Classical artists blind comparison #9. Scarlatti K 141

Just finally submitted my vote by PM - some amazingly energetic and virtuosic interpretations there - ranking at least half of them was like splitting almost invisible hairs.

Unfortunately, I've been having major problems with my Internet connection (don't know if it's just my computer or my provider which is Three Mobile) which meant each performance took over half an hour on average to download and play properly, which made playing one performance after a different one for the sake of direct comparisons nigh on impossible - I had to rely entirely on my own written out comments to determine the rankings.

Which leads to another important question, for the sake of the next blind comparison assuming you're going to continue to use Dropbox - is there any way of actually saving these MP3s? The FLACs could sometimes be a pain to download, but the obvious advantage (for me anyway, unless I've missed something here) was that once it was done it was done. I'm not going to criticise your method though, because 99% of the time it works for me and the rest of us and it's by far the most user-friendly, but I think it's worth keeping one's options open in case any of us have similar problems.

 

The reveal...............

#1 Mikhail Pletnev.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikhail_Pletnev

#2 Emil Gilels
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emil_Gilels

#3 Alexandre Tharaud
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexandre_Tharaud

#4 Martha Argerich
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martha_Argerich

#5 Joyce Yang
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joyce_Yang

#6 Balazs Szokolay
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balázs_Szokolay

#7 Benjamin Grosvenor
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benjamin_Grosvenor

#8 HJ Lim

 

The results..............


Mikhail Plentev: 0 1st place votes, 2 2nd place votes, 2 3rd place votes, 0 4th place votes, 2 5th place votes, 0 6th place votes, 1 7th place vote and 0 8th place votes

Emil Gilels: 1 ½ 1st place votes, 1 2nd place vote, 0 3rd place votes, 0 4th place votes, 1 5th place vote, 2 6th place votes, 1 7th place vote and 0 8th place votes.

Alexandre Tharaud: 1 1st place vote, 0 2nd place votes, 1 3rd place vote, 1 4th place vote, 1 5th place vote, 0 6th place votes, 2 7th place votes, 1 8th place vote.

Martha Argerich: 1 1st place vote, o 2nd place votes, 0 3rd place votes, 2 4th place votes, 1 5th place vote, 0 6th place votes, 3 7th place votes.

Joyce Yang: 0 1st place votes, 1 2nd place vote, 2 3rd place votes, 1 4th place vote, 1 5th place vote, 2 6th place votes, 0 7th place votes, 0 8th place votes.

Balazs Szokolay: 1 1st place vote, 1 2nd place vote, 1 3rd place votes, 3 4th place votes, 1 5th place vote, 0 6th place votes, 0 7th place votes, 0 8th place votes.

Benjamin Grosvenor: 3 ½ 1st place votes, 2 2nd place votes, 0 3rd place votes, 0 4th place votes, 2 5th place votes, 0 6th place votes, 0 7th place votes, 0 8th place votes.

HJ Lim: 0 1st place votes, 1 2nd place vote, 0 3rd place votes, 0 4th place votes, 0 5th place votes, 0 6th place votes, 0 7th place votes, 6 8th place votes.

 

The posts.

SBurke

IMO if you are going to play this piece on the piano is must be for the purpose of using the piano part of pianoforte rather than just the forte. Why is it so many pianists want to play this at Presto, and bang with the left hand? The tendency among several of these performers to do that, particularly in the repeat of the first theme, became about as welcome as a jackhammer. I love Scarlatti almost as much as any composer. Frankly though, but for Gilels, this piece may need to be relegated to the harpsichord. Candidly, some of my frustration may have been due to the fact that I could barely follow the score in some of these faster versions.

So with that said I hardly know how to rank these performances, except I put no. 2 first.

And I put nos. 4 and 8 at the bottom. They are taken at breakneck speed. Perhaps as the final encore of a tremendous recital this would blow my hair back and leave me awestruck. As it is, at home, amongst others, I could hardly tolerate them. Those trills are there for a reason, by the way, and they need to be played. You can't do it at 110 miles per hour. 6 also bothered me for blowing through the trills.

5 is done at a decent tempo, with no repeats. But the sound of the piano and the pianist's touch could be better IMO.

3 seems a study in contrasts, at least as far as my impression went. LH is too brusque in the first theme, but the second theme is quite nice.

7 is interesting as the LH is again too aggressive, though it is moderated somewhat on the repeat. I don't mind the interpretive license taken at other points in the piece, e.g. the ritard in bars 116-22. It is fast, but seems more thought through.

In the end I suppose I'd rank as follows:

2
7
3
6
1
5
4
8

To restate the above, however, the only things I'd stand by are the top and bottom of my ranking. I suspect if I went over and over the others they'd all shuffle around. Essentially there are three tiers:

2
1 3 5 6 7
4 8

Now I am going to put on some Scott Ross to cleanse the palette. His version, by the way, clocks in at 4:45. Capiche?

N.B.: All of the above kvetching is only meant for the purpose of provoking discussion and is undertaken in good fun. Many thanks to Scott for doing this, these are always great thinking exercises for me. I look forward to finding out who's who.




Adam9
3
2
1
5
6
7
4
8

This was my very first ranking but after listening, re-listening, and reordering, it's what I ended up with at the end too.
A lot of speed demons here, especially #8, so maybe that's why the relatively slow #2 ranked so high.

John






canzld
My 2 cents for the Scarlatti.

Was not a great fan of the piece as played. On first listen to a snippet of each, 2 and 7 were the only two that grabbed me at all. Clearly the slowest versions with intimations of volume and speed dynamics that were completely absent in the rest. Whether a harpsichord could have done this or not, this added musicality to my ears. The rest were just a wall of sound or blur at times – and uninteresting.

So votes
2&7
the rest


2 slowest, with dynamics vol&speed 7 still fast in parts,
the rest
1 heavy left
3 too fast, wall of noise
4 even faster, bass not so obtrusive
5 heavy left, too fast
6 a little charm, but not much
8 speed demon

Regards
Nigel





Konut
This is my favorite Scarlatti sonata (so far.....I have not heard all of them). Even the renditions I ranked lowest had something interesting to recommend them. While I did not mind the speed of some of them, it would have been wiser to slow a bit as the faster versions seemed to have a problem maintaining a steady tempo, irrespective of rubato. My ideal version would have the dynamism and ending
of 2, the speed of 1, and the delicacy and rubato of 7. It was really tough ranking them as their relative strengths and weaknesses were hard to prioritize. In the end 7 just beat 5 for 1st place by virtue of the fact it was the most well thought out in the context of overall presentation.

1st. - 7
2nd. - 5
3rd. - 6
4th. - 4
5th. - 1
6th. - 2
7th. - 3
8th. - 8

1. The first time I listened to this one I thought it was too fast. But after repeated listening to all 8, this version strikes me as just right. There is some nice rubato, but is marred by some jerky rhythm problems. The other major fault is a heavy, plodding left hand. Good ending.

2. Too slow, but with some outstanding dynamic contrasts and good rubato. Some passages just plod. Favorite ending.

3. Starts too fast and slows toward the end. Slightly heavy left hand. Some rests are a little too long. Very plain ending.

4. Starts fast, stays fast. Is this a race? A better integrated left hand. Not enough dynamic contrasts, but not by much. One of the best of the fast versions. Plain ending.

5. Excellent integration between the right and left hands highlighting the melodic intent of each. 2nd slowest. Slightly flat dynamics. A nicely balanced version. Good ending.

6. Nice speed. Good integration of right and left hands. Could use a bit more rubato and more dynamics. Plain ending.

7. The most dramatic use of rubato and best delicate rendition with respect to the integration of right and left hands. The best of the fast versions, Just not my
favorite ending. I'm guessing its Horowitz.

8. Scarlatti on Dexedrine. Tempo and rubato just too erratic.
__________________
The pellet with the poison's in the flagon with the dragon, the vessel with the pestle has the brew that is true.





Jebjebitz
7 - favorite
8
5
6
4
2
1
3 - least favorite





John S

Scarlatti K. 141

Here’s my vote, listed first to last:

#7 At first, I was put off by the lightening tempo, but then one has to marvel at the awesome technique. But the best thing is the limited expressive rubato that makes it most musical. This is a version I could live with for a ling time.

#6 Very brisk, but not overly so. Brilliant execution and very nice dynamics. This is another long term keeper for me.

#1 Very impressive – this was my number one at first. Listen to the exquisite touch in those descending runs beginning at measure 18. OMG! What swift light touch this pianist has. I do think the left hand get a touch heavy during the chord passages. Curiously no trills are observed.

#4 Also very brisk, but nicely handled. Maybe not quite as subtle or nuanced as others, but this still invites repeat listenings.

#5 Here’s a quick dash with no repeats – doubtless done as an encore. I was ready to dismiss this, but there’s not really a whole lot wrong with it. (I’m happy it wasn’t my cell phone that rang during this.)

#2 I expect this to at the bottom of many lists because of its comparatively slow pace. It seems a plodding slow motion performance, far slower than the piece demands. But listen to it on its own without the company of its faster brethren. This pianist turns the aforementioned section beginning at bar 18 into an anthem; in fact, the whole piece takes on a gravitas not heard in any version. This tortoise crosses the finish line well behind the hares, but it does so with style and drama.

#3 Here’s an admirable performance that follows the score, shows great technique, but is just too heavy handed at times.

#8 Here’s another encore performance that’s over the top. Blisteringly fast, but has some ritards that alleviate the almost inhuman tempo. It must have been ‘you had to be there’ moments.





John DeAngelis
How I ranked them atarting with my favorite and ending with my least favorite:
5/1/6/3/7/4/2/8





Bluesfan

Here's my ranking:

1. #6 (dynamic, sparkling, brings out the melodies to their best advantage)
2. #1 (places nice accents, strong left hand)
3. #5 (nice flow)
4. #3 (some overly heavy chords)
5. #2 (too slow, too much pedal)
6. #7 (too fast, melodies can't develop)
7. #4 (too fast, melodies can't develop, strange kind of phasy effect)
8. #8 (hard, hammering, doesn't bring out the melodies)

I had trouble ranking them because I ranked some of them very differently in the different parts of the piece. #1 and #6 were close, 3# and #5, too, as well as #2, #4 and #7. I liked #8 consistently the least.

It seems strange to me, that some of these pianists (especially #8, but #2 and #7 as well) use so much pedal (which makes some passages blurry) in a work that was written for the harpsichord if I'm not mistaken.


Tangledupinblue
#1 A performance full of fire, passion, energy and dazzling virtuosity, bringing out the guitar-like LH chords well. Effective use of percussive bass which was never heavy or overdone and there was the right lightness of touch and legato in the more tranquil contrasting episodes. Excellent!

#2 Ponderous, over-pedalled and too romantic for Scarlatti - lacked subtlety with some overly heavy moments (like in the broken chords near the beginning) - spread chords were too soft, and some weird ornamentation. Pretty dull overall.

#3 Similar speed to #1 but with more elegance and grace; the most Spanish sounding of the set, you could really imagine this piece being playing by a flamenco guitar player. Occasionally rushed and a bizarre tendency to slow right down at cadences, but still very good.

#4 Dazzlingly quick performance; the lightness of touch and seeming effortlessness and smoothness of the repeated notes was astonishing. But this was no mere display of empty showmanship; it was also very musical, with nice dynamic contrasts, clear, crisp articulation with an effective semi-percussive, semi-pizzicato touch for the LH repeated notes. Already I know it's going to be tough to decide a winner...

#5 Not much to say about this really; solid performance, with a good tempo, nice harmonic colour and articulation, but a bit lacking in dynamic contrast with often an over-emphasis of the held notes in the LH. Was this done live? (might partly explain the strange decision not to do at least one of the repeats)

#6 See #1 and #3 above, combined, with a more dramatic middle section.

#7 Er...see #3 and #4, combined - think I'll have to use a random number generator to rank some of these...

#8 This performance made it easy for me to pick a winner. Was wondering whether in considering #4 as my favourite whether I was being too favourably disposed toward fast performances, but that one is a supreme case of how a breakneck speed for this kind of piece can be just as if not more so valid than a more measured interpretation, whereas this one was the polar opposite. Playing this piece as fast as is humanly possible (and I don't think it was that assured technically, either, often coming across as rushed and/or uneven) doesn't amount to much if you clearly disregard the more musical fundamentals such as dynamics, expression, harmonic colour, dramatic contrasts et al. #2 may have had less life but at least it was more coherent.

Right, rankings:
#4
#7
#1
#6
#3
#5
#2
#8





Just a not about HJ Lim. I chose here for this comparison before she became the subject of some debate on our classical music thread. Pure coincidence.

 

Fascinating. Glad to hear Martha Argerich was my favourite - it was a phenomenal all-round performance. Have you ever seen her live? I'd love to one day, assuming she's still touring.

Not surprise that Emil Giles came second last for me - not saying it was that bad a performance, but I've yet to hear a performance by him in this blind comparison series that truly impressed me. Perhaps his true strengths lie in other repertoire.

Also, wasn't HJ Kim the same pianist we were having a lengthy discussion about on Classical Music Corner the other week, mainly about the way female (and especially Asian) musicians are marketed? I seem to remember that opinions about her playing weren't very complimentary either, and I'd hope that other performances by her have a little less showmanship and more heart. Classical music is a serious business and for me it surely has to be more than just good looks and dazzling technique (and even that wasn't all that great, as I said in my PM).

EDIT: Scott just answered my question in the post above

 

Just looking back at the posted comments.

Surprised that #7 was such a favourite given that it seemed most people were more favourably inclined towards the slower performances, and the lukewarm reception afforded to #4 (I think this place must be the first time I've ever seen anyone criticize Martha Argerich!). What was it that #7 offered that #4 didn't?

Also, it seems a number of people criticising #3 for the left hand being too brusque or heavy are missing the point somewhat - Scarlatti spent almost the last 30 years of his life in Spain, and so was well versed in Spanish music and flamenco. The chords in the LH along with the rapid repeated notes are intentionally being played that way to emulate the sound of the guitar and flamenco music, and like a lot of other Scarlatti sonatas this performance along with others (like #1) shows how good this piece would sound arranged for that instrument. But if you know all this, and that kind of playing just wasn't to your liking, then fair enough - but it's quite common for people to play Scarlatti that way, as well as use very fast tempos to capture the sparkling nature of many of these jewel-like pieces, which are usually short, economical and to the point.

 

I will make the files available in both formats next time.

 

Kind of a low turnout in the end. I'll take the blame. I did not promote this one as well as I did previous ones but I was simply too busy with Key and Peele.

Martha Argerich certainly is on my short wish list of pianists to see live. So is Benjamin Grosvenor.

 

Thanks Scott for an outstanding effort and for making us aware of Benjamin Grosvenor. An amazingly sophisticated reading for, at the time, a 17 year old. I had to google Key and Peele. I don't get Comedy Central. Funny guys.

 

As much as I admire great artists from the past I do tend to keep an eye out for the great artists of the present and future. My first love is live performance and I'm pretty sure Emil Gilels will not be coming to Disney Hall anytime.....

OTOH I saw Joyce Yang this year and would love to see any of the other living artists in this comparison. But I really want to see Martha Argerich before she calls it quits.

 

I tried to find out the ranking of all voters combined. Concerning the ½ 1st rankings of Emil Gilels and Benjamin Grosvenor I counted the first as 1 and the last as 0 to get to 7 votes for each artist.

1. Benjamin Grosvenor (17)
2. Balazs Szokolay (23)
3. Mikhail Plentev (27)
4. Emil Gilels (28)
5. Joyce Yang (29)
6. Alexandre Tharaud, Martha Argerich (35)
8. HJ Lim (50)

I’m glad Szokolay came out 2nd as I placed him 1st – for the second time in a Scarlatti sonata. I guess I have to buy his CD now …

 

I thought it was a pretty good turnout looking at the poll (the longer time given notwithstanding) but then I noticed despite the poll showing 10, only 7 people actually submitted their votes?

 

In a recital, that would be very unlikely. I think she has for the most part, if not entirely, stopped giving solo recitals. I did see her in the Ravel Concerto in G a few years ago.

 

Interesting results, many thanks to Scott for setting this up. Grosvenor has gotten a lot of praise in Britain and I think his debut disc has come out in the US recently. I've not heard it yet. Very positive review in Gramophone. Pletnev, Tharaud, and Argerich are all artists I like quite a bit, just not very much in this piece. I didn't know this particular Argerich recording, actually; I have another which I think is likewise too fast. What is the source of this one?

Although I recognized Gilels, it is a different recording that I have by him; the interpretation is similar. Scott, do you know the source of this one as well?

Sort of an eye-opener that one artist's take ended up nearly unanimously in last place. What is the source of the performance? Perhaps the context gives a reason for how she went at it.

I'd never even heard of Szokolay. Recommendations, anyone?

 

I made a similar wishful comment to Scott a few posts before him, before checking her date of birth on Wikipedia - wow, how time flies, she'll be 71 this coming June, really thought she was much younger.

Seems then she's pretty much retired from public performances, as in general it would appear that female solo pianists have a shorter shelf life in that respect than their male counterparts. When was that Scarlatti performance recorded?

 

8

 

I just ordered this:



It turns out I ranked Szokolay first in K 380 and second in K 466. Both these and K 141 are on this. Szokolay was my front runner for most listenings until I went with Grosvenor at the last minute.

 

But in your results roundup on post #53 the votes for each pianist add up to 7.

 

10 people posted in the poll.

 

So did I!

 

I noticed some similarities in my list to some others, but that'll happen with 8 possibilities I suppose. Really I should say 7 choices, because that freak of nature HJ Lim put herself out of contention a mere millisecond after the first note. Actually, the rap on Szokolay seems to be he is all technique and no soul. There may be some justification to that, but after sampling some varied Lim on YouTube, I'd say she makes the 51-year-old Hungarian sound like he's on a direct line to the god of music inspiration.

Anyway, I'd like to thank Scott for making me aware of the Scarlatti sonatas, which are obviously some of the greatest musical gems ever. Somehow this significant piece of musical history has eluded me until now.

 

Interesting reveal. Apart from the near unanimity for 8 as the worst, I'm intrigued how many people liked 7 but alternatively heard it as either one of the fastest or one of the slowest.
Curiously, after having completed the poll I pulled up utube and listened to a few takes of this piece on harpsichord and liked all the versions I heard much better than any of these attempts on the piano. Horses for courses perhaps.

 

one person only voted for two artists as their number one. So I gave both of those artists a half of a first place vote. The other 6 artists received no vote from that one person