Best Brahms Piano Concerto No. 2?
L Scanlon
(Abbado/Berlin PO) and Ashkenazy (Haitink/Vienna PO) and I'm not
very enthusiastic about either one of them. Penguin, Good CD
Guide, and Ted Libbey's NPR Guide are unanimous in recommending
Emil Gilel's performance with Jochum/Berlin PO on DG. Do
R.M.C.R.ers agree?
Leo Scanlon
Mario Taboada
>Leo Scanlon
My favorites are Richter/Leinsdorf (RCA), Rubinstein/Krips (RCA),
and Serkin/Szell (CBS). If I had to pick just one, I think the Richter
is of desert-island quality. But all three are superb. By the way, I
am not sure that Gilels/Jochum is in print right now.
regards,
--
Mario Taboada
* Department of Mathematics * University of Southern California * Los Angeles
e-mail: tab...@mtha.usc.edu
Anson Wun
the set of 2 CDs coupled with the #1 in minor and the Op.116 pieces. If
you really like Brahms PC#2, then I think you should go for Gilel's :)
Well, that played of Richter was really another dimension with lots of
fire and electricity.
Anson
--
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Anson Wun. Dept. of Atmospheric Science.
University of British Columbia, Canada.
email: aw...@unixg.ubc.ca; anso...@deepcove.com
Kevin Hamner
I have Gilel's with Reiner/CSO, circa 1958. Very good recording. I imagine
that Gilels's/Jochum would match that high standard.
I don't like the Brahm's Second Concerto very much, but this recording along
with Mr. Rubinstein's makes the piece about as palatable as it's gonna get....
--Kevin
Thierry van Bastelaer
>From: lsca...@aol.com (L Scanlon)
>Subject: Best Brahms Piano Concerto No. 2?
>Date: 23 Jan 1995 09:24:14 -0500
Well, I do... It's available on a double CD, with the concerto #1 and
solo piano pieces (op. 118?)
Thierry van Bastelaer
Institutional Reform and the Informal Sector
Department of Economics
University of Maryland
College Park, MD 20742
(301) 405-3344
Clifford Ando
another, W. Backhaus with K. Boehm and Vienna.
All four recordings are notable for the quality of their
conductor: from an age when conductors learned their craft more slowly,
and which generated far greater accompanists for concerti.
Eugene Ormandy doesn't get mentioned on this list (or it
companion r.m.c.) very often, but he was a superb trainer of orchestras,
and perhaps the finest accompanist-conductor I ever heard.
Andrea TRAVE
: I have recordings of the Brahms Piano Concerto No. 2 by Brendel
I have Zimerman/Bernstein/WP and Richter/Leinsdorf/Chicago (?) and I am
very satisfied with them. You could give them a chance.
Andrea Trave tr...@cibs.sns.it
Jim Clow
In the new Stereophile magazine, one of the reviewers lists a Naxos
recording of this work as one of his two allotted Records To Die For. I
haven't heard it but will buy it just to find out since it's so cheap.
I've only heard a couple of Naxos CDs so far and have liked neither.
But many here and on r.m.c have praise for specific Naxos recordings.
I have the Gilels/Reiner mentioned above among others, and like it above
all I have heard.
Jim Clow
San Diego
Bruce Rodean
> In article <3g0e6e$2...@newsbf02.news.aol.com> lsca...@aol.com (L Scanlon) writes:
> >From: lsca...@aol.com (L Scanlon)
> >Subject: Best Brahms Piano Concerto No. 2?
> >Date: 23 Jan 1995 09:24:14 -0500
> >I have recordings of the Brahms Piano Concerto No. 2 by Brendel
> >(Abbado/Berlin PO) and Ashkenazy (Haitink/Vienna PO) and I'm not
> >very enthusiastic about either one of them. Penguin, Good CD
> >Guide, and Ted Libbey's NPR Guide are unanimous in recommending
> >Emil Gilel's performance with Jochum/Berlin PO on DG. Do
> >R.M.C.R.ers agree?
> Well, I do... It's available on a double CD, with the concerto #1 and
> solo piano pieces (op. 118?)
However that set is full priced. It was reissued individually as two
separate CDs, each at a budget price if you want to save some money.
But fundamentally I agree, these are very good indeed.
--
Bruce Rodean Hewlett-Packard Company
rod...@fc.hp.com Fort Collins, Colorado
Byoung Park
writes:
>
I've listened to (own, actually) Gilel/Jochum/BPO and
Serkin/Szell/Cleveland Orchestra among many other inferior recordings.
I prefer Serkin for this piece and it is a bargain to boot on Sony
Essential Classics.
Byoung Park
writes:
The Gilels/Jochum can still be found. I don't know if it is out of
print, but I found it singly and also coupled with Brahm's Piano
Concerto No. 1 on DG at Tower Records.
Dan Koren
Gilels/Jochum is certainly one of the top performances, however I
would not consider it "the best". Gilels/Reiner on RCA is better,
though the recording is not as good. In my opinion, if one only
wants to own one performance of the Brahms 2nd, Rubinstein/Krips
is the one.
The other must hear/have performances of it are, in my opinion:
(in alphabetical order)
Cliburn/Reiner
Fischer/Furtwaengler
Gilels/Jochum
Gilels/Reiner
Horowitz/Toscanini (perhaps the most important "how not to" performance)
Richter/Kondrashin
Richter/Leinsdorf
Richter/Mravinsky
Schnabel/Boult
Watts/Bernstein
If allowed three choices, I'd go for Rubinstein/Krips, Gilels/Reiner,
and Richter/Mravinsky.
BTW, I heard most of the other performances, so please no reminders
about Arrau, Ashkenazy, Barenboim, Bishopcevich, Brendull, Fleisher,
Moravec, or the Serkiners.
;-)
dk
Daniel Barolsky
wrote:
>
> My favorites are Richter/Leinsdorf (RCA), Rubinstein/Krips (RCA),
> and Serkin/Szell (CBS). If I had to pick just one, I think the Richter
> is of desert-island quality. But all three are superb. By the way, I
> am not sure that Gilels/Jochum is in print right now.
>
> regards,
> --
> Mario Taboada
Very interesting preferences. The Serkin recordings I haven't ever heard
so I won't comment on it. I am puzzled however, by the presence of Richter
among Rubinstein and gilels (which is available on Deutsch Grammophone).
The Rubinstein recordings is a gorgious cd with beautiful, warm, and
powerful emotion on the part of both Rubinstein and Krips. i will still
claim that no one has been able to emulate the singing quality o
Rubinstein. The gilels recordings is also quite wonderful. His power and
energy are like nothing I've heard since or before. The Richter recording,
however, doesn't please me. actually, i admit that i've never heard the
Richter/Leinsdorf but the recording i have of Richter playing live with
Kondrashin (sp?) leaves me feeling very incomplete. his phrasing and
flexible tempi take away from the grandness of the entire piece. perhaps i
was too used to gilels and rubistein who play the concerto with roundness
and timely phrasing, meaning that in certain lyrical passages, the pianist
allows the listener to really soak up the beauty before attacking the next
section. I admit i'm talking about a different recording of the Brahms but
I have trouble believing that it would be that significantly different in
interpretation.
dgb
Daniel G Barolsky
Swarthmore College
dbar...@cc.swarthmore.edu
Allan Burns
>
>
> Well, I do... It's available on a double CD, with the concerto #1 and
> solo piano pieces (op. 118?)
Make that op. 116. The Gilels/Jochum recordings are also
available individually at mid-price (& #1 is now coupled w.
the op. 10 Ballades). My favorite recording of the 2nd
concerto, however, is Gilels/Reiner, RCA (budget).
Allan Burns
J Mohundro
to find the recording at Tower. It will probably show up in the next few
weeks. In the meantime, I've got to get around to calling KING-FM
(Seattle's classical musical station) to request the Gilels if they've got
it.
My personal favorite to date is the Serkin/Szell, which I have on LP. I'm
now actively looking for a CD Brahms 2nd (and willing to experiment with
an alternate prformance) so I can play it on the PC's CD player while
grinding away at large office spreadsheets in the comfort of my own home.
The Brahms 1st piano concerto is good working music and I listen often to
a remastered Kapell/Mitropoulos CD as I work.
Dan Koren
>In article <3g0n2h$r...@mtha.usc.edu>, tab...@mtha.usc.edu (Mario Taboada)
>wrote:
>>
>> My favorites are Richter/Leinsdorf (RCA), Rubinstein/Krips (RCA),
>> and Serkin/Szell (CBS). If I had to pick just one, I think the Richter
>> is of desert-island quality. But all three are superb. By the way, I
>> am not sure that Gilels/Jochum is in print right now.
>>
>> regards,
>> --
>> Mario Taboada
>
>Very interesting preferences. The Serkin recordings I haven't ever heard
>so I won't comment on it. I am puzzled however, by the presence of Richter
Why? You do not think Richter is/was in the same league?
>The Rubinstein recordings is a gorgeous cd with beautiful, warm, and
>powerful emotion on the part of both Rubinstein and Krips. I will still
>claim that no one has been able to emulate the singing quality of
>Rubinstein.
Why would they have to "emulate" it? While Rubinstein's singing
quality was certainly unusual, there were/are other pianists who
could/can make the piano sing, and Richter is definitely one of
them. Have you heard his Rachmaninov 2nd? Or his Schubert Moments
Musicaux or Impromptus? Or his Brahms, Schumann and Chopin?
Also, try to hear Berman, Lhevinne, Michelangeli and Sofronitzky.
They too knew a thing or two about making the piano sing.
>Rubinstein. The Gilels recordings is also quite wonderful. His
>power and energy are like nothing I've heard since or before.
Perhaps, but Richter's power and energy are even greater. Try,
for instance, the Brahms 2nd with Ancerl on MultiSonic. BTW, I
heard both of them live quite a few times. I would definitely
agree, on the other hand, with the notion that Gilels was the
more polished of the two of them.
>The Richter recording, however, doesn't please me. Actually, I
>admit that I've never heard the Richter/Leinsdorf, but the recording
Then you should perhaps reserve your judgment until you do. There are
at least five different Brahms 2nd performances by Richter floating
around (with Ancerl, Kondrashin, Leinsdorf, Maazel, Mravinsky), of
which the one with Kondrashin is arguably the least successful. I
have also heard rumors that Richter was not entirely happy with
the Leinsdorf recording, but could not prevent RCA from releasing
it. Originally, the plan had been to record the piece with Reiner,
who was taken ill and replaced at the last moment by Leinsdorf. I
wish he had recorded it with Reiner or Szell!
In addition, there probably are quite a few tapes of other Richter
Brahms 2nd performances than the 5 listed above, which may not be
quite as easy to come by. I'm thinking in particular of one taped
at the 1969 or 1970 Baalbek festival, which I recall as the best
of his performances - he played the *entire* concerto again as an
encore!
>I have of Richter playing live with Kondrashin (sp?) leaves me
>feeling very incomplete. His phrasing and flexible tempi take
>away from the grandness of the entire piece.
Or maybe they give it a different greatness.
>Perhaps I was too used to Gilels and Rubistein who play the
That seems rather obvious.
>concerto with roundness and timely phrasing, meaning that in
>certain lyrical passages, the pianist allows the listener to
>really soak up the beauty before attacking the next section.
On the other hand, this could also detract from the tension
built into this piece. Richter's intensity and urgency are
quite unmatched, and I think they suit the piece very well.
In my opinion, all three do the first movement very well,
perhaps with a slight edge to Richter. Richter is best in
the 2nd movement, Gilels in the 3rd, and Rubinstein in the
last one. Overall, I'd take Rubinstein if I had to choose
one only. But I don't think I could be without all three.
>I admit i'm talking about a different recording of the Brahms
>but I have trouble believing that it would be that significantly
>different in interpretation.
Richter's overall conception of the piece has not changed
much over the years, but the details have changed quite a
bit from the 1950 recording with Ancerl to the 1970 one
with Maazel. His tempi got slower, the phrasing more
refined, the tone mellower, etc.. On the other hand,
the energy and intensity have slackened a bit. In my
opinion, of the currently available Richter performances,
the best is the one with Mravinsky recorded around 1960
(Russian Disc). I also have recollections of broadcast
concerts with Gauk and/or Sanderling, but I don't know
if tapes of these are available. Farhan, can you shed
some light on this matter?
dk
Carl Tait
d...@netcom.com (Dan Koren) writes:
>
>The other must hear/have performances of it are, in my opinion:
>(in alphabetical order)
>
>Horowitz/Toscanini (perhaps the most important "how not to" performance)
One of the wackiest performances around. How could these two guys
trash the piece so thoroughly?
BTW, there is another Brahms B-flat on Arkadia by this same duo.
It is a live performance from October 1948, and it's surprisingly
good. The CD includes an orchestra-only rehearsal from 1940, in
which Toscanini instructs the oboe player on the proper way to
ruin his solo in the Andante.
>BTW, I heard most of the other performances, so please no reminders
>about Arrau, Ashkenazy, Barenboim, Bishopcevich, Brendull, Fleisher,
>Moravec, or the Serkiners.
Okay, I won't remind you about FLEISHER. Since I would also place
Rubinstein/Krips first among currently available recordings, we'll
have to postpone this debate until the FLEISHER is reissued.
Carl Fleisher Tait
P.S. -- Has anyone mentioned the Fleisher recording?
Daniel Barolsky
> >Very interesting preferences. The Serkin recordings I haven't ever heard
> >so I won't comment on it. I am puzzled however, by the presence of Richter
> >among Rubinstein and Gilels (which is available on Deutsch Grammophone).
>
> Why? You do not think Richter is/was in the same league?
From what i've heard so far, no. i do admit that i've heard relatively few
recordings but i've recently ordered Richter's recording of Schubert Sonata
D.664 in A so we'll see. The recordings that i've heard that really stand
out are his performances of the Franck and Shostakovich violin sonatas with
Oistrakh. Please don't give you regular list of Richter favorites and
suggestions. i've seen it before and I get the idea that you think he's
close to if not G-d.
> >The Rubinstein recordings is a gorgeous cd with beautiful, warm, and
> >powerful emotion on the part of both Rubinstein and Krips. I will still
> >claim that no one has been able to emulate the singing quality of
> >Rubinstein.
>
> Why would they have to "emulate" it? While Rubinstein's singing
> quality was certainly unusual, there were/are other pianists who
> could/can make the piano sing, and Richter is definitely one of
> them. Have you heard his Rachmaninov 2nd? Or his Schubert Moments
> Musicaux or Impromptus? Or his Brahms, Schumann and Chopin?
Rachmaninov-no, Schubert Impromptus have been orderd, Brahms- nothing
besides the concerto, Chopin and Beethoven- he does much of it
beautifully but i'm bothered by his extreme tempi and dissecting phrasing
which takes away from the unity of the piece. schumann- no.
> Also, try to hear Berman, Lhevinne, Michelangeli and Sofronitzky.
> They too knew a thing or two about making the piano sing.
I've heard all of them but Berman. Beautiful sounds they do bring from the
piano, especially Lhevinne. Michelangeli i've always found a little cold,
even his earlier 1940s recordings. however this is another discussion
altogether. Nevertheless, I've never found they sing as warmly and softly
(i'm not talking dynamics hear) as Rubinstein. I noticed you comment in
regards to Brendel and your preference for people who can play the really
big romantic pieces. I'm sure Richter can play these pieces beautifully
but Rubinstein's singing ability is best represented in the far easier and
shorter Chopin nocturnes. his Brahms 1 also represents his singing as
well.
>
> >Rubinstein. The Gilels recordings is also quite wonderful. His
> >power and energy are like nothing I've heard since or before.
>
> Perhaps, but Richter's power and energy are even greater. Try,
> for instance, the Brahms 2nd with Ancerl on MultiSonic. BTW, I
> heard both of them live quite a few times. I would definitely
> agree, on the other hand, with the notion that Gilels was the
> more polished of the two of them.
I must retract my comment concerning power. Having just listened to the
Richter again, i'll admit that power and excitment are by no means lacking.
He just doesn't tie it together. That's my main problem witht the
performance. Why is the Brahms 2 with Ancerl on MultiSonic worth buying?
How does it compare to the Kondrashin?
> >The Richter recording, however, doesn't please me. Actually, I
> >admit that I've never heard the Richter/Leinsdorf, but the recording
>
> Then you should perhaps reserve your judgment until you do. There are
> at least five different Brahms 2nd performances by Richter floating
> around (with Ancerl, Kondrashin, Leinsdorf, Maazel, Mravinsky), of
> which the one with Kondrashin is arguably the least successful. I
> have also heard rumors that Richter was not entirely happy with
> the Leinsdorf recording, but could not prevent RCA from releasing
> it.
In that case, why do you care that i've never heard it. I can't spend my
time and money listening to every single cd put out. I do with what i
have. why not just comment on the recordings i'm referring to since
obviously you've heard it?
>
> In addition, there probably are quite a few tapes of other Richter
> Brahms 2nd performances than the 5 listed above, which may not be
> quite as easy to come by. I'm thinking in particular of one taped
> at the 1969 or 1970 Baalbek festival, which I recall as the best
> of his performances - he played the *entire* concerto again as an
> encore!
wow, it must have been wonderful. however i'm curious as to the audiences
reaction to hearing the 40 minutes concerto all over again.
> >I have of Richter playing live with Kondrashin (sp?) leaves me
> >feeling very incomplete. His phrasing and flexible tempi take
> >away from the grandness of the entire piece.
>
> Or maybe they give it a different greatness.
to each their own!
>
> >Perhaps I was too used to Gilels and Rubistein who play the
>
> That seems rather obvious.
Hey, you've got to start somewhere. Are you going to tell that you're NEVER
critical of people who play differently from your favorites, i.e. Richter
and Argerich?
> >concerto with roundness and timely phrasing, meaning that in
> >certain lyrical passages, the pianist allows the listener to
> >really soak up the beauty before attacking the next section.
>
> On the other hand, this could also detract from the tension
> built into this piece. Richter's intensity and urgency are
> quite unmatched, and I think they suit the piece very well.
in certain places his power if fabulous. you'll have no argument here. it
just doesn't always serve to tie the piece together. there are too many
dead spots in between his brilliance.
>
> In my opinion, all three do the first movement very well,
> perhaps with a slight edge to Richter. Richter is best in
> the 2nd movement, Gilels in the 3rd, and Rubinstein in the
> last one. Overall, I'd take Rubinstein if I had to choose
> one only. But I don't think I could be without all three.
>
1st- the opening chords i'd rank Rubinstein, Richter, and then Gilels
however, as the piece goes along Giles surpasses Richter
2nd- I'll admit richter is pretty damn impressive here. he doesn't quite
match the orchestra in a few spots however. he also enjoys taking off in
some of the faster octave and chord runs.
3rd and 4th- Rubinstein at his best!
> >I admit i'm talking about a different recording of the Brahms
> >but I have trouble believing that it would be that significantly
> >different in interpretation.
>
> Richter's overall conception of the piece has not changed
> much over the years, but the details have changed quite a
> bit from the 1950 recording with Ancerl to the 1970 one
> with Maazel. His tempi got slower, the phrasing more
> refined, the tone mellower, etc.. On the other hand,
> the energy and intensity have slackened a bit. In my
> opinion, of the currently available Richter performances,
> the best is the one with Mravinsky recorded around 1960
> (Russian Disc).
how does it compare to the Kondrashin?
>I also have recollections of broadcast
> concerts with Gauk and/or Sanderling, but I don't know
> if tapes of these are available. Farhan, can you shed
> some light on this matter?
>
these would be interesting to hear.
> dk
Dimitrios Antsos
>>
>>I have recordings of the Brahms Piano Concerto No. 2 by Brendel
>>(Abbado/Berlin PO) and Ashkenazy (Haitink/Vienna PO) and I'm not
>>very enthusiastic about either one of them. Penguin, Good CD
>>Guide, and Ted Libbey's NPR Guide are unanimous in recommending
>>Emil Gilel's performance with Jochum/Berlin PO on DG. Do
>>R.M.C.R.ers agree?
>>
>>Leo Scanlon
>>
IMO, the best is the Aeschbacher/Furtwaengler performance with the Berlin
Phil., from Dec 12-15 1943. Now on the KING-CC and Tahra labels.
Dimitri
Dimitrios Antsos
>Date: Thu, 26 Jan 1995 12:51:54 EST
>From: Allan Burns <AD...@psuvm.psu.edu>
>Subject: Kapell's Brahms 1 (was: Re: Best Brahms Piano Concerto No. 2?)
>In article <3g4ssu$n...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, jmoh...@aol.com (J Mohundro)
>says:
>>
>>The Brahms 1st piano concerto is good working music and I listen often to
>>a remastered Kapell/Mitropoulos CD as I work.
>This sounds like a *very* interesting recording. What opinions
>are there out there about it? My principal points of reference for
>this concerto are Rubinstein/Reiner, Gilels/Jochum & Cliburn/
>Leinsdorf.
>Thanks.
Wonderful, stupendous, amazing, beautiful (both the soloist and the conductor)!
Dimitri
Doug Beardslee
John Fitzgerald Kennedy
YM
Juan I. Cahis
better than Arrau/Haitink on Phillips
--
Enviado desde mi iPad usando NewsTap, Juan I. Cahis, Santiago de Chile.
M&S Frost
> Are you trying to compete with the quote bot? You can't win.
>
> dk
Am I the only one who thinks that the opening movement sounds like it should come second, and the second movement sounds like it should be the opening movement?
:-)
MIFrost
MELMOTH
> I used to like this concerto very much in my younger years,
> having been imprinted on live performances by Richter,
> Gilels, Andre Watts, Rubinstein, Igor Zhukov and Julius
> Katchen.
You forgot *Claudio Arrau*...
Herman
Alan Cooper
> On Wednesday, November 4, 2020 at 2:38:21 AM UTC+8, dk wrote:
> > he always sounded as if playing
> > from 6 feet under. The greatest
> > moron to ever disgrace the stage.
>
> This is the evidence, if evidence
> were needed, that Arrau was an
> incompetent pianist at best,
> and an imbecile at worst:
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eLpMxlXmrug
>
> Anyone playing Feux Follets like
> this on stage must be immediately
> admitted and evaluated for dementia.
>
> dk
I got a chuckle from the youtube commentator who described the performance, which sounds awful to me, as afflicted by "Arrauthritis." But I do enjoy Arrau in Brahms PC#2 when the right mood strikes--Haitink in preference to Giulini.
AC
MELMOTH
> were needed, that Arrau was an
> incompetent pianist at best,
> and an imbecile at worst:
ridicule honors you...Yes it does...
But...come on...I still like you...
By the way...I would be curious to know who are for you the...Let's say
the 5 best pianists of your keyboard panteon...
One of the most beautiful concerts that I attended was, in the 70's,
Arrau conducted by Markevitch in Brahms' second concerto...I believe
that this concert was recorded (I don't find the disc in my
collection...I can hear myself applauding there !)...
As for calling Arrau a "moron"...I leave you entirely responsible for
your bullshit...
JohnGavin
>Après mûre réflexion, dk a écrit :
> > and an imbecile at worst:
> I think I've already told you: your total absence of the sense of
> ridicule honors you...Yes it does...
> But...come on...I still like you...
>
> By the way...I would be curious to know who are for you the...Let's say
> the 5 best pianists of your keyboard panteon...
>
> One of the most beautiful concerts that I attended was, in the 70's,
> Arrau conducted by Markevitch in Brahms' second concerto...I believe
> that this concert was recorded (I don't find the disc in my
> collection...I can hear myself applauding there !)...
>
> As for calling Arrau a "moron"...I leave you entirely responsible for
> your bullshit...
this on stage must be immediately
admitted and evaluated for dementia.
dk
I know that Arrau has long had passionate fans, yet when I have heard him, live and on recordings, it has always left me feeling numb. I remember hearing some excerpts from Iberia, from an old mono recording. It was like Eating paella without any spices. It seems like his fans like this smooth flatness - but I admit this may be a blind spot in my musical taste. I don’t know which is more controversial- politics or opinions on musical interpretation.
Frank Berger
http://www.arkivmusic.com/classical/album.jsp?album_id=10896&album_group=14
MELMOTH
> !)...
ø Concert 1961 - [Inédit - Bande Radio]
Durée : 47'22
MELMOTH
MELMOTH
>> Après mûre réflexion, dk a écrit :
>>> This is the evidence, if evidence
>>> were needed, that Arrau was an
>>> incompetent pianist at best,
>>> and an imbecile at worst:
>>
>> I think I've already told you: your total
>> absence of the sense of ridicule honors
>> you...Yes it does... But...come on...I
>> still like you...
That's YOUR problem...
>> By the way...I would be curious to know
>> who are for you the...Let's say the 5
>> best pianists of your keyboard panteon...
> you manage to pass le baccalauréat?
As trump...Thanks to the Supreme Court...
> 2) Only 5? Do you think I am still in
> kindergarten?
Oh YES...
> 3) Unlike so many in this ng, I worship
> no one. I like or dislike individual
> performances on merits alone. Saying
> I like or dislike a pianist is only
> shorthand for statistical evaluation.
> 4) You can write me privately if you are
> would like to ask for an autographed
> copy of my bio.
OK...I'm waiting for you to give me your e-mail address...
Mine : melm...@free.fr
>> One of the most beautiful concerts that I
>> attended was, in the 70's, Arrau conducted
>> by Markevitch in Brahms' second concerto...
Do you know how funny you are ?...
>> As for calling Arrau a "moron"...I leave
>> you entirely responsible for your bullshit...
> guano. Worst pianist of any note ever,
> more so than even Backhaus, who could
> at least move his fingers.
Have you thought about consulting ?...
> dk
Henk vT
> >
> > For me the best recording for Brahms Opus 83 is
> > August 29th, 1939 recording in Luzern by Horowitz
> > and Toscanini.
>
> have ever been allowed to touch
> Brahms!
I seldom agree with JFK but in this case, he has a point. It's either Horowitz/Toscanini or Backhaus/Böhm.
To my surprise, there is no recording of the concerto by a youngster. At least not by someone who is on my to-buy list. No Vondracek, for example.
Henk
Henk vT
> Henk, you really need new ears!
<g> I'm too old now (as I was when you first mentioned it - 20 years or so ago).
> You also need to get out of the cave where you live. God save us from Vondracek and like pianists.
He did, with the exception of Vondracek himself. There aren't many like him. He's quite unique - one of the few great Brahms performers of the younger generation.
> PS. I noticed your tendency to unconditionally
> like QEPC prize winners. The QEPC was never a
> first class competition. It is a competition
> for 2nd class competent pianists like Gilels
> or Ashkenazy. Very conservative.
The QR competition isn't anymore what it was. Afanssiev (1972) was the last of the great (even if he too was only 2nd class). Eckardstein and Vondracek are the only youngsters I follow. The first because of his Scriabin and Prokofieff, Vondracek because of his Brahms (only available on YT).
Henk
Henk vT
> on YT: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PdUMU5UzSAg
>
> This is a perfect example of how NOT TO PLAY
> Scriabin. One can hear every beat and every
> bar! No texture, no colors, the metronome
> rules!
>
> Here are a few comments left by others:
>
> marmasiotis
> 8 years ago
> It is very peculiar.. it isn't that he is
> having any problems of technical issues,
> but it is as if something in his ...soul..
> or personality? There is a layer of
> sensibility he doesn´t achieve.. as if
> he experiences the music through ..his
> outside but not from his inside. I can't
> explain it better. (poor english :-p )
>
> NOSEhow2LIV
> 10 years ago
> Very insensitive, heavy, loud first
> movement and brutal pecked-at prestissimo
> volando, not flying at all. He's got mixed
> up and thinks he's playing Prokofiev! Final
> climax is the most un-extatic imaginable.
> Try Fiorentino or Friere for the antidote!
>
> QED.
Hmmm. The likes are 150 and the dislikes are 18. That proves as little as your appeal to 'authorities'. It is naive to think that something must and can be demonstrated in musical matters, and it is even more naive to think that something has been demonstrated.
In this case, most, if not all, of the notes Scriabin wrote seem to be there. The question that matters is not whether they are as Scriabin intended them to be, or as Moscow, Julliard, Curtis, or any other school says they are meant to be. What matters is: does it move 'me'?
BTW, this performance doesn't (at least not in a positive sense).
Henk
gggg...@gmail.com
> > On Monday, January 23, 1995 at 6:24:14 AM UTC-8, L Scanlon wrote:
> >> I have recordings of the Brahms Piano Concerto No. 2 by Brendel
> >> (Abbado/Berlin PO) and Ashkenazy (Haitink/Vienna PO) and I'm not
> >> very enthusiastic about either one of them. Penguin, Good CD
> >> Guide, and Ted Libbey's NPR Guide are unanimous in recommending
> >> Emil Gilel's performance with Jochum/Berlin PO on DG. Do
> >> R.M.C.R.ers agree?
> >> Leo Scanlon
> > From the moment I discovered the Emil Gilels/Eugen Yochum recording of
> > the Brahms Piano Cto No. 2 in the early 1980s, it has remained my
> > far-and-away desert island disc choice. I have heard some good ones
> > (most recently, Nelson Freire's with Riccardo Chailly conducting), but
> > Gilels is in a category all his own.
> >
>
> better than Arrau/Haitink on Phillips
>
> --
> Enviado desde mi iPad usando NewsTap, Juan I. Cahis, Santiago de Chile.
(Recent Youtube upload):
Brahms - Piano Concertos Nos.1,2 / NEW MASTERING (ref.record.: Claudio Arrau, Carlo Maria Giulini)
Henk vT
> other listeners heard the same shit I heard in his
> playing.
Since when do you need others to point that out?
>
> > It is naive to think that something must and can be
> > demonstrated in musical matters,
>
Define competence. Most if not all of the notes were there.
> > and it is even more naive to think that something
> > has been demonstrated.
>
> been amply demonstrated!
That's a non sequitur - since you like Latin (although you don't seem to understand it: using QED when you just want to point something out). <g>
> > In this case, most, if not all, of the notes Scriabin
> > wrote seem to be there. The question that matters is
> > not whether they are as Scriabin intended them to be,
> > or as Moscow, Julliard, Curtis, or any other school
> > says they are meant to be.
>
After your 'just point out', I'm starting to doubt that.
> > What matters is: does it move 'me'?
>
Really?
> > BTW, this performance doesn't (at least not in a
> > positive sense).
>
I didn't promote it. You mentioned it, concluding from seeing one black swan that there are no white swans.
Henk
Herman
> I only listen to my own ears!
>
Of course you do.
The strange thing however is that you have a gigantic history of trying to bludgeon other people into listening with your own ears.
It's impossible and unnecessary.
Herman
>
> I only provide considered professional
> advice -- and reminders we live in the
> 21st century rather than in the 19th
> century.
>
> dk
Professional how? You're not a concert pianist, otherwise you wouldn't write this silly absolutist stuff, typical of somebody who is a listener (or was).
Andrew Clarke
> I have recordings of the Brahms Piano Concerto No. 2 by Brendel
> (Abbado/Berlin PO) and Ashkenazy (Haitink/Vienna PO) and I'm not
> very enthusiastic about either one of them. Penguin, Good CD
> Guide, and Ted Libbey's NPR Guide are unanimous in recommending
> Emil Gilel's performance with Jochum/Berlin PO on DG. Do
> R.M.C.R.ers agree?
> Leo Scanlon
Andrew Clarke
Canberra