|  | | | Customer Reviews: | | | Average Customer Review:
Write an online review and share your thoughts with other customers.
1 of 1 found the following review helpful:
Comparison Sep 22, 2009
I used to listen to the Beethoven piano trios on LPs, the original releases by the Beaux arts Trio (Presler, Cohen, Greenhouse). It was 'in-house' wisdom that those were the standard of interpretation. I was satisfied enough to have replaced the LPs with the complete-box re-release of CDs three or four years ago. I don't want to say that I'm suddenly dissatisfied with the Beaux Arts performances. I'm not. They remain the standard of excellence for performance on modern piano and strings.
Nevertheless, the recording of Haydn's Last Four Piano Trios by Robert Levin, Anner Bylsma, and Vera Beths impressed me as such a revelation that I hastened to buy this CD of Beethoven's two most popular piano trios, to see what difference the historical instruments might make. The keyboardist on this CD is Jos van Immerseel in place of Robert Levin. I played this and my older recording "back to back", movement by movement, Opus 70 #1 first and then Opus 97. Quite an afternoon of listening pleasure!
Most people living in the 19th Century, Beethoven's contemporaries and their heirs, would have made their acquaintance with Beethoven's music from the page, from playing it themselves rather than hearing it in a concert hall. That would have been especially true of chamber works like these piano trios; in many cases, we know exactly for whom Beethoven composed such music, who played it first, etc. We know some of the occasions when Beethoven himself played the fortepiano (he NEVER played the instrument we call a piano today), often with members of the household on the violin and cello. Such music was written for elegant pleasure, for shared entertainment in the salons of the wealthy. People of lesser means but rich enough to own instruments would soon have had the opportunity to buy the printed scores and imitate the elegance of their "betters". The image of Beethoven elaborated by later romantic historians, as a thunderous social radical and uncompromising musical tyrant, is partly humbug and partly based on the composer's unfortunate attempts to keep playing despite his deafness. What this all leads to, in my mind, is the necessity of remembering that these and other pieces of Beethoven's chamber music should NOT be overinterpreted. They should be beautiful to hear above all. They should embody both the taste, and to challenges to that taste, of the era in which they were composed. That would seem to be a central tenet of "historically informed" performance.
So... the first thing most listeners will hear in the comparison of the Beaux Arts vs. the Immerseel/Bylsma/Beth is that the former interpret the music more dramatically. It's hard for me not to declare that they overplay some passages, that they coarsen the music with romantic excess. The historical instrument trio tends to let the music "speak for itself" in affect, and to concentrate on purely musical values. I rush to confess, mind you, that I never 'heard' the Beaux Arts people as overinterpreting until I played this track-to-track match-up.
The next thing I heard was that the fortepiano had certain advantages for THIS music over the modern grand piano. Obviously the modern piano has resources the fortepiano lacked. The timbre of the lower and higher octaves on the modern piano is far more consistent; the forte piano sounds tinkly in its highest range and plunky in its lowest. However, for THIS music, such a contrast of timbre is quite satisfactory. It clarifies the voicing and emphasizes the contrast of registers. The fortepiano lacked the pedal controls of the modern piano, but listening to the two instruments in comparison, I find that Menahem Pressler of Beaux Arts depended far too much on damping the piano-string resonance by pedal. The quick decay of the 'lighter' fortepiano produces a cleaner, more transparent, more elegant sound. A more subtle difference will be heard only on high quality sound equipment; the modern piano, with its crossed string construction, inevitably 'contaminates' its notes with sympathetic vibrations, producing a low rumble of dissonance. Hence the tuning of the fortepiano is purer and acoustically simpler.
The dynamic range of the modern piano, from softest to loudest, is far greater than that of the fortepiano, especially toward the fortissimo side. But when Pressler coaxes his piano to its most energetic forte, the violin of Isadore Cohen becomes shrill and edgy. Odd that modern metal strings should sound more 'feline' than pre-modern 'cat gut' strings! On the whole, though Vera Beths is a less skilled player than Cohen, the sound of her violin is sweeter and better balanced with the fortepiano. Remember my premise, that the beauty of this music trumps the melodrama!
As for the cellos, the comparison is easy. Anner Bylsma is profoundly more sensitive to the ensemble values of these trios, more generous, more fundamentally musical, than modern cellist Bernard Greenhouse, and once again the gut strings of the historical cello sound sweeter and blend better.
The Beaux Arts box is a great performance and a great value; I have no complaints about it. But if a complete set of Beethoven's fortepiano trios performed by Bylsma&Co were available, I'd recommend it as the better choice. Head to head, I prefer Bylsma&Co on every movement of these two trios except the Largo Assai of the "Ghost" trio, which the Beaux Arts bunch performs exquisitely.
0 of 1 found the following review helpful:
 Period Fans Will Probably Enjoy This Very Much Nov 20, 2008
The period instruments are the attraction for me here. While I've never been a HIP zealot, these performances are mostly hale and vigorous with fine intonation and exhibiting plenty of period "style". The eponymous largo movement of the Ghost Trio is initially taken a bit too fast for my liking, but overall these performances are sure to satisfy most fans of these popular works, especially period fans. The recording is vivid, up-close and intimate; highlighting the mostly charming astringent qualities of the period strings. That there's plenty of bass and a slight reverberance somewhat ameliorates the inherent "nasality" and "tinkling" of the overall ensemble sound.
3 of 3 found the following review helpful:
Electrifying performances with fascinating sonorities Aug 26, 2008
No matter how many recordings of these works you have (and I have more than I will admit to my wife) you must get this one. Jos, Vera and Anner are having a blast here, especially in the Ghost, which is easily my favorite performance ever of that work. The Archduke has one flaw that bothers me, but I find this issue with most every recording of it to some extent: this must be a tough piece for the pianist. I get the feeling there's no place to hide, no pounding virtuosity that--though most people don't realize it--is actually a great place to *hide* technical weaknesses. Opus 97 demands rhythmic evenness (avoid rushing without sounding mechanical), subtle shading of dynamics and a great sense of phrasing. There are moments here where Immerseel fails. In the opening phrase, the first two chords are languid and then he lurches forward on the third, finally settling out on the fourth. I know counting bars sounds pedantic, but trust me, if you're listening carefully, it's jarring. Similarly, there are incompletely-voiced chords, some mangled trills in the famous pizzicato part, and a climax right after that where a trill starts on the wrong note (at precisely 8:40). In the second movement, like nearly every pianist, he slightly rushes the crescendo that introduces the second theme. (Many rush it more than slightly.) I have a feeling that this moment is tough for pianists because they have to increase volume and you do that by pounding harder, but this also, in rapid repeated chords, makes you speed up. (I wonder if using the shoulders for weight instead of the elbows would help. Claudio Arrau said this technique allowed him to play loudly in a more relaxed manner as well as avoid fatigue.) Moments like that made me wince, especially when his partners do such a great job. I wish they could have cleaned up his performance a little bit.
But that's the only problem I have, and it's mostly in the first movement anyway. In the heavenly third, the theme and variations, these musicians are speaking to us from heaven. And it just gets better after that. (A disc that gets *better* after the Archduke is great indeed.) The Ghost Trio is the dictionary definition of intensity, with the three taking every twist and turn with ease and abandon in the first movement, and wait till you hear the Largo! (A disc that gets *more intense* with the Largo is great indeed.) With all due respect to all the other chamber greats who've played it, if we ever make another recording to attach to an unmanned space probe, *this* is the performance that should be sent out of the solar system.
What's so fascinating is the sonorities these three bring out with their period approach. I've heard other HIP performances of these works, but they sound thin and dry by comparison. Here the instruments--the piano especially--illuminate balances that one didn't know existed. There are so many moments of "delicious" music-making as the three instruments congeal. Because of these very special sounds--textures and balances--I'm willing to overlook a few sloppy moments with the piano in the first work. While this won't displace Cortot-Thibaud-Casals (what will?), it's a very fine reading.
Sound is clear and upfront without being glassy, which is often the case with HIP. This is a rare thing, two performances of often-recorded works that give us a fresh take. What are you waiting for? Why haven't you ordered it yet? Go go go!
3 of 3 found the following review helpful:
Fabulous Period Beethoven Feb 15, 2008
Just wonderful performances of two piano trio masterpieces by Beethoven. The period instruments give a different feel for this famous music, and it is easy to imagine this might be close to what a good performance would have sounded like at the time they were written. Beautiful playing, excellent recording. A must have.
16 of 16 found the following review helpful:
Thrilling performances on period instruments Feb 16, 2005
First things first: I am a period instrument enthusiast who enjoys historically informed performances. That being said, I usually prefer classical recordings that use a modern piano rather than fortepiano for obvious reasons. At times, Beethoven seems to have intuited that the fortepiano would soon be improved upon and wrote music for this soon-to-be instrument.
So, I was hesitant to buy this recording, but took a chance due to my high regard for Anner Bylsma. Wow! I was thrilled from the start of the "Archduke" and this joy continued through the ending Presto of the "Ghost". The recorded sound is brilliant and the sound of the fortepiano did not dissapoint me in the least. In fact, this is my absolute favorite recording of the "Archduke" I've ever heard. Very highly recommended!!!
|
| |
|
![Firefly: The Complete Series [Blu-ray]](http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51734pRq2%2BL._SL75_.jpg "Firefly: The Complete Series [Blu-ray]")
![Gattaca [Blu-ray]](http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51VfE5rU9OL._SL75_.jpg "Gattaca [Blu-ray]")
![Resident Evil [Blu-ray]](http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51m8P3lO%2BnL._SL75_.jpg "Resident Evil [Blu-ray]")
![Run Lola Run [Blu-ray]](http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51gTXpHYF7L._SL75_.jpg "Run Lola Run [Blu-ray]")
