The greatest single classical piano solo recording of all time

[opus10no2]

you have to take everything into account. hamelin, for one, has a massive rep, and berezovsky doesnt. just check out hamelin's 50 or so CDs and compare to berezovsky's pitiful output.

hamelin also has a better technique (listen to ignis fatuus for a great example). also, berezovsky may have power, but when his fury increases, his tech and interpretation decrease. watch his liszt transcendental etudes for an example (mazeppa in particular). also, hamelin has a bad reputation when it comes to interpretation, but he plays it like it is, no more, no less. i can say just about the same about berezovsky. sure, a few godowsky etudes of berezovsky's may be "better" speedwise, but in terms of technique and interpretation, hamelin owns.

I think Hamelin's technique is marginally better, but this doesn't excuse his tempi in some of the Chop-Gods.

Berezovsky's performing repertoire is comparable to Hamelin's.

[chromatickler]

ahahaha n da ticklahz pick fo bez 88 rec evah:


















da TRUMOFO SDC FANTAZIA 

[zheer]

  The Bach concertos by Murry periah ( sorry i have no idea how his name is spelt).
 
  Rachmaninoff playing choipn is also very good.

[jre58591]

Berezovsky's performing repertoire is comparable to Hamelin's.

comparable, but not better.

[opus10no2]

comparable, but not better.

No, but the point is that you discredited Berezovsky in your previous statement.

Actually, I do not doubt(based on recordings I've been exposed to) that Hamelin is perhaps the most pianistically gifted human being on this planet; I only doubt his choices.

I believe he thought he could get away with a slow LH 10/4...however he did not have the foresight to realize on day Libetta's legendary video would be widely recognized, aswell as having his ass pwnt by Berezovsky.

[jakev2.0]

In terms of pressing keys down quickly, in the correct order, in any of the most complex permutations, I agree that Hamelin has every other human being on the planet beat. But in my books, tone and colour and the basic sounds that the pianist produces are also part of technique, and in those areas Hamelin just comes up short. So I'd say based on my definition Berezovsky has the better technique than Hamelin. (Based on this definition I also regard Libetta as a total non-entity.)

[opus10no2]

This definition of 'technique' involves the subjective matter of 'musicality', which renders it irrelevant in objective discussion.

The 3 things that make up a pianist are -

His mechanism/dexterity/raw speed

His range of expressive vocabulary(tone, dynamics, rhythm) (this range is not part of technique, but it can only exist with technique behind it)

His interpretive instincts and choices


only the first can be judged objectively, and it is the one with the most important bearing on realizing the other 2, and hence - the most important.

[jre58591]

only the first can be judged objectively, and it is the one with the most important bearing on realizing the other 2, and hence - the most important.

typical comme.

[jakev2.0]

That's like saying efficiency is much more important than equity in a society, because only efficiency can be measured objectively. If we only considered efficiency, there would be no minimum wage, no handicapped parking etc. In short, society wouldn't be as good as it could be. How "good" society is is totally subjective. But all rational, educated, and fair people believe that some equity is desirable to no equity - even if it means giving up efficiency.

It's as bad to listen to music without tone, colour, interesting rhythmic effects, and interpretive insight as it is to live in a society without equity. It doesn't matter whether the quantities can be measured objectively or not. We're all human here (presumably)...95% of pianists would rather hear Schnabel play the slow movement of a Beethoven Sonata than Hamelin. That is a pretty good indicator that interpretation, tone, colour etc. is not make-believe, and does in fact make a performance great - even though it's quality cannot be measured with a stop watch

[opus10no2]

typical comme.

Thank you, very kind praise.

That's like saying efficiency is much more important than equity in a society, because only efficiency can be measured objectively. If we only considered efficiency, there would be no minimum wage, no handicapped parking etc. In short, society wouldn't be as good as it could be. How "good" society is is totally subjective. But all rational, educated, and fair people believe that some equity is desirable to no equity - even if it means giving up efficiency.

However noone gets them mixed up, and anyone can observe them seperately.

It's as bad to listen to music without tone, colour, interesting rhythmic effects, and interpretive insight as it is to live in a society without equity. It doesn't matter whether the quantities can be measured objectively or not. We're all human here (presumably)...95% of pianists would rather hear Schnabel play the slow movement of a Beethoven Sonata than Hamelin. That is a pretty good indicator that interpretation, tone, colour etc. is not make-believe, and does in fact make a performance great - even though it's quality cannot be measured with a stop watch

This is all irrelevant, I love great music too, I just can seperate my views from technique from my views on music, which you apparently can't.

I pity the fool, to quote one of the finest men of the 20th centruy.

[jakev2.0]

However noone gets them mixed up, and anyone can observe them seperately.

Based on that logic, we could presumably observe musicality without piano technique! Of course... Schnabel radiated his profound understanding of Beethoven's music when he was playing billiards, brushing his teeth, and watching the Three Stooges with Karl Ulrich. ...Neah, even he had to depress some keys on the piano and manipulate the pedals. 

[opus10no2]

Based upon the power of my logic we could all understand life, the universe, and everything.

However it would be no fun for everyone to know everything, and henceforth I allow you all to be mice running in your mazes, imparting my glorious wisdom judiciously and only if and when I choose.

Feel blessed, for you truly are.

[jakev2.0]

Thank you, O exalted one. 

[opus10no2]

your graciousness shall be noted 

[mephisto]

Gould's 54 Goldberg variations kills his other recs(55,81 and live in Salzburg).

[mephisto]

I think Hamelin's technique is marginally better, but this doesn't excuse his tempi in some of the Chop-Gods.

Berezovsky's performing repertoire is comparable to Hamelin's.

Proof it, becuase I do NOT belive it.

[sevencircles]

Funny thing about Hammelin is that he often claims that he never practice more then he has to, and that is apr 3 very effective hours a day.

He plays whatīs on the page until he can play in the tempo he desires without any technical mistakes and then he goes on with other stuff.


He plays what canīt play perfectly from a technical standpoint and leaves the piano as soon as he can play the works technically well.

Many people praise his Kaleidoscope album from the rooftops.

I played it for a friend of mine and he thought Hamelin  played like an uneven playerpiano on that album.

I got mad first, but I realised where he was coming from when I compared to Volodos playing his Ruslan annd Loudmila variations a minute later.

Hamelin can do better from a musical standpoint, no question about that.

[opus10no2]

The Kaleidoskope album is his best studio playing IMO, it's an incredible album, lovingly played.

Show your friend the live video of Hamelin playing Alkan's op39no10

He may change his mind.

[nicco]

Andsnes's Dante Sonata.

[mephisto]

Andsnes's Dante Sonata.

Oohh, just too f+++great!

[sevencircles]

Andsnes didnīt start to play the piano seriously until he was 18 years old.

It sure gave latestarters like me more confidence.

[mephisto]

Andsnes didnīt start to play the piano seriously until he was 18 years old.

But he did play Mozart sonatas when he was 6 and started at the conservatory when he was 15/16 so I am not really sure if you are right.

[sevencircles]

But he did play Mozart sonatas when he was 6 and started at the conservatory when he was 15/16 so I am not really sure if you are right.

He said that he didnīt start to play seriously unil he was 18 in an interview on Swedish Television.

[mikebechstein]

Thanks for all your comments and sorry about the repetition of the subject (my mistake).

Keep them coming though (apart from pros and cons of Hamelin as I think that has been covered enough now!!!)

Mike.

[iumonito]

Or, before that happens, let's at least turn the lights off Hamelin in particular for a moment and consider the fact that, since it is clear that this thread has so far incited what seems to be a disproportionate number of posts about Hamelin's and others' performances and recordings of those remarkable Chopin/Godowsky Studies, no one has yet mentioned two other pianists who play(ed) the complete cycle of these - Carlo Grante and Joyce Hatto (the latter of whom has so far had but one mention here - and in a context other than these studies).

Best,

Alistair

Alistair, you are very kind not to include Madge in that list.  Merci (and mercy). 

Hattos' Chop-Gods belongs in the list of spectacular, BTW.