Beethoven's Piano Sonatas

[DavidRoss]

Off the recent high of the Firkusny, I shot the not long ago acquired Gilels set to the top of the piano listening list. Op. 109, being my favorite, was the first one to hit the player...and....disaster! Oh no! This is one of the more exaggeratedly slow performances I have ever heard and it crosses over the whole piece (unlike some that will start the first movent slow and then fire the engines up for the prestissimo). None of that here. So far, I hate it. I mean, really hate. I suppose there is a strange curiosity in how he is able to play it in slow motion, but the piece loses its cohesion in a major way. Sure, he does speed up in some of the variations (finally), but there is still often this feeling of hearing every single note clang to the detriment of the overall line. This single disaster means this is not a set to be recommended (by me).

For those of you that recommend it - how can you do so with OP. 109 played in this way?!?!?!

Wow. I think his op 109 is beautiful. Before throwing the set away, hear his op 53.

[George]

For those of you that recommend it - how can you do so with OP. 109 played in this way?!?!?!

I enjoy his Op. 109 more than you do, but I prefer at least 8 other pianists ahead of him for that work.

I think he's at his best in Op. 2/3, 10/3, 27/1 and especially 81a, where he's the best I have heard.

[Mandryka]

Off the recent high of the Firkusny, I shot the not long ago acquired Gilels set to the top of the piano listening list. Op. 109, being my favorite, was the first one to hit the player...and....disaster! Oh no! This is one of the more exaggeratedly slow performances I have ever heard and it crosses over the whole piece (unlike some that will start the first movement slow and then fire the engines up for the prestissimo). None of that here. So far, I hate it. I mean, really hate. I suppose there is a strange curiosity in how he is able to play it in slow motion, but the piece loses its cohesion in a major way. Sure, he does speed up in some of the variations (finally), but there is still often this feeling of hearing every single note clang to the detriment of the overall line. This single disaster means this is not a set to be recommended (by me).

For those of you that recommend it - how can you do so with OP. 109 played in this way?!?!?!

[asin]B000ICM0YY[/asin]

There are lots of slow Op 109s on record, some even slower than Gilels. Elly Ney is much slower, and I like it a lot. Levy takes it pretty  slowly, and so do R Serkin, Claude Frank, Richter-Haaser, Bernard Roberts, Paul Komen,  Afanassiev and Arrau. Andrea Lucchessini and Dino Ciani are hardly Speedy Gonzelez either.  I don't think any of these pianists make the music incoherent.

Most people play this sonata a bit like Op 111, you know, a sort of bouncy prelude to a set of transcendental variations. One reason I like to hear Ney's slow motion one is that formally, the vision is original.

[mc ukrneal]

There are lots of slow Op 109s on record, some even slower than Gilels. Elly Ney is much slower, and I like it a lot. Levy takes it pretty  slowly, and so do Richter-Hasser,  Afanassiev and Arrau. I don't think any of these pianists make the music incoherent.

Most people play this sonata a bit like Op 111, you know, a sort of bouncy and boisterousus prelude to a set of transcendental variations. One reason I like to hear Ney's slow motion one is that formally, the vision is original.

Are there? I have looked through my whole collection of 109s. I don't see any that are slower in the first movement (out of about 20-25, including Backhaus, Kempff, Fischer, Uchida, Schiff, Lewis, Brendel, etc.). Gilels is slowest. Two of them are slower in the second movement: Roberts by 1 second and Biret by about three seconds. It's hard to compare the third movement as the interaction of the variations can cause significant changes and some of the variations can take going slower pretty well.

But slowness per se is not necessaily a problem if the line is held and the piece moves forward. In the first go through, I didn't feel that Gilels did that. I'll relisten with a different ear one day soon. Perhaps knowing what to expect will help.

[Todd]

For those of you that recommend it - how can you do so with OP. 109 played in this way?!?!?!

In general, I prefer speedy LvB to slow LvB, but Gilels manages to pull off slow LvB, at least for me.  They very traits you mention are what draws me to his playing, and I think he manges to make everything cohere.  I get why you don't like it, though.  I haven't listened to Gilels in a while, so I will try to get to 109 specifically this weekend and give it another listen. 

[Mandryka]

Are there? I have looked through my whole collection of 109s. I don't see any that are slower in the first movement (out of about 20-25, including Backhaus, Kempff, Fischer, Uchida, Schiff, Lewis, Brendel, etc.). Gilels is slowest. Two of them are slower in the second movement: Roberts by 1 second and Biret by about three seconds. It's hard to compare the third movement as the interaction of the variations can cause significant changes and some of the variations can take going slower pretty well.


But slowness per se is not necessaily a problem if the line is held and the piece moves forward. In the first go through, I didn't feel that Gilels did that. I'll relisten with a different ear one day soon. Perhaps knowing what to expect will help.

I think you're a bit hard on Gilels, though it's not  one of the ones I play very often. He may have kept a slow tempo through his career with it, as he did with Schumann's symphonic variations. Or he may have experimented with tempos choices, as he did with the Beethoven concertos. As far as I know the only record of him playing it is the DG studio one.

A quick question. On Lubimov's CD I and II are presented on a single track. Are they presented as seperate movements by Beethoven? Does someone have a copy of  the urtext?

[Madiel]

Vaguely curious to know, is Kovacevich's Waldstein well thought of?

Because it's the only I've got, but I thoroughly enjoyed it the other day.

[DavidRoss]

Vaguely curious to know, is Kovacevich's Waldstein well thought of?

Because it's the only I've got, but I thoroughly enjoyed it the other day.

It's well thought of by me. That whole disc--in fact, his whole cycle--is well thought of by me...and one or two others in this world besides his mother.

[Sergeant Rock]

For those of you that recommend it - how can you do so with OP. 109 played in this way?!?!?!

Because I'm not allergic to slower tempos, and I hope others aren't as well. In fact, the reason I like it is because it's so slow, and different in a way that makes musical sense to me. Since his tempos relate to one another, I don't feel the incohesion you hear. Those first few bars, the opening melody, sound perfect at Gilels' pace: spacious, deep, poetic. Once heard, I can't imagine preferring it any other way and I wonder why he's the only pianist to play it like this (at least among the op.109s in my collection...even Arrau sounds rushed in comparison). I remember Gramophone described Gilels' playing in the late sonatas as Olympian. Good description. I too think it lofty, majestic, serene, and utterly beautiful.

Sarge

[mc ukrneal]

Because I'm not allergic to slower tempos, and I hope others aren't as well. In fact, the reason I like it is because it's so slow, and different in a way that makes musical sense to me. Since his tempos relate to one another, I don't feel the incohesion you hear. Those first few bars, the opening melody, sound perfect at Gilels' pace: spacious, deep, poetic. Once heard, I can't imagine preferring it any other way and I wonder why he's the only pianist to play it like this (at least among the op.109s in my collection...even Arrau sounds rushed in comparison). I remember Gramophone described Gilels' playing in the late sonatas as Olympian. Good description. I too think it lofty, majestic, serene, and utterly beautiful.

Sarge

I dont think I am allergic - at least, I never went out of my way to avoid any version whether slow or fast.

[Sergeant Rock]

I dont think I am allergic - at least, I never went out of my way to avoid any version whether slow or fast.

And yet you had an allergic reaction 

Sarge

[Brian]

Because I'm not allergic to slower tempos, and I hope others aren't as well. In fact, the reason I like it is because it's so slow, and different in a way that makes musical sense to me. Since his tempos relate to one another, I don't feel the incohesion you hear. Those first few bars, the opening melody, sound perfect at Gilels' pace: spacious, deep, poetic. Once heard, I can't imagine preferring it any other way and I wonder why he's the only pianist to play it like this (at least among the op.109s in my collection...even Arrau sounds rushed in comparison). I remember Gramophone described Gilels' playing in the late sonatas as Olympian. Good description. I too think it lofty, majestic, serene, and utterly beautiful.

Sarge

This. His Op. 109 is not my favorite - that may be Penelope Crawford on fortepiano, at the moment - but another place where his slowness may be controversial is the fugue in Op. 110. It is not "objective" or Bach-like as it is probably supposed to be, and it certainly is not "Allegro ma non troppo"; I think he's more meditating on the fugue than playing it outright. And yet the cumulative emotional effect is such that by the time he gets to the (in his conception) absolutely titanic final bars, I'm swept up and don't especially care that his style might be in some way inauthentic.

By the way, my favorite Gilels readings are 'Les adieux,' Op 27/1, Op 26, the Eroica variations, and, yes, that wacky Op 110.

[mc ukrneal]

And yet you had an allergic reaction 

Sarge

Perhaps. But it may have been to something other than the slowness. I am fully willing to admit if it is so, but let me take another stab at it at a later date. Perhaps I was just surprised or in the wrong the mood or something.

[Madiel]

It's well thought of by me. That whole disc--in fact, his whole cycle--is well thought of by me...and one or two others in this world besides his mother.

Well, yes, the cycle IS good.  Although I wouldn't say the whole cycle... I think I've mentioned on this very thread before, sometimes he pushes too far.  I'm almost up to re-listening to the Appassionata, and my memories of it are that it's over-the-top.

[Sergeant Rock]

Perhaps. But it may have been to something other than the slowness. I am fully willing to admit if it is so, but let me take another stab at it at a later date. Perhaps I was just surprised or in the wrong the mood or something.

Keep us posted. I have no vested interest in promoting the box but I am interested in your reaction to it. How much of the contents of the box have you heard? Would like to know if you get along with his Pathetique and Waldstein.

Sarge

[mc ukrneal]

Keep us posted. I have no vested interest in promoting the box but I am interested in your reaction to it. How much of the contents of the box have you heard? Would like to know if you get along with his Pathetique and Waldstein.

Sarge

Will do! So far, for both Firkusny and Gilels, I have only listened to 109. So I have a bunch to go.

[Coopmv]

Well I am convinced now and will probably start collecting what I can. I just realized he plays some of the concertos in the Steinberg ICON set that I have (including some Beethoven), so I will bump that up the pile.

I enjoyed the Steinberg ICON set and still have a few CD's to go ...

[DavidRoss]

Well, yes, the cycle IS good.  Although I wouldn't say the whole cycle... I think I've mentioned on this very thread before, sometimes he pushes too far.  I'm almost up to re-listening to the Appassionata, and my memories of it are that it's over-the-top.

I like his "pushing." It's how I imagine Beethoven himself playing.

[Holden]

Vaguely curious to know, is Kovacevich's Waldstein well thought of?

Because it's the only I've got, but I thoroughly enjoyed it the other day.

The Waldstein is one of my favourites and I rate the Kovacevich very highly. It has nearly all the attributes and the most important is a first movement that has a forward impetus. Other Waldsteins I also rate very highly are the Gilels from 1966 in Aix-en-Provence, Dubrovka Tomsic and the best of all IMO - Rudolf Serkin - which has everything

[xochitl]

speaking of unsatisfactory op.109's i heard kempff mono yesterday and was so disappointed i stopped it in the 1st mvmt exposition...skipped ahead to the last mvmt and also played about 2 minutes before i couldn't take more.  there was no tension or forward drive at all.  it sounded to me like the man had just woken up or something

just out of curiosity i checked out the stereo recording and ended up playing it all the way through [god bless spotify!] and was very impressed, even awed in the last movement


ive been meaning to try richter's beethoven.  is it recommendable?  his live op.57 kinda scared me off.