Help with Annie Fischer’s Beethoven Piano Sonatas cycle

[JBS]

I'm in the negative column with Ms. Fischer: choppy, unspontaneous, micromanaged are the words I would use.
I suppose it can be blamed on the "here a splice there a splice" approach, but at any rate I was fairly unimpressed and never quite understood why it has the admiration it gets.

[Mandryka]

I think they give a "range" like 1977-80 or so. They stem from the late 70s, but were never approved for release by Fischer and therefore published some time after her death in the 1990s, and, as already said, supposedly put together from a multitude of takes.
I have had these in the "introuvables" box for a long time and the continued praise in some corners of the internet (long before I knew of this forum, probably going back to the late 1990s after the hungaroton appeared) made be buy two volumes of the hungaroton around 10 or 12 years ago when they were on sale.

I agree that the overall approach seems somewhat similar (and it's less than 20 years between the EMI and the hungaroton, less time, I believe, than between Pollinis Late Sonatas and his last recorded Beethoven sonatas). The sound is not great on either (the EMI being muffled late 50s, some mono, the hungaroton almost brutally direct). I think they are worthwhile but I don't quite get the "über-status" they have acquired (and I have the strong impression that this status is particularly pronounced in US-dominated internet fora... which is neither good nor bad, of course, just a bit odd, but correct me, if I am wrong and Diapason or Fonoforum have waxed lyrical about them).
Years ago I compared a bunch of op.31/3 in some discussion in another forum and I wrote that Fischer's (EMI) was the grimmest, least humorous version of this sonata I encountered, nevertheless oddly compelling and worth listening.
I could probably say similar things about all of the 12 or 14 sonatas I have heard. Of course, for some sonatas the grim intensity and expressivity has almost no downside but as overall far more sonatas are lyrical or playful than dramatic (and the dramatic ones are often the ones with MANY compelling recordings) this is for me an overall downside. Because the hungaroton discs are hard to find and expensive separately and I don't do streaming or downloads, I am not in a hurry to get the remainder; it's a good set but I don't agree that it deserves the exalted status it has in some quarters.

@aligreto: Try op.110 and 111 from the hungaroton, or maybe op.10/3.

I really wonder whether that unique sense of swagger and muscularity comes mainly from that "brutal" Hungaroton piano sound. It may be realistic - if you sit in the front row and it's an old and not the best Bosendorfer.

[Jo498]

The very sound certainly contributes to the muscular and "powerful" impression.
However, as hvbias pointed out above, the EMI recordings of ca. 20 years earlier (around 1960) are similar in approach, although not in sound. And I doubt that with early stereo tape technology they had many takes and splices, certainly not to the extent the late 1970s recordings have.

[Holden]

I have this cycle and rate it very highly but with a caveat. Out the 32, there is only one sonata in there that I would say is the best version I've heard. I can find better versions of the other 31 from other pianists.

One of the reasons I like the cycle is it's intensity and that it does get to the depth of many of the PS. There is passion as well as a good range of expression - she finds a degree of appropriate melancholy in a number of the slow movements. I find the degree of gravitas in a number of them works very well for how I like to hear Beethoven played. However, Fischer's style never varies and if you sat down to listen to all 32 in a couple of sessions this would become very evident and would also start to be annoying.

Now I could also say similar things about the Kempff mono cycle which I also rate highly and which is the polar opposite to Fischer's approach. His is a poetic and intimate approach with wonderful inner nuances and sense of fluidity and many of the sonatas benefit from this way of playing. However, this doesn't work for all the sonatas some of which do require a more muscular approach. A full listening session, like with the Fischer, would eventually become tiresome.

Like me, it sounds as if you have looked for individual favourite performances of each work. I believe this is the best way to go. You may end up with more than one favourite for some of the sonatas but that's OK. For example, Moravec's Op 13 is outstanding but I really like what Rubinstein does - it's very different from the Moravec but it works so well for me. I've got a Richter recording of the same work from 1959? which is also outstanding. I've kept all three.

[staxomega]

Hence the nickname "FrankenFischer cycle", which I do not think is undeserving. Personally, I find this heavy-handed editing work disqualifies it from being seriously and validly considered among other interpretations.

With the caveat that nearly everything studio related is going to be manipulated I will highlight and agree with you that it is the sloppy nature of the editing I have complaints with, not that they aren't single takes of every sonata. 

It's not you, it's the playing.
Let me add my voice to those who do not like her Beethoven cycle. At all. I find her playing heavy-hitting and insensitive to the music.

I find there is much beauty and sensitivity throughout the cycle. I like her Les Adieux as much as Kempff, Backhaus, Schnabel, Lucchesini: https://youtu.be/jiS-MQV6QwM

I also like the cycle because it's unapologetically bold and uniquely hers. Similar to a live recording of Brahms op. 5 sonata, she turns in a red hot firebrand performance the likes I've only seen matched by Zimerman (and incorrect of him to think these aren't good performances).

I think they give a "range" like 1977-80 or so. They stem from the late 70s, but were never approved for release by Fischer and therefore published some time after her death in the 1990s, and, as already said, supposedly put together from a multitude of takes.
I have had these in the "introuvables" box for a long time and the continued praise in some corners of the internet (long before I knew of this forum, probably going back to the late 1990s after the hungaroton appeared) made be buy two volumes of the hungaroton around 10 or 12 years ago when they were on sale.

I agree that the overall approach seems somewhat similar (and it's less than 20 years between the EMI and the hungaroton, less time, I believe, than between Pollinis Late Sonatas and his last recorded Beethoven sonatas). The sound is not great on either (the EMI being muffled late 50s, some mono, the hungaroton almost brutally direct). I think they are worthwhile but I don't quite get the "über-status" they have acquired (and I have the strong impression that this status is particularly pronounced in US-dominated internet fora... which is neither good nor bad, of course, just a bit odd, but correct me, if I am wrong and Diapason or Fonoforum have waxed lyrical about them).

Agree the EMI recordings are muffled.

I'm not sure it's a regional thing. When those EMI LPs turn up in UK pressings they sell for hundreds of pounds, I'm not so sure these are American buyers, I'd be more lead to believe it's the Japanese... a similar demographic that might think JSB's Sonatas and Partitas have never been bettered since Johanna Martzy.

The first time I heard these being praised to high heavens was in a British classical music book. The author also loved Backhaus, and this seems to be a commonality in people that like Fischer like Backhaus as well.

Years ago I compared a bunch of op.31/3 in some discussion in another forum and I wrote that Fischer's (EMI) was the grimmest, least humorous version of this sonata I encountered, nevertheless oddly compelling and worth listening.

I'll revisit this, I wouldn't be surprised by the bolded part. Humor is not on the top of the list of adjectives when I think of her playing.

I could probably say similar things about all of the 12 or 14 sonatas I have heard. Of course, for some sonatas the grim intensity and expressivity has almost no downside but as overall far more sonatas are lyrical or playful than dramatic (and the dramatic ones are often the ones with MANY compelling recordings) this is for me an overall downside.

What are the dramatic sonatas for you? I find Appassionata particularly problematic in vast majority of pianists hold back the reigns. The gold standard for me is Richter from December 23, 1960, an unparalleled account.

Hammerklavier is the other problematic (dramatic as well?) one. amw made a list in the main Beethoven Piano Sonata thread I find myself in agreement with, very few made the real top tier, like my own list.

I like Fischer quite a bit in both of those sonatas.

Because the hungaroton discs are hard to find and expensive separately and I don't do streaming or downloads, I am not in a hurry to get the remainder; it's a good set but I don't agree that it deserves the exalted status it has in some quarters.

Agree, I bought this as the older red box and even then Hungaroton priced it on the premium side, ~ $10 per CD when most box sets were far less back then.

I think this is a cycle one should come to after hearing several others. A personal 2nd or 3rd ranking for me is sort of meaningless compared to what is out there for others.

@aligreto: Try op.110 and 111 from the hungaroton, or maybe op.10/3.

Good suggestions. Fischer is what I would call a late Beethoven pianist.

What do you particularly like about Lucchesini?
(I think it's good and very impressive for live and mostly in pleasant sound but I also don't understand why it is often recommended so highly.
The Philips recordings by Kovacevich have more pleasant sound, are less "bangy" than the EMI and include the last 3 sonatas and op 101.

I've never heard any other cycle manage to carry out the sheer feeling, passion, and poetry without letting the music drag or slump (no tired trope of music being played slowly for a "spiritual quality") as well as Lucchesini did and I am including Kempff in that lot who I have heard all three complete cycles including the horrendous live in Japan.

The Adagio of the Hammerklavier: https://youtu.be/a3SWL-ZZCtw The most a dark, melancholy account of it ever. That single movement is one of the greatest things I have ever heard. And Lucchesini turns in a phenomenal closing movement played with such vigor and climbing towards the light, beautifully starkly contrasted against the Adagio. But all is not perfect as I think the opening movement does need to be played at Beethoven's tempo markings to allow the contrast with the grave third movement, where Lucchesini instead takes it slow.

I think op 109, 110 and 111 are up there with the very best as well. His personal rubato, that yearning quality in the opening of op. 110 (https://youtu.be/8qaEUQTQDHI), the darkness in op. 111 like the Hammerklavier. I've really heard nothing remotely like it from Les Adieux to 111.

Interestingly I find Maria Tipo recorded one of the very best op. 109, who Lucchesini studied with.

I'd very gladly give up all my cycles to live with just Lucchesini if forced to.

I think Gulda has a rather different style, usually less dramatic (more "kinetic") and expressive. He can be a bit "slick", very fast and not very expressive although I think sometimes I'd call this unpretentious and "natural", rather than plain, and I like his op.106 and 111 still a lot but I agree that the others are a bit prosaic (op.110 apparently was a huge favorite of Gulda and he frequently played it in recital).
As I wrote in the other reply, Fischer manages to make some sonatas (like 31/3 or 14/2) "work" despite lack of charm and humor but I find Gulda superior in most such pieces and these respects.

Between Kovacevich and Gulda Amadeo, Fischer does lean more towards the former. Kovacevich misses on those "transcendental" aspects and feeling that Fischer has.

Unpretentious I can get onboard with Gulda... though in that case I'd consider very few to be pretentious, I guess Gould, Fazil Say, maybe Schiff ECM, Russell Sherman. I do like the latter but that is in some part due to my Boston area bias 

There's another think I could say, at the level of anecdote. Every time I listen to something from the cycle I'm reminded of how excellent it is. Amazingly excellent at times. The named sonatas, op 2s and 10s, the last sonatas -- all incredible really.  It's just that I don't like it much.

That's funny, I sort of feel the same. When I haven't heard it in a long time I get annoyed thinking about the edits. Then I listen to it and that feeling washes away.

[aligreto]

Ms Fischer is hard hitting, intense, and almost fraught at times.  Her playing is vigorous and mostly avoids a softer style, even in places where it may benefit the music.  Subtlety is not a priority. 

Thank you for your response. I like the quote above from you. It helps me to contextualise her presentation style.

[aligreto]

It was recorded over many years, it was edited rather sloppily from numerous takes, and to the best of my memory the booklet makes no mention of these edits...

I had originally forgotten to mention these edits which I had already come across. They are so bad. I wonder who sanctioned such poor editing and why? This has more of an impact on my listening pleasure than the quality of the sound to be honest.

[aligreto]

  I am horrible at trying to describe why I like a recording, or qualities of the performance.  But since you seem to want that kind of feedback, I'd say her's is authoritative, strongly articulated and defined;  possessing a unique personality and interpretation of the music. 

All of which I think creates a distinctive and remarkable performance of Beethoven.

Thank you for your thoughts and I think that you did a fine job in articulating them. Once again I am reading terms like authoritative and strongly articulated. I will need to pay more attention to these characteristics as I progress with my listening.

[aligreto]

I personally dislike her Beethoven enormously for all the reasons which make Todd like it  -- hard hitting, vigorous, commanding, confident and extrovert. These things are just taste but I will say this -- although I dislike it, it's a very good cycle and it really needs to be heard. One day I may even acquire the taste for it.

There's another think I could say, at the level of anecdote. Every time I listen to something from the cycle I'm reminded of how excellent it is. Amazingly excellent at times. The named sonatas, op 2s and 10s, the last sonatas -- all incredible really.  It's just that I don't like it much.

I wonder will I eventually end up adopting this attitude of not liking it but still admiring it? That is still a worthwhile attitude to have but I will obviously have to earn it by listening to it fully and critically.

[aligreto]

This is my second favorite set and a great contrast to my favorite (Kempff).  Fischer is so muscular and vibrant and personal.  It just has to be heard.  You don't have to like it, but it brings another dimension to these great works, and should be heard just for that reason.

That same sentiment again of admiration. I certainly appreciate the concept of contrast. I do have and like the Kempff [mono] which I consider to be lyrical, poetic even. It is becoming more obvious to me that I need to assimilate this muscular and vibrant approach for what it is. Thank you for that.

[aligreto]

Hence the nickname "FrankenFischer cycle", which I do not think is undeserving. Personally, I find this heavy-handed editing work disqualifies it from being seriously and validly considered among other interpretations.

It's not you, it's the playing.
Let me add my voice to those who do not like her Beethoven cycle. At all. I find her playing heavy-hitting and insensitive to the music.

Thank you for your thoughts. As mentioned above in another response this heavy-handed editing work is likely to be a big issue for me going forward as it appears to be ubiquitous from various reports thus far.

[aligreto]

I think they give a "range" like 1977-80 or so. They stem from the late 70s, but were never approved for release by Fischer and therefore published some time after her death in the 1990s, and, as already said, supposedly put together from a multitude of takes.

You appear to have answered a question that I posed earlier in that I did not know that Fischer had not approved the releases. I find that very interesting and telling.
Thank you for the information and your other thoughts and recommendations.

[aligreto]

I'm in the negative column with Ms. Fischer: choppy, unspontaneous, micromanaged are the words I would use.
I suppose it can be blamed on the "here a splice there a splice" approach, but at any rate I was fairly unimpressed and never quite understood why it has the admiration it gets.

Thank you for your thoughts. Choppy and unspontaneous I understand but micromanaged is something that I will have to listen out for. From what I am hearing so far I would interpret this as meaning that too much attention is being paid to the playing of the notes rather than the interpretation of them. I will consider this carefully as I progress with my listening.

[aligreto]

I really wonder whether that unique sense of swagger and muscularity comes mainly from that "brutal" Hungaroton piano sound. It may be realistic - if you sit in the front row and it's an old and not the best Bosendorfer.

I suspect that you may have something there. From the little that I have heard so far I am having issues with the large sonics of the bass register. I find them too powerful and unbalanced with the treble register. That is just my humble opinion.

[aligreto]

I have this cycle and rate it very highly but with a caveat. Out the 32, there is only one sonata in there that I would say is the best version I've heard. I can find better versions of the other 31 from other pianists.

One of the reasons I like the cycle is it's intensity and that it does get to the depth of many of the PS. There is passion as well as a good range of expression - she finds a degree of appropriate melancholy in a number of the slow movements. I find the degree of gravitas in a number of them works very well for how I like to hear Beethoven played. However, Fischer's style never varies and if you sat down to listen to all 32 in a couple of sessions this would become very evident and would also start to be annoying.

Now I could also say similar things about the Kempff mono cycle which I also rate highly and which is the polar opposite to Fischer's approach. His is a poetic and intimate approach with wonderful inner nuances and sense of fluidity and many of the sonatas benefit from this way of playing. However, this doesn't work for all the sonatas some of which do require a more muscular approach. A full listening session, like with the Fischer, would eventually become tiresome.

Like me, it sounds as if you have looked for individual favourite performances of each work. I believe this is the best way to go. You may end up with more than one favourite for some of the sonatas but that's OK. For example, Moravec's Op 13 is outstanding but I really like what Rubinstein does - it's very different from the Moravec but it works so well for me. I've got a Richter recording of the same work from 1959? which is also outstanding. I've kept all three.

Thank you for your considered thoughts and I appreciate everything that you are saying.
One immediate response that comes to mind is that, for me, there was just too much gravitas, even for Beethoven, in what I had heard thus far.
Also, again based on the relatively little that I have heard so far, I too have found that the lack of variety in her approach was a bit of an issue for me.

[aligreto]

Good suggestions. Fischer is what I would call a late Beethoven pianist.

That is indeed interesting because my initial disappointment was to to my perceived heavy-handedness in the Op. 2 sonatas. I felt inclined to think that this approach would indeed be more suited to later sonatas.
What is concerning me somewhat that, as has been mentioned above, her approach will be uniform throughout the cycle.

[aligreto]

Thank you all for your thoughts and recommendations. Your time taken along with the considered responses has been wonderful and is much appreciated by me. What I have enjoyed, in particular, has been reading both sides of the story, and also for the reasons that you all argue.

I have taken all of your various points on board and I have decided that I will continue to the end with my listening of this cycle. At least I now have valid points of argument to consider, other than my own, along my way.

[Jo498]

I'm not sure it's a regional thing. When those EMI LPs turn up in UK pressings they sell for hundreds of pounds, I'm not so sure these are American buyers, I'd be more lead to believe it's the Japanese... a similar demographic that might think JSB's Sonatas and Partitas have never been bettered since Johanna Martzy.

These Martzy LP prices are a pure collector's fad, virtually no connection to musical quality. I actually meant only the hungaroton cycle, I wasn't even aware that these old LPs were yielding high prices as I had had the comparably cheap Introuvables box for ages.

The first time I heard these being praised to high heavens was in a British classical music book. The author also loved Backhaus, and this seems to be a commonality in people that like Fischer like Backhaus as well.

I am usually bored by Backhaus and like Fischer much better, even though I don't quite join the panegyrics of others.

What are the dramatic sonatas for you? I find Appassionata particularly problematic in vast majority of pianists hold back the reigns. The gold standard for me is Richter from December 23, 1960, an unparalleled account.

Mostly, op.10/1+3, 13, 31/2, 53, 57, 106, 111. Of course there are dramatic movement in others, such as the "Moonlight" finale or the first of op.90. And there are other sonatas that can use a lot of energy despite not being so obviously emotional.
This is for me mostly a practical point, namely that most of these sonatas have been well covered in great recordings, often outside cycles. So I don't really find them problematic. (Or if they are, like inconsistent tempi in op.106 (although I came to not automatically disliking a slowish majestic first movement) or amw's complaint that I partly share, that most play the first movement of op.53 too slow and/or the Rondo too fast, are not likely to be better in yet another cplt box...)

Much harder to find good op.2/2, op.14 or others usually only covered in cycles. And they are often more of the lyrical/playful/brilliant (like op.2/3 or 7 or 22) kind. When over 20 years ago I got the Gulda box, after having had Gilels incomplete one for about to years and before that most of the sonatas cobbled together on separate discs, I was quite bowled over because of the energy and drive of many of these earlyish "lighter" pieces. By now, I agree that Gulda can be a bit slick and fast even in them but after Gilels (good in his way but often overly serious and weighty) it's still fresh and flowing. (Supposedly the recordings were done in summer 1967 withing a few weeks and few alternative takes.)

I bought this as the older red box and even then Hungaroton priced it on the premium side, ~ $10 per CD when most box sets were far less back then.

I doubt I have ever seen them that cheap. Otherwise I would probably have bought the whole lot (or a few more) in my "buying lots of stuff"-time ca. 2003-13
But I don't remember the details; might also mostly have been a saturation effect.

I've never heard any other cycle manage to carry out the sheer feeling, passion, and poetry without letting the music drag or slump (no tired trope of music being played slowly for a "spiritual quality") as well as Lucchesini did

Thanks for your comments. I also liked Lucchesini when I finally listened to the whole thing two years ago although I had a few quibbles, especially wrt repeats and tempi (both pet peeves of mine, unfortunately...)

Interestingly I find Maria Tipo recorded one of the very best op. 109, who Lucchesini studied with.

The Tipo Ermitage live concert with Chopin Ballades? I like this also a lot, it's one of the best Recital discs ever.

[Mandryka]

That is indeed interesting because my initial disappointment was to to my perceived heavy-handedness in the Op. 2 sonatas. I felt inclined to think that this approach would indeed be more suited to later sonatas.
What is concerning me somewhat that, as has been mentioned above, her approach will be uniform throughout the cycle.

Why would the heavy handedness be more suited to the late sonatas? The op 2s aren't the world of a child, he was in his mid 20s when he wrote them - when I was 26 I was vigorous and muscular, and we all know that the younger you are, the more serious you are: as the great man said, but I was so much older then, I'm younger than that now. Annie Fischer's musical tenseness and poetic intensity seems spot on in a young firebrand's music. As far as uniformity is concerned, not everyone holds to the idea of three distinct Beethoven styles - I'd say Annie Fischer makes a good case for the uniformity of Beethoven's music.

I stick to what I said yesterday. While I dislike the set enormously, I think it is brilliant and revealing. And I'd go as far as to say that it's especially brilliant and revealing in op 2/1 for example.

[Mandryka]

I'm in the negative column with Ms. Fischer: choppy, unspontaneous, micromanaged are the words I would use.

I hate performances which sound micromanaged - that's why I hate Lucchesini's brilliant but self conscious and over refined Beethoven sonatas set. And Annie Fischer may have in fact been micromanaged. But to me it doesn't sound it - the sound is too consistently tough for a micromanaged sound. To me Fischer sounds spontaneous! Although I'd prefer not to listen to either, I'd take Annie Fischer over Andrea Lucchesini in op 2/1 any day, though both are excellent of course. Lucchesini mentioned positively by someone above.