The Most Important LvB Piano Sonata Cycle Comparison in the History of the World

[Brian]

Speaking of predictability, the winners of this bizarre contest were obvious from the start.

Do you mean obvious after the first few rankings, or obvious before the results even started coming in?

I have wondered whether the relative dominance of newer artists marks a natural progression in skill or interpretation, or whether it shows a matching evolution in Todd's taste objective ranking criteria.

[Todd]

Speaking of predictability, the winners of this bizarre contest were obvious from the start.

It's not a contest.  I will put your misuse of English down to the fact that English is not your native language.

I have wondered whether the relative dominance of newer artists marks a natural progression in skill or interpretation, or whether it shows a matching evolution in Todd's taste objective ranking criteria.

As science progresses, with enhanced understanding and improved observations, it is only natural that outcomes differ.

[Todd]

.

[(poco) Sforzando]

Do you mean obvious after the first few rankings, or obvious before the results even started coming in?

I have wondered whether the relative dominance of newer artists marks a natural progression in skill or interpretation, or whether it shows a matching evolution in Todd's taste objective ranking criteria.

There's a goodly mix here of classic and new artists. I'd like to hear the Irina Mejoueva, but the ordering information on Bijin is all in Japanese.

There are a few copies on eBay, but they're kind of expensive. Oh what the hell . . . .

[Mandryka]

I'll put this here because I can

I'll flesh mine out a bit, listing my "top" five for each sonata.  (This list is of course subject to change.)

Gulda = Amadeo cycle unless noted
Fischer = Annie Fischer, Hungaroton cycle unless noted
Backhaus = Mono cycle unless noted
Kempff  = Mono cycle unless noted


2/1 – Fischer, Gulda, Pollini, Perahia, Schnabel

2/2 – Schnabel, Fischer, Gulda, Gulda (Orfeo), Hungerford

2/3 – Perahia, Fischer, Gulda, Backhaus, Brautigam

7 – Michelangeli (BBC Legends), Kempff, Hungerford, O'Conor, Backhaus

10/1 – Frank, Gulda, Fischer, O'Conor, Pollini

10/2 – Frank, Gulda, Fischer, Kovacevich, Pollini

10/3 – Kovacevich, Fischer, Frank, Gulda, Zacharias

13 – Serkin (1945), Serkin (1960s), Nat, Moravec, Schnabel

14/1 – Backhaus, Silverman, Gieseking (Tahra), Richter (BBC Legends), Nat

14/2 – Backhaus, Richter (BBC Legends), Willems, Pludermacher, Foldes

22 – Pommier, Michelangeli (Lugano, 1981), Heidsieck, Gulda, Brendel II

26 – Willems, Frank, Michelangeli (BBC Legends), Gulda, Silverman

27/1 – Lucchesini, Kempff, Gulda, Nakamichi, Levinas

27/2 – Backhaus, Arrau, Fischer (EMI, stereo), Gieseking (EMI), Firkusny

28 – Kempff (stereo), Kempff, Silverman, Levinas, Nakamichi

31/1 – Gulda, Frank, Kuerti, Sherman, Silverman

31/2 – Gulda, Backhaus (stereo), Backhaus, Nat, Fischer

31/3 – Gulda, Gieseking (Tahra), Fischer, Nat, Lucchesini

49/1,2 – Heidsieck, Kovacevich, O'Conor, Kempff, Lewis

53 – Gulda, Silverman, Gilels, Pollini (1997), Serkin

54 – Richter (RCA), Fischer, Kempff, Heidsieck, Ciani

57 – Fischer, Richter (RCA), Serkin (1947), Lipkin, Casadesus

78 – Backhaus (stereo), Silverman, O'Conor, Kempff, Lucchesini

79 – Backhaus (stereo), Lucchesini, Silverman, O'Conor, Kempff

81a – Serkin, Backhaus (stereo), Kempff, Lucchesini, Badura-Skoda (Gramola)

90 – Fischer, Kovacevich, Moravec, Lucchesini, Brendel II

101 – Schnabel, Kovacevich, Kempff, Barenboim III, Lipkin

106 – Pollini, Serkin, Fischer, Gulda, Frank
 
109 - Serkin, Gieseking (EMI), Brendel II, Kempff, Horszowski

110 - Gieseking (EMI), Fischer, Kempff, Silverman (Orpheum), Levinas

111 – Pollini, Serkin, Fischer, Sheppard, Silverman (Orpheum)

[Todd]

I'll put this here because I can

That's from 2009.  That's about eighty cycles ago.

[(poco) Sforzando]

That's from 2009.  That's about eighty cycles ago.

Science evolves.

[Todd]

Science evolves.

Indeed it does.

One phenomenon I have witnessed on this forum and on other fora is that it is quite common for many listeners, particularly those who are middle aged, to believe that performers from around mid-century possessed all the secrets, knew the proper style, played the correct way, etc.  The recordings tend to come from the magnetic tape mono period to roughly the onset of the digital era a generation later.  A few interpreters from the 78s era (Schnabel, say) and a few interpreters from the digital era (Brendel, say) may be considered top notch Beethoven interpreters, to stick with the topic of this thread.  Generally, interpreters from the 50s through the mid-80s are held up as the standard-bearers.  People who have passed from the scene may have had other ideas, and people in their teens, twenties, and thirties may hear things differently, as well.  Performance styles evolve, along with science. 

[Spotted Horses]

Poked my head in here and was reminded of the existence of the Annie Fischer cycle, which I am accustomed to seeing praised to the high heavens, but which I have never heard because it has been (to me) cost prohibitive. But now I am a streamer, so I listened to Sonata No 1. It is nice!

[(poco) Sforzando]

Indeed it does.

One phenomenon I have witnessed on this forum and on other fora is that it is quite common for many listeners, particularly those who are middle aged, to believe that performers from around mid-century possessed all the secrets, knew the proper style, played the correct way, etc.  The recordings tend to come from the magnetic tape mono period to roughly the onset of the digital era a generation later.  A few interpreters from the 78s era (Schnabel, say) and a few interpreters from the digital era (Brendel, say) may be considered top notch Beethoven interpreters, to stick with the topic of this thread.  Generally, interpreters from the 50s through the mid-80s are held up as the standard-bearers.  People who have passed from the scene may have had other ideas, and people in their teens, twenties, and thirties may hear things differently, as well.  Performance styles evolve, along with science. 

I have a friend who refuses to hear any recordings of Mozart, Beethoven, or above all Bach issued after 1975. You might as well think all living performers might as well give up, and we should all just listen to Schnabel, Moravec, Serkin, Horowitz, Richter, Cortot, etc. (to keep this with pianists) because no one these days knows how to "phrase," as if is even possible not to phrase. And if these older recordings are issued in dismal sound, all the better. I haven't cared for all the artists in the list above (Heidsieck seems to me eccentric, Gulda stiff and mechanical, though I recently heard a great Hammerklavier), but I definitely want to hear some of these new voices to challenge my embedded ideas of what can be done with these thrice-familiar works.

[Hobby]

On the basis of the written texts for op 22 I'd have expected Kosuge and Sherman to come 5th and 6th but that's not scientific!

[(poco) Sforzando]

Poked my head in here and was reminded of the existence of the Annie Fischer cycle, which I am accustomed to seeing praised to the high heavens, but which I have never heard because it has been (to me) cost prohibitive. But now I am a streamer, so I listened to Sonata No 1. It is nice!

The complete Fischer cycle comes up from time to time on eBay, where you can now get a copy for about $225. Expensive? well maybe, but the individual CDs are pricey too, and if it matters to you the sonatas are not issued in chronological order. If I'm willing to pay $100 or more for a live concert, paying $225 for 9 CDs does not seem that unreasonable. What I especially like about Fischer, particularly in slow movements, is the almost operatic freedom she brings to her phrasing, almost opposite to the stiffness I hear in Gulda.

[Spotted Horses]

The complete Fischer cycle comes up from time to time on eBay, where you can now get a copy for about $225. Expensive? well maybe, but the individual CDs are pricey too, and if it matters to you the sonatas are not issued in chronological order. If I'm willing to pay $100 or more for a live concert, paying $225 for 9 CDs does not seem that unreasonable. What I especially like about Fischer, particularly in slow movements, is the almost operatic freedom she brings to her phrasing, almost opposite to the stiffness I hear in Gulda.

$225 sound unreasonable to me, since now I can stream it at no marginal cost. At a lower cost (what is typical these days for a back catalog Beethoven cycle) I would be willing to get it just to have it in a tidy package.

[Todd]

I have a friend who refuses to hear any recordings of Mozart, Beethoven, or above all Bach issued after 1975.

We live in the golden age of keyboardists, with the average level of technical accomplishment beyond what came before, and with interpretive insights to at least match what came before.  Not listening to artists in the here and now relegates classical music to the dustbin of history. 

The complete Fischer cycle comes up from time to time on eBay, where you can now get a copy for about $225. Expensive?

Nowadays, I consider over $100 for a domestic market cycle to be expensive - but I will buy.  For foreign market cycles, that's the lowest price, basically.  I've happily spent >~$300/cycle on several Japanese market cycles and will likely do so in the future.  Not everything can be streamed in all markets.  Plus, I want to own LvB sonata cycles.

[(poco) Sforzando]

$225 sound unreasonable to me, since now I can stream it at no marginal cost. At a lower cost (what is typical these days for a back catalog Beethoven cycle) I would be willing to get it just to have it in a tidy package.

I still prefer physical product when I can. I previously streamed/downloaded the Fischers but now have a physical copy. I like the packaging, also the notes, and I can take a CD with me for the car, where I do a good deal of listening.

[Mandryka]

The disadvantage of the physical Annie Fischer set for me is that the sonatas aren't in the right order. Listening now to op 110, on Disc 1, sandwiched between op 10/2 and op 27/1 (waiting for some of that operatic phrasing in this most cantabile music)

It is clearly a magnificent performance of a magnificent piece of music, and it probably deserves all the praise it receives.

[(poco) Sforzando]

The disadvantage of the physical Annie Fischer set for me is that the sonatas aren't in the right order. Listening now to op 110, on Disc 1, sandwiched between op 10/2 and op 27/1 (waiting for some of that operatic phrasing in this most cantabile music)

It is clearly a magnificent performance of a magnificent piece of music, and it probably deserves all the praise it receives.

You might think of it as constructing a set of recital programs of a complete cycle, in which the pianist usually selects sonatas from each of the periods without concern for chronology. I don't know if Fischer herself chose which sonatas to appear on which CD, or whether they are the most successful pairings. But if the apparent randomness of the discs is unsatisfactory to you, there's always the option to extract the WAV files from the CD and burn a chronological set of your own. That is, if you want to put in the time and work.

[AnotherSpin]

It's not a contest.  I will put your misuse of English down to the fact that English is not your native language.

Name it whatever you want.

[(poco) Sforzando]

Op. 22 was a sonata of which Beethoven was particularly proud. Compositionally, his technique is as advanced and mature as anything written to this point, while perhaps not being a work of great individuality or expressiveness. Op. 13 and the largo of 10/3 surpass it in that respect. That's the paradox for me; 22 is flawlessly written, but in my opinion a bit dull. Technically for the pianist it is certainly more demanding than op. 14, without being extreme. The hardest passages are probably the trio of the minuet and certain parts of the rondo. But from here on the sonatas start acquiring more personality, as in the familiar but still astonishing Moonlight, and the three from op. 31 in which the musical language becomes far more original and surprising.

[Todd]

Name it whatever you want.

Only you feel some strange impulsion to give it a name you like.