My Profile

Feed Subscription

Blog Forum
Blog RSS Forum RSS
Post New Topic Post Reply
Posted 9 Months, 3 Weeks ago
JasicaCHINA
Expert Boarder
Posts: 130
graphgraph
User Offline
 
Finished transferring the Graffman/Munch/BSO LP (1959) of Brahms 1st piano concerto recently. Had some doubts durring the process, but when I listened to the whole thing I realized it's an excellent performance - of Brahms' PC1. That's the thing though: it's Brahms' PC1. Seems like I've heard that work several hundred times in the past 50 years, many excellent performances among them.

Makes me wonder: Is there any possibility at all that there'll be a new recording worth owning? Taken a step further, why would anyone make a new recording?
The administrator has disabled public write access.
Posted 9 Months, 3 Weeks ago
juanorez
Gold Boarder
Posts: 173
graphgraph
User Offline
 
I am listening right now to Joyce Hatto's recording of this piece (rec. 4/6/95) and this one is absolutely worth owning!
The administrator has disabled public write access.
Posted 9 Months, 3 Weeks ago
quaternion
Expert Boarder
Posts: 147
graphgraph
User Offline
 
There's so much written about Hatto's recordings on MusicWeb recently, and there's nothing but praise. Her name is very seldom mentioned in this newsgroup. What are the opinions about her recordings?
The administrator has disabled public write access.
Posted 9 Months, 3 Weeks ago
Adolf
Expert Boarder
Posts: 138
graphgraph
User Offline
 
This is an interesting question, and not just about this piece.

Recordings have been made for the past 100 years, give or take. If we just consider the advent of stereo, it's still about 50 years. Many performances over that time of all the great standards.

So with 50-100 years of performances, vs the comparative handful that were recorded in, say, the last 5-10 years, isn't it much more likely that a truly great performance will be found in the former rather than the latter?

There may be the occasional 'ear-opener' among the new offerings, but other than sound quality, the odds that anything recent will equal or surpass what we already have (performance-wise) strike me as rather low.
The administrator has disabled public write access.
Posted 9 Months, 3 Weeks ago
pplayer44
Expert Boarder
Posts: 156
graphgraph
User Offline
 
Heard only a few
The administrator has disabled public write access.
Posted 9 Months, 3 Weeks ago
globular
Gold Boarder
Posts: 164
graphgraph
User Offline
 
I know that just too well. That was an 'inside joke'. My preferred pianists being mostly dead, Ms. Hatto (whom I knew for sometime from a famous German collector) IS quite young for my ordinary standards. . . not to mention that her playing sounds both masterful and 'young' indeed.

regards,
The administrator has disabled public write access.
Posted 9 Months, 3 Weeks ago
Squirrel-Honest
Expert Boarder
Posts: 152
graphgraph
User Offline
 
Depends on the repertoire. To these ears, rather large patches of the repertoire have been vastly better performed in the past decade or two than previously (most baroque music, the general quality of Rossini tenors), others worse (e.g. Brahms symphonies, Verdi and Wagner sopranos and tenors and baritones). And since exceptions keep popping up (I don't know about 'truly great' but certainly 'worth spending money on'
The administrator has disabled public write access.
Posted 9 Months, 3 Weeks ago
pplayer44
Expert Boarder
Posts: 156
graphgraph
User Offline
 
I should have suspected this...
The administrator has disabled public write access.
Posted 9 Months, 3 Weeks ago
pietersejl
Expert Boarder
Posts: 148
graphgraph
User Offline
 
This could be asked about any standard-repertoire concerto. It has gotten to the point that anyone trying to make a name for him- or herself will automatically tackle the Rachmaninoff Third, and it isn't very often that anyone succeeds in portraying it as anything other than a big Russian showpiece. Every new recording, with dismal regularity, has the same proportions, and most differ only in detail. Unfortunately, it's just as bad for the Brahms D minor, with its three big blocks of the D tonality, its imposing weight and bulk, and its antiquated structure. It doesn't offer too many different approaches - the orchestra sets everything up in the first six minutes and then it's up to the soloist to do justice to what has happened.
The administrator has disabled public write access.
Posted 9 Months, 3 Weeks ago
quaternion
Expert Boarder
Posts: 147
graphgraph
User Offline
 
And very wise too. This from an interview she gave in 1973, when she was.... maybe 2 years old ?!?

You do not think that Liszt's lack of popularity springs from his music being generally so difficult? Sometimes it appears to be almost unplayable.

'Please don't think that I am trying to be clever when I say this. I have never found Liszt difficult to play in the way that Chopin, for example, can be difficult. Although very often a page of Liszt can, at first glance, look almost impossible. Once you have worked out the notes, fingering, and actually know where it's leading then it is the old adage of practise makes perfect. Now, with Chopin, looking at the printed pages of the Funeral March Sonata it doesn't appear at all bad. However, I will tell you, in my opinion, there are few things in the entire piano repertoire as difficult as the first movement of that sonata. Hour upon hour of work can go into that piece but you are never absolutely sure that all will go well with it in a recital programme. I took both the Chopin sonatas to Alfred Cortot and he admitted to me that he always felt the same way!'

For the complete interview please refer to:
http://www.musicweb.uk.net/classrev/2003/Mar03/ Hatto.htm
The administrator has disabled public write access.
 
Copyright © 2008 My Piano Friends