Beethoven's Piano Sonatas

[Mandryka]

What I tried to point out was that there seem to be very few recordings going for op.22 "in 3" at all. And except for Gulda they are usually closer to 7 min than to 6 (so closer to 100 than 108, which is still in the same range) and very few at the slowest end of what could still be counted in 3. Apparently most players prefer what is closer to andante (ca. 72-82) in 8ths to adagio in dotted quarters. So in a sense Arrau and Gilels bite the bullet and get closer to adagio (in 8ths) than those in between.

I have 3 discs of Kovacevich's EMI series (not the one with op.22). The sound is not so great ("hard and brittle") and he is sometimes a little brutal. The single discs are mostly out of print and somewhat pricey and I don't really like the sonata op.22 enough to get another one although both he and Pollini would certainly be candidates for me. And I actually like Gulda here, I think he is too fast in the finale but the adagio works quite well for me. Similarly with op.10/1 I listened to last night. The adagio has a nice flow despite being at the faster end of normal but the first movement at 80 bars/min or even faster was too breathless for me (most play it around 70). (Then there's Gould who goes through 10/1i at about 112 bars/min and rushes through the thing in 2:40 without repeat...)

Generally, it seems that Gilels and some others take in some of these movements the position that even "sLmall notes" (like 32nds) should go rather slowish, although the melody at the beginning of a movement quite clearly goes in quarters or dotted quarters.

Another outlier from Gilels is the variation movement in op.14/2 where he (Gould as well) ignores the alla breve marking and plays it almost at half the speed of most others (8:05 vs. typically around 5 min.)

It would be interesting to really listen carefully and analytically to Gilels sometime. I mean just see exactly what he does where. I don't have the time right now, and anyway my main interest at the moment isn't really in 19th century music, but I remember some astonishing freedoms with Schumann's etudes. Almost randomly slow tempos.

I bet he's as much a law to himself as Yudina was. Richter and Sofronitsky seem much more middle of the road, but maybe I'm wrong.,

[Jo498]

Gilels does not really take liberties. He seems extremely thorough, very finely graded dynamics, attention to detail, strong contrasts (listen to e.g. the beginning "question" in op.31/3i, I think I understand what people like about his interpretations (because I like many of those aspects myself). But overall tending to the severe and serious (and slow). As a relative beginner Gilels' was the first box I bought, so in several of the lesser known pieces (e.g. opp.22,31/1) his were the first interpretations I heard (I had many of the better known sonatas long before I got that box).
When I got Gulda's about a year or two later (this was in the late 1990s) some movements turned into different music. I still find that I "get" the long line and overall form of many movements better in Gulda's fast and sometimes slighly "mechanistic" readings than in slow ones, despite their scrupulous attention to details. And although I find some of his too fast nowadays, I usually still enjoy their drive and energy.
(So I have a "personal history" with those recordings...)

But what is more interesting to me now than what some or other pianists do, is the importance of tempo and larger rhythmic units. Although I think Kolisch is to be doubted in some specific tempo suggestions (he wanted to "destroy" a particular romanticized way of interpretation and is sometimes overstressing things), he was right to point out the importance of such factors and how distorted pieces can get when they are customarily played (usually) too slow.

[Holden]

After vacillating for a couple of years now I've finally decided to fork out for this as it comes so highly recommended. While I don't mind fast tempi in the opening and closing movements of the LvB sonatas, the tempi of the slow movements must feel like they are at the right speed and not merely glossed over. As I've not heard virtually any of this set (but have sampled his earlier Decca/Philips recording) I'm just hoping that Gulda will oblige. This will now go alongside my other sets (not all complete*) which include: Annie Fischer, Kempff (mono), Barenboim (EMI) Ciani, Schnabel, Gilels*, Gerard Willems, Bruce Hungerford*, Rudolf Serkin*, and Sviatoslav Richter*. I'm at work and might have forgotten a couple.

So was this $100 well spent or not?

[George]

So was this $100 well spent or not?

Absolutely! The only sets that I like more are Annie Fischer's and Lucchesini's. I need to hear Lucchesini's set again, but it may be my new favorite. Hopefully Brilliant Classics rescues it from OOP-land, like they did with the Gulda/Amadeo set.

[Jo498]

Gulda has very fleet tempi throughout; many listeners find some of his slow movements too fast. (I think he is the fastest I have heard in several of them although Backhaus, Gould, Kovacevich, Pollini might be faster in others).

I rarely do, but I think his combination of high velocity and somewhat "cool" approach is not for everyone. And I think he is (almost) too fast in some fast movements, e.g. op.10/1i. But overall I like this a lot. It was my second cycle after a bunch of single CDs with about half of the better known sonatas and the almost complete Gilels and I bought it in 98 or 99, in the old "white" amadeo guise with one track per sonata. And found his approach very refreshing compared to the slow and severe Gilels.

[jlaurson]

Annie Fischer, Kempff (mono), Barenboim (EMI) Ciani, Schnabel, Gilels*, Gerard Willems, Bruce Hungerford*, Rudolf Serkin*, and Sviatoslav Richter*.

So was this $100 well spent or not?

Yes, absolutely. $100 is a bargain for those works in those interpretations. Although, technically speaking (rather than *value*-wise), $100 seem a little steep: I see the set listed for around $40,- in either this oop guise on Brilliant or its newer re-issue incarnation on Decca: http://amzn.to/1Wt99Pw There are claims that the Brilliant is the better deal, because it doesn't suffer from AMSI remastering. I have both versions and while I've not listened to them side-by-side to compare specifically, I've not noticed a particular difference.

Good collection you have; if I had them, I'd add Backhaus Stereo for complete happiness.

Beethoven Sonatas - A Survey of Complete Cycles

[Jo498]

$100 seems a lot for the Brilliant re-issue. The eloquence re-issue is offered for EUR 25 at amazon.de, the Brilliant for about 30 (with cheaper marketplace offers)
(I paid about 70 DM 17 or 18 years ago for the amadeo box, but this was also a good offer). I have not heard the AMSI but I have been told that the differences are very slight.
I have heard/compared the eloquence vs. the older harmonia mundi of Gulda's Diabellis (they have far more problematic sound to begin with) and the differences was small (a little in favor of the somewhat less dry eloquence).

[GioCar]

An excellent thread, that convinced me to get the Annie Fischer set.
I already have the Backhaus, the Arrau, the Goode, the Barenboim 1980's DG, the (uncomplete) Gilels and the Pollini.

I found the entire Fischer set (FLAC files) on prestoclassical.co.uk for less than £10! 
The physical CDs are almost ten times more expensive.

[PerfectWagnerite]

$100 seems a lot for the Brilliant re-issue. The eloquence re-issue is offered for EUR 25 at amazon.de, the Brilliant for about 30 (with cheaper marketplace offers)
(I paid about 70 DM 17 or 18 years ago for the amadeo box, but this was also a good offer). I have not heard the AMSI but I have been told that the differences are very slight.
I have heard/compared the eloquence vs. the older harmonia mundi of Gulda's Diabellis (they have far more problematic sound to begin with) and the differences was small (a little in favor of the somewhat less dry eloquence).

For a bit more you could buy this which has the Gulda set:


NOT to be confused with this one:

where they replaced Gulda with Brendel for some unspeakable reason !

[Holden]

$100 seems a lot for the Brilliant re-issue. The eloquence re-issue is offered for EUR 25 at amazon.de, the Brilliant for about 30 (with cheaper marketplace offers)
(I paid about 70 DM 17 or 18 years ago for the amadeo box, but this was also a good offer). I have not heard the AMSI but I have been told that the differences are very slight.
I have heard/compared the eloquence vs. the older harmonia mundi of Gulda's Diabellis (they have far more problematic sound to begin with) and the differences was small (a little in favor of the somewhat less dry eloquence).

The $40 sets were on Amazon US and all the US sellers that I thought would be OK would not post to Australia. As a result I had to get this from the UK. I just don't understand why a lot of Amazon US stuff (more than just CDs BTW) can't be posted to Australia.

[André]

Re: Amazon US. You would think they would sell to Canada,non  ? Well, think again: the cheapest items can't be mailed here ("sorry, there is a problem with the address you have chosen, blablazzzzzzz...."). When they do allow the mailing, the postal charge is 2, 3, 5, 10 times the amount of your purchase (14.99$ per item, equivalent to 19$ CAD). Clearly there is a tariff issue here that makes no commercial sense.

[Gurn Blanston]

Thoughts?

[asin]B00D8DVFFA[/asin]

[asin]B004E2WK6W[/asin]

[jlaurson]

Thoughts?

I've been trying to be totally bowled over by that Alpha release -- but so far we haven't clicked. Nothing to dislike... just, for whatever that's worth, no immediate "wow" effect. Could be my deficiency, of course, and probably is.

[Holden]

I've finished listening to the Brilliant Gulda cycle and am somewhat underwhelmed. I started with Op2/1 and went on from there. Initial impressions were good but as I moved through the cycle I became a bit bored with the relentless sameness of approach. No 'Sturm und Drang' here I'm thinking. There was the odd sonata or two where Gulda did take time to smell the roses but this was only occasionally. One fact that does stand out is that there is not a single sonata where I can't find a superior version by another pianist. Yes, technically the playing is excellent but it lacks, for want of a better word, 'soul'

To many who have touted the cycle as one of the greats this sounds like heresy but unless a second listen changes my mind I will sell the set.

[prémont]

I've finished listening to the Brilliant Gulda cycle and am somewhat underwhelmed. I started with Op2/1 and went on from there. Initial impressions were good but as I moved through the cycle I became a bit bored with the relentless sameness of approach. No 'Sturm und Drang' here I'm thinking. There was the odd sonata or two where Gulda did take time to smell the roses but this was only occasionally. One fact that does stand out is that there is not a single sonata where I can't find a superior version by another pianist. Yes, technically the playing is excellent but it lacks, for want of a better word, 'soul'

To many who have touted the cycle as one of the greats this sounds like heresy but unless a second listen changes my mind I will sell the set.

I have never really appreciated Gulda's Beethoven for the reasons you mention, and I have commented about it more times in this forum. Mandryka called somewhere Gulda's playing "matter of fact", and I think this hits the nail on the head.

[Drasko]

Thoughts?

I rather like the Zig-Zag one, with late sonatas. Both Lubimov's playing and the sound of the piano, which is really lovely; full bodied, warm and woody.

Haven't heard the other one, but wasn't there an earlier Erato recording with similar (same?) sonatas? I remember liking that one as well.

[Gurn Blanston]

I've been trying to be totally bowled over by that Alpha release -- but so far we haven't clicked. Nothing to dislike... just, for whatever that's worth, no immediate "wow" effect. Could be my deficiency, of course, and probably is.

Or maybe not. I have several Lubimov disks, it would be extraordinary if every one of them was brilliant!   Thanks for the input, Jens.

[Sergeant Rock]

I've finished listening to the Brilliant Gulda cycle and am somewhat underwhelmed.

You aren't alone.

Sarge

[Gurn Blanston]

I rather like the Zig-Zag one, with late sonatas. Both Lubimov's playing and the sound of the piano, which is really lovely; full bodied, warm and woody.

Haven't heard the other one, but wasn't there an earlier Erato recording with similar (same?) sonatas? I remember liking that one as well.

Thanks, Draško. Everything I have read about that one has been positive.

Yes, I don't think it is exactly the same. I have it, but haven't played it for 2 or 3 years (Haydn frowns on my Beethoven time). It certainly has Moonlight, but I think the others are Waldstein and Appassionata. One difference right away, it is on a genuine Erard, an 1805 IIRC, rather than a reproduction, and in the more impassioned sections, there is doubtless some clanging. I have always reserved my recommendations of it for people who I know can look beyond that, because it would drive some people crazy!!   

[jlaurson]

I've finished listening to the Brilliant Gulda cycle and am somewhat underwhelmed. I started with Op2/1 and went on from there. Initial impressions were good but as I moved through the cycle I became a bit bored with the relentless sameness of approach. No 'Sturm und Drang' here I'm thinking. There was the odd sonata or two where Gulda did take time to smell the roses but this was only occasionally. One fact that does stand out is that there is not a single sonata where I can't find a superior version by another pianist. Yes, technically the playing is excellent but it lacks, for want of a better word, 'soul'

To many who have touted the cycle as one of the greats this sounds like heresy but unless a second listen changes my mind I will sell the set.

Seems reasonable. It's certainly not what one might suspect, given his flamboyant personality. But it's also the reason the cycle is well liked... just as some (myself included) love and adore Backhaus for making you see the forest rather than showing you all the trees.