The "What are you listening now?" thread

[eliasfrost]

I listened to a number of Arrau's interpretations of the nocturnes. While he does excel at rubato, I find his cantabile to be worse than Rubinstein's. Take this playing, for example:






Arrau starts off the piece a bit too loud, and follows the rest of the nocturne with somewhat confusing variations in dynamics. The cantabile tone demands clarity but also needs consistent shifting from louds to softs, as a singer is never monotone. I felt that Arrau lacked Rubinstein's tenderness in playing this nocturne, as the beginning of this piece is supposed to sound flitting and ephemeral but is rather presented in too solid a manner. Now, this nocturne has a doppio movimento section at 1:47 which is supposed to be very light, but requires a sudden crescendo at 2:06 reminiscent of one with a high temper bursting into violence. Because the beginning is already quite loud, Arrau fails to deliver the necessary softness at the start of the doppio movimento to make this crescendo noticeable, where as Rubinstein is more successful.

Arrau does, however, surpass Rubinstein in a few other nocturnes through his rubato alone, especially in the popular op. 9 no. 2. But his main downfall is a somewhat faulty articulation of cantabile.

Not invalid points in their own right, but I want to point out a few things:

1. Nowhere in Nocturne no. 5 did Chopin ever write "cantabile". Only Nocturne no. 4, which is a part of op.15 is marked cantabile (adagio cantabile). To say that all of Chopin's works should be played like a singer is absurd.

2. The crescendo you're referring to in the doppio movimento is less noticeable because that is what Claudio Arrau wants, not because of less sensitivity to dynamics. I have the score right in front of me, and immediately preceding the crescendo marking are numerous large hairpins without accompanying dynamic markings, making them completely up to the performer. I have a CD-quality version of the nocturne and the crescendo is not only noticeable, it is exciting in its subtlety. Not to mention, to compare two performer's degree of expression to such a degree is just ridiculous and I want no part in it. We are talking about a piece of music here, and a Romantic one at that; exactly how the performer wants to express it is in this case completely up to the performer. As long as he respects the "sotto voce" marking, as Claudio certainly does.

Also, I'm listening to Rubinstein's version, and while it is excellent there are quite a few similar "errors" in his playing, if you seriously want to say Rubinstein is better than Claudio because he follows the score more closely. For example:

completely ignoring all of the marcatos
playing slurs non-legato
playing a note with a marcato sign and marked con forza at mf/f

I could go on, but frankly I find it disgusting to list off errors in a freaking Chopin performance. I find Claudio's use of dynamics to be perfect and the most representative of what Chopin's music means to me. Obviously it does not to you, so let's leave it at that.

EDIT: I want to make one thing abundantly clear: I don't hate Rubinstein. He is a fantastic pianist and to call him overrated would be absurd. I just don't think he plays Chopin well. He understands Chopin in his own way, and I in my own way (Hell, I think Arrau has many missed opportunities that I would key in on in my playing). That, to me, is the beauty of Chopin. Just because I don't like Rubinstein's playing doesn't make him a bad pianist, I just don't like the way he plays Chopin. Period. His really strict and reserved style lends itself incredibly well to, say, the Beethoven piano sonatas, which seem to me to be incredibly well done. I'm listening to Op. 8 mvt 2 right now and his playing there is simply stunning.

Too many.. weird... words...



























Anyways, I'm listening to this: