Rachmaninov's Preludes

[Holden]

I've come to Rachmaninov somewhat late in life. Apart from the famous Op3/2 Prelude I couldn't seem to get my head around his music and "Mein Gott!" was some of it hard to play. Sviatoslav Richter changed all that, to me he is the best ever interpreter of SRs (same initials hmmm) piano music including Rachmaninov himself. Since then I've dabbled with his solo, concertante, orchestral and chamber works and even have a copy some of his choral pieces.

But the works I always return to are his piano preludes and also the Etudes. With this in mind and as Richter didn't record the complete 24 I've had to acquire others and up until this point have both the Fiorentino and Ashkenazy. Today I added a third set to that collection that I feel is far better than both of those estimably excellent recordings. This is by Steven Osborne and  is recorded  by Hyperion. In a side by side comparison he just seems to have more to say than either Fiorentino or Ashkenazy. Now I know that there are other sets out there and I believe they include

Ogdon
Lugansky
Lympany
Scherbakov
Anievas

Are there any others you can think of and any that you consider noteworthy.

[Todd]

I'm not a huge Rach fan, though I must say that the recordings by Benno Moiseiwitsch and Zoltan Kocsis I have heard always work for me.  They did not record complete sets of the Preludes, so they may not be what you're looking for.  Just sayin, that's all.


(Edit; changed Kodaly to Kocsis.   )

[Brian]

I'm really very interested by the choice of Osborne, Holden. He seems to me a very poetic, meditative interpreter, sometimes dreamlike, who's at a formidable best in some of the slower preludes and in the faster ones, he's never just hammering away or showing off. I like Osborne in a certain mood, very grand beautiful pianism and an expansive sound, but I also can't help remembering that Rach himself played the works very differently.

The very opposite of the interpretive spectrum, and therefore something I'd suggest you hear for the pleasure of comparison, is the Constance Keene set. It's nigh-impossible to find - I turned to FLAC from a dark and mysterious corner of the internet - but she charts a highly unusual, idiosyncratic course through the works, rather quicker than most but not just for the sake of being quick. Her Op 23 No 1, for instance, sounds nervous, almost agonizingly fearful - an emotion I just don't hear in any other music by anybody.

By the way, Richter is probably my overall favorite too. George would agree, but he views Keene as a curiosity. Not sure what he thought of Osborne - George has about a million opinions on this repertoire and they're all worth hearing!

[Brian]

I've now put Keene back on again and I'm not so inclined to think it a reference - it definitely is eccentric, and it plays by its own rules. That said, I can't help noticing that I am clicking through to the next prelude very quickly, keen to know what she's going to do next. It's a bit like popcorn!

[Drasko]

Firstly I'd second Todd's recommendation for Moiseiwitsch and Kocsis but neither of them recorded more than half a dozen.

I've heard Berezovsky play op.32 live and it was superb, effortless nonchalant virtuosity that avoids being to heavy, but his studio recording of complete preludes on Mirare, which I haven't heard, got rather mixed reviews.

Another very interesting set is Weissenberg on RCA, but I'd strongly recommend sampling before buying, his machine like playing is like no one elses and decidedly not to everyones taste. But good alternative.

[George]

By the way, Richter is probably my overall favorite too.

We should assemble a set, using Richter's recordings as a starting point, adding in other great performances by other pianists, to fill in the set of 24. Might be a fun exercise.

George would agree, but he views Keene as a curiosity. Not sure what he thought of Osborne

I had avoided him - until now. I value Holden's opinion highly, so I will give Osborne a try. Up til now I have only heard Diary of a Madman, but find it to be an enjoyable record.    Seriously, though, I plan to hear Osbourne (the one who plays the piano and doesn't eat bats) this weekend.

- George has about a million opinions on this repertoire and they're all worth hearing!

First, I must say thanks, as I am flattered to read this. Second, I currently own 9 sets of these lovely works. Osbourne will make 10. Of these, Ashkenazy remains my favorite. I think he handles the poetic side of the music remarkably well, but still has the chops to handle the faster, more challenging ones. I enjoy much of what Santiago Rodriguez does with this music and although he can bring out the excitement in the music well, he falls short of Ashkenazy on the poetic side of things. Anievas was my first set, so I am bound to biased. I haven't heard it in awhile, but I used to listen to it a lot and find it to be very underrated set. The other ones I own (Weissenberg, Nebolsin, Keene, Lympany, Alexeev, Fiorentino) all offer interesting insight, but are not ones that I would really recommend. I was surprised that I didn't love Fiorentino here, as I love his Chopin preludes and many of his other recordings. Maybe I should revisit it? 

[George]

I've now put Keene back on again and I'm not so inclined to think it a reference - it definitely is eccentric, and it plays by its own rules. That said, I can't help noticing that I am clicking through to the next prelude very quickly, keen to know what she's going to do next.

Punny. 

[Brian]

I enjoy much of what Santiago Rodriguez does with this music and although he can bring out the excitement in the music well, he falls short of Ashkenazy on the poetic side of things.

Oh! I forgot I have that set. Perhaps I'll give it a listen, too. 

[Mandryka]

This thread prompted me to search for a recording I had always wanted to hear -- Mark Hambourg in the Op 3/2  Prelude. (Sorry it says Op 2/3 -- my typo!)

http://www.goear.com/files/external.swf?file=13f8fdb

[George]

This thread prompted me to search for a recording I had always wanted to hear -- Mark Hambourg in the Op 3/2  Prelude. (Sorry it says Op 2/3 -- my typo!)

http://www.goear.com/files/external.swf?file=13f8fdb

Thanks for sharing that. It's far too fast and subdued for me, though.

[karlhenning]

I know Sarge will bespeak Hélène Grimaud . . . I must really revisit that disc he kindly sent!

I have an Arte Nove disc with Andrei Nikolsky playing the Opus 3/2 and the Opus 23 Preludes which I tend to listen to for a week at a stretch . . . .

[Mandryka]

Thanks for sharing that. It's far too fast and subdued for me, though.

He's certainly fast -- so is Moiseiwitsch. Rachmaninov is extremely slow.

[karlhenning]

Rachmaninov is extremely slow.

Must be something he wanted in the piece. (At least, at the time.)  The fellow had chops.

[George]

He's certainly fast -- so is Moiseiwitsch. Rachmaninov is extremely slow.

Santiago Rodriguez is slow - he takes 6:12.

Wait, Rachmaninov isn't slow, he plays it at 3:36 and 3:41.

[Mandryka]

Santiago Rodriguez is slow - he takes 6:12.

Wait, Rachmaninov isn't slow, he plays it at 3:36 and 3:41.

Oh sht. I should know better than to get into these time discussions. I always fk up the numbers. These early Rachmaninov preludes aren't bad -- but the only Rach which has really gotten under my skin is Pogorelich's recording of the Moments Musicaux -- a bootleg I found on the web, unpublished.

I'll just note here -- completely randomly -- that I am very happy right now because I've just  managed to get my music on the hard drive to play through wifi in the garden -- that's about 100 feet away from the music source. It has been a big struggle with the technology to make it happen but now my entire music collection is available while I'm dozing in the  hammock watching the dragon flies, no CDs involved.

[George]

Oh sht. I should know better than to get into these time discussions. I always fk up the numbers. These early Rachmaninov preludes aren't bad -- but the only Rach which has really gotten under my skin is Pogorelich's recording of the Moments Musicaux -- a bootleg I found on the web, unpublished.

Have you heard Gavilov's incomplete Moments Musicaux or Berman's live complete set of them on Aura? They are both very special.

I'll just note here -- completely randomly -- that I am very happy right now because I've just  managed to get my music on the hard drive to play through wifi in the garden -- that's about 100 feet away from the music source. It has been a big struggle with the technology to make it happen but now my entire music collection is available while I'm dozing in the  hammock watching the dragon flies, no CDs involved.

Congrats! I looooooove listening to music in nature. In a bit, I will be listening to Osbourne's rec of the preludes in sunny Central Park. 

[George]

I'm really very interested by the choice of Osborne, Holden. He seems to me a very poetic, meditative interpreter, sometimes dreamlike, who's at a formidable best in some of the slower preludes and in the faster ones, he's never just hammering away or showing off. I like Osborne in a certain mood, very grand beautiful pianism and an expansive sound, but I also can't help remembering that Rach himself played the works very differently.

I am almost all the way through Osborne's set myself and I must say I have never listened to Rachmaninoff and had very little emotional response - until now. Osborne spends too much time with detail and loses overall effect in the process. I admired some of what he does here, but I honestly don't enjoy most of it. The sound is lovely, though. I suppose if I wanted some Rachmaninoff for background music, this would fit the bill perfectly, but why on Earth would I want that? 

[AllegroVivace]

Another vote for Angelich. The overall mood isn't too romanticized and the control of dynamics in superb.

[Drasko]

My personal favorite is Nicholas Angelich.

Another vote for Angelich. The overall mood isn't too romanticized and the control of dynamics in superb.

Are you talking about Preludes or Etudes?

[Drasko]

Nah, just skimming too fast, happens.