different sound. I do agree that the difference between the modern piano and Mozart's Walter is more pronounced than the difference between a modern piano and a turn-of-the-century Erard. Robert Levin makes a good case for playing Mozart on the fortepiano:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r-DEhpPgtSY&playnext=1&list=PLC4FAC84BBF03605B

However, I also don't think anyone will mistake the Streicher (I think it is?) Arthur Schoonderwoerd plays on his recording of the Beethoven concertos for a modern piano. It's quite different.

Even if the difference is less pronounced on mid to late-century pianos, it exists. I'm not musically educated enough to say anything except that I enjoy the sounds
made by these instruments - with their absence of iron frames and their leather hammers.

I like this video as it explains something about romantic-period pianos.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E714khu3MPc

I enjoy these instruments and I love the Staier Schumann recording, although I admit that the Kinderscenen tracks are not my favorite tracks on it.
I'm just not as involved in Chopin's music as I am in Schumann's but I do like the Alain Planès recording. I'm really ignorant about music and about the famous recordings mentioned so I'll leave it to others to say whether modern-instrument recordings are simply better. Perhaps they are. 

[milk]

This is a little off topic from the Romantics but I was just musing on another thread about how much I love Patrick Cohen's Satie recording. He plays on a pre-period piano - I think it's an 1855 Erard. The piano really sounds great (IMO) and both it and the performance convince.   

[kishnevi]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r-DEhpPgtSY&playnext=1&list=PLC4FAC84BBF03605B

However, I also don't think anyone will mistake the Streicher (I think it is?) Arthur Schoonderwoerd plays on his recording of the Beethoven concertos for a modern piano. It's quite different.

I have Tan's recording of the Beethoven concertos.  Yes, it does make a difference.  Which is why I  suggested 1825 as a cut-off point.

But, while the differences between a fortepiano and  a modern piano are fairly obvious, the differences between a piano of Liszt's era and a modern piano are for me too subtle to make an impact.     Liszt played on a piano of 1850 simply sounds like he's being played on an old piano, and nothing more. 

[Mandryka]

Indeed there's no dispute for Beethoven.

Let me post again Lubimov's berceuse to see whether people agree with me that the piano is here making quite a difference to the feel of the music. An Erard

http://www.goear.com/files/external.swf?file=8afd576

[milk]

I have Tan's recording of the Beethoven concertos.  Yes, it does make a difference.  Which is why I  suggested 1825 as a cut-off point.

But, while the differences between a fortepiano and  a modern piano are fairly obvious, the differences between a piano of Liszt's era and a modern piano are for me too subtle to make an impact.     Liszt played on a piano of 1850 simply sounds like he's being played on an old piano, and nothing more.

I have lots of recordings past the cut-off. The difference is subtler but, for me, the difference does make an impact in some cases. I'm not sure the distinction we're making here. They do sound like old pianos because that's what they are. It's true that sometimes it's just a novelty perhaps. But not in all cases. The 1897 Erard Immerseel uses on his Debussy recording may impact his performance more than the sound of the instrument. I have Daniel Grimwood's Liszt recording on a 1851 Erard. I'm not sure I could pick these pianos out of an audio line-up. The difference is nuanced. However, the 1835 Conrad Graf used on the new Atlantis Ensemble recording of Schumann's Quartets (and many of their other recordings) is quite different - and effectively so. Of course the gut strings and style of performances are also quite different but this is another area of discussion. The differences are subtler but, I would say for me, still effective sometimes. I do sometimes ask myself why I stick with some these later HIP recordings. Well, there's a story about Woody Allen bumping into two lamps within the span of a few minutes. His remark: "I'm going to bump into every lamp is see today just for symmetry."

     

[Luke]

I have lots of recordings past the cut-off. The difference is subtler but, for me, the difference does make an impact in some cases. I'm not sure the distinction we're making here. They do sound like old pianos because that's what they are. It's true that sometimes it's just a novelty perhaps. But not in all cases. The 1897 Erard Immerseel uses on his Debussy recording may impact his performance more than the sound of the instrument. I have Daniel Grimwood's Liszt recording on a 1851 Erard. I'm not sure I could pick these pianos out of an audio line-up. The difference is nuanced. However, the 1835 Conrad Graf used on the new Atlantis Ensemble recording of Schumann's Quartets (and many of their other recordings) is quite different - and effectively so. Of course the gut strings and style of performances are also quite different but this is another area of discussion. The differences are subtler but, I would say for me, still effective sometimes. I do sometimes ask myself why I stick with some these later HIP recordings. Well, there's a story about Woody Allen bumping into two lamps within the span of a few minutes. His remark: "I'm going to bump into every lamp is see today just for symmetry."

   

That Grimwood recording of the Liszt Annees de Pelerinage is one I keep meaning to recommend on this thread. I think it is spectacular - Grimwood's playing is very ful of verve and fire and poetry. But the sound of the instrument makes the most enormous difference, for me. The works stand revealed as something completly different; the registral differentiation which the instrument makes possible introduces varieties of light and shade and colour which the music needs very much (in the first book above all, and that is where this recording scores most highly IMO). Listening to this set in the last week I kept thnking - perhaps Liszt was more adventurous, more extreme, more ambitious elsewhere, both before and after this, but nevertheless I think these works are the most polished, complete, potential-fulfilling thing he ever did; not a moment of slack, not a moment structurally misjudged or without poetic import. Maybe that is so - but maybe the revelatory impact of the instrument on the music also has something to do with this reaction of mine!

[asin]B001O3MLN6[/asin]

The Amzon UK reviews are bang on the money, particularly the third one, which is a perceptive and accurate piece of writing; might as well copy and paste them here:

9 of 10 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars Exquisite, majestic and beguiling!, 19 April 2009
By Lexicon (UK) - See all my reviewsThis review is from: Liszt: Annees de pelerinage (Audio CD)

Grimwood's rendition of Liszt's works impresses beyond the normal expectations one has. Here, you won't find brashness or any sort of the normal contrived conceit that pianists generally exhibit. This is a player of immense technical, musical, artistic and intellectual genius: his choice of instrument in the Erard a testament to this. Although this pianist packs an almighty punch in terms of power-playing, with its chandelier-like treble register, Grimwood plays the more watery, rapid passage with genuine delicacy and clarity that very few pianists could manage on an instrument of this type.

Throughout the CD, one is also struck by a rare commodity that Grimwood displays throughout his entire repertoire: startling lyricism. His ability to find the voicings of hidden melodies and rhythms is eye-opening - a knack that only musicians with a keen ear and deeper instinct for such complexities are capable of pulling off. One is reminded of some of Argerich's abilities here: passages of her rendition of Rachmaninoff's 3rd Piano Concerto seem to be completely different pieces of music when one hears them for the first time. What melodies and opportunities for rhythmic excitement other pianists miss, she captured with a musical tenacity and verve. Grimwood too possesses that power, and his Liszt recordings harken towards a musician and pianist that has Greatness at his fingertips and a deepening respect and renown from his peers and mentors alike.


2 of 2 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars In pellegrinaggio con Liszt, 16 Sep 2010
By pablot68 (Italy) - See all my reviewsThis review is from: Liszt: Annees de pelerinage (Audio CD)

L'ascoltatore si mette idealmente in viaggio alla volta di luoghi reali e letterari, seguendo l'ispirazione romantica di Franz Liszt. La formidabile tecnica e l'eccezionale spessore di Daniel Grimwood sono esaltati dal pianoforte Erard, uno splendido strumento del 1851: suoni smussati, caldi, evocativi, di grande impatto.


3 of 4 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars Liszt From a Liszt Epoch Piano, 23 Oct 2009
By Bing-Alguin - See all my reviewsThis review is from: Liszt: Annees de pelerinage (Audio CD)

It has been a glorious year or so for all Lisztians, or Lisztomaniacs, if you prefer that term. Brilliant Classics 10 CD box "Great Liszt Interpreters Play Liszt" was such an exuberant revelation, as regards old, established players like Cziffra, Berman and Earl Wild as well as young, still promising pianists like Klára Würtz and Artur Pizarro.
An essential contribution comes from SFZ Music. On two CDs, Daniel Grimwood plays the whole suites of "Années de Pélerinage", both the First Year from Switzerland and the Second and Third years from Italy, those remarkable travel music pieces Liszt composed during his journeys in these countries. Grimwood plays them excellently and in a very personal way, revealing him as an important pianist and a Liszt expert with a deep feeling for the special qualities of Liszt's music. Maybe he is mentally most affiliated with the great Swiss numbers: "Chapelle de Guillaume Tell", "Au Lac de Wallenstadt", "Au Bord d'une Source" and that long, sweeping devotion to Romantic nature and rêverie, "Vallée d'Obermann". But he has a strong creative and emotional approach also to some of the Italian impressions, in particular the brilliant, glittering and fountain-imitating "Les Jeux d'Eaux à la Villa d'Este" and most of all "Aprés une lecture de Dante", one of Liszt's greatest creations, full of agitation, excitement and diabolic atmosphere in the most phantasmagorical way of High Romanticism. Whereas I am less convinced by the interpretation of the musical settings of three Petrarca sonnets, which are slightly under-characterized.
Noteworthy is Grimwood's way of playing these travel pieces without a distinct pause between them, as if they were a rolling, continuous report from a journey. It makes a surprising and elucidatory effect, like a perpetual wandering through a Romantic landscape, an external as well as an internal one.
But still more remarkable is the piano played by Daniel Grimwood. It is an Érard piano, and the Érard pianos were Liszt's own favourite instruments. In fact, he often had three of them on the podium in order to be able to change piano after the character of the music piece he was going to play. So this is the way Liszt's own piano playing must have sounded! And how does it sound? There is nothing of these hard, bombastic, almost boisterous and over-resounding tone cascades, so often dominant in traditional Liszt playing of our days. No thunderstorms, no desperately hasty runs along the keyboard... The tone is gentle and intimate, mellow, creating a more indoor cosiness, mildly reverberant and utmost impressive. This is soft Liszt!!! And it is delightful and attractive to listen to, musically pleasing in quite another way than the more traditional playing on the pianos of our age.
So these CDs give your Liszt listening a new and very pleasurable feeling. It maybe will change your view of Liszt's music. As Daniel Grimwood points out in his informative annotations, Liszt is still "subject of controversy, prejudice and misunderstanding". Perhaps it is due to our conventional playing of his music? Nobody can have strong objections when hearing Liszt from an Érard piano, I suppose. This is a great experience of great music.
So listen to these records and be still more impressed by the genius of Liszt, or, if you don't appreciate his music, take a chance to change your mind! And please, SFZ Music and Daniel Grimwood, more Liszt! More Liszt on an Érard piano, please!

[milk]

I've enjoyed the Grimwood recording but perhaps I need to delve deeper into it. I also enjoy these cello pieces - although they are quite dark. Here Immerseel plays two Erads: one from 1886 and a baby grand from 1897.

[milk]

Liv Glaser & Ernst Simon Glaser perform Schumann's cello and piano pieces. Magnificent!

[Que]

What a coincidence: the HIP-debate heated up and just now the significance of HIP for Romantic repertoire is being discussed.

And along comes this recording!



The list of performers look pretty good to me - my curiosity is more than piqued.

Q

[kishnevi]

What a coincidence: the HIP-debate heated up and just now the significance of HIP for Romantic repertoire is being discussed.

And along comes this recording!



The list of performers look pretty good to me - my curiosity is more than piqued.

Q

Hurwitz gave it a very firm thumbs down, if that's any help to you.
http://www.classicstoday.com/review.asp?ReviewNum=13480

[Antoine Marchand]

Hurwitz gave it a very firm thumbs down, if that's any help to you.
http://www.classicstoday.com/review.asp?ReviewNum=13480

Some people would consider his thumbs down as a sign of distinction.  I have not read his review, but I would bet the word "vibrato" appears there. Am I right? 

[kishnevi]

Some people would consider his thumbs down as a sign of distinction.  I have not read his review, but I would bet the word "vibrato" appears there. Am I right? 

too bad this isn't Vegas.  You would win handsomely.

Most notable is the wretched string timbre, hideously ugly in the two slow movements, and once again completely unidiomatic in its lack of a warm, vocal, cantabile style. There is simply no excuse for it. It's not just a question of vibrato either--string players, particularly in ensemble, can sound lovely with very limited vibrato. These performers simply don't. It's a choice, and a bad one

[Que]

Hurwitz gave it a very firm thumbs down, if that's any help to you.
http://www.classicstoday.com/review.asp?ReviewNum=13480

Well, the samples I've listened to in the mean time sounded gourgeous, very pretty indeed. If they are anything to go by third recording will be an eyeopener.

Hurwitz is an idiot. He claims the music is written for piano because the publication of Beethoven's third piano concerto says "pianoforte".

Wait a minute - these pieces by Mendelssohn were published in 1822 and 1823. Bezuidenhout plays a copy after a Conrad Graf from 1824. What is suposed to be wrong in that picture?

If I'm correct the terms "fortepiano" and "pianoforte" were in those days used interchangeably. Of course Hurwitz has a response to that, which is fully incomprehensible: Now, even if some folks still did use the term "fortepiano" in the 1820s (I wonder who?), it has a clear 21st century association with early music. A "clear 21st century association"? 

The rest of this "review" is basically: "I don't like the way this sound" What else is new....? 

I think Hurwitz should stop reviewing period performances - he does obviously not know what he is talking about an hence the informational value is absolutely ZERO.

Q

[DavidW]

When Hurwitz gives a PI recording a thumbs down it usually means that I should listen to it!

Jeff, didn't you know that Hurwitz is an idiot?  It's so well known that posting or referring to one of his reviews is a step away from trolling Newman style.

[DavidRoss]

Hurwitz gave it a very firm thumbs down, if that's any help to you.
http://www.classicstoday.com/review.asp?ReviewNum=13480

Since the Hurwitzer hates HIPPI music--the more so the better it's played--its damn near a sure thing that this recording is well worth a listen.

I see many others have noticed the same thing.

BTW, he does adjust his views to accommodate a general consensus when it develops.  I well remember him trashing Rachel Podger's Bach S&Ps...but recently noticed that after her lovely recordings were generally recognized as outstanding, he has given her recent recording of Bach concertos a "10/10" review.  What a pompous dork.  Sigh.

[Antoine Marchand]

Picked up out of the bargain bin yesterday:



Finally - a recording of Schubert's Arpeggione Sonata on arpeggione.

I look forward to your report, Q. I own one version played on arpeggione (Deletaille/Badura-Skoda, Fuga Libera), but your disc looks enticing. 

[Gurn Blanston]

I look forward to your report, Q. I own one version played on arpeggione (Deletaille/Badura-Skoda, Fuga Libera), but your disc looks enticing. 

I only have 2 myself, the one you mention and Klaus Storck (Arpeggione) & Alfons Kontarsky (Hammerflügel)  along with Hans-Martin Linde (Traversflöte) & Kontarsky playing the D 802 Trockne Blumen Variations. I really do like the sound of the real deal
Arpeggione, it doesn't sound like a cello! 

I would be interested to hear back about Q's also. Recordings are still thin on the ground.

[Antoine Marchand]

I only have 2 myself, the one you mention and Klaus Storck (Arpeggione) & Alfons Kontarsky (Hammerflügel)  along with Hans-Martin Linde (Traversflöte) & Kontarsky playing the D 802 Trockne Blumen Variations.

This really looks intriguing: Alfons Kontarsky playing a pianoforte and without his brother Aloys! I don't know Storck, but Linde has faultless HIP credentials.