has anyone heard the chamber versions of chopin concerti

[simonjp90]

? theyre really good.

[perfect_pitch]

Nope - they aren't...

Sorry, but nothing compares to a full orchestra matched with the piano... there's too much intensity emotionally and musically that can't be fully captured with a small ensemble.

[stevebob]

I've never heard them, but I would try to listen with an open mind—as I did with this excerpt of Op. 11's Allegro maestoso played by François-René Duchâble's unorthodox ensemble that includes accordion, hammered dulcimer and barrel organ:

https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x59q76_duchable-plays-chopin-piano-concert_music

Sorry, but nothing compares to a full orchestra matched with the piano... there's too much intensity emotionally and musically that can't be fully captured with a small ensemble.

I agree, though I won't be surprised if someone now repeats the standard clichés about the perceived deficiencies of Chopin's orchestration. 

By the way, Polish musicologist Kazimierz Wilkomirski created a very powerful transcription for piano and orchestra of Chopin's Allegro de Concert Op. 46.  I think it's a very plausible (and completely faithful) realization of Chopin's original intention, but, unfortunately, it hasn't elevated the popularity of this neglected piece.  I'm aware of only one commercial recording of it, by Michael Ponti and the Berlin Symphony Orchestra; it's part of the series The Romantic Piano Concerto on the Vox label:

The Romantic Piano Concerto Vol. 1 (Chopin, Henselt, Hiller, Hummel, Kalkbrenner) at Amazon.com

[birba]

My god, that performance is obscene.  He plays very well, but those instruments!  Actually, in the passage of the left hand trills they didn't sound so bad...  was that the guy who threw his piano out of an airplane into a lake?

[simonjp90]

Nope - they aren't...

Sorry, but nothing compares to a full orchestra matched with the piano... there's too much intensity emotionally and musically that can't be fully captured with a small ensemble.

really? i think the chopin concerti are crap pieces anyway, emotional intensity is non-existant, and putting them in a small ensemble arrangement makes them a bit more interesting.

SORRY

just my opinion

[horowitzian]

really? i think the chopin concerti are crap pieces anyway, emotional intensity is non-existant, and putting them in a small ensemble arrangement makes them a bit more interesting.

SORRY

just my opinion

 

[m]

No reason to get surprised--something to expect from somebody who wrote:

"Glenn gould...the most overrated pianists of the 20th century in my opinion... because of his bach, brahms, scriabin & prokofiev. and everything else."

and:

"horowitz isnt the best pianist of all time like people say. hes pretty good but not that good"

Best, M

[thalbergmad]

The Chopin concerti are typical of some early romantics, where the orchestra is playing a much less noticable part. I have never understood why the orchestration sometimes comes under criticism.

I like both of them, but would submit that the Burgmuller and Thalberg are equals.

Thal

[stevebob]

really? i think the chopin concerti are crap pieces anyway, emotional intensity is non-existant, and putting them in a small ensemble arrangement makes them a bit more interesting.

SORRY

just my opinion

What passes you ain't for you.

[horowitzian]

No reason to get surprised--something to expect from somebody who wrote:

"Glenn gould...the most overrated pianists of the 20th century in my opinion... because of his bach, brahms, scriabin & prokofiev. and everything else."

and:

"horowitz isnt the best pianist of all time like people say. hes pretty good but not that good"

Best, M

Wow, thanks! I am at loss for adjectives. Those statements, if you'll pardon the expression, are nuts.

[simonjp90]

No reason to get surprised--something to expect from somebody who wrote:

"Glenn gould...the most overrated pianists of the 20th century in my opinion... because of his bach, brahms, scriabin & prokofiev. and everything else."

and:

"horowitz isnt the best pianist of all time like people say. hes pretty good but not that good"

Best, M

haha aww bless you

[john11inc]

Wow, thanks! I am at loss for adjectives. Those statements, if you'll pardon the expression, are nuts.

Oh?  I consider Gould to be one of the most overrated pianists of the 20th century, and also do not believe Horowitz was the best pianist to ever walk the earth.

That combination of statements is truly that inconceivable to you?

[retrouvailles]

While I like Glenn Gould, I also agree with that combination of statements. I think that both Gould and Horowitz have been hyped beyond recognition, in all seriousness. Frankly, I could do without both of them in my regular listening, especially Horowitz.

[horowitzian]

Oh?  I consider Gould to be one of the most overrated pianists of the 20th century, and also do not believe Horowitz was the best pianist to ever walk the earth.

That combination of statements is truly that inconceivable to you?

They are silly blanket statements.

While I do agree that Gould's personal idiosyncrasies got more airtime than his pianism, I think he was a genius in his own way.

As to Horowitz, he was one of the greatest whether you like him or not.

[john11inc]

They are silly blanket statements.

As to Horowitz, he was one of the greatest whether you like him or not.

How is what you just said not a "silly blanket statement"?  Because your opinion makes it such an obvious fact?  What is your argument for supporting that?  All I have to say is, "he wasn't one of the greatest, whether you like him or not."

Where's your argument?  Why is he so incredible?

[horowitzian]

How is what you just said not a "silly blanket statement"?  Because your opinion makes it such an obvious fact?  What is your argument for supporting that?  All I have to say is, "he wasn't one of the greatest, whether you like him or not."

Where's your argument?  Why is he so incredible?

No sense in trying to persuade you otherwise, since you've already decided where you stand.

[thalbergmad]

Why is he so incredible?

Because nobody else can sit 3 inches off the ground and still play Bach.

Thal

[m]

Why is he so incredible?

Because he had personality, his own rules, his own voice, his own tone, his own style, his own sound, as well as he had something to say. Not many modern so called pianists can say the same. Whether you like his personality, voice, tone, interpretations, etc., or not is completely different thing, but no one can deny the fact that one can recognize Horowitz from only a couple notes, or from one single chord he plays. For me this is probably one of the most important qualities in an artist--to be unique. There were many great pianists in the music history, however, not many had this unique quality (to be recognised just from a few notes)--Rachmaninov, Hoffmann, Gilels, Gould, Horowitz...

I might even agree there are pianists who maybe play piano better than Horowitz (don't confuse with "to be better"  ), however, the difference is, if Horowitz played like crap (in the later years, under medication), still in every note one could recognize a great artist. Many others could play very well, or even great, but still sound like... crap artists.

Best, M

[simonjp90]

They are silly blanket statements.

While I do agree that Gould's personal idiosyncrasies got more airtime than his pianism, I think he was a genius in his own way.

As to Horowitz, he was one of the greatest whether you like him or not.

yes, he was one of the greatest. not THE greatest. can't really make that any clearer.

saying gould was a genius is surely just as much a silly blanket statement as saying that gould was overrated?? even more so surely!

[horowitzian]

yes, he was one of the greatest. not THE greatest. can't really make that any clearer.

[...]

Exactly what I said, is it not? 

[simonjp90]

Exactly what I said, is it not?  

Oh?  I consider Gould to be one of the most overrated pianists of the 20th century, and also do not believe Horowitz was the best pianist to ever walk the earth.

That combination of statements is truly that inconceivable to you?

yes, and as you can see john11inch said

and also do not believe Horowitz was the best pianist to ever walk the earth.

not THE best.

so why kick up a big fuss? we're all entitled to our own opinion

you're more or less just repeating what he's saying

[simonjp90]

Exactly what I said, is it not? 

I was aiming the post at Marik actually who quoted me from different topics where i said "horowitz wasnt THE best ever" and also "i think glenn gould is overrated" in an 'overrated pianists of the 20th century' topic . I don't get why theyre such outrageous statements

Best, S

[simonjp90]

No reason to get surprised--something to expect from somebody who wrote:

"Glenn gould...the most overrated pianists of the 20th century in my opinion... because of his bach, brahms, scriabin & prokofiev. and everything else."

and:

"horowitz isnt the best pianist of all time like people say. hes pretty good but not that good"

Best, M

so.. you're saying horowitz is the best pianist of all time... fact .. ..?!?

and also, in a topic titled "Overrated pianists of the 20th century", why is it so bad to put glenn gould? - in my opinion, he's overrated...

Best, S

While I like Glenn Gould, I also agree with that combination of statements. I think that both Gould and Horowitz have been hyped beyond recognition, in all seriousness. Frankly, I could do without both of them in my regular listening, especially Horowitz.

ahhh thank you so much