Classical Artists Blind Comparison Thread #5 (Chopin's Berceuse)

lol - agreed. I thought they were all good in different ways and it was real nitpicking to order them. Even my last placer, I still thought was good, just with different aims.

 

Struggling with a shortage of time this week--things just keep going like that (*&(%^*&^ drum-beating rabbit--but I've listened through once and have a preliminary ranking. My method is to go through the lot from end to end and, taking a few cryptic notes as I go, rely on memory to set up an initial ordering. Then I go back and compare neighbors to fine tune it. Right now I've done step 1 but not step 2.

 

Spoiler

One benefit of these blind comparison exercises is that they force one to pay concentrated attention to a thrice-familiar work, and so it was here. I had neither time nor technical facility to look deeply for matters of execution, so instead I worked along the lines of my belief that the piece should evoke a dreamy feeling (it is, after all, a lullaby) with romantic sensibilities.

In general, I thought most of the performances were at least very nice, and even the two that I didn't like were well played, just with what I consider wrongheaded tempo choices. So, without further ado, my rankings:

1) No. 1. The acoustic recording technique didn't help this pianist very much, but it was good of its type and more than good enough to display lovely filigree work, light and airy.

2) No. 3. Maybe even a bit "dreamier" than the foregoing, but the former's passagework won me over in a close contest. I could live happily with this one if the other were not available.

3) No. 7. Lovely account, although I found the little hiccups a bit offputting.

4) No. 6. Also very nice, but on balance I liked 7 better.

5) No. 4. Felt a bit slowish to me, although not drastically so.

6) No. 2

7) No. 9

8) No. 10. I found the passagework here rather heavier than it should be.

9) No. 8. As noted, nicely played, but just felt too darned slow, even though it was only a second slower than no. 10.

10) No. 5. Too fast! Again, nicely played, but if one must err in this piece, too brisk is not the way to go.

So there you have it. Thanks to George for taking the time and trouble to assemble such an audible feast for our listening delection!

 

Well, having at last posted my own responses, I've reviewed all the other "spoiler" posts, and I'm glad to see that as usual, to paraphrase Churchill, I'm in agreement with everyone except for all the others.

 

I can't even reach a concensus with myself on this one.

 

see inside

 

as usual I agree with drh - voted last week and just looked at his spoiler...

 

You mean 4:00pm UTC? I was expecting to have seen the results revealed by now, but if not, do you still want to me to copy my thoughts/rankings in or are you going to do that yourself?

 

Oh, those tricky publishers! Next thing you know, you'll be telling me they messed with Dvorak's opus numbers or something. Sheesh!

Without presuming to speak for George, I imagine he probably meant 4:00 local--which would be US Eastern Daylight Time for New York, just as it is for me here in the DC suburbs. We here stateside tend to be rather less cosmopolitan about such things than our friends in Europe, I'm afraid--or, at least, this statesider does....

For what it's worth, this post is going in at 11:20, give or take a minute, my US local time.

 

Only six votes? hmmmm. I wonder what we can do to increase participation.

 

At least one more--even though I posted votes, I came in just a bit too late to click one of the poll options. If we get 8 or 9, we'll be at about the level we've run for the last few iterations.

 

offer free beer or a date with Martha Argerich

 

I was hoping SBurke and Robin L would have taken part, but neither have been on here much lately - pity...

 

maybe move outside of piano music and move outside of Chopin and Beethoven? That Berceuse was awesome though, I have to admit.

 

I'm not so sure content has been the issue. I have this nagging feeling that there maybe some guilt by association with ABX DBTs and all the baggage that goes with it.

 

Agreed! On the other hand, I'm glad we've picked up some spirited newcomers (you know who you are!), so things are still plenty interesting.

 

I meant 4:00 EST, sorry I wasn't clear on that. So 2 hours and 2 minutes from this post.

And yes, please post for yourselves everyone. I can PM people back their votes if they have lost them (a copy should be in your outbox as well.)

 

Thanks!

If it means watering things down, I say lets stick with less people.

 

I believe it's three hours from now isn't it? (Just to add to the confusion, New York is four hours behind us as opposed to the usual five during the few weeks between when we change clocks.)

 

No, it's 2 hours, or rather, 1 hour 54 minutes.

 

There are a great number of wonderful performances here. I think I need a lifetime to get the ranking right.

And like the previous threads, thanks George for providing some interesting choices to challenge our perceptions.

Spoiler

9
8
10
7
4
5
6
2
1
3

 

That's strange, this site says that it's now 15:00 EST (actually 14:00 if you don't take account of daylight saving time). But whatever, I doubt anyone as we "speak" is in a desperate rush to finish their submission before the deadline, so I'll post mine now:


Some really good performances there and I look forward to the results being revealed. Ranking them was hell but I did my best...

#1 Don't much care for the separating of notes between hands, LH not very distinctive (in fairness the sound quality may be a factor) and rhythmically a bit unstable. But overall very nice singing tone, with the right blend of intimacy and a touch of drama in the more animated sections - good feel for the architecture and the rise and fall nature of the piece. Great technique with silky smooth runs (especially liked the upward chromatic thirds and that rapid descending leggierissimo line).

#2 Sounded nice enough but lacked a certain magic; main theme was jerky, perfunctory and piece overall lacked sufficient cantabile. Grace notes too fast, sounded more like parts of chords. Not enough variance in tone and mood - just because the harmony hardly changes throughout, doesn't mean it should all sound the same.

#3 Love the predominantly dreamy and introverted mood that in its understated way manages to reach a passionate climax. Nice variety in tone, colour and shading. Only problem is the somewhat abrupt tempo changes (speeds up too quickly for the start of the decorative stuff, and slows down too much for the first and only change of harmony), but very nice nonetheless.

#4 Virtually flawless performance, full of emotion, good tempo with the right amount of rubato while maintaining a nice rhythm. Lovely lightness of touch in runs with an effortless technique. Ashkenazy perhaps? (I know he favours this kind of tempo)

#5 Too fast which pretty much ruined the whole piece for me - good technique no doubt, but this is a late Chopin piece not a Czerny study. Grace notes virtually imperceptible. Tone and mood didn't change much - again, there's more to this piece than a couple of chords and rapid passagework. Worst of all was the way OTT bell-like accentuation of the A flat towards the end - since when did Chopin specify that this should be played as a pedal point?

#6 Too much separating of notes (worse than in #1), unconvincing rubato, seemed to be mostly going through the motions. Too agitated in middle sections, sometimes rushed, and lacked the subtlety and delicacy this piece should always have. Next!

#7 Loved the faraway feel the main melody had. Not so keen on the spread chords (not what Chopin wrote) but that's a very minor nitpick. Very romantic interpretation with wild tempo changes, but somehow it all came together - pianist really captured the improvisatory nature of the piece with impeccable technique. But above all this performance really lived up to the piece's name, something you could really fall asleep to in the best sense.

#8 Very slow, with a gentle and understated performance that concentrates more on atmosphere and a unified mood than virtuosity and drama. Some may find it a bit dull, but in many ways this was the most beautiful of the set; wonderful tone, perfect legato and pedalling with a kind of inner glow and subtly veiled intensity that never loses its grip.

#9 Great cantabile and magical bell like timbres in RH. Quite rhythmic and not much rubato, lending the piece a relaxing and hypnotic feel. Dynamics spot on. The amazing thing about this piece in the right hands is its emotional depth and the way it does so much with seemingly so little, and the pianist captured that perfectly. A no-frills performance, not flamboyant, virtuosic or exaggeratedly heart-on-sleeve, just one that sticks perfectly to Chopin's intentions with tone, expression and technique in perfect balance. Man, this is going to be tough!

#10 Not very smooth legato, overall somewhat nonchalant performance. Nice but just a bit subpar for the set chock full of superb performances - no real flaws but just lacked the magic and ability to really transport me somewhere that #4 and #7-9 did.

Rankings - er...
#8
#7
#9
#4
#1
#3
#10
#2
#6
#5

 

Ok, I will be revealing the identities of the 10 samples in about an hour when I get home from work.

Just wanted to give any latecomers one last chance to post.

 

Here are the identities of the 10 samples. I have added the label and year of original recording for those who may wish to track any of these down. They were all released on CD

1. Benno Moiseiwitsch - (Naxos Historical) 1916
2. Wilhelm Backhaus - (Andante)1928
3. Raoul von Koczalski - (Marston) 1928
4. Walter Gieseking - (Great Pianists of the Century) 1938
5. Josef Hofmann - (Marston) - 1937
6. Moriz Rosenthal - (Pearl) - 1930
7. Alfred Cortot - (Naxos) - 1926
8. Solomon Cutner - (Great Pianists of the Century) 1952
9. Jeanne-Marie Darre - (Vanguard) 1965
10. Ivan Moravec - (Vox) 2002

 

FWIW, my favorites were Darre and Koczalski. If pressed to pick one, I'd say the latter. The worst (by far) was Hofmann. Too fast for me, but since it was such a unique take on this work, I wanted to include it.