Mozart Piano Concerto No. 24 in C minor (K491)
Matthew Silverstein
Stadtfeld in this concerto, and so I'm curious: what are everyone's
favorite performances? I'd love some recommendations, available separately
or only in a complete set.
Thanks!
Matty
Gerard
It's hard to name a favorite with a few splendid recordings around. It would
require comparing (something I very rarely do).
Some candidates:
- Moravec with Marriner
- Brendel (twice: with Marriner, with Mackerras)
- Shelley
Rugby
wrote:
I suspect you'll soon have a list of all recordings ever made odf K.
491, but one I enjoy:
Casadesus/Szell
Rugby
Matthew�B.�Tepper
be typed in news:cafc54f6-8387-4f94-8376-
b98cdd...@m20g2000vbp.googlegroups.com:
Curzon/Kert�sz.
--
Matthew B. Tepper: WWW, science fiction, classical music, ducks!
Read about "Proty" here: http://home.earthlink.net/~oy/proty.html
To write to me, do for my address what Androcles did for the lion
Opinions expressed here are not necessarily those of my employers
Andrej Kluge
Gerard wrote:
> It's hard to name a favorite with a few splendid recordings around.
> It would require comparing (something I very rarely do).
>
> Some candidates:
>
> - Brendel (twice: with Marriner, with Mackerras)
> - Shelley
Seconded: Brendel in K.466, Shelley in both. I enjoy also Goulds K.491, with
Badura-Skoda's cadenca in I. spliced in (instead of Gould's).
Ciao
AK
wkasimer
wrote:
> At least a few people disagree rather strongly with my recommendation for
> Stadtfeld in this concerto, and so I'm curious: what are everyone's
> favorite performances?
Gibbons/Brüggen (Philips, HIP, probably OOP).
Bill
Bastian Kubis
I mentioned mine in the other thread: three modern ones with smallish
orchestras, Pletnev, Anderszewski, and Vladar, all conducting from the
keybord; plus Annie Fischer/Kurtz for "big band". Of course I should
listen to everything I have again (also to maybe find a preference
between the first three); and of course this thread has already started
out with several recommendations I have never heard...
[Some I have heard and own and like, but I /think/ a little less than
the above, include Moravec/Marriner, Gould, Barenboim/EMI,
O'Conor/Mackerras; well, Stadtfeld, too, but I guess you figured *that*
out. ;-) I also have Edwin Fischer and Fou Ts'ong, but embarassingly
enough remember nothing about the performances.]
Bastian
Bastian Kubis
>> At least a few people disagree rather strongly with my recommendation for
>> Stadtfeld in this concerto, and so I'm curious: what are everyone's
>> favorite performances?
>
Interesting - I once saw that listed somewhere, but can't remember it
ever being mentioned around here (which I found surprising, given the
number of eloquent Br�ggen admirers around here). Can you say a bit
more about what this is like? Despite the fact that I very much like
HIP orchestral sonorities, I remain a bit sceptical towards
fortepianos... How does this one sound?
Bastian
wkasimer
> > Gibbons/Brüggen (Philips, HIP, probably OOP).
>
> Interesting - I once saw that listed somewhere, but can't remember it
> ever being mentioned around here (which I found surprising, given the
> number of eloquent Brüggen admirers around here). Can you say a bit
> more about what this is like? Despite the fact that I very much like
> HIP orchestral sonorities, I remain a bit sceptical towards
> fortepianos... How does this one sound?
I don't think that this one will change your mind. It's not so much
the instrument as Gibbons, who plays well but without a lot of
passion. I like this recording mostly for the orchestral
contribution. As I recall, there's a fabulous broadcast with Bruggen
and Bezuidenhout kicking around cyberspace.
Bill
Simon Roberts
news:htb0hp1lxbri.c...@40tude.net:
Annie Fischer/EMI (some of the best old-fashioned Mozart on discs and still
one of the most powerful/dramatic accounts of the outer movements, thanks
in part to the orchestral contribution); Brendel/Marriner; maybe Vladar.
The best HIP performance I've heard was a broadcast by Bezuidenhout - right
now the name of the conductor escapes me; may have been Herreweghe.
Simon
mandryka
like him in 19 amd 27.
mandryka
Here are my favourites on pianoforte.
Gould's studio recording -- the one with Susskind. (Not the live one.)
There Variations movement contains some of the best Mozart playing I
have ever heard -- especially the final variation.
Edwin Fischer – the one with the Danish orchestra has slightly better
sound than the one he conducted from the piano for EMI.
Curzon and Kubelik – a real good rapport between conductor and
orchestra and hence some special poetry. I like this more than
Curzon’s other recordings.
Brendel and Mackerras – way better I think than his CD with Marriner.
Dark and tragic – but I haven’t lived with this one for as long as the
others.
On fortepiano two have given me a lot of pleasure. Bilson and Gardiner
is glittering and intense. And I love the way Viviana Sofronitski
does it – lively joyful playing.
If I could only have one it would be the Gould.
Simon Roberts
be20-c1f...@p23g2000vbl.googlegroups.com:
> Can someone review Schnabel's for me? -- I have never heard it, but I
> like him in 19 amd 27.
>
You have to be tolerant of the stylistic clash posed by his cadenza (which
evidently provoked snickering from members of the orchestra, resulting in a
rather tense atmosphere).
Simon (who doesn't remember much of the rest of the performance; but how
bad can it be?)
Simon Roberts
8eed-3b1...@p20g2000vbl.googlegroups.com:
> Yudina � unbelievably fine Mozartian. I just can�t describe how
> convincing her recording is.
Can you describe *what* it is? Unless my memory's worse than I think it's
become, I've only seen/heard Yudina in 466 and 488, not 491.
Simon
mandryka
> mandryka <howie.st...@googlemail.com> wrote in news:4a511589-1908-4dec-
> 8eed-3b15f18a7...@p20g2000vbl.googlegroups.com:
>
> > Yudina – unbelievably fine Mozartian. I just can’t describe how
> > convincing her recording is.
>
> Can you describe *what* it is? Unless my memory's worse than I think it's
> become, I've only seen/heard Yudina in 466 and 488, not 491.
>
> Simon
Sorry mate -- that was a mistake. I tried to delete the reference to
Yudina but I clearly I failed (how come -- are you reading on a
newsreader?)
I was confusing Yudina's PC20 with PC24 -- sorry! As soon as I
realised I tried to edit the post.
This software is so unforgiving!
In brief my favourite piano recordings are Gould, Fischer, Curzon and
Brendel.
Bastian Kubis
> Brendel/Marriner;
mandryka wrote:
> Brendel and Mackerras � way better I think than his CD with Marriner.
> Dark and tragic � but I haven�t lived with this one for as long as
> the others.
Could the two of you try and describe the respective merits of
Brendel/Marriner and Brendel/Mackerras? I don't have any Brendel in
Mozart, but would be very willing to try one of the two... but which??
Bastian
Simon Roberts
@news.eternal-september.org:
> Simon Roberts wrote:
>> Brendel/Marriner;
>
> mandryka wrote:
>> Brendel and Mackerras � way better I think than his CD with Marriner.
>> Dark and tragic � but I haven�t lived with this one for as long as
>> the others.
>
> Could the two of you try and describe the respective merits of
> Brendel/Marriner and Brendel/Mackerras? I don't have any Brendel in
> Mozart, but would be very willing to try one of the two... but which??
>
> Bastian
>
I've not listened to either one in quite a while, but I've been generally
disappointed by Brendel's remakes with Mackerras (17, one of the weaker
entries in his set with Marriner, is an exception), who isn't anywhere near
as characterful as he is in his marvelous remakes of syms 38-41 on Linn. I
don't think it's an improvement over Marriner's airy, clean-textured,
contribution. Nor is Brendel's playing, which sounds smoother and blander
to me (but then I'm rather partial to the somewhat detached articulation he
was prone to in the early 70s when this was made - I realize that many are
not). Of course, it's quite possible that were I to compare them side-by-
side today, I would react differently....
Simon
Simon Roberts
a936-573...@o13g2000vbl.googlegroups.com:
> On Oct 22, 7:48�pm, Simon Roberts <s...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> mandryka <howie.st...@googlemail.com> wrote in news:4a511589-1908-4dec-
>> 8eed-3b15f18a7...@p20g2000vbl.googlegroups.com:
>>
>> > Yudina � unbelievably fine Mozartian. I just can�t describe how
>> > convincing her recording is.
>>
>> Can you describe *what* it is? �Unless my memory's worse than I think i
> t's
>> become, I've only seen/heard Yudina in 466 and 488, not 491.
>>
>> Simon
>
>
> Sorry mate -- that was a mistake. I tried to delete the reference to
> Yudina but I clearly I failed (how come -- are you reading on a
> newsreader?)
Yes; perhaps to punish you for trying to delete your message it appeared
(to me, anyway) about four times!
> I was confusing Yudina's PC20 with PC24 -- sorry! As soon as I
> realised I tried to edit the post.
Doesn't matter - anyway, I agree with you re the Mozart she *did* record!
Simon
Harry C
wrote:
Before this thread is out, every single recording ever made of this
wonderful piece will have been mentioned. I'd like, if I may, to
contribute to this by mentioning the recording with Christian
Zaccharias, with the North German Radio Orchestra conducted by Gunter
Wand.
But then again, I can't remember ever hearing any performance of this
work that didn't make me wonder at the sheer glory of it.
Harry C
Greg
Of all the pieces on which I have spent considerable time doing
comparative listening, two of the most difficult in terms of settling
on one or two favorite versions have been Mahler 9 and Mozart K491.
Now we have simultaneous threads on both... For the Mahler, the
"problem" seems to me to be an abundance of very good performances;
for the Mozart the problem (for me) is the lack of anything good
enough.
Perhaps I have some sort of partial blind spot here, but I am usually
at least a little disappointed by performances I hear of this
concerto. To me, the orchestral contribution in particular usually
seems too tame by half, lacking passion and fire. I compared about 15
or so versions several months ago (including most of the stereo
versions mentioned already), and really the only one that went (more
or less) far enough in the orchestral part was O'Conor/Mackerras. At
least the brass and timpani show up. But then you have to have
O'Conor, who is pretty good (better than he often is), but not more
than that. Still, this is probably my overall favorite until
something better comes along. I will also at least partially endorse
Fischer/Kurtz, Curzon/Kertesz, Vladar (though I don't like it as much
as his 21), Moravec/Marriner, Haskil/Markevitch (mostly for the
orchestra) and the mono Casadesus/Szell (but I'm less fond of the
stereo one). I ordered the Stadtfeld a few days ago, but it is
presumably still on its way.
So, in summary, if anyone knows of a version that they consider "too
extreme", I'd love to hear about it...
Greg
Greg
> Simon Roberts wrote:
> > Brendel/Marriner;
> mandryka wrote:
> > Dark and tragic – but I haven’t lived with this one for as long as
> > the others.
>
> Could the two of you try and describe the respective merits of
> Brendel/Marriner and Brendel/Mackerras? I don't have any Brendel in
> Mozart, but would be very willing to try one of the two... but which??
>
> Bastian
Caution: Highly detailed and technical review to follow.
Brendel/Marriner - Brendel pretty good, Marriner dull
Brendel/Mackerras - Brendel less good, Mackerras pretty good
I recommend neither, as you have several that are better. YMMV.
Greg
Sol L. Siegel
news:7kba1nF...@mid.individual.net:
I have no problem with Gould's cadenza - especially when compared to
Schnabel's!
I can also endorse Zacharias/Wand and Edwin Fischer on APR.
I have recordings by Denis Mathews, Clara Haskil and Solomon which I
remember liking but which I haven't played in too long - the usual
problem with a collection that gets much over a thousand discs.
--
- Sol L. Siegel, Philadelphia, PA USA
Greg
Let me expand on my previous (rather dismissive) remarks. First - my
comments were restricted to the different versions of 24, both of
which I think are pretty good, but not special. Second, as I re-read
Bastian's question, I don't want to seem like I am bashing all of the
Brendel Mozart recordings. The Marriner set has some worthwhile
performances, notably (but not exclusively) 9 and 21, and I like one
or two of the Mackerras ones as well (I think 17 and 22, but I'm not
sure I am remembering correctly). As sets go, Brendel/Marriner is one
of the better ones, I think. There, that's more what I meant to say.
Greg
Alan Cooper
news:Xns9CAC79CDA7E7...@216.196.97.131:
I think it was with Brueggen and the Orchestra of the 18th Century if we're
referrring to the same performance. Terrific performance. I have that one and Fou
Ts'ong/Sinfonia Varsovia on my ipod right now and am enjoying both of them very much.
AV
Rugby
> Can someone review Schnabel's for me? -- I have never heard it, but I
> like him in 19 amd 27.
Stick with Schnabel in 27. I also have DeLarrocha and Backhaus there,
and neither quite matches Schanbel's vigor,nor his trancendent slow
mov.
As to K.491, the one I have not Schnabel's best moments.In fairness,
mine is a Classics D'Oro release by Allegro, which is alledged by IPA
to be a pirate , dubbing lp's.TD,anyone else, on this
allegation ? The sound is lousy. Allegro had a companion label
Fidelio, with which I believe Barrington-Coupe was once
associated.Maybe mine is not Schnabel, but Hatto ?! The liner notes
give no dates or even orchestra/conductor ?! Schnabel seems in a hurry
to get done, perhaps because of the tension reported here earlier
arising from use of his own cadenzas.The first mov. cadenza sounds
like poor Reger, the 3rd mv.cadenza poor Thalberg. The slow mov. is
hurried. Schnabel really off here, one of his worst. I have a lot of
Schnabel, and he is one of my heroes, but I'll stick with Casadesus/
Szell, and I also understand, but have not heard, that Rubinstein/
Hendl in K.491 also excellent.
Rugby
mandryka
it interesting?
I'll try and listen side by side to the two Brendels over the weekend
and post accordingly.
mandryka
movement was bloody amazing and that he could never write anything as
good.
What is the truth behind this bit of internet gossip?
Bastian Kubis
>>> Could the two of you try and describe the respective merits of
>>> Brendel/Marriner and Brendel/Mackerras? I don't have any Brendel in
>>> Mozart, but would be very willing to try one of the two... but which??
>>> Bastian
>> Caution: Highly detailed and technical review to follow.
>>
>> Brendel/Marriner - Brendel pretty good, Marriner dull
>>
>> Brendel/Mackerras - Brendel less good, Mackerras pretty good
>>
>> I recommend neither, as you have several that are better. YMMV.
>>
>> Greg
>
> Let me expand on my previous (rather dismissive) remarks. First - my
> comments were restricted to the different versions of 24, both of
> which I think are pretty good, but not special. Second, as I re-read
> Bastian's question, I don't want to seem like I am bashing all of the
> Brendel Mozart recordings. The Marriner set has some worthwhile
> performances, notably (but not exclusively) 9 and 21, and I like one
> or two of the Mackerras ones as well (I think 17 and 22, but I'm not
> sure I am remembering correctly). As sets go, Brendel/Marriner is one
> of the better ones, I think. There, that's more what I meant to say.
I loved your detailed technical review. But thanks for the more
extensive comments, too! [And thank you to Simon for /his/ answer to my
question.] I am probably not going for a complete set - for most Mozart
concertos, something of the order of 3-5 different recordings is enough
for me... the two minor concertos being the most prominent exceptions.
9, on the other hand, is one of which I could do with a couple of more
recordings, but that (by Brendel/Marriner) is of course /not/ coupled to
any of the others that interest me most. And then the complete set
costs only little more than one of those twofers...
But after your other comment down the thread, I feel rather impatient to
get home tonight and check O'Conor/Mackerras in 24 again - that seems to
be better than I actually remembered!
Bastian
herman
I doubt Beethoven had a lot of time to gossip on the internet.
However this story belongs to the confirmed Beethoven tradition, C
minor being a big thing with ol' blue eyes.
Gerard
>
> Of all the pieces on which I have spent considerable time doing
> comparative listening, two of the most difficult in terms of settling
> on one or two favorite versions have been Mahler 9 and Mozart K491.
> Now we have simultaneous threads on both... For the Mahler, the
> "problem" seems to me to be an abundance of very good performances;
> for the Mozart the problem (for me) is the lack of anything good
> enough.
It's very hard to imagine here that there is nothing good enough.
Is this because you are a pianist/conductor yourself and nobody else is capable
of realizing what's in your mind about this music?
>
> Perhaps I have some sort of partial blind spot here, but I am usually
> at least a little disappointed by performances I hear of this
> concerto. To me, the orchestral contribution in particular usually
> seems too tame by half, lacking passion and fire. I compared about 15
> or so versions several months ago (including most of the stereo
> versions mentioned already),
I'm curious to know if your comparing included Barenboim, Immerseel, Gibson,
Bilson, Perrahia, Shelley, Goode, Zaccharias, Anderszewski, Ashkenazy, Anda,
Pletnev, Gulda, Rubinstein, Kirschnereit.
(Or could you mention which 15 recordings you have compared?)
> and really the only one that went (more
> or less) far enough in the orchestral part was O'Conor/Mackerras. At
> least the brass and timpani show up. But then you have to have
> O'Conor, who is pretty good (better than he often is), but not more
> than that. Still, this is probably my overall favorite until
> something better comes along.
Is O'Connor to be recommended in the other Mozart concerti he has recorded? Or
only in a few ones?
Are those all with Mackerras?
wimpie
Any Bashkirov is interesting! I wish Melodya would issue more of his
recordings..........
W.
herman
>
> As to K.491, the one I have not Schnabel's best moments.In fairness,
> mine is a Classics D'Oro release by Allegro, which is alledged by IPA
> to be a pirate , dubbing lp's.TD,anyone else, on this
> allegation ? The sound is lousy. Allegro had a companion label
> Fidelio, with which I believe Barrington-Coupe was once
> associated.Maybe mine is not Schnabel, but Hatto ?! The liner notes
> give no dates or even orchestra/conductor ?! Schnabel seems in a hurry
> to get done, perhaps because of the tension reported here earlier
> arising from use of his own cadenzas.The first mov. cadenza sounds
> like poor Reger, the 3rd mv.cadenza poor Thalberg. The slow mov. is
> hurried. Schnabel really off here, one of his worst. I have a lot of
> Schnabel, and he is one of my heroes, but I'll stick with Casadesus/
> Szell, and I also understand, but have not heard, that Rubinstein/
> Hendl in K.491 also excellent.
>
> Rugby
The Schnabel recording I have is from June 1948 with the Philharmonia
and Walter Susskind. It has beautiful moment, and the sound is
perfectly alright on The Piano Library cd I have. However the
performance is marred by really weird cadenza's that don't make any
contact with the rest of the music.
Greg
> Greg wrote:
>
> > Of all the pieces on which I have spent considerable time doing
> > comparative listening, two of the most difficult in terms of settling
> > on one or two favorite versions have been Mahler 9 and Mozart K491.
> > Now we have simultaneous threads on both... For the Mahler, the
> > "problem" seems to me to be an abundance of very good performances;
> > for the Mozart the problem (for me) is the lack of anything good
> > enough.
>
> It's very hard to imagine here that there is nothing good enough.
> Is this because you are a pianist/conductor yourself and nobody else is capable
> of realizing what's in your mind about this music?
>
>
No, of course not. I simply haven't found a recording that I thought
to be excellent in terms of the contributions of both pianist and
conductor/orchestra. It's usually the orchestra that I find
lacking.
>
> > Perhaps I have some sort of partial blind spot here, but I am usually
> > at least a little disappointed by performances I hear of this
> > concerto. To me, the orchestral contribution in particular usually
> > seems too tame by half, lacking passion and fire. I compared about 15
> > or so versions several months ago (including most of the stereo
> > versions mentioned already),
>
> I'm curious to know if your comparing included Barenboim, Immerseel, Gibson,
> Bilson, Perrahia, Shelley, Goode, Zaccharias, Anderszewski, Ashkenazy, Anda,
> Pletnev, Gulda, Rubinstein, Kirschnereit.
> (Or could you mention which 15 recordings you have compared?)
>
I have all of those, except possibly Gulda. (Who is the conductor? I
don't think that was one of the Abbado ones, which I do have.) Of
those, Barenboim, Anderszewski, Pletnev, Zacharias, and probably
Kirschnereit are contenders.
> > and really the only one that went (more
> > or less) far enough in the orchestral part was O'Conor/Mackerras. At
> > least the brass and timpani show up. But then you have to have
> > O'Conor, who is pretty good (better than he often is), but not more
> > than that. Still, this is probably my overall favorite until
> > something better comes along.
>
> Is O'Connor to be recommended in the other Mozart concerti he has recorded? Or
> only in a few ones?
> Are those all with Mackerras?
I don't have them all, but of the ones I have heard, 24 stands out.
Mackerras is the main attraction, though.
Greg
Gerard
>
> No, of course not. I simply haven't found a recording that I thought
> to be excellent in terms of the contributions of both pianist and
> conductor/orchestra. It's usually the orchestra that I find
> lacking.
>
>
> I have all of those, except possibly Gulda. (Who is the conductor? I
> don't think that was one of the Abbado ones, which I do have.) Of
> those, Barenboim, Anderszewski, Pletnev, Zacharias, and probably
> Kirschnereit are contenders.
>
>
> I don't have them all, but of the ones I have heard, 24 stands out.
> Mackerras is the main attraction, though.
>
Thank you.
I'm not sure about Gulda - I know that he has recorded #20 with Abbado. Did he
record with Harnoncourt?
According to
http://fischer.hosting.paran.com/music/Gulda/discography-gulda.htm#Mozart
he recorded KV 491 with Keilberth and with ... ?
Gerard
> According to
> http://fischer.hosting.paran.com/music/Gulda/discography-gulda.htm#Mozart
> he recorded KV 491 with Keilberth and with ... ?
Probably Markevitch:
Gerard
> On Oct 23, 5:05 am, "Gerard" <ghen_nospam_drik...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > I'm curious to know if your comparing included Barenboim,
> > Immerseel, Gibson, Bilson, Perrahia, Shelley, Goode, Zaccharias,
> > Anderszewski, Ashkenazy, Anda, Pletnev, Gulda, Rubinstein,
> > Kirschnereit. (Or could you mention which 15 recordings you have
> > compared?)
> >
>
> I have all of those, except possibly Gulda. (Who is the conductor? I
> don't think that was one of the Abbado ones, which I do have.) Of
> those, Barenboim, Anderszewski, Pletnev, Zacharias, and probably
> Kirschnereit are contenders.
>
Didn't Pollini also record KV 491 recently?
How is that one?
Matthew Silverstein
> I loved your detailed technical review. But thanks for the more
> extensive comments, too! [And thank you to Simon for /his/ answer to my
> question.] I am probably not going for a complete set - for most Mozart
> concertos, something of the order of 3-5 different recordings is enough
> for me... the two minor concertos being the most prominent exceptions.
> 9, on the other hand, is one of which I could do with a couple of more
> recordings, but that (by Brendel/Marriner) is of course /not/ coupled to
> any of the others that interest me most. And then the complete set
> costs only little more than one of those twofers...
Really? Where can the complete set be purchased for such a reasonable
amount?
Matty
Matthew Silverstein
> It's very hard to imagine here that there is nothing good enough.
> Is this because you are a pianist/conductor yourself and nobody else is capable
> of realizing what's in your mind about this music?
Why must one be a pianist/conductor in order for this to be the case?
Matty
Bastian Kubis
Ah - on German Eloquence, i.e. probably only from German online stores:
<http://preview.tinyurl.com/yz59yh5> (amazon.de) or
<http://www.jpc.de/jpcng/classic/detail/-/hnum/7547854>. Admittedly,
"only little more" is a relative statement that takes into account that
those Philips Duo sets are more expensive here (18-19 Euros) than they
are in the US. Still, 22-25 Euros for a 10 CD set...
Bastian
mandryka
>
> - Show quoted text -
I'll try and find that transfer.
Do you feel the same about his cadenzas for 21?
mandryka
Yes -- he lead it from the piano with the VPO. Very big orchestra.
Gerard
That's not what I said. It was a question.
There are dozens of recordings of this work, and I suppose that most of those
are good enough to the pianists and conductors who performed on them. So I'm
wondering what special demands one has, if *no one* of the existing recordings
is good enough.
herman
Leitner / BPO.
I'm not even going to think why no one's mentioned that one.
Simon Roberts
a8de28...@d23g2000vbm.googlegroups.com:
> Frankly if I want to listen to this piece I usually grab the Kempff /
> Leitner / BPO.
>
> I'm not even going to think why no one's mentioned that one.
The conducting, perhaps (that's one reason why I wouldn't include it). I'm
with Greg on this concerto - it happens to be a favorite of mine, but while
there are plenty of recordings with marvelous details, and even several
really good accounts of the piano part, there are few that I find overall
satisfying as far as the orchestral contribution is concerned - I grew up
with Annie Fischer's and find it a bit odd that Efrem Kurz still has few
real rivals. There's no shortage of performances which succeed in the
quiet/lyrical music, but most short-change the drama, playing down dynamic
contrasts, softening attacks, subduing the brass and timpani (even in the
march variation in the finale), etc.
Simon
Simon Roberts
b41f-d49...@p9g2000vbl.googlegroups.com:
> There's a recording (I believe) by Bashkirov with Alexander Gauk -- is
> it interesting?
If that's the recording issued on CD in the Russian Piano School Edition,
coupled with K453, it's rather small-scale, pretty Mozart. I can't say it
interests me all that much, though it's extremely good playing of its sort.
Either way, you can download Bashkirov/Gauk very inexpensively via various
online outfits, including emusic.com.
Simon
Rugby
> I also understand, but have not heard, that Rubinstein/
> Hendl in K.491 also excellent.
>
Have not heard because it is Krips, not Hendl.
I really like what AR and Krips did in the Beethoven concerti for RCA.
Has anyone heard, be willing to comment on, the AR/Krips K.491 ?
Thanks.
Rugby
Simon Roberts
news:8c82c$4ae1942c$5ed13b3d$13...@cache5.tilbu1.nb.home.nl:
> I'm not sure about Gulda - I know that he has recorded #20 with
> Abbado.
Plus 21, 25 (though his earlier 25, cond. Collins, now on Testament, is far
better) and 27. His 21 and 27 on Preiser, if you can listen past
Swarowsky's dreadful accompaniments, are weird, featuring over-the-top and
surely not entirely stylish ornaments (21/ii is almost unrecognizable at
times).
> Did he record with Harnoncourt?
Yes (double cto, 23 and 26), but not 24.
Simon
Gerard
> At least a few people disagree rather strongly with my recommendation
> for Stadtfeld in this concerto, and so I'm curious: what are
> everyone's favorite performances? I'd love some recommendations,
> available separately or only in a complete set.
>
Anyone about Uchida's last one?
http://www.deccaclassics.com/newsandnewreleases/september2009/4781524.htm
mandryka
> herman <her...@yahoo.com> wrote in news:0b41db05-6923-4bf2-a985-
So Fischer/Kurtz is ,inevitably, tempting me, despite the premium
price.
Before I one click and then pour myself a scotch -- tell me, how is
the PC27 it comes coupled with?
Ludwig
wrote:
> At least a few people disagree rather strongly with my recommendation for
> Stadtfeld in this concerto, and so I'm curious: what are everyone's
> favorite performances? I'd love some recommendations, available separately
> or only in a complete set.
>
>
> Matty
A potentially interesting survey of recordings up to 1998:
http://www.gramophone.net/Issue/Page/November%201998/36/793528/ .
mandryka
It's beautiful in the central movement.
A bit slow Ifor my tastes in the other two..
Simon Roberts
news:c9065d14-ec44-42c6...@z34g2000vbl.googlegroups.com:
>
> So Fischer/Kurtz is ,inevitably, tempting me, despite the premium
> price.
That's a shame; it appeared in the US on a super-budget disc when first
issued on CD!
> Before I one click and then pour myself a scotch -- tell me, how is
> the PC27 it comes coupled with?
Every bit as good.
Simon
Simon Roberts
$5ed13b3d$6...@cache2.tilbu1.nb.home.nl:
I found it very disappointing after her marvelous 20/13 on a DG DVD from
Salzburg, which boasts (among other things) vastly more characterful
orchestral playing (Camerata Salzburg) than the bland polish Cleveland
delivers here, where everyone seems to be on valium. To bad you can't do
rhapsody; the whole thing can be heard there....
Simon
Gerard
Accidentally only a few minutes after my posting I heard the 3rd movement on the
radio, without knowing who was playing.
It did not sound interesting. I was surpirsed to hear her name.
Wasn't there a recording of her doing the 20th concerto on Youtube (and didn't
you post the URL some months ago)?
Simon Roberts
news:25ade$4ae2004e$5ed13b3d$31...@cache5.tilbu1.nb.home.nl:
Someone else did, I think. The youtube performance is the same as the
DVD I referred to.
Simon
Matthew Silverstein
> Ah - on German Eloquence, i.e. probably only from German online stores:
> <http://preview.tinyurl.com/yz59yh5> (amazon.de) or
> <http://www.jpc.de/jpcng/classic/detail/-/hnum/7547854>. Admittedly,
> "only little more" is a relative statement that takes into account that
> those Philips Duo sets are more expensive here (18-19 Euros) than they
> are in the US. Still, 22-25 Euros for a 10 CD set...
That's quite a bargain indeed. Thanks for letting me know about it.
Matty
Matthew Silverstein
> A potentially interesting survey of recordings up to 1998:
> http://www.gramophone.net/Issue/Page/November%201998/36/793528/ .
Thanks for the thought, but I didn't find this interesting (or helpful) at
all.
Matty
Ludwig
wrote:
Would you care to expand on this verdict a little? Did you disagree
with the author, or is it just that you already knew everything in
this article and all the recordings discussed? Or something else? The
point about the false harmonies in some versions of the slow movement,
for example, is one that might be of potential interest to some
listeners in choosing among performances. Or not?
mandryka
Well I did.
I haven't heard Schiff's -- and Plaistow has whetted my appetite a
bit.
And same for Pletnev.
He says that Howard Shelley's has "grace and capacity for spontaneous
and deep feeling that can only be wondered at"? Can someone conform
or deny?
Gerard
Interesting indeed.
Matthew Silverstein
> Would you care to expand on this verdict a little? Did you disagree with
> the author, or is it just that you already knew everything in this
> article and all the recordings discussed? Or something else? The point
> about the false harmonies in some versions of the slow movement, for
> example, is one that might be of potential interest to some listeners in
> choosing among performances. Or not?
It's just that the rather quick and dirty way in which certain recordings
were dismissed (and others entirely ignored) made me confident that the
reviewer's tastes were far from my own (and thus of little help to me).
Matty
Gerard
> At least a few people disagree rather strongly with my recommendation
> for Stadtfeld in this concerto, and so I'm curious: what are
> everyone's favorite performances? I'd love some recommendations,
> available separately or only in a complete set.
>
Does anyone know the recording by Homero Francesch?
He seems to have recorded a lot of Mozart piano concerti (if not all).
Ludwig
wrote:
Fair enough. Obviously he had to be selective, but he seems to me to
do a good job of describing the qualities of the recordings he
focusses on.
Gerard
> At least a few people disagree rather strongly with my recommendation
> for Stadtfeld in this concerto, and so I'm curious: what are
> everyone's favorite performances? I'd love some recommendations,
> available separately or only in a complete set.
>
I've bought the recording by O'Connor and Mackerras (and a few others - see
below), and I really should start comparing now, but I don't think I will.
In the series "nothing is good enough" this one takes it's place :)
At first it all seemed so slow, almost soporic, from the beginning; too calm and
too easy and comfortable. But at relistening (after listening to some
recordings) this was clearly not true. A lot of recordings have that slowness.
Eschenbach and Flor belong in this series too. From the start until the end
being too slow and broad and without any tense.
Barenboim and the Berliner Philharmoniker do it much better, but of course not
good enough either ;-(
With pleasure I returned - for a few moments - to Shelley, Perrahia,
Brendel/Mackerras, Brendel/Marriner, Casadesus/Szell, Goode/Orpheus CO,
Moravec/Marriner, Barenboim/ECO, Immerseel, Bilson/Gardiner, Gibbons/Br�ggen,
Bezuidenhout/Br�ggen.
After those I retried Stadtfeld/Weil, and I liked it better than the first time.
But it's not "stunning" yet :)
I think I liked Goode, Moravec, Barenboim/ECO, Brendel/Marriner and specially
Bezuidenhout most, today.
If you don't have that last one (Bezuidenhout/Br�ggen), it's the one to
recommend.
For now I've heard too much KV 491, but I'll try to relisten to some other
recordings too in the near future.
Rugby
> It's beautiful in the central movement.
>
> A bit slow Ifor my tastes in the other two..
Thanks. One at Amazon for $ 2 so I grabbed it as Krips/AR so good in
the Beethoven concerti and I often confuse the last movements of K.466
and 491 with the LvB 3rd.
Rugby
mandryka
> Matthew Silverstein wrote:
>
> If you don't have that last one (Bezuidenhout/Brüggen), it's the one to
> recommend.
>
I can see he played it in Paris with Bruggen a couple of months ago --
but where did you get the recording from?
Gerard
> On Oct 24, 4:50 pm, "Gerard" <ghen_nospam_drik...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > Matthew Silverstein wrote:
>
> >
> > one to recommend.
> >
>
> I can see he played it in Paris with Bruggen a couple of months ago --
> but where did you get the recording from?
I've downloaded it somewhere, once.
Somewhere in this thread (wkasimir, sep. 22) it was mentioned that the broadcast
was to be found at some site: "As I recall, there's a fabulous broadcast with
Bruggen and Bezuidenhout kicking around cyberspace". But I really cannot
remember where.
It's fabulous indeed.
I don't know what instrument he actually has used; but if it is a 'real'
fortepiano, the sound of it is much more agreeable and stronger/louder than the
instruments used by Immerseel and Bilson. Br�ggen seems more "wild" than on his
recording with Gibson.
number_six
> mandryka wrote:
> > On Oct 24, 4:50 pm, "Gerard" <ghen_nospam_drik...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > Matthew Silverstein wrote:
>
> > > one to recommend.
>
> > I can see he played it in Paris with Bruggen a couple of months ago --
> > but where did you get the recording from?
>
> I've downloaded it somewhere, once.
> Somewhere in this thread (wkasimir, sep. 22) it was mentioned that the broadcast
> was to be found at some site: "As I recall, there's a fabulous broadcast with
> Bruggen and Bezuidenhout kicking around cyberspace". But I really cannot
> remember where.
>
> It's fabulous indeed.
> I don't know what instrument he actually has used; but if it is a 'real'
> fortepiano, the sound of it is much more agreeable and stronger/louder than the
> recording with Gibson.
Interesting; years ago I heard, on the radio, a live recording of
Bruggen conducting Stravinsky's Dumbarton Oaks cto, and I thought at
the time the performance had great clarity and energy. Probably never
came out on CD. I wonder if that's "floating around" somewhere.
david...@aol.com
> The
> point about the false harmonies in some versions of the slow movement,
> for example, is one that might be of potential interest to some
> listeners in choosing among performances.
Enshrined in the old Breitkopf & Haertel edition and hence the Dover
reprint I have, those parallel harmonies couldn't possibly have been
written by Mozart. In fact, they could have come straight out of
Tosca. Surprising how many pianists have played them unblushingly.
I agree with whoever claimed it’s hard to find a good recording of the
C minor concerto. None of the performances I have strikes me as
especially convincing. (I’ve never heard Annie Fischer.)
-david gable
Simon Roberts
mandryka says...
>
>I haven't heard Schiff's -- and Plaistow has whetted my appetite a
>bit.
>
>And same for Pletnev.
>
>He says that Howard Shelley's has "grace and capacity for spontaneous
>and deep feeling that can only be wondered at"? Can someone conform
>or deny?
If someone did confirm or deny it, would you be any the wiser? I think I have an
idea what "grace" means, but the rest of it doesn't tell me anything at all
about the performance itself.
Simon
Simon Roberts
says...
>
>mandryka <howie...@googlemail.com> wrote in news:f5fdd882-390b-4395-
>b41f-d49...@p9g2000vbl.googlegroups.com:
>
>> There's a recording (I believe) by Bashkirov with Alexander Gauk -- is
>> it interesting?
>
>If that's the recording issued on CD in the Russian Piano School Edition,
>coupled with K453, it's rather small-scale, pretty Mozart. I can't say it
>interests me all that much, though it's extremely good playing of its sort.
>Either way, you can download Bashkirov/Gauk very inexpensively via various
>online outfits, including emusic.com.
Forget my comments above; I must have been thinking of 453, which isn't coupled
with 491 on the disc I referred to. Anyway, I just downloaded the performance
with Gauk from emusic and am very impressed by Bashkirov's performance of the
first movement (all I've heard so far - it's fairly plain/straightforward, but
superbly played and never swoons; in fact, it hardly has time to - Gauk sets the
movement going at what must be one of the fastest speeds on disc (by contrast,
the tempo of the accompanying 453 w Oborin must be the slowest ever; what a
humorless bore Oborin must have been). Gauk's conducting seems above average,
but the rather tinny sound of the orchestra (trumpets too prominent, for a
start) doesn't appeal to me. Maybe there's a better-sounding transfer of it
available from another source.
Simon
Ludwig
> In article <55670f14-5665-4258-91c6-047bcb67f...@l35g2000vba.googlegroups.com>,
Really? Do you think he would have used this language in reviewing
(say) Kocsis's recording of K488? Anyway, the expression quoted is
appended to a comparison of Shelley to Curzon (whose recording is
discussed earlier in the piece), which helps to suggest the qualities
he finds in Shelley's recording. It's true that one might have wished
for a more detailed discussion of this recording, but the author
evidently preferred to devote more of his space to earlier recordings.
Ward Hardman
>
> I suspect you'll soon have a list of all recordings ever made of K.
> 491, but one I enjoy:
>
> Casadesus/Szell
This is my favorite too. This is likely due to my imprinting on the
old 10" mono Musical Masterpiece Society LP (MMS-46) edition with
Grant Johannesen, Otto Ackermann and the Netherlands Philharmonic:
(They misspell his name.) See also
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grant_Johannesen
in which they cite Casadesus as one of his teachers, which may
explain GJ's choice of K. 491 cadenza.
The reason for my preference is that both versions use the
Saint-Saens cadenza, which is tragic, dramatic, violent, and
not too long.
Looking through my collection, I see the following soloist choices
- Rubinstein/Krips (1958) - Hummel
- Casadesus/Szell (1961) - Saint-Saens
- Curzon/Kertesz (1968) - ???
- Brendel/Marriner (1973) - Brendel
- Perahia/Perahia (1975) - Perahia
- Moravec/Marriner (1995) - E. Fischer (ed. Moravec)
Questions:
1. What other choices exist?
2. Anybody have a particular favorite?
3. Who wrote Curzon's cadenza?
--Ward Hardman
"The older I get, the more I admire and crave competence,
just simple competence, in any field from adultery to zoology."
- H.L. Mencken
mandryka
Having now had the chance to listen to Annie Fischer, I have just made
a CD with a rather good performance:
Ist movement -- Annie Fischer
2nd movement -- Rubinstein
3rd Movement -- Gould
Bastian Kubis
>>> If you don't have that last one (Bezuidenhout/Br�ggen), it's the
>>> one to recommend.
>>
>> I can see he played it in Paris with Bruggen a couple of months ago --
>> but where did you get the recording from?
>
> I've downloaded it somewhere, once.
> Somewhere in this thread (wkasimir, sep. 22) it was mentioned that the broadcast
> was to be found at some site: "As I recall, there's a fabulous broadcast with
> Bruggen and Bezuidenhout kicking around cyberspace". But I really cannot
> remember where.
>
> It's fabulous indeed.
> I don't know what instrument he actually has used; but if it is a 'real'
> fortepiano, the sound of it is much more agreeable and stronger/louder than the
> instruments used by Immerseel and Bilson. Br�ggen seems more "wild" than on his
> recording with Gibson.
I'd just like to join the appeal: if someone reading this remembers
where Bezuidenhout/Br�ggen can be downloaded, that would be fabulous...
Bastian
herman
and Mackerras in K491?
Gerard
> So, is there anyone here who's listened to Brendel with bth Marriner
> and Mackerras in K491?
I did. See my post of yesterday 16h50.
mandryka
> So, is there anyone here who's listened to Brendel with bth Marriner
> and Mackerras in K491?
First movement. Marriner is energetic and exciting. Sparkling, fluid
passage work. It’s unforced but slightly breathless somehow. The
cadenza is stunning – but it’s a real shock – the music suddenly
becomes expansive and less speedy.
OTH Mackerras is more measured – the dominant feeling is not of
excitement but of menace. Nice cadenza. There’s a better balance in
the orchestra – I kept hearing rasping brass which I never heard so
clearly with Marriner. Overall there’s a greater variety of feeling,
emotion, than with Marriner.
I think Mackerras is way better than Marriner in this movement –
though I wouldn’t want to be without the cadenza in the Marriner set.
Second movement. Mackerras’s performance just didn’t seem at all
special -- nothing memorable about it for me. Marriner’s was just
beautiful. I have no hesitation in preferring Marriner in this one.
Third movement. I prefer Marriner – I want to use words like:
confidence, forward momentum, integrity. The Mackerras performance
seemed blander.
So I have to eat my words – though I still prefer Mackerras in the
first movement (cadenza aside)
Matthew�B.�Tepper
letters to be typed in news:8bc4cc9c-0570-4c12-b434-
fe2d1b...@a37g2000prf.googlegroups.com:
> On Oct 24, 11:50�pm, "Gerard" <ghen_nospam_drik...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I think I liked Goode, Moravec, Barenboim/ECO, Brendel/Marriner and
>> specially Bezuidenhout most, today.
>>
>> If you don't have that last one (Bezuidenhout/Br�ggen), it's the one to
>> recommend.
>
> Don't know that, but Barenboim grows on me more and more (in most
> everything, as pianist).
There are some good antifungals you could use for that. PLONK
--
Matthew B. Tepper: WWW, science fiction, classical music, ducks!
Read about "Proty" here: http://home.earthlink.net/~oy/proty.html
To write to me, do for my address what Androcles did for the lion
Opinions expressed here are not necessarily those of my employers
Gerard
> Yet another iteration of Ward's troll appears to have caused the
> following letters to be typed in news:8bc4cc9c-0570-4c12-b434-
> fe2d1b...@a37g2000prf.googlegroups.com:
>
> > On Oct 24, 11:50 pm, "Gerard" <ghen_nospam_drik...@hotmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I think I liked Goode, Moravec, Barenboim/ECO, Brendel/Marriner
> > > and specially Bezuidenhout most, today.
> > >
> > > If you don't have that last one (Bezuidenhout/Br�ggen), it's the
> > > one to recommend.
> >
> > Don't know that, but Barenboim grows on me more and more (in most
> > everything, as pianist).
>
> There are some good antifungals you could use for that. PLONK
Sure you have a 'good' reason to "plonk" someone this time.
What is it?
Diafani
> The Schnabel recording I have is from June 1948 with the Philharmonia
> and Walter Susskind. It has beautiful moment, and the sound is
> perfectly alright on The Piano Library cd I have. However the
> performance is marred by really weird cadenza's that don't make any
> contact with the rest of the music.
Those are Schnabel's own cadenzas. He was a composer himself, and he
decided to try his hand at something Mozart would have done, and
expected any good pianist to have done with this concerto, perform an
original cadenza, preferably improvised. We know Beethoven's attitude
towards cadenzas -after the Violin Concerto he decided to write them
out, and he also wrote the ones that are commonly performed during the
Mozart concerto, but Schnabel is trying to get into the spirit of late
18th Century performance by doing something original. I agree they're
a bit strange in context, but it's a legitimate attempt at something
that most classical musicians these days would not dream of doing.
Mark
"Diafani" <dia...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:93134076-3bd8-4f9d...@z34g2000vbl.googlegroups.com...
Those are Schnabel's own cadenzas. He was a composer himself, and he
decided to try his hand at something Mozart would have done, and
expected any good pianist to have done with this concerto, perform an
original cadenza, preferably improvised. We know Beethoven's attitude
towards cadenzas -after the Violin Concerto he decided to write them
out, and he also wrote the ones that are commonly performed during the
Mozart concerto, but Schnabel is trying to get into the spirit of late
18th Century performance by doing something original. I agree they're
a bit strange in context, but it's a legitimate attempt at something
that most classical musicians these days would not dream of doing.
Stephen Hough worte his own cadeza for K488 - scorned by some but I rather
enjoyed it when I heard it at the Proms a couple of years ago...
Mark
Rugby
> Stephen Hough worte his own cadeza for K488 - scorned by some but I rather
> enjoyed it when I heard it at the Proms a couple of years ago...
>
I think Benjamin Britten did as well for K.467 and K.482 ?
Rugby
FANG-LIN HOU
>
> I think Benjamin Britten did as well for K.467 and K.482 ?
>
> Rugby
No original cadenzas were left by Mozart for these concerti.
FL
Diafani
I think most pianists use Beethoven's cadenzas for this concerto,
although I could be wrong...
Gerard
If you're referring to KV 491, there is no cadenza by Beethoven AFAIK.
Steve Emerson
<4b43a98b-b15d-4f62...@l31g2000vbp.googlegroups.com>,
"david...@aol.com" <david...@aol.com> wrote:
Whether it's convincing as to the work Mozart wrote, I have no thoughts
one way or the other, but I expect you'd agree that Kempff/Maderna is a
riveting piece of work. No?
SE.
Johannes Roehl
AFAIK there are Beethoven Cadenzas for KV 466 only. Mozart wrote many of
his concerto in a hurry and it was customary to improvise the cadenza
anyway. I think most cadenzas left by Mozart's hand were written for
other people, either in the few cases when he wrote a concerto for
another person to perform, or afterwards he might write a cadenza for a
student.
Johannes
Matthew�B.�Tepper
be typed in news:3e6e39c1-d605-4e47-a675-
b2b1bb...@x5g2000prf.googlegroups.com:
> On Oct 26, 2:03�pm, FANG-LIN HOU <fho...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> On Oct 26, 3:12�pm, Rugby <steveha...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > I think Benjamin Britten did as well for K.467 and K.482 ?
>>
>> No original cadenzas were left by Mozart for these concerti.
>
> I think most pianists use Beethoven's cadenzas for this concerto,
> although I could be wrong...
I'm aware of Beethoven cadenzas for K. 466, but not for K. 491.
Rugby
Burned again, but you're right. Surprisingly, Krips and Rubinstein
turn in a lackluaster K.491. AR's K.467 and 488 with Wallenstein MUCH
better.
Rugby
Rugby
Forgot to ask;; whose cadenzas does AR play in K.491 ? S-S ?
Rugby
Norman Schwartz
> On Oct 29, 7:24 pm, Rugby <steveha...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Forgot to ask;; whose cadenzas does AR play in K.491 ? S-S ?
>
> Rugby
mandryka
Didn't you like the slow movement? Or was my memory wrong in thinking
that it was nice?
Rugby
> Didn't you like the slow movement? Or was my memory wrong in thinking
> that it was nice?
It's nice, but can't save the rest, and not all that great alone,
either. Casadesus/Szell far better throughout.
Rugby
herman
them too cool and analytical. No demons in sight.
I also listened to Uchida and Tate. First I liked it: Uchida seemed to
have the humor of the finale down, and the strings had a nice depth;
but when I listened to it the next morning I realized it was way too
laid back and had no drive whatsoever.
mandryka
Yep -- agreed.
Just got Kirkpatrick from a friend -- will report if it's interesting.
Will someone who has recorded that Brueggen concert please upload it
for me. PLEASE.