|
|
Partitas BWV 825, 827, 830
Piotr Anderszewski (Piano)
Review: Bach Partitas Anderszewski
|
Kirk McElhearn wrote (November 17, 2001):
Since receiving this new disc, containing three of Bach¹s six keyboard partitas, I have listened to it over and over again, attempting to get a handle on Piotr Anderszewski¹s interpretation of these works. It is not often that I am so perplexed by a performer that I cannot come to a conclusion more easily. With most pianists, these works show immediately the approach of the performer; whether the interpretation is restrained, unbridled, or somewhere in between these two extremes. But with this disc, there is no pinning down Anderszewski¹s performance.
He opens with the 6th partita, the first measures of which he plays with grandiose flourishes, eschewing any strict tempo, and seems almost to be rushing through this first section. But then when he gets to the second contrapuntal section, he becomes more rigid, then returns again to his flights of fancy. There seems, at first, to be a contradiction in these brief sections of the opening. Yet as the work goes on, one hears that it is full of contradictions - at times his ornamentation is almost excessive, at other times his tempi seem rigid and overly stiff.
The same can be said for his dynamics: at times, he plays very softly, much more so than many pianists would play Bach; at others his left hand, especially, is much more forte than one could expect, such as in the final gigue of the 6th partita. He uses a light touch for most of the allemandes and sarabandes, but more vigour in the courantes and gigues. He tends to put a great deal of stress on the final gigue of each partita, which, combined with his light touch in most of the opening movements, gives each work an upward progression in intensity, which does not always seem in the spirit of these works.
This disc is indeed full of contradictions, yet somehow these contradictions work together to create a tone that is quite compelling. I have not yet decided if I truly like this way of playing Bach, but it has the merit of requiring repeated listenings, and indeed grows on the listener.
Without being able to come to a firm judgement on this disc, it is nevertheless one of great individuality, which presents Bach in a very new light. Anderszewski¹s approach is unique and very personal, and certainly deserves the attention of those who are curious about new ways of interpreting these works. |
| |
|
Feedback to the Review |
|
Pioter Jaworski wrote (November 17, 2001):
[To Kirk McElhearn] One could hardly imagine better coincidence - on my way to weekend-work I've finally decided to buy this CD - no matter extremely tighten budget. So I work and I listen... mixing it with 'Toccatas' performed by another Piotr - Hantai! ;-)
And seriously - I could not even think about more appropriate review for Anderszewski that yours.
This is the recording for the numerous long winter nights - it will take that much of time to have a 'fair judgement' on it. Personally - I'm totally confused in a moment ....
Many thanks! |
|
Bradley Lehman wrote (November 17, 2001):
[To Kirk McElhearn] Are there working samples available on the web? I looked it up at both www.amazon.fr and www.jpc.de, but at both of those I get the error "unable to establish a connection with the server" when trying to listen to the samples. (Same in two different browsers.) Anybody having better luck?
Also, at JPC, when I did the search on "Anderszewki" it showed me a disc on the "Aura" label along with the Virgin issue: the new Virgin disc being 19.99 and the Aura at 6.49 (Euros). The Aura release date is five days later. Is this a pirate knock-off, or something more legitimate? |
|
Riccardo Nughes wrote (November 17, 2001):
[To Bradley Lehman] Aura is a legal Italian label that usually publish recordings from Swiss Radio (RSI) archives. Actually the recording you're referring to is this :
Bach,Johann Sebastian (1685-1750)
Partita BWV 828
Aura, ADD, 69 CD, 6441254 EUR 6.49
Rel. Date: 31.10.2002 (5.64 USD)
Artist/Composer:
+Chopin:Nocturnes Nr.3, 5, 13, 21;Scherzo Nr.1;
Etüde nr.19
+Brahms:Rhapsodie op.79
Alexis Weissenberg, Klavier |
|
Francine Renee Hall wrote (November 17, 2001):
I wonder why Christophe Rousset isn't mentioned more. His Partitas was a launching point for me, expressive, not boring at all. His insights into Rameau were extraordinary for me, especially his forsight to understand that Rameau was pulling out all the stops, that Rameau had exploited French court harpsichord music as far as the envelope could take him before becoming 'artificial'. I enjoy having Rousset's Partitas poised against GG's Partitas. On recommendation by Piotr, I also have Richard Goode's Partitas 4, 2, and 5 on piano (Nonesuch label) and who seems to take the middling ground: slower, expressive with noticable pedalling.
As usual Kirk's review style has a really nice 'rhythm' to it! Based on a past Kirk's review, I did get the London Baroque, with Charles Medlam, doing the Trio Sonatas, and noticed that their style and engineering haven't changed -- there's a tendency to make shrill the high end and to separate the stereo sound noticeably. But I'm quite happy with it and proves to be my favorite of the Trio Sonatas I have thus far. |
|
Pete Blue wrote (November 17, 2001):
[To Bradley Lehman] If you typed in the name as you spelled it in your post, it is no wonder you couldn't connect. Kirk also got it wrong in his heading (but correct in the body of his post). The name as listed on the JPC website is "Anderszewski". I got to the sound samples easily a few minutes ago.
BTW, thank you for your suggestions re piano Englische Suiten. I found a used copy for sale of the Rubsam Bayer recording and have been enjoying it. Rubsam's unique, spontaneous sounding intrepretive choices are mostly quite effective; only the Prelude of the A Minor I believe to be a failure, the odd hesitations being increasingly irritating on repeated listenings (I just program my CD player around it).
On another matter, Carl Seemann vs. Zhu Xiao-Mei in the piano partitas: I hope I'm not being too argumentative, but I believe your question "which one is better?" is unanswerable. The two are at times outwardly similar, but there is an ineffable sense of rightness I get from the Seemann that I don't get from the estimable Zhu (or even the Gould). Beyond that I -- and IMO no one else -- can go.
I believe, as I've said or intimated before, that objectivity is impossible in evaluating re-creations of great music. For example, many others before me have pointed out that meeting scholarly/historical requirements can never detemine the superiority of one interpretation over another. The popularity of HIP performances of Bach over the last 40 years lies much more in their perceived greater expressiveness -- and to a lesser degree in their novelty and improvements in technology -- than it does in their supposed greater proximity to what the composer heard or intended, which absent a Time Machine is incapable of being authenticated anyway.
In short, ANYBODY'S evaluation is, I believe, ultimately subjective; the expression "intrinsic high quality" (which I have used in moments of weakness) is illegitimate. But, hopefully, such evaluation can be inter-subjective. IMO the best that any listener/critic can do is describe as precisely as possible his or her reaction, as a way of helping other listeners' own self-. |
|
Pete Blue wrote (November 17, 2001):
[To Bradley Lehman] A postscript to my post and an apology: Brad, you DID have the correct spelling. Sorry. But I got through with no problem to JPC, after typing in the name wrong a couple of times. |
|
Donald Satz wrote (November 17, 2001):
[To Piotr Jaworski] Anderszewski is a fantastic artist, and I'm just about salivating at the prospect of picking up his new Bach disc. As for having trouble getting a good handle on his style, I'm not surprised. Seems to me that Anderszewski re-thinks everything about a work, resulting in a very distinctive interpretations. His Beethoven Diabelli Variations disc is about the best ever recorded, and his recent Mozart piano concerto disc is a stunner also. |
|
Kirk McElhearn wrote (November 17, 2001):
[To Donald Satz] I'll be looking forward to your comments on it.
As for the Diabellis, maybe I should pick that one up... |
|
Bradley Lehman wrote (November 18, 2001):
Pete Blue wrote:
< A postscript to my post and an apology: Brad, you DID have the correct spelling. Sorry. But I got through with no problem to JPC, after typing in the name wrong a couple of times. (...) >
I can get to JPC's page about the disk just fine, but the samples still don't play. And I'm currently on a different internet service provider compared with this morning; no luck on either one. Anybody?
I had written earlier:
< Are there working samples available on the web? I looked it up at both www.amazon.fr and www.jpc.de, but at both of those I get the error "unable to establish a connection with the server" when trying to listen to the samples. (...) > |
|
Bradley Lehman wrote (November 18, 2001):
Donald Satz wrote:
< Anderszewski is a fantastic artist, and I'm just about salivating at the prospect of picking up his new Bach disc.(...) his recent Mozart piano concerto disc is a stunner also. >
A stunner, yet fatally flawed (OK, maybe not quite "fatally") in its lack of pontaneity, and in his incomprehension of Mozart's compositional style (re the sketchy passages a player is supposed to complete, but which Anderszewski allows to stand naked). Meanwhile, the orchestra sounds wonderful. Reviewed: Amazon.com |
|
Piotr Jaworski wrote (November 18, 2001):
[To Donald Satz] I liked your writing a lot! Couldn't stop laughing! ;-) But I'm not surprised. Anderszewski's turn towards Bach music - more than ever - since he already had to CDs with JSB works - is extremely promising event.
And we can already look forward for more!
And believe me - I'm struggling with that recording for another day - and I like it more and more ...
A stunner??? Hmm.... very much like so, I'm almost prepared to admit. |
| |
|
Seemann & Zhi in Partitas |
|
Bradley Lehman wrote (November 18, 2001):
Pete Blue wrote:
< On another matter, Carl Seemann vs. Zhu Xiao-Mei in the piano partitas: I hope I'm not being too argumentative, but I believe your question "which one is better?" is unanswerable. The two are at times outwardly similar, but there is an ineffable sense of rightness I get from the Seemann that I don't get from the estimable Zhu (or even the Gould). Beyond that I -- and IMO no one else -- can go.
I believe, as I've said or intimated before, that objectivity is impossible in evaluating re-creations of great music. For example, many others before me have pointed out that meeting scholarly/historical requirements can never detemine the superiority of one interpretation over another. The popularity of HIP performances of Bach over the last 40 years lies much more in their perceived greater expressiveness -- and to a lesser degree in their novelty and improvements in technology -- than it does in their supposed greater proximity to what the composer heard or intended, which absent a Time Machine is incapable of being authenticated anyway.
In short, ANYBODY'S evaluation is, I believe, ultimately subjective; the expression "intrinsic high quality" (which I have used in moments of weakness) is illegitimate. But, hopefully, such evaluation can be inter-subjective. IMO the best that any listener/critic can do is describe as precisely as possible his or her reaction, as a way of helping other listeners' own self-examinations. >
I agree, Pete.
I like the convenience of the internet; I checked out the Seemann samples from JPC's site.
Sad to say, I didn't find them as much to my liking as I'd hoped from your description. My main impression of them is a disagreement with (what I hear as) a rhythmic stiffness, an overly-literal reading of the notes.
And, also not to my liking, I think he connects the notes too much within beats, rather than setting them apart between the beats according to the phrase structure. That's hard to say in words; let me try again. What I mean is, I heard plenty of passages where I interpret the downbeat note as "old" belonging to the previous phrase, and the next notes immediately thereafter as "new" commencing a new phrase...but Seemann runs them all together, in accordance with the way they're typically barred in a score. He plays them too literally as groups of four or eight or whatever, not differentiating notes within them as "old" or "new." So, to my ears, the musical grammar sounds wrong; he doesn't so much parse the musical syntax as running right over it. (I'd accuse Gould of that sometimes, too.)
In Bach, I feel that a large part of the interest is the "stuff" that happens within or between beats, according to their harmonic and rhythmic and contrapuntal functions. There are so many surprising things that can be brought out, and it helps to make Bach "Bach" as opposed to any competent craftsman (say, Zachow; or Telemann in his keyboard music, ugh; or Bach himself in the Neumeister Chorales). Some of Bach's most lively motives start *off* the beat, after an explicit or implicit rest, and (I believe) this should be preserved wherever it comes up. This interest is lacking if the player spins out the groups of four or eight as units, not looking at the possibility of phrasing across the barring, where the downbeat note finishes the "old" passage and a new one starts immediately.
Ah well. That's my reaction, described I hope accurately (and with a touch of logorrhea)! :) And, it's merely from hearing those one-minute samples on the web. To give Seemann a fairer shake, I should probably hear the whole performances sometime. No performance can build up much of an effect in less than a minute. |
|
Pete Blue wrote (November 18, 2001):
In the post above Brad Lehman observed: "In Bach, I feel that a large part of the interest is the 'stuff' that happens within or between beats, according to their harmonic and rhythmic and contrapuntal functions."
Roger Sessions, a great, mostly forgotten American composer and teacher, extended this observation to all music: the musical experience, as he called it, happens between the notes. That's what my approach to music (and MY logorrhea) comes down to. |
|
Peter Bright wrote (November 18, 2001):
[To Pete Blue] Interestingly, Bob Dylan of all people made much the same comment when asked his opinion on 'computerised' music - something along the lines of it being the space between the notes that is as important as the notes themselves. The breath and pausing in the music is critical to the dynamic response we have to it (something lacking in most 'manufactured' music). The attraction to the music of the great jazz periods, particularly from the 1920s to 1950s, comes from the momentum and excitement produced by the band or soloist playing just before or after the natural pulse of the music (i.e., the 'swing'). "It don't mean a thing if it ain't got that swing" as the Duke's band famously observed. |
| |
|
Anderszweski - Partitas / Pollini |
|
Piotr Jaworski wrote (November 19, 2001):
(I'd like to dedicate this post to another Piotr - to Peter Bright!) But other should also not hesitate ... ;-)
Peter, there are two reasons for this - this new recording is splendid(!); and I'm listening to it 'comparatively' with Rosalyn Tureck's rendition as included in Philips 'GP' series. I don't have to assure you about my rather distant approach to RT. I can imagine that her playing is full of those qualities I still can't find. Listening to her 'Partitas' was for me another unsuccessful attempt :-(
Then I moved quickly to Anderszewski. As Kirk wrote - this performance is full of contradictions. But how captivating, how exciting contradictions! How many happens in this performance, how complex the music is! I enjoy this disc so much - I mix it with Koroliov's Bach, Sokolov's Rameau and Couperin, Tharaud's Rameau - and ... last but not least - to Angela Hewitt ....- you can see my points of reference.
Peter, do not buy Perahia's 'Etudes' - in my opinion Anderszewski is much more important! |
|
Peter Bright wrote (November 21, 2001):
[To Piotr Jaworski] I have just been listening to snippets from Anderszewski's recording of French Suite no. 5 (from 1999) - I couldn't find audio files of his partitas on line. From these few seconds, I enjoyed his playing very much - very clean and clear playing, kind of like Angela Hewitt meets Koroliov: more respect for separation of 'lines' and structure than Angela, but with more warmth and inflection than Evgeni. Of piano versions of the partitas I only own Hewitt's but really enjoy it. I haven't actually heard Tureck's rendition of these pieces but they remain on my wanted list. Are there any Tureck enthusiasts here who would also vouch for Anderszewski? (Otherwise, I'm afraid that it will be Perahia's Chopin Etudes, Piotr!) |
|
Piotr Jaworski wrote (November 19, 2001):
[To Peter Bright] Peter .... the end of your message contradicts the earlier contents, your findings and feelings!!! ;-)
You're very much right comparing Anderszewski to a Hewitt-Koroliov mixture - that was also my first impressions - you can see my point - the famous "Farinelli" soundrack - voices of Malas-Godlewska and Daniels - mixed - created the brand new quality. And what sort of!I think that Anderszewski is on the right path to achieve, one day, similar result ....
I could choose - and I opted for Anderszewski and that was the blind choice(!) since I listened to all from Perahia. For a bit longer Pollini will stay unrivalled ....
And I'm a bit affraid that any reasonable Tureck enthusiast would ALSO vouch for Anderszewski ... it's like water and fire - I'm affraid.Here I prefer fire.... ;-) |
|
Craig Schweickert wrote (November 21, 2002):
Peter Bright wrote:
<snip> <<(Otherwise, I'm afraid that it will be Perahia's Chopin Etudes, Piotr!) >>
Piotr Jaworski wrote:
< I could choose - and I opted for Anderszewski and that was the blind choice(!) since I listened to all from Perahia. For a bit longer Pollini will stay unrivalled .... >
Re the Études, I have to agree with Piotr. After hearing various tracks from Perahia's recording on the radio and in stores, I listened to the disk straight through last week. While the interpretation and playing were not devoid of interest, neither could hold a candle to Pollini's, and I'm left wondering what all the fuss is about. (Way back in the late '70s, at the end of a evening devoted to an étude-by-étude comparison of the recordings by Pollini and Ashkenazy, one of the participants trashed the latter and then said, "but listening to Pollini's is like dropping mescalin and watching ice crystals form on the window." The simile may dated, but he put his finger on something.)
In an interview, Pollini included Bach among the composers whose music he regularly plays. And I seem to recall reading that he sometimes programs Bach works in his recitals. Yet he's never recorded any Bach. Does anyone know why? Has anyone heard Pollini in works by JSB? Interesting to speculate how it would sound. |
|
Bradley Lehman wrote (November 21, 2002):
[To Craig Schweickert] On the Chopin Etudes: what do you think of Pletnev's performance of 10/5, 25/6, and 25/7? That's on DG 453456 along with the F minor Fantasy, the B minor sonata, three waltzes, and other short works.
But I usually listen to Cortot and Novaes more often.... |
|
Trevor Evans-Young wrote (November 22, 2001):
[To Craig Schweickert] Back in college years ago, while working on one of the slower etudes, I came across a cheap tape of Pollini's set. I agree that no one can approach him but it makes me wonder why no Bach recordings. Is he still recording? I don't know his age.
The only other set I like is Perlemuter's. Eventhough it is more like sipping absinthe? and watching ice melt, I am amazed how such laid back playing can be exciting at the same time. I think he recorded them at an advanced age (70+?) and I think the introspective, non-flashy way of playing has its valid points also. |
|
Craig Schweickert wrote (November 23, 2001):
Trevor Evans-Young wrote:
< Back in college years ago, while working on one of the slower etudes, I came across a cheap tape of Pollini's set. I agree that no one can approach him but it makes me wonder why no Bach recordings. Is he still recording? >
Oh, yes. His two latest disks (2001 and 2002), both devoted to Schumann, are stupendous, some of his best work in years. Especially the former, with the Davidsbudlertanze and Concert sans orchestre (the first version of Piano Sonata No. 3 in F minor). The latter programs Kreisleriana, Gesange der Fruhe and the Allegro in B minor.
< I don't know his age. >
He turned 60 last year, prompting DG to release a 14-disk Pollini Edition, a repackaging of many of his best recordings--the complete Schoenberg, Bartok Concertos 1 and 2, nearly all his Chopin, the Lizst B-minor Sonata, Nono, some of his electrifying early Schumann and Schubert performances, etc. All mid-price.
Also in 2001, EMI/Angel reissued the first Chopin concerto, recorded in 1960 right after his Warsaw Competion win (he was 18 at the time). Has this music ever sounded fresher? Coupled with a selections from his Chopin recital recorded for them in 1968. Mid-price on Great Recordings of the Century, and splendidly remastered, too.
< The only other set I like is Perlemuter's. Eventhough it is more like sipping absinthe? and watching ice melt, I am amazed how such laid back playing can be exciting at the same time. I think he recorded them at an advanced age (70+?) and I think the introspective, non-flashy way of playing has its valid points also. >
Was saddened to see that Perlemuter, one of our last direct links to Ravel and Cortot, passed away in September at the age of 98. |
|
Craig Schweickert wrote (November 23, 2001):
Bradley Lehman wrote:
< On the Chopin Etudes: what do you think of Pletnev's performance of 10/5, 25/6, and 25/7? That's on DG 453456 along with the F minor Fantasy, the B minor sonata, three waltzes, and other short works. >
Don't know it. Should I?
Have heard very few of Pletnev's piano recordings, and of those I have listened to only one knocks my socks off: the Scarlatti recital, now on a Virgin twofer, which in terms of pianism, musicality, imagination and sheer élan outshines even such illuminaries as Horowitz. A regular visitor to my CD player (and although I don't listen to music when nodding off, it is a set I especially enjoy late in the evening). The only downside is that nothing else I've heard by him (e.g. the C.P.E. Bach recital) quite measures up to it.
< But I usually listen to Cortot and Novaes more often.... >
Novaes' Vox recordings were my introduction to many Chopin works, including, possibly, the Études. Haven't heard any of them since I was in college in the '70s. My memory is of playing that was self-effacing, poetic but not exactly brilliant, and recording that bordered on the muddy (to say nothing of the snap, crackle and pop pressings). Time for a reassessment?
Cortot I've not heard in the Études. They're such technically demanding works; I take it his fallible technique doesn't impair enjoyment? What label? |
|
Pete Blue wrote (November 23, 2001):
Craig Schweickert wrote:
< Cortot I've not heard in the Études. They're such technically works; I take it his fallible technique doesn't impair enjoyment? What label? >
I don't know of a label, but you can hear Cortot's complete Etudes online, on Mp3 (free), They're at www.geocities.com/alfredcortot. Definitely worth hearing, though IMO no real competition for the Pollini.
I also was weaned on Novaes' Chopin. Her Nocturnes are still among my favorites, being uniquely dry-eyed but sounding like bel canto arias.
While in the Etudes I agree Pollini rules, right alongside him I would put the classic Wilhelm Backhaus (from his early EMI period, not his late, staid Decca/London one). |
|
Donald Satz wrote (November 23, 2001):
[To Craig Schweickert] Pletnev has another recording for DG where he performs at Carnegie Hall. The disc has Chopin's Scherzos, and Pletnev gives them a compelling and fiery interpretation. |
| |
|
Anderszweski - French Suite #5 |
|
Bradley Lehman wrote (November 21, 2002):
Peter Bright wrote:
< Hi all. I have just been listening to snippets from Anderszewski's recording of French Suite no. 5 (from 1999) - I couldn't find audio files of his partitas on line. From these few seconds, I enjoyed his playing very much - very clean and clear playing, kind of like Angela Hewitt meets Koroliov (...) >
IMO that Anderszewski recording of the French Suite #5 (plus the French Ouverture) sounds better as snippets than it does straight through, on the CD. Listening straight through it, I find he has a sameness, too much contrived rationality, that gets boring across the span of entire movements. It sounds too carefully planned rather than like play...well, here's what I wrote about it a month ago:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BachRecordings/message/7818 |
| |
|
|
|
