1.Martha Argerich: (on EMI) exquisite coloring and nuances plus much
fantasy-like atmosphere and very Schumannisque anxiety. The coda of the 2nd
mvt is the best and most immaculate leaps ever imaginable. This is exactly
the part where Horowitz failed so miserably in his 1965 Carnegie Return
Recital, but the same spot Evgeni Kissin was able to sail through with
dazzling abandon and finesse in his recent San Francisco recital (He only
played one single wrong note in that passage, where even Annie Fisher and
Egorov were reportedly to have messed up in their recitals)
2.Maurice Pollini: (on DG ) Amazingly balanced yet full of underlying and
ardent romanticism. Clean and perfect,as usual, as always in Pollini's
recordings.
3.Murray Perahia: (on CBS MasterWorks) beautifully concieved and
utra-sensitively rendered.
4.Claudio Arrau: (on Phillips) very architectually aware and played with
much passion, there is much old-fasion romanticism here.
5. Arthur Rubinstein: (on RCA) very straightforward. This is one
superlative example where the music speaks for itself and one is barely
aware of an interpreter at work.
There must be some other incredible recordings out there. I suspect
Richter, Gieseking and Michelangeli would do a great job with this piece.
Any opinions and thoughts or suggestions ?
Some bad recordings to avoid:
1.Micha Dichter: (on Phillips) it's on LP and I don't think it's been
re-issued.(I'm glad!) All senses of poetry, fantasy and nuaces are
destroyed in his Lisztian playing.
2.Daniel Barenboim: (on DG) it's also on LP. It's incredibly impetuous and
inconiderately and insensitively so. An artist of his stature should and
could have done better.
Give me some feedbacks, folks !!
William Hsieh, wil...@leland.stanford.edu
I hope you don't mind me saying this, but you should make opinions even a
little bit humbler :-) While Martha and Maurizio are indeed very good, the
reference interpretation is still Richter's 1962 performance (reissued many
times on CD). One cannot really attempt a serious study of this piece without
first listening to it (there is an alternate Richter version from the Prague
spring festival).
>1.Martha Argerich: (on EMI) exquisite coloring and nuances plus much
>fantasy-like atmosphere and very Schumannisque anxiety. The coda of the 2nd
>mvt is the best and most immaculate leaps ever imaginable. This is exactly
>the part where Horowitz failed so miserably in his 1965 Carnegie Return
>Recital, but the same spot Evgeni Kissin was able to sail through with
>dazzling abandon and finesse in his recent San Francisco recital (He only
>played one single wrong note in that passage, where even Annie Fisher and
>Egorov were reportedly to have messed up in their recitals)
>
>2.Maurice Pollini: (on DG ) Amazingly balanced yet full of underlying and
>ardent romanticism. Clean and perfect,as usual, as always in Pollini's
>recordings.
>
>3.Murray Perahia: (on CBS MasterWorks) beautifully concieved and
>utra-sensitively rendered.
Not in the running.
>4.Claudio Arrau: (on Phillips) very architectually aware and played with
>much passion, there is much old-fasion romanticism here.
What ?!? Claudio Arthritis? ;-))
>5. Arthur Rubinstein: (on RCA) very straightforward. This is one
>superlative example where the music speaks for itself and one is barely
>aware of an interpreter at work.
>
>There must be some other incredible recordings out there. I suspect
>Richter, Gieseking and Michelangeli would do a great job with this piece.
>Any opinions and thoughts or suggestions ?
I am not aware of any Michelangeli performances, but you've certainly
missed a few great ones: Edwin Fischer, Yves Nat, and Dmitri Bashkirov's
supreme 1961 recording (also on EMI).
dk
Best regards,
Mario Taboada
Los Angeles
F.H Chong
Nadine
-Erika