Late Brahms Piano Works -- that's Ops 116 - 119 mainly.

[Mandryka]

Although Yudina offers the most contrast to Lupu, I like Gould most of all, so if you can hear his Brahms, I definitely suggest you do.

Gould's Brahms is the opposite of his Bach. In Bach his method  was  to take  highly contrapuntal music and vulgarise it by highlighting the tunes . In Brahms his method was to take highly lyrical music and un-vulagrise it by highlighting inner voices.

There's a sense in which Gould is the extreme polar opposite of Kempff. Kempff highlights to a fault  the lyricism, often overstating the simplicity by hiding the counterpoint. Gould highlights to a fault  the counterpoint, often overstating the complexity by hiding the lyricism.

Just maybe Gould's deconstruction of late Brahms is really important in the reception history. Could it be that the modern style of playing intermezzos slowly and bringing out counterpoint started with Gould? I'm not sure, but I wouldn't be surprised to learn that Gould was  an influence on Pogorelich, for example.



Horowitz's Op 117/2  isn't so well known. Neither is Fiorentino's which I think is just as interesting


http://www.youtube.com/v/CdeE-1cHhxA

Shorter than Kempff and the pre-Gould pianists, and more analytic too. It wouldn't be surprising if Gould had influenced Fiorentino too.

There's another aspect of late Brahms interpretation which is interesting.  Poetically, emotionally, modern Brahmsians find  vigorous and fiery emotional content. By contrast Edwin Fischer and Schnabel and Kempff and Gieseking and Rubinstein  saw the music as dominated at the emotional level  by autumnal regret.   I wonder if this poetic trend has its origin in Yudina.

Toucan loves Horowitz's late Brahms. For me, the pianist who presses all the right buttons in late Brahms isn't Horowitz, but Schnabel

http://www.youtube.com/v/SzOvuXZc7GE

And Sokolov. Not  the Sokolov of the commercial recording but the Sokolov who has performed some extraordinary Brahms over the past couple of years:

http://www.youtube.com/v/GmiYxpUfH2M

What he is doing with Brahms right now  seems to me to be wholly original and very wonderful.

[George]

Let's not leave Levy out of the discussion:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S1smhEkH5vU&feature=related

[George]

I searched this thread in vain for recommendations of Serkin's Brahms, namely his Op. 119, which is wonderful. No love for Serkin's Brahms?

[George]

By which I suppose you mean the following CD - let me order it then I'll tell you if there is still love for Serkin, in this aging heart.

Actually, I meant his studio recording. Haven't heard the BBC one.

http://www.amazon.com/Brahms-Concerto-Intermezzi-Rhapsody-Interpretation/dp/B0026D0ARM

[Mandryka]

Do you think Serkin makes the right tone for solo Brahms? I have the same sort of doubts about his Schubert. Texture matters.

[George]

Do you think Serkin makes the right tone for solo Brahms? I have the same sort of doubts about his Schubert. Texture matters.

I love his touch with the quieter movements in Op. 119.

It's remarkable how many different interpretations of Brahms's late music there are, and  a joy to have them all.

[George]

What about Van Cliburn?

I am listening to his late Brahms now on Spotify. Though I know Lupu came after him, his playing reminds me of Lupu's Brahms. I'm wondering if I need both.

[Mandryka]

You don't need both. Get rid of the Lupu.


From memory he's less self conscious than Lupu and the tone is more burnished.

[George]

You don't need both. Get rid of the Lupu.


From memory he's less self conscious than Lupu and the tone is more burnished.

Thanks! I don't have the Cliburn - yet.

[jwinter]

I've been listening to these works quite a bit over the past few days.  I think my particular favorite is Op 117 #1.  Through the happy magic of iTunes, last night I pulled together a playlist of the six versions I have on CD (Kuerti, Ax, Grimaud, Katchen, Lupu, and Nat), and downloaded sample tracks of Kempff and Gould to make eight. 

To my surprise, I found Emanuel Ax to be the most enjoyable, followed by Lupu and Gould.  Ax never seems to get much attention, either in these parts or from critics, but I thought his performance here brought just the right emotional touch to the piece, understated without being flat, nostalgic without becoming sentimental.  Very enjoyable.


Radu Lupu is still my favorite set of Op 117-119 as a whole, and his Op 117 #1 is excellent as well -- it's the version by which I came to know the work.  Glenn Gould was very nice as well, not at all what I would have expected based on the Bach and a few other things I've heard.  I may have to invest in his Brahms disc.  The only one of the 8 pianists that truly disappointed me was Yves Nat -- clocking in at just under 4 minutes, it seemed a bit rushed, as if it needed a bit more room to breathe, so to speak.  But I love Nat's Beethoven, so I'll give it a few more tries down the road.

Any favorites for Op 117 #1 that I've missed?

[Mandryka]

Well I prefer Ax to Lupu too in 117/1 just because he doesn't make me think of the Edwardian gentleman wiping away a tear of nostalgia with his cologne scented pocket handkerchief.

But the real thing I have to thank you for is this: while hunting around for Ax's Brahms on spotify I came across Shliessmann's recording of Op 117 -- I've been dipping into his other record. with Ops 118 and 119 from time to time over the past month or so, but I'd somehow missed the one with Op 117 -- maybe because I don't like the early Brahms which is on the same CD. Anyway, this is seriously good -- burnished tone, no Edwardian gentleman's tear, some nostalgia but tremendous strength and passion too.


Oh and by the way, someone on another  forum put me on to Michaela Ursuleasa's op 117 recently  -- certainly it's worth trying if you've got spotify. It's nostalgia ridden, golden autumnal glow sort of thing. She's recently died and was clearly a very promising musician.

And  if you like  Op 117/1 be sure to check Schnabel, who's  top dog for me in the world of Brahms. 

[jwinter]

Thanks Mandryka!  I'll have to check those out...

[liuzerus87]

And  if you like  Op 117/1 be sure to check Schnabel, whose top dog for me in the world of Brahms.

Agreed that Schnabel is very very good in Op 117/1. What other Brahms solo pieces are on record by him? The only Brahms I see by him are the two piano concerti and then 79/2, 116/2 and 117/1. If that's it, that'd be quite a pity...

[jwinter]

Excellent, it turns out I already have the Schnabel, coupled w/ the 1st piano concerto on Naxos!  Very fine indeed, thanks for pointing it out...

[Brahmsian]

*Bump*

Bumping this mainly for 'Sock Monkey Greg's' benefit. 

[Dancing Divertimentian]

Getting to know some late Brahms from Paik. Definitely enjoyable.

[Mandryka]

I've been listening to Backhaus's first record of op 118, from 1932. There's an outstanding transfer of it by Mark Obert-Thorn for  Naxos on spotify. Let me say at the outset that I find the interpretation totally convincing. We know that Backhaus was a great a brahmsian from his recording of the second concerto with Schuricht. This op 118 certainly confirms that.

But what's interesting me most is how dynamic it is. There is not one iota of the golden glow of lingering nostalgia that you hear from Lupu, for example. I couldn't help but think of Eteleka Freund's record of the Handel Variations - she knew Brahms and presumably her style was influenced by what he wanted. I just wonder if Lupu- esque late Brahms style is a relatively modern construction.

[George]

I've been listening to Backhaus's first record of op 118, from 1932. There's an outstanding transfer of it by Mark Obert-Thorn for  Naxos on spotify. Let me say at the outset that I find the interpretation totally convincing. We know that Backhaus was a great a brahmsian from his recording of the second concerto with Schuricht. This op 118 certainly confirms that.

I've listened to Backhaus's solo Brahms on Naxos a few times, but I have yet to connect with it. It's very different than modern day pianists Brahms. So different that the first time I heard it, I hated it. I think Rubinstein is more successful at the non-nostalgic Brahms approach.

I listened to Richter's op. 119 from the late 50s Moscow (from a recent Olympia CD) last night and really loved it. There was a wonderful air of mystery in the air.   

But what's interesting me most is how dynamic it is. There is not one iota of the golden glow of lingering nostalgia that you hear from Lupu, for example. I couldn't help but think of Eteleka Freund's record of the Handel Variations - she knew Brahms and presumably her style was influenced by what he wanted. I just wonder if Lupu- esque late Brahms style is a relatively modern construction.

It seems to be. I find the difference between Backhaus and Lupu to be vast. The latter I found instantly likeable, while the former almost seems to go out of it's way to not attract admirers.   

[Sammy]

Gould's Brahms is the opposite of his Bach. In Bach his method  was  to take  highly contrapuntal music and vulgarise it by highlighting the tunes .

That's pretty much the opposite of how I hear Gould's Bach.  To me, he gives equal weight to each voice, so highlighting the tunes is not his thing.  It might apply to pianists such as Hewitt or Perahia.

[mjwal]

Mandryka: "I just wonder if Lupu-esque late Brahms style is a relatively modern construction."
I know no descriptions of how Brahms played his own works - but Florence May, for instance, who studied with him (after Clara Schumann) in the  early 70s,gave us her description of his playing of Bach: "It was my happiness to hear, amongst other things, his readings of many of the forty-eight preludes and fugues, and his playing of them, and especially of the preludes, impressed me with such force and vividness that I can hear it in memory still. His interpretation of Bach was always unconventional and quite unfettered by traditional theory, and he certainly did not share the opinion, which has had many distinguished adherents, that Bach's music should be performed in a simply flowing style. In the movements of the suites he liked variety of tone and touch, as well asa certain elasticity of tempo. His playing of many of the preludes and some of the fugues was a revelation of exquisite poems, and he performed them, not only with graduated shading, but with marked contrasts of tone effect. Each note of Bach's passages and figures contributed, in the hands of Brahms, to form melody which was instinct with feeling
of some kind or other. It might be deep pathos, or lighthearted playfulness and jollity ; impulsive energy, or soft and tender grace; but sentiment (as distinct from sentimentality) was always there; monotony never. 'Quite tender and quite soft,' was his frequent admonition to me, whilst in another place he would require the utmost impetuosity. He loved Bach's suspensions. ' It is here that it must sound,' he would say, pointing to the tied note, and insisting, whilst not allowing me to force the preparation, that the latter should be so struck as to give the fullest possible effect to the dissonance." Life of Johannes Brahms pp.16-17. This splendid book can be found on the Internet Archive.
While this gives us no direct clues to how he played his own later pieces, reading this one can imagine the combination of qualities he may have brought to them. Lupu is too studied and jewelled in his pathos, perhaps, to find approval in Brahms's ears. For me, Richter is the ideal in those later pieces he recorded, but he is, perhaps, a touch too marmoreal to correspond to the Brahmsian ideal, which sounds to me as if it was Schumannesque. Somehow I think of Egorov, but he recorded no Brahms that I know of. Perhaps Etelka Freund is the best model pianists should take cognizance of.