GMG Classical Music Forum

Since apparently the idea of shorter blind comparisons has caught on, here's one that should be fairly quick.

The first page of Chopin's Second Ballade was singled out for extensive discussion in Rosen's The Romantic Generation:
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/32084883/blind%20comparison%20folder/Screen%20Shot%202017-02-05%20at%203.35.29%20AM.png)
The musical material is of an ostentatious simplicity, a long melody on a repetitive 6/8 rhythm harmonised mostly with chords in root position, given almost no expressive markings by Chopin. And yet contained within it are the seeds of the tonal conflict that animates the piece, between F major and A minor, and it gradually and subtly pushes towards greater intensity so that the subsequent section—an eruption of violence that on the surface couldn't be more different—is heavily foreshadowed. Dissonances gradually invade the music, and the note A comes to dominate the final bars of the page, eventually repeated six times in the last bar, preparing the A minor Presto con fuoco that follows. Over the course of the Ballade the two sections gradually become intertwined until they are inseparable, and the final cadence is quietly inevitable.

This first page is simple enough to be played by a child, but still poses interpretive difficulties that can trip up even the most experienced pianists. Most noticeable are Chopin's preternaturally long slurs, far longer than any phrase that could be sung or played on a string or wind instrument. The piano, on the other hand, has no true legato, but that does make it possible to realise (or at least make the listener believe in) those slurs and turn the entire page into a single long phrase, if the pianist chooses. But is it effective? The other aspect is the relative lack of expressive markings, which gives the pianist a certain amount of freedom. But at the same time, there's a catch: if played thoughtlessly, the end of this page may feel like the end of the entire piece. The foreshadowing of the subsequent Presto con fuoco must be brought out, a sense of momentum must be created, and when the Presto crashes in it must in retrospect feel inevitable.

So for the nine performances of this page that I've selected, you are judging pianists primarily on their interpretive and communicative abilities rather than their technical ones, to the extent that those things can be separated. The purpose of a Ballade is, after all, to tell a story.

Pianist #1 (https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/32084883/blind%20comparison%20folder/Pianist%2001.mp3)
Pianist #2 (https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/32084883/blind%20comparison%20folder/Pianist%2002.mp3)
Pianist #3 (https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/32084883/blind%20comparison%20folder/Pianist%2003.mp3)
Pianist #4 (https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/32084883/blind%20comparison%20folder/Pianist%2004.mp3)
Pianist #5 (https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/32084883/blind%20comparison%20folder/Pianist%2005.mp3)
Pianist #6 (https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/32084883/blind%20comparison%20folder/Pianist%2006.mp3)
Pianist #7 (https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/32084883/blind%20comparison%20folder/Pianist%2007.mp3)
Pianist #8 (https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/32084883/blind%20comparison%20folder/Pianist%2008.mp3)
Pianist #9 (https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/32084883/blind%20comparison%20folder/Pianist%2009.mp3)

These are all 2 to 3 minutes in length, including the first page and the first few bars of the Presto that follows. Most of the performances are well known and you may well recognise some of them. Feel free to score as many or as few excerpts as you like, in whatever manner you like. Also, however, feel free to hone your comparative listening skills and discuss any aspects of the performances that you find worth while. The identities of the pianists will be revealed on Monday the 13th NZ time (Sunday 12th in America and Europe).

My first time doing this!

Chopin Ballade #2 Notes

Pianist 1: Rubato at the end of phrases seems to drag a bit.  Good accenting of the melody, though, so the stratification of layers comes out well.  Next section bursts out very strongly.

Pianist 2: Opening not quite as soft as might be expected.  Ritardandos at ends of phrases handled more smoothly than pianist 1.  More breath noises, though.  Accompaniment a bit quiet.  Transition to next section too forceful, feels artificial.

Pianist 3: Older recording, and a bit sprightlier in tempo than the first two.  Piano or recording is slightly out of tune.  Not bad, but a bit less natural in interpretation than I might hope.  As with #2, the next section bursts out very strongly, but I prefer it here.

Pianist 4: Very clean and nicely shaded throughout, with an excellent pianissimo.  Ritardando at the end of the first page seems a little strong, but I like the performer's handling of the second section, which is also very well articulated.  Audience cough indicates a live performance.

Pianist 5: Seems a little more distant, with the accompaniment louder than the other versions.  Not as emotionally shaded at first, but at the minor key section the matter of fact facade disappears, and naturally the second section bursts out, with a little less feeling than others, but still well.

Pianist 6: I like the way the pianist here handles the voices, bringing out the bass motion as a countermelody.  Good balance and a nice natural lilt to the rhythm.  Transition to the second section handled well.

Pianist 7: Interpretation is somewhat matter-of-fact, but understated in a beneficial way.  The transition didn't work quite as well as I might have hoped, though.

Pianist 8: A good amount of feeling, but I wonder if the ritardandos at the ends of phrases aren't too telegraphed here.  I like the way the second section comes in here, though, and it seems very well played.  I might end up liking this one more in the long run if I listened to the whole thing.

Pianist 9: A fine pianissimo, but the rubato is a little too frequent and too pronounced.  I'm glad it doesn't come in over the transition towards the minor.  The transition seems a little less than inevitable.

Ranking: 4, 6, 1, 3, 8, 5, 9, 7, 2

Ah I am looking forward to hearing all of these. I know the piece quite well, although not from any recordings I have heard as I haven't actually listened to any in great detail. My friends have played this many times though.......it should be interesting to hear some others play it!

Pianist 1: I actually think there could be a little more flexibility in tempo as it sometimes came of as a little rigid. Rubato in relation to phrasing: this pianist plays it very safe and doesn't appear to really make any really interesting choices here. The top voice/main melody was strong but without obscuring some of the interesting countermelodic voice leading underneath. I really like that aspect of the interpretation. Very sudden shift to the next section; I like how the next section starts, but not much is done to differentiate one repeated phrase from the next in any interesting interpretative way.

Pianist 2: I like the use of rubato a little more here, although I dislike the use of rubato in the Presto as it seems to create a bit more of a feeling of motion sickness. Generally there is a big emphasis on the main melody and the long phrases certainly sound like they are long phrases. However, the tone and the balance remains almost exactly the same throughout the entire andantino, making it a little boring to listen to after a while.

Pianist 3: Firstly I really loved the little rit at the end of bar 2! A fairly happy sounding andantino with some additional arpeggiations of chords that aren't written in the score, but I kinda like that. There generally seems to be more effort in making repeated phrases and repeated sub-phrases sound different the second time they are heard through balance of voices and/or articulation and/or use of rubato. This is very enjoyable! The presto sounds very intense. There is rubato here, but it certainly doesn't come across like the motion sickness of Pianist 2.

Pianist 4: Ah! This one actually sounds sotto voce! However, it was much faster than I was expecting which threw me a little, but then again andantino I suppose should be taken to mean 'a bit faster than andante' so this tempo choice makes sense. The changes in tone, especially the bell-like pianissimo at the end of the third system and the more 'nasal' sound halfway through the fifth system are very appropriate. The rollicking Presto I don't like as much. There seem to be some accented notes which sound musically out of place.

Pianist 5: Really lovely octaves at the start. The pedalling seems to muddy some of the chords and therefore it does not make the musical phrasing coincide well with the changes of harmony. The bottom system is nicely done, especially with the accentuated bass voice in the third and fourth bars. I don't feel as if there is much I can really say apart from those comments as I feel that this pianist doesn't really create much interest in this piece. I can only imagine that the pianist would rather be playing something else.

Pianist 6: I like the prominence given to the bass voice here. I feel like some of the interesting dissonances could be brought out much more though. I like how this interpretation seems to breath and flow nicely, but little variation in tone and rubato makes the Andantino a little more boring than it needs to be imo. The transition to the Presto is one of the better ones I have heard. The Presto is quite nice, a bit restrained, but with some interest in articulating the rapid notes. I suppose there would be more variation in articulation and dynamic as the Presto progresses.....

Pianist 7: I looked up 'meh' in the dictionary and this is recording what I heard. It leaves a LOT to be desired. The Presto is clear but very boring. Overall it seems to lack everything that would make for what I could even regard as an actual 'musical interpretation.'

Pianist 8: Seems to be rather ho-hum at first with a general lack of exploring dynamics beyond all the safest choices. I like how the pianist brings out some of the dissonances, but I always feel as if this could be done a little more. Many of the repeated phrases and repeated motifs are played almost exactly the same, a dangerous interpretative choice as that could come across as boring.....but I think there are some subtle differences here and there. Generally I believe these differences should be more pronounced and unfortunately this andantino leaves me a little cold because of that. I love the dynamic swells in the Presto as well as how they bring out countermelodic features in the music, so it definitely has that going for it.

Pianist 9: I think the rubato gets in the way of the music here. Also, the repeated melodic fragments seem rushed over, as if the pianist would prefer to disregard them and move on to the next cadence or the next phrase. The subtle swells of dynamic come across well. I do like how this pianist dwells on the suspension at the start of the fourth bar in the fourth system, but they also spend a bit too much time on other chords where it doesn't seem as appropriate to. I also don't like the transition to the Presto, or the Presto very much. It seems rather pedestrian.

Ranking: 3, 4, 6, 1, 8, 2, 9, 5, 7

Heh, we have the same top 4 and bottom 4.

Thanks for the replies!

Quick comments:

Quote from: Mahlerian on February 04, 2017, 09:48:51 AM
Pianist 8: [...]  I might end up liking this one more in the long run if I listened to the whole thing.

Quite possibly; it is one of three recordings in this selection that in my opinion stand well above the rest, but I'm obviously non-blind as I've heard the rest of the performance as well...

Quote from: jessop on February 04, 2017, 03:18:09 PM
Pianist 5: [...] The pedalling seems to muddy some of the chords and therefore it does not make the musical phrasing coincide well with the changes of harmony.

Potentially interesting thing to note: Chopin was always very specific with his pedal instructions and this page contains only two of them, in the first two and last bars. The rest of the page should presumably be played without pedal. I don't think any of our pianists here are obeying that instruction, though!

Quote from: amw on February 05, 2017, 01:03:06 AM
Potentially interesting thing to note: Chopin was always very specific with his pedal instructions and this page contains only two of them, in the first two and last bars. The rest of the page should presumably be played without pedal. I don't think any of our pianists here are obeying that instruction, though!

I've noticed this when it comes to Chopin. Unfortunately it is also one of the reasons I rarely listen to his music as I feel that many pianists' interpretations leave me cold. Disregarding a composer's instructions is fine if a pianist does something particularly enlightening with their own view, however, I don't often hear this.

I've got that issue too—there's a pretty short list of Chopin pianists who I think get him right pretty much all the time (including pianist #4 in this comparison) and a few others who are hit-and-miss but whose hits outweigh their misses. With other interpretations, I often am just not convinced, and at times they can even make me lose faith in the music, if only temporarily.

This music is an area very far from my realm of interest and/or expertise. However, I wanted to make the effort to support the concept of the blind comparisons in general. Given my opening sentence I will not indicate my decision making process but my result is as follows [in order of preference]....

4, 3, 6, 9, 7, 8, 5, 2, 1.

:)

Brief comments:
1-Nice, but don't like the sound engineering. A bit too bland at times. Dynamics too static. Still, I think the major problem is the sound. Line feels lost even in the later section.
2-Brighter playing. It's nice, but not exceptional. Similarly uninspired ending (compared to #1) to the clip.
3-I'd never buy this one because of the hiss, but the performing and direction is much clearer. This one has something to say.
4-Too fast, and thereby loses something, though clean and crisp. Rubato seems too exaggerated, probably a by-product of the tempo.
5-Sweet. Beautiful start. A hair static as it goes on, and then too heavy.
6-Too deliberate at the start, but lows more prominent. But too much of the same thing as it goes on. Didn't like the end of the clip at all.
7-Quite nice start.  A beautiful simplicity here. Faster, but seems to retain what #4 lost (because not that fast). But spoiled at the end.
8-Tender start. Certain lightness to the playing here. Well done. One of the best at the end of the clip. A winner for me.
9-Too fast also. And rubato just too 'start and stop'. Too prissy for me. Ending of clip is better, but too late and not enough.

None are really bad in the opening, but I didn't like them all equally as they progressed. Still, #8 seemed to get it best for me here and I really enjoyed that one quite a bit more than any of the others. I think one of the things I didn't like in many of them (whether I mentioned it or not) was that they were too exaggerated, whether it be tempo, rubato, phrasing, or dynamics.

Rankings:
8>>>3, 4, 7, 5, 2,1, 6, 9

I'm having another listen to these..........

I don't like to be negative, but I keep feeling that number 5 really doesn't get Chopin at all, maybe the pedalling is to make it sound bad on purpose???

(that is subjective, of course, maybe there are people who like the sound of the piano so much that they don't care if they can't hear it clearly because it's goddam PIANO sounds that they love unconditionally)

I didn't mention anything about the presto before.....but I can't get a sense of any genuine feeling in it. It feels like some kind of cheap, mass-produced, inauthentic kind of 'romanticism' rather than the real deal.

I am still keeping that one firmly in second last place. My original ranking goes unaltered. Number 7 I like even less. :P

It would be a huge embarrassment for me if these two turn out to be a couple of pianists I have previously hailed as favourites ;D

Quote from: jessop on February 06, 2017, 01:27:45 AM
I'm having another listen to these..........

I don't like to be negative, but I keep feeling that number 5 really doesn't get Chopin at all, maybe the pedalling is to make it sound bad on purpose???

(that is subjective, of course, maybe there are people who like the sound of the piano so much that they don't care if they can't hear it clearly because it's goddam PIANO sounds that they love unconditionally)

I didn't mention anything about the presto before.....but I can't get a sense of any genuine feeling in it. It feels like some kind of cheap, mass-produced, inauthentic kind of 'romanticism' rather than the real deal.

I am still keeping that one firmly in second last place. My original ranking goes unaltered. Number 7 I like even less. :P

It would be a huge embarrassment for me if these two turn out to be a couple of pianists I have previously hailed as favourites ;D

I liked the beginning. There, he/she uses a very light touch to create a beautiful sound/impression. I didn't like it as it went on, but the first 30-45 seconds was just brilliant. But then, we seem to have different preferences. I am less a fan of too percussive or pingy an approach. I also don't like too obvious an approach to dissonance, and much prefer subtlety and nuance, without overly sharp changes. It should flow. Also, some don't handle the rubato as tenderly as I think can help move the music forward. I just think it works better, though I am open to any approach really. #3, for example, which I liked, is a bit different - creating a different impression.

Quote from: aligreto on February 05, 2017, 08:42:16 AMGiven my opening sentence I will not indicate my decision making process but my result is as follows [in order of preference]....

Feel free to if you want though! This isn't open just to "experts", it's fine for anyone to participate or make their decisions for any reason. :)

Quote from: jessop on February 06, 2017, 01:27:45 AM
I don't like to be negative, but I keep feeling that number 5 really doesn't get Chopin at all, maybe the pedalling is to make it sound bad on purpose???

Pianist #5 has won awards and been particularly praised for their playing of Chopin, so if so, I'm not sure how well that has worked out for them >.>

Quote from: amw on February 06, 2017, 06:24:29 AM
Feel free to if you want though! This isn't open just to "experts", it's fine for anyone to participate or make their decisions for any reason. :)

Pianist #5 has won awards and been particularly praised for their playing of Chopin, so if so, I'm not sure how well that has worked out for them >.>

As interesting an exercise as this is (and understanding the need for comparisons of short clips), I feel that excerpts can be unrepresentative of a performance's overall impact.  I would use the example of Boulez's Mahler 7.  The beginning always leaves me wondering why it sounds so slow and draggy, and I'm sure in a blind comparison, it would be ranked below other versions.  The cumulative impact of the movement, though, is always astounding, because every single thing has been handled with the overall balance in mind.

Still, in principle I really like the idea of a blind comparison that gets past our preconceptions about this or that artist.

7 3 5 1 4 6 8 2 9


Unlike Jessop, I really like the "meh" performance of 7 (is this Pollini?). For this particular piece I think a non-interpretation works well. Strangely enough, my favorite Presto in this group is my last pick, 9, but the preceding bits disqualifies it (too fast when combined with too much rubato)...although on a third listen, while writing this comment, it's starting to grow on me...like a fungus. Must resist listening to it a fourth time.

Sarge

Quote from: amw on February 06, 2017, 06:24:29 AM
Feel free to if you want though! This isn't open just to "experts", it's fine for anyone to participate or make their decisions for any reason. :)
Pianist #5 has won awards and been particularly praised for their playing of Chopin, so if so, I'm not sure how well that has worked out for them >.>

Interesting......i suppose the experts  (i most certainly am NOT an expert) believe number 5's interpretation to be better than many other pianists currently recording Chopin. Putting that in perspective, I think we must be living in an age without pianists who can really get into the music. Somehow that doesn't seem right though....but it is true that what sounded like the oldest recording was also the most interesting to me.


How long ago was number 7's recording made?

Quote from: jessop on February 06, 2017, 12:52:10 PMbut it is true that what sounded like the oldest recording was also the most interesting to me.

I agree...up until the presto. At that point, for me, it went all to hell: scrambled and muddy. And yet I still placed it second.

Sarge

Rubinstein has to be in here but damned if I can hear where.

Thanks for all the comments everyone.

Quote from: Mahlerian on February 06, 2017, 07:50:49 AM
As interesting an exercise as this is (and understanding the need for comparisons of short clips), I feel that excerpts can be unrepresentative of a performance's overall impact.  I would use the example of Boulez's Mahler 7.  The beginning always leaves me wondering why it sounds so slow and draggy, and I'm sure in a blind comparison, it would be ranked below other versions.  The cumulative impact of the movement, though, is always astounding, because every single thing has been handled with the overall balance in mind.

Yes, that's definitely one of the recurring issues with these kinds of comparisons: it's hard to find excerpts that are representative enough to stand in for the entire work. For example, I wouldn't choose the opening of Mahler 7 to run a blind comparison upon (the representative passage I'd choose would most likely be the opening 3-4 minutes of Nachtmusik I, or the second half of the scherzo, but it's hard to find just one excerpt with a Mahler symphony when the material it contains is so varied). I do feel like the page of music I chose is a good stand-in for the entire Ballade—it's basically such an exposed passage, one where no pianistic "tricks" are possible, and one that reveals the pianist's conception of the entire work. (e.g. should it be played in a way that maximises the beauty of the sound [pianist #2] or the clarity of the rhythm [#7], should it have an irresistible forward drive [#3] or linger over the prettiest chords [#9], etc) There's actually one even more exposed passage in the 4th Ballade which I also might have chosen, but oh well. Every pianist here did record all 4 Ballades so once I reveal their names you can listen to their 4ths if you want >.>

Quote from: Mahlerian on February 06, 2017, 07:50:49 AM
As interesting an exercise as this is (and understanding the need for comparisons of short clips), I feel that excerpts can be unrepresentative of a performance's overall impact.  I would use the example of Boulez's Mahler 7.  The beginning always leaves me wondering why it sounds so slow and draggy, and I'm sure in a blind comparison, it would be ranked below other versions.  The cumulative impact of the movement, though, is always astounding, because every single thing has been handled with the overall balance in mind.

Still, in principle I really like the idea of a blind comparison that gets past our preconceptions about this or that artist.

I've done a lot of these. My experience, for me anyway, is that my impression of the first 30-60 seconds holds as a proxy for the whole section/movement for about 80-90% of all the clips I listen to. Occasionally, there is a clip that doesn't allow that (for example one of the excerpts from the Bach partitas didn't work that way). But for the most part, my initial impression holds. I think that is because the approach for groups and individuals holds throughout a piece. For example, it is not typical for a conductor to change approach once they've begun. Also, the quality of the playing tends to be consistent too. This begins to break down a bit for pieces that have lots of varied movements or sections (like the Bach partitas or Cello Suites). But even there, I think it holds, just understanding that there may be a bit more variation due to the changing nature of the piece.

Others may have different experiences, and I would never want to say that I can always judge it based on such a short excerpt. But most of the time, that is the case (and I think it holds better for larger groups, and can be challenged more with smaller groups or individuals).

I don't get it, it's a short piece. Why cut it off just when the allegro starts?

The Rosen analysis was pretty important in my reasoning, as well as my own thoughts about playing this particular excerpt. I did also want to include more recordings though.... obviously could have cut it down to 5 pianists and done the entire piece, I guess.

I want to listen to everything a second time.  Right now #6 and #8 are the leaders, but a second listening could change things.

In general, the faster ones are not my preferred choices.

Quote from: amw on February 07, 2017, 06:02:32 AM
Thanks for all the comments everyone.
Yes, that's definitely one of the recurring issues with these kinds of comparisons: it's hard to find excerpts that are representative enough to stand in for the entire work. For example, I wouldn't choose the opening of Mahler 7 to run a blind comparison upon (the representative passage I'd choose would most likely be the opening 3-4 minutes of Nachtmusik I, or the second half of the scherzo, but it's hard to find just one excerpt with a Mahler symphony when the material it contains is so varied). I do feel like the page of music I chose is a good stand-in for the entire Ballade—it's basically such an exposed passage, one where no pianistic "tricks" are possible, and one that reveals the pianist's conception of the entire work. (e.g. should it be played in a way that maximises the beauty of the sound [pianist #2] or the clarity of the rhythm [#7], should it have an irresistible forward drive [#3] or linger over the prettiest chords [#9], etc) There's actually one even more exposed passage in the 4th Ballade which I also might have chosen, but oh well. Every pianist here did record all 4 Ballades so once I reveal their names you can listen to their 4ths if you want >.>

Not wanting to steer the discussion too far towards Mahler, but there is one passage in the first movement of the Seventh that would be perfect for similar reasons to the opening of the Ballade.  The B major section near the end of the development, where all of the motifs from the movement come together.  Some conductors like to luxuriate in it, but it needs to retain momentum or the return of the introduction figure will seem like a non-sequitur.  The other thing that would be a deal-breaker for me would be treating that section or any part of the work as primarily homophonic rather than polyphonic.  Everything should be brought to the fore.

Looking forward to the reveal of the pianists, though.  I'm sure all of the names will be familiar.

First of all, thanks for this opportunity to get to know different pianists playing this enigmatic piece. The fact that it ends in in a different key is in itself already intriguing, together with the extreme contrasts between the F major and A minor sections.  I don't want to be dismissive of any of the fine pianists cited here, so it is hard for me to put them in any kind of ascending or descending order.

There are certain general trends I look for or expect in Chopin's music, a kind of improvisatory quality where it is called for. The first bars of the 1st, 2nd and 4th Ballades are tonally ambiguous, not giving a sure indication of where the music is going to proceed.  So from the get go, I do not expect that a big production should be made of the repeating C, which serves as an upbeat for what's coming anyway, a kind of tuning or warming up.  I am not sure about no pedal for the rest of the first page except for the two instances where it is marked, I feel that Chopin was only pointing out special effects, to pedal the C in the beginning into the next chord and not to drop the bass at the end of the section.

The recordings that sounded older had those improvisatory and narrative qualities. These would be Nos. 3 and 5, who I think could be Cortot and Rubinstein. (If it is too early to guess, I can delete these speculations.) About the phrasing, I don't know what your source is but the Paderewski edition has different markings. The first phrase goes from half measure on 1 to the first half of 10. If you consider the repeated C's as upbeats, then for all practical purposes, it is 8 measures long that could easily be divided in half with the 2nd part repeating the A on top.  The same goes for the next phrase.

Another anomaly is the C that should be tied on the last half of measure 18. These long notes are actually very important in this section. All the pianists do not repeat this note as in your score.  I like to hear some counterpoint in the four part harmony in the beginning, not too much but some pianists were top heavy.

Some musical observations: the C in the beginning is a jumping off point for the higher F, the upper limit in this section. The second part has the stormy downward motion of the A/F through the same thirds that were featured in the beginning, which are E, C, and A. This is not surprising as Chopin uses frequently third relationships.  It is also very odd how the A towards the end of the section is harmonized with a C dominant chord. Already the A is asserting itself in an aggressive manner. It will not be content to be the third of an F major chord and in the end will smash this tonality to pieces.

The short list:
1. Andantino well-balanced, presto technically sound
2. Inconsistency in the top melody, notes going in and out, also too loud, presto doesn't sound like one, rather heavy handed.
3. Long lines, narrative quality, very much in the music, but also a muddle in the presto section that should point to a pianist like Cortot.
4. Nice lilt to the Andantino, also more counterpoint in the 1st part
5. Nicely narrative, balanced counterpoint in the 1st part, with a rare (probably obsolete these days) improvisatory spirit, Presto with marked drive, Rubinstein?
6. Plodding 1st part, weird beginning of the Presto
7. Presto not good, rather boring 1st part
8. On the whole the most balanced, could be Zimerman, one of my favorite Chopin pianists.
9. Strange lingering on some notes of the 1st section and fading out of some other ones. Hobbling presto, not convincing.

To sum up, 8 is my favorite followed by 5,3, 1 and 4.
ZB

Not my kind of music so apologies if I'm wide of the mark but here goes -

1 - If this is story-telling, then this version is a fairly dry and deadpan delivery.  I like this, to the extent that now I don't really want to hear it done any other way ...
I've just imprinted on the first thing I've heard, haven't I?

2 - Slower pace and more demonstrative.  Now I can just see the pianist emoting away with eyebrows and shoulders - never a good look.
3 - a tendency to spread his chords (where not indicated) and positively indulge them (where indicated) indicates - what? - over-heated febrile romantic sensitivity? - or small hands?   Otherwise, quite similar to No.1 I thought.
4 - seems fast after 3 but on analysis is no quicker than no.1 - some dynamics especially towards the end (penultimate stave in the score), seem a bit un-called-for, this pianist doesn't seem too comfortable with 'pp'.
5 - Oh, get on with it man!  Starting slow and almost grinding to a halt at one point, this person is obviously paid by the hour.  Also, is it my imagination, but I can hear something going on with the pedalling?  Either lots, or none - I'm not sure which (not being much of a pianist).
6 - also slow, but this pianist gives more weight than others to the harmonic undercarriage.  Miles Davis would have approved ("gimme those block chords man" he is heard to growl to his pianist on more than one recording) - but to my ears this is uninteresting.
7 - noticeably divides the music up into 'verses' - doesn't really tie in with the markings on the score, and doesn't work either, it gets obtrusive after a while.  Which is worse than 'uninteresting'.
8 - almost metronomic (not completely of course, but the steadiest of all those here), slightly funereal, and I would like this a lot if it were only a bit lighter of texture.
9 - no this is overheated and attention-seeking, obtrusive, the very opposite of No.1. 

I went back to No.1 for a re-listen, and found it much more characterful than I thought at first.  But in a good way.  A  clear favourite for me.

1 ... 8 ... 3 2 4 5 6 7 9

I should just add - I found the onset of the Presto most unpleasant and stopped each of these samples before it could kick in.  To me, the music stands alone just fine without.  (Though of course I note what amw says about this in his intro.)  All the above comments are based on the music that stops at the end of page 1.

My favorite clips are #4 and #8.  The presto should come as a slap in the face, a brutal shock after the sotto voce introduction.  I really get it in those two versions.  Furthermore there should also be motion in the slow introduction.  #4 gets this motion in part by the faster tempo.
#1 is to me very feminine.  Perhaps a much better interpreter of the nocturnes.  I like my ballads as manly as I can get them.

I just stumbled upon what Charles Rosen had to say about this Ballade in "The Romantic Generation". (I don't have the book, wish I did, and will try to buy it somehow.) He says the tonality of A minor is not established until the Coda. In fact, F Major was never really stable either.

The current thinking on this Ballade about tonality as I understand it, is that the Andantino functions like a first subject and the Presto a second, which gives the tonality of the first subject priority even if the piece does not end in it. Instead of the Presto being in the dominant (if we are talking about likeness to sonata form), it is the mediant.

But how many bars do we get of A minor? Only six until it goes to G minor and a host of several other keys. There is a kind of "development" and mingling of themes, a "return" of the second theme in submediant and then the coda that firmly establishes the key of A minor.

Quote from: jessop on February 06, 2017, 12:52:10 PM
Interesting......i suppose the experts  (i most certainly am NOT an expert) believe number 5's interpretation to be better than many other pianists currently recording Chopin. Putting that in perspective, I think we must be living in an age without pianists who can really get into the music. Somehow that doesn't seem right though....but it is true that what sounded like the oldest recording was also the most interesting to me.

Can't agree more about "getting into the music". I have had too many useless arguments defending the artistry of say, a Cortot. Pianists who are brought up to bang, play in time and in short, follow directions, will look at you blankly and ask what is THAT?

It's an elusive something called "poetry". Now how does one define THAT?

Since I'm not familiar with the entire Ballade, I had a dig around in my collection and found (surprise!) that I do have a copy, and had a listen last night. (The recording I've got is definitely not one of the nine in this comparison, and if it had been included I probably would have ranked it quite low, due to a particular repeated mannerism.  It was recorded in the mid-1980s by a pianist then in his 70s.)
Taken as a whole, it's actually a pretty turbulent  ???  piece of music - this is not something I can listen to comfortably in the confines of my own home, it needs more space.  I can't really imagine it in a 'salon' context either - though I daresay some salons were pretty big.
So - taking zamyrabyrd's good point about the initial repeated C's being a preparatory jumping-off point, and taking amw's interesting advice about this Andantino inevitably preparing the listener for what is to follow, I can sort-of see that the whole thing is an extended 'jumping-off point', for the more turbulent music that makes up the bulk of this Ballade.  (Though I do still think it works quite well as a standalone, ending on those lovely repeated A's.)

My problem with this though (as I have mentioned in some other threads) is that I hear music in the present and recent past, without any future (beyond the immediate resolution of a cadence, or melodic line).  I don't have any 'expectation' of what is to follow. This surely replicates the concert-hall experience (more especially for larger orchestral works) - but is completely undermined by our repeated listening to recordings.  Obviously the composer, or the performer or an academic, will see the music quite differently but this does not equate with what the rank-and-file listener can be expected to experience.
Obviously some education about the grammar of sonata form, the conventions of harmonic progression etc, would help with this - and I had some of that way back as a schoolboy - but how educated is a music-lover supposed to be?

Quote from: aukhawk on February 09, 2017, 12:49:00 AM
So - taking zamyrabyrd's good point about the initial repeated C's being a preparatory jumping-off point, and taking amw's interesting advice about this Andantino inevitably preparing the listener for what is to follow, I can sort-of see that the whole thing is an extended 'jumping-off point', for the more turbulent music that makes up the bulk of this Ballade.  (Though I do still think it works quite well as a standalone, ending on those lovely repeated A's.)

If you want a good example of revving up to a ascent, like the charging up of an engine, the beginning (and continuation) of the "Minute Waltz" is a good example. There are other instances in Chopin's music.

Okay, here are my little comments after a second listening:

Pianist 1: Fine performance in general, a little too fast for my taste in the work, but others may prefer it.  The Presto opening is nicely done.

Pianist 2: In general, somewhat too loud and the notes are not legato enough to my ears.  Certainly the Presto begins in an impressive way!

Pianist 3: A not bad performance overall, just somewhat too fast for me.

Pianist 4: Much better dynamics in this one than in the first three, and in the Presto one hears more of the voices in the music, as opposed to a confused roar.

Pianist 5: One of the slowest performances, and so I enjoyed its pace.  Excellent dynamics, as if a friend in childhood were whispering secrets to the listener.

Pianist 6: One of my top ones from my first listening.  Slower, excellent pianissimo and legato, impressive Presto!  Some clothes rustling or breathing sounds distract a little bit.

Pianist 7: The notes are played without much nuance or mystery.  The Presto seems to hold more interest.

Pianist 8: Again, one of the slower performances, similar to 5 and 6, with fine dynamics and expression.  WOW!  That Presto is shown to be an explosion of bells!

Pianist 9: Nice quiet sound, and the use of rubato makes the opening seem slower than it is.

So they all have their merits, but...

8

5

6

4

9

1

3

2

7

Pianist 8 barely over Pianist 5 purely on the basis of the Presto. 0:)

Quote from: aukhawk on February 09, 2017, 12:49:00 AMMy problem with this though (as I have mentioned in some other threads) is that I hear music in the present and recent past, without any future (beyond the immediate resolution of a cadence, or melodic line).  I don't have any 'expectation' of what is to follow. This surely replicates the concert-hall experience (more especially for larger orchestral works) - but is completely undermined by our repeated listening to recordings.  Obviously the composer, or the performer or an academic, will see the music quite differently but this does not equate with what the rank-and-file listener can be expected to experience.
Obviously some education about the grammar of sonata form, the conventions of harmonic progression etc, would help with this - and I had some of that way back as a schoolboy - but how educated is a music-lover supposed to be?

Are you saying that even after you listen to it, you are unable to gain the ability to know where it is going, or that you think the music should be predictable from a first listen (to some well-equipped listener)?

Music like that of the early Romantics and the modernists with all of its juxtapositions and irregularities of form certainly does require a different mindset from the more conventionalized Baroque and Classical eras.  With the latter one can come in with an expectation that the music will follow some broad pattern, and even if the details are unexpected (as is certainly true of the best composers), the contours of the outline will not be.  With the early Romantics and the moderns, however, the form itself can be questioned, constructed out of any material imaginable.

It is true that the feeling of not knowing where a Chopin Ballade or Schumann piano work is going in the long run can be taken away by means of familiarity, but I don't see that as a loss.  When one knows the trajectory of a work, one can hear the way details lead there, and that enriches the experience of any music.

As for how educated a listener has to be, it depends on how that listener wants to experience a work.  If they are content (as many are) to simply let it wash over them as a stream of sound, not much education is required, merely enough familiarity with the language to be able to perceive its basic features (enough, in other words, that it does not strike them as meaningless noise).  If the listener wants to be able to fully follow a work in every detail, understanding the import of those details, this would require specific study of not only the music of an era, but of that composer and that work in particular.  What you need to put in is related to what you want to get out of it.

Study, in this case, need not be academic, and one can become a fine listener indeed without reading music, but I personally find it easier to internalize a piece if my experience of listening is reinforced by seeing the notes on a page.

Quote from: Mahlerian on February 09, 2017, 08:33:22 AM
Are you saying that even after you listen to it, you are unable to gain the ability to know where it is going, or that you think the music should be predictable from a first listen (to some well-equipped listener)?

No - that music must be able to stand alone, without any reference to what is to come (beyond the few seconds it takes to resolve a cadence or finish a melody).

I'm suggesting that critiques that make reference to the future direction of the music, are coming from our privileged position of having listened repeatedly to recordings of the piece.  This is completely OK as we are writing on a sub-board called "Great Recordings and Reviews" - but from the standpoint of the music and its intended audience, it sometimes seems a bit unnatural to me.  Maybe not so much here, where a relatively 'miniature' piece (though it is 8 minutes) may actually have become familiar to Chopin's most ardent followers - but more in the case of some big orchestral work where opportunies to hear it even more than once must have been severely limited, back in the 19th C.

Quote from: aukhawk on February 10, 2017, 03:49:26 AM
No - that music must be able to stand alone, without any reference to what is to come (beyond the few seconds it takes to resolve a cadence or finish a melody).

Thank you for the clarification.

What you are suggesting seems to be like a novel without foreshadowing, though.  Even if one only reads a particular novel a single time, isn't one still grateful that the author constructed a narrative that implies what is to come in what comes before?

Or that a film director should cut out references to things that are to happen so long as they don't affect the immediate scene?

Just like in those media, a part of a piece of music does not stand alone without reference to any other parts.  A piece constructed in such a fashion will most likely not satisfy even on a first hearing, let alone on subsequent hearings.  A performance that doesn't relate the parts to each other may sound fine in snippets, but will lose the cumulative effect.

Quote from: aukhawk on February 10, 2017, 03:49:26 AMI'm suggesting that critiques that make reference to the future direction of the music, are coming from our privileged position of having listened repeatedly to recordings of the piece.  This is completely OK as we are writing on a sub-board called "Great Recordings and Reviews" - but from the standpoint of the music and its intended audience, it sometimes seems a bit unnatural to me.  Maybe not so much here, where a relatively 'miniature' piece (though it is 8 minutes) may actually have become familiar to Chopin's most ardent followers - but more in the case of some big orchestral work where opportunies to hear it even more than once must have been severely limited, back in the 19th C.

Any critique of the piece we may write, except that written on the spot while listening to it for a first time, betrays our knowledge of its progression.  As far as possible, I think a critique should be related to the experience of listening, and that includes the experience of an informed listener who already knows the piece well.

I understand what you are saying, but I don't see the point of feigning ignorance of things which affect our immediate experience when relating that experience.

1 - Pianist can't help that their (early digital?) recording sounds a little like a MIDI. Rubato beings sensitively, but gets a little too teasing for me at times. There's a stop-start feel to phrases. I think I agree with Jessop - the performer could have gotten away with more if they had blurred the line a bit more between metronomic and freer playing. The fast bit at the end is definitely superior. 3.5/10

2 - I'm not sure I like how slow a basic tempo this performer takes, but I do think they do a good job differentiating (uh...inventing!) dynamic variation within each phrase. As someone notes, the presto is not terribly presto, but I don't mind it. It's hard to comment on this clip; seems like a performance I could really enjoy within context, or then again, it might not be. 5.5/10

3 - Had to rewind to re-hear the first few bars. Those opening chords encapsulate the uncertainty and instability of the piece (even though this pianist inserts a pause in the second bar; Jessop loved this!). Not 100% precise in the presto section, but overall I quite like this performance. 7.5/10

4 - Wow, a live performance, and the best performance so far in this game. Love the tempo, although it seems to get fractionally slower as the andantino goes on, as if the performer has had a bit of a second guess. Does set up the presto quite well though, while offering a more sung, more flowing interpretation of the opening melody and (in bars 3-4) an utterly beautiful attention to the countermelody also in the treble. I definitely disagree with those who accuse this of being too fast. 9/10

5 - This pianist's control of tone and color and play-soft-ability must account for their success with many voters. This does feel rather sleepy and nocturne-ish, however. The Rubinstein guess seems doubly wrong; Rubinstein was more literal, and he was recorded much longer ago than this new-sounding recording. Watch as it turns out to be Rubinstein and I look like a dum dum. The fluency of the presto confirms that turning the andantino into an adagio was a deliberate choice by a highly skilled virtuoso. 5/10 (harsh?)

6 - Two chords was enough for me to know I wasn't gonna like this one. That and seeing the length of the clip. Left hand feels quite heavy under the main melody, the bass accompaniment to each phrase's second half elevated in importance. Unlike others, I do not feel that this bass part is meant to be a 'countermelody' - unless to suggest that the extreme prettiness of this section is an illusion. Gosh the slowdown before the presto is agonizing. The presto itself is OK; do I hear fingernails clicking? 4/10

7 - Very good andantino. Others have commented on the transition to the presto; I think the recording's obvious age has been most damaging to the bass registers, which is why the attack on those first chords seems so light. This wins the You Had To Be There award, but props to the pianist for a superb andantino, on par with #4. Guess y'all know my tempo preferences now. 8/10

8 - If one is to play slowly, one should play slowly like this. Excellence, subtlety, and although some people complained about the rubato I found the rhythm to be quite straightforward here most of the time (there's also some kind of tonal waver caused by compression rather than performance). Of course I wish this were more 'andantino' but with a good presto to boot, this is really a contender. 8.5/10

9 - Love that the first bars have become a crescendo here. It does rather make the main theme, uh, what's not sotto voce? En voce? A couple microscopic pauses disrupt what's a nice flowing tempo that does a very good job stitching together the phrases into a logical whole. Part of why I advocate for a faster tempo is we need to hear Chopin's long-run game plan with this melody, not just the fact that this bar is pretty, and then that bar is also pretty. If you let everything flow together naturally (and, sure, a little quickly), it's almost like a whole 'nother piece, one with clearer classical roots. Anyway, I unfortunately don't love 9's execution in some spots (the gentle easing into the Presto, the tiny pauses, one phrase that sticks out as not quite coherent with its surroundings [0:48-0:57] but they are on a good track. 7/10

Final ranking:
Really good - 4, 8, 7
Good with flaws - 3, 9
Respect, but not quite for me - 5, 2
Nope - 6, 1

Also, a hearty thank-you to amw for a superb version of the game with a great first post and a really diverse, distinct, and engaging collection of performances.

In complete agreement on all count with you Brian.  It is really nice that you took the time to write it all up.  It looks like we are converging on the same recordings, just some of us are differing on the order.  It might be time to stick to the first 3 and listen to the whole bloddy ballade to get an overall view.

7 is way more popular than I anticipated! Good for all of you who like it. :)

After listening to them, and probably under some influence of amw's initial comments, and following the score, I came up with these general criteria (in no particular order):

*not too slow
*the pp should be respected
*arpeggios (throughout) and left-hand dotted rhythms (bar 41-42) should not become distractions
*subtle differentiation of similar phrases

I didn't worry too much about the ending of the Andantino seeming like the ending of the piece.

My ranking from best to worst:
8. Nice tempo, pretty good dynamics. Gets my nod for flow and lack of attention-hogging details. I bet some people criticize it for being MOR, but I think it's unique in its own way.
7. Really close to #8 in the Andantino. Maybe a tad too fast. Presto has nice dynamic contrasts. Instrument seems to have faster decay than others.
4. Intimate and dreamy, with the best pp. A bit too much emphasis on those details while being slightly homogenous otherwise. Still, could have landed on top on a different day.
5. Slow. Still really good.
6. Nice bell sound at the beginning. The pp is good, not that much quieter than before but the effect comes through. Clock says it's even slower than #5 but doesn't seem so. Knocked for over-emphasis on those details, and a herky-jerky Presto.
1. Good but not much of a pp. On second listen, some of the dotted rhythms sound rushed.
2. Probably would come across better outside of comparative listening, but here it sounded too big, and the pp was more like mp.
9. Fast, with some agogic hesitations that bug me. Again, not much of a pp. The Presto has impressive clarity.
3. Older recording with surface noise, but still good piano sound. Unfortunately the performance lacks dynamic contrast.

Thanks for all the comments everyone! Also I'm in the middle of moving so sorry for being MIA but I do appreciate aukhawk and mahlerian's discussion about future in music a lot

Quote from: Spineur on February 08, 2017, 05:16:47 AM
#1 is to me very feminine.  Perhaps a much better interpreter of the nocturnes.  I like my ballads as manly as I can get them.

If pianist #1 ever does record the complete Nocturnes I am buying them immediately. Unfortunately hasn't happened yet.

It might be interesting if a recording "by" Joyce Hatto were put into the mix alongside the recording that release was based on.  See how perceptions of the two versions differ.

 :)

Well - the perils of listening 'blind' - initially, pianist 8 was ranked 5th twice, and then amw offered this comment:

Quote from: amw on February 05, 2017, 01:03:06 AM
... it is one of three recordings in this selection that in my opinion stand well above the rest, but I'm obviously non-blind as I've heard the rest of the performance as well...

and since then, pianist 8 has ranked first or second 7 times.  ;)

I'll join others in thanking amw for this very well-presented game - fitted in to a rather busy schedule by the sounds of it!

Quote from: aukhawk on February 11, 2017, 01:06:55 AM
Well - the perils of listening 'blind' - initially, pianist 8 was ranked 5th twice, and then amw offered this comment:

and since then, pianist 8 has ranked first or second 7 times.  ;)

To be fair, (a) it's not just me—pianist #8 offers one of the most critically acclaimed recordings of the Ballades; (b) another of the three recordings that stand out for me is pianist #4, who has also been ranked first 4 times. The third one, on the other hand, is pianist #1 who obviously hasn't been doing nearly as well. >_>

(My personal ranking would be 4 8 1 >>> 3 7 2 >>> 5 6 9 if anyone's curious. I think I'm safe to say that without risking any spoilers.)

Quote from: aukhawk on February 11, 2017, 01:06:55 AM
:)

Well - the perils of listening 'blind' - initially, pianist 8 was ranked 5th twice, and then amw offered this comment:

and since then, pianist 8 has ranked first or second 7 times.  ;)

I'll join others in thanking amw for this very well-presented game - fitted in to a rather busy schedule by the sounds of it!

FWIW I did not read any of the replies before posting.

Quote from: Pat B on February 11, 2017, 06:13:15 AM
FWIW I did not read any of the replies before posting.

Amen! 0:)

#8 had my vote as a top choice, along with #5 and #6.

Again, all 9 had their moments and their arguments as to why playing it this way is the right way.

I think one of amw's top 3 is Zimerman and maybe it's the 8th or 1st......perhaps 8th?

The identities of the participants will be revealed in about 24 hours so if you wanna vote and haven't yet, now's the time!

$20 on Cortot for number 3 and I'm just gonna guess that no. 8 is Zimerman.

No. 6, Ashkenazy?

It's monday the 13th! Come on amw! Out with it! Who are the pianists! ;D

Number 4 was the stand-out for me.  The slightly faster pace is initially a surprise, but it serves the purpose of relaxing the music a little, consistent with what in my view is its pastoral nature.  Once Number 4 has been heard, the slower tempi in other recordings make the long phrases too long, and the music less natural – mannered, even.  Also in Number 4, the dynamics are truly 'sotto voce' and the subsequent pianissimo properly discernible.  This all of course allows the pianist to break into the presto with the full contrast required.

sorry! Things are a bit busy today, I'm writing up the results now though

About the results

Pretty much what I expected.

About the method

I averaged the relative positions of the excerpts across all the voters. High scores reflect relative positions averaging closer to 1st place, lower scores reflect relative positions averaging closer to the bottom. So the lower the score of an excerpt, the better.

The actual results

In joint 8th place (tied): Pianists #2 and 9 with 7.00

Pianist #9 was

(https://i.ytimg.com/vi/XNH5RJxEs-0/0.jpg)
https://www.amazon.com/Chopin-Ballades-Funebre-Funeral-Trauermarsch/dp/B00000E53C

In Four Ballades and Sonata No. 2, Andrei Gavrilov stars as Frédéric Chopin, a struggling high school chemistry teacher from Albuquerque, New Mexico, diagnosed with inoperable lung cancer. He turns to a life of crime, producing and selling crystallised methamphetamine to secure his family's financial future before he dies, while navigating the dangers of the criminal world. Although this album has been widely praised, some question the historical accuracy of Gavrilov's portrayal, noting, for example, that Chopin was Polish.

Pianist #2 was

(https://i.ytimg.com/vi/8KTZD2Zfupw/0.jpg)
https://www.amazon.com/Chopin-Ballades-Impromptus-Stanislav-Bunin/dp/B00ZDGPSXK/

Onetime adult movie star, Saturday Night Live alumnus, independent presidential candidate in Russia's 1991 elections and heir to the vast Neuhaus fortune, Stanislav Bunin was a well-known figure in the West for some years and expected to become a pianist of some import. However, charges of tax evasion—widely believed to be trumped-up by his supporters—forced him to flee to exile in Japan, where he now avoids the limelight for the most part apart from occasional photos and videos of him at the piano posted to his Instagram account.



In 7th place: Pianist #7 with 5.44

(http://en.chopin.nifc.pl/=files/foto/1/2826/o/1_1551.jpg)
http://www.deccaclassics.com/fr/cat/4632932
(only existing photo pre-transformation)

The Castle Károlyi on the surface appears to be merely a gloomy, ancient dungeon falling into long disrepair. However, when night falls, Julian von Károlyi rises from his crypt to stalk the Transylvanian countryside and drink the blood of the living, striking fear into the hearts of local villagers. An ancient, terrifying vampire, Károlyi can only be defeated by a stake to the heart, a silver bullet blessed by a priest of Orthodox faith, or a negative review from ClassicsToday. His preference for playing the piano instead of the organ is seen as somewhat of an eccentricity by local neighbours such as Count Dracula and Count von Count.



In 6th place: Pianist #1 with 5.30

(http://www.harrisonparrott.com/sites/default/files/styles/mobile_carousel/public/stephen_hough_credit_grant_hiroshima_0.jpg)
https://www.amazon.com/Chopin-Four-Ballades-Scherzos/dp/B0001B0A8A/

An American homicide detective from Dallas, Texas, Stephen Hough was escorting John F. Kennedy's killer Lee Harvey Oswald to a county prison when Oswald was himself fatally shot by Jack Ruby. According to Hough, he leaned over Oswald and said, "Son, you're hurt real bad. Do you wanna say anything?" Oswald looked at Hough for a second, like he was thinking. Then he said, "Your Chopin ballades are too mannered. I greatly prefer Julian von Károlyi's", before shutting his eyes for the final time.



In 5th place: Pianist #6 with 5.00

(http://dogcat.love/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/26-2.jpg)
https://www.amazon.com/VIRTUOSO-Ballades-Scherzi-Claudio-Arrau/dp/B00D2PB36U/r

Although it's somewhat uncertain as to which of the 6 cats in a trench coat operated the hands of the now definitively fraudulent pianist "Claudio Arrau", musicologists now believe it was this one, rather than the one depicted on the cover of Arrau's collected Liszt recordings ("Arrau 1"). Tentatively dubbed "Arrau 3", this 8-year-old female tabby was capable of reproducing the majority of Arrau's repertoire when outfitted with a pair of prosthetic hands. A search is still ongoing for "Arrau 6", the cat believed to have operated the pedals.



In 4th place: Pianist #5 with 4.90

(http://chopin2015-assets.medici.tv/media/uploads/artists/sj-cho2.jpg.1600x0_q85.jpg)
https://www.amazon.com/Chopin-Piano-Concerto-No-Ballades/dp/B01LXRAQZQ/

Seong-Jin Cho got a somewhat late start on piano playing due to being forced to live in a closet under the stairs by his adoptive parents. However, after dozens of owls began to flood their residence and Michel Béroff informed him "Yer a pianist, Seong-Jin", he found himself waiting on Platform 9 3/4 to the Paris Conservatoire, befriending a redheaded boy named Jan Lisiecki and gradually learning more about the strange new world he had been thrust into, and the origins of the mysterious scar on his forehead that is conveniently not visible in the above photograph. The rest is, of course, history.



In 3rd place: Pianist #3 with 3.70

(http://ring.cdandlp.com/lintrouvable/photo_grande/114751190.jpg)
https://www.amazon.com/Cortot-Vol-5/dp/B000M2DNTQ/

There was a common myth during his lifetime that Cortot was a vampire, presumably due to the hungry, haunted, empty-eyed photographs that have circulated for decades. Although he never totally dispelled these rumours himself, careful examination of this photo should be enough to suggest an alternative hypothesis. Notice the unnatural length of the head, the size and shape of the overcoat—evidently concealing a quite significant amount of mass—and the angles of the head and limbs. It should be all too clear that Cortot's human form was merely a clever disguise, and he was in fact a xenomorph. His death thus should be attributed not to a David Hurwitz skewering, but rather Sigourney Weaver with a flamethrower. Please also see my more extensive paper in Analecta Musicologica, vol. 47 examining the existing biographical evidence and photographs in more detail and offering side-by-side comparisons of Cortot photographs and various shots of the creature from Alien, Aliens and Alien vs. Predator. I am sure you will be as convinced as I was.



In 2nd place: Pianist #8 with 3.00

(http://en.chopin.nifc.pl/=files/foto/1/1610/o/2_2743.jpg)
https://www.amazon.com/Chopin-Ballades-Barcarolle-Sharp-Fantasy/dp/B000001G8Q/

Some absolutely true facts about Krystian Zimerman:
- Krystian Zimerman once played La Campanella with his toes.
- Krystian Zimerman has 3 facial expressions, and they all mean "better than you".
- Krystian Zimerman has wrestled a bear to a draw. The bear is now his page-turner.
- Krystian Zimerman single-handedly ended the US-Iraq war with a performance of a Szymanowski etude. This also caused the re-election of Barack Obama.
- When Krystian Zimerman was three, he destroyed his first piano with an overly energetic performance of Beethoven's Hammerklavier Sonata. He has destroyed or ruined another 76 pianos since then. The current piano he travels everywhere with is in fact made of diamonds, that being the only substance tough enough to withstand his performances.
- There are rumours that Krystian Zimerman once played a wrong note, but immediately stopped the performance, and ordered the entire audience to be executed so that word would not spread.



In 1st place: Pianist #4 with 2.82

(http://www.bach-cantatas.com/Pic-Bio-T-BIG/Tipo-Maria-02.jpg)
https://www.amazon.com/Mozart-Sonata-Beethoven-Chopin-Ballades/dp/B00004VSDK/

Nicknamed the "Neapolitan Horowitz" for her resemblance to Winona Horowitz (now known as Winona Ryder), Maria Tipo has maintained a relatively low profile after winning a Golden Globe Award and several Academy Award nominations in the 1990s—she has been open about her difficult relationship with Giovanni Depo and struggles with mental health—but recently reappeared in the Netflix original series Cose più strane as Gioia Bieria, the troubled mother of 11-year-old Guillermo who disappears into a parallel dimension after a strange creature escapes from a nearby lab.


Ok! That's it!

Hope you guys had fun! And no Jessop I'm not paying up, gambling is a sin. Go to church.

WELL! That was fun! Thank you very very much amw for all your effort and reading the results after all the reactions and speculation from the GMG crowd certainly has been entertaining. 8)

Thanks for all that. I think I shall be acquiring some Zimerman!

Quote from: amw on February 12, 2017, 06:43:04 PM
About the results

Pretty much what I expected.

About the method

I averaged the relative positions of the excerpts across all the voters. High scores reflect relative positions averaging closer to 1st place, lower scores reflect relative positions averaging closer to the bottom. So the lower the score of an excerpt, the better.

The actual results
...

Post of the Year.

I laughed out loud so much it's embarrassing.

P.S. Knee-jerk reaction thought: Stephen Hough's recording sounds at least 20 years older than it is. I really strongly dislike the cold, bloodless way Hyperion records pianos, as do certain pianist vampires in our midst.

Quote from: Brian on February 12, 2017, 07:02:19 PM
Post of the Year.

I laughed out loud so much it's embarrassing.

P.S. Knee-jerk reaction thought: Stephen Hough's recording sounds at least 20 years older than it is. I really strongly dislike the cold, bloodless way Hyperion records pianos, as do certain pianist vampires in our midst.

I agree with everything here............yet another problem I have with Hyperion.

Quote from: mc ukrneal on February 12, 2017, 06:58:26 PM
Thanks for all that. I think I shall be acquiring some Zimerman!

Yeah, especially since looking at the current price tag in the link of the Maria Tipo recording! :o

Quote from: jessop on February 12, 2017, 07:18:42 PM
Yeah, especially since looking at the current price tag in the link of the Maria Tipo recording! :o

Just ordered a different (I presume) but much cheaper Tipo performance of the Ballades.
[asin]B00ISH1ZCO[/asin]

I have no idea why the Tipo set is out of print seeing as it's now been proven to be objectively the best. It can, obviously, be obtained extralegally, but I would never encourage that kind of behaviour.

There is indeed another set of Tipo Ballades out there (studio rather than live I think) which I don't know, and have been considering outlaying a quantity of cash for.

Quote from: Brian on February 12, 2017, 07:02:19 PM
P.S. Knee-jerk reaction thought: Stephen Hough's recording sounds at least 20 years older than it is. I really strongly dislike the cold, bloodless way Hyperion records pianos, as do certain pianist vampires in our midst.

It does happen to be one of my favourites—I enjoy the tough-talking Texan cop's mannerisms quite a bit—but yeah, the sound really doesn't make much of a case for it. Hyperion's recording process consists of using a single microphone located approximately 25,000 light-years away from the performer, which evidently doesn't always yield great results.

Quote from: amw on February 12, 2017, 07:34:43 PM


There is indeed another set of Tipo Ballades out there (studio rather than live I think) which I don't know, and have been considering outlaying a quantity of cash for.

If it's the one I ordered, you may pay more for the shipping charge than the CD. Amazon MP price started at about $4 plus s/h

Many thanks for running this comparison.  It was entertaining and informative!

I've just listened through the Arrau (whom I've liked in other repertoire, certainly) and am now listening to the Tipo as well.  Truly an excellent performance.

So a woman beat all the guys!!!

The shocker for me was No.5, Seong-Jin Cho, because it did sound like an early 20th century sort of of interpretation by a mature person. I listened to two performances by Rubinstein of the 2nd Ballade, and while they were not exact reproductions of No. 5 which sort of confused me, I would not put it past a young pianist to play recordings over and over again until he or she can assimilate and reproduce them. Wasn't that the system of Yundi Li's teacher, to cut and paste recordings for his student to trot out for competitions?

Girl power!!

Cho is of course a student of Michel Béroff, in turn a student of Yvonne Loriod, who was in turn a student of Isidore Philipp, who was in turn a student of Georges Mathias, who was a student of Chopin. (One could say he has a Chopin number of 5, à la Bacon or Erdös numbers >_>) So the "lineage" is there in a manner of speaking.

There is not much in common on the surface between Cho's interpretation and Rubinstein's imo—Rubinstein is faster, more literal, uses less pedal and so on—but their larger conception of the work is similar. Actually the recording he reminds me most of, among those that I know, is that by Lise de la Salle: slow, dreamy, rubato-filled, weighty in the faster passages. And she is also a Paris Conservatoire alumna. I wonder if it's a Paris thing and, whether e.g. Cédric Tiberghien for instance, shares qualities with those two, or it's just a coincidence.

(Yundi's recording of the Ballades was not included due to being, in my personal opinion, mediocre. If that's the strategy he used, I don't think it worked for him. <_<)

Quote from: amw on February 12, 2017, 11:04:48 PM
There is not much in common on the surface between Cho's interpretation and Rubinstein's imo—Rubinstein is faster, more literal, uses less pedal and so on—but their larger conception of the work is similar.

(Yundi's recording of the Ballades was not included due to being, in my personal opinion, mediocre. If that's the strategy he used, I don't think it worked for him. <_<)

Over the years I have become more and more appreciative of Rubinstein's faithfulness to the score. His rubatos are not distortions as they can sometimes degenerate into with some pianists. Cortot has an idiosyncratic approach that would be almost impossible to imitate. I did check out Yundi Li's 2nd Ballade, nothing really to write home about.

I did check out a few pages of Rosen's Romantic Generation available on Google books. Rosen does divide the 8 bar phrases into two (if you take the first measure and a half as upbeats). It makes much sense, the 2nd four bars in each group hover around the A, the first part active and the second static. Rubinstein does make this clear. The 3rd "long" phrase is actually divided up in the Paderewski edition. 2+2+4 , the last reiterating the higher pitch E that will be featured in the Presto.

Thank you very much for running this entertaining blind comparison.  I was quite sure #3 was Cortot, and found it interesting to compare his playing with the more recent interpretations.  It made clear to me that artistic conception change with time: what was considered as supreme interpretation in the 30s is no longer so today.
As far as our winner, Maria Tipo, my guess was Samson Francois.  Totally wrong, but really happy I discovered a pianist I was only vaguely acquainted to.
I was also surprised to hear the somewhat old fashioned interpretation in #5 was Cho.

Quote from: amw on February 12, 2017, 06:43:04 PM


In 2nd place: Pianist #8 with 3.00

(http://en.chopin.nifc.pl/=files/foto/1/1610/o/2_2743.jpg)


Some absolutely true facts about Krystian Zimerman:
- Krystian Zimerman once played La Campanella with his toes.
- Krystian Zimerman has 3 facial expressions, and they all mean "better than you".
- Krystian Zimerman has wrestled a bear to a draw. The bear is now his page-turner.
- Krystian Zimerman single-handedly ended the US-Iraq war with a performance of a Szymanowski etude. This also caused the re-election of Barack Obama.
- When Krystian Zimerman was three, he destroyed his first piano with an overly energetic performance of Beethoven's Hammerklavier Sonata. He has destroyed or ruined another 76 pianos since then. The current piano he travels everywhere with is in fact made of diamonds, that being the only substance tough enough to withstand his performances.
- There are rumours that Krystian Zimerman once played a wrong note, but immediately stopped the performance, and ordered the entire audience to be executed so that word would not spread.

AND...YES!  All of these things are TRUE, because Krystian Zimerman is the long-lost piano-playing twin brother of...


(http://vignette2.wikia.nocookie.net/deathbattle/images/a/a7/Chuck_Norris_BZ_WBK_0005-MasterNorris_com.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20150917035259)

The resemblance is truly amazing!!! 8) 8) 8) ??? 8) 8) 8)

Thanks for this effective and fast blind comparison. I have this thought of adding a week-long second leg of 9 pianists playing the same section and again with dropbox links. Maybe we can have the winner face Tipo. Would there be  support for it?

Now I know why I couldn't identify Rubinstein - he isn't there.

I got only two of the 9 correct - Zimerman and Cortot. Not that hard to guess who they were.

Quote from: Ubiquitous on February 14, 2017, 04:38:26 AM
Thanks for this effective and fast blind comparison. I have this thought of adding a week-long second leg of 9 pianists playing the same section and again with dropbox links. Maybe we can have the winner face Tipo. Would there be  support for it?

Sure!  And again, many thanks to AMW for all the work!

There are certainly other worthy candidates you could put in such as Moravec, Rubinstein, Richter, Perahia, Ashkenazy, Horowitz, Fou T'Song, Malcuzynski, Pollini, Cherkassky, Moisewitsch, Yundi  ..there's a dozen off the top of my head. I've probably missed some glaring examples.

Quote from: Ubiquitous on February 14, 2017, 04:38:26 AM
Thanks for this effective and fast blind comparison. I have this thought of adding a week-long second leg of 9 pianists playing the same section and again with dropbox links. Maybe we can have the winner face Tipo. Would there be  support for it?

Yes, feel free! Also message me if there are any recordings you want help sourcing, I might be able to assist...

Quote from: Ubiquitous on February 14, 2017, 04:38:26 AM
Thanks for this effective and fast blind comparison. I have this thought of adding a week-long second leg of 9 pianists playing the same section and again with dropbox links. Maybe we can have the winner face Tipo. Would there be  support for it?

Sure!

Thank you for your acceptance. I'll prepare them right away and upload in a short while. I'd like to ask you to refrain from the simultaneous 'Guess the Pianist' game if possible (or at least as much as possible :) ). You can PM me your guesses and I'd be glad to announce them at the end of the comparison for its own fun.

Here you are, another round of 9 pianists:


Pianist #10 (https://dl.dropbox.com/s/ghoyl2ghi999nns/Pianist%2010.mp3)
or
[audio]https://dl.dropbox.com/s/ghoyl2ghi999nns/Pianist%2010.mp3[/audio]


Pianist #11 (https://dl.dropbox.com/s/3cme9uki16yz040/Pianist%2011.mp3)
or
[audio]https://dl.dropbox.com/s/3cme9uki16yz040/Pianist%2011.mp3[/audio]


Pianist #12 (https://dl.dropbox.com/s/91y12mugi7rrrc0/Pianist%2012.mp3)
or
[audio]https://dl.dropbox.com/s/91y12mugi7rrrc0/Pianist%2012.mp3[/audio]


Pianist #13 (https://dl.dropbox.com/s/v0iaja88mo1z03r/Pianist%2013.mp3)
or
[audio]https://dl.dropbox.com/s/v0iaja88mo1z03r/Pianist%2013.mp3[/audio]


Pianist #14 (https://dl.dropbox.com/s/lw9uwjvhy7qvgdk/Pianist%2014.mp3)
or
[audio]https://dl.dropbox.com/s/lw9uwjvhy7qvgdk/Pianist%2014.mp3[/audio]


Pianist #15 (https://dl.dropbox.com/s/pop1fm5pwxfdtrc/Pianist%2015.mp3)
or
[audio]https://dl.dropbox.com/s/pop1fm5pwxfdtrc/Pianist%2015.mp3[/audio]


Pianist #16 (https://dl.dropbox.com/s/tpz7pxytio7qxlf/Pianist%2016.mp3)
or
[audio]https://dl.dropbox.com/s/tpz7pxytio7qxlf/Pianist%2016.mp3[/audio]


Pianist #17 (https://dl.dropbox.com/s/fhtcagj8lm399qe/Pianist%2017b.mp3)
or
[audio]https://dl.dropbox.com/s/fhtcagj8lm399qe/Pianist%2017b.mp3[/audio]


Pianist #18 (https://dl.dropbox.com/s/8e9npml5g6rmiul/Pianist%2018.mp3)
or
[audio]https://dl.dropbox.com/s/8e9npml5g6rmiul/Pianist%2018.mp3[/audio]



I'll announce their names in exactly 1 week from now. Happy comparison.

Quote from: Ubiquitous on February 15, 2017, 05:51:21 AM
Here you are, another round of 9 pianists:

10 - [audio]https://www.dropbox.com/s/ghoyl2ghi999nns/Pianist%2010.mp3[/audio]

11 - [audio]https://www.dropbox.com/s/3cme9uki16yz040/Pianist%2011.mp3[/audio]

12 - [audio]https://www.dropbox.com/s/91y12mugi7rrrc0/Pianist%2012.mp3[/audio]

13 - [audio]https://www.dropbox.com/s/v0iaja88mo1z03r/Pianist%2013.mp3[/audio]

14 - [audio]https://www.dropbox.com/s/lw9uwjvhy7qvgdk/Pianist%2014.mp3[/audio]

15 - [audio]https://www.dropbox.com/s/pop1fm5pwxfdtrc/Pianist%2015.mp3[/audio]

16 - [audio]https://www.dropbox.com/s/tpz7pxytio7qxlf/Pianist%2016.mp3[/audio]

17 - [audio]https://www.dropbox.com/s/zkbf4iy4iz1yxrw/Pianist%2017.mp3[/audio]

18 - [audio]https://www.dropbox.com/s/8e9npml5g6rmiul/Pianist%2018.mp3[/audio]

I tried two different browsers and this didn't work. If I change it to [url] instead of audio, I can listen online (but not download). I've never used the [audio] function, so I don't know if it is a problem with me or with the links.

Quote from: mc ukrneal on February 15, 2017, 05:55:59 AM
I tried two different browsers and this didn't work. If I change it to [url] instead of audio, I can listen online (but not download). I've never used the [audio] function, so I don't know if it is a problem with me or with the links.

I used the forum's built-in feature for mp3 files. I see what you mean. They progress but won't play this way. I've added direct dropbox links and fixed the player, too.

Quote from: Holden on February 14, 2017, 03:45:41 PM
There are certainly other worthy candidates you could put in such as Moravec, Rubinstein, Richter, Perahia, Ashkenazy, Horowitz, Fou T'Song, Malcuzynski, Pollini, Cherkassky, Moisewitsch, Yundi  ..there's a dozen off the top of my head. I've probably missed some glaring examples.

Horowitz never recorded it. Richter did, but it is harder to find than his versions of 3rd and 4th. Of the four Ballades it seems to be the least recorded.

After the results were posted, I listened to the ones in my collection (only 3: Rubinstein, Moravec, and Lubimov) and everybody I had heard of on spotify — 34 versions in all.

Rubinstein was really good, Moravec maybe even better. But my favorites — mostly surprisingly — were: Ax, Indjic, Komen, Pollini 1999 (from his set), Francois, and Tiberghien, along with Zimerman. The first four had mostly the things I liked about Zimerman, with Ax probably being my absolute favorite. Tiberghien and especially Francois, with his dramatic dynamic contrasts, were less how-I-think-it-should-be-played but totally convincing in their ways.

Nobody talks about Ax. He doesn't go crazy with rhythm; if he wants to highlight or shade something, he does it with dynamics and tone. That's right up my alley. His basic pulse in the Andantino has a nicely round feel. Spotify has both the harsh-sounding original release (coupled with the second sonata) and the remaster (coupled with the scherzos and assorted other pieces). I ordered the remaster on CD.

I'd be curious if anybody else likes Komen's. His Beethoven has fans — including myself — among the GMG PI Posse, but I have never heard anybody mention his Chopin, here on a modern piano.

I am not always a fan of Pollini, which may be DG's fault. They were an excellent team here.

Spotify has Richter on Preiser, apparently from 1950. I wasn't completely taken with his Andantino, but he goes full Richter in the Presto!

Pogorelich (from the Chopin Competition that he famously lost, released on Capriccio) is daringly slow in the opening but somehow pulls it off.

Ashkenazy 1978 is a really good performance, not quite in the top group but not far back at all. The sound in the Presto, almost unlistenable on computer speakers, became fine once I hooked it up to a real system.

Biret's is much better than her reputation, and about on par with Ashkenazy.

Schoonderwoerd was also a pleasant surprise, much better than his Beethoven and better than the other fortepiano options (Lubimov, Khouri, Goerner, Świtała), but still only middle of the pack overall. I'm waiting for a great PI recording.

Ones I didn't care for: Perahia, Vásáry (both DG and Hungaroton), and Feltsman, mostly because of rhythmic issues.

Biggest names among the rest: Ashkenazy 1964 and Pollini 2008 were not as good as their versions mentioned earlier. Kissin and Yundi were pretty good.

Quote from: mc ukrneal on February 15, 2017, 05:55:59 AM
I tried two different browsers and this didn't work. If I change it to [url] instead of audio, I can listen online (but not download). I've never used the [audio] function, so I don't know if it is a problem with me or with the links.

Seems to work now! Not sure what happened....Anyway, excited to try another 9...

Quote from: Pat B on February 15, 2017, 10:35:14 AMI'm waiting for a great PI recording.

Edna Stern is pretty good I think. Worth a listen anyway, I preferred her to Schoenderwooerd at least...

Also Moravec might turn out to be my overall favourite but i couldn't get hold of a lossless quality recording in time for the comparison. (Have the CD now but delivery to new zealand is often a long waiting game)

Quote from: mc ukrneal on February 15, 2017, 03:59:55 PM
Seems to work now! Not sure what happened....Anyway, excited to try another 9...

It was not you. For future reference, if 'www.dropbox' in dropbox links are replaced with 'dl.dropbox", both audio feature of the forum and direct dropbox links play nicely.

I can prepare 2 more batches of 9 with still good performances and including only a very few of the names mentioned on this thread. Let's finish this first and see the interest.

First impressions!  (Using Herr Zimerman as my standard... ;)  )

10 - A fine, delicate opening, but the second part is average, I thought.

11 - One of the slowest, and quietest, and therefore to my ear it should be a favorite.  The second part is also nicely done, a more modest tempest than in certain other interpretations. 8)

12 - Good opening, and an impressive Presto with great clarity.

13 - Too fast for me, too loud at times, and the Presto sounds like it was played by an old mechanical piano!

14 - Again, I find things are taken too fast: the Presto, however, is well done, dramatic with clear lines.

15 - More delicate than 13 and 14, although at times a little too loud.  The Presto is rather impressive.

16 - Softer sound in an echoing hall, giving a more wistful, nostalgic atmosphere.  However, the Presto sounds similar to #13, as if an old upright mechanical piano had suddenly been pushed on stage for the second part!

17 - Slower, with (I think) just the right touch of rubato.  The Presto shows a good amount of Sturm und Drang !

18 - Quiet, delicate performance, perhaps a wee too fast, but with the Presto an overall good interpretation.

No rankings yet!   0:)

Here we go again:
10 - more melancholy. More on the back of the beat. I like it. Very deliberate, or perhaps purposeful. Well done, and next section quite intense in comparison.
11 - Too many hesitations (rubato) and thus, too stilted (stop and start). I'd like it if not for this, but irritating because of it. Maddening, really.
12 - Nice, but perhaps a bit too top heavy. Or perhaps I don't like the piano sound. Some stop and go doesn't help.
13 - Sounds warped and another piano I don't like the sound of. Anyway, faster and quite pingy (and unsteady to boot). Uggh.
14 - Also faster, and also just as uneven in rhythm and rubato. But overall, much better than 11, 12, and 13. Ending more powerful. This part is pretty awesome.
15 - Another one where the phrasing makes the rhythms come across differently. Perhaps a bit static too. Rather electrifying at the end.
16 - Mushy and echo-y, and pingy, but there is a warmth in the sound. The reverb is hard to ignore.
17 - A bit slower, but it seems to flow better. A bit of a relief from the past several. And then he (or she) just go nuts at the end!
18 - Faster, but much more cohesive. Here's a fast one I like, it has clarity of direction. Ending is violent enough, but speed is perhaps too similar to opening.

My two favorites, 10 and 18, couldn't be more different really. And I thought they stood quite a bit ahead of the others. When I went back to 10, there it just something about the way it is played that touches me. I think, in part, it is a lighter touch on the rubato, which makes it softer and more poignant. It allows the line to be more clearly heard/felt. 
Order: 10, 18 <<< gap>>> 15, 17, 14, 16, 11, 13, 12

I like 18 the best. I find the speed OK and it coheres, with long phrase lines (unlike #11 where the phrasing is almost every four beats).

#18 comes in second for me, once more for coherence and very subtle use of rubato. The rest I'll decide on later but these two stood out.

Quote from: amw on February 15, 2017, 04:50:04 PM
Edna Stern is pretty good I think. Worth a listen anyway, I preferred her to Schoenderwooerd at least...

Thanks for the suggestion (and for actually reading my post, which turned out a lot longer than I intended). And for running the comparison.

A 'thank you' to the three listeners and the first ranking after two days. A tiny unwrapping for the guessers: 3 deceased, 2 compatriots of the composer, 2 women, 2 on Pleyels, 2 from Western Hemisphere, 1 International Chopin Competition winner.

Quote from: Holden on February 16, 2017, 05:48:38 PM
I like 18 the best.
#18 comes in second for me

There seems to be a typo here.

Quote from: Ubiquitous on February 17, 2017, 05:16:38 AM
A 'thank you' to the three listeners and the first ranking after two days. A tiny unwrapping for the guessers: 3 deceased, 2 compatriots of the composer, 2 women, 2 on Pleyels, 2 from Western Hemisphere, 1 International Chopin Competition winner.

There seems to be a typo here.

Oops #18 is first and #10 is second.

The outline of Ballade No. 2's design:
                                 Bars            Key
Theme I                     1-46           F major
Theme II                    47-82         A minor
Theme I'                    83-140        F major
Theme II'                   141-168      A minor
Closing (refs to II & I) 169-204      A minor

Okay, this time with headphones, and some things have changed:

10 - Why did I call the Presto "average" ?  It did not seem so this time!

11 - I liked it even more this time!  This might be the challenger to knock off Herr Zimerman!

12 - Again, I liked it more this time!

15 - It did not seem overly loud this time.

17 - Wow!  Was this Rachmaninoff when he was in his best/worst manic depressive state? One wishes for a modern recording!

18 - I did not care for the Presto quite as much this time.

Here we go!

11

12/17

18

10

15

14

16

13

Thank you, Cato.

After 4 days and some 700+ thread views we have complete scores of only two judges. I'll name the names on Wednesday, no matter what.

I wonder if these 'Mini-Blind's could be done in Polling Station section for the sake of attendance.

Quote from: Ubiquitous on February 19, 2017, 03:55:01 AM
Thank you, Cato.

After 4 days and some 700+ thread views we have complete scores of only two judges. I'll name the names on Wednesday, no matter what.

I wonder if these 'Mini-Blind's could be done in Polling Station section for the sake of attendance.

Many thanks to you for such an effort, and one done so quickly!

I have come to the conclusion that Life today is so hectic, so "scatter-shot" in its duties and opportunities and temptations, that people end up not responding to their promises.  And so I am not sure that the Polling Station idea would work, but who knows?

A modest response may be the best one can hope for these days. 0:)  One might think, given the number of members here, that more people would have more to say, but...  I have been a GMG member for over a decade, and when I offered for the first time a musical work of my own, the response was also modest.  To be sure, the composition lasted c. 25 minutes in a MIDI version, and so possibly, for many members, the time needed did not exist.  And also, it may have been proof that I should definitely refrain from being a composer again!  8)

I have noticed, however, in recent years that certain of the non-musical topics seem to generate more pages and interest than the musical ones! ;)

Less than 22 hours left to reveal. 18 and 10 are head-to-head   :laugh:

Quote from: Cato on February 19, 2017, 04:47:37 AM
Many thanks to you for such an effort, and one done so quickly!

Sure. It was an easy task.

Quote from: Cato on February 19, 2017, 04:47:37 AM
I have noticed, however, in recent years that certain of the non-musical topics seem to generate more pages and interest than the musical ones! ;)

It's not hard to understand why after taking a peak at the forum. I hope you'll like the names.

Quote from: Cato on February 19, 2017, 04:47:37 AM

A modest response may be the best one can hope for these days. 0:)  One might think, given the number of members here, that more people would have more to say, but...  I have been a GMG member for over a decade, and when I offered for the first time a musical work of my own, the response was also modest.  To be sure, the composition lasted c. 25 minutes in a MIDI version, and so possibly, for many members, the time needed did not exist.  And also, it may have been proof that I should definitely refrain from being a composer again!  8)

I have noticed, however, in recent years that certain of the non-musical topics seem to generate more pages and interest than the musical ones! ;)

Quote from: Ubiquitous on February 21, 2017, 07:30:53 AM

It's not hard to understand why...

0:) 0:) 0:) 0:) 0:) 0:) 0:) 0:)

4 groupings, from best to least good:

14 15
18
12 13 16
10 11 17

I have to admit I didn't listen as carefully as the first set.

Quote from: Pat B on February 21, 2017, 10:20:22 PM
I have to admit I didn't listen as carefully as the first set.

Thanks. That's always an encouraging and motivating factor for the second set preparer.

Thanks to the 3 complete rankings by mc ukrneal, Cato and Pat B:


9th Place:
Pianist #13: Arthur Schoonderwoerd on Alpha 147 (https://dl.dropbox.com/s/v0iaja88mo1z03r/Pianist%2013.mp3)
[audio]https://dl.dropbox.com/s/v0iaja88mo1z03r/Pianist%2013.mp3[/audio]


8th Place:
Pianist #16: Nelson Goerner on Fryderyk Chopin Institute 3 (https://dl.dropbox.com/s/tpz7pxytio7qxlf/Pianist%2016.mp3)
[audio]https://dl.dropbox.com/s/tpz7pxytio7qxlf/Pianist%2016.mp3[/audio]


7th Place:
Pianist #12: Janusz Olejniczak on Sony 87739 (https://dl.dropbox.com/s/91y12mugi7rrrc0/Pianist%2012.mp3)
[audio]https://dl.dropbox.com/s/91y12mugi7rrrc0/Pianist%2012.mp3[/audio]


6th Place:
Pianist #11: Lise de la Salle on Naive 5215 (https://dl.dropbox.com/s/3cme9uki16yz040/Pianist%2011.mp3)
[audio]https://dl.dropbox.com/s/3cme9uki16yz040/Pianist%2011.mp3[/audio]


5th Place:
Pianist #17: Sviatoslav Richter on Urania 4231 (https://dl.dropbox.com/s/fhtcagj8lm399qe/Pianist%2017b.mp3)
[audio]https://dl.dropbox.com/s/fhtcagj8lm399qe/Pianist%2017b.mp3[/audio]


3rd Place:
Pianist #10: Nikita Magaloff on Newton 8802076 (https://dl.dropbox.com/s/ghoyl2ghi999nns/Pianist%2010.mp3)
[audio]https://dl.dropbox.com/s/ghoyl2ghi999nns/Pianist%2010.mp3[/audio]


&

                  &
Pianist #14: Adam Harasiewicz on Newton 8802015 (https://dl.dropbox.com/s/lw9uwjvhy7qvgdk/Pianist%2014.mp3)
[audio]https://dl.dropbox.com/s/lw9uwjvhy7qvgdk/Pianist%2014.mp3[/audio]


2nd Place:
Pianist #15: Earl Wild on Ivory 75001 (https://dl.dropbox.com/s/pop1fm5pwxfdtrc/Pianist%2015.mp3)
[audio]https://dl.dropbox.com/s/pop1fm5pwxfdtrc/Pianist%2015.mp3[/audio]


1st Place:
Pianist #18: Janina Fialkowska on Atma 2666 (https://dl.dropbox.com/s/8e9npml5g6rmiul/Pianist%2018.mp3)
[audio]https://dl.dropbox.com/s/8e9npml5g6rmiul/Pianist%2018.mp3[/audio]

Quote from: Ubiquitous on February 22, 2017, 05:04:49 AM
Thanks to the 3 complete rankings by mc ukrneal, Cato and Pat B:


9th Place:
Pianist #13: Arthur Schoonderwoerd on Alpha 147 (https://dl.dropbox.com/s/v0iaja88mo1z03r/Pianist%2013.mp3)
[audio]https://dl.dropbox.com/s/v0iaja88mo1z03r/Pianist%2013.mp3[/audio]


8th Place:
Pianist #16: Nelson Goerner on Fryderyk Chopin Institute 3 (https://dl.dropbox.com/s/tpz7pxytio7qxlf/Pianist%2016.mp3)
[audio]https://dl.dropbox.com/s/tpz7pxytio7qxlf/Pianist%2016.mp3[/audio]


7th Place:
Pianist #12: Janusz Olejniczak on Sony 87739 (https://dl.dropbox.com/s/91y12mugi7rrrc0/Pianist%2012.mp3)
[audio]https://dl.dropbox.com/s/91y12mugi7rrrc0/Pianist%2012.mp3[/audio]


6th Place:
Pianist #11: Lise de la Salle on Naive 5215 (https://dl.dropbox.com/s/3cme9uki16yz040/Pianist%2011.mp3)
[audio]https://dl.dropbox.com/s/3cme9uki16yz040/Pianist%2011.mp3[/audio]


5th Place:
Pianist #17: Sviatoslav Richter on Urania 4231 (https://dl.dropbox.com/s/fhtcagj8lm399qe/Pianist%2017b.mp3)
[audio]https://dl.dropbox.com/s/fhtcagj8lm399qe/Pianist%2017b.mp3[/audio]


3rd Place:
Pianist #10: Nikita Magaloff on Newton 8802076 (https://dl.dropbox.com/s/ghoyl2ghi999nns/Pianist%2010.mp3)
[audio]https://dl.dropbox.com/s/ghoyl2ghi999nns/Pianist%2010.mp3[/audio]


&

                  &
Pianist #14: Adam Harasiewicz on Newton 8802015 (https://dl.dropbox.com/s/lw9uwjvhy7qvgdk/Pianist%2014.mp3)
[audio]https://dl.dropbox.com/s/lw9uwjvhy7qvgdk/Pianist%2014.mp3[/audio]


2nd Place:
Pianist #15: Earl Wild on Ivory 75001 (https://dl.dropbox.com/s/pop1fm5pwxfdtrc/Pianist%2015.mp3)
[audio]https://dl.dropbox.com/s/pop1fm5pwxfdtrc/Pianist%2015.mp3[/audio]


1st Place:
Pianist #18: Janina Fialkowska on Atma 2666 (https://dl.dropbox.com/s/8e9npml5g6rmiul/Pianist%2018.mp3)
[audio]https://dl.dropbox.com/s/8e9npml5g6rmiul/Pianist%2018.mp3[/audio]

Thanks for organizing! I think #18 is perhaps more repeatable, but the opening to #10 still really grabs me. I don't think I have either Magaloff or Fialkowska in my collection, but may add some one of these days! Really enjoyed it!!

Thanks for running that. Nice selection of pianists.

My other two batches were going to be:

19-27: cherkassky - kissin - ohlsson - switala - perlemuter - arrau - tharaud - ashkenazy - biret

28-36: lortie - ax - hobson - feltsman - graffman - sheng - ousset - demidenko - glemser

And even at no.36 that still doesn't include the only version I've heard in full (accidentally, as a filler for the Preludes) - Jorge Bolet, on Decca

Quote from: Ubiquitous on February 22, 2017, 10:48:47 AM
My other two batches were going to be:

19-27: cherkassky - kissin - ohlsson - switala - perlemuter - arrau - tharaud - ashkenazy - biret

28-36: lortie - ax - hobson - feltsman - graffman - sheng - ousset - demidenko - glemser

That is some collection! Is Chopin a favorite?

Quote from: Ubiquitous on February 22, 2017, 10:48:47 AM
My other two batches were going to be:

19-27: cherkassky - kissin - ohlsson - switala - perlemuter - arrau - tharaud - ashkenazy - biret

28-36: lortie - ax - hobson - feltsman - graffman - sheng - ousset - demidenko - glemser

I've heard about half of those. Which ones stand out to you?

Quote from: mc ukrneal on February 23, 2017, 06:48:14 AM
That is some collection! Is Chopin a favorite?

I wouldn't say the favorite, but yes, one of my favorites. The first classical music that I've attentively listened to were his etudes and preludes

Quote from: Pat B on February 23, 2017, 07:24:36 AM
I've heard about half of those. Which ones stand out to you?

It depends. My favorites are Moravec, Perahia, Rubinstein and Zimerman. So, if I wanted to listen to brilliant, dramatic but overstated like Zimerman's I'd have preferred Ohlsson from the first. If I wanted overall "Chopinness", Ax would have led the second group. But none of them can get close to the nuances, shading and expressions of Rubinstein. Thanks for asking.

Quote from: Ubiquitous on February 23, 2017, 08:36:04 AM
It depends. My favorites are Moravec, Perahia, Rubinstein and Zimerman. So, if I wanted to listen to brilliant, dramatic but overstated like Zimerman's I'd have preferred Ohlsson from the first. If I wanted overall "Chopinness", Ax would have led the second group. But none of them can get close to the nuances, shading and expressions of Rubinstein. Thanks for asking.

Interesting! Of the six you mention, I have heard all but Ohlsson, and of the other five, I very much like Ax, Moravec, Rubinstein, and Zimerman. So I'd say our tastes are fairly similar. I'll try to hear Ohlsson and maybe give Perahia another go.

Quote from: Ubiquitous on February 23, 2017, 08:36:04 AM
My favorites are Moravec, Perahia, Rubinstein and Zimerman. So, if I wanted to listen to brilliant, dramatic but overstated like Zimerman's I'd have preferred Ohlsson from the first. If I wanted overall "Chopinness", Ax would have led the second group. But none of them can get close to the nuances, shading and expressions of Rubinstein. Thanks for asking.

I've got quite a few versions of this myself and I always return to Rubinstein. And, like you, Moravec is my other choice. It's the simplicity of their playing while still conveying that this is Chopin you're listening to that makes them so good.