Paraskivesco's Debussy (on a Bosendorfer)
sidoze
4-CD Calliope set today. So far I've listened twice through the
Preludes and am very impressed. Paraskivesco is swift (book 1 35 min)
but rarely sounds impatient, and more importantly it mostly sounds
natural and convincing to these ears without any of the faux-profundity
and emotional detachment that mars the recent Koroliov. On the contrary
there's an exciting creative spark and burn that brings many to life.
Did anyone else react favourably to this set?
Tom Deacon
1111010619.9...@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com, "sidoze"
<sid...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Attracted by the shiny Diapason d'Or sticker on the box I bought this
> 4-CD Calliope set today. So far I've listened twice through the
> Preludes and am very impressed. Paraskivesco is swift (book 1 35 min)
> but rarely sounds impatient, and more importantly it mostly sounds
> natural and convincing to these ears without any of the faux-profundity
> and emotional detachment that mars the recent Koroliov.
How are you able to tell real profundity from the faux variety?
Just curious.
Do you have some sort of geiger-counter?
I must say that Koroliov's Debussy struck me as unidiomatic rather than
fakely profound or even emotionally detached.
No Gieseking for sure. And no Michelangeli. But interesting.
Mind you, the Russians just never get French music right, do they now?
TD
sidoze
You tell me. I like Sokolov's Ravel a lot.
In this case, the faux variety is the slow-and-somewhat-steady attempt
Koroliov aims for. Unidiomatic would work too, though I do hear him
trying hard at something or other (and missing it). For me he is
certainly detached.
Dan Koren
"Tom Deacon" <deac...@nospam-yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:BE5E2144.C325%deac...@nospam-yahoo.com...
Such sweeping generalizations...
Have you heard Bashkirov's Ravel and Debussy?
And Richter was no slouch either.
dk
Steve Emerson
Tom Deacon <deac...@nospam-yahoo.com> wrote:
> Mind you, the Russians just never get French music right, do they now?
Trolling?
Russians have recorded great Ravel by the truckload.
SE.
xys...@hotmail.com
> Have you heard Bashkirov's Ravel and Debussy?
In fact Bashkirov plays French music better than he does Russian. Now
take *this* sweeping generalisation! (-:
Who the bleeding hell is Paraskivesco? The ending of his name makes him
highly suspicious!
regards,
SG
Miguel Montfort
[...]
> Who the bleeding hell is Paraskivesco? The ending of
> his name makes him highly suspicious!
Indeed ;-) From the Calliope website:
------------------------------------------------------------
Théodore PARASKIVESCO
Pianiste roumain naturalisé français (1940)
Après des études au Conservatoire de Bucarest, il en
sort avec 5 Premiers prix. Lauréat du Concours internation
Georges Enesco en 1961, le gouvernement français lui accorde
une bourse qui lui permet de venir parfaire sa formation à
Paris. L'enseignement de Nadia Boulanger et d'Yvonne Lefé-
bure sera déterminant pour son art. Ses interprétations de
la musique pour piano de Debussy lui valent le Prix Claude
Debussy en 1970. L'intégrale Debussy qu'il réalise sur
disque est considérée comme l'une des meilleures.
C'est également un remarquable accompagnateur de mélodies.
------------------------------------------------------------
Miguel Montfort
alanwa...@aol.com
music/performers are not exclusive to the country in which they
originated and I've got a few recordings which, I think, back up my
argument.
I have not heard the artist/recording so I can't say about that but
here a few examples that I have personally experienced.
Rozhdestvensky conducting Elgar/Vaughan Williams (No 1 Elgar with a
Czech orchestra as well as with the BBC Symphony), a Czech orchestra
playing Honegger, Fedoseyev doing Tallis Fantasia with strings deeper
and darker than I think some English orchestras could manage, Zara
Dolukhanova doing Faure and Ravel songs exquisitely in lieder (and not
being too bad in Gounod, Massenet, Saint-Saens operas), Pesek doing
his beloved Suk (brilliantly) with the Royal Liverpool Philharmonic
Orchestra, Svetlanov doing La Mer and Chausson.
And what on earth would you say of Skrowaczewski doing Ravel or
Bruckner with "non national" players?
Or of the wonderful performance of the Odense Symphony conducted Serov
in Rimsky-Korsakov. Okay, he is a Russian conductor but that isn't a
Russian orchestra and yet they produce marvellous performances,
highlighting moments that I have heard Russian orchestras miss.
TD may be right in this specific recording but Old Chap thinks that far
too wide a generalisation.
Kind regards,
Alan M. Watkins
Tom Deacon
<dank...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Mind you, the Russians just never get French music right, do they now?
>>
>
>
> Such sweeping generalizations...
They're the only kind which are interesting.
The rest are for chicken-shits.
TD
Tom Deacon
emersn-955DB0....@typhoon.sonic.net, "Steve Emerson"
<eme...@nospamsonic.net> wrote:
> In article <BE5E2144.C325%deac...@nospam-yahoo.com>,
> Tom Deacon <deac...@nospam-yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> Mind you, the Russians just never get French music right, do they now?
>
> Trolling?
No, just expressing my opinion. Do you have a problem with that?
> Russians have recorded great Ravel by the truckload.
Hmmmmmmm.
I'm not sure that Ravel would have appreciated his music by the truckload.
TD
Tom Deacon
1111022740.7...@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com,
"alanwa...@aol.com" <alanwa...@aol.com> wrote:
> I am not sure TD is right about this and I would certainly say that
> music/performers are not exclusive to the country in which they
> originated and I've got a few recordings which, I think, back up my
> argument.
> TD may be right in this specific recording but Old Chap thinks that far
> too wide a generalisation.
Old Chap may also be right in avoiding such wide generalisations.
Personally, Alan, I like them. They tend to smoke out the exceptions to the
rule, which is always helpful.
Richter's sympathy for French music - and food, and wine, and, churches,
and, well, that's enough - is one. But only one.
The others mentioned are fairly pathetic, in my opinion. Bashkirov? Someone
is joking.
The most gruesome spectacle of all is to hear some clod of a Russian
piano-banger fresh out of the Conservatory plow his way through Gaspard de
la Nuit. Ugh! No tact. No discretion. Pas de pudeur. Degeulasse!
And to hear a Russian French Horn do his best saxophone imitation in
orchestral Debussy is sad, if it were not also very, very funny.
TD
Matthew B. Tepper
typed in news:1111021451.6...@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
What, you think maybe he's a fugitive financier?
--
Matthew B. Tepper: WWW, science fiction, classical music, ducks!
My personal home page -- http://home.earthlink.net/~oy/index.html
My main music page --- http://home.earthlink.net/~oy/berlioz.html
To write to me, do for my address what Androcles did for the lion
Take THAT, Daniel Lin, Mark Sadek, James Lin & Christopher Chung!
Steve Emerson
Tom Deacon <deac...@nospam-yahoo.com> wrote:
> > Trolling?
>
> No, just expressing my opinion. Do you have a problem with that?
No.
SE.
sidoze
No one to really rush out and buy, I'd say. This is good playing IMO
but it's unlikely it'll supplant your favourites or you'll find it
particularly revelatory. What's nice about the Preludes is that
Paraskivesco is swift without neglecting their beauty and melody.
abac...@att.net
that is stupid... thought you had more intelligence. You still believe
faithfully in the "Piano Schools" theory....
that attitude is for "chicken'shits"...
AB
abac...@att.net
dont be so sure that we appreciate such bullshit from you "by the
truckload"..... SHAME
AB
AB
abac...@att.net
I see that you are too much of a gentleman to really tell off "old" TD.
( I have never had any constraints as to telling TD what I think of
him):-)
He has been espousing this "exclusitivity" as you put it so gracefully
for years without a particle of evidence to back up his thoughts.......
I pointed out to him that Heifetz, Milstein and Elman were violinists
from the "Russian School" (Auer) and they all sound completely
different from each other. Of course, TD NEVER responded to my
statement and as usual never considers any philosophy that differs from
his.
AB
alanwa...@aol.com
but I heard Svetlanov do a wonderful French programme in London with
the Philharmonia and the last time I heard the Russian National
Orchestra there was not a "Russian French Horn" in earshot (the section
must have all been substitutes).
I have no idea about how other people rate him but the most wonderful
Debussy I have experienced so far is in some of the live recitals of
Ivan Moravec. Years ago I remember buying an LP of Francois doing
Ravel and very much looking forward to it but being very disappointed
(although in fairness to the artist I now understand it was a difficult
personal time for him so it's probably not the performance to judge him
on).
I went back to Perlemuter:):) where as far as I know I still am
although the one time I heard Firkusny play Ravel I thought that was
pretty good as well although, of course, by then he was long out of the
Conservatoire.
I think there are more exceptions than you are currently permitting and
that generally these are often very good for music. Much is rightly
made of the contribution of Sir Charles Mackerras in spreading Czech
music but I would suspect that the person most often performing Martinu
around the world at the moment is Christopher Hogwood - although
England may get their share with Mr Belohlavek and the BBC Symphony in
due course.
alanwa...@aol.com
national performers "may" have a way with a national composer (I hope
so) but, as you also put it in a gentlemanly manner, there are no
exclusive rights to such a piece (or so I think) and so from time to
time you should expect someone to come along and steal a national
"copyright".
Hence Netania Davrath, a Jewish girl born in the Ukraine, domiciled in
Israel for most of her life, ends up recreating the wonderful Songs of
the Auvergne (arranged Canteloube).
A passing question: Boult loved Elman's playing but said he was
sometimes a "difficult" artist to work with. I never got around to
asking him why in detail. Does anyone know? I think they recorded
Tchaikovsky VC and all I recall Boult saying is that Elman wanted to
take parts of it very slowly with which he did not agree.
Is there a good representative CD of Elman today?
If it helps, my two favourite violinists are Milstein and Kogan. I
never had the good fortune to play for Milstein but I did for Kogan and
that experience is unforgettable. I get the impression that he was a
bit in the "shadow" of Oistrakh but they were completely different
musicians in my view with a completely different sound and it is
Kogan's voice I personally prefer over Oistrakh although both were
clearly great players.
When he was on stage it just appeared so effortless. I nearly
bankrupted myself buying the Leonid Kogan Legacy but I am very glad I
did. There wasn't much to "see". He just stood there but could fill a
hall with his particular sound.
There's a Bruch from 36 years ago with the Berlin Radio/Maazel which,
after about eight bars, knocks all the "War Horse" stuff out of the
window. War Horse does exist, of course, but not in this performance.
I believe there are sometimes "universal" artists and I think Kogan was
one of them. Sometimes it is hard to go along spontaneously with a
performer but, in my few experiences, the sound of the player in the
case of Kogan gave everyone their "cue". That concerto in particular,
in my opinion, is a "response" concerto if it is to work well.
I also love the Milstein concerti with Steinberg/Pittsburgh where I
sense the same thing happening. Steinberg was also a fine Bruckner
conductor, but I digress.
Tom Deacon
1111090072.8...@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com,
"alanwa...@aol.com" <alanwa...@aol.com> wrote:
> Fortunately I have been spared a clod in Gaspard de la Nuit (so far)
> but I heard Svetlanov do a wonderful French programme in London with
> the Philharmonia and the last time I heard the Russian National
> Orchestra there was not a "Russian French Horn" in earshot (the section
> must have all been substitutes).
> I have no idea about how other people rate him but the most wonderful
> Debussy I have experienced so far is in some of the live recitals of
> Ivan Moravec.
You heard the best Debussy going. I will be hearing him play Mozart in
Ottawa next week. Should be glorious.
But of course Moravec is definitely NOT a Russian pianist. Trained with
Michelangeli, in fact, and shares many qualities with him.
TD
alanwa...@aol.com
think I was trying to say. And for that matter neither was
Michaelangeli so far as I know.
I think you let "country of origin" bother you too much.
I hope you enjoy his performance. He's getting on but I think it is
still all there. Indeed,it may even be getting better. No doubt you
will let us know.
He is MUCH better live than on a recording, or so I think but either
way if you ever get a chance to hear him in Janacek Sonata 1.X.1905 you
should do so.
It is a pity he is not in recital otherwise you might have got a couple
of Smetana Polka's thrown in for free.
Kind regards,
Alan M. Watkins
Kind regards,
xys...@hotmail.com
Mr. Watkins about Moravec:
"He is MUCH better live than on a recording, or so I think but either
way if you ever get a chance to hear him in Janacek Sonata 1.X.1905 you
should do so."
I praise quite often Ivan Moravec in this circle - one of the
substantial pianists-musicians of our times and one of the most refined
of all times. However, I heard his Janacek Sonata live and I have to
say that I found it anything but faultless - forget the wrong notes and
the slight memory slips, but the music itself wasn't explored with
anything approaching the thoroughness Moravec performs, say, Chopin's
Fourth Ballade, both live and in studio.
Disclaimer: I didn't hear yet any Moravec official version of Janacek's
work.
regards,
SG
xys...@hotmail.com
I highly recommend the one Naxos CD - the early Tchaikovsky Cto
version, Wieniawski's D Minor and other smaller stuff.
regards,
SG
abac...@att.net
alanwa...@aol.com wrote:
> It's not really a telling off thing, AB. He has a point in that some
> national performers "may" have a way with a national composer (I hope
> so) but, as you also put it in a gentlemanly manner, there are no
> exclusive rights to such a piece (or so I think) and so from time to
> time you should expect someone to come along and steal a national
> "copyright".
>
> Hence Netania Davrath, a Jewish girl born in the Ukraine, domiciled
in
> Israel for most of her life, ends up recreating the wonderful Songs
of
> the Auvergne (arranged Canteloube).
>
many other examples as well, to be sure....
> A passing question: Boult loved Elman's playing but said he was
> sometimes a "difficult" artist to work with. I never got around to
> asking him why in detail. Does anyone know?
first of all, Elman was way past his best days, took things very slowly
as you mention below......
I think they recorded
> Tchaikovsky VC and all I recall Boult saying is that Elman wanted to
> take parts of it very slowly with which he did not agree.
>
> Is there a good representative CD of Elman today?
Yes, I think Biddulph or Pearal reissued Elman in his prime years...
> If it helps, my two favourite violinists are Milstein and Kogan.
If you want to hear the greatest violinist(musically speaking)that ever
recorded, try to get a hold of Kreisler's early electricals (1925-30).
AB
abac...@att.net
>
> But of course Moravec is definitely NOT a Russian pianist. Trained
with
> Michelangeli, in fact, and shares many qualities with him.
>
> TD
tell us what these qualities are.
AB
abac...@att.net
I have never heard Moravec live, but there is nothing in his recordings
that sounds outstanding to my ears.......
IMO, his recent Chopin 4th Ballade is really mediocre..... lack of
power, poor voicing of chords, etc.....
AB
Tom Deacon
1111185657.7...@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com, "abac...@att.net"
<abac...@att.net> wrote:
> I have never heard Moravec live, but there is nothing in his recordings
> that sounds outstanding to my ears.......
What a pity. He used to play in New York fairly regularly. How did you
manage to miss him?
> IMO, his recent Chopin 4th Ballade is really mediocre..... lack of
> power, poor voicing of chords, etc.....
Hah!
You should live so long!
TD
alanwa...@aol.com
least. Probably alone here but I regard this as one of the greatest
pieces ever written for the tonal qualities of the piano or the
pianoFORTE as it was called in my youth.
I would say he is a master of pedalling which I would think important
in Debussy.
He is not a power pianist. He is a "bell" pianist if you understand
me, which I am sure you do. I am probably allergic to power pianists,
in fact I feel sure I am.
Why did he impress me? His incredible sonority in La cathedrale
engloutie, the detail in Pouissons d'or and virtually every note
sounded individually and differently (so I thought) in Des pas sur la
niege.
Or it could have been his encores: two Smetana polkas and, finally, Le
fille aux cheveuz de lin.
There's a funny thing about Moravec recitals. You can usually hear the
proverbial "pin" drop throughout them.
He is not a big hitter so if you are looking for power I think it
likely you will be disappointed but if you are looking for Footsteps in
the Snow or the Girl with the flaxen hair I think he's pretty good.
I am biased. I have played for him personally many times and know him
personally which obviously colours my judgment.
1905 Janacek is hardly a repertoire work but there have only been two
pianists who have moved me to tears in this work: Firkusny and Moravec.
I was pretty close to it with Moravec in
Le fille aux cheveuz de lin.
It is just a personal opinion, as always. I love musicians who can
"float" a note rather than just play it and I think that both Moravec
and Kogan come into that category.
Sorry:):)
abac...@att.net
>
> > I have never heard Moravec live, but there is nothing in his
recordings
> > that sounds outstanding to my ears.......
>
> What a pity. He used to play in New York fairly regularly. How did
you
> manage to miss him?
>
because the few recoreings I heard did not impress me...
> > IMO, his recent Chopin 4th Ballade is really mediocre..... lack of
> > power, poor voicing of chords, etc.....
>
> Hah!
>
> You should live so long!
>
Unfortunately I have lived longer than you....... I have noticed that
you really don't discern too well (understanding great pianism).
Anybody who praises Brendel in ANY music does not have a good musical
ear IMO.....
Perhaps it is also a pity that I never heard Brendel in NY ???????
AB
abac...@att.net
that I dont find his playing extraordinary :-))
AB
alanwa...@aol.com
Sorry:):) was to mildly state that I completely disagree in this
particular discussion.
Dan Koren
news:1111272924.6...@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
>
> No. You should say, as you honestly have, that it is not for you.
>
... or anyone else ;-)
dk
PS. Just as sincerely as the original poster.
alanwa...@aol.com
I am okay with that and no doubt you are, too. So, from time to time,
we say our thing.
abac...@att.net
dk will never behave.........what does "anyone else" have to do with
the situation?
Alan is a true gentleman... dk, you could learn from him,(maybe even I
could):-)
AB
Tom Deacon
1111272052.2...@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com, "abac...@att.net"
<abac...@att.net> wrote:
> Perhaps it is also a pity that I never heard Brendel in NY ???????
You got that right.
TD
Tom Deacon
1111281213.5...@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com, "abac...@att.net"
<abac...@att.net> wrote:
> Alan is a true gentleman... dk, you could learn from him,(maybe even I
> could):-)
You got that right, too.
Hey, Arri, you're on a roll. Don't stop now.
TD
xys...@hotmail.com
"Probably alone here but I regard this as one of the greatest
pieces ever written for the tonal qualities of the piano or the
pianoFORTE as it was called in my youth."
Not alone. I have a feeling you misunderstand me. I happen to know this
work note by note and I agree with your extravagant praise. I also
mostly agree with what you say about Ivan Moravec, a superb master of
great refinement and musicianship. All I said was that the one Janacek
live with Moravec I've heard wasn't at the height of many of his
recordings. Which is not to say that the man wouldn't be allowed to
have a night, or better said a half of hour off. (By the way, I don't
think Firkusny does justice to Janacek's Sonata either. This is a work
better than it can be performed.) I agree with everything you say about
Moravec otherwise. "Poor voicing" in Moravec's Chopin? I must be going
deaf, because I only hear the most judicious, refined and perfectly
mastered voicing with him. In fact, voicing is one of the abilities in
which Moravec has absolutely nothing to envy to any of the maestros of
the past.
regards,
SG
Tom Deacon
1111303032.3...@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com, "xys...@hotmail.com"
<xys...@hotmail.com> wrote:
Never a truer word was spoken. And this quality - to answer Arri's challenge
- is precisely what allies Moravec with Michelangeli. Personally, I find
Moravec's musical ideas far more interesting than those of his former
teacher. But that may be a minority view. And I don't take away for a single
minute my respect for ABM.
TD
fh...@yahoo.com
> Anybody who praises Brendel in ANY music does not have a good musical
> ear IMO.....
> Perhaps it is also a pity that I never heard Brendel in NY ???????
>
> AB
You certainly disqualified yourself here.
Dan Koren
news:1111270676.5...@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>
> Leaving aside Chopin for a moment, his Janacek 1905 is
> awesome, live at least. Probably alone here but I regard
> this as one of the greatest pieces ever written for the
> tonal qualities of the piano or the pianoFORTE as it was
> called in my youth.
A very narrow corner of the piano repertoire that appeals
to Janacek fans and no one else.
> I would say he is a master of pedalling which I would
> think important in Debussy.
Indeed he is. Unfortunately, mastery of one aspect of the
instrument does not make someone a great artist. One needs
to master all of them.
> He is not a power pianist. He is a "bell" pianist if you
> understand me, which I am sure you do.
Not only is Mr. Moravec not a "power pianist" (assuming I
read correctly between the lines your meaning and intent),
he is not even a "momentum" pianist. Every work I heard
Mr. Moravec perform (on record or live) sounded static
and devoid of drive or energy. Just compare his Chopin
Nocturnes with Rubinstein's, or his Preludes with Martha
Argerich, Ivo Pogorelich, Tzimon Barto or Sofronitsky.
The most amazing demonstration of Mr. Moravec's limits in
repertoire that he plays very well is to listen to his
rendition of Brahms' Capriccio op. 76/2 side by side
with Dmitry Bashkirov's (EMI). There is absolutely no
contest! Likewise, his Chopin 4th Ballade (a performance
very much praised by his fans) sounds cold and calculated
compared to Cziffra's. Mr. Moravec seems totally incapable
of projecting the slightest trace of passion in anything I
heard him play -- from Mozart to Debussy.
> I am probably allergic to power pianists, in fact I feel
> sure I am.
Take some Allegra.
>
> Why did he impress me? His incredible sonority in La
> cathedrale engloutie, the detail in Pouissons d'or and
> virtually every note sounded individually and differently
> (so I thought) in Des pas sur la niege.
Mr. Moravec is indeed a very fine craftsman of the piano.
His interpretations are carefully constructed with great
attention to detail, as perfectly polished as his scalp.
He is however not a great artist in the sense I use this
term -- although he may well be one in the sense Deacon
uses it (see for instance Mme Strudel Haebler).
> Or it could have been his encores: two Smetana polkas and,
> finally, Le fille aux cheveuz de lin.
>
> There's a funny thing about Moravec recitals. You can
> usually hear the proverbial "pin" drop throughout them.
Only if one is not already asleep.
> He is not a big hitter so if you are looking for power I
> think it likely you will be disappointed
I am looking for whatever the music demands. Like or not,
a lot of the piano repertoire demands power, momentum and
drive, in addition to all the other things Mr. Moravec is
perfectly able to provide. Mr. Moravec's art may be very
polished, but it is not complete.
> but if you are looking for Footsteps in the Snow or the
> Girl with the flaxen hair I think he's pretty good.
Yes indeed. However, he is not alone in this repertoire,
and he is not even half as good as Radu Lupu.
dk
Tom Deacon
<dank...@yahoo.com> wrote:
As stark a delineation of the differences in taste as I know.
Koren goes for the slam-bang, thank you ma'am school of Russian piano
playing. And that, I am afraid, indicates the limits of his taste.
Most music, in fact, does NOT benefit from such an approach - although some
does, of course - making Russian pianists largely limited in their
repertoire. Lord help them if they are ever faced with the "simplicities" of
Mozart, for example, or a Chopin Mazurka, or even a Rachmaninoff Prelude
which demands lyricism and not "power pianism". Anyone who has ever attended
the International Tchaikovsky Competition throughout its lengthy preliminary
rounds will grant the Russians precedence in the Etudes, and so on. But give
them anything by Beethoven, or Mozart, or Schubert, or Chopin, and it
largely becomes a no-contest victory for musicians of wider musical scope.
Koren mentions Lupu, himself a product of the Moscow Conservatory.
Fortunately Lupu imbibed the right lessons from that place and came away
fully equipeed technically but also with his musical instincts intact. Most
are not so fortunate.
Of course it isn't any better at Juilliard these days, now that the truly
great teachers are long dead. And the cookie-cutter pianists churned out by
that institution of higher learning are each less interesting than the one
before.
The Paris Conservatoire is a tiny bit better; the schooling there seems to
have taken on a variety of styles. And the result is a plethora of
interesting pianists coming up.
In the meantime, Moravec sits high above both the Russian pianists of the
"jackboots" school of pianism, as well as above the dull, scholarly
musicologists who have also flooded the scene. Anyone for a Richard Goode
ticket today? And long may he continue to grace our concert platforms.
TD
sidoze
>and he is not even half as good as Radu Lupu.
Dan, have you heard Lupu play Debussy's preludes book 1? I know he's
touring with them now.
sidoze
some
>does, of course - making Russian pianists largely limited in their
>repertoire. Lord help them if they are ever faced with the
"simplicities" of
>Mozart, for example, or a Chopin Mazurka, or even a Rachmaninoff
Prelude
>which demands lyricism and not "power pianism".
As much as I love Russian pianists I have to agree with this (the
Mozart and Chopin mazurka part anyway). This "simplicity" they find
incapable of handling most of the time, so what refuge do they seek?
Either powerhouse pianism, or "the dirge effect". Listen to Sokolov
play the slow movement of K488 and you'll hear what I mean.
Dan Koren
news:BE633BEA.C5CD%deac...@nospam-yahoo.com...
And what else is new?
> Koren goes for the slam-bang, thank you ma'am school of
> Russian piano playing. And that, I am afraid, indicates
> the limits of his taste.
You seem to have an obsession with the Russian piano school.
First, there was absolutely no reference to the Russian
piano school in what I wrote. Are you having a discussion
with the windmills?
> Most music, in fact, does NOT benefit from such an approach -
Yet another obvious non-sequitur wrt the thread's topic.
> although some does, of course - making Russian pianists
> largely limited in their repertoire.
Many Russian pianists have (or had) broader repertoires
than most other pianists. Would you care to point out
some examples of top tier Russian pianists whose
repertoires were as narrow as (or narrower than)
or Backhaus' or Kempff's?
The most astounding thing about people who reject the
"Russian piano school" is that they do not realize the
absurdity of the proposition. The Russian piano school
(if there is indeed just one) has produced a broader
range of talent, style and musical personalities than
any other pianistic school ever. Like it or not, the
law of large numbers always wins. There are certainly
some characteristics they all share, suchs as being
minimally competent from both a technical and musical
point of view (something that cannot be said about an
Entremont or a Haebler). However, the variety of their
styles defines any attempt at definition as cut from a
single cloth.
Just consider: Anton and Nikolai Rubinstein, Felix
Blumenfeld, Alexander Scriabin, Sergei Rachmaninov,
Sergei Prokofiev, Alexander Goldenweiser, Konstantin
Igumnov, Vladimir Sofronitsky, Vladimir Horowitz, Leo
Sirota, Maria Yudina, Maria Grinberg, Grigory Ginzburg,
Samuil Feinberg, Yakov Flier, Yakov Zak, Lazar Berman,
Sviatoslav Richter, Emil Gilels, Vitalij Margulis, Bella
Davidovich, Vasso Devetzi, Elisabeth Leonskaja, Elisso
Virsaladze, Dmitry Bashkirov, Igor Zhukov, Mikhail
Pletnev, Grigory Sokolov, Vladimir Ovchinnikov, Yuri
Egorov, Oleg Maisenberg, Margarita Fyodorovna, Tatiana
Nikolayeva, Vladimir Viardo, Alexander Toradze, Anatol
Ugorsky, Stanislav Neuhaus, Sergey Dorensky, Nikolai
Demidenko, Naum Shtarkman, Vladimit Tropp, Alexander
Melnikov, Konstantin Lifshitz, Arkady Volodos, Lylia
Zilberstein, Anna Gourari, Irina Malikova, Olga Kern
sound as different from each other as any two Western
pianists one cares to remember. Even their Tchaikovsky
1st piano concerto recordings sound more different than,
say Argerich and Graffman. Not to mention each and every
single one of them had/has better techniques than Kempff
and Backhaus combined.
In fact, the only Russian pianists I can think of who
match your stereotype are Kissin, Berezovsky and
Gavrilov.
> Lord help them if they are ever faced with the
> "simplicities" of Mozart,
Lord help any pianist trying to compete with Gilels'
K365, K467 or K595 or Bashkirov's K453 or K491. Or
for that matter, even with Pletnev's K466. They will
most likely sound coarse, vulgar, dry or constipated
by comparison.
> for example, or a Chopin Mazurka,
Have you ever heard (of) a guy named Sofronitsky? Or
Bashkirov? Or Sokolov?
> or even a Rachmaninoff Prelude which demands lyricism
> and not "power pianism".
Not enough lyricism in Richter's or Pletnev's Preludes?
(when called for of course). You must have a moose stuck
in your ear.
> Anyone who has ever attended the International Tchaikovsky
> Competition throughout its lengthy preliminary rounds will
> grant the Russians precedence in the Etudes, and so on. But
> give them anything by Beethoven, or Mozart, or Schubert, or
> Chopin, and it largely becomes a no-contest victory for
> musicians of wider musical scope.
Another non-sequitur. Have you listened to any Van Cliburn
competitions lately?
> Koren mentions Lupu, himself a product of the Moscow
> Conservatory. Fortunately Lupu imbibed the right lessons
> from that place and came away fully equipeed technically
> but also with his musical instincts intact. Most are not
> so fortunate.
That is no different from any other conservatory. Juilliard,
Curtis and Peabody churn out as many pianistic robots as
does Moscow, and of lower average quality. Moscow graduates
can at least play Bach decently enough.
> Of course it isn't any better at Juilliard these days,
> now that the truly great teachers are long dead.
And you forgot to mention they were mostly Russians and
Poles (not to mention Jewish).
> And the cookie-cutter pianists churned out by that
> institution of higher learning
Not "higher learning". Prestidigitation.
> are each less interesting than the one before.
>
> The Paris Conservatoire is a tiny bit better; the
> schooling there seems to have taken on a variety of
> styles.
Largely as a reslut of not having had any style of
their own for quite some time, and having a whole
new generation of teachers who studied in Moscow
under Neuhaus (e.g. Brigitte Engerer, Pierre
Sancan, Jacques Rouvier).
> And the result is a plethora of interesting pianists
> coming up.
And going to the wolves.
> In the meantime, Moravec sits high above both the
> Russian pianists of the "jackboots" school of pianism,
Geez! Jackboots are/were not exclusive to the Russians,
just remember William Kappell, Philippe Entremont, Elly
Ney, Wilhelm Backhaus, Walter Gieseking, Cladio "the
gaucho" Arrau, even Mme Argerich and Mr. Pollini more
often than one cares to admit.
> as well as above the dull, scholarly musicologists who
> have also flooded the scene. Anyone for a Richard Goode
> ticket today?
You can shove it in your moose's shithole and send him
to the concert.
> And long may he continue to grace our concert platforms.
Richard Goode?
dk
alanwa...@aol.com
alanwa...@aol.com
1905 is a narrow corner of the repertoire.
Repertoire, so far as I have encountered, has nothing to do with the
stature of the music. Popularity, yes, but not necessarily "stature."
Kind regard,
Alan M. Watkins
Dan Koren
news:1111351690.0...@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
Mozart is not Sokolov's cup of tea -- so what?
There are plenty of Russian pianists who play
Mozart superbly.
Listen to Gilels play K365, K467 or K595, or
to Bashkirov play K453 or K491, and you will
find out how wrong the Deacon is.
dk
Tom Deacon
<dank...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Just consider: Anton and Nikolai Rubinstein, Felix
> Blumenfeld, Alexander Scriabin, Sergei Rachmaninov,
> Sergei Prokofiev, Alexander Goldenweiser, Konstantin
> Igumnov, Vladimir Sofronitsky, Vladimir Horowitz, Leo
> Sirota, Maria Yudina, Maria Grinberg, Grigory Ginzburg,
> Samuil Feinberg, Yakov Flier, Yakov Zak, Lazar Berman,
> Sviatoslav Richter, Emil Gilels, Vitalij Margulis, Bella
> Davidovich, Vasso Devetzi, Elisabeth Leonskaja, Elisso
> Virsaladze, Dmitry Bashkirov, Igor Zhukov, Mikhail
> Pletnev, Grigory Sokolov, Vladimir Ovchinnikov, Yuri
> Egorov, Oleg Maisenberg, Margarita Fyodorovna, Tatiana
> Nikolayeva, Vladimir Viardo, Alexander Toradze, Anatol
> Ugorsky, Stanislav Neuhaus, Sergey Dorensky, Nikolai
> Demidenko, Naum Shtarkman, Vladimit Tropp, Alexander
> Melnikov, Konstantin Lifshitz, Arkady Volodos, Lylia
> Zilberstein, Anna Gourari, Irina Malikova, Olga Kern
> sound as different from each other as any two Western
> pianists one cares to remember.
I am asked to "consider" them, as though I haven't already done that.
I have, and have drawn the appropriate conclusions.
You disagree. Fair enough. And so what?
>
> In fact, the only Russian pianists I can think of who
> match your stereotype are Kissin, Berezovsky and
> Gavrilov.
Please consult the list above. You'll find lots and lots of Rach 3 pianists.
>> Lord help them if they are ever faced with the
>> "simplicities" of Mozart,
>
>
> Lord help any pianist trying to compete with Gilels'
> K365, K467 or K595 or Bashkirov's K453 or K491. Or
> for that matter, even with Pletnev's K466. They will
> most likely sound coarse, vulgar, dry or constipated
> by comparison.
Gilels' 595 is, in fact, extraordinary, but highly sentimental in the end
and stylisically overstated.
I won't mention the other two examples. PUHLEESE!
>> for example, or a Chopin Mazurka,
>
>
> Have you ever heard (of) a guy named Sofronitsky?
Dead, long since.
> Or Bashkirov? Or Sokolov?
Exactly. Can't handle them if their lives depended upon it. Completely but
totally gauche.
>> or even a Rachmaninoff Prelude which demands lyricism
>> and not "power pianism".
>
>
> Not enough lyricism in Richter's or Pletnev's Preludes?
> (when called for of course).
Richter was never a member of the "jackboots" school of pianism. Pletnev was
in his early days - I heard him live then - but has improved immensely.
>> Anyone who has ever attended the International Tchaikovsky
>> Competition throughout its lengthy preliminary rounds will
>> grant the Russians precedence in the Etudes, and so on. But
>> give them anything by Beethoven, or Mozart, or Schubert, or
>> Chopin, and it largely becomes a no-contest victory for
>> musicians of wider musical scope.
>
>
> Another non-sequitur. Have you listened to any Van Cliburn
> competitions lately?
Yup. Same story.
>
>
>> Koren mentions Lupu, himself a product of the Moscow
>> Conservatory. Fortunately Lupu imbibed the right lessons
>> from that place and came away fully equipeed technically
>> but also with his musical instincts intact. Most are not
>> so fortunate.
>
>
> That is no different from any other conservatory. Juilliard,
> Curtis and Peabody churn out as many pianistic robots as
> does Moscow, and of lower average quality. Moscow graduates
> can at least play Bach decently enough.
You think so? Really?
>> Of course it isn't any better at Juilliard these days,
>> now that the truly great teachers are long dead.
>
>
> And you forgot to mention they were mostly Russians and
> Poles (not to mention Jewish).
Yes, but Russians BEFORE the jackboots school took hold of the world's
imagination.
>> And the cookie-cutter pianists churned out by that
>> institution of higher learning
>
>
> Not "higher learning". Prestidigitation.
As you say.
>> are each less interesting than the one before.
>>
>> The Paris Conservatoire is a tiny bit better; the
>> schooling there seems to have taken on a variety of
>> styles.
>
>
> Largely as a reslut of not having had any style of
> their own for quite some time, and having a whole
> new generation of teachers who studied in Moscow
> under Neuhaus (e.g. Brigitte Engerer, Pierre
> Sancan, Jacques Rouvier).
Exactly. But as always, they have the musical ability to discriminate, to
pick what is good and throw away the chaff.
>> And the result is a plethora of interesting pianists
>> coming up.
>
>
> And going to the wolves.
Not that I have heard.
>> In the meantime, Moravec sits high above both the
>> Russian pianists of the "jackboots" school of pianism,
>
>
> Geez! Jackboots are/were not exclusive to the Russians,
> just remember William Kappell, Philippe Entremont, Elly
> Ney, Wilhelm Backhaus, Walter Gieseking, Cladio "the
> gaucho" Arrau, even Mme Argerich and Mr. Pollini more
> often than one cares to admit.
I think we disagree on the meaning of the term "jackboots".
Check your dictionary.
>> as well as above the dull, scholarly musicologists who
>> have also flooded the scene. Anyone for a Richard Goode
>> ticket today?
>
>
> You can shove it in your moose's shithole and send him
> to the concert.
Precisely. See what I mean? Nobody wants one.
>> And long may he continue to grace our concert platforms.
>
>
> Richard Goode?
Perverse interpretation of the paragraph. Perhaps your Robot-Coupe prevented
you from comprehending.
TD
Dan Koren
I heard Lupu play a lot of Debussy, however not recently.
It would be impossible to imagine better performances.
Incidentally, I do not believe Lupu has improved much
(if at all) over the years. At the time he won the Van
Cliburn, and during the few years that follows, he was
every bit a match for Gilels, Richter, Zhukov or
Bashkirov.
He also played a much larger repertoire than today, a
lot more Chopin, late romantics and French repertoire
than today. I heard him play live a Chopin 1st ballade,
Polonaise-Fantaisie and a few etudes (including 10/4
and several from op. 25) that left even Richter's in
the dust. Also Lupu's Bach (WTC fragments and a few
other pieces) were far better than anyone else I
heard live (Richter included), and his Beethoven
op. 110 is simply unmatched.
I my opinion, his pianistic decline started shortly
after he moved to the UK and shifted his attention
mainly to German repertoire. Too much Beethoven can
turn even the most intelligent pianist into a dumb
peasant.
dk
Dan Koren
news:1111097165.4...@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
>
> Hence Netania Davrath, a Jewish girl born in the Ukraine, domiciled in
> Israel for most of her life, ends up recreating the wonderful Songs of
> the Auvergne (arranged Canteloube).
>
Not surprising.
The Auvergnats are the Jews of France ;-)
dk
sidoze
> There are plenty of Russian pianists who play
> Mozart superbly.
>
> Listen to Gilels play K365, K467 or K595, or
> to Bashkirov play K453 or K491, and you will
> find out how wrong the Deacon is.
>
>
>
> dk
I don't know how I forgot about Gilels (and Sofronitsky's Chopin
mazurkas too...). Speaking of Bashkirov though, did he make many
recordings of Chopin's mazurkas? I'll have to take a long hard look now
to see if I can find his EMI Schumann Fantaisie. And I'll have a listen
to his Mozart too, thanks.
Dan Koren
"Tom Deacon" <deac...@nospam-yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:BE635401.C5DC%deac...@nospam-yahoo.com...
> On 3/20/05 3:48 PM, in article 423d...@news.meer.net, "Dan Koren"
> <dank...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> Just consider: Anton and Nikolai Rubinstein, Felix
>> Blumenfeld, Alexander Scriabin, Sergei Rachmaninov,
>> Sergei Prokofiev, Alexander Goldenweiser, Konstantin
>> Igumnov, Vladimir Sofronitsky, Vladimir Horowitz, Leo
>> Sirota, Maria Yudina, Maria Grinberg, Grigory Ginzburg,
>> Samuil Feinberg, Yakov Flier, Yakov Zak, Lazar Berman,
>> Sviatoslav Richter, Emil Gilels, Vitalij Margulis, Bella
>> Davidovich, Vasso Devetzi, Elisabeth Leonskaja, Elisso
>> Virsaladze, Dmitry Bashkirov, Igor Zhukov, Mikhail
>> Pletnev, Grigory Sokolov, Vladimir Ovchinnikov, Yuri
>> Egorov, Oleg Maisenberg, Margarita Fyodorovna, Tatiana
>> Nikolayeva, Vladimir Viardo, Alexander Toradze, Anatol
>> Ugorsky, Stanislav Neuhaus, Sergey Dorensky, Nikolai
>> Demidenko, Naum Shtarkman, Vladimit Tropp, Alexander
>> Melnikov, Konstantin Lifshitz, Arkady Volodos, Lylia
>> Zilberstein, Anna Gourari, Irina Malikova, Olga Kern
>> sound as different from each other as any two Western
>> pianists one cares to remember.
>
> I am asked to "consider" them, as though I haven't already done that.
You don't appear to be the most "considerate" person
around here.
> I have, and have drawn the appropriate conclusions.
As my friend Winston Churchill used to say: "simple,
satisfying, and wrong".
> You disagree. Fair enough. And so what?
>
>> In fact, the only Russian pianists I can think of
>> who match your stereotype are Kissin, Berezovsky
>> and Gavrilov.
>
> Please consult the list above. You'll find lots and
> lots of Rach 3 pianists.
Paraphrasing Yudina?
And then, isn't Martha Argerich a Rach 3 pianist?
>>> Lord help them if they are ever faced with the
>>> "simplicities" of Mozart,
>>
>>
>> Lord help any pianist trying to compete with Gilels'
>> K365, K467 or K595 or Bashkirov's K453 or K491. Or
>> for that matter, even with Pletnev's K466. They will
>> most likely sound coarse, vulgar, dry or constipated
>> by comparison.
>
> Gilels' 595 is, in fact, extraordinary, but highly
> sentimental in the end and stylisically overstated.
Given that it is (in your own words) "extraordinary",
all the other adjectives do not really matter. Not to
mention that Gilels' Mozart is nowhere as "sentimental"
as Edwin Fischer's or Artur Schnabel's.
One does gather that you prefer your Mozart dressed in
the pretty clockwork of Santa Clara or Mme Haebler, or
with the thick sugar coating of Geza Panda.
> I won't mention the other two examples. PUHLEESE!
We can find others.
>>> for example, or a Chopin Mazurka,
>>
>> Have you ever heard (of) a guy named Sofronitsky?
>
> Dead, long since.
>
>> Or Bashkirov? Or Sokolov?
>
> Exactly. Can't handle them if their lives depended
> upon it. Completely but totally gauche.
You have clearly not listened to much (if any) Bashkirov,
and you are simply trying to cover up your ignorance with
slogans and hand waving.
>>> or even a Rachmaninoff Prelude which demands lyricism
>>> and not "power pianism".
>>
>> Not enough lyricism in Richter's or Pletnev's Preludes?
>> (when called for of course).
>
> Richter was never a member of the "jackboots" school of
> pianism. Pletnev was in his early days - I heard him live
> then - but has improved immensely.
If Pletnev's early work can be described as "jackboots"
you must be using the language in a very strange fashion.
We've always know that English is somewhat different North
of the border, with all that French rot contamination, but
"jackboots" seems a little harsh for Pletnev's arrangements
of the Nutcracker and Sleeping Beauty. The sublety of touch,
color and articulation displayed in those works leaves even
Horowitz and Michelangeli in the dust.
>>> Anyone who has ever attended the International Tchaikovsky
>>> Competition throughout its lengthy preliminary rounds will
>>> grant the Russians precedence in the Etudes, and so on. But
>>> give them anything by Beethoven, or Mozart, or Schubert, or
>>> Chopin, and it largely becomes a no-contest victory for
>>> musicians of wider musical scope.
>>
>> Another non-sequitur. Have you listened to any Van Cliburn
>> competitions lately?
>
> Yup. Same story.
Glad to hear jackboots piano playing is not the monopoly of
the Moscow Conservatory or the Tchaikovsky Piano Competition.
Is Montreal any better? I haven't been there in a long time,
and some part of my body keeps thinking of Toque and Claude
Postel.
>>> Koren mentions Lupu, himself a product of the Moscow
>>> Conservatory. Fortunately Lupu imbibed the right lessons
>>> from that place and came away fully equipeed technically
>>> but also with his musical instincts intact. Most are not
>>> so fortunate.
>>
>> That is no different from any other conservatory. Juilliard,
>> Curtis and Peabody churn out as many pianistic robots as
>> does Moscow, and of lower average quality. Moscow graduates
>> can at least play Bach decently enough.
>
> You think so? Really?
At least as good as Mme Hewitt.
>>> Of course it isn't any better at Juilliard these days,
>>> now that the truly great teachers are long dead.
>>
>> And you forgot to mention they were mostly Russians and
>> Poles (not to mention Jewish).
>
> Yes, but Russians BEFORE the jackboots school took hold
> of the world's imagination.
>
>>> And the cookie-cutter pianists churned out by that
>>> institution of higher learning
>>
>> Not "higher learning". Prestidigitation.
>
> As you say.
>
>>> are each less interesting than the one before.
>>>
>>> The Paris Conservatoire is a tiny bit better; the
>>> schooling there seems to have taken on a variety of
>>> styles.
>>
>> Largely as a resultt of not having had any style of
>> their own for quite some time, and having a whole
>> new generation of teachers who studied in Moscow
>> under Neuhaus (e.g. Brigitte Engerer, Pierre
>> Sancan, Jacques Rouvier).
>
> Exactly. But as always, they have the musical ability to
> discriminate, to pick what is good and throw away the chaff.
Very clever double talk for "not being able to play
octaves, tenths and big chords as well as the Russians".
If we agree to call the above "chaff, voila, the problem
goes away immediately. Everything the French pianists do
not (or cannot) do is the result of superior taste, rather
than limited technical resources. Incidentally, the French
have always had a few really interesting pianists who were
overshadowed by monstres sacres like Cortot, Nat, Francois
and Casadesus. For instance, Jeanne Marie Darre, Monique
Haas and France Clidat deserve to be much better known.
>>> And the result is a plethora of interesting pianists
>>> coming up.
>>
>> And going to the wolves.
>
> Not that I have heard.
You must have a rather short memory.
>>> In the meantime, Moravec sits high above both the
>>> Russian pianists of the "jackboots" school of pianism,
>>
>> Geez! Jackboots are/were not exclusive to the Russians,
>> just remember William Kappell, Philippe Entremont, Elly
>> Ney, Wilhelm Backhaus, Walter Gieseking, Cladio "the
>> gaucho" Arrau, even Mme Argerich and Mr. Pollini more
>> often than one cares to admit.
>
> I think we disagree on the meaning of the term "jackboots".
Probably.
> Check your dictionary.
English here is different from what passes for English in
Ontario.
>>> as well as above the dull, scholarly musicologists who
>>> have also flooded the scene. Anyone for a Richard Goode
>>> ticket today?
>>
>> You can shove it in your moose's shithole and send him
>> to the concert.
>
> Precisely. See what I mean? Nobody wants one.
>
>>> And long may he continue to grace our concert platforms.
>>
>> Richard Goode?
>
> Perverse interpretation of the paragraph. Perhaps your
> Robot-Coupe prevented you from comprehending.
Only after your Robot Coupe prevented you from typing
coherent sentences.
dk
Tom Deacon
<dank...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Barely. She found it too "heavy".
She was right, of course. Leave it to the Mack Trucks.
In any case, she hardly belongs among your list of Russian pianists.
Argentina is a long way from Moscow.
>>>> Lord help them if they are ever faced with the
>>>> "simplicities" of Mozart,
>>>
>>>
>>> Lord help any pianist trying to compete with Gilels'
>>> K365, K467 or K595 or Bashkirov's K453 or K491. Or
>>> for that matter, even with Pletnev's K466. They will
>>> most likely sound coarse, vulgar, dry or constipated
>>> by comparison.
>>
>> Gilels' 595 is, in fact, extraordinary, but highly
>> sentimental in the end and stylisically overstated.
>
>
> Given that it is (in your own words) "extraordinary",
> all the other adjectives do not really matter.
But of course they do. He is "out of the ordinary", i.e. eccentric.
> Not to mention that Gilels' Mozart is nowhere as "sentimental"
> as Edwin Fischer's or Artur Schnabel's.
Schnabel's Mozart never veers into self-indulgent emotionalism, which is why
Gilels' 595 is so potent. Like cheap sentiment, as Wilde said.
> One does gather that you prefer your Mozart dressed in
> the pretty clockwork of Santa Clara or Mme Haebler, or
> with the thick sugar coating of Geza Panda.
No, I just prefer the music presented with a modicum of tact, discretion,
taste, and technique.
>> I won't mention the other two examples. PUHLEESE!
>
>
> We can find others.
Please be my guest.
>>>> for example, or a Chopin Mazurka,
>>>
>>> Have you ever heard (of) a guy named Sofronitsky?
>>
>> Dead, long since.
>>
>>> Or Bashkirov? Or Sokolov?
>>
>> Exactly. Can't handle them if their lives depended
>> upon it. Completely but totally gauche.
>
>
> You have clearly not listened to much (if any) Bashkirov,
> and you are simply trying to cover up your ignorance with
> slogans and hand waving.
Wrong.
And Sokolov is a PRIME candidate for gauchery.
>>>> or even a Rachmaninoff Prelude which demands lyricism
>>>> and not "power pianism".
>>>
>>> Not enough lyricism in Richter's or Pletnev's Preludes?
>>> (when called for of course).
>>
>> Richter was never a member of the "jackboots" school of
>> pianism. Pletnev was in his early days - I heard him live
>> then - but has improved immensely.
>
>
> If Pletnev's early work can be described as "jackboots"
> you must be using the language in a very strange fashion.
> We've always know that English is somewhat different North
> of the border, with all that French rot contamination, but
> "jackboots" seems a little harsh for Pletnev's arrangements
> of the Nutcracker and Sleeping Beauty. The sublety of touch,
> color and articulation displayed in those works leaves even
> Horowitz and Michelangeli in the dust.
He is and was very adept at a certain kind of confection, even at an early
stage.
But as one who endured each and every round of his Tchaikovsky Competition
performance in 1978, I can attest to the brittle, dry, emotionally
constipated pianism delivered there. And his Prokofiev 7 was pure jackboots
stuff. Forget the "recoding" released during the competition to
(pre)announce him as the winning candidate. I'm talking about the actual
playing in the flesh, in the hall. Really disconcerting.
His transformation into a great pianist has been both surprising and
satisfying.
>>>> Anyone who has ever attended the International Tchaikovsky
>>>> Competition throughout its lengthy preliminary rounds will
>>>> grant the Russians precedence in the Etudes, and so on. But
>>>> give them anything by Beethoven, or Mozart, or Schubert, or
>>>> Chopin, and it largely becomes a no-contest victory for
>>>> musicians of wider musical scope.
>>>
>>> Another non-sequitur. Have you listened to any Van Cliburn
>>> competitions lately?
>>
>> Yup. Same story.
>
>
> Glad to hear jackboots piano playing is not the monopoly of
> the Moscow Conservatory or the Tchaikovsky Piano Competition.
>
> Is Montreal any better? I haven't been there in a long time,
> and some part of my body keeps thinking of Toque and Claude
> Postel.
?
All competitions in which the Russians - formerly Soviets - appear, are
studded with this style of sock-it-to-em pianism. The very kind which you
find lacking in Ivan Moravec. Thank the Lord for small mercies.
>>>> Koren mentions Lupu, himself a product of the Moscow
>>>> Conservatory. Fortunately Lupu imbibed the right lessons
>>>> from that place and came away fully equipeed technically
>>>> but also with his musical instincts intact. Most are not
>>>> so fortunate.
>>>
>>> That is no different from any other conservatory. Juilliard,
>>> Curtis and Peabody churn out as many pianistic robots as
>>> does Moscow, and of lower average quality. Moscow graduates
>>> can at least play Bach decently enough.
>>
>> You think so? Really?
>
>
> At least as good as Mme Hewitt.
You think so? Really?
For you, perhaps. But I don't accept the statement in any form whatsoever.
Everything the French pianists do
> not (or cannot) do is the result of superior taste, rather
> than limited technical resources. Incidentally, the French
> have always had a few really interesting pianists who were
> overshadowed by monstres sacres like Cortot, Nat, Francois
> and Casadesus. For instance, Jeanne Marie Darre, Monique
> Haas and France Clidat deserve to be much better known.
I have known Madame Clidat. And she has attained every bit of fame she
deserves. Perhaps a trifle too much.
Darre is another case, but there she was typecast early on as a Saint-Saens
pianist and could never escape the moniker. In fact her SS was sui generis.
But the music is much despised, alas, and now only served up by musically
stunted players like Hough with no style. Darre, yes, indeed.
Monique Haas was a lovely player. Small sound. Small hands - talk about
10ths!!! You might have well used her as an example.
>>>> And the result is a plethora of interesting pianists
>>>> coming up.
>>>
>>> And going to the wolves.
>>
>> Not that I have heard.
>
>
> You must have a rather short memory.
Only one that I can think of, and more literally than you suggested.
>
>>>> In the meantime, Moravec sits high above both the
>>>> Russian pianists of the "jackboots" school of pianism,
>>>
>>> Geez! Jackboots are/were not exclusive to the Russians,
>>> just remember William Kappell, Philippe Entremont, Elly
>>> Ney, Wilhelm Backhaus, Walter Gieseking, Cladio "the
>>> gaucho" Arrau, even Mme Argerich and Mr. Pollini more
>>> often than one cares to admit.
>>
>> I think we disagree on the meaning of the term "jackboots".
>
>
> Probably.
>
>
>> Check your dictionary.
>
>
> English here is different from what passes for English in
> Ontario.
>
>
>>>> as well as above the dull, scholarly musicologists who
>>>> have also flooded the scene. Anyone for a Richard Goode
>>>> ticket today?
>>>
>>> You can shove it in your moose's shithole and send him
>>> to the concert.
>>
>> Precisely. See what I mean? Nobody wants one.
>>
>>>> And long may he continue to grace our concert platforms.
>>>
>>> Richard Goode?
>>
>> Perverse interpretation of the paragraph. Perhaps your
>> Robot-Coupe prevented you from comprehending.
>
>
> Only after your Robot Coupe prevented you from typing
> coherent sentences.
You should star in Chinese Karate movies. You can play the role of "chop
chop"!
TD
abac...@att.net
don't agree...... better lsiten more carefully to the voicing.....
> Never a truer word was spoken. And this quality - to answer Arri's
challenge
I dont have TD's mentality..... I am not "challenging" anybody. If you
dont agree, that is fine.....
> - is precisely what allies Moravec with Michelangeli. Personally, I
find
> Moravec's musical ideas far more interesting than those of his former
> teacher.
that is ridiculous. at his best, Moravec does not even approach ABM in
any facet of pianism..... I find Moravec not so "interesting" as a
refined,musical pianist without any particular strenghts. How you find
him so interesting is beyond me. I think he is about as interesting as
Brendel.....
But that may be a minority view. And I don't take away for a single
minute my respect for ABM.
to compare him in any positive way to ABM is a crime SFAIAC :-))
AB
> TD
abac...@att.net
just did not have the patience to say what you said.
I feel that people latch on to some of these musicians for no apparant
reason....
I am almost sure if one were to listen "blind folded" the points of
comparison made by DK would be quite obvious.....
AB
FWIW, a professional pianist, Block felt exactly as dk and I feel.....
AB
abac...@att.net
> >
> > Mr. Moravec is indeed a very fine craftsman of the piano.
> > His interpretations are carefully constructed with great
> > attention to detail, as perfectly polished as his scalp.
> >
> > He is however not a great artist in the sense I use this
> > term -- although he may well be one in the sense Deacon
> > uses it (see for instance Mme Strudel Haebler).
>
>
> Koren goes for the slam-bang, thank you ma'am school of Russian piano
> playing. And that, I am afraid, indicates the limits of his taste.
regardless of what dk "goes for" it has nothing to do with his thoughts
about Moravec.... his taste has nothing to do with at all...... he is
right on the money on Mr. M.
> Most music, in fact, does NOT benefit from such an approach -
although some
> does, of course - making Russian pianists largely limited in their
> repertoire.
More bullshit..... Richter, Gilels, Sofrinitky,Feinberg, Pletnev
"limited in their repertoire". I think you are limited in your
thinking.
Lord help them if they are ever faced with the "simplicities" of
> Mozart, for example, or a Chopin Mazurka, or even a Rachmaninoff
Prelude
> which demands lyricism and not "power pianism".
STUPIDITY.....
Anyone who has ever attended
> the International Tchaikovsky Competition throughout its lengthy
preliminary
> rounds will grant the Russians precedence in the Etudes, and so on.
But give
> them anything by Beethoven, or Mozart, or Schubert, or Chopin, and it
> largely becomes a no-contest victory for musicians of wider musical
scope.
the above goes for most of the lesser musicians from all the countries.
> Koren mentions Lupu, himself a product of the Moscow Conservatory.
> Fortunately Lupu imbibed the right lessons from that place and came
away
> fully equipeed technically but also with his musical instincts
intact. Most
> are not so fortunate.
no, more bullshit.... Lupu inherited the right GENES from whatever and
that is why he plays like he does....
> Of course it isn't any better at Juilliard these days, now that the
truly
> great teachers are long dead. And the cookie-cutter pianists churned
out by
> that institution of higher learning are each less interesting than
the one
> before.
the greatest musicians are not taught.... the are born to be great and
it does not matter WHERE they get their musical education....
> The Paris Conservatoire is a tiny bit better; the schooling there
seems to
> have taken on a variety of styles. And the result is a plethora of
> interesting pianists coming up.
yes, TD, tell who to look for.....
> In the meantime, Moravec sits high above both the Russian pianists of
the
> "jackboots" school of pianism, as well as above the dull, scholarly
> musicologists who have also flooded the scene.
really....... Moravec is not dull???? I think you are smoking pot from
the Canadian Northwest, ( the capital of pot prodcution) in North
America :-)
Anyone for a Richard Goode
> ticket today? And long may he continue to grace our concert
platforms.
another competent, unexciting, uninteresting pianist.... you live in a
dreamworld, TD
AB
> TD
Dan Koren
You can star in them too.
You can play the role
of chopped chopped.
dk
Dan Koren
news:1111371425....@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> Koren mentions Lupu, himself a product of the Moscow Conservatory.
>> Fortunately Lupu imbibed the right lessons from that place and came
> away
>> fully equipeed technically but also with his musical instincts
> intact. Most
>> are not so fortunate.
>
> no, more bullshit.... Lupu inherited the right
> GENES from whatever and that is why he plays
> like he does....
>
In fairness, Lupu studied with Heinrich and
Stanislav Neuhaus (and their assistants,
probably including Naum Shtarkman).
Genes alone cannot take one very far in the
art of piano playing. Just look at Claudio
Arrau, and at the other end of the spectrum,
Evgeny Kissin.
dk
Dan Koren
news:1111370361.0...@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> very well said DK, (for a change):-) You echo my thoughts EXACTLY. I
> just did not have the patience to say what you said.
>
> I feel that people latch on to some of these musicians for no apparant
> reason....
> I am almost sure if one were to listen "blind folded" the points of
> comparison made by DK would be quite obvious.....
>
> AB
>
> FWIW, a professional pianist, Block felt exactly as dk and I feel.....
>
I almost feel insulted... ;-)
dk
Bob Harper
and pianism, but the two recitals I've heard by Ivan Moravec have been
two of the greatest evenings of music it has ever been my privilege to
experience. And his recordings aren't bad, either.
Bob Harper
Tom Deacon
Harper" <bob.h...@comcast.net> wrote:
> Compared with the others in this thread, I know nothing about pianists
> and pianism, but the two recitals I've heard by Ivan Moravec have been
> two of the greatest evenings of music it has ever been my privilege to
> experience. And his recordings aren't bad, either.
Compared with the others in this thread, Bob, you would seem to know more
about pianists and pianism.
Indeed, a great pianist, and an even greater musician.
TD
Tom Deacon
1111371425....@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com, "abac...@att.net"
<abac...@att.net> wrote:
> Anyone for a Richard Goode
>> ticket today? And long may he continue to grace our concert
> platforms.
>
> another competent, unexciting, uninteresting pianist.... you live in a
> dreamworld, TD
Like Koren, you only follow your own thoughts.
The subject of that comment was Moravec.
TD
abac...@att.net
>
> > Alan is a true gentleman... dk, you could learn from him,(maybe
even I
> > could):-)
>
> You got that right, too.
>
> Hey, Arri, you're on a roll. Don't stop now.
>
> TD
what should I put on the "roll"... some Canadian salmon full of
mercury and
other pollutants:-)
AB
abac...@att.net
> >>
> >> Koren mentions Lupu, himself a product of the Moscow Conservatory.
> >> Fortunately Lupu imbibed the right lessons from that place and
came
> > away
> >> fully equipeed technically but also with his musical instincts
> > intact. Most
> >> are not so fortunate.
> >
> > no, more bullshit.... Lupu inherited the right
> > GENES from whatever and that is why he plays
> > like he does....
> >
>
>
> In fairness, Lupu studied with Heinrich and
> Stanislav Neuhaus (and their assistants,
> probably including Naum Shtarkman).
I doubt if it matters who he studied with.... his concepts are innate
just like Arrau and Kissin concepts are innate that you mention
below.......
don't really understand what you mean about them and genes.
Genes is waht takes the great pianists as far as they go...... in fact
the really great pianists often dont study that long with famous
teachers,
like Hofmann, Richter, Gieseking,Horowitz, Lipatti,etc...... (don't
know about Sanchez) :-))
AB
abac...@att.net
> > very well said DK, (for a change):-) You echo my thoughts EXACTLY.
I
> > just did not have the patience to say what you said.
> >
> > I feel that people latch on to some of these musicians for no
apparant
> > reason....
> > I am almost sure if one were to listen "blind folded" the points of
> > comparison made by DK would be quite obvious.....
> >
> > AB
> >
> > FWIW, a professional pianist, Block felt exactly as dk and I
feel.....
> >
>
>
> I almost feel insulted... ;-)
>
>
> dk
"almost" means nothing:-) try to handle the situation as best as you
can :-)
AB
abac...@att.net
it applies to Moravec as well.
AB
Tom Deacon
1111427359....@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com, "abac...@att.net"
<abac...@att.net> wrote:
How would you know?
You've never heard him play.
TD
Dan Koren
>>
>> it applies to Moravec as well.
>
> How would you know?
>
> You've never heard him play.
>
On the other hand, I have.
Nice, but ultimately boring.
dk
abac...@att.net
> > it applies to Moravec as well.
>
> How would you know?
>
> You've never heard him play.
>
> TD
you mean the recordings that I have heard, (more than enuf) dont really
represent his playing??????
AB
abac...@att.net
more or less like his recordings??
AB
Marcel Bartnik
"Tom Deacon" <deac...@nospam-yahoo.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:BE637F1E.C5F6%deac...@nospam-yahoo.com...
>
> Darre is another case, but there she was typecast early on as a
Saint-Saens
> pianist and could never escape the moniker. In fact her SS was sui
generis.
> But the music is much despised, alas, and now only served up by musically
> stunted players like Hough with no style.
Do you know the new Saint-Saëns recording (on Audite SACDs) with Anna
Malikova? It has been much praised by critics. Personally I find it
splendidly recorded, great sound, excellent orchestra and conductor (Thomas
Sanderling), and played very expressively, with much attention to detail.
Small caveat, at least for me (I don't share your disdain for Hough, but
that's another story) is that sometimes a little more fire would be
welcome - not only compared to Hough, but also to Freire's recording of the
2nd concerto, for example (on Silverline DVD).
M.B.
Dan Koren
news:42401487$1...@127.0.0.1...
>
> "Marcel Bartnik" <marcel_bartnik@nospam_gmx.de> wrote in message
> news:d1oc48$1rke$1...@ulysses.news.tiscali.de...
>>
>> Do you know the new Saint-Saëns recording (on Audite SACDs) with Anna
>> Malikova? It has been much praised by critics. Personally I find it
>> splendidly recorded, great sound, excellent orchestra and conductor
>> (Thomas
>> Sanderling), and played very expressively, with much attention to detail.
>> Small caveat, at least for me (I don't share your disdain for Hough, but
>> that's another story) is that sometimes a little more fire would be
>> welcome - not only compared to Hough, but also to Freire's recording of
>> the
>> 2nd concerto, for example (on Silverline DVD).
>>
>> M.B.
>>
>
Or Rubinstein? ;-)
dk
Bob Lombard
"Marcel Bartnik" <marcel_bartnik@nospam_gmx.de> wrote in message
news:d1oc48$1rke$1...@ulysses.news.tiscali.de...
>
> Malikova? It has been much praised by critics. Personally I find it
> splendidly recorded, great sound, excellent orchestra and conductor
> (Thomas
> Sanderling), and played very expressively, with much attention to detail.
> Small caveat, at least for me (I don't share your disdain for Hough, but
> that's another story) is that sometimes a little more fire would be
> welcome - not only compared to Hough, but also to Freire's recording of
> the
> 2nd concerto, for example (on Silverline DVD).
>
> M.B.
>
bl
Marcel Bartnik
"Dan Koren" <dank...@yahoo.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:4240507c$1...@news.meer.net...
Yes, I know both of these performances. They're fine, both have their merits
(especially Rubinstein's) but I still prefer Freire's.
I guess then that my initial question (directed at Tom, by the way) about
Malikova's new recordings will go unanswered.
M.B.
Tom Deacon
"Marcel Bartnik" <marcel_bartnik@nospam_gmx.de> wrote:
Sorry, Marcel. I was not aware you were addressing that query to me.
The answer will have to be a "no", for the time being. Just haven't noticed
that CD or the reviews you mention.
The SS concerto sweepstakes entered the realm of the ridiculous when Hough's
appallingly cynical recordings won some Gramophone Magazine award. My
outrage at that designation was exceeded only by my support for almost any
other available recording - with the exception of Entremont, whom I refuse
to endorse in anything ever written for the piano - with heavy enthusiasm
for Darre, of course, Rubinstein, of course, and even Roge and Tacchino.
So, there is a new arrival on the "scene". Good. The music deserves to be
heard and played really well. It is NOT junk.
TD
Marcel Bartnik
>
> Sorry, Marcel. I was not aware you were addressing that query to me.
>
> The answer will have to be a "no", for the time being. Just haven't
noticed
> that CD or the reviews you mention.
>
> The SS concerto sweepstakes entered the realm of the ridiculous when
Hough's
> appallingly cynical recordings won some Gramophone Magazine award. My
> outrage at that designation was exceeded only by my support for almost any
> other available recording - with the exception of Entremont, whom I refuse
> to endorse in anything ever written for the piano - with heavy enthusiasm
> for Darre, of course, Rubinstein, of course, and even Roge and Tacchino.
>
> So, there is a new arrival on the "scene". Good. The music deserves to be
> heard and played really well. It is NOT junk.
>
> TD
I should have made myself clearer when addressing you, that's true. I agree
that this music should be played more often and has real value (I also find
Entremont boring in anything I've ever heard with him). I think you'll find
the Malikova recordings to your liking, should you decide to acquire them. I
quote some reviews below, FYI.
M.B.
-----------
http://www.classicstoday.com/review.asp?ReviewNum=8302
We badly need a first-rate Saint-Saëns piano concerto cycle in modern sound.
I know that this may be a minority view, but I found Stephen Hough's
Hyperion edition unsatisfying both interpretively and technically. The best
overall remains Jean-Marie Darré's mono EMI set from the mid-1950s, and I'm
happy to report that this newcomer, if it stays true to form, will offer an
essential complement to that classic (and hard to find) set. You might say
that Sanderling and Melikova take a more "German" or "symphonic" approach to
the music, but never to the point of heaviness. Indeed, at tempos very
marginally slower than the norm, Malikova uses the extra time to point her
phrases and inflect the music's singing lines with exceptional poise and
genuinely French elegance and grace.
Take, for example, the popular central scherzo of the Second Concerto, with
its delicious interplay between soloist and orchestra. Every exchange
between them registers with maximum color in a genuine dialog, while the
concluding tarantella has power as well as the necessary swiftness.
Malikova's right hand floats the melodies over her rock-solid left,
generating excitement with no trace of glibness. I also very much like the
darkness that she and Sanderling bring to the first movement of the Fourth
Concerto, a tough work to hold together, but that here seems to grow with
organic inevitability as well as an unusual amount of emotional depth. The
second movement has particular cogency, with Malikova clearly making an
effort to characterize each episode, building the work to an unusually
satisfying conclusion.
She also makes a persuasive case for the neglected First Concerto (actually
the largest of these three), aided in no small degree by a conductor clearly
aware of the music's debt to Beethoven and Mozart. There are no "dead spots"
here. Malikova's treatment of the Andante has great fluidity and poise,
while the finale offers high spirits with no hint of shallowness. Listen to
the way Malikova holds her own against the orchestra in the big chords that
comprise the opening theme: that's exactly what this music needs--players
who really dig in and take it seriously. A co-production with WDR, the
sonics are ideally warm and well balanced, the piano tone gleaming. In
multi-channel format there's no loss of impact, and there's greater
front-to-back depth. An outstanding disc in every way--I eagerly look
forward to Volume 2!
--David Hurwitz
--------------------
http://www.classicstoday.com/review.asp?ReviewNum=8703
This second installment in Audite's complete series of Saint-Saëns piano
concertos completes what easily is the finest modern reference edition for
these beautiful, underrated works. As in the previous release, Anna Malikova
displays all of the classical virtues that the composer requires: gleaming
tone, polished scales, shapely phrasing, and most of all, a light touch that
makes whatever tempos she chooses flow effortlessly. On the whole, these
versions are a bit slower than the classic performances by Jeanne-Marie
Darré on EMI, but Thomas Sanderling's leadership is so probing and detailed,
so refreshingly respectful of the text yet never inflated, that the
performances are as valuable for what he brings to the party as they are for
Malikova's contributions.
Take the Third Concerto: is there any more beautiful opening in the entire
literature? How marvelously Sanderling and Malikova underline the music's
romantic poetry, only to follow that evocative introduction with the most
cogent allegro on disc! In the andante, Malikova's ability to float the
music across the bar lines makes you think of Mozart, an apt comparison in
my view, since Saint-Saëns often combines grace and poise with sweet (but
never cloying) lyricism in equal measure. The finale, a brilliant trip to a
French music hall, sparkles with delightful detail, but also has sufficient
weight to bring the entire work to an immensely satisfying conclusion. Why
isn't this piece ever played? I just don't understand it.
I have to confess that I have a special fondness for the "Egyptian" Concerto
(simply called No. 5 here--no reason to be embarrassed, folks!). It's a
piece that should seem to play itself, but it conceals a host of
difficulties for the soloist. For example, in the first movement all of
those simple phrases, lyrical bits tied together by rippling scales, have to
go (as Mozart said) "like oil". Malikova's supple fingers float over the
keyboard like palm fronds wafting down the Nile, and she captures the
exoticism and mystery of the second movement without ever overdoing the
Orientalism. Part of her secret comes from always knowing the difference
between mere filigree and what really matters melodically. Notice also in
this same movement how cleanly Sanderling has the strings articulate the
opening rhythm: it comes across as an indistinct mush in most other
performances. The scintillating finale has a sense of swagger that I haven't
heard since Madga Tagliaferro's mono recording for Philips, and once again I
doff my hat to Sanderling for giving Malikova enough time to really
articulate the fistsful of notes.
Sonically this is state-of-the-art. Audite has captured a totally realistic
balance between soloist and orchestra, ideally clean and clear. Notice how
the woodwinds in the finales of both concertos engage Malikova in
characterful interplay, and in multichannel playback the rear channels add
depth without ever suggesting the instruments are placed behind the
listener. I look forward to years of pleasure living with these
performances, and I can't recommend them highly enough. They really do set a
new standard for performances of these works, and even if you know them well
you will come away from this disc more impressed with the music than you
probably thought possible. [3/15/2005]
--David Hurwitz
-------------------
http://classicalcdreview.com/MC132.html
Saint-Saëns' five piano concertos are wonderful pieces, brilliant for the
soloist, orchestrally imaginative (the first concerto opens with a series of
horn calls), and filled with ingratiating melodies. Audite's SACD is volume
one of the composer's works for piano and orchestra-a total winner in every
way. Anna Malikova is a pianist new to me although she has made a number of
recordings, primarily on budget labels, mostly music of Chopin and Schubert.
She graduated from Tchaikovsky Conservatory in 1991 and has won a number of
competitions since then. Malikova is a stylish performer with a solid
technique, tossing off Saint-Saëns' masses of notes with the greatest of
ease. The Cologne German Radio Orchestra is first-rate, with the
distinguished conductor Thomas Sanderling (son of Kurt Sanderling) not
missing a bit of the music's coruscating energy or humor. The surround sound
is superb, the rich piano sound always clear and nicely balanced with the
orchestra. Rear channels provide ambient sound effectively. Andreas Beutner
produced this recording with Mark Hohn as engineer; they did their work very
well indeed. I look forward to Volume II.
R.E.B. (February 2005)
Tom Deacon
"Marcel Bartnik" <marcel_bartnik@nospam_gmx.de> wrote:
>
> "Tom Deacon" <deac...@nospam-yahoo.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
> news:BE675FE1.C7DC%deac...@nospam-yahoo.com...
>>
>> Sorry, Marcel. I was not aware you were addressing that query to me.
>>
>> The answer will have to be a "no", for the time being. Just haven't
> noticed
>> that CD or the reviews you mention.
>>
>> The SS concerto sweepstakes entered the realm of the ridiculous when
> Hough's
>> appallingly cynical recordings won some Gramophone Magazine award. My
>> outrage at that designation was exceeded only by my support for almost any
>> other available recording - with the exception of Entremont, whom I refuse
>> to endorse in anything ever written for the piano - with heavy enthusiasm
>> for Darre, of course, Rubinstein, of course, and even Roge and Tacchino.
>>
>> So, there is a new arrival on the "scene". Good. The music deserves to be
>> heard and played really well. It is NOT junk.
>>
>> TD
>
> I should have made myself clearer when addressing you, that's true. I agree
> that this music should be played more often and has real value (I also find
> Entremont boring in anything I've ever heard with him). I think you'll find
> the Malikova recordings to your liking, should you decide to acquire them. I
> quote some reviews below, FYI.
But Marcel, surely you know that I attach no importance whatsoever to
anything David Hurwitz might say on anything except perhaps the weather, and
even then....
Your own recommendation, however, is appreciated.
Cheers,
Tom