Beethoven's Piano Sonatas

[Brian]

And opus 22 could also be a great candidate for a blind comparison.

If I could play the piano, and if I could then record a Beethoven sonata cycle, I would begin with Op. 22. It just feels like an exciting beginning to a journey. (And it contains a wide range of expressive demands.)

[Cosi bel do]

Could it be, that this is intended? So what you hear as lack of precision is meant as microagogic expression?

I am not unfamiliar with that. Serkin is a great example of what you call "microagocic expression" and that I describe as a kind of "trembling" that just gives a lot of expression to a line. That's not what I hear in Kempff. There is nothing prepared in this lack of precision. It seems that Kempff is too frequently coping with his technical limitations to prepare anything.

[aquablob]

If I could play the piano, and if I could then record a Beethoven sonata cycle, I would begin with Op. 22. It just feels like an exciting beginning to a journey. (And it contains a wide range of expressive demands.)

I've been playing through it a lot recently, and the more often I play it and the more closely I examine the score, the more subtle motivic/thematic relationships between the movements I find. It's really a standout work I think, and definitely a personal favorite of mine.

I am not unfamiliar with that. Serkin is a great example of what you call "microagocic expression" and that I describe as a kind of "trembling" that just gives a lot of expression to a line. That's not what I hear in Kempff. There is nothing prepared in this lack of precision. It seems that Kempff is too frequently coping with his technical limitations to prepare anything.

Okay, you're perfectly entitled to your taste in pianists, but to call Wilhelm Kempff technically incapable and an amateur is just silly.

[Cosi bel do]

just silly.

Well, and one more insult. The Kempff-mania apparently drives to extreme behaviour. Who could have predicted that.

[Mookalafalas]

Okay, you're perfectly entitled to your taste in pianists, but to call Wilhelm Kempff technically incapable and an amateur is just silly.

   Certainly it needs more validation. I got a Kempff set just because it seemed it was universally agreed that he is a fine player--with a plain, non-dramatic style, but technically excellent (which, no doubt could make him anathema to those who like a more assertive and adventurous musician). As a rather un-charismatic, low-key, non-self promoting type he certainly didn't do anything to fool people.  Is the world of classical music mysteriously delusional about Kempff, or is this opinion an outlier? Sorry, but it's hard not lean towards the latter. 

EDIT: a new one came up while I was typing. "Kempff mania"??     Come on. 

[mc ukrneal]

When I think of Kempff in Beethoven, I inevitably think of Barenboim in Beethoven. Whatever you may think of them (and I am decidedly less enthusiastic about Barenboim), they both have a clear understanding and thorough feel for Beethoven's works. Whenever I listen to them, I cannot help but think that here was a pianist who really has something to say about the music. I say this not agreeing with all the decisions that both make when they play the works. Perhaps Kempff brings a lightness of touch when one wishes something weightier - but I personally enjoy this approach. Poetry in motion.

[kishnevi]

By the way, if I was to organize a blind comparison on a sonata, which one would you like (speaking to all potential future participants) ? Waldstein ? Les Adieux ? Another one ?

What about one of the sonatas that don't get all the press, like Op. 27/1 (you know, the one that isn't the Moonlight),  one of the Op. 14s or (from the later ones) "A Therese"?

[trung224]

  I found Kempff played too understated in the middle-heroic sonatas like Appasionata, Waldstein or Hammerklavier. Nor did he bring the enigmatic quality Opus 110 and 111. Unlike Richter and Schnabel, who have improvisation in both tempo and phrasing throughout all movements, Kempff only did it occasionally some spakle moments in score, and played so beautifully in the remainder.  That kind of approach suites the early and middle sonatas really well, especially on the Pathetique, Op.27, or Op.31 No.3.
  In sum, Kempff is not really my absolutly favorite Beethoven interpreters, who are Schnabel, Edwin Fischer and Richter in his prime ( from 1950-1975), but I admired him. To me, saying him as amateur pianist is disgraceful.

[Ken B]

Put me firmly in the Kempff is The God of Beethoven camp. (Brendel is the God of Schubert.)  I really like a lot of others here, Lortie, Kovacevich, Ashkenazy, and they all have better sound, and for that reason I might recommend Ashkenazy to people (cheap Canada only edition). But for me Kempff is home.

[Mandryka]

Well, this is less a problem of what I'm hearing that of what I'm not. To be clear, I'm not that concerned by technical difficulties, wrong notes, etc., that can be found even in Richter best performances. The problem is that Kempff is not precise, there is a lack of structure, of rythmic clarity. Just listen to the first minute of his Waldstein and compare to any good pianist, Serkin, Richter, Gilels, Grinberg, Schnabel, Gieseking, Lupu (not all are my favourites in this sonata, but all are giving a faitful reading), really anyone (I even like Cziffra in the Waldstein !).
To take another example, Nat is not at all the more precise, but you never feel that he loses his footing. This is the case with Kempff.
If you don't hear the big difference then, I don't know what to say, maybe we simply don't have the same perception of this music...

I don't think that Kempff's mono op 53/i is a high point, so I can see where you're coming from. The live Waldstein from 1961 is better.

But try Kempff in a sonata where he was more in his element, like op 2/2 or 10/3 or op 28 or op 109 or even op 106 or the mono op 111/ii. I think one reason I play Kempff's Beethoven is that he seems to have things to say in early and late Beethoven, which is really what I'm mostly interested in. I don't like the heroic middle period sonatas. One of the reasons I like his Hammerklavier so much is that it's not epic.

I think another thing to take into account is that, although his basic conception of the music is pretty stable, how successful he is in terms of execution is more variable. So you may have to hunt around for the recordings which show what he can do. Also his sound was more bass up, and more forceful, than the DG recordings suggest - that makes a difference too. Of course wherther you think it's worth the effort depends on how much you're intrigued by his conception of Beethoven.

Richter didn't play op 53 did he? I too like Cziffra's Waldstein, partly because it's not epic.

[Cosi bel do]

Richter didn't play op 53 did he?

No, of course not, these were just a few names of pianists I usually like in Beethoven.

About Kempff, well, I guess I explained my point sufficiently. I took the example of the Waldstein, but I don't feel different in other sonatas. His early sonatas are especially dull (as are his Schubert, by the way).

The blind comparison will be necessary to continue this discussion with an empirical basis.

What about one of the sonatas that don't get all the press, like Op. 27/1 (you know, the one that isn't the Moonlight),  one of the Op. 14s or (from the later ones) "A Therese"?

The problem with these sonatas is that they also are among the less recorded sonatas, it limits the possibility of a comparison (just think : no Richter, no Serkin, ni Gilels (in op. 78)...  Otherwise this would have been a fine idea.
Now that I think, this is also a problem with op. 22 (no Gilels). Well, maybe op. 26 then...

[Mandryka]

Some may have notice that I'm a maniac about comparing versions. A few months back I've listened to all my Beethoven piano sonatas CDs and compared all of them. So now I know what my favourite versions are in each of the sonatas.

I sometimes like several versions, I haven't re-compared them already. I wait to get to a higher level of my comparison sickness.

I still have to listen again to Schnabel, and also to Frank. And probably a few isolated versions (at least a few Richter and Gilels I know I recently bought, or forgot during my comparison).

1 Schnabel 1934 / Grinberg 1966 / Richter 6/1976
2 Schnabel 1934 / Heidsieck / Annie Fischer 1977-78 / Guilels 1984
3 Richter 12/1/1975 / Annie Fischer 1977-78
4 Schnabel 1935 / Richter 12/1/1975 / Sokolov 3/1991
5 Schnabel 1935 / Backhaus 1963
6 Grinberg 1964
7 Richter 6/1976 / Guilels 21/9/1980 / Guilels 10/1980
8 Serkin 1962 / Annie Fischer 1977-78
9 Heidsieck
10 Arrau 4/1966 / Heidsieck / Annie Fischer 1977-78
11 Grinberg 1964 / Richter 20/10/68 / Annie Fischer 1977-78 / Michelangeli 7/4/1988
12 Serkin 8/12/1970 / Michelangeli 13/4/1982
13 Grinberg 1964 / Guilels 9/1980
14 Backhaus 10/1958 / Annie Fischer 2/11/1958 / Grinberg 1959 / Arrau 6/1962 / Guilels 9/1980
15 Edwin Fischer 28/7/1954 / Backhaus 11/1961
16 Schnabel 1935 / Backhaus 4/1969 / Serkin 1970
17 Schnabel 1934 / Richter 2/6/1965 /
18 Nat 1955 / Richter 2/6/1965 / Grinberg 1966 / Fischer 1977-78
19 Richter 17/1/65 / Backhaus 3/68 / Annie Fischer 1977-78 / Lupu 12/1977
20 Nat 1954 / Grinberg 1965 / Lupu 12/1977
21 Serkin 1975
22 Grinberg 65 / Arrau 10/65
23 Gieseking 23/6/1951 / Levy 1956 / Richter 1/11/1959 / Gilels 14/1/61 / Serkin 62
24 Schnabel 32 / Heidsieck
25 Backhaus 10/63 / Annie Fischer 1977-78
26 Gilels 12/74 / Gilels 10/80
27 Gilels 22/4/57
28 Yudina 1958 / Grinberg 1966 / Heidsieck / Sokolov 3/1991
29 Richter 2/6/75
30 Gieseking 1955 / Serkin 1976
31 Schnabel 32 / Edwin Fischer 38 / Serkin 71 / Guller 73 / Richter 10/91
32 Edwin Fischer 1954 / Serkin 67 / Michelangeli 1988 (Bregenz)

Overall, Richter is the pianist I prefer in Beethoven, followed by Serkin, Annie Fischer and Maria Grinberg (I really love also a pianist like Edwin Fischer but he only recorded a few sonatas).

So, first let me say that it's refreshing to meet someone who likes late Michelangeli. I'm very keen on the late recordings myself.

Second, thanks for drawing my attention to Grinberg's wonderful sonata 13, op 27/1. I'd not noticed how remarkable it is before. I'd also passed over her op 10/2, which is if anything even more valuable - I haven't been lucky in finding performances of this which I like. Have you heard her LP of op 53, and even more remarkable, the LP with op 13? If not, I'd be happy to let you have FLAC transfers.

And third, where is Sokolov's 3/91 recital to be found?

[aquablob]

Well, and one more insult. The Kempff-mania apparently drives to extreme behaviour. Who could have predicted that.

Insult? Extreme behavior?

No.

Factual observation? Yes. You said that Kempff was technically incapable and an amateur. Those are factually incorrect statements, not just matters of opinion, so it is indeed "silly" to assert them.

Anyone who can play the difficult repertoire that Kempff played to great acclaim is not technically incapable. I'll grant that pianists like Richter, Michelangeli, Cziffra, Argerich, and Hamelin (to name a few) have possessed superior techniques, but that hardly makes Kempff technically incapable. What a bizarre claim to make!

And "amateur" means "nonprofessional" or "hobbyist." Kempff was a professional pianist, so it's simply factually incorrect to label him an amateur.

Calling you out on silliness is not the same as insulting you. And it's not extreme. I suggest you grow some thicker skin if you intend to continue conversing with others.

Oh, and "Kempff-mania"? That's even sillier.   

[Holden]

Richter didn't play Op 53 did he?

No, of course not, these were just a few names of pianists I usually like in Beethoven.

Both as pianists and interpreters Richter and Kempff are diametrically opposed so I can see, as a Richterphile, why you might not like what Kempff does with Beethoven. The converse is also true with some describing Richter's LvB as bombastic so it's the old case of one man's meat being another man's poison.

[aquablob]

Both as pianists and interpreters Richter and Kempff are diametrically opposed so I can see, as a Richterphile, why you might not like what Kempff does with Beethoven. The converse is also true with some describing Richter's LvB as bombastic so it's the old case of one man's meat being another man's poison.

I like Richter, too!

[The new erato]

And "amateur" means "nonprofessional" or "hobbyist." Kempff was a professional pianist, so it's simply factually incorrect to label him an amateur.

Well: amateur actually means soebody who does something out of love. No higher praise than that. While a professional is someody who does things for money.................

[aquablob]

Trigger warning: pedantry

Well: amateur actually means soebody who does something out of love. No higher praise than that. While a professional is someody who does things for money.................

I think that you're giving the word's etymology too much weight.

Here is American Heritage:

1. One who engages in an art, science, study, or athletic activity as a pastime rather than as a profession.
2. Sports An athlete who has never accepted money, or who accepts money under restrictions specified by a regulatory body, for participating in a competition.
3. One lacking the skill of a professional, as in an art.

And Oxford:

a person who engages in a pursuit, esp. a sport, on an unpaid basis.
a person considered contemptibly inept at a particular activity

And Merriam-Webster:

1 : DEVOTEE, ADMIRER
2 : one who engages in a pursuit, study, science, or sport as a pastime rather than as a profession
3 : one lacking in experience and competence in an art or science

AMATEUR, DILETTANTE, DABBLER, TYRO mean a person who follows a pursuit without attaining proficiency or professional status. AMATEUR often applies to one practicing an art without mastery of its essentials <a painting obviously done by an amateur>; in sports it may also suggest not so much lack of skill but avoidance of direct remuneration <remained an amateur despite lucrative offers>.

So I maintain that "nonprofessional" and "hobbyist" were pretty decent synonyms. Regardless, "hobbyist" isn't far from what you're getting at, is it?

[Cosi bel do]

Insult? Extreme behavior?

No.

Factual observation? Yes. You said that Kempff was technically incapable and an amateur. Those are factually incorrect statements, not just matters of opinion, so it is indeed "silly" to assert them.

Anyone who can play the difficult repertoire that Kempff played to great acclaim is not technically incapable. I'll grant that pianists like Richter, Michelangeli, Cziffra, Argerich, and Hamelin (to name a few) have possessed superior techniques, but that hardly makes Kempff technically incapable. What a bizarre claim to make!

And "amateur" means "nonprofessional" or "hobbyist." Kempff was a professional pianist, so it's simply factually incorrect to label him an amateur.

Calling you out on silliness is not the same as insulting you. And it's not extreme. I suggest you grow some thicker skin if you intend to continue conversing with others.

Oh, and "Kempff-mania"? That's even sillier.   

André Rieu is a professional violinist, too.

[Cosi bel do]

So, first let me say that it's refreshing to meet someone who likes late Michelangeli. I'm very keen on the late recordings myself.

Second, thanks for drawing my attention to Grinberg's wonderful sonata 13, op 27/1. I'd not noticed how remarkable it is before. I'd also passed over her op 10/2, which is if anything even more valuable - I haven't been lucky in finding performances of this which I like. Have you heard her LP of op 53, and even more remarkable, the LP with op 13? If not, I'd be happy to let you have FLAC transfers.

And third, where is Sokolov's 3/91 recital to be found?

Yes, Michelangeli is indeed exceptional in these late recordings. It is always a little difficult to appreciate any other version after having listened to him.

You're very welcome about Grinberg ! I know both versions of op. 13 by Grinberg (both very good) but only the stereo version of 53. The FLAC would be a greatly appreciated gift

Sokolov in Verona, march 1991 :



(also in the Naive complete Sokolov recordings set)

[aquablob]

André Rieu is a professional violinist, too.

And...?