Friedrich Gulda Plays Beethoven, Take 3

[Todd]

When I bought the Andante set dedicated to Friedrich Gulda several years ago, I noticed that the liner notes mentioned that Gulda had recorded three complete LvB sonata cycles.  Well, I had the Decca and Amadeo cycles, and the idea of a third cycle was rather exciting, but of course it was nowhere to be found.  Now it is!  Orfeo has reissued what is Gulda's first complete cycle and Op 126 Bagatelles, recorded in 1953-1954 for RAVAG, a Viennese radio station, along with the Eroica and Diabelli Variations, recorded in 1957 for ORF.  (It's worth remembering that some of these recordings are not the first LvB sonata recordings Gulda made, the Decca cycle having started in 1950.)

After devouring the cycle, I must say that it basically sounds like a test run for the Amadeo cycle.  It displays many of the same traits: generally fast tempi (including an Op 106 clocking in at around 37 minutes), an unerring and snappy rhythmic sense, almost devout seriousness with appropriate hints of levity thrown in, clear articulation, a broad dynamic range, and an overall command of the pieces matched by few.  That written, it is not as good as the Amadeo cycle.  Gulda seems to be working out ideas he mastered in the 1960s.  On the plus side, the set is more consistent and generally better than the Decca cycle.

Not too surprisingly, Gulda is at his best in the more energetic sonatas.  There are no real weaknesses in the early sonatas, and some – Op 2/3, Op 10/1, Op 22 – are superb.  The Op 27 sonatas are not quite as good, but the Pastorale and Op 31 sonatas are all excellent.  The big middle sonatas are more about speed and drive than anything else, but still the opening of the Waldstein is thrilling in parts, and the opening movement of Op 54 is satisfyingly zippy.  The later sonatas are probably the weakest of the set, with the Hammerklavier a bit sloppy and the last three a bit shallow.  Still, there's more than enough there to hold this listener's interest.  I do wish that Gulda would have played some of the key repeats he omits, most notably in the finale of Op 57 (which he does in other recordings) and 10/2.  That's a minor quibble.  To the other works, they are stylistically similar of course, with the Eroica Variations faring best.  The Diabellis are quick, quick, quick and a bit monochrome, but the playing is good enough for me to want to get the Amadeo recording of that work to see if there's a similar qualitative improvement.

Sound is about what one would expect, with some spurious noise here and there in the sonatas, a bit of distortion, some dynamic limits, and so on.  The 1957 recordings, not too surprisingly, sound a bit better.  The performances do seem to be real performances in some cases; there is a live in the studio feel.  There are some noticeable slips, starting in the finale of 2/3, and as mentioned before Op 106 is a bit sloppy, but the energy level benefits.

Overall this is a good set and I'm glad I got it.  It's not as good as the Amadeo set, but it is better than the Decca set, and it's above average overall.  That written, I think this is probably for collectors like me who can't have enough Beethoven, or for Gulda aficionados.

[mjwal]

The Amadeo set will do me fine - what a great bargain! When I listen to Beethoven sonatas, I most often pick the Schnabel, Gulda, plus (what there is of)  Richter and Hungerford off my shelf. - Is there an Amadeo version of the Diabelli Var.? I have a 1970 recording on Harmonia Mundi France - is that the same? It is very much in the same style (he takes 44'25, more or less the same as Judina, only Lefébure at 31'17 is much faster of those recordings I have).

[Todd]

Is there an Amadeo version of the Diabelli Var.? I have a 1970 recording on Harmonia Mundi France - is that the same?

JPC lists an Amadeo recording of the Diabellis, but I do not know if it is the same as the HM release.

[George]

Overall this is a good set and I'm glad I got it.  It's not as good as the Amadeo set, but it is better than the Decca set, and it's above average overall.  That written, I think this is probably for collectors like me who can't have enough Beethoven, or for Gulda aficionados.

Thanks for your review and for saving me some dough.

[val]

I think that Gulda's version of the Sonata no. 11 opus 22 is not one his best interpretations. The first movement is superb, with a perfect articulation, but the second, Adagio is too fast, without a real phrasing. Arrau and Kempff (1956) are much better here.
The final movement, a sort of Rondo, is also too fast, poor in nuances.

Gulda's versions are usually fast, but that doesn't prevent a deep spirituality, and a very personal but touching phrasing in the slow movements. The opus 22 is an exception.

[Todd]

Gulda's versions are usually fast, but that doesn't prevent a deep spirituality, and a very personal but touching phrasing in the slow movements. The opus 22 is an exception.

I think this is the first time I've seen someone write about spirituality in the same paragraph as Op 22.  Anyway, I obviously think Gulda's quick approach works quite well in this work in his Orfeo set.