Blind Comparison: Ravel's Gaspard de la Nuit

[Brian]

RESULTS: "Ondine"

A word about the scores offered: these are averages on a scale of 1-10 across all voters! Each pianist received between 4 and 6 votes, with most of those listed here receiving at least 5.

A word on tiebreakers: where two pianists received an identical average score, tie goes to the pianist who received a higher single score on one ballot. For instance, if two pianists averaged a 7, but one person gave performer A a 10, I'll give A the higher ranking.

Without further ado...

Twentieth and last place: Pianist #9 (4.4)

"the pianist was worried about being late to catch a bus after the concert" "Apparently Ravel wrote a scherzo" "The funny thing is that I don't hate it." "The climax is a complete mess" "FAST FAST FAST!!" "can be quite harsh" "with itching powder under his armpits" "ridiculous" "control is not exemplary"

The pianist nobody liked is...



MARTHA ARGERICH

Live in the Concertgebouw, May 7, 1978

Nineteenth place: Pianist #12 (5.5)

"A bit too slow opening with the trills" "Intense, powerfull climaxes and great glissandi" "Rhapsodizing like it's Chopin" "Rather heavy and "Germanic" in a way." "Almost sounds like a cold, modernist take on the piece." "beautiful key strokes"

Pianist #12 is...

[asin]B0072A4HHS[/asin]

ALICE ADER

I'm a little sad about this result. Alice Ader's Ravel set is self-consciously peculiar, with a sort of cold modernist approach to much of it, but I at least found it interesting!

Eighteenth place: Pianist #6 (5.7)

"This pianist is at least aware that there should be poetry, but in general he/she doesn't quite know how to deliver it." "very fluent playing" "Very impressive control though, just lacking a bit of magic" "Doesn't evoke cascading water, is not alluring enough, though after about 4' there's a nice, extended section of attractive playing." "a very tense and taught recording, I couldn't hear or feel the music flowing" "harsh, sharp playing"

Pianist #6 is...

[asin]B000PMFTCM[/asin]

VLADIMIR ASHKENAZY

The 1965 recording. If this had somehow survived, it would surely have been torpedoed by my all-time least favorite Le Gibet.

Seventeenth place: Pianist #4 (5.80)

"Somehow despite good tempo doesn't quite cohere as well as the better ones in this comparison." "felt like a race from the start" "A bit steely, and not especially alluring, but virtuosic, with thundering climaxes." "makes the beginning sound like a trill rather than a repeating pattern" "It is well controlled, though I wish there was more organic build up"

Pianist #4 is...

[asin]B0000C8WZU[/asin]

ALEXANDRE THARAUD

Next up is one of the recordings I deployed which has never before been discussed on GMG...

Sixteenth place: Pianist #16 (6.125)

"sounding rushed, draining mystery and/or allure" "satisfying climax, but not nuanced enough" "the structure is vague and the climax badly approached and executed. I lost interest almost from the start." "lacking that lightness of touch. Good build up to the climax though, and the ending was reasonably dramatic." "Gorgeous atmosphere and phrasing." "this person also completely gets the piece. Humongous climax!"

Pianist #16 is...

[asin]B002FWFQK0[/asin]

FRIEDRICH GULDA

Yes! Legendary for his Beethoven and to some extent his jazz, Gulda earns mixed marks for his early Gaspard. I am happy to report that the other ultra-rare recording I snagged for this competition has advanced with very high scores.

Fifteenth place: Pianist #11 (6.125)

"a remarkable performance, with a very suggestive and elegant playing" "beautifully poetical impression of water falling and flowing" "Chiseled sound that I generally don't like but surprisingly not without atmosphere." "Sounds like the pianist is phrasing more to avoid mistakes" "seems cool.  Nothing alluring or colorful." "just did not like the sound nor performance"

Pianist #11 is...

[asin]B0000037J0[/asin]

VLADO PERLEMUTER

This is his later recording for Nimbus, made when he was in his seventies.

Fourteenth place: Pianist #18 (6.25)

"Playing is swift and colorful, almost insouciant, not to say careless, in how some of it is dashed off." "Entertaining, but something is missing." "sense of eery sadness present from the start" "Seems a little rushed but the structure was good." "poorer sound quality" "Generally too straight and too loud too early." "Entirely too brawny"

Pianist #18 is...

[asin]B000007QCI[/asin]

ROBERT CASADESUS

This result makes me sad. I wonder how much he was punished for sound quality?

Thirteenth place: Pianist #20 (6.25)

"entirely too "pretty" and dreamy for me" "The speed up into the climax is not organic at all. As if the pianist woke up suddenly from the previous slumber." "While I find the build-up to the climax and its calm postlude beautifully managed, the ending seemed a little too abrupt and inexpressive." "The second half was better, great drama and dynamics." "A bit mannered and on the slow side, but the playing drew me in."

Pianist #20 is...

[asin]B00000GCA9[/asin]

SAMSON FRANCOIS

We're at the point, with Francois, where the eliminated pianists were well-liked by several voters, but just not enough. That's also true of the last two eliminated recordings...

Twelfth place: Pianist #8 (6.333)

"Ondine really does sound like she's singing.  It's quite a bright and clear song" "The coda is very well judged." "faster but still full of poetry" "I find it just a bit too straight in places. But some very powerful and impressive climaxes" "For some reason the word "fun" popped into my head while listening" "Dark texture in the left hand is very deep" "riveting, rewarding and chillingly good" "The random staccato seems to be an epidemic." "rubato sounds more like it's set up to make transitions easy for the pianist" "not a huge fan of some of the speed changes. That all said, it certainly has some dreaminess to it"

Pianist #8 is...



YEVGENY SUDBIN

Man. I'm really sad about this one. mc urkneal and MishaK, my eye's on you... one of my favorite recordings, a very distinctive reading all the way through. If Sudbin's interpretation and personality appealed to you here, they're just as strong in the other two movements. Certainly a unique Gaspard all the way.

And our last elimination:

Eleventh place: Pianist #5 (6.833)

"there's a great ascent to the climax, but this is another pianist who sees the opportunity for a great big crash of notes" "Not awful by any means, but not top notch either" "Big uncalled for slowdown in the middle before climax breaks structure" "the climaxes hit with gale force" "just seduces the listener. Oh a joy!"

Pianist #5 is...

[asin]B000001GQQ[/asin]

MARTHA ARGERICH

Oh dear! With her DG studio recording, poor Martha is eliminated twice in a single round! On average this performance was graded 2.4 points higher than her live reading, but it wasn't enough.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

ANALYSIS
The top complaint: playing too fast. Argerich (EMI), Ashkenazy, Tharaud, and Gulda were all heavily criticized for playing too quickly, while voters - interestingly - thought that Casadesus and Sudbin played overly quickly but got away with it for various reasons. I might personally add that Ashkenazy's "Le gibet" is my least favorite precisely because it is so absurdly rushed. Nobody ever criticized some of our highest scorers for speeding.

And speaking of highest scorers:

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

ON TO LE GIBET...
10. Pianist #3 (7.25)
9. Pianist #19 (7.375)
8. Pianist #15 (7.42)
7. Pianist #10 (7.50)
6. Pianist #2 (7.50)
5. Pianist #13 (7.75)
4. Pianist #17 (8.125)
3. Pianist #1 (8.20)
2. Pianist #7 (8.30)
1. Pianist #14 (8.50)

Boy, if you guys knew who pianist #14 was, you'd be very, very surprised.

Sound clips coming to an inbox near you within a few days! If you didn't partake in round 1 but want to sample our "Le gibet" recordings, just say so!

P.S. The eliminated pianists' "Ondine" recordings will be deleted within 24 hours. I don't have much space in my Dropbox folder so I can't afford to keep them there. If you want to rehear a file from one of this round's losers for whatever reason, access it now.

[Todd]

Fourteenth place: Pianist #18 (6.25)

Pianist #18 is...

[asin]B000007QCI[/asin]

ROBERT CASADESUS

This result makes me sad. I wonder how much he was punished for sound quality?

Possibly.  Take a dated recording, compress it, and listen through a computer, and who knows?  I rated it a 7 in this round, and normally I rate it more highly - not that I usually assign numeric values to recordings.  This is really the only surprise amongst the culled for me, at least among those recordings I know.  I may have to spin it later today.

[Lisztianwagner]

What interesting results. So Pianist No.11 was Vlado Perlemuter....I'm sorry his recording has been left out, I liked his Ondine very very much; I'm also suprised that both Ashkenazy and Argerich haven't passed the turn, they're usually amazing in Ravel!
I'm looking forward to Le gibet now.

[Beale]

Thank you Brain for the interesting results from Ondine.

• #18 Casadesus. I fess up to have been influenced by the poor sound quality. I tired to look pass it but it was really hard.
• #8 Sudbin. I listened to #3, #5, #8 and #15 as suggested, and I found Sudbin to have very good techniques and clear sound. You are right that it is distinctive and unique compared to others. So I think it would be hard to judge it fairly.
• #5 Argerich. Oh dear! I have this record, but I only paid attention to the concertos  I would have given it a 7.5/10.
• #15. Glad it make it through. I would have given it a 8/10.
• #3. Didn't like it. How it did made top 10?

[madaboutmahler]

Very interesting that two Argerich have been voted out, thought I would have enjoyed her performance more. Glad my two favourites are still in though! Looking forward to the rest!

[Madiel]

Perlemuter is a name I recognise from one person's overview of a large number of Gaspard recordings, I think favourably. I think Ashkenazy was highly regarded there as well, but you've indicated more than one Ashkenazy recording exists so perhaps it wasn't this one.

I've downloaded all 20 but not listened to them all so far. I did like Sudbin, so disappointed to see him go.

I don't feel especially sorry for 'poor Martha'.  She has something of a reputation as a fiery speed demon, and while I expect that would make more for a great Scarbo, Ravel didn't write Scarbo twice.

[MishaK]

Not at all surprised by some of these results, actually. I love Martha dearly and had the privilege of hearing her live on several occasions over the past two decades. But she is a very nervous and inconsistent interpreter. I have witnessed performances that would have disintegrated from pure stage fright if it hadn't been for her sheer inexhaustible technical reserves and her natural musical instincts (I have of course also witnessed performance of pure incandescent perfection from her). So it's not surprising that her live performance was less well received than her studio performance. I absolutely adore her take on Jeux d'eau, both the DG studio version and the live performance that can be found on youtube. But her Gaspard never convinced me. I share the disappointment over Gulda's early elimination. He is an exceptional and underrated pianist who is always interesting, as he was here, which is why I gave him high marks. Casadesus I've always liked more in classical and baroque repertoire than in the romantics and the impressionists. So this again doesn't surprise me entirely. Francois is likewise very inconsistent. I'm unfamiliar with his Ravel, but love his Debussy, There are performances of pure genius, gutsy unique takes that are played with a lot of sexy swagger. But they are contrasted with other performances that are just a little odd and incoherent, like this Ondine here. Ashkenazy, likewise to me is a rather bland performer in most repertoire outside e.g. Rachmaninov and Chopin. As to the more individual interpretations that were eliminated, like Sudbin, yes, they are interesting and if listened to on their own would probably yield more to the listener. But when juxtaposed in direct comparison with some really outstanding performances that really observe every nuance of the score and tie it all together in a nicely passionate package, it's hard to give the more individualistic take the same high scoring.

[MishaK]

• #3. Didn't like it. How it did made top 10?

Because it's a democracy, and I for instance thought it was the best of the lot. ;-)

[TheGSMoeller]

Boy, if you guys knew who pianist #14 was, you'd be very, very surprised.

Liberace.

[Bogey]

Try to sneak me in, Brian.

[Madiel]

Liberace.

Worse. Richard Clayderman.

[Brian]

Our Le gibet files are uploading now. I'm off to the art museum to see a Bernini exhibit this afternoon, but the Round 2 links may be going out as soon as tonight or tomorrow night.

A stray comment: our top ten list is STACKED. There are legitimately seven pianists I want to see in the top five. In fact, we may yet find ourselves auditioning more than five "Scarbo" recordings.

~~~~~~~~~~

If I may be permitted to make a few comments on the foregoing, now that results are in...

Ok. Herewith the first five. Listened on Senns steaming while under the influence of a glass of Sancerre.

Good choice, sir. I remember participating in the Berlioz game and ensuring that wine was nearby for several of the finalists.

11 Sounds like the pianist is phrasing more to avoid mistakes than because the music demands it that way.

11 is of course Vlado Perlemuter, a recording he made when he was around 75 years old. I faced a choice between this and the younger Perlemuter on Vox. If we had twice as many players in the game, we could have expanded the bracket to 32 pianists and enjoyed both, as well as a number of other recordings I was sad to leave out.

Pianist 14 is an extraordinary artist who is, as you say, not very well-known for letting it rip. In fact, pianist 14 is not very well-known for Ravel either. In fact, outside of [composer name] enthusiasts, pianist 14 is not very well-known at all. [like I'd give too big a hint there!]

Not knowing this piece really well I found the differences quite subtle, like splitting hair, and have resorted to using half points. Brian, I hope you don't mind.

Half points are great! In fact we had one vote last round for "6-7" which I converted to 6.5 for averaging purposes.

8 – Quick, with some of the playing having a Scarbo-esque scampering about it.  Superb control, nice clarity –and is that a snort before the first climax?  For some reason the word "fun" popped into my head while listening.  Score: 7.

Not surprisingly, Sudbin's "Scarbo" is also a lot of fun - it also in some ways resembles pianists #7 and #15 there, for future reference. Maybe not quite as scintillating or dazzling as those two.

Possibly.  Take a dated recording, compress it, and listen through a computer, and who knows?  I rated it a 7 in this round, and normally I rate it more highly - not that I usually assign numeric values to recordings.  This is really the only surprise amongst the culled for me, at least among those recordings I know.  I may have to spin it later today.

Yup. I was in a bind with Casadesus, as it's very hard to find these days. There really needs to be a Casadesus solo box in that cheap Sony reissue series.

#8 Sudbin. I listened to #3, #5, #8 and #15 as suggested, and I found Sudbin to have very good techniques and clear sound. You are right that it is distinctive and unique compared to others. So I think it would be hard to judge it fairly.

In past games it has been quite a challenge to figure out how to rate recordings that are very different from all the other ones. We're not done facing that challenge in this game!

I love Martha dearly and had the privilege of hearing her live on several occasions over the past two decades. But she is a very nervous and inconsistent interpreter. I have witnessed performances that would have disintegrated from pure stage fright if it hadn't been for her sheer inexhaustible technical reserves and her natural musical instincts (I have of course also witnessed performance of pure incandescent perfection from her).

I saw Martha live with Prokofiev's Third Concerto a few years ago; somehow had never heard about her stage fright and nervousness (it wasn't apparent then). Incidentally the concert was led by her ex-husband, Charles Dutoit.

Ashkenazy, likewise to me is a rather bland performer in most repertoire outside e.g. Rachmaninov and Chopin.

Agreed - even his Chopin I'm not crazy about. I've much preferred Ashkenazy the conductor to Ashkenazy the pianist.

Try to sneak me in, Brian.

With pleasure!

Liberace.

Okay, maybe not THAT surprising. 

[Todd]

Okay, maybe not THAT surprising.

Angela Hewitt, then.

[Brian]

Angela Hewitt, then.

Of course I'll neither confirm nor deny, but why Hewitt?

[Todd]

Of course I'll neither confirm nor deny, but why Hewitt?

Because you said we'd be surprised, and I doubt most people think of Hewitt when considering Ravel. 

[Brian]

THE GAME IS AFOOT!

If you want to participate in the blind comparison for "Le gibet" but you have not received a PM from me with links to the recordings, please reply or PM me! The more the merrier... and the listening/reckoning has begun. 

[mc ukrneal]

Round 2:

#1 - Immediate connection here. The tension is palpable. The idea of a corpse, setting sun, and deathly feel permeate quite strongly. The constant toll of the bell creates real tension all the way to the end. Rating: 9.75.

#2 - A completely different version. It's slower and the bell is a bit more to the background. This one is more sad and less dischordant (and thus not as dark in sound image). This makes it easier to listen to, but that bell SHOULD go on unwearingly. There is minimal tension. Here it is something else and not entirely what the composer intended I think (too pretty). Rating: 1.5.

#3 - At first, it sounded like a repeat of #2 as the tolling sound seems again subsumed a bit (and is played slower). And I think it could be a bit better highlighted, but it is not quite as bad as #2. Still, the tension is allowed to escape, which doesn't give the piece the edge I think helps it along and really keeps the interest.  Rating: 2.5

#7 - Another slow one. Again, the bell does not create the tension it can in this piece. Again, the bell seems too soft to me and occasionally seems missed/lost in the texture. Rating: 3.

#10 - Not quite as slow as the others, but not as fast as #1, but the bell has good presence. And this one is darker. The bell is well defined in its constancy. I can picture the buzzards in this one. So another winner for me. Rating: 7

I think #1 and #10 are the only two that successfully keep the bell audible regardless of the texture of the other bits. This is part of why I think they work better in the end.

[Brian]

Neal, you've given pianist #2 grades of 2.5 and 1.5 so far, and pianist #3 grades of 3.5 and 2.5. Pretty sure these pianists are your kryptonite!

I was surprised, putting together these files, how many of them last 7+ minutes. Will be interesting if anybody sees this as a factor; for me the "bells" being suitably creepy and consistently done is one of the most important ways I judge a performance.

[mc ukrneal]

Neal, you've given pianist #2 grades of 2.5 and 1.5 so far, and pianist #3 grades of 3.5 and 2.5. Pretty sure these pianists are your kryptonite!

I was surprised, putting together these files, how many of them last 7+ minutes. Will be interesting if anybody sees this as a factor; for me the "bells" being suitably creepy and consistently done is one of the most important ways I judge a performance.

For me it has to be consistency first. Then it is a bit more of a question of interpretation. When the bell is too hidden, I find the entire structure disintegrates and then it just turns to mush. I don't know about kryptonite, but I feel #2 and #3 are approaching this from an entirely different direction (not one I admire). I hope MishaK will listen to them to see if he still likes them as he did in round 1.

[AnthonyAthletic]

Okay, maybe not THAT surprising. 

Liberace, Clayderman...could it be....