GMG Classical Music Forum

Couldn't see a thread for the great man!

So here it is....

Favourite works/pianists etc.

How long will it take until Sidoze contributes...?

But more importantly, can we take him on and challenge his rather forthright views, can we fight over Chopin? The decision, is yours....

I've been collecting Chopin discs for a good few years now and find that perhaps more than any other, it pays to have an eclectic, cherry-picked collection.

Some of my favourite discs and performances would be:

Zhukov's live Piano sonata no.3 (1998), as well as his live preludes

Richter's scherzi on Regis/Olympia and the Ballades form the Praga set. Various etudes all over the place, but quite a few on the BBC Legends label.

Michelangeli:
(http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B00000E2VC.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg)

The Tipo nocturnes - unashamedly romantic

Sokolov's Op.25

Gavrilov's Op.10/5, normally makes me giggle when I hear it, it just sounds astonishing hearing a human play like this...

The Rosenthal 2CD set on APR for the nocturnes and mazurkas - an exquisite, velvet tone, simply beautiful playing!

Pletnev:
(http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B000001GYT.01._SCMZZZZZZZ_.jpg) Op.48/1 is stunning on here. How about the virtuosity in the Scherzo's from the Carnegie recital disc?

Sofronitsky for his mazurkas (partic.), but most of his Chopin is top notch..

Pollini for neutrality:
(http://www.paxmusic.co.kr/html/images/3203699.jpg)

I like this disc:
(http://cover6.cduniverse.com/MuzeAudioArt/410/410781.jpg)

Rubinstein, so much recorded! Where to begin...

Thanks for the eclectic list!

For me:

Any Chopin by Moravec.  8)

Quote from: George on November 25, 2007, 08:18:08 AM
Thanks for the eclectic list!

For me:

Any Chopin by Moravec.  8)

I've not warmed to Moravec in Chopin as much (yet) as I feel I should have. I own the Nocturnes set, and whilst he is an undeniably sensitive, poetic interpreter, I find his style almost one-dimensional in that respect.

I might give the set another spin later, haven't listened to it for a long time. What other Chopin has he done? There's a disc with the ballades, if I'm not mistaken...?

Quote from: Peregrine on November 25, 2007, 08:23:35 AM
I've not warmed to Moravec in Chopin as much (yet) as I feel I should have. I own the Nocturnes set, and whilst he is an undeniably sensitive, poetic interpreter, I find his style almost one-dimensional in that respect.

I might give the set another spin later, haven't listened to it for a long time. What other Chopin has he done? There's a disc with the ballades, if I'm not mistaken...?

There is. He's also done the Preludes and some various stuff on a Vox 2CD set that contains some incredible Debussy.

the old GMG had a wonderful Chopin thread in which we used to discuss performances. At one point Luke wrote an insightful analysis of some Chopin pieces (mazurkas I think) and Herman regularly brought new recordings to the fore. Our Chopin contingent has narrowed somewhat since then.

Quote
Pollini for neutrality:

let's not make a virtue out of neutrality, okay?  ;D

Having said that, his live PC 2 is one of my favourite performances. Nothing really neutral about it though.

QuoteI find his style almost one-dimensional in that respect.

I feel the same, mostly. 2 CD Vox set which George mentioned is my favourite one -- the Debussy is incredible and there are some excellent waltzes/mazurkas and a gorgeous Polonaise-Fantaisie.

I'm not fond of his Ballades, particuarlly not his overly-worked-out, overly-mature reading of number 1. However that disc has some beautiful mazurkas. The Preludes are on the soft side too. I've always wanted to hear his first recording of the Preludes but the disc is hard to come by usually. Apparently it's the better recording. I'm not particularly taken by his Nocturnes either -- undeniably poetic as they are.

It's rather a shame that Moravec plays Chopin so softly like this. If you hear his Prokofiev PC 1 you know exactly what he was capable of. Why he didn't apply that to Chopin, well, sometimes it's a pity.

Quote from: sidoze on November 25, 2007, 08:49:54 AM
It's rather a shame that Moravec plays Chopin so softly like this. If you hear his Prokofiev PC 1 you know exactly what he was capable of. Why he didn't apply that to Chopin, well, sometimes it's a pity.

You mean you would like him to play Chopin like a Russian pianist?  :o  ;)
Personally, I'm very glad he doesn't.  8)

Q

Quote from: Que on November 25, 2007, 09:07:43 AM
You mean you would like him to play Chopin like a Russian pianist?  :o  ;)

i realise this is facetious but I don't see the connection. Moravec is both more volatile and more aggressive than nearly any Russian pianist in that PC. Gavrilov is faster, maybe, and Richter is wonderful over all, but the Moravec is unique and my personal favourite. He puts most Russian pianists to shame in it, no doubt about it.

Anyway, my point is that if his Chopin had more spontaneity/volatility and more power/backbone like his Prokofiev PC 1, then in some cases it would be more to my taste. There's no denying the magical sonorities, colours and grace of his Chopin, but there's also more to Chopin than just that, of course.

Quote from: Peregrine on November 25, 2007, 06:24:13 AM
Gavrilov's Op.10/5, normally makes me giggle when I hear it, it just sounds astonishing hearing a human play like this...

So this set is recommendable?

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/410KWV5KDBL._AA240_.jpg)

Quote from: rubio on November 25, 2007, 09:58:23 AM
So this set is recommendable?

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/410KWV5KDBL._AA240_.jpg)

I'd say yes. This is one of the better overall etudes sets I've heard.

Quote from: rubio on November 25, 2007, 09:58:23 AM
So this set is recommendable?

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/410KWV5KDBL._AA240_.jpg)

Only if you want to hear a machine cruising through Chopin, devoid of any musicality...

Bit harsh? Possibly...but, Orbital is right, definitely one of the better sets. I'll put up a couple of the etudes on Mediafire for you Rubio, including the 10/5 I mentioned. I'm just uploading something else at the moment...

You can normally find that set very cheap, so surely worth the outlay  ;)

Gavrilov, 10/4 and 10/5:

http://www.mediafire.com/?sharekey=8517fa91b1f0f37191b20cc0d07ba4d288f9b377c569435b

Quote from: Peregrine on November 25, 2007, 10:22:57 AM
Only if you want to hear a machine cruising through Chopin, devoid of any musicality...

Bit harsh? Possibly...but, Orbital is right, definitely one of the better sets. I'll put up a couple of the etudes on Mediafire for you Rubio, including the 10/5 I mentioned. I'm just uploading something else at the moment...

You can normally find that set very cheap, so surely worth the outlay  ;)

This is recommendable for Op 10 which is played with astonishing technique and there is musicality there. Op 25 is another matter and I prefer Ginzburg from 1948 for this with Cziffra as second choice alongside Cortot.

Other stereo recs are:
Waltzes - Ashkenazy or Anievas
Preludes - Bolet live or Argerich for a more fiery version alongside Arrau live in Prague from 1960
Polonaises - Ashkenazy
Nocturnes - Rubinstein or Moravec
Ballades - Rubinstein or Richter (Michelangeli for #1)
Scherzi - Rubinstein, Richter

Quote from: Holden on November 25, 2007, 11:18:24 AM
This is recommendable for Op 10 which is played with astonishing technique and there is musicality there

Agree strongly with the former, it's the latter I have problems with, but maybe I'm being harsh on Andrei...

Sokolov's Op.25 is self-recommending IMO, very strong set.

Quote from: Peregrine on November 25, 2007, 10:22:57 AM
Only if you want to hear a machine cruising through Chopin, devoid of any musicality...

It is hard for me to think of Gavrilov as unmusical  :-\ If anything he is a bit too musical at times (like those live nocturnes he played).
Anyway here is a close up of his 10/4 (at 2:10)  Watch how he moves his feet away from the pedal, possibly to avoid temptation  >:D
http://www.youtube.com/v/pztWI_8t53k

Quote from: orbital on November 25, 2007, 02:04:52 PM
It is hard for me to think of Gavrilov as unmusical  :-\ If anything he is a bit too musical at times (like those live nocturnes he played).
Anyway here is a close up of his 10/4 (at 2:10)  Watch how he moves his feet away from the pedal, possibly to avoid temptation  >:D

thanks for that. Those are new videos to Youtube. Any idea when they were recorded? Can't stand the theatrical mannerisms though. Reminds me of Stanislav Bunin. Do these guys think they're rockers?  ::)

Here are links to two dubious Chopin compositions. A waltz in f-sharp minor (No:20) and (a supposedly) 17th prelude in eflat minor.

Waltz:
http://nt1k23.com/musicalsec/walFm.mp3
I could not make up my mind as to whether it is genuine or not. The main theme is certainly Chopin-esque with the melancholic mood, but he mid section is either underworked or a student effort.

Prelude:
http://nt1k23.com/musicalsec/preE.mp3
This one can only be a sketch at best  >:D

Probably destined to fail but here's yet another attempt to revive the thread.

There was a very interesting exchange about Chopin down at the Modern composers (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,6684.0.html) thread. It was about "Chopin's modernity". I'm copying it beneath (it feels a little silly to be quoting my own posts so extensively but I'm doing it for the sake of this thread! ;D):

Quote from: Sarkosian on April 15, 2008, 10:35:20 AM
Witold Lutoslawski (in Lutoslawski on Music, Zbigniew Skowron, ed), says the precursor was Chopin, Chopin's last Mazurka in F minor op. 68 but nobody knows it because the innovative part of Chopin's piece is hard to decipher and therefore was never printed.

Quote from: Maciek on April 21, 2008, 04:36:08 AM
BTW, naming Chopin as the precursor of musical modernity is a commonplace in Polish musicology. Tadeusz Zieliński's textbook on 20th century music idioms has a large quotation form the E Minor Prelude in the opening chapter. (I also seem to remember a quotation from Schumann's Waldszenen there, but can't find it. However, this is not the copy I originally read, and I just noticed all page numbers are missing from the index - so perhaps it is somehow faulty. ??? I distinctly remember that Schumann from my teacher's copy - in fact, it was one of the reasons why I became interested in that piece. Ah, whatever. Need to get back to work now.)

Quote from: lukeottevanger on April 21, 2008, 10:33:56 AM
The E minor prelude - perhaps. But there are some Mazurkas which are much more extreme. And that sketch of an E flat minor prelude (I think that's they key - I have the music at home) which is really ultra-modern.  :o :o Or would have been, at any rate (if he'd had the guts to go through with it  >:D >:D >:D ) (only joking)

Quote from: Maciek on April 21, 2008, 02:21:27 PM
I guess he (Zielinski) chose the E minor prelude because the extreme chromatics (both extremely simple, and extremely not-really-tonal at the same time) somehow connect it to Wagner. Obviously, we both favour the Mazurkas as the best thing Chopin gave to the world, nothing to discuss there 8) (and many of them are more modal than tonal, I think - because of the use of folk scales? but then my knowledge of harmony is really rather sketchy...) But I guess there are some other "tonally-transgressive" pieces of his as well: like the slow movement of the B minor sonata where the functionality seems to be almost entirely subordinated to colour. Which is the case in many Chopin pieces, and which of course is still a far cry from atonal writing. ;D

(BTW, I have no idea what prelude you're talking about - nor which mazurka was it that Lutosławski mentioned.)

Quote from: lukeottevanger on April 21, 2008, 02:39:33 PM
Hey, could it be I can actually tell you something about Polish music you were unaware of!!

Check this out (http://www.scienceblog.com/community/older/2002/B/20026577.html) - with downloadable mp3. Edit - darn it - that mp3 link is not working any more, and though I used to have it saved on my PC, I can't find it now....

Anyway, the attachments give you all the detail, plus various reconstructions. It's an astonishing sounding piece, you'll have to trust me!

(Luke attatched pdfs of said prelude to the above post and the two that followed. If you want them, this (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,6684.msg172579.html#msg172579) is a link to the first one.)

Quote from: Maciek on April 21, 2008, 02:55:46 PM
Would this be the same thing?

http://www.sas.upenn.edu/~kallberg/ChopinEbminorPrelude.mp3 (http://www.sas.upenn.edu/~kallberg/ChopinEbminorPrelude.mp3)

(I found the link on the guy's site (http://www.sas.upenn.edu/~kallberg/). He actually wrote a book entitled Chopin at the Boundaries: Sex History, and Musical Genre LOL)

(OK, sorry for straying off topic. 0:))

Quote from: Maciek on April 21, 2008, 02:59:18 PM
Well, that's what it says on the guy's own site! 0:) The Harvard UP site (http://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog/KALCHO.html) has a simpler title, with a comma between "sex" and "history". Not that it makes it any less funny. :P ;D ;D ;D ;D

Quote from: lukeottevanger on April 21, 2008, 03:03:04 PM
You are a wonderful human being  ;D  :-*

Odd piece, isn't it?

Quote from: lukeottevanger on April 21, 2008, 03:07:59 PM
My searching didn't hit the bullseye as yours did, but I did find this:

http://www.nifc.pl/=files/doc/269/kallberg_2006_en.pdf

which is another little essay by Kallberg which gives us (among other things) Chopin's alternative ending to the op 9/2 Nocturne.  8)

Quote from: Maciek on April 21, 2008, 03:15:17 PM

Quote from: lukeottevanger on April 21, 2008, 03:03:04 PM
Odd piece, isn't it?

To the point of absurdity - yes. And I absolutely love it! :D :D :D :D :D :D

(I notice the first article give examples from the Eb min Etude and Prelude which are also my favorites in the "odd - in a great way - pieces by Chopin" genre.)

BTW, I think the title of Kallberg's book would benefit if the author decided to remove the word "history" in later editions...

Oh, I really need to go now - I'll read both articles later in the week.

See you around - it's always a pleasure!
Maciek

Quote from: Sarkosian on April 22, 2008, 12:32:46 AM

Quote from: Maciek on April 21, 2008, 02:21:27 PM
(BTW, I have no idea what prelude you're talking about - nor which mazurka was it that Lutosławski mentioned.)

Mazurka in F minor, op. 68.  There is nothing commonplace about Lutoslawski.  The bars he believes anticipate Tristan were not published.

Quote from: lukeottevanger on April 22, 2008, 03:04:59 AM
Interestingly enough, that very F minor Mazurka (the composer's last piece) is another Chopin work - the only one, in fact - that exists only in sketch form, like the E flat minor prelude. You can read Kallberg's interesting discussion of what the implications are for the 'canonical status' of both works in part 3 of the PDF I posted on the previous page.


Another interesting page on the E flat minor piece (http://www.upenn.edu/gazette/1102/1102gaz7.html)

And another (http://www.riprense.com/kallbergchopin.htm)

Quote from: Maciek on April 22, 2008, 05:54:15 AM

Quote from: Sarkosian on April 22, 2008, 12:32:46 AM
There is nothing commonplace about Lutoslawski.

I never said that. Why would I say something like that about a favorite composer? (Of course, the fact that someone is a great artist doesn't automatically make that someone into a great thinker - but it doesn't preclude it either, and Lutosławski seems to have been a very intelligent person). But what Lutosławski says about Chopins in general or this specific Mazurka - I should have checked this yesterday but somehow missed the fact that you gave both key and opus number, sorry - is anything but new, at least in Polish musicology. In Poland, Chopin was considered a "modern" composer as far back as the early 20th century (e.g. by Szymanowski), and possibly even earlier.

Re the specific piece: It is pretty well known by virtue of it probably being Chopin's last completed (?) piece. The Mazurka is opused which means it was published (back in 1855 by Chopin's friend Julian Fontana) - the publication was prepared by Franchomme who tried to decipher the illegible manuscript (I haven't seen it but they say it's impossible to decipher it definitely). Another reconstruction, by Jan Ekier, was published in 1965 - it contains the middle, F Major section that Franchomme omitted (though Zieliński says the section is "not very interesting"). But this really doesn't make that much of a difference - Franchomme's version (the only one I know ::)) is extremely chromatic (parts of the melody are essentially based on the chromatic scale) and contains the Tristan chord. (BTW, the series of chords in this Mazurka is constructed along very similar lines to the E Minor prelude! >:D) I'm not sure what more there could be in the "unpublished bars" - the sources I have at hand claim that Franchomme's edition is a pretty good approximation of Chopin's manuscript, even if some of the details may differ (again, the text is difficult to decipher).

But anyway, my point is this: you really don't have to be Lutosławski in order to notice a Tristan chord or a very chromatic melody. And saying that musical modernity started in this or that specific piece will always remain a moot point, I think. Why not say it started in Beethoven's late quartets? >:D

Incidentally, one of the "modal" mazurkas I had in mind was another from op. 68: no. 3 in F Major - a very early Chopin mazurka and not really a masterpiece but that middle sections is mind-boggling (at least to me 0:)).

Quote from: jochanaan on April 26, 2008, 06:55:54 PM

Quote from: Maciek on April 21, 2008, 04:36:08 AM
BTW, naming Chopin as the precursor of musical modernity is a commonplace in Polish musicology. Tadeusz Zieliński's textbook on 20th century music idioms has a large quotation form the E Minor Prelude in the opening chapter...

Aside from any nationalistic pride, those Polish scholars have a point.  The E minor Prelude (I assume from the Opus 28 set of 24, modeled after The Well-tempered Clavier) indeed anticipates, not atonality necessarily, but certainly indeterminate tonality of the Liszt-Wagner type.  Even more extraordinary is the A minor Prelude from the same set, where not until the very last chord does the A minor tonality become clear.

But, in several senses, tonality began to break down almost as soon as it was fully established.  Just look at the extreme dissonances in Bach's famous D minor Toccata! ;D

Quote from: jochanaan on April 26, 2008, 07:01:14 PM

Quote from: jochanaan on April 26, 2008, 06:55:54 PM
...not atonality necessarily, but certainly indeterminate tonality of the Liszt-Wagner type...

Having said that, I guess I should clarify the difference. :-[ The Étude sans tonalité, the Tristan prelude and the rest suggest tonalities that shift constantly and have no center; thus "indeterminate."  What Schoenberg, Berg and Webern practiced was music in which there are no tonal implications at all.

Quote from: jochanaan on April 28, 2008, 11:48:20 AM

Quote from: Sarkosian on April 28, 2008, 09:29:55 AM
It would not seem inappropriate to discuss definitions of modernity in any thread devoted to the modern.
A pretty widespread opinion out there is that the breakdown of tonality begins with the opening bars of Tristan.  And if that opinion is sound then musical modernity derives from Wagner.

See my previous reply #79 (on page 4, as the thread comes up for me) for an alternate viewpoint. 8)
[That's jochanaan's first post above - Maciek]

(I know that Harvard University Press post of mine was lame but had to copy it for the link it contained... ::))

The Chopin F minor fantasy is a fave of mine.

I like the story-telling from Liszt via De Pachmann that is associated with it.

  What I love most about Chopin is the melancholia in practically all his piano compositions. It's that  wonderful  "bordering on depression" mood coupled with some of the most beautiful melodies I have ever heard that gives Chopin his unique style.  I only hope all of you understand what I am trying to say or express here?? His nocturnes are indispensable (ie essential for every collection!!) as are his preludes. I especially love Claudio Arrau's recording of the Nocturnes.  I sampled them at HMV once and after hearing Nocturne No.1 I just had to buy the whole set!!  Couldn't part without having it in my collection.

   
  marvin   

  During the past couple of years I have read a lot about Chopin.  The one thing that struck me the most was his early death from Tuberculosis.  After suffocating slowly from this terrible illness (thank God we have antibiotics and a vaccine now) Chopin wrote his last request on a sheet of paper:  "As this cough will choke me, I implore you to have my body opened, so that I may not be buried alive" 

  I find Chopin's last words heartachingly painfull! 

  marvin

I do think of Chopin's mazurkas when I am asked to think about his foreshadowing of modernism - there's one in A minor which never resolves - but I also think of the last movement of the Sonata No 2, and of a couple of the scherzi, which seem to eschew melody in the outer sections (try whistling the one in B minor...).

Quote from: Brian on April 30, 2008, 07:27:31 AM
I do think of Chopin's mazurkas when I am asked to think about his foreshadowing of modernism - there's one in A minor which never resolves - but I also think of the last movement of the Sonata No 2, and of a couple of the scherzi, which seem to eschew melody in the outer sections (try whistling the one in B minor...).

  Now this a very interesting post Brian.  It never occurred to me to link Chopin with modernism (I am assuming here that you are referring to the period of Richard Strauss, Shostakovitch etc. and dissonance in music in general).  I have most of Chopin's Mazurkas and perhaps it is about time I paid them another visit.  Which Mazurka in A minor are you referring to: the "Notre Temp" or the "A Emile Gaillard"??

  marvin

Quote from: marvinbrown on April 30, 2008, 08:12:59 AM
  Now this a very interesting post Brian.  It never occurred to me to link Chopin with modernism (I am assuming here that you are referring to the period of Richard Strauss, Shostakovitch etc. and dissonance in music in general).  I have most of Chopin's Mazurkas and perhaps it is about time I paid them another visit.  Which Mazurka in A minor are you referring to: the "Notre Temp" or the "A Emile Gaillard"??
  marvin

Hm. Perhaps he is referring to the Op. 17, No. 4?

I find the music of Chopin to hide a wealth of adventurous harmonic innovations behind the beautiful melodies for which he is usually (and primarily) credited with. Most of his pieces tend to take some time to establish their tonic, and then only gradually, employing typically evasive and heavily chromatic harmonies in order to delay this establishment. Therefore there are a lot of passages, especially at the start or end of the piece, that is tonally ambiguous or essentially atonal. Sometimes this tonal ambiguity may extend to permeate the entire piece; the Prelude in A Minor, for instance, borders on atonality. Of course, Chopin is different from Richard Strauss and Shostakovich in that he doesn't usually explicitly reveal his dissonances in order to shock, create sensations or otherwise provoke strong reactions. Strauss could write music that is ugly when he feels that his subject matter warrants it (not that the result is 'bad' music), but I feel such a thing must be alien to Chopin's personality.

The Mazurkas provide the canvas for the most radical of Chopin's harmonic experimentation. For the start, most of the mazurkas have a modal feel to them - or at least sections where modality is employed in favour of conventional tonality, thus creating an ambivalence between the two. This modal character might be inherent to the Polish mazurka (can any Polish here enlighten me on this subject!), but overall the extent of harmonic sophistication is such that I find it a stretch to attribute them to mere folkloric influence. It is more likely that Chopin absorbed the progressive musical language of the day and combined it with the traditional mazurka to achieve a truly original result. We all know how Chopin transformed this genre from a humble folk dance. It is in the Op. 17, No. 4 that I find the initial tonal ambiguities most heavily prolonged such that it permeates the entire piece, where the modal/tonal tension feels the strongest, and just when you thought you are going to have a resolution, whoosh, the piece ends - not in the tonic - but on an F major chord!

I must also mention the Preludes, Op. 28 as an example of Chopin's radical approach to form. They are outstanding in their brevity; in fact, I don't remember hearing any works where the musical material is so concentrated within such a short length from this period! Listen to, say, the Prelude in E Minor - surely this is a world all unto itself, and to think that it is developed from such a simple material! Doesn't this anticipate the modern era, in a way?

While I do not in any way deny Chopin's greatness, I have rather a mixed feeling about this composer. I admire his restraint and balance, reminiscent of Classicism, and his almost poetic elegance; but as I have said elsewhere, virtuosic playing doesn't really interest me, so his brand of pianistic writing I find not all that appealing to me. The works from his late period though I consider to be some of the dearest musical gems to me; I like particularly the Op. 62 Nocturnes, Op. 63 and Op. 67 Mazurkas, Op. 69 and Op. 70 Waltzes, the Cello Sonata, and a few others I can't recall at the moment. It is in these works that Chopin - after abandoning all that extraneous ornamentation - achieved true simplicity, which he himself described as his highest goal! I also like Sonata 2, Sonata 3, and the Preludes. The Concertos I find terrible (just a personal opinion). Ah, all this talk is whetting my appetite for some Chopin! Perhaps I will give my collection another spin later tonight...

Where do you place the Etudes dear friend?
Excellent post by the way, enjoyed reading that, and learning. :)

Quote from: Monsieur Croche on May 02, 2008, 08:13:34 AM
Hm. Perhaps he is referring to the Op. 17, No. 4?

I find the music of Chopin to hide a wealth of adventurous harmonic innovations behind the beautiful melodies for which he is usually (and primarily) credited with. Most of his pieces tend to take some time to establish their tonic, and then only gradually, employing typically evasive and heavily chromatic harmonies in order to delay this establishment. Therefore there are a lot of passages, especially at the start or end of the piece, that is tonally ambiguous or essentially atonal. Sometimes this tonal ambiguity may extend to permeate the entire piece; the Prelude in A Minor, for instance, borders on atonality. Of course, Chopin is different from Richard Strauss and Shostakovich in that he doesn't usually explicitly reveal his dissonances in order to shock, create sensations or otherwise provoke strong reactions. Strauss could write music that is ugly when he feels that his subject matter warrants it (not that the result is 'bad' music), but I feel such a thing must be alien to Chopin's personality.

The Mazurkas provide the canvas for the most radical of Chopin's harmonic experimentation. For the start, most of the mazurkas have a modal feel to them - or at least sections where modality is employed in favour of conventional tonality, thus creating an ambivalence between the two. This modal character might be inherent to the Polish mazurka (can any Polish here enlighten me on this subject!), but overall the extent of harmonic sophistication is such that I find it a stretch to attribute them to mere folkloric influence. It is more likely that Chopin absorbed the progressive musical language of the day and combined it with the traditional mazurka to achieve a truly original result. We all know how Chopin transformed this genre from a humble folk dance. It is in the Op. 17, No. 4 that I find the initial tonal ambiguities most heavily prolonged such that it permeates the entire piece, where the modal/tonal tension feels the strongest, and just when you thought you are going to have a resolution, whoosh, the piece ends - not in the tonic - but on an F major chord!

I must also mention the Preludes, Op. 28 as an example of Chopin's radical approach to form. They are outstanding in their brevity; in fact, I don't remember hearing any works where the musical material is so concentrated within such a short length from this period! Listen to, say, the Prelude in E Minor - surely this is a world all unto itself, and to think that it is developed from such a simple material! Doesn't this anticipate the modern era, in a way?

While I do not in any way deny Chopin's greatness, I have rather a mixed feeling about this composer. I admire his restraint and balance, reminiscent of Classicism, and his almost poetic elegance; but as I have said elsewhere, virtuosic playing doesn't really interest me, so his brand of pianistic writing I find not all that appealing to me. The works from his late period though I consider to be some of the dearest musical gems to me; I like particularly the Op. 62 Nocturnes, Op. 63 and Op. 67 Mazurkas, Op. 69 and Op. 70 Waltzes, the Cello Sonata, and a few others I can't recall at the moment. It is in these works that Chopin - after abandoning all that extraneous ornamentation - achieved true simplicity, which he himself described as his highest goal! I also like Sonata 2, Sonata 3, and the Preludes. The Concertos I find terrible (just a personal opinion). Ah, all this talk is whetting my appetite for some Chopin! Perhaps I will give my collection another spin later tonight...

  I agree with Harry, a very enlightening post.  I'll have to give the Mazurkas another listen sometime in the near future paying very close attention to Op.17 No.4.  It turns out I have that recording in my collection  :).  I too would be interested to hear from Polish members of GMG who are familiar with Polish folk music.  Perhaps you can educate me on the effect this Polish folk music had on the tonality of Chopin's mazurkas. 

  marvin   

Quote from: Maciek on April 28, 2008, 02:55:44 PM

...(Luke attatched pdfs of said mazurka to the above post and the two that followed. If you want them, this (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,6684.msg172579.html#msg172579) is a link to the first one.)...

Just a small point, but that E flat minor piece isn't a mazurka but an idea for an alternative to the E flat minor Prelude. And, though it wouldn't have been Chopin's greatest piece - he did scrap the idea after all - it would have been his most radical. Do try to hear/see it (just follow those above links) because it does give an idea of quite how extreme Chopin could be.But to me, Chopin is very frequently almost this radical, at least incipiently - it's near the surface but doesn't often break through as here. I've said it before, but the Mazurkas are simply the finest examples of this - the complete set being one of my desert island volumes - and particularly illustrate Chopin's genius at opening and closing forms, at detailed, meaningful and always varied articulation, at harmonic subtlety - op 17/4, one of my favourites and just cited, is one of many. Add the Preludes (plus the later C# minor one), the Barcarolle, Berceuse, Third Sonata and the op 27 Nocturnes and I have enough to keep me happy for years.

Quote from: lukeottevanger on May 02, 2008, 10:17:05 AM
Just a small point, but that E flat minor piece isn't a mazurka but an idea for an alternative to the E flat minor Prelude. And, though it wouldn't have been Chopin's greatest piece - he did scrap the idea after all - it would have been his most radical. Do try to hear/see it (just follow those above links) because it does give an idea of quite how extreme Chopin could be.But to me, Chopin is very frequently almost this radical, at least incipiently - it's near the surface but doesn't often break through as here. I've said it before, but the Mazurkas are simply the finest examples of this - the complete set being one of my desert island volumes - and particularly illustrate Chopin's genius at opening and closing forms, at detailed, meaningful and always varied articulation, at harmonic subtlety - op 17/4, one of my favourites and just cited, is one of many. Add the Preludes (plus the later C# minor one), the Barcarolle, Berceuse, Third Sonata and the op 27 Nocturnes and I have enough to keep me happy for years.

To chime in with a wildly inappropriate analogy, perhaps to some degree Chopin played a sort of Mendelssohn to Liszt's Berlioz.

Quote from: lukeottevanger on May 02, 2008, 10:17:05 AM
Just a small point, but that E flat minor piece isn't a mazurka but an idea for an alternative to the E flat minor Prelude.

Absent-minded me. ::) Thanks for pointing that out. Corrected.

And here's to remind you of the existence of another interesting thread (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,1238.0.html), perhaps in the need of resuscitation.

Quote from: karlhenning on May 02, 2008, 10:19:58 AM
To chime in with a wildly inappropriate analogy, perhaps to some degree Chopin played a sort of Mendelssohn to Liszt's Berlioz.

Hmm..I can see what you mean, but I can't quite go along with it. Chopin seems to me to be an innovator, plain and simple - we're so used to the surface beauty of his music that we tend to forget that there is little in his major output which isn't new in some way or other - formally, technically, texturally, harmonically. He is a quiet, intimate figure compared with Liszt, perhaps, simply because he kept to small scale forces and shorter pieces for the most part - but he's far more radical than Mendelssohn, to my mind anyway.

Quote from: lukeottevanger on May 02, 2008, 10:31:38 AM
Hmm..I can see what you mean, but I can't quite go along with it. Chopin seems to me to be an innovator, plain and simple - we're so used to the surface beauty of his music that we tend to forget that there is little in his major output which isn't new in some way or other - formally, technically, texturally, harmonically. He is a quiet, intimate figure compared with Liszt, perhaps, simply because he kept to small scale forces and shorter pieces for the most part - but he's far more radical than Mendelssohn, to my mind anyway.

I spoke off the cuff, and in fact discarded the cuff soon after speaking; I knew there would be holes found in the analogy, and I am delighted at the gaping hole you've found in it, Luke.

Well, since no replies are forthcoming from the legion of Polish GMG members, a couple of thoughts from me re the folklore subject:

Is the influence of folklore visible in Chopin's mazurkas? Yes. And very clearly.

Does Chopin ever quote original folk melodies? As far as I'm aware, there isn't a single instance of that.

Does the use of modal scales have anything to do with the folk inspiration? You bet! In fact, I'd say that's where Chopin's originality lies: in adapting folk material he did not cram it into a strictly tonal framework. There were lots of Polish composers who wrote folk-inspired pieces before and after Chopin (especially after) in the 19th century but practically none of them avoided that terrible reef. Moniuszko's folk dances, fine as they are, had been "tamed" by the composer. Even Paderewski's Album tatrzańskie is completely "tonalized"! Not to mention names such as Maria Szymanowska or Karol Kurpiński.

Yes, I was referring to the mazurka Op 17, No 4. Excellent post, Monsieur Croche; I learned a great deal from it, a lot about that very piece. :)  Here's a recording (http://www.mediafire.com/?j02mhytsn4u) by Wladyslaw Szpilman, subject of the great film The Pianist and one of my favorite Chopin interpreters.

Quote from: Maciek on May 02, 2008, 01:10:37 PM
Does Chopin ever quote original folk melodies? As far as I'm aware, there isn't a single instance of that.

Depends on your definition of folk melodies, I suppose. There are non-Polish ones - 'Der Schweizerbub', which is the German theme of his early variation set; or the 'Carnival of Venice' tune he varies in the Souvenir de Paganini. Then there are Chopin's elaborations of the 'Dabrowski' Mazurka which have been reconstructed. And above all - the best music, and the most notable quotation - there's the central section of the Scherzo no 1, which draws on the lullaby 'Lulajze, Jezuniu'. But I suppose in all these cases one could argue that these are scarcely folk melodies by the time Chopin gets to them. I bow to your knowledge on matters of Polish folk music in any case....

...and there's the Grande Fantasie on Polish Themes op 13 - though again, I'm not sure how much these melodies can count as 'folktunes'.

Don't be silly, Luke. My knowledge of Polish folk music is practically nonexistent. ::) But I should have made clear I was talking only about Polish folk tunes, and really only thinking about the mazurkas - which is why Lulajże Jezuniu escaped me. 0:) But then, that's not really a quotation - more of an "impression"; what I mean to say is it's done in a very intricate way, much more than just an "arrangement" (feebly trying to turn the tables here ;D).

No, that's absolutely fair!

Quote from: Harry on May 02, 2008, 08:26:44 AM
Where do you place the Etudes dear friend?
Excellent post by the way, enjoyed reading that, and learning. :)

Thank you for your compliment, Harry. :) Chopin is one of the "transitional" composers who played an important part in shifting my preference away from emotional excesses, which I described in my Introduction thread. I actually became acquainted with his pieces when I started taking up the piano, and he is also one of the very first composers with whom I became engaged on a more theoretical level, beyond the "emotional-but-eventually-rather-mindless" kind of listening that I was accustomed to. My piano teacher is quite the Chopin fan. So, you see, I have rather a special place for this composer.

I find the Etudes to be fascinating works. Given my general dislike of virtuosic pieces (Well, maybe 'dislike' is putting it a little too strongly here), I find myself liking this work more than I should! Perhaps this is because I find the figurations in these pieces to be something more than 'ornaments' or flashy show-off passages; indeed, they actually penetrate ever-so-subtly into the realm of melody and harmony. I detect a blurring, so to speak, between melody and harmony/accompaniment and the decorative, in a way foreshadowing Debussy (Indeed Debussy's piano music owes much to Chopin). The figurations are more extended and interesting in Op. 25. I don't listen to the Op. 10 Etudes as much, and then I tend to cherry-pick the more lyrical ones, such as the No. 3 in E Major and the No. 6 in E Flat Minor (Chopin himself thought the Op. 10/3 to contain his finest melody! - though I disagree), though I like the more epic "Revolutionary" Etude as well. On the other hand, the Op. 25 Etudes IMO benefits more from being played as a cycle - which I usually do. Surely the last three Etudes of the set, when played in that order, provides an exciting climax to the cycle, and a sense of closure - with a bang that is!

Overall, I still listen more to the late works, the Sonatas, and the Preludes, but the Etude is no doubt a work of great artistry, and we ought to at least give credit to Chopin for transcending the limitations of the genre to create something beyond mere technical exercises.

Quote from: lukeottevanger on May 02, 2008, 10:17:05 AM
I've said it before, but the Mazurkas are simply the finest examples of this - the complete set being one of my desert island volumes

Do you have any desert island recordings of the Mazurkas, Luke?

Quote from: Maciek on May 02, 2008, 01:10:37 PM
Well, since no replies are forthcoming from the legion of Polish GMG members, a couple of thoughts from me re the folklore subject:

Is the influence of folklore visible in Chopin's mazurkas? Yes. And very clearly.

Does Chopin ever quote original folk melodies? As far as I'm aware, there isn't a single instance of that.

Does the use of modal scales have anything to do with the folk inspiration? You bet! In fact, I'd say that's where Chopin's originality lies: in adapting folk material he did not cram it into a strictly tonal framework. There were lots of Polish composers who wrote folk-inspired pieces before and after Chopin (especially after) in the 19th century but practically none of them avoided that terrible reef. Moniuszko's folk dances, fine as they are, had been "tamed" by the composer. Even Paderewski's Album tatrzańskie is completely "tonalized"! Not to mention names such as Maria Szymanowska or Karol Kurpiński.

Thank you for clarifying, Maciek!

Of course, folk-inspired pieces are already common in Chopin's time, but usually they are treated as mere exotic novelties, designed more for domestic consumption of music-loving amateurs. Chopin is perhaps one of the first composers to let folk idiom consistently inform his more serious works, as well as allowing that influence to override, or at least go hand-in-hand with - rather than being subservient to - the technical conventions of his day. Will it be a stretch to suppose that in this regard he at least sets some precedent for the nationalists to come?

Quote from: Brian on May 02, 2008, 02:05:22 PM
Here's a recording (http://www.mediafire.com/?j02mhytsn4u) by Wladyslaw Szpilman, subject of the great film The Pianist and one of my favorite Chopin interpreters.

Ah, yes, The Pianist. I love that movie, not least for having one of the most tasteful usage of classical music in a film - but that is an entirely different discussion. Thank you for sharing the recording.

Quote from: lukeottevanger on May 02, 2008, 02:18:35 PM
I bow to your knowledge on matters of Polish folk music in any case....

I, too, eagerly wait for your insight on this subject (and others). Could you enlighten me, on, say, the Polonaises, with which I am relatively less familiar (compared to the Mazurkas)?

Quote from: Monsieur Croche on May 03, 2008, 08:12:06 PM
Do you have any desert island recordings of the Mazurkas, Luke?

Well, not really - I'm a little conventional in listening to Rubinstein most of all (his early recordings in my case). You really need to look at the Chopin Mazurkas thread, and to pay attention to people like Sidoze, who has heard and compared many, many more versions of his Chopin than I have.

That said, my favourite version of the Mazurkas is the one I play - not because I play them so fantastically (I don't!), but because this is fantastic music, and communing with it, reveling in its imagination and detail, is one of life's great pleasures. Like playing Beethoven sonatas or Bach's WTC, or indeed the Chopin Preludes in this respect. So I guess my desert island would need a piano and a copius supply of sheet music too.

Quote from: Maciek on May 02, 2008, 01:10:37 PM
Well, since no replies are forthcoming from the legion of Polish GMG members, a couple of thoughts from me re the folklore subject:

Is the influence of folklore visible in Chopin's mazurkas? Yes. And very clearly.

Does Chopin ever quote original folk melodies? As far as I'm aware, there isn't a single instance of that.

The Mazurkas are one of the best instances of Chopin quoting original folk melodies.

Really? I don't doubt you, but as far as I can recall I've never seen a specific instance of this, and searching around just now tended to confirm this. E.g. this, from Prof. Jan Gorbaty, on a page entitled  Polish Folk Music and Chopin's Mazurkas (http://chopinfound.brinkster.net/ip.asp?op=MusicMazurkas) which I would assume would mention such quotation if it existed but which doesn't:

QuoteSometimes it is virtually impossible to identify a mazurka, or even its section, as a mazur, kujawiak, or oberek. Even a minute analysis of original folk mazurkas does not provide parallels of rhythmic substructure to Chopin's mazurkas or their parts. According to Paul Hamburger, most of Chopin's dances cannot be traced to a single, definite folk model. Rather, they arise from a composite recollection of certain types of melody and rhythm, which is then given an artistically valid expression in the composition. In this respect, Chopin's "Polishness: is rather like Dvorak's "Czechness" and Bloch's "Jewishness". All three composers distilled their national flavors from a raw material that is not strictly folkloric, as opposed to those who start off with genuine, unadulterated folklore-e.g. Bartok, Vaughan Williams, or composers of the Spanish national school.

But I'd honestly be delighted if you could show me instances of such quotations - it all adds to the pot, doesn't it!?  :)

Whilst searching, btw, I saw that BBC R3 is planning a Chopin weekend (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7348185.stm) on the lines of their previous Bach, Mozart and Beethoven weeks - all the composer's works, played non-stop. 17th-18th May

If you are trying to understand the mazurkas, you will have to discard the myth that this was a folk dance. Both the polonaise and the mazurka were invented for the use of the Polish court. Obviously they had their folk roots and employ folk melodic idiom but they had been the property of the ruling classes for several centuries before Chopin took them up. This does have an important impact on the way in which the slower mazurkas should be played, with feelings of sweetness and tenderness, if not a little haughtiness

Quote from: Ten thumbs on May 04, 2008, 06:46:45 AM
If you are trying to understand the mazurkas, you will have to discard the myth that this was a folk dance. Both the polonaise and the mazurka were invented for the use of the Polish court. Obviously they had their folk roots and employ folk melodic idiom but they had been the property of the ruling classes for several centuries before Chopin took them up. This does have an important impact on the way in which the slower mazurkas should be played, with feelings of sweetness and tenderness, if not a little haughtiness

I believe Chopin wrote once in one of his letters that his mazurkas are "not for dancing". I can't remember where I read it, but I will look it up.

If you guys want to try an interesting and "radical" take on the Mazurkas, you should seek out the recording by Andrezej Wasowski. It's unlike anything i ever heard before, and apparently it's supposed to be closer to the "feeling" of the original dance, though i can't vouch on that since i know next to nothing about polish dances.

I have them and could upload some (maybe all). Also have his (just as unique) nocturnes which Orbital recommends :) He really is quite unique, though you'll probably either love it or hate it.

Quote from: Josquin des Prez on May 04, 2008, 08:35:58 AM
If you guys want to try an interesting and "radical" take on the Mazurkas, you should seek out the recording by Andrezej Wasowski. It's unlike anything i ever heard before, and apparently it's supposed to be closer to the "feeling" of the original dance, though i can't vouch on that since i know next to nothing about polish dances.

I enjoy these, but I like Luisada on DG even more.

Quote from: Monsieur Croche on May 05, 2008, 05:48:37 AM
I ran an Amazon search, and was told that my query did not match any products. Can anyone kindly provide a link?

That one won't be easy to find I am afraid. It's a rareity. Also, the spelling of the name might be off. I can check much later if you like.

Quote from: Monsieur Croche on May 05, 2008, 05:48:37 AM
I ran an Amazon search, and was told that my query did not match any products. Can anyone kindly provide a link?

This should work (http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_gw/104-4720987-4348748?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=wasowski+chopin&x=0&y=0)

Quote from: Brian on May 05, 2008, 10:30:24 AM
This should work (http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_gw/104-4720987-4348748?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=wasowski+chopin&x=0&y=0)

Boy those amazon thieves are unreal!  :o

...and they're even more expensive in the UK... (http://www.amazon.co.uk/s/ref=nb_ss_m_h_/026-5470918-0500434?url=search-alias%3Dclassical&field-keywords=wasowski&x=0&y=0)

Quote from: Monsieur Croche on May 04, 2008, 07:20:16 AM
I believe Chopin wrote once in one of his letters that his mazurkas are "not for dancing". I can't remember where I read it, but I will look it up.

This is certainly the case but then neither are the valses and the polonaises. Chopin's intentions are not transparent because he does not always indicate offbeat accents. Generally in the mazurka the accent is always on the second or third beat. In the dance the first beat is a balancing step unlike the waltz where one steps forwards. This accentuation seems to be more evident in the mazurkas of Scriabin and Szymanowski.

Quote from: lukeottevanger on May 05, 2008, 11:57:30 AM
...and they're even more expensive in the UK... (http://www.amazon.co.uk/s/ref=nb_ss_m_h_/026-5470918-0500434?url=search-alias%3Dclassical&field-keywords=wasowski&x=0&y=0)

Wow  :o

My interest is high, but not that high ... can't somebody buy the rights? They probably cost as much as the CDs do  ::)

Maybe we can all pool our resources and buy a mazurka or two apiece. I'll take the late C minor and C# minor, from opp. 50 and 56 if memory serves.

Wasowski's mazurkas are very interesting. He plays with highly pronounced rhythmic rubato which is really fascinating. Anyone interested in mazurkas or Chopin should definitely try to hear them, pity about the availability.
But also have to say that, for me at least, he is hardly be all end all for mazurkas. As mesmerizing as his playing is rhythmically his tonal palette isn't very broad and his dynamic range not very wide and with tendency to play constantly on the slow side in longer spans it can get quite monotonous with certain sameness in approach.
Here are few samples, one that I like very much

Wasowski - Mazurka in C major op.24/2 (http://www.mediafire.com/?xj5zmmhyj7g)

and one I like much less, excruciating 8 minute trawl through op.56/3

Wasowski - Mazurka in C minor op.56/3 (http://www.mediafire.com/?zbloxkwguww)

and for comparison, Maryla Jonas playing the same mazurka with similar rhythmic freedom but far more up-tempo with nice dynamic shadings (40s recording with fake reverb)

Jonas - Mazurka in C minor op.56/3 (http://www.mediafire.com/?g1nb0elagsu)

Quote from: Drasko on May 07, 2008, 06:58:43 AM
But also have to say that, for me at least, he is hardly be all end all for mazurkas. As mesmerizing as his playing is rhythmically his tonal palette isn't very broad and his dynamic range not very wide and with tendency to play constantly on the slow side in longer spans it can get quite monotonous with certain sameness in approach.

my opinion precisely. here is the first disc, from op. 6 up to op. 41 nr 2

http://www.mediafire.com/?noxd9xbmkt7

Quote
and for comparison, Maryla Jonas playing the same mazurka with similar rhythmic freedom but far more up-tempo with nice dynamic shadings (40s recording with fake reverb)
Jonas - Mazurka in C minor op.56/3 (http://www.mediafire.com/?g1nb0elagsu)

She is really special and her op. 68/4 is far and away the most graceful, brilliant and fleet-footed performance ever (with the most breathtaking dynamic shading)

disc 2 of the Wasowski mazurkas

http://www.mediafire.com/?hbm3xmpsddl

That's fantastic - very kind of you! Downloading now...  :) :) :) :)

As far as I can tell such things, this review seems accurate. (http://www.classicstoday.com/review.asp?ReviewNum=11646)

Lots of Chopin today and tomorrow on BBC Radio 3

http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio3/thechopinexperience

Etudes and Preludes - Pollini
Nocturnes - Rubinstein

Can't make a decision for concerti.

Argerich's recording with Rostropovich is up there for PC No. 2;

(Speaking of Argerich, I dislike her PC 2 recording with Dutoit.)

Quote from: op.110 on May 20, 2008, 10:20:17 AM
Etudes and Preludes - Pollini

Pollini's Preludes aren't really all that great. The Arrau on APR, the Bolet on GPOC are really the ones to go for.

This weekend I chanced upon an interesting 2cd, with a Mazurka pen-intégrale (41 of 'em) by the French-Polish pianist (and composer) Milosz Magin, whose story is he was embarking on a great pianist career when he broke his left wrist in a car crash, in 1963. It looks like he recorded most of Chopin's works after he'd recuperated, between 1970 and 1975, for Decca, and theyhave been issued on Accord  -  except these cds seem to have vanished from the market completely.

This is not the top of Chopin interpretation, but after two days I would at least rate Magin higher than Waszowki. Magin has a very interesting rubato and some of his mazurkas are very good. even though these are studio recordings he doesn't shy away from dramatic pauses. In a couple of mazurkas (17 / 2 is wonderful) I wouldn't put him far behind the stereo Rubinstein, though Magin never has the overt demonism of Rubinstein at his best. I sure would like to get hold of another Chopin disc of this pianist.

Most interesting, thanks, Herman.

Quote from: Herman on December 15, 2008, 11:55:11 AM
I sure would like to get hold of another Chopin disc of this pianist.

Should be able to get 10 disc box from French vendors for around 50-60 euros, or single disc with waltzes and few standalone pieces for about 10 euros, also from France.

Quote from: Herman on December 15, 2008, 11:55:11 AM
This is not the top of Chopin interpretation, but after two days I would at least rate Magin higher than Waszowki. Magin has a very interesting rubato and some of his mazurkas are very good. even though these are studio recordings he doesn't shy away from dramatic pauses. In a couple of mazurkas (17 / 2 is wonderful) I wouldn't put him far behind the stereo Rubinstein, though Magin never has the overt demonism of Rubinstein at his best. I sure would like to get hold of another Chopin disc of this pianist.

Speaking of which, the following eye-witness report by one of Chopin's pupils is interesting:
'In keeping tempo, Chopin was inflexible and it will surprise many to learn that the metronome never left his piano. Even in his much-slandered rubato, one hand, the accompanying hand, always played in strict tempo, while the other - singing, either indecisively hesitating or entering ahead of the beat and moving more quickly with a certain impatient vehemence, as in passionate speech - freed the truth of the musical expression from all rhythmic bonds.'
There are passages where I have found this approach to be most effective. Of course the 'accompanying hand' may sometimes be the right.

Quote from: Drasko on December 17, 2008, 04:44:27 PM
Should be able to get 10 disc box from French vendors for around 50-60 euros, or single disc with waltzes and few standalone pieces for about 10 euros, also from France.

I used to have that box. You know I normally don't mind bad recorded sound--it's not the pianist's fault that equipment in the '30s was in its infancy--but I draw the line when sound is just plain badly recorded, as is the case with the Magin set, or much of it anyway. I think they put the microphones inside the piano and closed the lid, 'cause it hurts. I don't remember much about the set, maybe the mazurkas were the best of the lot.

That's interesting. I don't have a problem with the sound.

Considering this is a seventies Decca recording, it's remarkable they had the piano tuned before recording. In the case of Ashkenazy they didn't always have time for getting the piano right.

And, no I'm not getting a 10 cd box. All I would like to have is the Preludes disc  -  I don't need more Polonaises.

What's a good entry level book on Chopin?  A good biography would be great, but I'm more interested in something that also discusses the music, though hopefully in an accessibly non-technical way, as I don't read music.

Jim Samson, Chopin in the Master Musician series.

Not too many note examples. It covers the life, but focuses primarily on the music.

http://www.abebooks.com/servlet/SearchResults?an=samson&bi=0&bx=off&ds=20&kn=master&sortby=2&tn=chopin&x=0&y=0

Quote from: Herman on February 05, 2009, 11:40:54 AM
Jim Samson, Chopin in the Master Musician series.

Not too many note examples. It covers the life, but focuses primarily on the music.

http://www.abebooks.com/servlet/SearchResults?an=samson&bi=0&bx=off&ds=20&kn=master&sortby=2&tn=chopin&x=0&y=0

Thanks Herman!

Another random question (sorry!): Have the piano concertos ever been recorded in 2 piano transcription? This type of performing was popular for a lot of symphonic music in the 19th century, and while I don't want to be all cliché abd bash the orchestral parts in these works, I would be interested to hear the music in a style Chopin was more comfortable with...

Question #2:

I've developed an inane problem with Chopin, especially in the Mazurkas, where I am now unable to sit and listen to them sequentually - instead I find myself repeating one that has just played, sometimes many times, until I get my fill then turn off. This means that I am excessively familiar with the early ones (especially op.6), but at the same time don't seem to feel cheated about this.

I don't find this impulse for repetition in any other composer for piano, does anybody else have this "problem" with Chopin?

I don't think there's anything odd about it. They are short but contain lots of musical substance (the textures are quite lean but there's still a lot happening on many levels). It makes a lot of sense to listen to them the way you do (listening to lots of short but rich pieces in sequence means one is bound to miss many details; or else become over-satiated very fast).

Interesting that there's still no feedback re your first question. I'm aware of several chamber performances of the concertos: piano + string quintet or quartet (which was supposedly one of the ways these were played back then - and one of the reasons why they are orchestrated the way they are). But I can't think of a single two piano recording...

Ooh, thanks for the double answers :D A chamber version of the concertos would make a lot of sense, providing the pianist has some restraint.

Wasowski mazurkas
listening to short samples of entire mazurka set at Amazon, very nice performance of these devilishly hard works, has that synchopated swoop/delay down very nice which gives it that dance momentum.......most versions sound muddled and confused. The cost however as mentioned is absurd  :(

Best mazurkas I have heard that you can afford are on the old EMI Rubinstein set......
In his younger days Ruby was much more a virtuoso performer with plenty of dramatic flare, as he aged his Chopin became more refined and smoothed out......this put a dull edge on his later mazurkas and they lost the early magic

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41FTNRCMDWL._SL500_AA240_.jpg)

For modern sound and just a 10 mazurka selection, Michelangeli has locked in the correct rythm on these.

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41eYDBBKbdL._SL500_AA240_.jpg)

Quote from: Lethe on November 12, 2009, 10:31:59 AM
Another random question (sorry!): Have the piano concertos ever been recorded in 2 piano transcription?

I think George was listening to one of the PCs in that form a couple of days ago (I think I saw it on WAYLT? can't find it now). George, was it you? Could you fill in the details?

Quote from: Lethe on November 12, 2009, 10:31:59 AM
Another random question (sorry!): Have the piano concertos ever been recorded in 2 piano transcription?

I can say with certainty that at least one of them has been.
http://www.arkivmusic.com/classical/album.jsp?album_id=211361

That's the one! And it was (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,9.msg389649.html#msg389649) George!

Quote from: Maciek on February 04, 2010, 04:21:21 AM
I think George was listening to one of the PCs in that form a couple of days ago

Woah, it was heroic to have remembered the original question for so long :o

That disc looks perfect - I don't have a clue how the other pieces will work out, but it should be fun.

Heroic is my middle name.

The workings of this thread are a complete mystery (to me).

When I was in grade school, the resident piano teacher would round off a concert of his students by asking the audience for a request. This was invariably "Polonaise", understood even without mentioning the composer's name that was probably unknown to most.  I looked forward to this every year and resolved one day to play it myself.

It didn't take long to find out there were other wonderful Polonaises by Chopin when trekking off to the music store to buy my own collection. Fairly recently, I discovered a few more gems by Chopin recently on Askenazy's 2 CD collection, that is, early and posthumously published works.

But a big surprise came yesterday upon finding a Polonaise Op. 72 by Carl Maria von Weber in a French collection of piano pieces. Weber was 24 years Chopin's senior, and his other piano works were surely known to Chopin, like the Sonatas. 

The similarity of form is unmistakeable, A-B-A, with the middle section a kind of trio. But harmonically it is fairly bland even though there are a lot of spirited dotted notes and strings of triplets emulated by Chopin.

Also found on IMSLP is another Grande Polonaise, Op. 21 by Weber, not the deepest music either but clearly shows a precedent to Chopin. 

Now further back in time is a Polonaise Op. 89 by Beethoven with a bravura introduction. This piece is more harmonically compact than Weber who does quite a bit of straying from tonality but not exactly getting back home in a convincing manner.

Chopin, however, is the real master of the Polonaise in every aspect--form and harmony--which I suppose is to be expected...

ZB

Advice & comments!  Reading the current issue of Fanfare (May-June 2010) and the recording below was of great interest:

Chopin - Ballades et al w/ Nelson Goerner on a period piano (Pleyel instrument built in Paris in 1848) - recorded on the Polish Fryderyk Chopin Institute label (apparently being devoted to recording all of his works) - I've not heard of this pianist nor the label - any comments, recommendations, etc?  Thanks all -  :D

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/31mirAfPnrL._SL500_AA300_.jpg)

Quote from: Maciek on May 02, 2008, 01:10:37 PM
Well, since no replies are forthcoming from the legion of Polish GMG members, a couple of thoughts from me re the folklore subject:

Is the influence of folklore visible in Chopin's mazurkas? Yes. And very clearly.

Does Chopin ever quote original folk melodies? As far as I'm aware, there isn't a single instance of that.

Does the use of modal scales have anything to do with the folk inspiration? You bet! In fact, I'd say that's where Chopin's originality lies: in adapting folk material he did not cram it into a strictly tonal framework. There were lots of Polish composers who wrote folk-inspired pieces before and after Chopin (especially after) in the 19th century but practically none of them avoided that terrible reef. Moniuszko's folk dances, fine as they are, had been "tamed" by the composer. Even Paderewski's Album tatrzańskie is completely "tonalized"! Not to mention names such as Maria Szymanowska or Karol Kurpiński.

It seems that Chopin was quite determined from very early on creating some kind of a "Polish" style. Just look!
- first his RONDO A LA MAZUR  and TWO MAZURKAS from 1826 (he was 16?!?  :o :o :o :o :o).
- Then in 1828 the POLISH FANTASY with that mazurka finale
- and then followed the wonderful, subtly scored piano-orchestra KRAKOWIAK (I always instinctively felt  that Szymanowski was making a tribute to KRAKOWIAK in his "nationalistic" work for piano and orchestra which similarly starts with piano playing unisono octave-melody in F-major- the SYMPHONIA CONCERTANTE op.60).
Moreover both finali of the G-MINOR TRIO and the E-MINOR CONCERTO are krakowiaks.
And his concertos- particularly the more extended e-minor one- might be seen as a fulfilment of a mission of creating the first truly great Polish orchestral works/ concertos.

I guess early Chopin succeeded being at the same time very nationalistic and Polish and the same time very Europian, and he set an example not only to such later Polish composers like Szymanowski and Lutoswawski but  for other "nationalistic schools" (or generally "national romanticism") in Russia, Norway and Finland.

Schumann wrote in early 1840s that the "nationalistic Polish after taste that clung to most of Chopin's earlier music" seemed to be slowly vanishing. And that exactly was what was happening; He continued composing Mazurkas (Polonaises are in my opinion never nationalistic but "patriotic") but just look how the earlier Mazurkas are much more "nationalistic" than the later ones (apart from few notable exceptions like op. 56/2&3)! Indeed it seems that late mazurkas and waltzes are starting to resemble one another- lol

I officially love Chopin now after hearing Scherzo no.1 and no.2. Amazing.

Quote from: Guido on August 23, 2010, 12:52:00 PM
I officially love Chopin now after hearing Scherzo no.1 and no.2. Amazing.

The first scherzo is an incredibly unique and interesting creation.  The second one, fantastic. :)

Quote from: Guido on August 23, 2010, 12:52:00 PM
I officially love Chopin now after hearing Scherzo no.1 and no.2. Amazing.

Wow! I think that back in August 2010 I did not visit the forum much, for some reason. And until today I somehow completely missed the fact that this thread had developed somewhat after my last post (in Feb 2010! :o). Anyway: Guido, your post, quoted above, blew me away! What a development - and to think I was completely unaware of it until today! :o ;D

Have you found any more amazing Chopin in the meantime?

Cheers!

And abidoful, I think Chopin's love of folk music might in part be explained by the fact that in his childhood he spent a lot of time in the country, and occasionally went to folk dances. Plus the general fascination with folk culture in Poland in the early 19th century - which might have had a lot to do with the fact that as a country Poland had been wiped off the map and Poles were really interested in understanding (and upholding) their national identity.

Has anybody bought the PI box set yet?

[asin]B004EQAUZQ[/asin]

If so, is it good?

Well, you & I got the Songs disc from that set : )

Cutting the dreamy romantic imagination off dead with machine gun fire and bombs seems to be a recurring Chopin theme -- not only in the Op 39 Scherzo but also in the Op 48/1 nocturne. Are there other examples?

Quote from: DavidW on April 11, 2011, 01:03:03 PM
Has anybody bought the PI box set yet?

[asin]B004EQAUZQ[/asin]

If so, is it good?

Sort-of-pricey but not outrageous . . . I've wish-listed it.

Quote from: Mandryka on June 23, 2011, 11:56:35 AM
Cutting the dreamy romantic imagination off dead with machine gun fire and bombs seems to be a recurring Chopin theme -- not only in the Op 39 Scherzo but also in the Op 48/1 nocturne. Are there other examples?

Gun fire and bombs, eh? I'm not hearin' it . . . .

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on June 23, 2011, 12:04:30 PM
Gun fire and bombs, eh? I'm not hearin' it . . . .

The last quarter of Op 39 where the chorale is attacked -- cut off.

The central section of Op 48/1 there's an anthemic theme which is similarly attacked.

Quote from: Mandryka on June 23, 2011, 11:56:35 AM
Cutting the dreamy romantic imagination off dead with machine gun fire and bombs seems to be a recurring Chopin theme -- not only in the Op 39 Scherzo but also in the Op 48/1 nocturne. Are there other examples?

How about the 2nd Ballade? The pastorale theme is followed abruptly by a Presto con Fuoco, then the first returns, albeit fragmented and constantly interrupted by a restless, chromatic piu mosso, until finally the stormy theme wins out with a tumultous coda, only to have a short quote of the tranquil beginning at the end.

Who are featured in this box set? I'm not so sure that playing Chopin's music on period instruments is any more real than great pianists on excellent Steinways and Bechsteins.

ZB

Quote from: Mandryka on June 23, 2011, 11:56:35 AM
Cutting the dreamy romantic imagination off dead with machine gun fire and bombs seems to be a recurring Chopin theme -- not only in the Op 39 Scherzo but also in the Op 48/1 nocturne. Are there other examples?

F minor Prelude.

The Polonaises are the obvious examples (not of the cutting-off, but of the guns and drums and cannons and bombs) and of these the central section of op 44 is a ne pus ultra in Chopin's oeuvre - Rosen spends a long time analysing this very severe and extreme passage - starting on pg 5 of the first score at IMSLP http://imslp.org/wiki/Polonaise_in_F-sharp_minor,_Op.44_%28Chopin,_Fr%C3%A9d%C3%A9ric%29  and sees understanding its import as of significance in locating Chopin's true significance (because the traits that it shows - for instance of a kind of registrally/colouristically delineated counterpoint - are found all over his music but are obscured by the usually more seductive surfaces).

Quote from: DavidW on April 11, 2011, 01:03:03 PM
Has anybody bought the PI box set yet?

You mean, this?

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51lcTnyhaXL.jpg)

;)

Yes -- it's the interruption of dreamy music by the bombs and guns which interests me -- a sort of semantic unit. So I'm not sure that the F minor prelude quite fits the bill Drasko. Unless you are thinking that it interrupts 17. Still . . .

The second ballade is interesting, zamyrabyrd,  because the way most of the records in my collection play it, the guns and bombs is definitely a second episode which just follows on after the end of the pastoral introduction, rather than an interruption of the opening music. I found a couple of  exceptions which I'm going to listen to more carefully -- namely Moiseiwitch (who does all sorts of strange things with the voice leading in the intro, to make it flow relatively seamlessly into the loud music) and Pogorelich in his Chopin competition recording. I've still to listen to Arrau again (tonight!) and I'll just note here that Zimerman plays it wonderfully!

I'll follow through the lead to Rosen. Thanks Luke.

And thanks to everyone for all your help. I like the idea of finding this type of meaningful unit in the music.

Good one George! ;D

(* chortle *)

Chopin is more this dude's cup of tea:

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on June 24, 2011, 10:37:58 AM
Chopin is more this dude's cup of tea:

Thanks for the new Wallpaper for my BB.  8)

Hah!

Chopin is one of the composers I admire most dearly. I like almost everything from him. It really shows that he was a perfectionist: his music is consistently of high quality I find (ok not including his orchestral works). The Nocturnes are in my opinions some of the best piano pieces on the planet.

Of all the Berceuse's I have heard, there is one from Cortot (on an EMI classics disc) that I enjoy most.

Does anyone know any really good interpretations for the Fantaisie Impromptu (and the Impromptus in general) ?

I am also trying to find good interpretations of the Ballades (I like Ballade 1 played by Helene Grimaud so far).

Any help would be MUCH appreciated. :)

Quote from: raduneo on April 29, 2012, 07:46:18 PM
Does anyone know any really good interpretations for the Fantaisie Impromptu (and the Impromptus in general) ?

My favorites:

Ashkenazy/Decca (1985) - gorgeous with delectable nuance.
Francois/EMI (1957) - drive and urgency off the charts.
Arrau/Philips (1980) - a tower of strength and nobility (I feel exhausted by the end).
Moiseiwitsch/Pearl (1961) - love the power and improvisatory nature of this private performance.

Chopin wanted the Fantasie-Impromptu destroyed after his death!
Artur plays from a previously unknown manuscript, which differs in numerous details from more well known versions.

(http://s.dsimg.com/image/R-2504150-1287613367.jpeg)


btw, by orchestral works, surely you didn't mean the piano concertos (for the piano part) not being of high quality?

Quote from: raduneo on April 29, 2012, 07:46:18 PM
I am also trying to find good interpretations of the Ballades (I like Ballade 1 played by Helene Grimaud so far).

The best I have heard is Maria Tipo (live) on Ermitage. (http://www.amazon.com/Sonata-4-Ballades-Maria-Tipo/dp/B000009L2F/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1335782158&sr=8-1)

Moravec on Supraphon (http://www.amazon.com/Ivan-Moravec-Plays-Chopin-Frederic/dp/B00005YEDE/ref=sr_1_3?s=music&ie=UTF8&qid=1335782198&sr=1-3) is my second favorite.

More details:

Chopin Ballades

I have been working on a survey of pianists who have recorded all four of Chopin's lovely Ballades. Over the years I have accumulated a number of different interpretations and thought it would be useful to compare them.

The pianists used in this survey are Moiseiwitsch, Cortot (Naxos), Ashkenazy (1960s and 1980s), Gulda, Entremont, Perahia, Zimerman, Rubinstein, Arrau, Moravec, Vasary, Gavrilov, Anievas, Tipo (live, Ermitage), Richter (live, Praga) and Casadesus (live, Sony.)

To make things more manageable, I listened to each pianists Ballade number one and then only listened to Ballade two from pianists whom I felt excelled at Ballade number one. In the same way, I only listened to Ballade three from pianists who excelled at one and two. At this point, I had narrowed the list to seven pianists; Gavrilov, Moravec, Perahia, Cortot, Ashkenazy (1980s), Zimerman and Tipo (live, Ermitage.)  All seven did well enough in three so that I wanted to hear their fourth Ballade to make my final decisions. 

In the end, these were my findings. I enjoyed Cortot's but felt that he was hampered a great deal by poor sound and somewhat sloppy playing. Nevertheless, his set makes a fine historical choice, especially because his Ballades are coupled with a number of gorgeously played Nocturnes. Zimerman had a number of things going for him, including great sound, technique and finish. However, I often found his dynamic contrasts to be too extreme, too Lisztian for my taste. Perahia also had much going for him, beautiful playing throughout and also very nice sound. Unfortunately, his playing was often generic, lacking spontaneity and excitement found in other readings. Gavrilov played these works extremely well, but unfortunately interpreted these much like Zimerman. His forte chords at times sounded steely and downright banging. Ashkenazy's 1980's readings were better than all the above, though a few times his recordings were somewhat generic, sounding dull and/or less exciting than others.

Moravec's Ballades were much better than I had remembered. His slow tempos, dark piano sound, solid technique and sumptuous tone made for some special readings of these four works. His playing lacked some of Gavrilov and Zimerman's drama, but it certainly wasn't boring by any means. In fact, his set would be my favorite if it weren't for the very special live recording by Maria Tipo. Her intensity and beautiful tone throughout has to be heard to believed. Considering that all of the above performances were studio creations and, with the exception of Cortot, therefore likely benefited from editing and retakes. The sound of her piano seemed a bit out of tune in the first Ballade, but this annoyance quickly faded into the background as she continued. She was at her best in the third and fourth Ballades, where she played with all the requisite power, along with that special beauty I look for in my Chopin. This OOP Ermitage CD is well worth seeking out. Luckily the Moravec Ballades remain in print and at Budget price.

For complete Ballades I'd choose Samson Francois for his sense of spontaneity and excitement, Benno Moiseiwitsch for the most beautiful piano tone ever committed to recorded medium and Alfred Cortot for his perfect phrasing, occasional dropped note notwithstanding.

Moravec I find lovely but just too reticent for Ballades, although is first recording of fourth Ballade is awesome.


raduneo, if you're into sifting through old threads there are two much bigger ones on Chopin :

Chopin recordings (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,21.msg159.html#msg159)
and from previous iteration of this forum
Fighting over Chopin (http://www.good-music-guide.com/forum/index.php/topic,38.0.html)

Quote from: Drasko on April 30, 2012, 03:41:32 AM
For complete Ballades I'd choose Samson Francois for his sense of spontaneity and excitement, Benno Moiseiwitsch for the most beautiful piano tone ever committed to recorded medium and Alfred Cortot for his perfect phrasing, occasional dropped note notwithstanding.

I'll give Moiseiwitsch another listen and give the Francois a try. I agree about the Cortot.

I'll have to relisten to Tipo, I have the disc somewhere but no recollection of the performance at all.

Speaking of Gavrilov, I've just received Belgrade Philharmonic program for the next season, and Gavrilov is scheduled to conduct from the keyboard Tchaikovsky's 1st, Ravel's Left Hand and Rachmaninov's 3rd in one concert. What a magnificent train wreck is that going to be!

Quote from: Drasko on April 30, 2012, 04:10:05 AMSpeaking of Gavrilov, I've just received Belgrade Philharmonic program for the next season, and Gavrilov is scheduled to conduct from the keyboard Tchaikovsky's 1st, Ravel's Left Hand and Rachmaninov's 3rd in one concert. What a magnificent train wreck is that going to be!

Yes, I'd love to be there!

BTW, I listened to the Samson Ballades this morning and though I find his approach original and somewhat refreshing, overall the phrases seem too rushed for me. This rushing seems to diminish the poetry of the music.

Quote from: raduneo on April 29, 2012, 07:46:18 PM
Does anyone know any really good interpretations for the Fantaisie Impromptu (and the Impromptus in general) ?

For the complete Impromptus including the Fantaisie Kodama is very fine. For the Fantaisie alone Katchen is first rate:


[asin]B0013GBD9W[/asin]

[asin]B00006IKP6[/asin]

QuoteI am also trying to find good interpretations of the Ballades (I like Ballade 1 played by Helene Grimaud so far).

Great Ballades for me include Moravec, Gavrilov, & Zimerman.

Zimerman's ballades, hands down, for me!
But I did recently come across Vladmir Feltsman's Chopin recordings, his ballades would have to be my second choice.

[asin]B003UFLYUW[/asin]

On Spotify:
http://open.spotify.com/album/7cGz8VJ4ZzmGSjTGlg4tSS (http://open.spotify.com/album/7cGz8VJ4ZzmGSjTGlg4tSS)

Quote from: Drasko on April 30, 2012, 03:41:32 AM
For complete Ballades I'd choose Samson Francois for his sense of spontaneity and excitement,

Although I don't think this approach really worked well for me in his Ballades, it sure works well in the Scherzos. Really well!

Quote from: George on April 30, 2012, 02:57:50 AM
The best I have heard is Maria Tipo (live) on Ermitage. (http://www.amazon.com/Sonata-4-Ballades-Maria-Tipo/dp/B000009L2F/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1335782158&sr=8-1)

Moravec on Supraphon (http://www.amazon.com/Ivan-Moravec-Plays-Chopin-Frederic/dp/B00005YEDE/ref=sr_1_3?s=music&ie=UTF8&qid=1335782198&sr=1-3) is my second favorite.

More details:

Chopin Ballades

I have been working on a survey of pianists who have recorded all four of Chopin's lovely Ballades. Over the years I have accumulated a number of different interpretations and thought it would be useful to compare them.

The pianists used in this survey are Moiseiwitsch, Cortot (Naxos), Ashkenazy (1960s and 1980s), Gulda, Entremont, Perahia, Zimerman, Rubinstein, Arrau, Moravec, Vasary, Gavrilov, Anievas, Tipo (live, Ermitage), Richter (live, Praga) and Casadesus (live, Sony.)

To make things more manageable, I listened to each pianists Ballade number one and then only listened to Ballade two from pianists whom I felt excelled at Ballade number one. In the same way, I only listened to Ballade three from pianists who excelled at one and two. At this point, I had narrowed the list to seven pianists; Gavrilov, Moravec, Perahia, Cortot, Ashkenazy (1980s), Zimerman and Tipo (live, Ermitage.)  All seven did well enough in three so that I wanted to hear their fourth Ballade to make my final decisions. 

In the end, these were my findings. I enjoyed Cortot's but felt that he was hampered a great deal by poor sound and somewhat sloppy playing. Nevertheless, his set makes a fine historical choice, especially because his Ballades are coupled with a number of gorgeously played Nocturnes. Zimerman had a number of things going for him, including great sound, technique and finish. However, I often found his dynamic contrasts to be too extreme, too Lisztian for my taste. Perahia also had much going for him, beautiful playing throughout and also very nice sound. Unfortunately, his playing was often generic, lacking spontaneity and excitement found in other readings. Gavrilov played these works extremely well, but unfortunately interpreted these much like Zimerman. His forte chords at times sounded steely and downright banging. Ashkenazy's 1980's readings were better than all the above, though a few times his recordings were somewhat generic, sounding dull and/or less exciting than others.

Moravec's Ballades were much better than I had remembered. His slow tempos, dark piano sound, solid technique and sumptuous tone made for some special readings of these four works. His playing lacked some of Gavrilov and Zimerman's drama, but it certainly wasn't boring by any means. In fact, his set would be my favorite if it weren't for the very special live recording by Maria Tipo. Her intensity and beautiful tone throughout has to be heard to believed. Considering that all of the above performances were studio creations and, with the exception of Cortot, therefore likely benefited from editing and retakes. The sound of her piano seemed a bit out of tune in the first Ballade, but this annoyance quickly faded into the background as she continued. She was at her best in the third and fourth Ballades, where she played with all the requisite power, along with that special beauty I look for in my Chopin. This OOP Ermitage CD is well worth seeking out. Luckily the Moravec Ballades remain in print and at Budget price.

That is an impressive analysis George, to say the least! I appreciate your help! I will put your advice to good use. I already had Ashnenazy's Ballade's: I will listen more carefully!

Quote from: Sammy on April 29, 2012, 08:14:01 PM
My favorites:

Ashkenazy/Decca (1985) - gorgeous with delectable nuance.
Francois/EMI (1957) - drive and urgency off the charts.
Arrau/Philips (1980) - a tower of strength and nobility (I feel exhausted by the end).
Moiseiwitsch/Pearl (1961) - love the power and improvisatory nature of this private performance.

Thanks Sammy, I will report back (somewhat) soon! :)

Quote from: Scion7 on April 30, 2012, 01:01:17 AM
Chopin wanted the Fantasie-Impromptu destroyed after his death!
Artur plays from a previously unknown manuscript, which differs in numerous details from more well known versions.

(http://s.dsimg.com/image/R-2504150-1287613367.jpeg)


btw, by orchestral works, surely you didn't mean the piano concertos (for the piano part) not being of high quality?

Thanks! Well, as far as I know his Piano Concertos don't stand among the best of the 19th century. It is true that the piano part is very good. Eitherway, I LOVE both concertos. :P (Pollini for the 1st and Zimmerman for the 2nd).

QuoteMoiseiwitsch/Pearl (1961) - love the power and improvisatory nature of this private performance.

I must revisit that, along with his Ballades. He was a very special pianist. 

Quote from: George on April 30, 2012, 02:10:54 PM
Although I don't think this approach really worked well for me in his Ballades, it sure works well in the Scherzos. Really well!

I listened to the 1st Scherzo on Youtube and you were right, Francois owns this piece. I was left speechless!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zBVqtQxep68

Lastly, I wanted to thank everyone. You have been very helpful. This is quite a great forum! :)

Quote from: raduneo on April 30, 2012, 05:33:05 PM
Thanks! Well, as far as I know his Piano Concertos don't stand among the best of the 19th century. It is true that the piano part is very good. Eitherway, I LOVE both concertos. :P (Pollini for the 1st and Zimmerman for the 2nd).

I adore Zimerman in both works, at least his recording with the Polish Orchestra. Absolute heaven!

Quote from: raduneo on April 30, 2012, 05:35:55 PM
I listened to the 1st Scherzo on Youtube and you were right, Francois owns this piece. I was left speechless!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zBVqtQxep68

And as good as he is, Sofronitsky is even better!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0oKa9UoyeFc

Can we talk about the 2nd Scherzo as well?


http://www.youtube.com/v/A6rSA4xL5EU

Best way to listen to Chopin:

http://www.youtube.com/v/ASUbdZW8Ys0

Quote from: Novi on April 30, 2012, 06:16:58 PM
Can we talk about the 2nd Scherzo as well?


http://www.youtube.com/v/A6rSA4xL5EU

Sure - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ADtDcNPMckE  8)

It may not be the best interpretation, but it is the one I like best:

Helene Grimaude in the 1st Ballade:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=upQ911nlCzw

From the ones I read it is the most dramatic, most sweetly romantic, and there is a nice sense of flow. Ashkenazy's was also quite on the romantic side, but he is a little slow for my liking. (I think I am programmed to like the interpretation that most resembles what I heard in the movie Impromptu about Chopin's life - starring Hugh Grant. Quite a good movie actually: there's also Delacroix, Liszt and of course George Sand). There is a scene where George Sand walks around the hallway of a mansion. All of a sudden, she hears the 1st ballade from behind a closed door: she leans against the door and starts listening more closely, and letting the music do the rest...

Another interpretation that I found impressive so far is the Moravec. It is a somewhat slow interpretation, until the climaxes, when it lets loose, but has a very dark and deep sound: I had no idea this Ballade could sound that way: Moravec has a strong vision for this piece. It is however not an interpretation that I would listen often to: it is not what I look for in this piece.

Isn't it great how great interpreters can bring a piece alive in different ways?

Quote from: raduneo on May 01, 2012, 06:15:00 AM
. . . what I heard in the movie Impromptu about Chopin's life - starring Hugh Grant. Quite a good movie actually. . . .

A fine movie, indeed!

Quote from: Novi on April 30, 2012, 06:16:58 PM
Can we talk about the 2nd Scherzo as well?


http://www.youtube.com/v/A6rSA4xL5EU

Superb - one of the best I've heard and while we are talking about Ballade #1 - this is from the same recital

http://www.youtube.com/v/XKwN_7LnXHw

BTW, how do you insert the actual Youtube video directly?

Quote from: Holden on May 01, 2012, 04:08:59 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XKwN_7LnXHw

flash= 425, 350
Delete watch?
Delete the = sign next to the view and insert a /

Quote from: BobsterLobster on April 30, 2012, 02:07:58 PM
...
But I did recently come across Vladmir Feltsman's Chopin recordings, his ballades would have to be my second choice.

[asin]B003UFLYUW[/asin]

On Spotify:
http://open.spotify.com/album/7cGz8VJ4ZzmGSjTGlg4tSS (http://open.spotify.com/album/7cGz8VJ4ZzmGSjTGlg4tSS)

Nobody's going to give this one a try on Spotify or say anything about it? Well, you're all missing out... unless you tell me otherwise...

Quote from: BobsterLobster on May 01, 2012, 05:09:49 PM
Nobody's going to give this one a try on Spotify or say anything about it? Well, you're all missing out... unless you tell me otherwise...

They are also available for a listen on NML so I'll give them a try there and report back

Quote from: raduneo on April 29, 2012, 07:46:18 PM
Chopin is one of the composers I admire most dearly. I like almost everything from him. It really shows that he was a perfectionist: his music is consistently of high quality I find (ok not including his orchestral works). The Nocturnes are in my opinions some of the best piano pieces on the planet.

Of all the Berceuse's I have heard, there is one from Cortot (on an EMI classics disc) that I enjoy most.

Does anyone know any really good interpretations for the Fantaisie Impromptu (and the Impromptus in general) ?

I am also trying to find good interpretations of the Ballades (I like Ballade 1 played by Helene Grimaud so far).

Any help would be MUCH appreciated. :)

I've said this before but am happy to repeat it. Some of the best Chopin playing I've ever heard comes from Solomon Cutner on an excellent Testament CD. His Berceuse on that is non pareil IMO. The whole CD is worth getting and I imagine it might be available on Spotify

Sokolov's Fantasie Impromptu from an Amsterdam concert is just hair raising though I don't know if it is still available on CD but here it is on Youtube

http://www.youtube.com/v/qQ-pehPISqg

Quote from: Holden on May 02, 2012, 06:57:09 PM
I've said this before but am happy to repeat it. Some of the best Chopin playing I've ever heard comes from Solomon Cutner on an excellent Testament CD. His Berceuse on that is non pareil IMO. The whole CD is worth getting and I imagine it might be available on Spotify

Sokolov's Fantasie Impromptu from an Amsterdam concert is just hair raising though I don't know if it is still available on CD but here it is on Youtube

http://www.youtube.com/v/qQ-pehPISqg

Indeed this is the best! I also like the Arrau for some reason, it just clicks with me. I like him in the Impromptus in general.

And it turns out I LOVE Michelangeli in the Mazurkas.

Forgot to mention that Louis Lortie's Ballades, Nocturnes and Barcarolle on this CD are sublime:

[asin]B0072A4F3E[/asin]

This repertoire really suits his sensitive delicate playing, although perhaps at the expense of a tiny bit of fire. He does get the large-scale structure though which very few pianists get with Chopin.

I haven't heard volume 1 yet, but I'm really interested checking it out!

Quote from: raduneo on May 03, 2012, 07:59:14 AM
Indeed this is the best! I also like the Arrau for some reason, it just clicks with me. I like him in the Impromptus in general.

And it turns out I LOVE Michelangeli in the Mazurkas.

No, there is even better by Sokolov. I thought that this was the same as the one I have on a CD burned for me by a friend but it's not. The live performance from Amsterdam 27/02/05 is what I have and it's brilliant. Does anyone else have this recital? It includes the impromptus. I can't seem to find it on the web so maybe it's a bootleg.

Quote from: Holden on May 05, 2012, 05:27:28 AM

The live performance from Amsterdam 27/02/05 is what I have and it's brilliant. Does anyone else have this recital? It includes the impromptus. I can't seem to find it on the web so maybe it's a bootleg.

I have it. I think it was broadcast recording (sound is too good to be a bootleg) made by Sidoze or Herman, or maybe Jonkers, I can't remember anymore. I guess you got it from one of them as I don't think it was ever widely available online.

Same program from same year, but from Italy can be found on Russian sites:

http://hi-copy.livejournal.com/tag/sokolov

Quote from: BobsterLobster on May 03, 2012, 04:47:57 PMat the expense of a tiny bit of fire.

That was my main impression, Bobster. I'm in the middle of writing a fairly negative review for MusicWeb, I'm afraid; there is nothing really wrong with Lortie, but for every piece on the album there are 5 pianists I find more interesting...  :-\

I liked Feltsman's ballades better; I remember them being sometimes 'mannered,' sometimes magical.

Quote from: Brian on May 05, 2012, 10:10:20 AM
That was my main impression, Bobster. I'm in the middle of writing a fairly negative review for MusicWeb, I'm afraid; there is nothing really wrong with Lortie, but for every piece on the album there are 5 pianists I find more interesting...  :-\

I liked Feltsman's ballades better; I remember them being sometimes 'mannered,' sometimes magical.

Thanks for the comment, I was wondering what other people's opinions would be.
I personally don't understand why Lortie is so undervalued, I think many of his albums are unfairly neglected.
In the Chopin, sure there are loads of pianists who ham it up and wring every drop of emotion out of it, usually with pained faces and raised shoulders, but Lortie captures the broad sweep and long-term structure of the Ballades... that's what makes the Ballades so special as opposed to Chopin's usual tendency towards salon music... and lets the music speak for itself. The problem, but also what I love about Lortie's playing is that he can sacrifice drama and fire for sensitivity and colour, but I usually find this to be a welcome and refreshing change.

I am a massive Lortie fan, if you hadn't gathered(!), I hope your review won't be too negative!

Quote from: Holden on May 05, 2012, 05:27:28 AM
No, there is even better by Sokolov. I thought that this was the same as the one I have on a CD burned for me by a friend but it's not. The live performance from Amsterdam 27/02/05 is what I have and it's brilliant. Does anyone else have this recital? It includes the impromptus. I can't seem to find it on the web so maybe it's a bootleg.

Found it - I was looking for a CD but checking out downloads paved the way.

http://auudoza.typepad.com/blog/2011/10/sokolov-grigory-chopin-schubert-amsterdam-27-02-2005.html

I see that there is actually more than what I have on the CD I was sent.

Quote from: Holden on May 05, 2012, 08:00:15 PM
Found it - I was looking for a CD but checking out downloads paved the way.

http://auudoza.typepad.com/blog/2011/10/sokolov-grigory-chopin-schubert-amsterdam-27-02-2005.html

I see that there is actually more than what I have on the CD I was sent.

Thanks! Has anyone joined the filesharer that hosts these files? Looks like you need to sign in/join to download.

Studying piano, I easily fell in love with Chopin's compositions and now he's one of my favourite composers, besides being a massive source of piano inspiration. ;D About Chopin's music, I don't know what attracts me so much: the rich and elegant harmonic language; the deep, poetical beauty expressed; the powerful, haunting passion bursting out from those melodies; the melancholic, but also dreamy and ethereal atmosphere created; the great tuneful inventiveness.

My favourite recordings are those ones made by Ashkenazy, Rubinstein and Barenboim, three absolutely excellent Chopin interpreters in my opinion; I particularly adore Ashkenazy's set box of the works for solo Piano, which contains stunning performances of the Nocturnes, the Preludes and Waltzes. Pollini also recorded on DG a wonderful version of the Nocturnes, very impressive.

Quote from: Lisztianwagner on May 06, 2012, 05:44:18 AM
Studying piano, I easily fell in love with Chopin's compositions and now he's one of my favourite composers, besides being a massive source of piano inspiration. ;D About Chopin's music, I don't know what attracts me so much: the rich and elegant harmonic language; the deep, poetical beauty expressed; the powerful, haunting passion bursting out from those melodies; the melancholic, but also dreamy and ethereal atmosphere created; the great tuneful inventiveness.

My favourite recordings are those ones made by Ashkenazy, Rubinstein and Barenboim, three absolutely excellent Chopin interpreters in my opinion; I particularly adore Ashkenazy's set box of the works for solo Piano, which contains stunning performances of the Nocturnes, the Preludes and Waltzes. Pollini also recorded on DG a wonderful version of the Nocturnes, very impressive.

Yeah, Chopin's nocturnes it sounds like every note is composed and in that sense creative, and not just an expression of style. As with Beethoven's music.

And Rubinstein, his playing is masterly.

I like the piano concertos very much as well.

Quote from: Henk on May 06, 2012, 05:54:34 AM
Yeah, Chopin's nocturnes it sounds like every note is composed and in that sense creative, and not just an expression of style. As with Beethoven's music.

And Rubinstein, his playing is masterly.

I like the piano concertos very much as well.

:)

Of course the Piano Concertos are very beautiful too, I appreciate Rubinstein's version with Skrowaczewski/Wallenstein a lot.

Ilaria, I just try to explain to myself, what makes this music special. But when I tell to others, it sound elite-like, also to myself.

Quote from: Henk on May 06, 2012, 09:08:08 AM
Ilaria, I just try to explain to myself, what makes this music special. But when I tell to others, it sound elite-like, also to myself.

I understand; it's not simple to express with words what music makes you feel: if doing that had been easy, composers wouldn't have needed to write music.

My apologies.

Quote from: Holden on May 05, 2012, 08:00:15 PM
Found it - I was looking for a CD but checking out downloads paved the way.

http://auudoza.typepad.com/blog/2011/10/sokolov-grigory-chopin-schubert-amsterdam-27-02-2005.html

I see that there is actually more than what I have on the CD I was sent.

That looks very interesting, but they require a registering. Is this available at some free sharing site?

Does anyone have any thoughts on the Ohlsson Hyperion set? I have heard various excerpts from his performances of the Waltzes and Mazurkas, and they sound really excellent. A set that certainly looks very inviting.... :)

Chopin is really one of my absolute favourite composers. I really think every note he wrote was just perfect. :) A real pleasure to play his music too. I have played some of the waltzes and nocturnes, and look forward to learning more in the future!

Really enjoyed my Chopin evening, listening to my favourites of the Waltzes and Mazurkas. His last work, the Opus 68 F Minor Mazurka on at the moment. Utter perfection, incredibly beautiful, divine music.  0:)

Quote from: madaboutmahler on October 17, 2012, 01:52:42 PM
Chopin is really one of my absolute favourite composers. I really think every note he wrote was just perfect. :) A real pleasure to play his music too. I have played some of the waltzes and nocturnes, and look forward to learning more in the future!

Really enjoyed my Chopin evening, listening to my favourites of the Waltzes and Mazurkas. His last work, the Opus 68 F Minor Mazurka on at the moment. Utter perfection, incredibly beautiful, divine music.  0:)

Nice description; I completely agree with everything you said, Daniel. :)

Quote from: madaboutmahler on October 17, 2012, 01:52:42 PM
Does anyone have any thoughts on the Ohlsson Hyperion set? I have heard various excerpts from his performances of the Waltzes and Mazurkas, and they sound really excellent. A set that certainly looks very inviting.... :) ........................

Well, if you're talking about the Ohlsson box shown below, I've owned it for nearly a year - have just listen to the entire set of discs once (w/ a few exceptions) and really enjoyed; now I also have a LOT of other CDs of Chopin's music, many of which I prefer for certain works, but as a 'complete box' offering, Ohlsson is a strong consideration for 'one stop' shopping.  I would wait for some other posts but my vote would be a 'thumbs up' if a box by one performer is your desire?

Now, Ohlsson is on a modern piano(s), I would also like a set on 'period instruments' of Chopin's time - the only one is the other set shown below (right) - multiple performers & different instruments, plus pianists that are not that familiar to me - finally the price is a little too much to entice me @ the moment - SO, I need some input from the forum as to this offering - :)

(http://giradman.smugmug.com/Other/Classical-Music/i-TpbmVwD/0/O/Chopin-Ohlsson.jpg)  (http://en.chopin.nifc.pl/=files/foto/5/2109/o/5563501.jpg)

Quote from: Lisztianwagner on October 17, 2012, 02:03:42 PM
Nice description; I completely agree with everything you said, Daniel. :)

Thank you, Ilaria! :)

Quote from: SonicMan46 on October 17, 2012, 03:31:23 PM
Well, if you're talking about the Ohlsson box shown below, I've owned it for nearly a year - have just listen to the entire set of discs once (w/ a few exceptions) and really enjoyed; now I also have a LOT of other CDs of Chopin's music, many of which I prefer for certain works, but as a 'complete box' offering, Ohlsson is a strong consideration for 'one stop' shopping.  I would wait for some other posts but my vote would be a 'thumbs up' if a box by one performer is your desire?

Now, Ohlsson is on a modern piano(s), I would also like a set on 'period instruments' of Chopin's time - the only one is the other set shown below (right) - multiple performers & different instruments, plus pianists that are not that familiar to me - finally the price is a little too much to entice me @ the moment - SO, I need some input from the forum as to this offering - :)

(http://giradman.smugmug.com/Other/Classical-Music/i-TpbmVwD/0/O/Chopin-Ohlsson.jpg)  (http://en.chopin.nifc.pl/=files/foto/5/2109/o/5563501.jpg)

Thanks very much for the feedback! :) Yes, I would rather like a set with just one performer, although I imagine that I'd probably want to get the very exciting-looking DG set with all of Chopin's works with various performers. I have listened to various extracts from Ohlsson's set, and it really does sound wonderful. Very subtle, beautifully melancholic performances, and the rubato seems perfect to me. I will probably have to wait till Christmas to get it, but I certainly think I want this set!
And thank you for mentioning the 'Real Chopin' set, it certainly sounds really wonderful. One I shall invest in soon, I'm sure! :)

Quote from: madaboutmahler on October 17, 2012, 01:52:42 PM
Does anyone have any thoughts on the Ohlsson Hyperion set? I have heard various excerpts from his performances of the Waltzes and Mazurkas, and they sound really excellent. A set that certainly looks very inviting.... :)

I don't have the complete set, but I did acquire 3 of the discs a few years ago.  He's certainly no scrub, although I found little in the performances that really impressed me.  Most impressive was his inclusion of a 2nd version of Prelude No. 14 from Op. 28.

Thanks for the feedback, Sammy! :)

Daniel, I listened to Ohlsson's box cover-to-cover in January and wrote this post! (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,21.msg593104.html#msg593104) Funnily enough, with the passage of time I'd be less likely to call the nocturnes standouts (mainly because I heard Moravec's recording at long last) but more likely to praise the little Berceuse for being a performance like nobody else's. I really did not enjoy the little-known first sonata, but on the other hand the Mozart variations for piano and orchestra are a total delight.

Quote from: Brian on October 20, 2012, 06:03:29 AM
Daniel, I listened to Ohlsson's box cover-to-cover in January and wrote this post! (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,21.msg593104.html#msg593104) Funnily enough, with the passage of time I'd be less likely to call the nocturnes standouts (mainly because I heard Moravec's recording at long last) but more likely to praise the little Berceuse for being a performance like nobody else's.

If you care to hear 10 of my favorites (Koczalski and Darre are the very best, IMO), I previously uploaded them here: http://www.mediafire.com/?kw32k40nmc78z

1. Benno Moiseiwitsch - (Naxos Historical) 1916
2. Wilhelm Backhaus - (Andante)1928
3. Raoul von Koczalski - (Marston) 1928
4. Walter Gieseking - (Great Pianists of the Century) 1938
5. Josef Hofmann - (Marston) - 1937
6. Moriz Rosenthal - (Pearl) - 1930
7. Alfred Cortot - (Naxos) - 1926
8. Solomon Cutner - (Great Pianists of the Century) 1952
9. Jeanne-Marie Darre - (Vanguard) 1965
10. Ivan Moravec - (Vox) 2002

Quote from: George on October 20, 2012, 06:17:49 AM
If you care to hear 10 of my favorites (Koczalski and Darre are the very best, IMO), I previously uploaded them here: http://www.mediafire.com/?kw32k40nmc78z

1. Benno Moiseiwitsch - (Naxos Historical) 1916
2. Wilhelm Backhaus - (Andante)1928
3. Raoul von Koczalski - (Marston) 1928
4. Walter Gieseking - (Great Pianists of the Century) 1938
5. Josef Hofmann - (Marston) - 1937
6. Moriz Rosenthal - (Pearl) - 1930
7. Alfred Cortot - (Naxos) - 1926
8. Solomon Cutner - (Great Pianists of the Century) 1952
9. Jeanne-Marie Darre - (Vanguard) 1965
10. Ivan Moravec - (Vox) 2002

You BET I want to hear them! Downloading the ZIP file now. And I already know and love Moravec '02... especially in the context of that whole immaculately built disc. Placing it between the second sonata and the fourth ballade was a masterstroke.

Quote from: George on October 20, 2012, 06:17:49 AM
If you care to hear 10 of my favorites (Koczalski and Darre are the very best, IMO), I previously uploaded them here: http://www.mediafire.com/?kw32k40nmc78z

1. Benno Moiseiwitsch - (Naxos Historical) 1916
2. Wilhelm Backhaus - (Andante)1928
3. Raoul von Koczalski - (Marston) 1928
4. Walter Gieseking - (Great Pianists of the Century) 1938
5. Josef Hofmann - (Marston) - 1937
6. Moriz Rosenthal - (Pearl) - 1930
7. Alfred Cortot - (Naxos) - 1926
8. Solomon Cutner - (Great Pianists of the Century) 1952
9. Jeanne-Marie Darre - (Vanguard) 1965
10. Ivan Moravec - (Vox) 2002

So with the exception of Moravec they're all over 50 years old. Why is that? What has happened to Chopin interpretation since 1960 in your opinion? And is Moravec in your opinion a reactionary, playing in an essentially antiquated style which you like? Or is he a modern, who has new contemporary things to say, but who has been ignored or rejected or misaprehended  by post 1960s Chopinists?

Quote from: Mandryka on October 20, 2012, 09:00:32 AM
So with the exception of Moravec they're all over 50 years old. Why is that?

Dunno.

QuoteWhat has happened to Chopin interpretation since 1960 in your opinion?

Dunno.

QuoteAnd is Moravec in your opinion a reactionary, playing in an essentially antiquated style which you like?

Of the ones that I heard, he was one of my favorites.

QuoteOr is he a modern, who has new contemporary things to say, but who has been ignored or rejected or misaprehended  by post 1960s Chopinists?

Dunno.

I just wanted to share some favorites with a friend.

Quote from: George on October 20, 2012, 09:33:30 AM
I just wanted to share some favorites with a friend.

I don't think you're being critiqued, George, I think it's legitimately interesting. If all my favorite Chopin predated 1960, I think I would spend a bit of time trying to figure out why that might be, similarly to if all my favorite Chopin was by Russian pianists, or if all my favorite Chopin was on EMI... it's just something to be curious about. :)

Anyway, I shall be listening over the weekend, thank you! :)

QuoteAnyway, I shall be listening over the weekend, thank you! :)

Your welcome, Brian, enjoy!

Quote from: Brian on October 20, 2012, 01:02:24 PM
I don't think you're being critiqued, George, I think it's legitimately interesting. If all my favorite Chopin predated 1960, I think I would spend a bit of time trying to figure out why that might be, similarly to if all my favorite Chopin was by Russian pianists, or if all my favorite Chopin was on EMI... it's just something to be curious about. :)

Anyway, I shall be listening over the weekend, thank you! :)

George wasn't  being judged!  You know, I'm interested in how ideas about performance have changed, and was struck by the dates in the list. That's all.

I mean how could it be that someone only really likes antiques, or near antiques?

Well put  aside boring reasons (XX shares Cortot's religion or politics  so likes Cortot, XX was imprinted on Moiseiwitsch, XX saw a good Backhaus concert so likes Backhaus, XX hasn't heard any of the best recent performances attentively or sympathetically   - that sort of thing) 

Either quality must have taken a major tumble -- unlikely. Or style values have been subjected to a major change -- possible.

So I just thought it would be interesting to explore this aesthetic paradigm shift a little more deeply, that's all.

Quote from: Brian on October 20, 2012, 06:03:29 AM
Daniel, I listened to Ohlsson's box cover-to-cover in January and wrote this post! (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,21.msg593104.html#msg593104) Funnily enough, with the passage of time I'd be less likely to call the nocturnes standouts (mainly because I heard Moravec's recording at long last) but more likely to praise the little Berceuse for being a performance like nobody else's. I really did not enjoy the little-known first sonata, but on the other hand the Mozart variations for piano and orchestra are a total delight.

Thank you for the feedback, Brian! :)

Quote from: Mandryka on October 20, 2012, 11:11:36 PM
Either quality must have taken a major tumble -- unlikely. Or style values have been subjected to a major change -- possible.

So I just thought it would be interesting to explore this aesthetic paradigm shift a little more deeply, that's all.

As I mentioned somewhere recently, Ivan Moravec is of George's mind too. In the interview on the new Supraphon reissue of his classic nocturnes, he says he believes that great Chopin playing has all but disappeared and everyone today is technically polished at the expense of expression. Old man's sweeping generalizations or not, it's a possibility at least.

Quote from: Brian on October 21, 2012, 06:08:32 AM
As I mentioned somewhere recently, Ivan Moravec is of George's mind too. In the interview on the new Supraphon reissue of his classic nocturnes, he says he believes that great Chopin playing has all but disappeared and everyone today is technically polished at the expense of expression. Old man's sweeping generalizations or not, it's a possibility at least.

Oh, c'mon! ;D Let's be fair, now.

If some "old man" wants to start dropping A-bombs on me then he could at least give me the courtesy of rebuttal time. I mean, it's the human thing to do!

Much more entertaining that way.

Seriously, though, I (for one, anyway ::)) would value some delineation as to WHY "old man x" thinks the way he does. Is that asking too much?

Quote from: Dancing Divertimentian on October 21, 2012, 08:11:10 AM
Seriously, though, I (for one, anyway ::)) would value some delineation as to WHY "old man x" thinks the way he does. Is that asking too much?

His full remark: "Perhaps it is a generational phenomenon. Today, the technical level, as well as craft integrity, is increasing. When you listen to some of the gentlemen from the past century, they seem like complete amateurs in comparison. Naturally, this does not apply to all of them, but sometimes you marvel at how the person managed to attain global fame. This cannot happen today. Today, you can hear dozens, hundreds of young performers who don't make mistakes. They are able to play everything. That is: they play all the notes. And many a time it doesn't actually say anything to you; at best, it provides you with a sort of account of which particular notes a composer wrote down in the score. Occasionally, however, you can discover an exception. Rafal Blechacz, for instance. He's a young pianist who still hears that silver wind.

"...I can only say that the decline is unfortunate, horrible. People's taste has been decaying. Yet you can still find around the world people, albeit in the minority, who are standard-bearers of culture and beauty."

translated by Hilda Hearne in these liner notes

[asin]B0085U0GYW[/asin]

(George and others, the Amazon review addresses sound quality and remastering in far greater detail than I could.)

Quote from: Brian on October 21, 2012, 08:42:33 AM
(George and others, the Amazon review addresses sound quality and remastering in far greater detail than I could.)

Thanks, Brian. I am more than happy with the SQ of my Nonesuch copy.

Quote from: Brian on October 21, 2012, 08:42:33 AM
His full remark: "Perhaps it is a generational phenomenon. Today, the technical level, as well as craft integrity, is increasing. When you listen to some of the gentlemen from the past century, they seem like complete amateurs in comparison. Naturally, this does not apply to all of them, but sometimes you marvel at how the person managed to attain global fame. This cannot happen today. Today, you can hear dozens, hundreds of young performers who don't make mistakes. They are able to play everything. That is: they play all the notes. And many a time it doesn't actually say anything to you; at best, it provides you with a sort of account of which particular notes a composer wrote down in the score. Occasionally, however, you can discover an exception. Rafal Blechacz, for instance. He's a young pianist who still hears that silver wind.

"...I can only say that the decline is unfortunate, horrible. People's taste has been decaying. Yet you can still find around the world people, albeit in the minority, who are standard-bearers of culture and beauty."

translated by Hilda Hearne in these liner notes

[asin]B0085U0GYW[/asin]

(George and others, the Amazon review addresses sound quality and remastering in far greater detail than I could.)

"People's tastes have been decaying." It's just bollocks.

He seems to think that creative communicative Chopin playing has declined but that's nonsense. I could easily make a list of 10 or maybe 20 post 1950s Chopinists whose music making is just brimming over with interesting and original ideas.

Quote from: Mandryka on October 21, 2012, 09:51:55 AM
He seems to think that creative communicative Chopin playing has declined but that's nonsense. I could easily make a list of 10 or maybe 20 post 1950s Chopinists whose music making is just brimming over with interesting and original ideas.

Interesting and original ideas? Just in my own non-comprehensive library, and just from the last 10-15 years, Gekic, Sudbin, Zimerman, Tharaud (waltzes), Pollini. If anything, I'd say the shoe's on the other foot now: of recent pianists, I find those who prettify and soften their Chopin, in the mistaken belief that poetry always means slowness, to be the cliched and unoriginal ones. I'm thinking of the likes of Lortie, Koroliov, Barenboim. I recently reviewed a disc by a Chopin Competition loser (made it to the third round and thus earned a CD release) - the dry technical perfection was there, but Chopin players today also learn that they must follow the "correct style" so they treat nocturnes and longer works like paintings in a museum to be cooed and sighed over. One can have both poetry and life; just ask Moravec!

Quote from: Brian on October 21, 2012, 08:42:33 AM
His full remark: "Perhaps it is a generational phenomenon. Today, the technical level, as well as craft integrity, is increasing. When you listen to some of the gentlemen from the past century, they seem like complete amateurs in comparison. Naturally, this does not apply to all of them, but sometimes you marvel at how the person managed to attain global fame. This cannot happen today. Today, you can hear dozens, hundreds of young performers who don't make mistakes. They are able to play everything. That is: they play all the notes. And many a time it doesn't actually say anything to you; at best, it provides you with a sort of account of which particular notes a composer wrote down in the score. Occasionally, however, you can discover an exception. Rafal Blechacz, for instance. He's a young pianist who still hears that silver wind.

"...I can only say that the decline is unfortunate, horrible. People's taste has been decaying. Yet you can still find around the world people, albeit in the minority, who are standard-bearers of culture and beauty."

translated by Hilda Hearne in these liner notes

Oh, I see. That mythical "time was..." argument again. It's an argument that's never held water at anytime in the past and it doesn't hold water now.

I'm surprised to even see it rear its ugly head again on GMG.

So, as I see it, no one since those dead guys has had any idea how to play Chopin. Generation after generation of professional musicians since the dead guy era have managed little except to prove just how right the dead guy era was.

This is so patronizing it's nauseating.

'Nuff said.

Here's a video that I came across recently and liked. Maria João Pires pops into a concert hall just as Frans Brüggen and his orchestra are wrapping things up after a rehearsal of a piano concerto. Pleasantries exchanged, Pires sits at the pianoforte and immediately begins playing Chopin, bringing the activities around her to a halt for awhile.

http://www.youtube.com/v/n0E3iqttI_E

Quote from: Opus106 on October 25, 2012, 10:57:09 AM
Here's a video that I came across recently and liked. Maria João Pires pops into a concert hall just as Frans Brüggen and his orchestra are wrapping things up after a rehearsal of a piano concerto. Pleasantries exchanged, Pires sits at the pianoforte and immediately begins playing Chopin, bringing the activities around her to a halt for awhile.

http://www.youtube.com/v/n0E3iqttI_E

To watch this video suddenly recalled to me this Capote's profile of Bogart:

QuoteIf one listens to any man's vocabulary, it will be noticed that certain key-to-character words recur. With Bogart, whose pungent personal thesaurus was by and large unspeakably unprintable, "bum" and "professional" were two such verbal signposts. A most moral -- by a bit exaggerating you might say "prim" -- man, he employed "professional" as a platinum medal to be distributed among persons whose behavior he sanctioned; "bum," the reverse of an accolade, conveyed, when spoken by him, almost scarifying displeasure. "My old man," he once remarked of his father, who had been a reputable New York doctor, "died ten thousand dollars in debt, and I had to pay off every cent. A guy who doesn't leave his wife and kids provided for, he's a bum." Bums, too, were guys who cheated on their wives, cheated on their taxes, and all whiners, gossipists, most politicians, most writers, women who Drank, women who were scornful of men who Drank; but the bum true-blue was any fellow who shirked his job, was not, in meticulous style, a "pro" in his work. God knows he was. Never mind that he might play poker until dawn and swallow a brandy for breakfast; he was always on time on the set, in make-up and letter-perfect in his part (forever the same part, to be sure, still there is nothing more difficult to interestingly sustain than repetition). No, there was never a mite of bum-hokum about Bogart; he was an actor without theories (well, one: that he should be highly paid), without temper but not without temperament; and because he understood that discipline was the better part of artistic survival, he lasted, he left his mark.

The key word is professional, of course.  :)

Just finished listening to the marvelous Chopin Piano Concertos.  I cannot believe it has been since June 2008 since I've listened to these!   :D

Excellent performance here, with Bella Davidovich, London Symphony Orchestra and Sir Neville Marriner conducting.  Philips label.  Sorry, can't find the cover for this one.  :-\


And now, I'm on to the Piano Sonatas, with Idel Biret on the piano.  I know there are many Biret detractors, but I love these performances!

[asin]B00001YVCP[/asin]

Quote from: Dancing Divertimentian on October 21, 2012, 06:10:28 PMOh, I see. That mythical "time was..." argument again. It's an argument that's never held water at anytime in the past and it doesn't hold water now.

I must agree.  I mean, Andrea Lucchesini and Yukio Yokoyama, while no longer young punks, seem to know a thing or two about playing Chopin.  Benjamin Grosvenor, too, and he is a young punk.  Oh well, the good old days, and all that.

Quote from: ChamberNut on November 29, 2013, 06:07:18 PM
And now, I'm on to the Piano Sonatas, with Idel Biret on the piano.  I know there are many Biret detractors, but I love these performances!

Nothing wrong with Biret.

Quote from: Mn Dave on November 29, 2013, 06:12:42 PMNothing wrong with Biret.

Maybe not in Chopin, but in LvB . . .

Quote from: ChamberNut on November 29, 2013, 06:07:18 PM
Just finished listening to the marvelous Chopin Piano Concertos.

Those slow movements are to die for!

Quote from: Brian on October 21, 2012, 08:42:33 AM
His full remark: "Perhaps it is a generational phenomenon. Today, the technical level, as well as craft integrity, is increasing. When you listen to some of the gentlemen from the past century, they seem like complete amateurs in comparison. Naturally, this does not apply to all of them, but sometimes you marvel at how the person managed to attain global fame. This cannot happen today. Today, you can hear dozens, hundreds of young performers who don't make mistakes. They are able to play everything. That is: they play all the notes. And many a time it doesn't actually say anything to you; at best, it provides you with a sort of account of which particular notes a composer wrote down in the score.

Up to this point, I am in full agreement. In fact, I could have written those very words myself. It's kinda spooky.

Quote from: Todd on November 29, 2013, 06:14:09 PM


Maybe not in Chopin, but in LvB . . .

Or Rachmaninoff. The kettle never reaches a full boil.

Quote from: Todd on November 29, 2013, 06:14:09 PM
Maybe not in Chopin, but in LvB . . .

I have no Beethoven performed by Biret, and will keep it that way. :)

Quote from: Todd on November 29, 2013, 06:09:15 PM
I must agree.  I mean, Andrea Lucchesini and Yukio Yokoyama, while no longer young punks, seem to know a thing or two about playing Chopin.  Benjamin Grosvenor, too, and he is a young punk.  Oh well, the good old days, and all that.

Haven't heard these. Thanks for mentioning them, Todd.

On the young punk side I enjoy Momo Kodama and Tharaud (in the waltzes).

As far as older farts but still going strong I enjoy Freire (in the nocturnes) and perhaps a dark horse entry, Paik in the concertos (better here than in his Beethoven).

I've been listening to the 3rd sonata a lot recently after discovering John Ogdon's turbulent  performance. I then turned to Pletnev's colourful and brooding and somehow psychologically dramatic performance as a sort of Ogdon antidote. In the past I remember enjoying Gilels's very positive, life affirming take on the music.

What are, in your opinion, the most interesting performances on record? Anyone enjoy Evgeni Bozhanov's recording? Or Sokolov's?

Quote from: Opus106 on October 25, 2012, 10:57:09 AM
Here's a video that I came across recently and liked. Maria João Pires pops into a concert hall just as Frans Brüggen and his orchestra are wrapping things up after a rehearsal of a piano concerto. Pleasantries exchanged, Pires sits at the pianoforte and immediately begins playing Chopin, bringing the activities around her to a halt for awhile.

http://www.youtube.com/v/n0E3iqttI_E

Thanks for posting that. Pires's rendition of the second concerto (with Previn) is sublime and all the traits are present here as well.

On to the Nocturnes, with Arthur Rubinstein.  So lovely!  :)

[asin]B000031WBV[/asin]

Quote from: Dancing Divertimentian on November 29, 2013, 09:08:34 PMAs far as older farts but still going strong I enjoy Freire (in the nocturnes) and perhaps a dark horse entry, Paik in the concertos (better here than in his Beethoven).

Freire is superb in Chopin.  Paik's Chopin is probably the best thing he's done after his magnificent Brahms.

Quote from: Dancing Divertimentian on November 29, 2013, 09:08:34 PM

On the young punk side I enjoy ... Tharaud (in the waltzes).

Haven't heard that CD, as I did not enjoy his Preludes.

QuoteAs far as older farts but still going strong I enjoy Freire (in the nocturnes) and perhaps a dark horse entry, Paik in the concertos (better here than in his Beethoven).

I've tried many times to enjoy the Freire, but I continue to be unsuccessful. Sometimes I grow to like something over time, but it doesn't seem to the case here.

Paik's Prokofiev concertos on Naxos are great! Have you heard them?

Quote from: ChamberNut on November 30, 2013, 05:36:49 AM
On to the Nocturnes, with Arthur Rubinstein.  So lovely!  :)

[asin]B000031WBV[/asin]

My favorite performance of the Nocturnes.
My second favorite is (relevant to the comments of DD, Todd and George) Friere.

Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on November 30, 2013, 08:27:03 AM
My favorite performance of the Nocturnes.

Have you heard his two earlier sets? I especially enjoy his first recording of these works.

Quote from: George on November 30, 2013, 08:31:22 AM
Have you heard his two earlier sets? I especially enjoy his first recording of these works.

I have the EMI Icon box, which has less than ideal sound quality, and therefore have heard the first recording.

And I've just acquired the Big Rubinstein Box, so the middle set will be heard--eventually.

Which raises a question: how does the sound quality of those first recordings in the Big Box compare to the EMI re-issues?

Now listening to the Rubinstein set of Ballades and Scherzos.  This was one of my first 'non-Beethoven' classical music purchases.  :)

My favourite of each is Ballade No. 1 in G minor, and the Scherzo No. 2 in B-flat minor

[asin]B0002TKFS6[/asin]

Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on November 30, 2013, 08:48:59 AM
I have the EMI Icon box, which has less than ideal sound quality, and therefore have heard the first recording.

And I've just acquired the Big Rubinstein Box, so the middle set will be heard--eventually.

Which raises a question: how does the sound quality of those first recordings in the Big Box compare to the EMI re-issues?

I actually never bought the EMI set, as I am weary of EMI's mastering (except the boxes done in France, like the big Cortot or Francois sets, those were wonderfully mastered.) Perhaps you can share some comparisons when you get the chance?

Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on November 30, 2013, 08:48:59 AM
I have the EMI Icon box, which has less than ideal sound quality, and therefore have heard the first recording.

And I've just acquired the Big Rubinstein Box, so the middle set will be heard--eventually.

Which raises a question: how does the sound quality of those first recordings in the Big Box compare to the EMI re-issues?

I haven't heard much of the EMI but I do have the Rubinstein big box and the sound is, given historical factors, uniformly excellent!

Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on November 30, 2013, 08:48:59 AMWhich raises a question: how does the sound quality of those first recordings in the Big Box compare to the EMI re-issues?

The big box remasterings sound better.

Quote from: Mandryka on November 29, 2013, 11:03:11 PM
I've been listening to the 3rd sonata a lot recently after discovering John Ogdon's turbulent  performance. I then turned to Pletnev's colourful and brooding and somehow psychologically dramatic performance as a sort of Ogdon antidote. In the past I remember enjoying Gilels's very positive, life affirming take on the music.

What are, in your opinion, the most interesting performances on record? Anyone enjoy Evgeni Bozhanov's recording? Or Sokolov's?

Love that piece!

My favorite is probably Cziffra, who I think is underrated as a Chopinist. Though he's often pigeonholed as a flashy virtuoso (and he sometimes was one!), his best recordings demonstrate acute awareness of when to hold back and when to let loose—there's spontaneity but it isn't unbridled.

More unbridled is Argerich from 1965, a classic nonetheless!

I've enjoyed readings by Ashkenazy, Ohlsson, Pollini, Hamelin, and Hough, but I find myself returning to Cziffra.

Of the recordings that you named, which is your favorite?

Quote from: aquariuswb on November 30, 2013, 12:09:49 PM
Love that piece!


Of the recordings that you named, which is your favorite?

Pletnev, no doubt about it. This is a performance I've returned to often for years now and I've always enjoyed what he does. Recently I've been enjoying Sokolov a lot too, but it's not commercially available.

Quote from: Todd on November 30, 2013, 06:44:17 AM
Paik's Chopin is probably the best thing he's done after his magnificent Brahms.

I'm a big fan of Paik's solo Brahms, which strangely seems only available on a Korean DG import. Have you heard Paik's Brahms first concerto with Inbal? I've been eyeing that disc for some time.

Quote from: Dancing Divertimentian on November 30, 2013, 06:29:40 PMHave you heard Paik's Brahms first concerto with Inbal?

Yes, and I recommend buying without delay. (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,373.msg652146.html#msg652146)

Quote from: George on November 30, 2013, 08:03:52 AM
Haven't heard that CD, as I did not enjoy his Preludes.

I haven't heard Tharaud's preludes but I've never been let down by his disc of waltzes.

QuoteI've tried many times to enjoy the Freire, but I continue to be unsuccessful. Sometimes I grow to like something over time, but it doesn't seem to the case here.

It's funny you should say that George. For years I had a similar problem with Arrau's nocturnes. It got so bad that at one point I finally just sold off the set and said goodbye to ever hearing them again.

But so many people kept saying so many good things about it I eventually caved and re-bought the set. But I STILL didn't get along with it. But years went by and one night I put it on after a long hiatus and *bang* it clicked!

Now I can't fathom what problem I might have had with Arrau's nocturnes. They're so beautifully poetic.

Now, practically speaking I can't say whether this story amounts to anything but all I can say is: time has a funny way of changing perceptions. :) 

QuotePaik's Prokofiev concertos on Naxos are great! Have you heard them?

Yes, I have one of the discs, the disc with concertos 1, 3, and 4. I agree, they're definitely up there with the best.

Quote from: Todd on November 30, 2013, 06:32:56 PM

Yes, and I recommend buying without delay. (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,373.msg652146.html#msg652146)

Quote from: Todd on August 14, 2012, 11:31:29 AMThe gem here, for me, is the Paik/Inbal.  Paik's Brahms is largely about tone and beauty, which works splendidly on his solo works disc.  It works here, too, because he can and does play with power and intensity when needed.  Inbal and the Czech PO play superbly, too, and the sound is top notch, with some hefty bass.  Paik is one heck of a Brahmsian, and this recording joins my favorites.

Oh, wow, thanks for that. Now I'm anxious to hear it. Thank goodness Christmas is right around the corner. :)

Quote from: Dancing Divertimentian on November 30, 2013, 07:15:14 PM
It's funny you should say that George. For years I had a similar problem with Arrau's nocturnes. It got so bad that at one point I finally just sold off the set and said goodbye to ever hearing them again.

But so many people kept saying so many good things about it I eventually caved and re-bought the set. But I STILL didn't get along with it. But years went by and one night I put it on after a long hiatus and *bang* it clicked!

Now I can't fathom what problem I might have had with Arrau's nocturnes. They're so beautifully poetic.

Now, practically speaking I can't say whether this story amounts to anything but all I can say is: time has a funny way of changing perceptions. :) 

Interesting you mention Arrau's Nocturnes, for they were my first set of these works and remain my favorite, even after 16 or so different sets later.

Just heard a great survey of the Chopin Ballades on BBC Radio 3: http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio/player/b03k0cnh?t=254.469

The survey begins at 27:20 and ends around 1hr 16min.

This BBC survey is making me curious to hear Zimerman and Richter again in these works. The samples she used for these pianists sounded superb.

For those who are curious to know what the BBC reviewer thinks, but don't wish to listen to the whole broadcast, her top three are Cortot 1929, Zimerman and Richter in 1960. Good for her! The first two were in my "runner up" when I did my own survey a few years ago.

I love how she sums up her survey: "Zimerman has my head, Cortot my heart and Richter my gut."

Does anyone know how Chopin got the idea to make his scherzos so savage? I know the scherzo was a fairly recent invention, but were there any examples of scherzi so violent and discordant? His scherzos push so many harmonic and expressive boundaries, and then generally pull back from "the brink" in the trio sections.

The three minor-key scherzi were written between 1831-1839, only a few years after the deaths of Beethoven and Schubert. Even Schumann seems to have been mystified by their darkness.

Also my post obviously reveals another uncertainty, which is whether I should be saying scherzos or scherzi.

I would say that Chopin's 4 Scherzi have nothing much in common with any Scherzos that came before or after. As far as I know noone had called an independent musical piece a scherzo before - all previous scherzi had been part of bigger works. Scherzi tended to be light and fanciful, like minuets. Chopin invented a new musical form and had the audacity, the irony, to call it a scherzo.

Supposedly Chopin did not much care for Beethoven, but of course there is at least one "dark" scherzo on an even grander scale than any of Chopin's in Beethoven's 9th symphony! And there are several dark and violent scherzi by Beethoven on a smaller scale: in the string quartets op.74, 95 and 130, in the piano sonatas opp. 106 and 109, also the b minor bagatelle from op.126.

But I agree that Chopin's Scherzi are quite original (although the large scale structure is usually quite simple, compared to his Ballades or the Polonaise Fantaisie).

Listening to the Nocturnes this morning.  I have the UTTS condition (uncontrollable toe tapping syndrome).  :)

[asin]B000031WBV[/asin]

Quote from: ChamberNut on July 16, 2014, 05:35:32 AM
Listening to the Nocturnes this morning.

That's just wrong, Ray.  :P

Quote from: North Star on July 16, 2014, 05:42:39 AM
That's just wrong, Ray.  :P

:D

Any recommendations for the orchestral works? Not just recommendations for the concertos, but also for the Mozart variations, Fantasy on Polish Airs, Krakowiak Rondo and Polonaise.

There's a set by Kun-Woo Paik that looks a bit interesting, there seem to be the occasional good noises about it...

Quote from: orfeo on September 27, 2014, 10:03:34 PM
Any recommendations for the orchestral works? Not just recommendations for the concertos, but also for the Mozart variations, Fantasy on Polish Airs, Krakowiak Rondo and Polonaise.

There's a set by Kun-Woo Paik that looks a bit interesting, there seem to be the occasional good noises about it...

Yes, that Paik set is highly recommendable, the rarities, the concertos...everything (I have it). 

Quote from: orfeo on September 27, 2014, 10:03:34 PM
Any recommendations for the orchestral works? Not just recommendations for the concertos, but also for the Mozart variations, Fantasy on Polish Airs, Krakowiak Rondo and Polonaise.

There's a set by Kun-Woo Paik that looks a bit interesting, there seem to be the occasional good noises about it...

Concertos - Zimerman and the Polish Festival Orchestra

The rest - Seek out the Arrau recordings. They are gorgeous. Not sure if he did them all, but he did most of them.

I never really cared (but I probably only listened once or twice) to the shorter orchestral works (and for the andante spianato + Grande Polonaise I am satisfied with the solo version), but I have the Arrau recordings in DGs 2010 anniversary box. It's available as a Duo with the concertos.

Quote from: George on September 28, 2014, 08:20:53 AM
The rest - Seek out the Arrau recordings. They are gorgeous. Not sure if he did them all, but he did most of them.

Are these the recordings with Inbal and the London Philharmonic?

(Thanks for the replies, everyone.)

Results of the 2015 Chopin Competition are In, Ey!

http://ionarts.blogspot.com/2015/10/the-results-of-2015-chopin-competition.html (http://ionarts.blogspot.com/2015/10/the-results-of-2015-chopin-competition.html)

Quote from: Jo498 on June 23, 2014, 01:25:41 PM
Supposedly Chopin did not much care for Beethoven, but of course there is at least one "dark" scherzo on an even grander scale than any of Chopin's in Beethoven's 9th symphony! And there are several dark and violent scherzi by Beethoven on a smaller scale: in the string quartets op.74, 95 and 130, in the piano sonatas opp. 106 and 109, also the b minor bagatelle from op.126.

But I agree that Chopin's Scherzi are quite original (although the large scale structure is usually quite simple, compared to his Ballades or the Polonaise Fantaisie).

Even so, the increased range and power of the developing piano gave Chopin the opportunity for a wider range of harmonic and textural effects than any previous works of this type I know. The wild virtuosity required of the soloist goes beyond even the most advanced examples in Beethoven. Either "scherzos" or "scherzi" is acceptable in English.

There is a lot of later piano music I am not really familiar with (Scriabin, Rachmaninov, Medtner etc.) so I might be missing something  but it seems interesting that there are almost no large scale "stand-alone"-scherzi AFTER Chopin's either. The one exception I am aware of is Brahms' early e flat minor Scherzo.

Whatever the opinions might be, scherzi are among Chopin's greatest works and tend to exploit the element of instrumental brilliance more than the ballades.
As a brief insight, all the scherzos are in ABA design with a contrasting B midsection. S1's first section recalls the first movement of Op. 35 and the theme is from the Polish Noel. Coda is taxing. S2 requires brilliant fingering technique. S3 is the most dramatic of the lot. It has a chorale-like melody and you need strong fingers. S4 must be the most joyous, poetic. It calls for delicate finger technique and chord playing.

Quote from: Jo498 on October 21, 2015, 12:12:19 AM
There is a lot of later piano music I am not really familiar with (Scriabin, Rachmaninov, Medtner etc.) so I might be missing something  but it seems interesting that there are almost no large scale "stand-alone"-scherzi AFTER Chopin's either. The one exception I am aware of is Brahms' early e flat minor Scherzo.

And Brahms claimed he knew of no Chopin when he wrote that piece, though I think he was fibbing.

There are Dukas's Sorcerer's Apprentice and Chabrier's Espana, though both of course are orchestral.

Quote from: (poco) Sforzando on October 21, 2015, 08:14:33 PM
And Brahms claimed he knew of no Chopin when he wrote that piece, though I think he was fibbing.

There are Dukas's Sorcerer's Apprentice and Chabrier's Espana, though both of course are orchestral.

Is Sorcerer's Apprentice an ABA scherzo format? If we expand this to orchestral, we have a plenty of examples - Dvorak's Scherzo capriccioso, Suk's superb Scherzo fantastique, minor examples by Lalo and Stravinsky. But Chopin maybe did corner the piano market?

EDIT: I was going to say something about what an interesting discussion this is, but it turns out that I started it a year ago  ;D ;D

I did not think about these orchestral pieces (I don't think I know the Suk or Lalo, but have heard the others).

Still, it is odd that, say Liszt (Mephisto waltz and similar pieces come pretty close), Rachmaninoff or others did not write solo piano scherzo in the vein of Chopin. They seem such an obvious vehicle for pianistic brillance...

Quote from: Mandryka on June 23, 2014, 01:01:25 PM
I would say that Chopin's 4 Scherzi have nothing much in common with any Scherzos that came before or after. As far as I know noone had called an independent musical piece a scherzo before - all previous scherzi had been part of bigger works. Scherzi tended to be light and fanciful, like minuets. Chopin invented a new musical form and had the audacity, the irony, to call it a scherzo.

It does seem that Chopin was the first to turn the scherzo into a major independent form although individual scherzos did exist previously. Apart from examples from for instance, Schubert and Hummel, Mendelssohn experimented with the form in the 1820s until it became, via a 'scherzo-capriccio', the capriccio itself. One possible inspiration was Weber. I recall wrestling with the demonic Menuetto from his first sonata in my youth. This is a scherzo all but in name, as are those in the second sonata, Menuetto capriccioso - Presto assai, and in the fourth, Menuetto - Presto vivace ed energico, both of which are equally vigorous and large scale.

Quote from: Brian on October 21, 2015, 09:38:41 PM
Is Sorcerer's Apprentice an ABA scherzo format?

No, and this is something your own ears can easily tell you, if you hear a substantial middle section in contrasting mood from the repeated outer parts. S'A does not appear to be in sonata form either; it seems rather just to toss its primary themes back and forth in various keys with occasional development material.

Perhaps a spiritual heir to the Chopin scherzos is the two Brahms rhapsodies, Op. 79.

Another subsequent composer who used the scherzo in his own way was Heller. I can but quote from Bernadette:

   Heller has published four Scherzos. The first (Op. 8 ), dedicated to Robert Schumann, is written with care and purity. It displays tenderness of a high order and affords promise of future greatness, but it has been surpassed by subsequent compositions.
   Op. 24, dedicated to Liszt, is full of freshness, youth and originality. It is evidently a work written in the spring-time of life, when all is sunny and smiling. The Scherzo Fantastique (Op. 57), is of a less serene character. It answers well to its title, and contains some extremely original points. The whole of the first movement exhibits a rare knowledge of rhythm and some ravishing contrasts. The middle part is very weird, and in looking at the work as a whole we cannot but regret that it was not scored for full orchestra, for the capabilities of which it displays most ample and tempting material.
   The fourth Scherzo (Op. 108), is pianoforte music proper. It is lovely work, and may rival the best efforts of Chopin in its own way.

Very interesting, thanks for the information. I know Heller only by name, but there are some recordings of some of his piano music.

Quote from: Brian on October 22, 2015, 10:42:16 AM
Perhaps a spiritual heir to the Chopin scherzos is the two Brahms rhapsodies, Op. 79.

How so?

Quote from: Brian on October 22, 2015, 10:42:16 AM
Perhaps a spiritual heir to the Chopin scherzos is the two Brahms rhapsodies, Op. 79.

Perhaps not  :D...unless you elaborate your angle.
The first scherzo has some restlessness and the first rhapsody has turbulence, but other than that the rhapsodies are quite extroverted and rich in harmonic and second one's origin is a ballad called "Archibald Douglas"... what is "spirit"?  ::)

Quote from: (poco) Sforzando on October 22, 2015, 01:26:53 PM
How so?

Quote from: El Chupacabra on October 22, 2015, 01:31:58 PM
Perhaps not  :D...unless you elaborate your angle.
The first scherzo has some restlessness and the first rhapsody has turbulence, but other than that the rhapsodies are quite extroverted and rich in harmonic and second one's origin is a ballad called "Archibald Douglas"... what is "spirit"?  ::)

Well, it's not a formal hypothesis - more of an idle thought - but the emotional turbulence, the virtuosity married to emotional power, the sort of abrupt stark beginnings to the works. (I'm thinking mostly of Chopin's first three scherzos, not the "happy" one.) And particularly in Brahms' first rhapsody Op. 79, the presence of a strongly contrasting B section.

Perhaps the formal underpinnings aren't too similar, but if you heard the Chopin scherzos & Brahms Op. 79 in recital or on disc together, you wouldn't think them strange bedfellows, would you?

El Chupacabra, I'm sure you're not saying that the Chopin works are introverted or harmonically simple...?

Quote from: Brian on October 24, 2015, 05:15:16 PM
Well, it's not a formal hypothesis - more of an idle thought - but the emotional turbulence, the virtuosity married to emotional power, the sort of abrupt stark beginnings to the works. (I'm thinking mostly of Chopin's first three scherzos, not the "happy" one.) And particularly in Brahms' first rhapsody Op. 79, the presence of a strongly contrasting B section.

Perhaps the formal underpinnings aren't too similar, but if you heard the Chopin scherzos & Brahms Op. 79 in recital or on disc together, you wouldn't think them strange bedfellows, would you?

Well, there are a lot of works with strongly contrasting B sections. But the one from 79/1 does have some points in common with the B section to the Chopin B minor scherzo. Even so, Chopin's virtuosity is often of a different order than Brahms's, and his keyboard textures are rather different. Brahms is often strongly chordal in his textures, lacking Chopin's brilliance of sound, while Chopin tends to favor the higher glittering parts of the keyboard and his left-hand parts tend to favor wide arpeggiations that cruelly stretch the player's reach. Perhaps the scale passages in 79/1 remind you of passages in Chopin, but consider also that Brahms's 79/1 ends quietly and the A section is in sonata form, while 79/2 is in sonata form throughout. This is not true of Chopin, who tends not to use the older classical forms. (I do however have a hunch that Wagner, when he wrote the preludes to Meistersinger and possibly even Parsifal, took a few hints in formal construction from Chopin's departures from sonata form in the 3rd ballade.)

So a toss-up on your question. But since "strange bedfellows" comes from Shakespeare's Tempest, where Trinculo creeps under Caliban's gabardine to escape thunder . . . . (Oh, and BTW, BGR, I took some pains to respond to your questions about Hamlet in the Diner. Mr. Smith saw fit to disagree with me, but he's wrong. :))

Quote from: Brian on October 24, 2015, 05:15:16 PM
I'm sure you're not saying that the Chopin works are introverted or harmonically simple...?

:(
I don't know what to say now.

...think of Chopin's output played in a manner that they are...would you prefer to listen to them in an intimate salon or a concert stage?

...and harmony is :

Quote from: (poco) Sforzando on October 24, 2015, 05:43:36 PM
Brahms is often strongly chordal in his textures,

so, yes, in your context Chopin is harmonically simple(r)...but the precise word is more 'conventional'

Quote from: El Chupacabra on October 25, 2015, 03:18:38 AM
:(
I don't know what to say now.

...think of Chopin's output played in a manner that they are...would you prefer to listen to them in an intimate salon or a concert stage?

...and harmony is :so, yes, in your context Chopin is harmonically simple(r)...but the precise word is more 'conventional'

I said or implied nothing about harmony. Chopin's harmonies are often far from simple.

Quote from: (poco) Sforzando on October 25, 2015, 03:31:51 AM
I said or implied nothing about harmony. Chopin's harmonies are often far from simple.

When you say "chordal" you mean 'harmony'. They are simpler than Brahms and they are a lot more conventional than Brahms's rhapsodies.

Quote from: El Chupacabra on October 25, 2015, 03:35:40 AM
When you say "chordal" you mean 'harmony'.

Er, no. "Chordal" is a description of texture.

Quote from: orfeo on October 25, 2015, 03:43:01 AM
Er, no. "Chordal" is a description of texture.

Thank you, orfeo. I know what I meant and I know what I wrote: "Brahms is often strongly chordal in his textures." (Not invariably of course, but see just for a start, the Rhapsody in Eb, op 119/4.) Chopin's harmonies can be quite advanced. (Not invariably of course, but see just for start, the Prelude in A minor; or the 2-bar passage in the F# major Impromptu, op. 36, where he leads back from the D major middle section to the restatement of the theme in F major. It's almost Schoenbergian.)

Reading your posts here and past , I couldn't find a way to answer without making you feel offended so I will not continue.

Quote from: (poco) Sforzando on October 25, 2015, 03:50:03 AM
Chopin's harmonies can be quite advanced. (Not invariably of course, but see just for start, the Prelude in A minor; or the 2-bar passage in the F# major Impromptu, op. 36, where he leads back from the D major middle section to the restatement of the theme in F major. It's almost Schoenbergian.)

No argument from me on that point. The essay in the Ashkenazy box set of Chopin that I have points out that, for a composer who has managed to be so popular for his "tunes", Chopin does some astoundingly modern things with his harmonies and massive amounts of chromaticism in places.

Having said that, I'd also say that the scherzi tend to be less a bit less harmonically adventurous than many of his other works (say, the preludes or the mazurkas). They are still utterly amazing. For a man who didn't really like Beethoven, it's pretty remarkable how he took what Beethoven had done to the scherzo and dialled it up to 11.

Personally, I marvel at just how many forms Chopin made his own. He's the first composer that would come to mind for close to half a dozen genres. Partly I think that's because he was so non-Romantic with his titles.

Quote from: El Chupacabra on October 25, 2015, 03:58:43 AM
Reading your posts here and past , I couldn't find a way to answer without making you feel offended so I will not continue.

Oh, please. If you have something good to say that would offend me, say it. Nothing like feeling offended at 8:15 on a Sunday morning. (And where are you writing from, Alaska? It must be four hours earlier there.)

Anyone following the 17th Chopin Competition? It's over of course and a Korean pianist won. I am just listening to the former prodigy, Ami Kobayashi in the Chopin PC1, that the finalists had to play. She seems to have matured well.
ZB

Quote from: Brian on October 24, 2015, 05:15:16 PM
Perhaps the formal underpinnings aren't too similar, but if you heard the Chopin scherzos & Brahms Op. 79 in recital or on disc together, you wouldn't think them strange bedfellows, would you?

I would.

Quote from: (poco) Sforzando on October 25, 2015, 04:15:56 AM
...at 8:15 on a Sunday morning...It must be four hours earlier there...

Quite irrelevant to me as the "time of the day" concept is different...especially 24 days away from polar twilight.

Quote from: orfeo on October 25, 2015, 04:02:55 AM
No argument from me on that point. The essay in the Ashkenazy box set of Chopin that I have points out that, for a composer who has managed to be so popular for his "tunes", Chopin does some astoundingly modern things with his harmonies and massive amounts of chromaticism in places.

Having said that, I'd also say that the scherzi tend to be less a bit less harmonically adventurous than many of his other works (say, the preludes or the mazurkas). They are still utterly amazing. For a man who didn't really like Beethoven, it's pretty remarkable how he took what Beethoven had done to the scherzo and dialled it up to 11.

Personally, I marvel at just how many forms Chopin made his own. He's the first composer that would come to mind for close to half a dozen genres. Partly I think that's because he was so non-Romantic with his titles.

I tend to think Chopin learned more and was more influenced by Beethoven than he let on. (It's the Harold Bloom "anxiety of influence" thing: the sense of competition with a strong earlier figure, which in some cases manifests itself as dismissal of the precursor's work.) But if the voice of Beethoven isn't speaking through the C minor etude from op. 25 and the first movement of the Bb minor sonata, I don't know what is.

Most of Chopin's small works fall under the heading of the "characteristic piece," similar in concept to those Schumann, Mendelssohn, and Brahms wrote despite their different styles. S and M (like Debussy later) generally title their short piano pieces, M collecting them as "songs without words," while B and C offer more generic and neutral titles. (Brahms likes to use terms like capriccio, intermezzo, rhapsody, while Chopin prefers dance-derived titles like mazurka, polonaise, and waltz.) I think though in terms of form per se, Chopin is most original in his longest independent works, the four ballades, none of which has an identifiable precursor and each of which is quite different in formal method from the others.

Quote from: (poco) Sforzando on October 24, 2015, 05:43:36 PMEven so, Chopin's virtuosity is often of a different order than Brahms's, and his keyboard textures are rather different. Brahms is often strongly chordal in his textures, lacking Chopin's brilliance of sound, while Chopin tends to favor the higher glittering parts of the keyboard and his left-hand parts tend to favor wide arpeggiations that cruelly stretch the player's reach.

Quote from: (poco) Sforzando on October 25, 2015, 03:50:03 AM
Thank you, orfeo. I know what I meant and I know what I wrote: "Brahms is often strongly chordal in his textures." (Not invariably of course, but see just for a start, the Rhapsody in Eb, op 119/4.) Chopin's harmonies can be quite advanced. (Not invariably of course, but see just for start, the Prelude in A minor; or the 2-bar passage in the F# major Impromptu, op. 36, where he leads back from the D major middle section to the restatement of the theme in F major. It's almost Schoenbergian.)

Thanks - half the time you say things I wanted to say but didn't know how, and half the time you make me race off to listen to a piece with ears out for something new. As far as harmonies in the scherzos go, I'll say the first time I heard No. 1 (which was in college), the first theme made me say "what?!" Imagine telling any of Chopin's predecessors that that was an appropriate melody...

Quote from: El Chupacabra on October 25, 2015, 03:18:38 AM
:(
I don't know what to say now.

Sorry! Also I didn't mean to start some weird personal argument.

Quote from: El Chupacabra on October 25, 2015, 03:18:38 AM
...think of Chopin's output played in a manner that they are...would you prefer to listen to them in an intimate salon or a concert stage?

Well, that depends on the work. I heard Abdel Rahman El Bacha play Sonata No. 3 in the Orangerie at the Bois de Boulogne, as intimate a space as can be imagined with the piano surrounded by flowers and candles:

(http://paris1900.lartnouveau.com/paris16/bois_de_boulogne/chateau_de_bagatelle/actuel/1chatbag3.jpg)

But I do think that "Chopin = salon" is a false generalization; he did write all those nocturnes and mazurkas, certainly, but quite a few of his works are as Big and weighty as you'd want to hear on a concert stage.

Quote from: (poco) Sforzando on October 25, 2015, 06:30:06 AMI think though in terms of form per se, Chopin is most original in his longest independent works, the four ballades, none of which has an identifiable precursor and each of which is quite different in formal method from the others.

And the Fantaisie in F minor - over time there have been plenty of opportunities for me to listen to contemporary fantasies by other composers (not talking about Schubert here! Raff, Ries, Vorisek, those types), and what's striking is how poorly they're usually structured, or how badly they fail to make the episodes of their fantasy cohere into one whole. What Chopin manages here (especially bringing back elements from earlier, at the end) is just incredible.

Quote from: (poco) Sforzando on October 24, 2015, 05:43:36 PM
(Oh, and BTW, BGR, I took some pains to respond to your questions about Hamlet in the Diner. Mr. Smith saw fit to disagree with me, but he's wrong. :))

I saw that! Never did reply, because I was reading it on my phone while traveling, and upon returning home forgot I hadn't replied. Will head back over to the Shakespeare discussion soon.

Quote from: (poco) Sforzando on October 25, 2015, 06:30:06 AM
I tend to think Chopin learned more and was more influenced by Beethoven than he let on. (It's the Harold Bloom "anxiety of influence" thing: the sense of competition with a strong earlier figure, which in some cases manifests itself as dismissal of the precursor's work.) But if the voice of Beethoven isn't speaking through the C minor etude from op. 25 and the first movement of the Bb minor sonata, I don't know what is.

I read somewhere that Chopin himself played the Op.26 Ab Sonata by Beethoven but was not particularly fond of his late Sonatas. I happen to be working on the Polonaise-Fantasie and after a lifetime of studying most of his works, case in point, the Ballades and the Scherzi, there is not the molecular development of material as with Beethoven and Brahms or even the thematic sort as in Liszt.
There is much harmonic movement via applied dominants that after a certain point become ambiguous seen already in the first page of the Polonaise-Fantasie. What key are we in after this happens 2 or 3 times?
The same goes for the 1st Ballade, in which the 1st theme appears in different keys (like the 2nd theme of the Fantasie) rather than developed but is used to move to different key areas. When the 2nd appearance of the 2nd theme arrives which key-wise is unclear since if it supposed to be in E major, starts right away with the applied dominant of A, an E7. The juxtaposition of keys is an important consideration when grappling with the structure. This is totally un-Brahms. One might raise a case for the Neapolitan, favored by Chopin, that he may have appreciated in the Appassionata Sonata by Beethoven. Conventional sonata form Chopin was able to do in his Sonatas and Concertos with real developments.

Quote from: Brian on October 25, 2015, 07:25:59 AM
As far as harmonies in the scherzos go, I'll say the first time I heard No. 1 (which was in college), the first theme made me say "what?!" Imagine telling any of Chopin's predecessors that that was an appropriate melody...

For sure. It's less a melody than a wild figuration flung over three and a half octaves. But I wonder if it's fanciful (and this never occurred to me before, or has been noted anywhere else I know - which of course means nothing) to hear that scherzo as a response to the first movement of Beethoven's op. 90. The same wild energy, the suspended dissonances, the extreme dynamics, and that brutally hammered minor ninth chord near the end (compare measures 52-53 in the Beethoven) - even the widely stretched, painfully awkward left-hand Alberti basses in B's bars 54-57 seem like Chopin to me. Feels like an example of Bloom's apophrades, the "return of the dead," where the precursor's work wants to be heard in terms of his successor's.

Quote from: zamyrabyrd on October 25, 2015, 07:37:15 AM
I read somewhere that Chopin himself played the Op.26 Ab Sonata by Beethoven but was not particularly fond of his late Sonatas. I happen to be working on the Polonaise-Fantasie and after a lifetime of studying most of his works, case in point, the Ballades and the Scherzi, there is not the molecular development of material as with Beethoven and Brahms or even the thematic sort as in Liszt.
There is much harmonic movement via applied dominants that after a certain point become ambiguous seen already in the first page of the Polonaise-Fantasie. What key are we in after this happens 2 or 3 times?
The same goes for the 1st Ballade, in which the 1st theme appears in different keys (like the 2nd theme of the Fantasie) rather than developed but is used to move to different key areas. When the 2nd appearance of the 2nd theme arrives which key-wise is unclear since if it supposed to be in E major, starts right away with the applied dominant of A, an E7. The juxtaposition of keys is an important consideration when grappling with the structure. This is totally un-Brahms. One might raise a case for the Neapolitan, favored by Chopin, that he may have appreciated in the Appassionata Sonata by Beethoven. Conventional sonata form Chopin was able to do in his Sonatas and Concertos with real developments.

I would definitely agree that development per se is not a primary element in Chopin's vocabulary. His tendency in bringing back themes is to transform them texturally (I'm thinking right now of the 4th Ballade, as in that wonderful episode in Db with the left hand in triplet scales). When I spoke of the C minor etude, I was thinking too of texture, which seems to derive from Beethoven's sturm-und-drang, combined with the elaborate arpeggios up and down the keyboard that are purely Chopin's. Harold Bloom's argument about the anxiety of influence, which is a Freudian reading of literature in which influence does not just mean "X kind of sounds like Y," is more a sense of competition between the younger creator and his precursor, and thus "X didn't much like Y" does not preclude X being in competition with Y.

Quote from: (poco) Sforzando on October 25, 2015, 07:55:18 AM
I would definitely agree that development per se is not a primary element in Chopin's vocabulary. His tendency in bringing back themes is to transform them texturally (I'm thinking right now of the 4th Ballade, as in that wonderful episode in Db with the left hand in triplet scales). When I spoke of the C minor etude, I was thinking too of texture, which seems to derive from Beethoven's sturm-und-drang, combined with the elaborate arpeggios up and down the keyboard that are purely Chopin's. Harold Bloom's argument about the anxiety of influence, which is a Freudian reading of literature in which influence does not just mean "X kind of sounds like Y," is more a sense of competition between the younger creator and his precursor, and thus "X didn't much like Y" does not preclude X being in competition with Y.

I don't know about Beethoven being that significant to Chopin psychologically as there was many other influences such as composers of Bel Canto. He showed a strong individuality from his early adolescence in his first Polonaises. Your comparison of the 1st Scherzo and Beethoven's Op. 90, yes, you do have a point there.

Quote from: zamyrabyrd on October 25, 2015, 08:14:58 AM
I don't know about Beethoven being that significant to Chopin psychologically as there was many other influences such as composers of Bel Canto.

Yes, the slow movement of sonata 3 could be an aria by Bellini. But composers absorb multiple influences, too. Bach was also very important to Chopin.

Quote from: Brian on October 25, 2015, 07:25:59 AMBut I do think that "Chopin = salon" is a false generalization; he did write all those nocturnes and mazurkas, certainly, but quite a few of his works are as Big and weighty as you'd want to hear on a concert stage.

And to think that the music, the mazurkas in particular, are somehow shallow and lacking in harmonic depth in particular because someone can think of them as 'salon music' baffles the mind.

I think the falsity lies already in the association of "salon". This was a semi-private meeting place of connoisseurs, not just some lady's boudoir or drawing room. Sure, e.g. the scherzi and polonaises are fairly extrovert pieces but overall the association of "intimate" and "for connoisseurs" does not seem so far off for Chopin.

Quote from: Jo498 on October 25, 2015, 09:00:03 AM
I think the falsity lies already in the association of "salon". This was a semi-private meeting place of connoisseurs, not just some lady's boudoir or drawing room. Sure, e.g. the scherzi and polonaises are fairly extrovert pieces but overall the association of "intimate" and "for connoisseurs" does not seem so far off for Chopin.

The term salon music, however, connotes pieces written for virtuosic display and undemanding sentiment. Chopin certainly wrote some pieces that fall into this category, including some of the mazurkas, but whether played on a concert stage or in an intimate gathering, much of his work is far more complex harmonically, formally, and emotionally. I would not even call the scherzi or the larger polonaises (like the F# minor and the P-Fantasie) "fairly extrovert."

I was listening to those scherzos today (in the rather nice recording by Yundi Li), and what occurred to me about Chopin in comparison to Brahms is the iridescence of Chopin's textures. I wouldn't go so far so say Brahms doesn't care about color - in many ways he does - but you won't hear the same degree of openness in piano writing that you hear in Chopin so often.

Openness. Yes. Chopin basically asks the player to have Mozartean clarity while hitting 2-3 times as many notes as Mozart would demand.

His larger scale one-movement works are truly marvellous things. The Ballades, the Fantasy, the Polonaise-Fantaisie, also the Barcarolle is another absolutely superb one.

Quote from: (poco) Sforzando on October 25, 2015, 05:56:22 PM
I was listening to those scherzos today (in the rather nice recording by Yundi Li), and what occurred to me about Chopin in comparison to Brahms is the iridescence of Chopin's textures. I wouldn't go so far so say Brahms doesn't care about color - in many ways he does - but you won't hear the same degree of openness in piano writing that you hear in Chopin so often.

I was thinking what you wrote about the possible Beethoven - Chopin connection, more than what meets the eye as it were. Beethoven actually was the composer who broke the mold of Minuet with some of his Scherzi wild to the point of Dionysian. Schumann was confused as to Chopin's appellation of "Scherzo" but seen as taken from Beethoven, it all starts to make sense.
The wide leaps in writing are also similar in spirit to the German mentor. Formally, none of the Chopin Scherzi are anywhere near a traditional binary, except there are two clearly delineated sections in all four, closer to rondo if anything. One doesn't expect development in a Scherzo but it is present int 2,3 and 4. Instead of a trio there is an often frenzied coda. Something to think about further...

The scherzi are mostly ternary, not binary. But then, so is a menuet/trio or scherzo/trio.

Quote from: orfeo on October 26, 2015, 04:39:55 AM
The scherzi are mostly ternary, not binary. But then, so is a menuet/trio or scherzo/trio.

I was thinking of scherzo without trio. At least the spirit of "trio" doesn't apply here.
The 1st Scherzo has two alternating contrasting themes + coda.
The 2nd's large units are A, B that turns into a development using some material from A, a return of A and a coda. OK that can be considered ternary but it is a far cry from a standard minuet form.
The 3rd has a long A exposition then a B with a bit of development going back to A, B again in a different key and coda.
No. 4 is A with a strongly contrasting B section, back to A and a coda, the most ternary of all four.
The point remains how much Chopin was influenced by Beethoven who not only owned the Menuet/Scherzo but stretched it way out of its original shape. Similarly, Chopin probably took the name from Beethoven and may have tried to best him in a new, Romantic interpretation of "Scherzo".

Quote from: zamyrabyrd on October 26, 2015, 07:43:24 AM
I was thinking of scherzo without trio. At least the spirit of "trio" doesn't apply here.

Eh?

You just leave me wondering what you think the "spirit" of a trio is, and how often you think you ever experienced Haydn, Mozart or Beethoven doing a menuet without a trio.

Menuet movements are ternary form. Just because the 'A' and the 'B' bits of the ternary form managed to get separate names doesn't alter that. And beyond that, I think you're overthinking things. I wasn't attempting to suggest that you should be able to find 2 refrains of unequal length in a Chopin scherzo's 'A' section, nor was I suggesting anything about codas (nor does a coda alter the basic form). Music is in some ways mathematical, but it's not mathematics and the great pieces of music break the "rules" as often as they fulfil them because they weren't "rules" in that sense to begin with. None of these composers set out to write perfect textbook examples of previously set-down forms, because most of the analysis we now apply didn't exist at the time. They aimed to write music that hit the emotions, and they used some of these forms because pattern recognition is fundamental to the human experience.

Quote from: orfeo on October 27, 2015, 02:05:04 AM
Eh?

You just leave me wondering what you think the "spirit" of a trio is, and how often you think you ever experienced Haydn, Mozart or Beethoven doing a menuet without a trio.

Menuet movements are ternary form. Just because the 'A' and the 'B' bits of the ternary form managed to get separate names doesn't alter that. And beyond that, I think you're overthinking things. I wasn't attempting to suggest that you should be able to find 2 refrains of unequal length in a Chopin scherzo's 'A' section, nor was I suggesting anything about codas (nor does a coda alter the basic form). Music is in some ways mathematical, but it's not mathematics and the great pieces of music break the "rules" as often as they fulfil them because they weren't "rules" in that sense to begin with. None of these composers set out to write perfect textbook examples of previously set-down forms, because most of the analysis we now apply didn't exist at the time. They aimed to write music that hit the emotions, and they used some of these forms because pattern recognition is fundamental to the human experience.

Hi there. Historically speaking, a "trio" is more often a commentary on an already musically compact minuet or scherzo. Just because something happens to be a B section, as in an ABA song form or any ternary form for that matter, doesn't mean that all B's wherever they appear fitting that particular mold have the same function. This is the danger of reading too much into the Chopin's appellation of "scherzo" formally. It doesn't function at all like the previous models. 
You can have a look at Hummel's Scherzo in A, a two pager used in the ABRSM 5th grade piano exams. This is all A material, no B at all. I should have been clearer at the outset and used that as an example of a scherzo without a trio. Chopin may well have used Hummel as a starting point rather than Beethoven for going outside the classical form.

Quote from: zamyrabyrd on October 27, 2015, 02:44:31 AM
Hi there. Historically speaking, a "trio" is more often a commentary on an already musically compact minuet or scherzo. Just because something happens to be a B section, as in an ABA song form or any ternary form for that matter, doesn't mean that all B's wherever they appear fitting that particular mold have the same function. This is the danger of reading too much into the Chopin's appellation of "scherzo" formally. It doesn't function at all like the previous models. 
You can have a look at Hummel's Scherzo in A, a two pager used in the ABRSM 5th grade piano exams. This is all A material, no B at all. I should have been clearer at the outset and used that as an example of a scherzo without a trio. Chopin may well have used Hummel as a starting point rather than Beethoven for going outside the classical form.

I would want to revisit the scores to the Chopin scherzos as well as this Hummel before specifically commenting. But I have no idea what you mean by "Historically speaking, a 'trio' is more often a commentary on an already musically compact minuet or scherzo." How is this true of the trios in the scherzos of Beethoven's 5th or 7th or 9th? or any number of other examples from Haydn, Mozart, and Beethoven? You might say that the trio sections of the typical classical minuet or scherzo cannot function independently from the A sections of their respective movements, that the trios are subordinate to the main parts of the movements, but kindly show me one example where the trio can be said to "comment" on the A part.

ETA: Well, I took a look at your Hummel just now, and it's apparently part of a collection of little piano pieces. But surely all the Chopin scherzos are far more elaborate and ambitious for this little Hummel thing to serve as any kind of model, and all seem to have B sections to one degree or other. Again though, I would want to examine the scores of these scherzos a little more thoroughly before saying for sure. 

Quote from: (poco) Sforzando on October 27, 2015, 02:57:18 AM
I would want to revisit the scores to the Chopin scherzos as well as this Hummel before specifically commenting. But I have no idea what you mean by "Historically speaking, a 'trio' is more often a commentary on an already musically compact minuet or scherzo." How is this true of the trios in the scherzos of Beethoven's 5th or 7th or 9th? or any number of other examples from Haydn, Mozart, and Beethoven? You might say that the trio sections of the typical classical minuet or scherzo cannot function independently from the A sections of their respective movements, that the trios are subordinate to the main parts of the movements, but kindly show me one example where the trio can be said to "comment" on the A part.

I'm talking about interpretation but maybe you don't see it this way. Plenty of Schubert's, Op. 42, as an example.  I would play the trio of Beethoven's Op. 26 as a comment (for want of a better word), but not the B sections of the above mentioned Chopin Scherzi. Just because a section is B and the name of the piece is scherzo doesn't mean the B has the same function of a B in a scherzo/trio.

Quote from: zamyrabyrd on October 27, 2015, 02:44:31 AM
Hi there. Historically speaking, a "trio" is more often a commentary on an already musically compact minuet or scherzo.

Nope. Don't agree. Some are, plenty aren't.

Sure, you can find examples where the trio is linked thematically to the minuet. And then I'll go find an example where they're not, and we could play that game for months. After that, we can go through Haydn's symphonies and decide which of them are "monothematic". Then, once we're done with all that, we can come back to Chopin's 3rd scherzo and dissect it and argue about whether it has the same kind of contrast as the first two.

PS I suspect you mean "musically complete", not "musically compact", but that's pretty much a common definition of ternary form: the 'A' is self-contained and the 'B' is not.

Quote from: orfeo on October 27, 2015, 03:37:18 AM
Nope. Don't agree. Some are, plenty aren't.

Sure, you can find examples where the trio is linked thematically to the minuet. And then I'll go find an example where they're not, and we could play that game for months. After that, we can go through Haydn's symphonies and decide which of them are "monothematic". Then, once we're done with all that, we can come back to Chopin's 3rd scherzo and dissect it and argue about whether it has the same kind of contrast as the first two.

PS I suspect you mean "musically complete", not "musically compact", but that's pretty much a common definition of ternary form: the 'A' is self-contained and the 'B' is not.

OK you don't agree but originally trio was a scaling down of instruments and texture. How this pans out for the last three sonatas of Schubert is also thinning out of texture but also a temporary emotional reprieve. This is how I would play such trios, with the contrast of the main section in mind. I would not treat any of the B sections in the Chopin Scherzi like that since they have different functions.

...you don't think the central section of the first Scherzo is a temporary emotional reprieve?

Okaaaaaaay then. *backs towards the exit slowly*

Quote from: orfeo on October 27, 2015, 04:18:24 AM
...you don't think the central section of the first Scherzo is a temporary emotional reprieve?
Okaaaaaaay then. *backs towards the exit slowly*

I didn't say that but unlike many trios, it is an independent theme in its own right. You are free to disagree.

I would say the B section of the first scherzo is pretty clearly a contrasting unit to the A - it is in the tonic major, slower, harmonically and rhythmically more stable, and the return of the A section is almost literal except for the loss of a repeat. I would definitely call that a "temporary emotional reprieve" against the violence of the A section. The return of the A part in the Bb minor is decidedly truncated, not a characteristic of the classical style which is usually an exact repeat. The third scherzo is far more complex, with the trio (the "how dry I am!" part) recurring several times and in different tonalities. This more fluid concept of an ABA structure is not unusual in Chopin; think also of the G major nocturne from op. 37 and the big C# minor mazurka.

Quote from: zamyrabyrd on October 27, 2015, 04:23:19 AM
I didn't say that but unlike many trios, it is an independent theme in its own right. You are free to disagree.

There is a great deal of variation. In an early Beethoven sonata like op. 2/3, the trio is little more than a set of figurations with no melodic interest. In the 9th symphony, it is an elaborate secondary structure. In the Schubert C major quintet, it is a separate lyrical andante in contrasting tempo and key.

I would not agree with the trio for Chopin 1 being "independent," as it has be considered within the movement of which it is a part. Yes, it has a theme, but there the contrast is to an A section which is almost athematic. I think it's fair to say, however, that we always have to consider the trio in relation to the main scherzo/minuet part. (For example, in the LvB quartet 18/6, the A section is highly syncopated, and the trio very regular in rhythm by contrast.)

Quote from: zamyrabyrd on October 27, 2015, 04:23:19 AM
I didn't say that but unlike many trios, it is an independent theme in its own right. You are free to disagree.

I will only disagree to the extent that you suggest it is uncommon for trios to have independent themes.

There are probably a few trios, especially in shorter pieces, that are close to the "menuetto", like being a minor mode variant of the menuetto theme. But I cannot think of an obvious example and it was certainly not the rule in mature Haydn, Mozart or in Beethoven scherzi.
This leads away from Chopin but usually the main section (that is, without the trio) of a menuet/scherzo already has some contrasting material. But this is very frequently only an expansion (often in the dominant key) of the theme presented first. So the menuet is already often "tripartite" like ABA with B often derived from A. Some large-scale late menuets of Haydn and some Beethoven Scherzi actually include often some kind of miniature sonata form in the main section. The scherzo of Schubert's "great C major" also has two fully-fledged themes.

Quote from: orfeo on October 27, 2015, 04:46:31 AM
I will only disagree to the extent that you suggest it is uncommon for trios to have independent themes.

Didn't say that either but doesn't it make sense there is a musical connection between A and B?

Quote from: Jo498 on October 27, 2015, 05:12:05 AM
There are probably a few trios, especially in shorter pieces, that are close to the "menuetto", like being a minor mode variant of the menuetto theme. But I cannot think of an obvious example and it was certainly not the rule in mature Haydn, Mozart or in Beethoven scherzi.
This leads away from Chopin but usually the main section (that is, without the trio) of a menuet/scherzo already has some contrasting material. But this is very frequently only an expansion (often in the dominant key) of the theme presented first. So the menuet is already often "tripartite" like ABA with B often derived from A. Some large-scale late menuets of Haydn and some Beethoven Scherzi actually include often some kind of miniature sonata form in the main section. The scherzo of Schubert's "great C major" also has two fully-fledged themes.

I don't know if it is the interest of anyone else, but mine has to do with whether the Chopin Scherzi have any correlation to the form or spirit of a minuet or scherzo and trio. I see very little.
I do see a simplification of scoring in Beethoven trios as in Sonata in D, Op. 10 No. 3 and Op. 31 No. 3 in Eb. In fact in the first 4 Symphonies, there is definitely a thinning out of texture, where usually the brass are featured.

Quote from: Jo498 on October 27, 2015, 05:12:05 AM
There are probably a few trios, especially in shorter pieces, that are close to the "menuetto", like being a minor mode variant of the menuetto theme. But I cannot think of an obvious example and it was certainly not the rule in mature Haydn, Mozart or in Beethoven scherzi.
This leads away from Chopin but usually the main section (that is, without the trio) of a menuet/scherzo already has some contrasting material. But this is very frequently only an expansion (often in the dominant key) of the theme presented first. So the menuet is already often "tripartite" like ABA with B often derived from A. Some large-scale late menuets of Haydn and some Beethoven Scherzi actually include often some kind of miniature sonata form in the main section. The scherzo of Schubert's "great C major" also has two fully-fledged themes.

I went through the Beethoven piano sonatas to see his practice in this regard, and though I didn't take notes, I would say as a rule he does not in the B sections derive material from the A. Instead the prevailing emphasis is contrastive. Sometimes a thinning of texture, but not invariably, and the material of the B section is generally simpler and rhythmically more regular. In terms of tonality, the contrast is between tonic major/minor, relative major/minor, submediant (when the A is in a minor key), and one subdominant (op. 10/3). But never a B section in the dominant. What you do often find in the A sections are "miniature sonata forms." This is quite obvious in the 9th symphony, for instance (where the A section of course is no longer quite so miniature).

Quote from: (poco) Sforzando on October 27, 2015, 05:41:00 PM
I went through the Beethoven piano sonatas to see his practice in this regard, and though I didn't take notes, I would say as a rule he does not in the B sections derive material from the A. Instead the prevailing emphasis is contrastive. Sometimes a thinning of texture, but not invariably, and the material of the B section is generally simpler and rhythmically more regular. In terms of tonality, the contrast is between tonic major/minor, relative major/minor, submediant (when the A is in a minor key), and one subdominant (op. 10/3). But never a B section in the dominant. What you do often find in the A sections are "miniature sonata forms." This is quite obvious in the 9th symphony, for instance (where the A section of course is no longer quite so miniature).

All of the above makes the Beethoven Scherzo even further away from Chopin's. I don't see "trio" in any of them. Schumann himself couldn't figure out why Chopin called them "Scherzi".

Quote from: (poco) Sforzando on October 27, 2015, 04:40:55 AM
I would not agree with the trio for Chopin 1 being "independent," as it has be considered within the movement of which it is a part. Yes, it has a theme, but there the contrast is to an A section which is almost athematic.

Scherzo No. 1 would be a reverse of more defined thematic material in the B section rather than the A, if B was supposed to be a stand in for trio. Chopin always struck me as an enigma in every way. I don't know how many hours I broke my head over his first pages as in the Polonaise-Fantasie and the 1st Ballade.

Quote from: (poco) Sforzando on October 27, 2015, 05:41:00 PM
I went through the Beethoven piano sonatas to see his practice in this regard, and though I didn't take notes, I would say as a rule he does not in the B sections derive material from the A. Instead the prevailing emphasis is contrastive. Sometimes a thinning of texture, but not invariably, and the material of the B section is generally simpler and rhythmically more regular. In terms of tonality, the contrast is between tonic major/minor, relative major/minor, submediant (when the A is in a minor key), and one subdominant (op. 10/3). But never a B section in the dominant. What you do often find in the A sections are "miniature sonata forms." This is quite obvious in the 9th symphony, for instance (where the A section of course is no longer quite so miniature).

May there is a misunderstanding: In what I wrote above with A and B I did not mean "Scherzo" and "Trio" but the section before the first double bar (=A) in the Scherzo/Menuetto proper and the stuff that comes after: B, or more often BA', so the scherzo proper is also tripartite, or more precisely a superposition of the bipartite structure indicated by the double bars and a tripartite structure because a variant of the first phrase is often closing the menuetto proper. Very commonly the A section goes to the dominant, the B (after the double bar) starts at the dominant, noodles around a bit and goes to the tonic for closing the menuetto proper.
If, as in Beethoven's 9th the scherzo proper is in sonata form this is basically just an expansion of this (like the sonata form probably started anyway in the 1740s or so by expanding bipartite dance forms).

And dominant key for the trio section is probably rare because this would only re-iterate the contrast from the sections of the Menuetto. Already Haydn has mediant keys in trios, to spice/color things up a bit (e.g. B flat major in his last  (D major) symphony, IIRC).

Quote from: (poco) Sforzando on October 27, 2015, 04:30:11 AM
I would say the B section of the first scherzo is pretty clearly a contrasting unit to the A - it is in the tonic major, slower, harmonically and rhythmically more stable, and the return of the A section is almost literal except for the loss of a repeat. I would definitely call that a "temporary emotional reprieve" against the violence of the A section. The return of the A part in the Bb minor is decidedly truncated, not a characteristic of the classical style which is usually an exact repeat. The third scherzo is far more complex, with the trio (the "how dry I am!" part) recurring several times and in different tonalities. This more fluid concept of an ABA structure is not unusual in Chopin; think also of the G major nocturne from op. 37 and the big C# minor mazurka.

Chopin's scherzi are very large structures by any standard (I think No. 4 runs to something like 900 bars) and the A sections themselves tend to be complicated enough structurally as to blur the lines between sections. This applies anyway in 2, 3 and 4, the 'trio' in No. 1 being set off by its slower tempo and the material remaining neatly confined within it.

No. 3 is actually a fairly simple structure on the large scale—scherzo (c#), trio (Db), scherzo (c#), trio (E)* and coda integrating elements of both. The return of the scherzo essentially 'finishes' the main structure with the trio recurrence in E being structurally superfluous, as is underlined by its much more hollow, muted nature (lacking the brilliance of the first appearance) and thematic transition directly into the coda. This trio-and-coda addition (which in itself is something like 300 bars long, iirc) is 'necessary' because the scherzo's A material remained unresolved both times, leading directly into the much more stable B material.** So Chopin must first destabilise the B material, it having an essentially secondary function, and then tie it to the A material which it at first seems to be totally independent from.

The trios in all four scherzi are pretty clearly delineated I think, usually by texture (quasi-heterophonic melody in No. 1, chordal and hymnlike in Nos. 2 and 3, simple melody-and-accompaniment in No. 4, all four being textures not used elsewhere in the piece) and key (B major, A major, D-flat major/E major, G-sharp minor). I personally don't see the logic in saying they aren't there?

(The only 'spiritual successors' I can think of to the Chopin Scherzi, right now, are the Queen Mab scherzo from Roméo et Juliette and the scherzo from Mahler 5, which of course have none of Chopin's darkness and whatever but are structurally (and in terms of instrumental demands) very similar... the only 'spiritual predecessor' I can think of is Beethoven's Op. 59/1. For dark-hued, ultrapowerful scherzo movements in a similar emotional vein I suppose there's Brahms Piano Concerto 2 but it's only superficially similar imo)

* It has been observed that for Chopin the counterpart to a minor key is often its relative major, not its parallel major. E major sounds more like the tonic than D-flat major, and its turn to E minor sometimes being mistaken for a turn to the tonic minor by persons without absolute pitch. However the piece does in fact end in C-sharp minor like every other piece Chopin wrote in this much-favoured key (with or without a picardy third—with one, in this case), so who knows.

** Brahms dealt with this problem much less elegantly in the finale of his F minor sonata (whose second episode is probably inspired by this scherzo along with Beethoven's Op. 2/3)

I don't see any "trio" in the Chopin Scherzi. Ternary form where it applies but not "trio" as much as a three part song would have a "trio" in the middle, that in fact the Scherzi, in particular, nos. 1 and 4 compare better to.

What exactly do you mean by a "trio" though? The contrasting/b sections aren't necessarily set up in a standard binary (A:||:B) or rounded binary (A:||:B A') form, and may be tonally unstable, but they do provide textural simplification, contrasting material and different emotional states as the "trio" normally does.  If one wants to have a more exclusive definition of trio that defines it as a form rather than just "a contrasting section in a large ternary design", they are still basically analogues of the trio, the same way the main/a sections are analogues to the scherzo despite not following the traditional binary form in the slightest. I mean that's how I'd put things anyway, if I had to analyse these pieces, lol

Quote from: amw on October 28, 2015, 01:11:15 AM
The trios in all four scherzi are pretty clearly delineated I think, usually by texture (quasi-heterophonic melody in No. 1, chordal and hymnlike in Nos. 2 and 3, simple melody-and-accompaniment in No. 4, all four being textures not used elsewhere in the piece) and key (B major, A major, D-flat major/E major, G-sharp minor). I personally don't see the logic in saying they aren't there?

(The only 'spiritual successors' I can think of to the Chopin Scherzi, right now, are the Queen Mab scherzo from Roméo et Juliette and the scherzo from Mahler 5, which of course have none of Chopin's darkness and whatever but are structurally (and in terms of instrumental demands) very similar... the only 'spiritual predecessor' I can think of is Beethoven's Op. 59/1. For dark-hued, ultrapowerful scherzo movements in a similar emotional vein I suppose there's Brahms Piano Concerto 2 but it's only superficially similar imo)

I hear the "trios" in the scherzo as you do, and don't quite understand zamara's resistance to this line of thinking.

But I don't know what you mean by spiritual successor or predecessor - unless you're thinking primarily in structural terms. As for 59/1, that piece has been described both as being in sonata form and ABA, and though it's a long time since I've done an analysis, I don't think it truly fits either. One interesting point I've found is that the piece touches on 11 of the 12 possible tonal centers, the only exception being the usual subdominant. As for dark-hued ultrapowerful, there are also Mahler 7 and Bruckner 9.

Good to see a discussion moving on such a serious musical level, even when we disagree. Thanks to all.

Quote from: (poco) Sforzando on October 28, 2015, 05:03:02 AMAs for dark-hued ultrapowerful, there are also Mahler 7 and Bruckner 9.

Sounds like Shostakovich 10 & 13 might fit that bill, too.

Quote from: (poco) Sforzando on October 28, 2015, 05:03:02 AM
Good to see a discussion moving on such a serious musical level, even when we disagree. Thanks to all.

Indeed - I wish the whole composer board was as engrossing to read as this is.

Quote from: zamyrabyrd on October 28, 2015, 01:29:17 AM
I don't see any "trio" in the Chopin Scherzi. Ternary form where it applies but not "trio" as much as a three part song would have a "trio" in the middle, that in fact the Scherzi, in particular, nos. 1 and 4 compare better to.

I really think you're overthinking this.

"Trios" hadn't had automatically had 3-part textures for a long time before Chopin came along. The etymology of the word doesn't automatically define its meaning.

And really, for my part all I said on this topic originally was that most of Chopin's scherzi were clearly in ternary form, in the same way that a menuet/trio or scherzo/trio is in ternary form. I'm honestly not sure if you understand what binary and ternary forms are, because you said something about them being binary and that's what I corrected. Ternary form is ABA, binary form is AB, and the scherzos are clearly ternary.

The difference is as simple as binary forms not having a full close at the end of the first section of music, and ternary forms having a full close at the end of the first section of music. Early binary forms led to sonata form (see Scarlatti's keyboard sonatas for example).

If you don't believe me, believe the Chopin Institute, which happened to be the first result I spotted when Googling. If the official Polish government organisation dedicated to the composer thinks there's a "trio" involved, I'd say that's a pretty decent source.

http://en.chopin.nifc.pl/chopin/genre/detail/id/17

Quote from: Brian on October 28, 2015, 06:01:13 AM
Indeed - I wish the whole composer board was as engrossing to read as this is.

Sometimes one man's heaven is another man's hell, isn't it?  ;)  ;D

Quote from: orfeo on October 28, 2015, 06:56:17 AM
I really think you're overthinking this.

"Trios" hadn't had automatically had 3-part textures for a long time before Chopin came along. The etymology of the word doesn't automatically define its meaning.

And really, for my part all I said on this topic originally was that most of Chopin's scherzi were clearly in ternary form, in the same way that a menuet/trio or scherzo/trio is in ternary form. I'm honestly not sure if you understand what binary and ternary forms are, because you said something about them being binary and that's what I corrected. Ternary form is ABA, binary form is AB, and the scherzos are clearly ternary.

The difference is as simple as binary forms not having a full close at the end of the first section of music, and ternary forms having a full close at the end of the first section of music. Early binary forms led to sonata form (see Scarlatti's keyboard sonatas for example).

I know all that theory. I did not make myself clear in the beginning. I was thinking of scherzo without a trio, as for instance what Hummel wrote. The 2nd and 3rd Scherzos would really have to be snipped and stretched to fit the definition of scherzo + trio. When you say the scherzos are clearly ternary, No. 2 has a middle section that leads to a development that I have a hard time regarding as a trio and No. 3 (simplified) is ABAB with coda.
As for "overthinking" I believe I am doing the opposite, taking a piece sui generis and not trying to align it with other boxes that it may resemble historically. Except with pieces that are clearly defined as Concerto and Sonata, Chopin's music usually dictates its own form.

Quote from: zamyrabyrd on October 28, 2015, 09:35:45 AM
No. 2 has a middle section that leads to a development that I have a hard time regarding as a trio

No.2 has a middle section. That makes it ternary. That's the sum total of what I was saying.

Again, I'm not out on a limb here. http://en.chopin.nifc.pl/chopin/composition/detail/id/86 . I didn't read that before starting this conversation, but when the official institute - the people who run the international Chopin competition - are talking about ternary forms and trios, I feel reasonably good about my views.

Quote from: orfeo on October 28, 2015, 09:59:51 AM
No.2 has a middle section. That makes it ternary. That's the sum total of what I was saying.

This may perhaps be a bit rigidly cut-&-dried ("that makes it a ternary"); the development section of a sonata-allegro design is arguably "a middle section," and zb is noting that there is a transition into a development section.  Composers do play with form, and as a rule, it is considered inartistic to hew to a cookie-cutter.  Chopin was certainly a subtle artist.  And I have some Poles in my family who might advise you to be skeptical of pronouncements by official institutes  ;)

Quote from: karlhenning on October 28, 2015, 10:10:50 AM
This may perhaps be a bit rigidly cut-&-dried ("that makes it a ternary"); the development section of a sonata-allegro design is arguably "a middle section," and zb is noting that there is a transition into a development section.  Composers do play with form, and as a rule, it is considered inartistic to hew to a cookie-cutter.  Chopin was certainly a subtle artist.  And I have some Poles in my family who might advise you to be skeptical of pronouncements by official institutes  ;)

Charles Rosen, who usefully reminds us that no 2 is actually in Db major, speaks of a "central section," thus making the form as ABA or scherzo-trio-scherzo as is good enough for me - even though the B section contains some development of the A material - and I hope that pronouncement will get us over any political humps.

But no, I would not agree that sonata form is ternary in the same sense as an ABA dance form; the earliest classical models tend to be ||:Exposition:|| and then ||:Development and Recapitulation:|| - which survives as late as the finale of Beethoven's op. 57 (where quite unusually only the D+R is marked for repeat, which means many pianists ignore B's very specific instruction), the first movement of 78, and the finale of 135 (where the repeat of the D+R is marked optional, and no one does it).

Besides, development sections are generally based on the exposition material, while the B sections of ABA dance forms are contrastive. It seems to me as unsatisfactory to reject the ABA heritage in these Chopin scherzos as it is to ignore that fact that he varied and enlarged the model.

^ Yep, exactly what he said.

Sonata form has its origins in binary form, not ternary. It then did indeed borrow from the original ternary forms, and so represents a kind of fusion, but it's origins are from a form where you were in another key at the 'halfway point' (the end of the exposition in sonata form) and then returned to the tonic at the end.

Plenty of sources will tell you this. As for being beware of the pronouncements of official institutes, it's all very well to make that kind of general remark but show me something on either of the pages I've linked to that is actually wrong / or can't be found in a whole lot of other sources. As I said, I expressed these ideas in my own words before finding that the Chopin Institute said the same things. I'm not parroting their pronouncements.

Nor, if you actually read the page, are they blandly saying the 2nd scherzo is a straightforward ternary form without any innovation.

Quote from: (poco) Sforzando on October 27, 2015, 02:57:18 AM
But I have no idea what you mean by "Historically speaking, a 'trio' is more often a commentary on an already musically compact minuet or scherzo." How is this true of the trios in the scherzos of Beethoven's 5th or 7th or 9th? or any number of other examples from Haydn, Mozart, and Beethoven?

I may be speaking more of content than form, which is an important consideration for a performer, more than for those who make graphs and analyses. You mention Symphonies 5,7 and 9 of Beethoven. I don't see any difference in basic treatment as for his first 4. The musical material and scoring are simplified. But even if they are, their relationship to the main scherzo movement is crucial. In 5 and 9, the change is from minor to major that is a switch from the usual major to minor of the minuet. The sections are compact in themselves but the trio is subservient to the main section and could not exist without it. It doesn't really matter when speaking of Chopin what happened after him but Schubert was still writing Scherzos in the traditional manner.
Also you, I believe, mentioned the A in Scherzo No.1 as being a-thematic. Fine, the B section has a well defined melody that might by way of what could be decided on as more important to feature in the piece, in your view and others that would be a "trio". For me it is the central part, like the two sides of a triptych converge on it. I don't care what you call it, but I care what is done with it. But, really is this a conventional or even derivative "trio"?
As for Rosen saying that the 2nd is in Db, it is the old story of the 2nd Ballade, is it in the major or relative minor?
Chopin probably wanted the tonality to be ambiguous. Someone pointed out that the Allegretto of the Moonlight Sonata begins with a move to Ab, then gives us a cadence in Db, something unexpected but interesting. After ending the A section in Scherzo No. 2 in Db, right away Chopin gives us a Db dominant in the A''. There may be more than what meets the eye in the Beethoven - Chopin connection.
As for his Scherzos, the "joke" is on us if we argue about them a century and a half later.

Hey! Please indicate your preferred recordings of the Sonata No. 3, Op. 58, and why you like them. It's important. For important reasons and stuff. Feel free also to comment on what you think makes for a good interpretation of the sonata.

Quote from: zamyrabyrd on October 29, 2015, 12:34:06 AM
I may be speaking more of content than form, which is an important consideration for a performer, more than for those who make graphs and analyses.

Content and form are inseparable and indistinguishable. A composer does not decide on a "form" and pour "content" into it. As for "performing" vs. making "graphs and analyses" (do I detect some sneering here?), these are two different processes with entirely different goals; and for someone who claims to be a performer, you also do a pretty good job at offering the same kind of analysis you apparently disparage in others.

Quote from: (poco) Sforzando on March 15, 2016, 03:53:07 AM
Content and form are inseparable and indistinguishable. A composer does not decide on a "form" and pour "content" into it. As for "performing" vs. making "graphs and analyses" (do I detect some sneering here?), these are two different processes with entirely different goals; and for someone who claims to be a performer, you also do a pretty good job at offering the same kind of analysis you apparently disparage in others.

Hi, I don't know what prompted me to open this link after a hiatus of a few days (as I was very busy), but I like Chopin very much so name recognition drew me to this thread. Now I am trying to remember what the discussion was all about.

Starting backwards, I don't disparage analysis on condition that it does indeed relate to content. ABA or XYZ don't mean a thing by themselves, or even bridge, transition, recap, modulation or any musical term. I broke my head over those while in school trying to relate them to actual performance. What are their expressive values were my own questions. I try to avoid such terminology while teaching music appreciation for the same reason that content is perceived before the form.

It was only through a two year college course in Schenker Analysis that a 3D approach was revealed and made possible. I was just listening to Horowitz today and by golly if he didn't know this sort of theoretical structure intellectually, he sure perceived it instinctively. Or at least the tradition from which he hailed was more organic than linear. (His performances of the Schubert Bb Sonata and Mozart D Major Rondo are cases in point. There is such a qualitative difference between his playing and most other pianists for that reason.)

Quote from: amw on March 15, 2016, 12:18:15 AM
Hey!

Yo!

Quote from: amw on March 15, 2016, 12:18:15 AM
Please indicate your preferred recordings of the Sonata No. 3, Op. 58,

Gilles (preferably live)
Horszowski
Pletnev
Bolet (live on Marston)
Zimerman (live London 1977,  unreleased)
John Ogdon


Firkusny, I only have the studio but a friend says the live one is even better (on Orfeo)
Weissenberg (live on Hansler)

Pollini (maybe)

Zhukov, London 1997 (maybe) (this may be rare or even unpublished, I can let you have it)
Arrau (maybe - I seem to remember there was a particularly good live one on YouTube.)

Quote from: amw on March 15, 2016, 12:18:15 AM
and why you like them.

You must be joking!

My notes on Horszowski read as follows : It seems to move from death to life in the first movement, and the largo is very fresh, as if it's being created there and then, with an attractive nocturnal feel. The complete opposite of Samson Francois.


Pletnev is one I felt an immediate affinity for when I heard it for the first time years ago, it is one of my favourite piano recordings. I cannot say why, it has something to do with the colours, textures, rubato and introspective quality.

Quote from: amw on March 15, 2016, 12:18:15 AMFeel free also to comment on what you think makes for a good interpretation of the sonata.

A lot of "great" chopinists seemed to treat the music as a miniature, and I don't think that does it justice. I'm thinking of Cortot,   Sofronitsky,  Tiegerman, Rosenthal.

Rosenthal has a very nocturnal mood in the largo which is interesting.

Gould's recording (which he didn't want published) is well worth hearing because of the clarity of the counterpoint.

And there's Sokolov. I was really disappointed by the recent perforamnces of it. There's an earlier one from the 1990s which I can let you have. I wrote (probably bullshit)

"The interpretation is very distinctive and characterful, especially in the
first movement which resembles no other first movement of this sonata
that I have heard. It seems a synthesis of a Lisztian  style
(Tiegerman), a like affirming style (Gilels) and a dark sad style
(Cortot).  -In the largo,  the pianissimo has to he heard to be
believes. He takes well over 12 minutes to play it (contrast --
Rosenthal takes about 9.) Elsewhere we hear plenty of the deep golden
tone that his come to be one of his hallmarks."

On Demidenko I commented "cool headed controlled, there isn't any suggestion that the emotions being expresed are actually being suffered by the performer. And yet - to play the music very expressively." Hamelin also for this type of approach I think. And Firkusny best of all.

Ogdon is wild, he was evidently in a strange mood. I love it most when I'm in a strange mood myself,

I forgot to mention Evgenyi Bozhanov, especially in the live Aug.14 at the 2015 Biarritz International Piano Festival, I can upload it.

Bozhanov sounds to me like a great pianist in the making. This is probably nonsense but the largo seemed really psychological - like it evokes all sorts of dream like mental states or something. The final movement is like someone throwing a bucket of cold water on your head.

Like when they reach Cornwall and King Marke turns up in Act 1. Night music, day music. Death music, life music. I've never had that idea before.

Pollini playing Chopin 62/1

I'm aware my frame of reference is still limited and so I would like to know the opinions of others, no matter how informed or whimsical they might be. I'm prepared to show my own hand and say that this sounds like a restrained, yet elegant performance.,

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=6JNRtM2Q3yI

Quote from: NikF on January 11, 2018, 11:15:08 AM
Pollini playing Chopin 62/1

I'm aware my frame of reference is still limited and so I would like to know the opinions of others, no matter how informed or whimsical they might be. I'm prepared to show my own hand and say that this sounds like a restrained, yet elegant performance.

Restrained and (why yet?) elegant seems like an apt description to me. Pollini's Chopin (especially live) usually works well for me.

Quote from: NikF on January 11, 2018, 11:15:08 AM
Pollini playing Chopin 62/1

I'm aware my frame of reference is still limited and so I would like to know the opinions of others, no matter how informed or whimsical they might be. I'm prepared to show my own hand and say that this sounds like a restrained, yet elegant performance.,

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=6JNRtM2Q3yI

Retrained, yes. Elegant, yes. But I prefer something poetic, beautiful:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mor9t8UXIlI

Quote from: North Star on January 11, 2018, 11:23:21 AM
Restrained and (why yet?) elegant seems like an apt description to me. Pollini's Chopin (especially live) usually works well for me.

I don't know how to say it, exactly. But it's one thing to show restraint and another to make it appear effortless.

Like, when you're in the boxing ring and your opponent lands a punch on you, it hurts like hell. When that occurs you can't afford to automatically react to it, to lash out, to change your game plan. But that's not enough, you need to receive it with calmness - that not only are you tough enough to take it, but you could take it all day and never lose it. Consistent coolness, on tap.

I just read all that back and LMAO.

Quote from: George on January 11, 2018, 11:34:02 AM
Retrained, yes. Elegant, yes. But I prefer something poetic, beautiful:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mor9t8UXIlI

Cheers, George - I liked that. And I know you've tipped me off to Arrau before.

I have/had these recordings which I enjoyed greatly -

[asin]B00000416B[/asin]

Quote from: NikF on January 12, 2018, 09:58:37 AM
Cheers, George - I liked that. And I know you've tipped me off to Arrau before.

I have/had these recordings which I enjoyed greatly -

[asin]B00000416B[/asin]

Although his Chopin is mixed overall, his Nocturnes are as good as it gets.

Ther's a 1971 recording of op 62/1 by Arrau which is well worth going out of your way to hear, I'd say more successful than the one in the big set that George mentioned. More punch -- it seems to have the punch of the Pollini and a rich emotional life too.

Quote from: Mandryka on January 12, 2018, 10:46:17 AM
Ther's a 1971 recording of op 62/1 by Arrau which is well worth going out of your way to hear, I'd say more successful than the one in the big set that George mentioned. More punch -- it seems to have the punch of the Pollini and a rich emotional life too.

Thanks for that, Mandryka. I'll certainly have a look for it.

OK fellas,... well let's gooooooo!!!!!


Why Chopin? Why now?

So, please recommend me THREE PIECES... seriously, I'll be like I never heard Chopin before. But please keep in mind who you're talking to- if I don't hear the right thing, or the right "way", or whatever, I'm sure Chopin will be lost to me. I'm just not in the mood for REAL 'Romantic' Music... finales,... fugues,... dancey saloney,...I mean, I'm having issues with Debussy,... Liszt is so overbearingly serious at times,... I have a feeling a very small portion of Chopin(or Schubert?, Schumann?,...) might appeal to me.

If I think it sounds like "Classical Music" this will all be in vain,...


Mandryka??

Quote from: snyprrr on May 20, 2018, 08:26:40 AM
OK fellas,... well let's gooooooo!!!!!


Why Chopin? Why now?

So, please recommend me THREE PIECES... seriously, I'll be like I never heard Chopin before. But please keep in mind who you're talking to- if I don't hear the right thing, or the right "way", or whatever, I'm sure Chopin will be lost to me. I'm just not in the mood for REAL 'Romantic' Music... finales,... fugues,... dancey saloney,...I mean, I'm having issues with Debussy,... Liszt is so overbearingly serious at times,... I have a feeling a very small portion of Chopin(or Schubert?, Schumann?,...) might appeal to me.

If I think it sounds like "Classical Music" this will all be in vain,...


Mandryka??

not gonna happen, is it? :(


I got the Livia Rev Nocturnes,... I guess now I'm seeing I probably won't be going bonkers over Chopin,... unless of course I can find the right pieces,... I did like Pogo in the Schezi, I'm starting to warm up to the Ballades,... Pogo in Sonata 2,...

The Waltzes,... eh,... the Mazurkas,... nice background, but ,... oh, I dunno,...


Polonaise?Preludes & Etudes?? Godowsky???

I'M GONNA NEED SOMETHING OUTRAGEOUS TO STOKE MY WICK

Quote from: snyprrr on June 04, 2018, 05:42:28 AM
not gonna happen, is it? :(

No. Because your demands are too demanding. Go and explore, see what you like.

I can tell you some pieces I particularly love, but I'm not going to be held to some promise to blow your mind. Personally I enjoy his larger-scale, single-movement pieces.

On the topic of blowing snyprrr's mind, I think that ship sailed long ago. 

Quote from: George on June 06, 2018, 04:19:28 AM
On the topic of blowing snyprrr's mind, I think that ship sailed long ago.

Made me laugh.

Quote from: Madiel on June 06, 2018, 02:56:26 AM
No. Because your demands are too demanding. Go and explore, see what you like.

I can tell you some pieces I particularly love, but I'm not going to be held to some promise to blow your mind. Personally I enjoy his larger-scale, single-movement pieces.

OK, just in case people don't believe that I.... whatever it is. Of the top of my head (and this is just me "discovering Chopin", basically for the first time (working backwards from the last stop, Debussy)): (who else do you know that dares a ")):"??)... or even a ")):"??)...???:

MAZURKAS: I fell asleep to Luisada. Well, there's a lot of them, they seem to be short, and, to me, they all seem to have a certain, distinct flavoure to them,- they seem to be spiked just the tiniest amount,... anyway, I did enjoy the whole thing as a wallpaper tapestry- I enjoyed it in the background but I heard nothing distinctive in between. The Concert of it all seemed quite modern to me. Still, I feel this would be a last-stop for me on the ChopinTrain.


NOCTURNES: obviously, I had Rubinstein?RCA because The Penguin Guide TOLD me to. At that time, I simply thought they didn't sound as cool as Satie's! (@1993) I couldn't tell you one from the other.

So, now, I guess they were the FIRST stop on the ChopinTrain, and I wanted someone new (in modern sound), and happened to get a MusicalHeretige copy of Livia Rev/Hyperion. There is quite a dusky and glowing aura dribbling out of the top of the piano image here, quite the classy recording. I'M STILL UPSET that some of these quiet pieces have eruptions of emotion in them, oh the horror! But, so far, I've grown used to 9/1-2 and 27/1. Yea, that's it for the time. Since I haven't been triggered by these Nocturnes, yet, I AM hesitant to further the ChopinTrain until I find something I can latch on to (happening now with the Ballades).

Also, the Performer here is soooo crucial (as with Debussy, but more so it seems). Currently, I'm curious about CIANI and TIPO,...


BALLADES (4): I've tried Rubie/RCA, Davidovich, Katsaris, Pollini, and fews others, but it IS Zimerman who seems to come out on top! Huh! Katsaris seems psycho, and I LOATHE Pollini in Chopin - for some reason...

However, the Ballades seem to be snyprrr-friendly...


SCHERZI (4): just hearing Pogo sold me here! Wild stuff! Definitely Chopin the RockStar...


POLONAISES (7+): haven't gotten into them yet,... looking at that Katsaris set...


WALTZES (19): I would really just get the Kocsis here and wait for me to get in the mood for... uh... waltzes. The 1st makes quite an impression by Kocsis.



BERCUESE: I like this!

BARCAROLLE:                                               These three pieces always seem to be programmed
                                                                        together. Zimerman, Perahia,... for next week...
FANTASIE:




SONATA 2: Pogo again. Ah, so there's the famous March,... Chopin's quite the barnburner, eh? I didn't know he was just as much a RockStar as Liszt, but Chopin is no shrinking violet!

SONATA 3: Argerich, - obviously, the music didn't hit me quite like #2,... future listening...



PRELUDES (24+1, basically):

ETUDES (2 SETS+3+): I am TOTALLY STUCK on the Pre+Etudes,... I loved the Preludes from the 'RealChopin' set, with the old piano,... and I'm now listening to Berezovsky's Teldec recital (also really like the overblown Godowsky bits!!- now this is more up my alley, totally gratuitous, lol),...

...who's the "Michellini" on EMI, @1979,... not Michaelangeli, a young guy,... can't remember if it's the Etudes or Preludes,...

However, the "studies" aspect of these pieces makes them more entertaining to me than, say, the Waltzes or Mazurkas,... eh?,...

Katsaris seemed too experimental in the Preludes, whereas some other, more "normal", Pianists seem to simply play the MUSIC in them. Again, the Performer seems to be just as important as the Composer,... almost??.... uh....



IMPROMPTUS (4): I looove No.1,... listening to a lot of different people,... SAMSON!!!! haha, sooooo fast, and CORTOT,... however, I like this piece by most people (no matter the speed), it has that cool downward chromatic thing,... haven't heard much of the others,...

RONDOS:


MISC:





I haaave read most of the 'Chopin Recordings' Thread, and really appreciated our helpful members' looong ass Posts on every conceivable Work+Performer critique.

I tend to want to hear GreatSound coupled with the ridiculously sublime and outrageous performer- I've now heard Chopin sound like swooning salon music AND Avant-Garde!!!! SAME MUSIC!!!! I see "off brand" performers that stoke my curiosity the most-

Pogo
Sultanov
Gavrilov
Berezovsky
Demidenko... ??...
Friere...??...
Katsaris (less so the thin sounding Teldec)
Kocsis
Leonskaja
Rev
Weissenberg... I hear  his Chopin is either great, or sucks...??....which is it?
Luisada
CAN'T STAND POLLINI HERE...WTF??... is it the DG sound, or is he just detached as f??...

Arrau... too slow for me??
Pletnev?
Ashkenazy... too masculine for me??...




ok, enough for now $:)

Quote from: snyprrr on June 06, 2018, 07:35:36 AM
OK, just in case people don't believe that I.... whatever it is. Of the top of my head (and this is just me "discovering Chopin", basically for the first time (working backwards from the last stop, Debussy)): (who else do you know that dares a ")):"??)... or even a ")):"??)...???:



POLONAISES (7+): haven't gotten into them yet,... looking at that Katsaris set...

I suppose I'm the only one here who really likes this disk:

(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51mZIZRnomL.jpg)

But then, the Poloniases are my favorite Chopin too. :)

8)

OK, if you like the Ballades then try this version of No 1 on Youtube. To me it's the best but others may disagree.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jKWkCKdDGVs

My favourite recording of the Berceuse is quite old and by a pianist most don't associate with Chopin (but they should)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2LxjqxnrDi0

I also like the Preludes. There is a classic live recording by Arrau from 1960

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DDkhi9dt0TU

..but they can be played so many different ways that recommending just one performance is not enough. I'd also seek out Fiorentino whose approach is very different to everyone else's and of course the famous live Carnegie Hall Bolet.

My favourite all time Chopin recital is Sokolov live in Amsterdam from around 2005. This recording was burned onto CD for me by someone who no longer posts on GMG.

Dont forget Moravec

https://www.youtube.com/v/zMSL1cpwcxM

Quote from: Holden on June 06, 2018, 12:41:04 PM
OK, if you like the Ballades then try this version of No 1 on Youtube. To me it's the best but others may disagree.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jKWkCKdDGVs

My favourite recording of the Berceuse is quite old and by a pianist most don't associate with Chopin (but they should)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2LxjqxnrDi0

I also like the Preludes. There is a classic live recording by Arrau from 1960

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DDkhi9dt0TU

..but they can be played so many different ways that recommending just one performance is not enough. I'd also seek out Fiorentino whose approach is very different to everyone else's and of course the famous live Carnegie Hall Bolet.

My favourite all time Chopin recital is Sokolov live in Amsterdam from around 2005. This recording was burned onto CD for me by someone who no longer posts on GMG.

ABM always seems to be given such a dry atmosphere to record in,... or I'm hearing the PianoImage as being too "hard" or something. It's so hard for me if I can't handle the sound... in ABM's case, yes, I am being extraordinarily finicky...


Right now, it's the Impromptus, Preludes, and Etudes that have me somewhat fluxxed... someone here did an "Etudes" comparison, but I can't find it in the 70 Pages....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dXfJplrbF8U

yay or nay?

So far, only Cortot, but especially Solomon Francois (is that correct?the guy wholookslike a movie star), have moved me. SF just blew my mind, and this girl blazes through, albeit, with a slight less charm than SF, BUT, I didn't find it so far off the Cortot in terms of the mechanics of the playing (again, with a bit less charm from the 8yo, but, I mean,...lol!!)

8yo = 2;18 at the point stopped... lol
SF = 3:00
Cortot = 3:40
Arrau = @5

Who do you like in Op.29? I love that little downward chromatic bit, very forward looking sounding (or is it Mozart sounding?)...

Yundi didn't make an impression,... many are playing it pretty standard,- only SF just blazes through ("power tthru Hhill")...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c4EIzo7lf7M

Just a thought: it may very well be that, of all past composers, Chopin is the only one whose work is still performed, recorded and universally acclaimed and loved almost in its entirety: excluding juvenilia, pretty much everything that Chopin wrote is still in the repertoire. That can't be said of any other major composer, not even Bach, Mozart and Beethoven. Chopin is quite unique in this respect.

Quote from: Florestan on June 11, 2018, 09:42:26 AM
Just a thought: it may very well be that, of all past composers, Chopin is the only one whose work is still performed, recorded and universally acclaimed and loved almost in its entirety: excluding juvenilia, pretty much everything that Chopin wrote is still in the repertoire. That can't be said of any other major composer, not even Bach, Mozart and Beethoven. Chopin is quite unique in this respect.

Indeed - most composers with that level of acclaim and of writing, wrote more music, and for more varied and larger forces.

Quote from: snyprrr on June 10, 2018, 11:12:08 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dXfJplrbF8U

yay or nay?

So far, only Cortot, but especially Solomon Francois (is that correct?the guy wholookslike a movie star), have moved me. SF just blew my mind, and this girl blazes through, albeit, with a slight less charm than SF, BUT, I didn't find it so far off the Cortot in terms of the mechanics of the playing (again, with a bit less charm from the 8yo, but, I mean,...lol!!)

8yo = 2;18 at the point stopped... lol
SF = 3:00
Cortot = 3:40
Arrau = @5

Who do you like in Op.29? I love that little downward chromatic bit, very forward looking sounding (or is it Mozart sounding?)...

Yundi didn't make an impression,... many are playing it pretty standard,- only SF just blazes through ("power tthru Hhill")...

Cortot is very good with it, I haven't heard Samson Francois play it, but here's Stanislav Bunin

https://www.youtube.com/v/4OdFfc6jCIk

Quote from: Florestan on June 11, 2018, 09:42:26 AM
Just a thought: it may very well be that, of all past composers, Chopin is the only one whose work is still performed, recorded and universally acclaimed and loved almost in its entirety: excluding juvenilia, pretty much everything that Chopin wrote is still in the repertoire. That can't be said of any other major composer, not even Bach, Mozart and Beethoven. Chopin is quite unique in this respect.

Not disagreeing with you, but isn't that in large part because Chopin's output is much smaller and more focused (so that the people who enjoy some of it don't dislike another part just because it's in a different genre) than those composers'?

Quote from: Florestan on June 11, 2018, 09:42:26 AM
Just a thought: it may very well be that, of all past composers, Chopin is the only one whose work is still performed, recorded and universally acclaimed and loved almost in its entirety: excluding juvenilia, pretty much everything that Chopin wrote is still in the repertoire. That can't be said of any other major composer, not even Bach, Mozart and Beethoven. Chopin is quite unique in this respect.

I think the same can be said of several equally significant composers such as Ravel and Debussy who had comparably small outputs. I'm not sure it is fair to compare with composers of different era, when economics dictated that they produce an unceasing stream of works to put food on the table.

Quote from: Florestan on June 11, 2018, 09:42:26 AM
Just a thought: it may very well be that, of all past composers, Chopin is the only one whose work is still performed, recorded and universally acclaimed and loved almost in its entirety: excluding juvenilia, pretty much everything that Chopin wrote is still in the repertoire. That can't be said of any other major composer, not even Bach, Mozart and Beethoven. Chopin is quite unique in this respect.

Chopin also had a fair amount of experimentation in his music, and influence on later composers as well. Many of his pieces are short, published (and sometimes performed/recorded) in sets and his music is almost exclusively piano music. Perhaps because he was one composer whose instrument of choice was also quite groundbreaking, and pianos around the time when music was being first recorded had enough in common for his music to be particularly well suited. Smaller and more focussed repertoire is, of course, beneficial to the interest in a large proportion of his repertoire. Considering that piano is one of the most popular instruments in western music institutions, it's no surprise that his music is advocated for developing technique and musicality that can be applied not only to other piano music, but any western classical repertoire in general. There aren't many composers like him who had such a small output in such a specific field of expertise. Wagner, Verdi, Bruckner and Mahler, of course come to mind in terms of composers who had a very specific focus and wide influence, but with much larger genres.

The Ashkenazy box of Chopin recordings has an essay that points out Chopin's enduring popularity is slightly surprising given how radical he was in some ways. There's some fairly astonishing sliding chromaticism.

Quote from: Florestan on June 11, 2018, 09:42:26 AM
Just a thought: it may very well be that, of all past composers, Chopin is the only one whose work is still performed, recorded and universally acclaimed and loved almost in its entirety: excluding juvenilia, pretty much everything that Chopin wrote is still in the repertoire. That can't be said of any other major composer, not even Bach, Mozart and Beethoven. Chopin is quite unique in this respect.

AFAIK, excluding (and maybe even not that) juvenilia and spurious works, everything that Bach wrote is in the repertoire. Not still though. It has grown in the last 50 years, and remains quite steady. As a Bach lover, it's impossible to take hold of every new Bach issue.
This includes vocal works (church, secular), orchestral stuff, chamber music, keyboard solo, formerly called 'abstract' works, et cetera, everything is being recorded by various musicians. The Bach catalogue includes 1128 works, but even quite a few Anhang works are performed and recorded on a more or less frequent basis.

Quote from: Marc on June 11, 2018, 08:15:54 PM
AFAIK, excluding (and maybe even not that) juvenilia and spurious works, everything that Bach wrote is in the repertoire. Not still though. It has grown in the last 50 years, and remains quite steady. As a Bach lover, it's impossible to take hold of every new Bach issue.
This includes vocal works (church, secular), orchestral stuff, chamber music, keyboard solo, formerly called 'abstract' works, et cetera, everything is being recorded by various musicians. The Bach catalogue includes 1128 works, but even quite a few Anhang works are performed and recorded on a more or less frequent basis.

You have a point about recordings (afaIk, there are three complete Bach editions --- far behind Chopin, for that matter, with at least seven) but performance-wise I strongly doubt that even during a whole concert season all around the world (including concert halls, churches and festivals) everything that Bach wrote is performed. And there is one more difference: everything that Bach wrote is of interest only to Bach completists, while everything that Chopin wrote appeals to the general audience.

Granted, Chopin's oeuvre is quantitatively only a tiny fraction of Bach's and this explains a lot; but otoh so is Beethoven's or Brahms' and there are enough of their works who never, or very rarely, get performed.

Quote from: Florestan on June 12, 2018, 01:00:02 AM
You have a point about recordings (afaIk, there are three complete Bach editions --- far behind Chopin, for that matter, with at least seven) but performance-wise I strongly doubt that even during a whole concert season all around the world (including concert halls, churches and festivals) everything that Bach wrote is performed. And there is one more difference: everything that Bach wrote is of interest only to Bach completists, while everything that Chopin wrote appeals to the general audience.

Granted, Chopin's oeuvre is quantitatively only a tiny fraction of Bach's and this explains a lot; but otoh so is Beethoven's or Brahms' and there are enough of their works who never, or very rarely, get performed.

And Chopin's oeuvre is quantitatively only a tiny fraction of Beethoven's or Brahms' and this explains a lot, too.

Boy, did I inadvertently touch some sore spots...  :laugh:

Anyway, let's see, limiting ourselves only to the opus-numbered works:

Beethoven: 138
Brahms: 122
Chopin: 65, ie 47% of Beethoven's and 53 % of Brahms.

Tiny fraction?

Quote from: Florestan on June 12, 2018, 01:13:00 AM
Boy, did I inadvertently touch some sore spots...  :laugh:

Anyway, let's see, limiting ourselves only to the opus-numbered works:

Beethoven: 138
Brahms: 122
Chopin: 65, ie 47% of Beethoven's and 53 % of Brahms.

Tiny fraction?

Average length (in bars or minutes) of work?

Ohlsson's Complete Chopin: 16 CDs
https://www.hyperion-records.co.uk/dc.asp?dc=D_CDS44351/66

Brilliant Complete Beethoven: 85 CDs
http://www.arkivmusic.com/classical/album.jsp?album_id=570976

Brilliant Complete Brahms: 58 CDs
https://www.brilliantclassics.com/articles/b/brahms-complete-edition/

So Beethoven and Brahms wrote about 5.3 and 3.6 as much music as Chopin did, respectively. The Brilliant Complete Bach is 160 CDs, so 10 times as much as the Chopin, and almost twice/thrice as much as the Beethoven/Brahms.

It would actually be an interesting exercise to look at what proportion of a composer's work is still heard regularly. Though exactly how you would assess what is "regular" is a bit of a difficult question.

This is where I think Chopin is on pretty strong ground. A large range of his works still get heard and are known, with only a relatively small proportion that are relegated to the completists.

Brahms doesn't do too badly. Beethoven does reasonably. Then you get someone like Sibelius where it's 7 symphonies and the Violin Concerto over and over...

But yes, this is at least partly to do with genre. If you wrote things that have gone decidedly out of fashion, like choral works, or require difficult or unusual resources to perform, then those works tend to fade away. Piano music is easy in this regard. It requires just one performer on a very common and popular instrument.

Quote from: North Star on June 12, 2018, 01:29:50 AM
Average length (in bars or minutes) of work?

Ohlsson's Complete Chopin: 16 CDs
https://www.hyperion-records.co.uk/dc.asp?dc=D_CDS44351/66

Brilliant Complete Beethoven: 85 CDs
http://www.arkivmusic.com/classical/album.jsp?album_id=570976

Brilliant Complete Brahms: 58 CDs
https://www.brilliantclassics.com/articles/b/brahms-complete-edition/

So Beethoven and Brahms wrote about 5.3 and 3.6 as much music as Chopin did, respectively. The Brilliant Complete Bach is 160 CDs, so 10 times as much as the Chopin, and almost twice/thrice as much as the Beethoven/Brahms.

From a purely quantitative point of view, you are right. Qualitatively, though, you'd be right if and only if you could explain in no uncertain terms how and why writing a symphony or a string quartet is a greater and more important musical achievement than writing a set of etudes or preludes, or how and why this or that of the many sets of Lieder Beethoven and Brahms composed are superior to this or that set of Chopin's nocturnes, waltzes or mazurkas.

Quote from: Madiel on June 12, 2018, 02:06:41 AM
It would actually be an interesting exercise to look at what proportion of a composer's work is still heard regularly. Though exactly how you would assess what is "regular" is a bit of a difficult question.

This is where I think Chopin is on pretty strong ground. A large range of his works still get heard and are known, with only a relatively small proportion that are relegated to the completists.

You seem to be the only one that got me right.

Quote from: Florestan on June 12, 2018, 01:00:02 AM
You have a point about recordings (afaIk, there are three complete Bach editions --- far behind Chopin, for that matter, with at least seven) but performance-wise I strongly doubt that even during a whole concert season all around the world (including concert halls, churches and festivals) everything that Bach wrote is performed. And there is one more difference: everything that Bach wrote is of interest only to Bach completists, while everything that Chopin wrote appeals to the general audience.

Granted, Chopin's oeuvre is quantitatively only a tiny fraction of Bach's and this explains a lot; but otoh so is Beethoven's or Brahms' and there are enough of their works who never, or very rarely, get performed.

I.c. Bach: as you said: his oeuvre (and f.i. Mozart's) is rather huge. That's already sufficient to make a comparison with Chopin difficult.

Still, in this country (and probably others, like Germany or Belgium), I think that a huge amount of the Bach output is performed. For instance: there are quite some cities with so-called Cantata Services. In many cases works of Bach for that particular Sunday are performed. In between they play organ chorales or other keyboard works on organ or harpsichord (if present). Of course it takes some years to perform them all. ;)
Also: I would not be surprised if the general audience (if it existed) around here is far more interested in a Complete Bach Edition than in Chopin's. When Brilliant issued their Bach boxset in 2000, it was a big hit in the Netherlands. Front page news about huge selling figures, and interviews with (mainly) Leusink on radio and television. Such a thing would be impossible here for a Chopin edition.

Btw: don't worry, you didn't touch a sore spot. I just had some (more or less) serious doubts about your assumption. And I can only/mainly speak of Bach, because I tend to listen to him the most (either at home, either at concerts).   

Quote from: Florestan on June 12, 2018, 02:35:12 AMFrom a purely quantitative point of view, you are right. Qualitatively, though, you'd be right if and only if you could explain in no uncertain terms how and why writing a symphony or a string quartet is a greater and more important musical achievement than writing a set of etudes or preludes, or how and why this or that of the many sets of Lieder Beethoven and Brahms composed are superior to this or that set of Chopin's nocturnes, waltzes or mazurkas.

You seem to be the only one that got me right.

I have not made a qualitative argument against Chopin. Writing a good piece of music is greater and more important than writing a bad piece of music. Chopin's output is a special case, not only because of its consistently high quality, but also because it is relatively small and mostly limited to solo piano works - not because there's anything wrong with these things, but because these things explain why such a large portion of his oeuvre is performed so often. I'm certainly not saying that Chopin's achievement is somehow lessened by him not writing operas or oratorios or overtures.

Quote from: Marc on June 12, 2018, 02:43:06 AM
I.c. Bach: as you said: his oeuvre (and f.i. Mozart's) is rather huge. That's already sufficient to make a comparison with Chopin difficult.

Still, in this country (and probably others, like Germany or Belgium), I think that a huge amount of the Bach output is performed. For instance: there are quite some cities with so-called Cantata Services. In many cases works of Bach for that particular Sunday are performed. In between they play organ chorales or other keyboard works on organ or harpsichord (if present). Of course it takes some years to perform them all. ;)
Also: I would not be surprised if the general audience (if it existed) around here is far more interested in a Complete Bach Edition than in Chopin's. When Brilliant issued their Bach boxset in 2000, it was a big hit in the Netherlands. Front page news about huge selling figures, and interviews with (mainly) Leusink on radio and television. Such a thing would be impossible here for a Chopin edition.

Yes, I am aware that in The Netherlands Bach has a cult status. But The Netherlands is only a tiny fraction of the global classical music market.

Quotedon't worry, you didn't touch a sore spot.

Oh, I wasn't referring to you with that rather tongue-in-cheek remark.

QuoteI just had some (more or less) serious doubts about your assumption. And I can only/mainly speak of Bach, because I tend to listen to him the most (either at home, either at concerts).

It was not an assumption, just a thought. As Madiel perceptively said, it could be shown to be false or right by calculating which percentage of Chopin's works is still currently and frequently performed / recorded and comparing the result with similar calculations for Bach, Beethoven or Brahms (the names that have been offered as a counter-argument). Difficult but not altogether impossible. My hunch is that Chopin will be ahead of all three.

And now it has just occurred to me that this could be, and probably was, interpreted as a judgment value, ie that I claim Chopin is a better / greater composer than the other three. That's definitely not the case: I am in principle opposed to ranking and classifying composers and, while I admit to liking Chopin's music more than Bach's this subjective preferrence is in no way a judgment value.

Quote from: North Star on June 12, 2018, 03:20:57 AM
I have not made a qualitative argument against Chopin. Writing a good piece of music is greater and more important than writing a bad piece of music. Chopin's output is a special case, not only because of its consistently high quality, but also because it is relatively small and mostly limited to solo piano works - not because there's anything wrong with these things, but because these things explain why such a large portion of his oeuvre is performed so often. I'm certainly not saying that Chopin's achievement is somehow lessened by him not writing operas or oratorios or overtures.

I have misunderstood your posts. My apologies.  0:)

Quote from: Florestan on June 12, 2018, 03:28:00 AM
Yes, I am aware that in The Netherlands Bach has a cult status. But The Netherlands is only a tiny fraction of the global classical music market.

Maybe there are more countries where Bach is rated higher. Whatever that is worth of course... and it's off-topic.

Quote from: Florestan on June 12, 2018, 03:28:00 AM
[...]
And now it has just occurred to me that this could be, and probably was, interpreted as a judgment value, ie that I claim Chopin is a better / greater composer than the other three. That's definitely not the case: I am in principle opposed to ranking and classifying composers and, while I admit to liking Chopin's music more than Bach's this subjective preferrence is in no way a judgment value.

Not to 'worry': I wasn't interpreting it that way.
And besides that: I'm perfectly fine with your personal preference. I like Chopin a lot, too. His music had an immediate appeal on me, and it still has. Vladimir Tropp's Denon disc (with a.o. Sonata no 2 and the Barcarolle) is one of my 'desert island' discs.

Quote from: Marc on June 12, 2018, 07:05:36 AM
Vladimir Tropp's Denon disc (with a.o. Sonata no 2 and the Barcarolle) is one of my 'desert island' discs.

That's an excellent disc indeed. Check oout the second volume, too.

Quote from: Florestan on June 12, 2018, 08:18:40 AM
That's an excellent disc indeed. Check oout the second volume, too.

I know about this issue, but is it available for a decent price somewhere?
Even a download would do.

Quote from: Marc on June 12, 2018, 08:27:51 AM
I know about this issue, but is it available for a decent price somewhere?
Even a download would do.

I'll let you have it.

Quote from: Mandryka on June 12, 2018, 08:32:17 AM
I'll let you have it.

ty, pm sent.

Mandryka beat me to it.  :D

Quote from: Florestan on June 12, 2018, 08:52:55 AM
Mandryka beat me to it.  :D

ty, too! :)

Listening to Tropp's 2nd Chopin disc right now... man, that delicious Denon sound (even on my modest PC).
Thanks, Mandryka!

Hm, I'd love to hear Tropp's Chopin too now... (both discs :D)

Quote from: North Star on June 12, 2018, 10:54:21 AM
Hm, I'd love to hear Tropp's Chopin too now... (both discs :D)

Oh dear... :D

Quote from: Florestan on June 11, 2018, 09:42:26 AM
Just a thought: it may very well be that, of all past composers, Chopin is the only one whose work is still performed, recorded and universally acclaimed and loved almost in its entirety: excluding juvenilia, pretty much everything that Chopin wrote is still in the repertoire. That can't be said of any other major composer, not even Bach, Mozart and Beethoven. Chopin is quite unique in this respect.

The only other examples I can think of are composers with smaller outputs: Mahler, Ravel, Borodin, Janáček (and even then almost all of his choral music is rarely heard—not too different from Chopin's songs). Chopin might be the composer with the largest output of which almost all is heard frequently.

Quote from: amw on June 12, 2018, 02:42:29 PM
The only other examples I can think of are composers with smaller outputs: Mahler, Ravel, Borodin, Janáček (and even then almost all of his choral music is rarely heard—not too different from Chopin's songs). Chopin might be the composer with the largest output of which almost all is heard frequently.

I don't know how you evaluate output size, but if you go by total duration of composed music a Chopin complete edition fits on 16 CDs, Ravel on 14 CDs, Mahler on 16 CDs. Debussy can be 24 CDs, but that is with a fair number of non-essential transcriptions.

I think it was Tovey who said that some people wasted talents on music that would have been more useful in double-entry bookkeeping.

What could be more modern or morose as the Prelude 25/2? (28??)

Are there people who like the Etudes, but not the Preludes? I'm listening to Sokolov now and even he is getting on my nerves somewhat...

I dunno :(


Would Chopin and Liszt still LIKE their own music if they could here what came after? Woulld they immediate get to learning all the new stuff and reinventing themselves,... or would they continue writing 1849 Muisc?

Quote from: snyprrr on June 16, 2018, 11:15:17 AM
Are there people who like the Etudes, but not the Preludes? I'm listening to Sokolov now and even he is getting on my nerves somewhat...

I dunno :(


Would Chopin and Liszt still LIKE their own music if they could here what came after? Woulld they immediate get to learning all the new stuff and reinventing themselves,... or would they continue writing 1849 Muisc?

Uchida once said that she thought that the Chopin études where much more a test of technique and stamina than of poetic sensibility, I don't know whether she was right about that.

I think pianists tend to go on and on about the Chopin études because they have to perform them for their peers, they're piano student fodder.  I think the préludes are more interesting to listen to, though I suspect that the études have been very influential - think of the plethora of piano études in the  20th century, I bet Chopin was the cause of that phenomenon.

Liszt, of course, is not Chopin, Chopin never wrote anything like Liszt's late music. The are glimmerings of a modernist Chopin, more so than Liszt I'd say, in things like the final movement of the second sonata.

The Chopin études are written specifically to cover individual technical problems, but are also so difficult as to be impractical for students. (Either Op.10 no.1 or Op.25 no.10, depending on your individual abilities, would be Chopin's most difficult piece.) As such they're more things for piano students to aspire to; you don't usually have piano students actually attempting the études until university/conservatory level. Chopin himself performed selections of them as concert pieces, and instead used the Nocturnes to teach his students, apparently.

Imo there is not much musical interest in something like Op.10 no.2, compared to e.g. Op.10 no.3, but of course the ability to hear a flawless performance of something very difficult is still an appealing prospect regardless of the ~substance.

Quote from: Mandryka on June 17, 2018, 06:28:05 AM

Liszt, of course, is not Chopin, Chopin never wrote anything like Liszt's late music. The are glimmerings of a modernist Chopin, more so than Liszt I'd say, in things like the final movement of the second sonata.

A 'Late Chopin' phase would've been interesting... Nocturne No.27 from 1876?...

Quote from: amw on June 17, 2018, 07:04:56 AM
(Either Op.10 no.1 or Op.25 no.10, depending on your individual abilities, would be Chopin's most difficult piece.)


WELL- THAT'S INTERESTING. 10/1 REALLY STRUCK ME... I HAD AN AHA MOMENT...


but of course the ability to hear a flawless performance of something very difficult is still an appealing prospect regardless of the ~substance.

sometimes I just want to hear that frisson!! scintillation ... bubbles... cool stuff...

COOL STUFF IS COOL!!

Cool Stuff SHOULD (also?) be Deep Stuff,... or, in these cases, is the Surface Itself Deepness Incarnate?

Is it Chopin? Is it the fingers of the Living Magical Performers? What is "IT"????

Quote from: amw on June 17, 2018, 07:04:56 AM


Imo there is not much musical interest in something like Op.10 no.2, compared to e.g. Op.10 no.3,

Here's a 10/3 from Ashkenazy, his first recording made in the USSR.

https://www.youtube.com/v/oFGonibxzTI


There's quite a nice review of the recording here

http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2014/Oct14/Chopin_etudes_MELCD1002108.htm

Quote from: amw on June 17, 2018, 07:04:56 AM
The Chopin études are written specifically to cover individual technical problems, but are also so difficult as to be impractical for students. (Either Op.10 no.1 or Op.25 no.10, depending on your individual abilities, would be Chopin's most difficult piece.) As such they're more things for piano students to aspire to; you don't usually have piano students actually attempting the études until university/conservatory level. Chopin himself performed selections of them as concert pieces, and instead used the Nocturnes to teach his students, apparently.

Imo there is not much musical interest in something like Op.10 no.2, compared to e.g. Op.10 no.3, but of course the ability to hear a flawless performance of something very difficult is still an appealing prospect regardless of the ~substance.

The amazing part is they don't SOUND like etudes, more like miniature pieces.

I remember one of my daughter's piano teachers who WAS a conservatory student in piano performance used to practice Op 10 No 12 right before my daughter's class. I didn't know the piece (yeah where have I been right?) and I remember dear lord all these notes how does she keep track of them let alone play them !

The musical interest of them varies in my opinion. Some of them wear their technical side too obviously to be great pieces of music.

Op.10 no.12 is, believe it or not, one of the more manageable ones if you know what you're doing and one that I managed to learn. More than anything it's about conservation of energy, and shaping the piece musically is the way to do it. If you go hell for leather your left arm will give out before you reach the end.

I learned Op.10 no.12 ages ago but have honestly forgotten most of it. It is certainly written more explicitly as a concert piece, compared to op.10 no.11, which I also learned and which is not nearly as musically interesting (though more valuable as an etude, at least for me and my hand size).

Op.10 no.12 is one of the only études that really focuses on the left hand, basically a much easier version of the hand-shifting in Op.10 no.1; the popularity of the Godowsky studies on the Chopin études is that they develop the left hand much more significantly than Chopin tried to. When I looked into using the Chopin études as the basis for teaching myself piano technique, I figured I'd have to supplement with the Godowsky versions of Op.10 no.2 and Op.25 no.6 at minimum.

Quote from: Mandryka on June 17, 2018, 06:28:05 AM
Uchida once said that she thought that the Chopin études where much more a test of technique and stamina than of poetic sensibility, I don't know whether she was right about that.

Cortot would have disagreed with her. It is interesting to use his edition of the études and listen how he interpreted them. He usually gets more music out of them than most pianists.

Quote from: Mandryka on June 17, 2018, 06:28:05 AM
Liszt, of course, is not Chopin, Chopin never wrote anything like Liszt's late music. The are glimmerings of a modernist Chopin, more so than Liszt I'd say, in things like the final movement of the second sonata.

Chopin seemed to be in a new phase with his 3rd piano sonata, a return to form perhaps, rather than written out improvisations at times, not to denigrate them, of course.  I played Chopin all my life, in fact was the main incentive to play the piano in the first place, besides having heard some of Beethoven's music. As much as I value his works that I also learned like the Fantasie, the Ballades, etc., there is not the kind of actual development of material that Liszt was able to accomplish.

Quote from: zamyrabyrd on June 18, 2018, 01:12:27 AM
there is not the kind of actual development of material that Liszt was able to accomplish.

Who says Chopin was attempting to accomplish the same things?

Quote from: Madiel on June 18, 2018, 02:20:08 AM
Who says Chopin was attempting to accomplish the same things?

No one, but don't call the repetitions of the same theme 3x in different keys in the Fantasie, or the thinly disguised variations fot the 4th Ballade for instance, as actual development of material.

Quote from: zamyrabyrd on June 18, 2018, 01:12:27 AM


. . . than written out improvisations at times, not to denigrate them, of course. 

I can see where you're coming from with the fourth movement of the second sonata. It's presumably totally unlike anything else before or after.

Quote from: Madiel on June 17, 2018, 10:31:51 PM
The musical interest of them varies in my opinion. Some of them wear their technical side too obviously to be great pieces of music.

Op.10 no.12 is, believe it or not, one of the more manageable ones if you know what you're doing and one that I managed to learn. More than anything it's about conservation of energy, and shaping the piece musically is the way to do it. If you go hell for leather your left arm will give out before you reach the end.

I think a lot of people certainly do try to hit the opening chord as loud as they can which is not what Chopin wrote. Had Chopin wanted a 'fff' he would have written one. If you play as loud as you can to start by the time Chopin indicates a crescendo it measure 7 you have nowhere to go basically.

Quote from: zamyrabyrd on June 18, 2018, 01:12:27 AM
I played Chopin all my life, in fact was the main incentive to play the piano in the first place, besides having heard some of Beethoven's music. As much as I value his works that I also learned like the Fantasie, the Ballades, etc., there is not the kind of actual development of material that Liszt was able to accomplish.

Chopin and Liszt are galaxies apart. Their upbringing, their lives, their personalities, their aesthetics --- everything separates them. Even filing them both under "Romanticism" is rather problematic.

Quote from: zamyrabyrd on June 18, 2018, 02:52:01 AM

No one, but don't call the repetitions of the same theme 3x in different keys in the Fantasie, or the thinly disguised variations fot the 4th Ballade for instance, as actual development of material.

Why should "development" be the be-all and end-all of music? I am reminded of Debussy's famous remark on development: "Ah, the development section begins! Good, now I can get out and smoke a cigarette!"

Quote from: Florestan on June 18, 2018, 11:15:07 AM
Chopin and Liszt are galaxies apart. Their upbringing, their lives, their personalities, their aesthetics --- everything separates them. Even filing them both under "Romanticism" is rather problematic.

True

Quote from: Florestan on June 18, 2018, 11:15:07 AM
Why should "development" be the be-all and end-all of music? I am reminded of Debussy's famous remark on development: "Ah, the development section begins! Good, now I can get out and smoke a cigarette!"

Who said that? Development is transformation of material, very useful in sustaining interest over long stretches of time. Brahms was a master of it, maybe the reason he wrote symphonies and some other composers didn't (talking about the Romantic period), not to denigrate them in any way.

Quote from: zamyrabyrd on June 21, 2018, 04:22:36 AM
Who said that?

I was under the impression that you faulted Chopin for not developping his material the way Liszt did. While true, it bears zero relevance to the intrinsic quality of the music.

Quote from: Florestan on June 21, 2018, 06:21:54 AM
I was under the impression that you faulted Chopin for not developping his material the way Liszt did. While true, it bears zero relevance to the intrinsic quality of the music.

Chopin was one of the main reasons I wanted to play the piano. I also told students that a pianist should know most, if not all, of his works. Valued by Schenker, his music continues to remain an enigma to me. more so as I get older.

I was really fascinated over the years trying to figure what was going on in most of his work view of the scarcity of conventional development of motives. Well, how does he do it? I found some patterns that perhaps lesser composers would not get away with as well. One is a kind of revving up as in the "Minute" Waltz, like winding up a spring and then taking off. This device can be seen in his other compositions.

There is also the improvisatory aspect that should not be ignored in many of his compositions, particularly the Mazurkas.

Another technique (if it can be called that) or habit are strings of applied dominants. Just an off the top example, the 2nd theme in the 1st Ballade. The first motive of the 4th Ballade essentially does not change its profile in spite of being placed into increasingly complex settings, in the spirit of an improvisation.

I adored the Fantasie, played it in concert, even for Gyorgy Sandor in a masterclass many years ago. One of my students played it a few years ago in a concert and I saw it with different eyes. Well, what is really happening, when the main section is repeated 3x in different keys? Does it work? In some strange way it does.

I do believe with certain writers on Chopin that his later period showed a different course. The Polonaise-Fantasie that I am currently working on and breaking my head over is really different than anything he wrote but of course has the opening set in various keys without change in profile. Well, how does one manage that??? The B minor Sonata has an actual development section. He may have been going down the conventional route in the latter part of his life while integrating everything from before. It is a pity as with Schubert that we will never know where the road would have led him.

I know next to nothing about Chopin. A neighbour asked me if I'd like to attend a local cinema showing of a film about Chopin today, as his wife was not interested. Now I know quite a lot about Chopin!
The film is on DVD:
(//)

Quote from: Florestan on June 18, 2018, 11:15:07 AM
Chopin and Liszt are galaxies apart. Their upbringing, their lives, their personalities, their aesthetics --- everything separates them. Even filing them both under "Romanticism" is rather problematic.

Why should "development" be the be-all and end-all of music? I am reminded of Debussy's famous remark on development: "Ah, the development section begins! Good, now I can get out and smoke a cigarette!"

That is a hilarious quote.  :laugh: Did you make it up, or is he really said to have said that? Certainly right in character for him.

Happy belated birthday to Frédéric Chopin. One of the greatest of all time.

Quote from: vers la flamme on March 02, 2020, 12:43:13 PM
That is a hilarious quote.  :laugh: Did you make it up, or is he really said to have said that? Certainly right in character for him.

I've encountered it somewhere. Taruskin, maybe? I'll have to check it but I certainly didn't make it up.

Quote
Happy belated birthday to Frédéric Chopin. One of the greatest of all time.

Amen! He's in my top 3.

Quote from: Florestan on March 02, 2020, 01:11:16 PM
I've encountered it somewhere. Taruskin, maybe? I'll have to check it but I certainly didn't make it up.

Amen! He's in my top 3.

Do you have a favorite pianist (or a handful of favorites) in his works? I'm looking to expand my limited library of his music. I'm looking at a couple of big sets:

(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/81lQJomNmRL._SL500_.jpg)

(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/61JonfOnltL.jpg)

(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51kSGKBmMqL.jpg)

Really, I want them all, because each of these pianists is so unique, but I can't do that to my wallet.

Quote from: vers la flamme on March 02, 2020, 01:19:01 PM
Do you have a favorite pianist (or a handful of favorites) in his works? I'm looking to expand my limited library of his music. I'm looking at a couple of big sets:

(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/81lQJomNmRL._SL500_.jpg)(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/61JonfOnltL.jpg)(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51kSGKBmMqL.jpg)

Really, I want them all, because each of these pianists is so unique, but I can't do that to my wallet.

Of those three, I would suggest the Ashkenazy over the others. Still, I would advise against sets. As consistent as Ashkenazy's set is (and I find it to be more than the other two), he is still only great in the Etudes. I feel this is great music that deserves great performances. I posted this elsewhere, maybe it will be of use to you:

Chopin works, pianists and recordings that I enjoy - I have focused on genres that I most enjoy by the composer and within each genre I focus only on complete recordings.

Ashkenazy does splendidly with the Etudes, one of the very best, in fact. He has an earlier set on Melodiya that many people praise, but I find the Decca recording to be one of his best. Pollini's technical prowess is put to superb use in his DG recording of the etudes, though I frequently miss the poetry and beauty that is lacking in his recording. Also impressive is the explosive recording of the Etudes by Gavrilov on Seraphim/EMI. And for a modern recording performed in a manner which couldn't be further from the modern style, I like Kemal Gekic. He is a superb pianist, who had already done a stellar recording of the Liszt Transcendental Etudes before later moving onto the complete Chopin etudes.

Arrau's Nocturnes were my first and still one of my favorites. His playing is gorgeous, with loving care given to every note he plays. The Philips sound is excellent as well. Maria Tipo is excellent as well, well worth seeking out on an OOP EMI 2CD set. Another Maria (Joao Pires) is more dynamic and expressive than anyone that I have heard. I don't listen to her Nocturnes very often, but they are expressive, kind of an early evening Nocturnes, if you will. Moravec's set has been justly praised by just about everyone. His beautiful tone and poetic style makes for some great listening. I recommend the original mastering on a Nonesuch 2CD set, which was mastered by the original producer. Though I am not normally a fan of Ciccolini, I find his set of Nocturnes to be absolutely gorgeous. Unfortunately, they are on an OOP Cascavelle CD set. Rubinstein has three full sets, one from the 30s (my personal favorite by him, mastered by the great Ward Marston and coupled with the 2 concerti with Barbirolli), one from 1949-50 (coupled with the 4 Scherzi) and a stereo version that gets recommended a lot, IMO more because the sound is very good compared to the two earlier sets. Another great OOP set is Wasowski, recorded in 1988 in DDD sound. His is a slower, more introspective take on these pieces that works wonderfully. I have a number of other sets of Nocturnes that I would recommend, but not as a first choice. Ciani's set on DG is performed live. I haven't really got to know the set yet, but I plan to listen to it more, as it comes very highly recommended by those I trust. Weissenberg on an OOP EMI twofer is another enjoyable set, which is a surprise to me, as I wouldn't expect his style to gel with the composer's so well. The Nocturnes are probably my favorite piano works and I am always eager to hear pianists play them, for I find that they are one of those works that people seem to usually play well. I have yet to hear a terrible set of Nocturnes. I guess the pianists love them as much as I do.

For the Mazurkas, Wasowski on Concord Concerto has a wonderful, but now OOP set that I would grab if you see it. It pops up on amazon from time to time. Another pianist I like in this repertoire is Luisada on DG. In fact, I didn't even like these works until I heard him play them. Luisada's is OOP as well, but available on amazon when I last checked. And last but not least, Rubinstein's two mono sets are endlessly imaginative. I enjoy them every time I play them. As to be expected, the second mono set has better sound than the first.

The Ballades are another favorite of mine by Chopin. For these, there are a lot of great recordings. A number of years ago I did a survey of a few dozen sets of these works and I arrived at two favorites. Moravec's Ballades featured slow tempos, dark piano sound, solid technique and sumptuous piano tone, which made for some special readings of these four works. His playing lacked some of Gavrilov and Zimerman's drama, but it certainly wasn't boring by any means. In fact, his set would be my favorite if it weren't for the very special live recording by Maria Tipo. Her intensity and beautiful tone throughout has to be heard to believed. Considering that all of the above performances were studio creations and therefore likely benefited from editing and retakes, her achievement is particularly impressive. The sound of her piano seemed a bit out of tune in the first Ballade, but this annoyance quickly faded into the background as she continued. She was at her best in the third and fourth Ballades, where she played with all the requisite power, along with that special beauty I look for in my Chopin. This OOP Ermitage CD is well worth seeking out. Luckily, the Moravec Ballades remain in print and at budget price.

Speaking of Zimerman, I recently got his set of the Concertos with the Polish Festival Orchestra. The 1999 sound and the incredible performance has made me forget any other version I own. I really think it's that good. And the sound is lovely as well.

The Scherzos were never a big favorite for me, but Pogorelich's DG recording is great. It came highly recommended and I can see why. His technical facility and romantic style fits these works like a glove.

I have collected many recordings of the Preludes. Very few of them seem to get all or even most of the 24 right, IMO. As with the Ballades, I did a survey of over a few dozen recordings of this work (the 24 preludes comprise one opus) and found three recordings to stand out from the crowd: 1. Sokolov (Naive)- An epic performance, with the best finale I have heard. Richter never recorded the complete preludes, but I imagine this is how it would sound if he had. A unique and powerful performance. 2. Moravec (Supraphon)- I had previously thought the much rarer, OOP VAI preludes were better than these, but after comparing them side by side, these are the clear winner. The piano tone is clearer and the playing is alternately more beautiful and more exciting. Tempos here are more common than many of Sokolov's choices. 3. Lucchesini (EMI) - Definitely a surprise for me, as this one never seems to get mentioned anywhere. However, he is remarkably consistent throughout. The recorded sound is excellent and he plays with great sensitivity and clarity. The faster preludes do not disappoint either. As an aside, I highly rate his complete Beethoven sonatas, recorded live on Stradivarius.

The Waltzes are not a favorite of mine, but if I was going to listen to them I would likely reach for Arrau or Rubinstein. Unlike the Nocturnes and Mazurkas, Rubinstein only recorded a set these works once, in 1953.

The Polonaises are also not a favorite of mine, but I'd listen to Cherkassky on DG or perhaps one of the mono Rubinstein sets.

For a set of the three Piano Sonatas, Andsnes on Virgin is excellent. You get all three sonatas and some Mazurkas and Etudes as well. When I studied the second sonata in college I needed to choose a recording to reference in my paper. After comparing him and Rubinstein, I chose the former. Great youthful playing here in nice 1992 sound.

For Historical performances of Chopin, I strongly recommend two pianists - Cortot and Rosenthal. Cortot's are sensitive, poetic performances that make one easily forget about any technical limitations that the pianist had. People don't play the piano like this anymore and it is for this reason that these performances are even more special. If I could go back in time and hear just one Chopin recital, it would be one of Cortot's. Rosenthal also had a special way with Chopin's music. His teacher was a student of Chopin's and his recordings are stunning. They have appeared on Pearl CDs, Biddulph CDs and APR, the latter is still in print, in a box of his complete recordings, (https://www.amazon.com/Complete-Recordings-Moriz-Rosenthal/dp/B006ICUJ8M) all of which are a treasure. Transfers were by Ward Marston.

^Wow, that's a big ol' post. I don't have time to read and reply to it in full at the moment, but I will have to refer back to this when I am looking for individual recordings of chunks of Chopin's works. Thanks for sharing!

The reason I'm looking at full sets in this case has more to do with the idea of exploring the work of a performer than with finding the absolute best recording of a given piece. This is why I've chosen three pianists who sound totally unlike anyone else in this repertoire. I am especially drawn to the Ashkenazy set because it would fill in a lot of gaps in my collection, but then... I have long been meaning to further explore the work of Samson François (a student of the great Alfred Cortot who you mention) and, of course, Rubinstein is Rubinstein.

From what you mention I have a few already; Arrau in the Nocturnes, which I agree is excellent. I have recently bought Andsnes' recording of the sonatas on the strength of someone else's similarly high praise, but so far I am very disappointed, his playing is uninteresting to me. I'll continue listening and see if my opinion changes, as I'm sure you and however many thousands of others who cherish this recording can't be wrong. I really would like to purchase more Moravec Chopin recordings, he is a killer pianist.

Quote from: vers la flamme on March 02, 2020, 03:43:31 PM
^Wow, that's a big ol' post. I don't have time to read and reply to it in full at the moment, but I will have to refer back to this when I am looking for individual recordings of chunks of Chopin's works. Thanks for sharing!

My pleasure. I adore Chopin so I am always happy to talk about him.

QuoteThe reason I'm looking at full sets in this case has more to do with the idea of exploring the work of a performer than with finding the absolute best recording of a given piece. This is why I've chosen three pianists who sound totally unlike anyone else in this repertoire. I am especially drawn to the Ashkenazy set because it would fill in a lot of gaps in my collection, but then... I have long been meaning to further explore the work of Samson François (a student of the great Alfred Cortot who you mention) and, of course, Rubinstein is Rubinstein.

Gotcha. The Ashkenazy has the advantage of being complete, so you'll get a lot of works not in the other two sets. It also has better sound than the other two you mention.

QuoteFrom what you mention I have a few already; Arrau in the Nocturnes, which I agree is excellent. I have recently bought Andsnes' recording of the sonatas on the strength of someone else's similarly high praise, but so far I am very disappointed, his playing is uninteresting to me. I'll continue listening and see if my opinion changes, as I'm sure you and however many thousands of others who cherish this recording can't be wrong. I really would like to purchase more Moravec Chopin recordings, he is a killer pianist.

Yeah, they should have done a Chopin box for Moravec. Still, it would be very far from complete. 

Quote from: George on March 02, 2020, 04:07:55 PM
My pleasure. I adore Chopin so I am always happy to talk about him.

Gotcha. The Ashkenazy has the advantage of being complete, so you'll get a lot of works not in the other two sets. It also has better sound than the other two you mention.

Yeah, they should have done a Chopin box for Moravec. Still, it would be very far from complete.

Complete or not I'd buy a Moravec Chopin box in a heartbeat. He brings something unique to the table, whether he's playing Chopin, Debussy, Mozart, or anything else for that matter.

Anyway, prompted by your bringing it up, I actually ordered something different of Ashkenazy's Chopin: the Melodiya set of the études. I have long been curious to check out more of Ashkenazy's recordings from his younger days, and this seems to be a highly acclaimed performance. Managed to find a copy for five dollars, so why not?

(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51SqmaieNfL.jpg)

It also includes a work of Liszt's, one of the Mephisto Waltzes if I'm not mistaken.

Quote from: vers la flamme on March 02, 2020, 04:36:09 PM

(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51SqmaieNfL.jpg)

This has, I think, a very good op 10/3 - full of feeling without any sentimentality.

I'd emphasise the Ashkenazy is consistent. There's very little indeed that is any way a disappointment in that box.

Sure, you could spend a lifetime hunting down the very best version of every single piece.  But at times here on GMG the perfect is the enemy of the good, and also of your wallet.

Ashkenazy, Francois and Rubinstein are very good.

I will not burden you with any more recommendations after George's mammoth post but I just have to mention Brigitte Engerer's and Claire Huangci's Nocturnes, Dinu Lipatti's Waltzes as well as the very incomplete but very high quality sets by Tamas Vasary and Stefan Askenase.

The best option for you imo is to get a complete set, either Ashkenazy or Rubinstein --- you can't go wrong with any of them --- and work your way through it. Then for each piece that you particularly like you can seek out alternative performances.

And now that I think of it, the DG complete edition might be a still better option because you get the almost complete works, including piano&orchestra, chamber music and songs. (the only item missing, charming but in no way essential is the Variations for Flute and Piano on a theme from Rossini's La cenerentola.) Take a look at the performers here:

https://www.deutschegrammophon.com/en/cat/4778445? (https://www.deutschegrammophon.com/en/cat/4778445?)

Quote from: Madiel on March 03, 2020, 02:15:26 AM
you could spend a lifetime hunting down the very best version of every single piece.  But at times here on GMG the perfect is the enemy of the good

So true!

Quote from: George on March 02, 2020, 03:25:43 PM
Of those three, I would suggest the Ashkenazy over the others. Still, I would advise against sets. As consistent as Ashkenazy's set is (and I find it to be more than the other two), he is still only great in the Etudes. I feel this is great music that deserves great performances. I posted this elsewhere, maybe it will be of use to you:

Chopin works, pianists and recordings that I enjoy - I have focused on genres that I most enjoy by the composer and within each genre I focus only on complete recordings.

Ashkenazy does splendidly with the Etudes, one of the very best, in fact. He has an earlier set on Melodiya that many people praise, but I find the Decca recording to be one of his best. Pollini's technical prowess is put to superb use in his DG recording of the etudes, though I frequently miss the poetry and beauty that is lacking in his recording. Also impressive is the explosive recording of the Etudes by Gavrilov on Seraphim/EMI. And for a modern recording performed in a manner which couldn't be further from the modern style, I like Kemal Gekic. He is a superb pianist, who had already done a stellar recording of the Liszt Transcendental Etudes before later moving onto the complete Chopin etudes.

Arrau's Nocturnes were my first and still one of my favorites. His playing is gorgeous, with loving care given to every note he plays. The Philips sound is excellent as well. Maria Tipo is excellent as well, well worth seeking out on an OOP EMI 2CD set. Another Maria (Joao Pires) is more dynamic and expressive than anyone that I have heard. I don't listen to her Nocturnes very often, but they are expressive, kind of an early evening Nocturnes, if you will. Moravec's set has been justly praised by just about everyone. His beautiful tone and poetic style makes for some great listening. I recommend the original mastering on a Nonesuch 2CD set, which was mastered by the original producer. Though I am not normally a fan of Ciccolini, I find his set of Nocturnes to be absolutely gorgeous. Unfortunately, they are on an OOP Cascavelle CD set. Rubinstein has three full sets, one from the 30s (my personal favorite by him, mastered by the great Ward Marston and coupled with the 2 concerti with Barbirolli), one from 1949-50 (coupled with the 4 Scherzi) and a stereo version that gets recommended a lot, IMO more because the sound is very good compared to the two earlier sets. Another great OOP set is Wasowski, recorded in 1988 in DDD sound. His is a slower, more introspective take on these pieces that works wonderfully. I have a number of other sets of Nocturnes that I would recommend, but not as a first choice. Ciani's set on DG is performed live. I haven't really got to know the set yet, but I plan to listen to it more, as it comes very highly recommended by those I trust. Weissenberg on an OOP EMI twofer is another enjoyable set, which is a surprise to me, as I wouldn't expect his style to gel with the composer's so well. The Nocturnes are probably my favorite piano works and I am always eager to hear pianists play them, for I find that they are one of those works that people seem to usually play well. I have yet to hear a terrible set of Nocturnes. I guess the pianists love them as much as I do.

For the Mazurkas, Wasowski on Concord Concerto has a wonderful, but now OOP set that I would grab if you see it. It pops up on amazon from time to time. Another pianist I like in this repertoire is Luisada on DG. In fact, I didn't even like these works until I heard him play them. Luisada's is OOP as well, but available on amazon when I last checked. And last but not least, Rubinstein's two mono sets are endlessly imaginative. I enjoy them every time I play them. As to be expected, the second mono set has better sound than the first.

The Ballades are another favorite of mine by Chopin. For these, there are a lot of great recordings. A number of years ago I did a survey of a few dozen sets of these works and I arrived at two favorites. Moravec's Ballades featured slow tempos, dark piano sound, solid technique and sumptuous piano tone, which made for some special readings of these four works. His playing lacked some of Gavrilov and Zimerman's drama, but it certainly wasn't boring by any means. In fact, his set would be my favorite if it weren't for the very special live recording by Maria Tipo. Her intensity and beautiful tone throughout has to be heard to believed. Considering that all of the above performances were studio creations and therefore likely benefited from editing and retakes, her achievement is particularly impressive. The sound of her piano seemed a bit out of tune in the first Ballade, but this annoyance quickly faded into the background as she continued. She was at her best in the third and fourth Ballades, where she played with all the requisite power, along with that special beauty I look for in my Chopin. This OOP Ermitage CD is well worth seeking out. Luckily, the Moravec Ballades remain in print and at budget price.

Speaking of Zimerman, I recently got his set of the Concertos with the Polish Festival Orchestra. The 1999 sound and the incredible performance has made me forget any other version I own. I really think it's that good. And the sound is lovely as well.

The Scherzos were never a big favorite for me, but Pogorelich's DG recording is great. It came highly recommended and I can see why. His technical facility and romantic style fits these works like a glove.

I have collected many recordings of the Preludes. Very few of them seem to get all or even most of the 24 right, IMO. As with the Ballades, I did a survey of over a few dozen recordings of this work (the 24 preludes comprise one opus) and found three recordings to stand out from the crowd: 1. Sokolov (Naive)- An epic performance, with the best finale I have heard. Richter never recorded the complete preludes, but I imagine this is how it would sound if he had. A unique and powerful performance. 2. Moravec (Supraphon)- I had previously thought the much rarer, OOP VAI preludes were better than these, but after comparing them side by side, these are the clear winner. The piano tone is clearer and the playing is alternately more beautiful and more exciting. Tempos here are more common than many of Sokolov's choices. 3. Lucchesini (EMI) - Definitely a surprise for me, as this one never seems to get mentioned anywhere. However, he is remarkably consistent throughout. The recorded sound is excellent and he plays with great sensitivity and clarity. The faster preludes do not disappoint either. As an aside, I highly rate his complete Beethoven sonatas, recorded live on Stradivarius.

The Waltzes are not a favorite of mine, but if I was going to listen to them I would likely reach for Arrau or Rubinstein. Unlike the Nocturnes and Mazurkas, Rubinstein only recorded a set these works once, in 1953.

The Polonaises are also not a favorite of mine, but I'd listen to Cherkassky on DG or perhaps one of the mono Rubinstein sets.

For a set of the three Piano Sonatas, Andsnes on Virgin is excellent. You get all three sonatas and some Mazurkas and Etudes as well. When I studied the second sonata in college I needed to choose a recording to reference in my paper. After comparing him and Rubinstein, I chose the former. Great youthful playing here in nice 1992 sound.

For Historical performances of Chopin, I strongly recommend two pianists - Cortot and Rosenthal. Cortot's are sensitive, poetic performances that make one easily forget about any technical limitations that the pianist had. People don't play the piano like this anymore and it is for this reason that these performances are even more special. If I could go back in time and hear just one Chopin recital, it would be one of Cortot's. Rosenthal also had a special way with Chopin's music. His teacher was a student of Chopin's and his recordings are stunning. They have appeared on Pearl CDs, Biddulph CDs and APR, the latter is still in print, in a box of his complete recordings, (https://www.amazon.com/Complete-Recordings-Moriz-Rosenthal/dp/B006ICUJ8M) all of which are a treasure. Transfers were by Ward Marston.

Great post.

Quote from: mc ukrneal on March 03, 2020, 03:47:54 AM
Great post.

Thanks!

Quote from: Florestan on March 03, 2020, 03:35:00 AM
Ashkenazy, Francois and Rubinstein are very good.

I will not burden you with any more recommendations after George's mammoth post but I just have to mention Brigitte Engerer's and Claire Huangci's Nocturnes, Dinu Lipatti's Waltzes as well as the very incomplete but very high quality sets by Tamas Vasary and Stefan Askenase.

The best option for you imo is to get a complete set, either Ashkenazy or Rubinstein --- you can't go wrong with any of them --- and work your way through it. Then for each piece that you particularly like you can seek out alternative performances.

And now that I think of it, the DG complete edition might be a still better option because you get the almost complete works, including piano&orchestra, chamber music and songs. (the only item missing, charming but in no way essential is the Variations for Flute and Piano on a theme from Rossini's La cenerentola.) Take a look at the performers here:

https://www.deutschegrammophon.com/en/cat/4778445? (https://www.deutschegrammophon.com/en/cat/4778445?)

I just got the Lipatti Waltzes. Damn good! Good sound for the time too.

Thanks for the advice, that's probably about what I'll end up doing.

Francois is extremely personal, passionate and usually interesting but the sound is hardly ever good for the period and because of the very personal approach, some pieces might be irritating or less convincing. I'd not recommend it as a first set, but it is highly interesting as a complement to more "straightforward" mainstream interpretations.

I'd say a similar thing about the concertos with Zimerman. They are brilliant and original but quite strange (very slow and micro-managed).

I mostly agree with George on Pogorelich for the Scherzi (although I like the pieces more than he does), Freire on Teldec (1970s) is also good for a more straightforward interpretation, on the Ballades with Tipo (LvB op.109 on that disc is also great), Nocturnes with Rubinstein and Joao Pires and the Preludes with Sokolov and Moravec. Although I would swap the order of recommendation in the last case because Sokolov is somewhat too monumental and slow at times. I actually prefer his Etudes op.25 to his Preludes. Great Etudes are also to be had by Cziffra. There used to be a cheapo 5 disc French EMI (or, I think, also as 10 discs with Liszt making up other half) of Cziffra's Chopin that is highly recommendable.

I also agree that the DG box is a very good collection, if still available and not too pricey.

Quote from: vandermolen on March 02, 2020, 08:49:48 AM
I know next to nothing about Chopin. A neighbour asked me if I'd like to attend a local cinema showing of a film about Chopin today, as his wife was not interested. Now I know quite a lot about Chopin!
The film is on DVD:

That is indeed an excellent film!  It was recently available to stream on Amazon Prime, not sure if it still is.  The same folks also did similar films on Haydn, Beethoven, and Mozart...

I liked it enough that I picked up Alan Walker's recent biography on Chopin after watching it... I haven't gotten too far into that as of yet, but so far it's quite readable. 

(https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1537217799l/38122517._SY475_.jpg)

Quote from: j winter on March 03, 2020, 10:36:33 AM
That is indeed an excellent film!  It was recently available to stream on Amazon Prime, not sure if it still is.  The same folks also did similar films on Haydn, Beethoven, and Mozart...

I liked it enough that I picked up Alan Walker's recent biography on Chopin after watching it... I haven't gotten too far into that as of yet, but so far it's quite readable. 

(https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1537217799l/38122517._SY475_.jpg)

That looks like a must-read, I keep forgetting it exists.

While the Ashkenazy is virtually complete (and I agree it's very consistent) musically I prefer the Rubinstein. If I was going to recommend individual performances I'd go as follows

Preludes: Fiorentino
Etudes: Early Ashkenazy (and I also like Anievas)
Ballades: Moravec
Waltzes: Anievas
Scherzos: Richter
Nocturnes: A toss up between late Rubinstein and Moravec
2nd Sonata: Michelangeli (or Rachmaninov)
3rd Sonata: Lipatti
Polonaises: Ashkenazy has the complete set but for the better known ones maybe Pollini.

I've got heaps of Chopin and probably more recordings of the Etudes than anything else.

Quote from: Holden on March 03, 2020, 12:45:57 PM
While the Ashkenazy is virtually complete (and I agree it's very consistent) musically I prefer the Rubinstein. If I was going to recommend individual performances I'd go as follows

Preludes: Fiorentino
Etudes: Early Ashkenazy (and I also like Anievas)
Ballades: Moravec
Waltzes: Anievas
Scherzos: Richter
Nocturnes: A toss up between late Rubinstein and Moravec
2nd Sonata: Michelangeli (or Rachmaninov)
3rd Sonata: Lipatti
Polonaises: Ashkenazy has the complete set but for the better known ones maybe Pollini.

I've got heaps of Chopin and probably more recordings of the Etudes than anything else.

Is Michelangeli in the 2nd piano sonata the one on BBC or something else?

Any love for Vlado Perlemuter's late Chopin for Nimbus? I believe Mandryka has heard and enjoyed the Mazurkas, at least. He is an interesting pianist to me, one that I would like to explore.

Quote from: hvbias on March 03, 2020, 03:11:41 PM
Is Michelangeli in the 2nd piano sonata the one on BBC or something else?

London 1959 is the recorded date and this matches up with a BBC Legends CD I looked up on line. My recording is now oop I believe. It's Music&Arts CD #955.

Quote from: Holden on March 03, 2020, 06:19:49 PM
London 1959 is the recorded date and this matches up with a BBC Legends CD I looked up on line. My recording is now oop I believe. It's Music&Arts CD #955.

Yeah I have the BBC disc, I was wondering if there was another great one. He certainly had an on day then, really a best of Michelangeli hits with great legato and tonal color. No pounding on the keyboard in the Funeral March that ruins so many otherwise great performances.

Quote from: hvbias on March 03, 2020, 06:44:34 PM
Yeah I have the BBC disc, I was wondering if there was another great one.

There is

(https://d27t0qkxhe4r68.cloudfront.net/t_900/8033549460372.jpg?1401982573)

By the way, one Chopin recording I've been listening to  is this


(https://d1iiivw74516uk.cloudfront.net/eyJidWNrZXQiOiJwcmVzdG8tY292ZXItaW1hZ2VzIiwia2V5IjoiODAzMzg3MS4xLmpwZyIsImVkaXRzIjp7InJlc2l6ZSI6eyJ3aWR0aCI6MzAwfSwianBlZyI6eyJxdWFsaXR5Ijo2NX19LCJ0aW1lc3RhbXAiOjE0OTQzNjIzMDV9)

Having watched the film 'In Search of Chopin' I ordered this CD. My first by Chopin:
(//)

Quote from: vandermolen on March 03, 2020, 10:12:06 PM
Having watched the film 'In Search of Chopin' I ordered this CD. My first by Chopin:
(//)

Wow, I'm surprised you have no Chopin in your collection after however many years of listening. You can't go wrong with Rubinstein, that should be a great introduction.

Quote from: vers la flamme on March 04, 2020, 02:53:23 AM
Wow, I'm surprised you have no Chopin in your collection after however many years of listening. You can't go wrong with Rubinstein, that should be a great introduction.

+1 on both.

That's what happens when he only accumulates CDs of second rate British composers (and 3rd, and 4th and and 5th...)  >:D :laugh:  :P

TD: I quite like Rubinstein in the Mazurkas  0:)

Quote from: Papy Oli on March 04, 2020, 03:02:50 AM
That's what happens when he only accumulates CDs of second rate British composers (and 3rd, and 4th and and 5th...)  >:D :laugh:  :P

TD: I quite like Rubinstein in the Mazurkas  0:)

I hate to say it, but you seem to be heading down that dark path as well, Oli!  :P

Hahaha I've enjoyed these last few posts.
I also have a large collection of music by second-rate Russian, American and Scandinavian composers.
:-)

Quote from: vandermolen on March 04, 2020, 06:14:51 AM
Hahaha I've enjoyed these last few posts.
I also have a large collection of music by second-rate Russian, American and Scandinavian composers.
:-)

So Chopin is your first encounter with a first-rate composer. Excellent choice!  :D

Quote from: vers la flamme on March 04, 2020, 05:47:58 AM
I hate to say it, but you seem to be heading down that dark path as well, Oli!  :P

Not as badly but you might have a point  0:)

TD: I love Moravec in the Nocturnes and Michelangeli in the 1st ballade  ;D

Quote from: Florestan on March 04, 2020, 06:19:47 AM
So Chopin is your first encounter with a first-rate composer. Excellent choice!  :D

Absolutely Andrei!
I guess that most of the music I enjoy listening to comes from the later 19th Century and beyond and Chopin has hitherto, despite recognising his importance, not really appealed to me. I know that, for some of you, is probably a terrible thing to admit but it is true. I may have some more Chopin in my collection, probably on a BBC Music Magazine freebie. I look forward to receiving the Rubinstein. Also, it's only in recent years that I've listened more to solo piano music. Interestingly, the art of the period, such as the paintings by Chopin's friend Delacroix appeals to me much more. I love his portrait of Chopin:
(//)

Quote from: vandermolen on March 04, 2020, 06:35:11 AM
Absolutely Andrei!
I guess that most of the music I enjoy listening to comes from the later 19th Century and beyond and Chopin has hitherto, despite recognising his importance, not really appealed to me. I know that, for some of you, is probably a terrible thing to admit but it is true. I may have some more Chopin in my collection, probably on a BBC Music Magazine freebie. I look forward to receiving the Rubinstein. Also, it's only in recent years that I've listened more to solo piano music.

My impression is that your listening time is devoted 99% to orchestral and symphonic music. Nothing wrong with that, of course, but when listening to Chopin you must put aside any expectations that kind of music might have created in you.

Quote from: Florestan on March 04, 2020, 06:39:39 AM
My impression is that your listening time is devoted 99% to orchestral and symphonic music. Nothing wrong with that, of course, but when listening to Chopin you must put aside any expectations that kind of music might have created in you.

Another good point. Chamber music has appealed to me more as I've got older. Probably now about 90% orchestral listening and also some non-classical (how many others here have attended a Monkees concert?) but maybe you are right.

Quote from: Mandryka on March 03, 2020, 07:43:08 PM
There is

(https://d27t0qkxhe4r68.cloudfront.net/t_900/8033549460372.jpg?1401982573)

Will check it out thanks.

Quote from: vandermolen on March 04, 2020, 06:43:20 AM
Another good point. Chamber music has appealed to me more as I've got older. Probably now about 90% orchestral listening and also some non-classical (how many others here have attended a Monkees concert?) but maybe you are right.

The second piano sonata may be a closer approximation of orchestral music, particularly by pianists that really play up the dynamics. I can't recall much about the Rubinstein disc you're getting, hopefully you enjoy it!

Quote from: hvbias on March 04, 2020, 06:53:23 AM
Will check it out thanks.

The second piano sonata may be a closer approximation of orchestral music, particularly by pianists that really play up the dynamics. I can't recall much about the Rubinstein disc you're getting, hopefully you enjoy it!

I'm sure I will. Thanks. In the film I was especially impressed by the extracts they played of the second sonata, including that famous funeral march and also the finale which sounded almost atonal.

Quote from: hvbias on March 04, 2020, 06:53:23 AM
Will check it out thanks.

The second piano sonata may be a closer approximation of orchestral music, particularly by pianists that really play up the dynamics. I can't recall much about the Rubinstein disc you're getting, hopefully you enjoy it!

I'm enjoying it very much thank you with, added appreciation knowing more about him now.
(//)
Not my normal cup of tea of course, as my musical tastes tend to be orchestral music from the late 19th Century onwards. Having said that I like Schubert's Unfinished Symphony and the music of Tallis and Byrd from the Tudor period as well some Beethoven. Anyway this makes a pleasant change from all those 'second rate' orchestral composers whose music I normally listen to. I'm now listening to the Piano Sonata No.2 for the second time through!
8)

Quote from: vandermolen on March 07, 2020, 02:04:24 AM
I'm enjoying it very much thank you with, added appreciation knowing more about him now.
(//)
Not my normal cup of tea of course, as my musical tastes tend to be orchestral music from the late 19th Century onwards. Having said that I like Schubert's Unfinished Symphony and the music of Tallis and Byrd from the Tudor period as well some Beethoven. Anyway this makes a pleasant change from all those 'second rate' orchestral composers whose music I normally listen to. I'm now listening to the Piano Sonata No.2 for the second time through!
8)

Chopin wrote some piano concerti as well, the first two are nice pieces with no cadenzas.

Quote from: hvbias on March 07, 2020, 06:59:22 AM
Chopin wrote some piano concerti as well, the first two are nice pieces with no cadenzas.

Oh, thank you. I heard extracts from them on the documentary I saw. One of them especially impressed me.

Quote from: hvbias on March 07, 2020, 06:59:22 AM
Chopin wrote some piano concerti as well, the first only two are nice pieces with no cadenzas.

Fixed.  :)

Quote from: vandermolen on March 07, 2020, 08:19:29 AM
Oh, thank you. I heard extracts from them on the documentary I saw. One of them especially impressed me.

I bet it was the e minor op. 11.  8)

Hmm, I have noticed that I still find the E minor PC kind of challenging. Possibly due to its expansiveness, and (don't kill me for this) somewhat colorless orchestration, to my ears. I do enjoy the F minor 2nd PC, though, which was actually written somewhat earlier. But I shall keep trying with both of them. I have two recordings: Claudio Arrau, Eliahu Inbal, London Philharmonic; and the wunderkind Evgeny Kissin live in Moscow in 1984 (don't remember orchestra or conductor).

Quote from: Florestan on March 07, 2020, 08:36:07 AM
Fixed.  :)

Op. 46 is for piano and orchestra.

Quote from: hvbias on March 07, 2020, 08:41:19 AM
Op. 46 is for piano and orchestra.

Hmm, the recording I have, Vladimir Ashkenazy, is solo piano only, but I have read that Chopin had written it originally as a first movement for a prospective third concerto.

Quote from: vers la flamme on March 07, 2020, 08:43:57 AM
Hmm, the recording I have, Vladimir Ashkenazy, is solo piano only, but I have read that Chopin had written it originally as a first movement for a prospective third concerto.

Huh, interesting just looked it up on Wikipedia and it wasn't originally scored for orchestra. I don't have the Ashkenazy box and doubt it's on any individual CD of his I have.

So just the first two piano concerti are nice pieces  ;D

Quote from: hvbias on March 07, 2020, 08:46:54 AM
Huh, interesting just looked it up on Wikipedia and it wasn't originally scored for orchestra. I don't have the Ashkenazy box and doubt it's on any individual CD of his I have.

So just the first two piano concerti are nice pieces  ;D

It's on the Polonaises 2CD. I don't have the box either, but I want it...  ;D

Quote from: hvbias on March 07, 2020, 08:41:19 AM
Op. 46 is for piano and orchestra.

But it's not a piano concerto.

Quote from: Florestan on March 07, 2020, 08:37:17 AM
I bet it was the e minor op. 11.  8)

Well, it was certainly in a minor key Andrei but that applies to both of them I think! You are probably right.

Quote from: vandermolen on March 07, 2020, 10:31:16 AM
Well, it was certainly in a minor key Andrei but that applies to both of them I think! You are probably right.

Well, the op. 11 is my favorite of them two, but this means nothing, you might prefer the op. 21. I'm very curious which is which.

Op.46 is definitely not for piano orchestra. But opuses 2, 13, 14 and 22 are.

I like some of them better than the concerti. Orchestral Chopin in smaller doses.

Quote from: Madiel on March 07, 2020, 12:59:37 PM
Op.46 is definitely not for piano orchestra. But opuses 2, 13, 14 and 22 are.

I like some of them better than the concerti. Orchestral Chopin in smaller doses.

I thought the same. Op.2 especially is really nice. This is the work that prompted the young Schumann to proclaim "hats off, gentlemen, a genius".

That was a major brain freeze moment on my part, I even have an Arrau EMI era CD of him playing Op. 46. Not sure when I heard this last, nice piece and performance.

I had not listened to Chopin (or piano music) in a long time.

I mean years.

However, suddenly I felt like hearing Chopin Impromptus, one of the not so familiar provinces of his work.

I guess I only have two different Rubinstein recordings to choose from (and of course a ton of Fantaisie-Impromptus as CD-fillers).

Is there anyone in particular who is particularly good in these works?

Murray Perahia or Pavel Kolesnikov, depending on interpretive preferences. Sampling of any 20-30 seconds from their recordings should be sufficient to determine which approach you prefer.

The Rubinsteins are honestly not bad either though.

Claudio Arrau is my favorite for the impromptus.

Quote from: Herman on July 03, 2020, 10:31:18 PM
I had not listened to Chopin (or piano music) in a long time.

I mean years.

However, suddenly I felt like hearing Chopin Impromptus, one of the not so familiar provinces of his work.

I guess I only have two different Rubinstein recordings to choose from (and of course a ton of Fantaisie-Impromptus as CD-fillers).

Is there anyone in particular who is particularly good in these works?

See if you enjoy Momo Kodama.

I hadn't listened to Samson Francois's Chopin in quite awhile. His Nocturnes are lovely. I don't recall them being this good. 

Quote from: Herman on July 03, 2020, 10:31:18 PM
I had not listened to Chopin (or piano music) in a long time.

I mean years.

However, suddenly I felt like hearing Chopin Impromptus, one of the not so familiar provinces of his work.

I guess I only have two different Rubinstein recordings to choose from (and of course a ton of Fantaisie-Impromptus as CD-fillers).

Is there anyone in particular who is particularly good in these works?

Two classics:

(https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/71yXJM2hNUL._SS500_.jpg)(https://s12emagst.akamaized.net/products/10749/10748536/images/res_6d7858ae5ce24f36e0c1260891d50a74_full.jpg)

Two contemporaries:

(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/81lEsgrV7UL._SL1500_.jpg)(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/71JTyj3W6IL._SL1374_.jpg)

I picked up an amazing recording of the E minor Piano Concerto last weekend: Emil Gilels w/ Eugene Ormandy & the Philadelphia Orchestra. Gilels might not be everyone's first choice as a Chopin pianist, but he is perfectly idiomatic and, as is his wont, brings out the contrapuntal elements of the music in a tasteful manner. The Philadephians under Ormandy provide a great accompaniment, though I might appreciate more detail in some of the tutti sections (but I don't know whether this is Ormandy's fault, or Chopin's—I don't know the concerto well enough).

Coupled w/ a recording of the F minor Concerto w/ André Watts, Thomas Schippers & the NY Philharmonic. Sounds good to me, too, despite that I don't know the soloist or conductor at all.

If you want more detail in the orchestra (up to the point of fussiness) with similarly painstakingly detailed playing from the pianist, try Zimerman's second recording where he conducts himself. Also the slowest tempi I encountered in the music, so probably not a first recommendation but quite interesting. (His earlier recordings (with conductor) are more mainstream in style.)

Both are on DG (I think he has been DG exclusive since a long time), I guess you mean the one with Zimerman also conducting?

Quote from: Jo498 on July 04, 2020, 12:08:53 PM
If you want more detail in the orchestra (up to the point of fussiness) with similarly painstakingly detailed playing from the pianist, try Zimerman's second recording where he conducts himself. Also the slowest tempi I encountered in the music, so probably not a first recommendation but quite interesting. (His earlier recordings (with conductor) are more mainstream in style.)

I haven't listened to that for years, but I remember when I first got the cd of Zimerman playing/conducting, I did a serious double take when the intro of the First struck up.
At first I thought he must have found a completely new edition or sth, but no, he had just gone back to first principles, and looked at everything anew. And for the first time in my experience, the introduction didn't just sound like a bit of dutiful huffing and puffing before the pianist came in. I found it a striking example of what a fresh, intelligent approach to a piece of music could do to bring it alive. Time to dig it out again I think.

Quote from: Iota on July 04, 2020, 02:09:59 PM
I haven't listened to that for years, but I remember when I first got the cd of Zimerman playing/conducting, I did a serious double take when the intro of the First struck up.
At first I thought he must have found a completely new edition or sth, but no, he had just gone back to first principles, and looked at everything anew. And for the first time in my experience, the introduction didn't just sound like a bit of dutiful huffing and puffing before the pianist came in. I found it a striking example of what a fresh, intelligent approach to a piece of music could do to bring it alive. Time to dig it out again I think.

When I moved a few years back and had to downsize, that was the only set of the concertos I brought with me. Never regretted the choice.

It's certainly very special and far more so than his first recordings from the late 70s or early 1980s. I got them accidentally in a DG Chopin box. In fact I have so many recordings of these concertos in boxes, that I would not need any singles. I bought about four separate recordings on single discs: #2 on old instruments (Olejniczak on op.111), #2 with Pogorelich and #1 with Pollini and Argerich respectively. Although I find Pollini/Kletzki a bit lame and keep it more for the "fillers".

Listening now to the Zimerman/Polish Festival recording on DG, on Youtube. Wow, I can see what you mean. Incredibly detailed. This is brilliant, I'll certainly be seeking it out.

Chopin: "George who?"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7FdDLvED_4E

Quote from: Scion7 on September 23, 2020, 08:17:30 AM
Chopin: "George who?"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7FdDLvED_4E

Man, was that a quickie!  ;)

Take that, Yuja Wang!  ;D

Thanks for posting, this is something that Sarge would surely enjoy as much as I did. ;D Could you please post it in the WAYL2 thread with a special note for him?  :D

I loved this performance of Piano Sonata 3, too bad Eloquence only released it as part of a box.

https://www.youtube.com/v/HE901bAzLg4

Nicely played with good sound.  Older recordings are often only found in more expensive boxed sets these days.

Quote from: Scion7 on September 28, 2020, 03:23:28 PM
Nicely played with good sound.  Older recordings are often only found in more expensive boxed sets these days.

True, I just don't like that the majority of that box is a bunch of piano concertos that will be in poor, historical sound. I don't mind it for solo instrument recordings but I have to really like the performers (ie Furtwangler) to put up with it on symphony music.

Quote from: Dancing Divertimentian on November 30, 2013, 07:15:14 PM
It's funny you should say that George. For years I had a similar problem with Arrau's nocturnes. It got so bad that at one point I finally just sold off the set and said goodbye to ever hearing them again.

But so many people kept saying so many good things about it I eventually caved and re-bought the set. But I STILL didn't get along with it. But years went by and one night I put it on after a long hiatus and *bang* it clicked!

Now I can't fathom what problem I might have had with Arrau's nocturnes. They're so beautifully poetic.

Now, practically speaking I can't say whether this story amounts to anything but all I can say is: time has a funny way of changing perceptions. :) 

It's funny, way back when you said this in response to me posting that I couldn't get into the Freire Chopin Nocturnes and now i have had a parallel experience to yours with Arrrau. About 4 years ago, I gave up on the Freire set altogether and got rid of it. Then, yesterday, I see the set in a used shop for $6 and since I have been on a Nocturne kick lately (Arrau, Moravec, Smeterlin, Weissenberg), I picked it up. I am listening to it now and really enjoying the intimate, gentle way he has with these works. And his tone, the recorded sound is incredible!

Thought you might get a kick out of that! Hope all is well with you, my friend.     

*bump*

It seems that as well as various lost works, there are at least a couple of small pieces that are held by private collectors and have never been available to anyone else for publication or recording.

Is it just me, or does anyone consider that kind of selfishness enraging? It's one thing to own a manuscript. It's quite another to prevent the rest of the world from knowing what's in it.

Quote from: Madiel on March 28, 2023, 04:04:42 AMIt seems that as well as various lost works, there are at least a couple of small pieces that are held by private collectors and have never been available to anyone else for publication or recording.

Interesting, but how do we know that? Is there an article or website which deals with the issue in more details?

Quote from: Florestan on March 28, 2023, 05:36:29 AMInteresting, but how do we know that? Is there an article or website which deals with the issue in more details?

There were a couple of different spots where this came up, I might have to squirrel around to find them again. It probably had to do with my looking at the sheet music volumes of the Chopin National Edition.

But it's nearly 3am and I'm annoyingly awake partly due to a leg cramp....

Quote from: Madiel on March 28, 2023, 07:50:32 AMThere were a couple of different spots where this came up, I might have to squirrel around to find them again. It probably had to do with my looking at the sheet music volumes of the Chopin National Edition.

But it's nearly 3am and I'm annoyingly awake partly due to a leg cramp....

Quinine Bisulphate - works for me but will require a script.

Okay, so here are the things that led me to my remark.

The commentary for the Chopin National Edition volume of posthumously published waltzes has a section labelled "Works lost, inaccessible and dubious". This has mentions of a few waltzes known from the catalogue that Chopin's sister created after his debt (writing the first few bars), where a full copy is unknown, but then also says the following:

QuoteThere also possibly exists a Waltz in B, the autograph of which Chopin presented to Madame Erskine on 12 Oct. 1848 (name and date on the title page, written in Chopin's hand). However, the manuscript is held in an inaccessible private collection and at the present time its contents cannot be verified.

There is also a website called "piano library" that I use a bit which refers to a Mazurka, of somewhat doubtful provenance, and says:

QuoteThis incipit is from a piece found in an album by Walerian Stopnicki; no more than the incipit has ever been published. According to the catalogue of Krystyna Kobylańska (Frédéric Chopin: Thematisch-Bibliographisches Werkverzeichnis; Henle, 1979), the album is held in the private collection of Jan Tomasz Stopnicki in Warsaw.

I'm less certain about that one because I haven't found mention of it anywhere else amongst all the obscurities and fragments. But when the Chopin National Edition, which is set up to be as authoritative as possible on Chopin, says that it knows about something but can't see it, that's pretty darn exasperating to me.

Quote from: Madiel on March 28, 2023, 11:55:38 PMOkay, so here are the things that led me to my remark.

The commentary for the Chopin National Edition volume of posthumously published waltzes has a section labelled "Works lost, inaccessible and dubious". This has mentions of a few waltzes known from the catalogue that Chopin's sister created after his debt (writing the first few bars), where a full copy is unknown, but then also says the following:

There is also a website called "piano library" that I use a bit which refers to a Mazurka, of somewhat doubtful provenance, and says:

I'm less certain about that one because I haven't found mention of it anywhere else amongst all the obscurities and fragments. But when the Chopin National Edition, which is set up to be as authoritative as possible on Chopin, says that it knows about something but can't see it, that's pretty darn exasperating to me.

Thanks, very interesting.

Re the Waltz in B: they say "name and date on the title page, written in Chopin's hand", implying that someone must have seen it at some point, otherwise they couldn't have known the details.

I don't think it's such a big deal, though. From the little information that's available, it can be inferred that those works, if they indeed exist at all, were occasional pieces which Chopin himself did not intend for publication.

Another thought: I'm not familiar with copyright laws, if the owner of a manuscript offers it for publication, isn't s/he entitled to some royalties? If yes, then I reckon those manuscripts, if they exist at all, are sketchy and incomplete, otherwise they would have been a source of income for their owners.

Be it as it may, Chopin's status as a genius is firmly secured and the publication of one more Waltz or Mazurka would add or detract nothing from it.

Just my two cents.

Well, except that - and I've only skimmed so forgive me if I'm understanding incorrectly - it would be genuinely late Chopin (very late!) and there's not a lot of that. Every note of it is priceless. Arguably it would also be the only piece he wrote in Scotland, certainly the only substantial one, and it would be of interest from that perspective too

This (quite creepy!) photo is of Calder House, where Chopin was based during his Scottish tour in late 1848. If he wrote anything at all in Scotland is likely he would have done so there. I took the photo last month at the beginning of my own tour north of the border.

Quote from: Luke on March 29, 2023, 02:12:29 AMThis (quite creepy!) photo is of Calder House, where Chopin was based during his Scottish tour in late 1848. If he wrote anything at all in Scotland is likely he would have done so there. I took the photo last month at the beginning of my own tour north of the border.

I imagine he must have felt even worse in Scotland than in Mallorca.  ;D

Quote from: Florestan on March 29, 2023, 01:04:19 AMI don't think it's such a big deal, though. From the little information that's available, it can be inferred that those works, if they indeed exist at all, were occasional pieces which Chopin himself did not intend for publication.

This is true of a lot of pieces you already have recordings of. They appeared in dribs and drabs over the course of about a century. Waltzes, mazurkas and other occasional pieces that he wrote in friends' notebooks.

Quote from: Madiel on March 29, 2023, 02:23:39 AMThis is true of a lot of pieces you already have recordings of. They appeared in dribs and drabs over the course of about a century. Waltzes, mazurkas and other occasional pieces that he wrote in friends' notebooks.

Yes, true, but charming as such occasional pieces are, Chopin's reputation does not rely on them. It's the opus numbered works that really count.

Don't get me wrong, it would be very nice to listen to the only work he might have written in Scotland --- very nice but also inessential.

Quote from: Florestan on March 29, 2023, 02:31:20 AMYes, true, but charming as such occasional pieces are, Chopin's reputation does not rely on them. It's the opus numbered works that really count.

Don't get me wrong, it would be very nice to listen to the only work he might have written in Scotland --- very nice but also inessential.

To be honest my issue is less that I want to hear it, and more that I think it's incredibly selfish to not allow access to the material. Even if this sort of piece is not of great interest to listeners, it would be of great interest to musicologists.

Meanwhile... according to the recent Stephen Hough album of Nocturnes, we actually have recently cut one nocturne and one waltz from the list. Mostly written by one of Chopin's students as composition exercises.

There are already several little things that the Chopin National Edition points out Chopin didn't actually write (eg he did an arrangement of an existing folksong), plus a couple they were prepared to include that have since been proven to be composed by others. The opus numbers are generally secure it seems (even the numbers from 66 onward that were published after Chopin's death).

Quote from: Madiel on March 29, 2023, 02:41:05 AMI think it's incredibly selfish to not allow access to the material. Even if this sort of piece is not of great interest to listeners, it would be of great interest to musicologists.

Agreed on both counts.

Quote from: Florestan on March 29, 2023, 02:31:20 AMDon't get me wrong, it would be very nice to listen to the only work he might have written in Scotland --- very nice but also inessential.

You are probably right, of course, if it exists it's probably inconsequential. But you can't know for sure without hearing it? He was in a lot of pain, existential and otherwise, at the time; he was less than a year from death, after all. He was suffering from composer's block as well, which contributed to his misery. (He actually quite like Calder House, though, which was a lot more comfortable than Valdemossa!) Personally I'd be very interested to hear anything that managed to get through that.

Quote from: Luke on March 29, 2023, 02:51:45 AMYou are probably right, of course, if it exists it's probably inconsequential. But you can't know for sure without hearing it? He was in a lot of pain, existential and otherwise, at the time; he was less than a year from death, after all. He was suffering from composer's block as well, which contributed to his misery. (He actually quite like Calder House, though, which was a lot more comfortable than Valdemossa!) Personally I'd be very interested to hear anything that managed to get through that.

It would be interesting to hear it, for sure.

(It should be noted, though, that at Valdemossa he wrote Op. 28, while in Scotland he wrote only one piece, if he ever wrote it.  :D )

No argument on that. It's just that the end of Chopin's life is a sad mystery. The music seemed to die in him. I'd like to see if there were any embers still burning.

Quote from: Luke on March 29, 2023, 03:11:54 AMNo argument on that. It's just that the end of Chopin's life is a sad mystery. The music seemed to die in him. I'd like to see if there were any embers still burning.

Maybe one day. One can only hope.

Quote from: Florestan on March 29, 2023, 03:03:38 AMIt would be interesting to hear it, for sure.

(It should be noted, though, that at Valdemossa he wrote Op. 28, while in Scotland he wrote only one piece, if he ever wrote it.  :D )

And now of course I need to listen to op.28.

This is the problem with Chopin. There are too many works that I think are total masterpieces and then I want to hop from one to the next.

Quote from: Florestan on March 29, 2023, 02:22:23 AMI imagine he must have felt even worse in Scotland than in Mallorca.  ;D

If it rained in Spain it probably poured down in Scotland. Not the raindrops, the cats and dogs prelude.

He was there for a few months, there was some sunshine amongst the showers!

I feel like there's a popular solo Chopin recital CD with a transcription for solo piano of the Concerto No. 2's "larghetto" movement. But I can't remember which CD it is. Google has become frustratingly hard to use and has only informed me of Earl Wild's arrangement; has anybody else done it? I swear I own a CD somewhere...

Quote from: Brian on August 05, 2023, 11:28:37 AMI feel like there's a popular solo Chopin recital CD with a transcription for solo piano of the Concerto No. 2's "larghetto" movement. But I can't remember which CD it is. Google has become frustratingly hard to use and has only informed me of Earl Wild's arrangement; has anybody else done it? I swear I own a CD somewhere...

What is the Opus number?

Quote from: George on August 05, 2023, 11:34:50 AMWhat is the Opus number?

It would be an arrangement by someone else. Larghetto from Op. 21, but arranged by a later pianist.

Quote from: Brian on August 05, 2023, 11:28:37 AMI feel like there's a popular solo Chopin recital CD with a transcription for solo piano of the Concerto No. 2's "larghetto" movement. But I can't remember which CD it is. Google has become frustratingly hard to use and has only informed me of Earl Wild's arrangement; has anybody else done it? I swear I own a CD somewhere...

I found a few pianists playing it on Youtube, none of them made recordings on CD. The only CD I could find is the Earl Wild transcription played by Giovanni Doria Miglietta.

(https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/41IRCJy75IL.jpg)

ChatGPT also gave me a pretty amusing answer  ;D

I think I was looking for the wrong concerto! There is a Balakirev arrangement of the "Romanza" larghetto from the other Chopin concerto. It's been recorded live by Marc-Andre Hamelin and James Rhodes.

Quote from: Brian on August 05, 2023, 02:58:19 PMI think I was looking for the wrong concerto! There is a Balakirev arrangement of the "Romanza" larghetto from the other Chopin concerto. It's been recorded live by Marc-Andre Hamelin and James Rhodes.

It's also in the Nicholas Walker and Alexander Paley respective sets of Balakirev's complete piano music.

Quote from: Brian on August 05, 2023, 02:58:19 PMI think I was looking for the wrong concerto! There is a Balakirev arrangement of the "Romanza" larghetto from the other Chopin concerto. It's been recorded live by Marc-Andre Hamelin and James Rhodes.

Which CD(s) do you have/were thinking of? I listened to the Hamelin Wigmore Hall recital which I haven't played in ages. It was a very nice selection of music, including the Romanza transcription from Chopin's first piano concerto.

Quote from: Zauberschloss on August 06, 2023, 11:57:00 AMWhich CD(s) do you have/were thinking of? I listened to the Hamelin Wigmore Hall recital which I haven't played in ages. It was a very nice selection of music, including the Romanza transcription from Chopin's first piano concerto.

It must have been the Rhodes, which I own, though I still can't shake the feeling that there may be another arrangement out there on disc somewhere.