Blind listening -- Brahms Intermezzo

[Mandryka]

Rules:

1. Listen to the track -- a Brahms Intermezzo, Op 116/6
2. Vote -- 1 is excellent, 5 is Poor
3. Post any comment you feel like as long as it isn't rude about me.
4. You can change your vote, but you can only vote once.
5. The aim is not really to guess the pianist -- the aim is to really get your reactions to the performance. But I'll post the details of the performance in a couple of weeks if anyone's interested.

http://www.goear.com/files/external.swf?file=2c62d1e

[Drasko]

I like it. Impressive dynamic range, very beautiful rounded tone, doesn't harden when it gets loud. I like the way he doesn't overdo the teneramente marking. I'm pretty positive I know who is the pianist, I can PM you the name if you want not to spoil the blind listening for the others.

[Verena]

I liked the playing. I found it not exactly great, but good. But I have to relisten, since I'm not very familiar with this piece anyway.

[Mandryka]

I like it. Impressive dynamic range, very beautiful rounded tone, doesn't harden when it gets loud. I like the way he doesn't overdo the teneramente marking. I'm pretty positive I know who is the pianist, I can PM you the name if you want not to spoil the blind listening for the others.

yes -- PM me with yoour guess.

[Herman]

When I hear this I'm picturing a big Russian pianist with an ungainly hairdo.

Do I like the performance? Well, it's taken from a live recital, and probably not from the start of the recital. So it is a bit of a plunge.

[val]

It was very good. Reminded me the version of Gilels (1983), but, as far as I remember Gilels was faster and with a more natural phrasing. The central part in G is the best moment of this version.

[George]

Rules:

1. Listen to the track -- a Brahms Intermezzo, Op 116/6
2. Vote -- 1 is excellent, 5 is Poor
3. Post any comment you feel like as long as it isn't rude about me.
4. You can change your vote, but you can only vote once.
5. The aim is not really to guess the pianist -- the aim is to really get your reactions to the performance. But I'll post the details of the performance in a couple of weeks if anyone's interested.

1. Check, listened twice. Once yesterday, once now.
2. I can't vote, as I don't have a response one way or another yet.
3. It reminds me of the finale of Barenboim's Op. 111 on DG, where the tempo is so slow that it's hard to hear how the notes connect with one another. Few pianists seem to be able to play very slow and still make sense of the music and this mystery pianist is no exception. FWIW, I usually like the slower interpretations in general, especially slow movements.
4. I'll listen again later and see what comes of it.
5. I have a guess, but I'll wait till you post the answer.

[Herman]

When I hear this I'm picturing a big Russian pianist with an ungainly hairdo.

Do I like the performance? Well, it's taken from a live recital, and probably not from the start of the recital. So it is a bit of a plunge.

Like this:

[George]

Yes, that was my guess as well.

[mc ukrneal]

Hmmm. I have no issues with slow or fast (can live with both if done well). I felt there was no forward development here. He (or she) seems to be relishing the slowness instead of letting the music develop. I also find the stresses to be a bit irritating (though this may be something that is being accentuated as it is live). Still, I wish there was more unity and less 'whacking' of the keys. So unfortunately, not a high rating from me.

EDIT: Fabulously brilliant idea by the way!

[ccar]

Thanks Mandryka. What a very stimulating exercise.

I liked the listening very much.  Probably we are more used to faster readings but if we look at Katchen's  "classic set" he takes even longer (mystery reading 3:53 / Katchen 4:05). But the more interesting is that while being slow not only the natural respiration of the phrasing is always kept but we are led to discover so many wonderful details in the piece – the relaxed tempo and the unusual phrasing and dynamics, even the silences, bring up beautiful colors and expressive details. This turns it into a much more introspective and perhaps more poetical reading than most. And it is also curious to notice the different character and the "separation" of the 3 sections of this piece. In a way this is also very revealing.
       
When I listen to this "mystery" interpreter my memory goes to the few pianists that go into a more introspective and "detailed" approach to these Brahms op.116 pieces – Afanassiev, Horszowski and Grimaud.  Obviously it can't be Horszowski and I usually don't see so much freedom and richness of colors in Grimaud.

I just hope the "mystery" pianist is a young or "unknown" name. It is so unusual to see this kind of courageously "free" interpretation nowadays.             

[mc ukrneal]

Bumping this in case a few more people want to comment before we get the pianist's name.

[Mandryka]

It was Sokolov, from a concert in Rotterdam earlier this year.

Here's a link to the recording:


http://megaupload.com/?d=0UYZ50HG

[Herman]

So... do we get a prize, George and I?