Chopin Recordings

[kishnevi]

If you just want something to put in at night and let some vaguely anodyne nocturnal tunes wash over you, then Moravec's perfect.

So would Yundi (Li).

[Holden]

The Moravec is excellent. This may sound strange but it is what he does with those little periods of silence that make this such an impressive recording. I also rate the stereo and mid 50s Rubinstein very highly.

I didn't know that Ciani recorded the complete Nocturnes - what label is it on?

[Mandryka]

The Moravec is excellent. This may sound strange but it is what he does with those little periods of silence that make this such an impressive recording. I also rate the stereo and mid 50s Rubinstein very highly.

I didn't know that Ciani recorded the complete Nocturnes - what label is it on?

There are two, both taken from concerts, audience recordings. The one I have is on DG. The other was on Stradivarius I think, I've never heard it.

Rubinstein's  good in the political nocturne,  op 48/1. And I remember in the first set he made, the pre war one, being impressed by the unity, the sweep of the way he plays. He's a bit short on psychological depth for me though. Compared with Pletnev or Cortot for example. Generally I only like him in the political music, polonaises, mazurkas.

I agree with what you say about Moravec's 1965 nocturnes. It's just not what I'm looking for from the music right now. He's too refined, too calm, too brooding.

One really interesting thng to do is compare the 1965 op 27/1 with how he plays it in the live record from 1983.

[Lisztianwagner]

As much as I enjoy his Chopin, I feel he's even better in Schumann and Brahms.

I prefer Rubinstein in Chopin, his interpretations of that music are absolutely brilliant, magical! But I agree he was great in Schumann and Brahms too, his Carnaval and his Brahms' Piano Concerto No.1 and Capriccio No.2 are beautiful.

[George]

I prefer Rubinstein in Chopin, his interpretations of that music are absolutely brilliant, magical!

Ok, but which Rubinstein? The early Rubinstein was very different than the late Rubinstein, not to mention middle Rubinstein, which was like a blend of the two. (I like early and mid a lot more than late) 

[Lisztianwagner]

Ok, but which Rubinstein? The early Rubinstein was very different than the late Rubinstein, not to mention middle Rubinstein, which was like a blend of the two. (I like early and mid a lot more than late)

Well, I love Rubinstein in general, he's one of my favourite pianists, especially in Chopin; though I think I prefer the early/middle too.

[George]

Well, I love Rubinstein in general, he's one of my favourite pianists, especially in Chopin; though I think I prefer the early/middle too.

Hi Five! 

[Bogey]

Any idea what this is?

http://store.acousticsounds.com/d/50157/Karl_Bohm-Chopin_Etudes_Op10__25-200_Gram_Vinyl_Record

[George]

Any idea what this is?

http://store.acousticsounds.com/d/50157/Karl_Bohm-Chopin_Etudes_Op10__25-200_Gram_Vinyl_Record

A misprint.

[Coopmv]

A misprint.

Karl Bohm on the piano?  I read he was originally a lawyer by training.

[betterthanfine]

I have been an enthusiastic proponent of Yevgeny Sudbin's CD on BIS, which I listened to a dozen times last year.

Brian, I bought this cd last week, partly because of your positive commentary. I've only listened to the first couple of tracks so far, but I must say that I'm not disappointed in the least! Very intense playing without the works becoming too 'heavy', and great sound too, although I usually prefer slightly dryer acoustics.

This is the first I've heard of mr. Sudbin's playing. From what I've read online, his Scriabin recordings also seem to go down well. I think I'll keep those in mind for future purchases!

[DavidA]

I bought a boxed set on French EMI with Cziffra playing Chopin. I know his Chopin upset a lot of the critics but the playing is simply amazing. Pretty robust but very exciting. Of course, if you're looking for elegance above all, go elsewhere. But Cziffra is giving me a lot of pleasure.

[Mandryka]

I bought a boxed set on French EMI with Cziffra playing Chopin. I know his Chopin upset a lot of the critics but the playing is simply amazing. Pretty robust but very exciting. Of course, if you're looking for elegance above all, go elsewhere. But Cziffra is giving me a lot of pleasure.

I too like Cziffra's Chopin. When you say he "upset a lot of critics", do you have any examples? I'd like to see how he was received. Did Cortot ever comment on Cziffra's Chopin playing?

[Expresso]

What do you think of this Rubenstein box set?
http://www.amazon.com/Arthur-Rubinstein-Original-Collection-Limited/dp/B001E1TG90/ref=sr_1_1?s=music&ie=UTF8&qid=1358879529&sr=1-1&keywords=chopin+original+jacket

I found it in a local store for 19 euros.


Is it the same set?
http://www.amazon.com/Chopin-Collection-Fryderyk/dp/B000026OW3/ref=pd_bbs_sr_3?ie=UTF8&s=music&qid=1202057540&sr=1-3

[Expresso]

Any recommendations for a Chopin beginner?

I'm also considering this box-set:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Chopin-Complete-Edition-Martha-Argerich/dp/B002NFCHBA/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1358970487&sr=8-1
Arrau, Pollini and Ashkenazy are great pianists and good Chopin performers.

Does this box-set contain cartboard or plastic cases?

[George]

Any recommendations for a Chopin beginner?

Preludes - Sokolov
Nocturnes - Arrau (get the 50 Great Recordings remaster)
Ballades - Moravec
Waltzes - Rubinstein (the earlier 1953 set)
Mazurkas - Rubinstein (one of the two earlier sets, 30s or 50s)
Concertos - Zimerman and Polish Orchestra

[North Star]

Any recommendations for a Chopin beginner?

I'm also considering this box-set:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Chopin-Complete-Edition-Martha-Argerich/dp/B002NFCHBA/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1358970487&sr=8-1
Arrau, Pollini and Ashkenazy are great pianists and good Chopin performers.

Does this box-set contain cartboard or plastic cases?

Cardboard sleeves and a big booklet, with some OK essays. It's a good set, but there are better performances out there for much of the music. The Preludes are dull, e.g. the Sokolov recommended by George is a great recording. Pollini's Etudes are quite cold, not necessarily bad, though. And Pires's Nocture set is another relative weakness - Arrau or Moravec would be great. But Ashkenazy's mazurkas, Zimerman's Ballades, Concertos (same set George recommends) and Pollini's Sonatas nos. 2 & 3, and Argerich and Rostropovich in the Cello Sonata are all quite good. Perhaps go with individual releases - you could always get the Preludes, Nocturnes, Etudes (perhaps Pollini's 1960 recording or Sokolov?), and Rubinstein's Mazurkas & Waltzes first, and then, if hungry for more, consider the box.

[Mandryka]

I've been really enjoying this recording  which I found on spotify. The records have a bit of a backstory. They were chosen by Barrington-Coupe for one of Joyce Hatto's Etudes CDs, they were reviewed very negatively in their original format  by Tom Deacon on rmcr, and very positively in their Hatto incarnation.

Anyway that's not the interesting thing really, though I must say I've got a tremendous amount of fun from listening to the Barrington-Coupe's selections, we obviously have similar taste. The important thing is the music making here, which I think is dramatic fluid natural charcterful. I find the performances completely persuasive, I forget all others when I listen to them, and offhand I can't think of a more recommendable performance with good sound.



The sonata seemed less interesting to me.

[Elgarian]

I mentioned somewhere else (I forget where) that for the first time in my life I find myself able to enjoy Chopin. The reason for this baffles me - I imagine some physiological change has occurred, presumably through the ageing process, because suddenly the sound of the modern solo piano is no longer a source of auditory personal torment, as it has been for several decades. Whatever the explanation, the result is that the floodgates have opened; and for some weeks now I've wanted to listen to little else.

It seemed very early on that I had a great opportunity here to escape that prejudice-forming practice of getting to know music through one particular recording, and consequently finding subsequent recordings somehow unsatisfactory, for no reason other than them not being the version through which I grew to love the music in the first place.

So I've adopted a fairly weird scattergun approach, of acquiring a variety of different artists' recordings so that each time I listened to a particular group of Nocturnes, or Preludes, or Walzes, etc, I could listen to a different interpretation - hopefully building up acquaintance with the music, rather than with some particular interpretation of it. And I'm trying not to attach too much weight to those that I think are emerging as my 'favourite' interpretations; but instead, give those a rest  in favour of others. For instance, one evening recently I listened to three successive recordings of the Nocturne Op.15 no.1, by Pires, Ashkenazy, and Leonskaja, expecting Pires (by reputation) to blow the others out of the water. Not so. Or at least, while Pires seemed to be offering liquid gold, Ashkenazy and Leonskaja were each offering, in their different ways, something less obviously glistening but still treasure nonetheless.

I'm not in a position yet to be able to articulate some of these differences in words, but I must say I'm enjoying this new multi-recording approach, and hope to make further comments here as my listening proceeds.

[Holden]

Ashkenazy's Nocturnes are excellent so don't be surprised at all. I am not familar with Leonskaja's recording. I've heard the Pires and found that she tampered with the tempo/rubato to much for my liking. I struggled to find a real flow from her in most of these works.