Blind Comparison: Ravel's Gaspard de la Nuit

[Madiel]

Doesn't surprise me in the least. That cad Faure.  He and Saint-Saens were friends for decades. There's a book of their correspondence with each other.

As for the Seven Scarbos, that will probably be as far as I can go. I'm unlikely to be in a position to participate in the super-finale round.

[Brian]

RESULTS: "Le gibet"

A word about the scores offered: these are averages on a scale of 1-10 across all voters! Each pianist received between 6 and 8 votes.

Without further ado...

Tenth place: Pianist #2 (5.19)

No pianist in the entire group of 20 generated as much controversy as pianist #2. Here are some scores he received in the two rounds: 1.5, 2.5, 3, 9, 9, 10, 10.

"minimal tension" "too pretty" "monochromatic...doesn't hang together" "generally a solid performance" "too fast and withdrawn" "It's easy to hear why this one can divide opinion strongly." "even snoozier than 1" "atmosphere is good" "Uninspired and unimaginative"

The pianist who set Todd and MC Ukrneal at daggers is...

[asin]B0000C4EXA[/asin]
JEAN-EFFLAM BAVOUZET

DavidRoss, you wrote "Very slow, poorly miked (sound distant and muffled), self-conscious and even snoozier than 1" JUST after buying this recording. I sincerely hope that hearing the CD in context improves your opinion of the performance!

Ninth place: Pianist #7 (5.75)

"the bell seems too soft to me and occasionally seems missed/lost in the texture" "more dramatic...not too excessive in context" "smoother, more beautiful" "joyful...Not stressful enough." "a little too bit colourful for this piece" "the bell gets hidden" "Not a good legato or phrasing"

Pianist #7 is...

[asin]B00006L76R[/asin]

IVO POGORELICH

It doesn't matter if you've made one of the most famous "Scarbo" recordings of all time, if your "Gibet" doesn't measure up to it. Pogorelich's "Ondine" was the second-highest ranked among the entire 20 (average score 8.3), but his "Gibet" cost him the game. Even if you add the scores for the two pieces together in a mega-ranking, Pogo's still not going to the finals.

Eighth place: Pianist #15 (5.92)

"This one lacks a bit of dynamic control." "over-excitability" "too heavy-handed" "Not bad. Just not coherent enough" "Slow, almost hypnotic, with strong chords and lovely melodies." "dynamics are very well handled, although they sound a little too energetic when they rise up in volume"

Pianist #15 is...

[asin]B001U1LA2A[/asin]

HERBERT SCHUCH

Well, phooey. One of my favorite recordings - which I thought for sure would make the top five - bites the dust.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

ON TO SCARBO...
Sound clips coming to an inbox near you within a few days! If you didn't partake in round 1 but want to sample our "Scarbo" recordings, just say so!

OVERALL LEADERBOARD
#....Ondine....Le Gibet....Total....Overall Rank
1....8.20........6.53........14.73...fourth
3....7.25........6.94........14.19...sixth
10..7.50........7.38........14.88...third
13..7.75........6.58........14.33...fifth
14..8.50........7.00........15.50...second
17..8.13........8.75........16.88...FIRST
19..7.38........6.75........14.13...seventh

Sound clips coming to an inbox near you within a few days! If you didn't partake in round 1 but want to sample our "Scarbo" recordings, just say so!

P.S. The eliminated pianists' "Gibet" recordings will be deleted within 24 hours. I don't have much space in my Dropbox folder so I can't afford to keep them there. If you want to rehear a file from one of this round's losers for whatever reason, access it now.

[Brian]

By the way, a special word on pianist #19: hanging around at the back of the crowd being just good enough for two rounds may not impress you, but after quite a lot of research and some fiddling with the performer's discography, based on the evidence available to us through the internet, this is one of just two times the pianist is known to have ever played the complete Gaspard, live or in the studio. (Those occurrences were a year apart, so this person may have performed the work on one tour and then abandoned it.) I included #19 both for the rareness and for a "Le gibet" that simply blew me away. Happy a couple other people liked it, too.

[Madiel]

Ah well, I shall file a mental note for Ivo. Because the Le Gibet wasn't bad to me, the Ondine was wonderful and the Scarbo is famous...

[mc ukrneal]

By the way, a special word on pianist #19: hanging around at the back of the crowd being just good enough for two rounds may not impress you, but after quite a lot of research and some fiddling with the performer's discography, based on the evidence available to us through the internet, this is one of just two times the pianist is known to have ever played the complete Gaspard, live or in the studio. (Those occurrences were a year apart, so this person may have performed the work on one tour and then abandoned it.) I included #19 both for the rareness and for a "Le gibet" that simply blew me away. Happy a couple other people liked it, too.

Don't forget that some listeners have not heard those performances, and there could be a change once they do. Waiting for the next round already!!

[Todd]

HERBERT SCHUCH
Well, phooey. One of my favorite recordings - which I thought for sure would make the top five - bites the dust.

Losing Bavouzet is terrible.  Losing Pogo is terrible.  And losing Schuch means eliminating two of the very best Scarbos - Pogo being the other.  Oh well.

Bavouzet's fate also makes me consider again the impact of sound quality.  His Ravel is recorded on an old piano and relatively distantly miked, which, when compressed sounds less than ideal.  Schuch's recording is also not helped by this process.  Perhaps I'll have to A/B Schuch and the eventual winner, whoever he or she is.

[DavidRoss]

DavidRoss, you wrote "Very slow, poorly miked (sound distant and muffled), self-conscious and even snoozier than 1" JUST after buying this recording. I sincerely hope that hearing the CD in context improves your opinion of the performance!

Ack! I hope so, too! And I also hope I was just impatient and not in the most receptive frame of mind on first hearing.  And ... though it pains me deeply to say this ... I hope Todd proves right about this one.

[Brian]

Losing Pogo is terrible.  And losing Schuch means eliminating two of the very best Scarbos - Pogo being the other.  Oh well.

I('ve) whole-heartedly agree(d):

I also have to mourn something, personally. In this round we have eliminated two exceptional Scarbo performances: probably my personal favorite, and probably the most famous reading ever made.

Although in most cases I'm endeavoring to deliver 320 kbps MP3 files (one of our finalists was ripped off YouTube), even that does represent a compromise from CD-quality sound. There are performances I think do benefit from the outstanding engineering they received, especially recently (Schuch, Sudbin, and #17, who's sailing through the competition), but we unfortunately have to account for (a) those who haven't taken the time to get software for playing lossless audio, (b) those whose internet connections are poor (including me - uploading even these files takes about 4 hours per round), and (c) my Dropbox account size limit.

[mc ukrneal]

I('ve) whole-heartedly agree(d):
Although in most cases I'm endeavoring to deliver 320 kbps MP3 files (one of our finalists was ripped off YouTube), even that does represent a compromise from CD-quality sound. There are performances I think do benefit from the outstanding engineering they received, especially recently (Schuch, Sudbin, and #17, who's sailing through the competition), but we unfortunately have to account for (a) those who haven't taken the time to get software for playing lossless audio, (b) those whose internet connections are poor (including me - uploading even these files takes about 4 hours per round), and (c) my Dropbox account size limit.

If most of what we are listening to is 320, then there is no issue with sound. Maybe it could be better, but 320 is not bad at all. So if Bavouzet was at that level, he was eliminated for his playing decisions (perhaps including the piano he chose to use), and not for any sound issues. I've not heard either Pogo or Bouzavet in their entirety. But if one or both of the first two movements are lousy (as I felt they were) then it just doesn't matter if they are the bees knees in the third.

In all honesty, I don't think it matters who wins or is eliminated. For each of us personally, I think it's more important to be able to explore the different approaches. If we find one we like (win or lose), we can seek it out. That is what I did with Bernstein in La Mer, which didn't make it out of the second round in that exercise. But I enjoyed it much more than 4 out of the 5 finalists. I am also getting a lot out of the comments and discussion, even if you think me a bit stone-headed on a few points. I happily voted out 2 and 7, so perhaps it's me you envision hanging in Le Gibet.

[Todd]

but 320 is not bad at all.

Yes it is.  320 sounds very poor when compared to uncompressed recordings.  Ultimately, great sound can't make a poor performance a great one, and it won't have much of an impact on results, but MP3 is a sub-optimal way to listen to anything.

[MishaK]

Yes it is.  320 sounds very poor when compared to uncompressed recordings.  Ultimately, great sound can't make a poor performance a great one, and it won't have much of an impact on results, but MP3 is a sub-optimal way to listen to anything.

For orchestral music that is true. For piano solo it is not really critical. Your playback equipment may have more impact than the compression.

[Todd]

For piano solo it is not really critical.

Not in my experience.  I performed a basic test once, converting some Ikuyo Nakamichi LvB solo piano recordings, selected specifically for its superior sound, to 320 using EAC, and then compared CD to MP3, and the difference between them was not minor.

[Brian]

It does vary from person to person, how well their ear is trained and what differences they can glean. In college I thought ripping files at 128 kbps was acceptable and now those MP3s make me want to heave.

[MishaK]

It does vary from person to person, how well their ear is trained and what differences they can glean. In college I thought ripping files at 128 kbps was acceptable and now those MP3s make me want to heave.

I'm not saying there are no audible differences, just that they don't bother me in appreciating a performance. Whereas with some older mono bootlegs of live performances the sound quality does inhibit the nuances of the performance coming through. I've noted in my reviews where I thought the sound quality was getting in the way. But I have met many people who seem to listen to the sound quality alone and don't hear the performance. I know one person who won't listen to anything if it isn't on top line speakers. He is basically auditioning the speakers everytime he listens to something. It's a question not simply of hearing ability and training, but also focus and ability to discern what is due to the performer and what is due to the recording. There are differences in the qualities of different pianos as well that may be more or less flattering to a given pianist. These are all things we have to take into account. But you can still hear what the pianist is doing and what he/she isn't doing.

[Dancing Divertimentian]

Not in my experience.  I performed a basic test once, converting some Ikuyo Nakamichi LvB solo piano recordings, selected specifically for its superior sound, to 320 using EAC, and then compared CD to MP3, and the difference between them was not minor.

My experience is the same. It wouldn't surprise me if the problems with the Bavouzet stem from the compression. On my home stereo the sound of Bavouzet's period Steinway is honey-sweet and delectable. And the recorded perspective doesn't bother me in the least. 

[MishaK]

My experience is the same. It wouldn't surprise me if the problems with the Bavouzet stem from the compression. On my home stereo the sound of Bavouzet's period Steinway is honey-sweet and delectable. And the recorded perspective doesn't bother me in the least.

I had no issues with the sound of Bavouzet's recording. I gave him relatively high marks on his Ondine and what issues I had with him were structural in nature. Again, I hear what you guys are saying. There is of course a difference resulting from compression. But unlike in, say, orchestral music where you literally cannot hear certain details properly due to the compression, you can still appreciate the touch, phrasing, dynamics and the interpretation of a solo piano performance under compression. I've actually played Debussy once on a period Steinway. I'm aware of the difference in original sound, unmediated by recording and playback equipment. But having near-perfect sound quality in a recording that transmits that particular coloration a little more accurately isn't going to rescue an otherwise not perfectly cogent and coherent interpretation, especially when compared head-to-head with some truly great performances. (In fact, that raises the question of whether Bavouzet perhaps used a period instrument precisely in a vain attempt to stand out in a crowded field, when his interpretation wasn't all that special).

After all, all the other recordings we are comparing were compressed the same way (apart from the youtube contribution), so it's a relatively even playing field, apart from the handicap caused by the imperfect recording and mastering used for the actual underlying recording. I'd note that there are some recordings with far less than stellar sound quality that have been getting very high marks, such as mystery pianist No.10. Yes, there is some loss from the compression, but just looking at the results here, it's not the fatal issue that is causing some recordings to get booted. We've seen everything from recent state of the art recordings like Sudbin, to classic remasters like Argerich DG, to old mono recordings from radio tapes like Gulda get booted. So there is no consistent data here to suggest that the sound quality is really affecting the vote very much.

The far bigger issue, I would surmise, is one of the big treacheries of blind comparisons: a given new recording might sound totally "fresh" and immensely interesting and "novel" when heard completely on its own, especially if it's a piece you haven't revisited in a while. But when put head-to-head with a field of exemplary and exceptional performances collected across the decades, that "freshness" and "novelty" fades in the direct comparison. Our memories of performances are often very imperfect. More likely than any sound issues, it is simply the recognition, under blind comparison conditions, that someone like Bavouzet really isn't all that interesting as you may have initially thought, when compared to some of the greats who will be revealed at the end of this contest. Direct comparisons have a way of recalibrating your parameters of reference, such that something that may have sounded exceptional ends up being recoginzed as rather bland actually.

[mc ukrneal]

My experience is the same. It wouldn't surprise me if the problems with the Bavouzet stem from the compression. On my home stereo the sound of Bavouzet's period Steinway is honey-sweet and delectable. And the recorded perspective doesn't bother me in the least. 

I've done a lot of these blind listenings at variable qualities. Good recordings and sound can help, but good playing is the more important. Bavouzet's problem (for me anyway) wasn't the sound, but the approach and decisions he made in playing the piece. But if you liked it and it works for you, I say keep listening (not that you need my permission of course ).

[Brian]

More likely than any sound issues, it is simply the recognition, under blind comparison conditions, that someone like Bavouzet really isn't all that interesting as you may have initially thought, when compared to some of the greats who will be revealed at the end of this contest. Direct comparisons have a way of recalibrating your parameters of reference, such that something that may have sounded exceptional ends up being recoginzed as rather bland actually.

Just to comment on this part (the rest of your post, not being an audiophile and not wanting to betray the ages of the surviving recordings lest they be identified, I won't speak to), there are some - particularly Todd - who did indeed love the Bavouzet readings. With the exception of the live Argerich on EMI, at least one person really enjoyed every performance we heard. THAT, I think is another joy of blind listening: like Neal, in previous games of this nature I've discovered new favorite performances among the ranks of the eliminated, and like Neal, I've discovered new favorites in places I'd have never thought to look.

As for "greats to be revealed." The top seven is comprised, more or less equally, of great performers giving celebrated performances and un-fanfared recordings I did not expect to advance this far.

[MishaK]

With the exception of the live Argerich on EMI, at least one person really enjoyed every performance we heard. THAT, I think is another joy of blind listening: like Neal, in previous games of this nature I've discovered new favorite performances among the ranks of the eliminated, and like Neal, I've discovered new favorites in places I'd have never thought to look.

Absolutely! I will, btw, be buying the Gulda, which I absolutely loved and was really disappointed that he didn't advance any further. A massively interesting and inspiring pianist. That recording has been my one big discovery of this comparison so far. Those recent audite releases from RIAS tapes have been pure gold. I have the Furtwängler box, which is simply some of the best material by that conductor to be found anywhere.

As for "greats to be revealed." The top seven is comprised, more or less equally, of great performers giving celebrated performances and un-fanfared recordings I did not expect to advance this far.

As I would expect as well.    But "greats" can include the "unfanfared" as well. I wouldn't be entirely surprised if someone I've never really heard, like Naida Cole, turns out to be one of our finalists.

[Brian]

But "greats" can include the "unfanfared" as well.

Very literally true in one finalist's case. Gulda's Gaspard is on Naxos Music Library - I think I'll listen to the whole thing and report back. 

EDIT: Oh, by the way, I'm off to the movies tonight and tomorrow will gather all the files and wipe identifying info. It'll take another day to upload them, so look for Scarbo links Thursday.