Customer Reviews

Brahms: Piano Concerto No. 2 / Beethoven: Piano Sonata No. 23

5 star:		(29)
4 star:		(5)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

In his notebooks, Richter himself tells repeatedly how strongly he disliked this performance of the Brahms Second. Most significantly, he blames Leinsdorf for pushing the tempo all the time. For the rest we have to guess for what his motives could be. After all, it is quite strange that the pianist in what is perhaps the best-loved of all Brahms B flat's doesn't like it himself. What could Richter have had in mind? Perhaps he had even greater ideas for this piece - but as it is here, I cannot possibly imagine. Richter gives probably the pianistically most perfect rendition of the concerto ever made, coupled with a musical insight that most of his colleagues could hardly dream of. And considering Leinsdorf: his accompaniment is very correct and I don't hear him pushing at any time - actually, Richter's playing is so dominant that it is the piano which seems to take the lead in the piece, not the orchestra. And that's fine with me.

I like it better than the also much-revered Gilels/Jochum recording: Gilels takes his time and is philosophizing around, but in the end he almost drowns in his own ideas. Richter's playing on the other hand is full of richness too, but never makes the piece excessively ponderous and storms right at the gates with utmost certainty. Similarly, Richter possesses all the power of a Serkin but avoids the latter's sometimes ugly neuroticism and his patronizing focus on rhythms. He takes about as many risks as Schnabel, but is pianistically more reliable. This all is not to say that we have the perfect recording of the Brahms here: pianists like Schnabel, Fleisher, Fischer, Anda, Curzon, Solomon, Brendel et al. show many insights for which Richter has no space. In fact, I'd perhaps take Solomon and Edwin Fischer over Richter in the end, but that's really splitting hairs.

There are many unforgettable moments here: the piano solo before the first orchestral tutti in the first movement blazes with fire and excitement - and complete technical mastery. I've never heard it played as good as here. And then the following piano entry after 3 minutes - Richter's fantastic, illuminating tone and sonorous basses shine through so well here. And then, in the following minutes, we get a demonstration of how to connect phrases almost effortlessly (perhaps this is what the editorial reviewer refers to, although he has come up with his usual nonsense as well). The marcato after 7 minutes once again demonstrates his technical skills, but also an incredible feeling for rhythm and excitement. The tender scenes are just that - and a look forward to the great slow movement. The second Allegro I'd say has the same fury as in Serkin's recording, but Richter is far more flexible and less dogmatic. Richter's approach to the Andante is rock-solid and unfussy; it is wonderful to hear how he is able to play without any mannerisms and yet generate the highest level of expression. In the Allegretto, Richter's sweet but powerful tone again does small wonders; he seems to shape many small and lively episodes within this movement that is sometimes treated as a perfunctory and dull conclusion. Not here; the Allegretto makes the ideal end for this hugely impressive recording.

I haven't spilled a word yet about the Appassionata on this disc, and it should not be left unnoticed that this, too, is a masterful performance. The first movement is boldly shaped, with lots of contrasts in tempi dynamics. However, it perfectly adds up in the end and it betrays that SR had a strong sense of architecture as well. The slow movement is done solemnly and with beautiful tone-coloring. And there's the famous last movement that runs at incredible pace - and still Richter never loses control. Yet good as this one may be, it is completely outshined by a live performance by Richter in Prague from one year earlier - there he drops all his caution and you'll get more passion in the opening, more life in the slow movement and a final that is about the most exciting piano recording made, period. But enthusiastic as I am about even that live performance, the greatest Appassionata on record I believe is by Claudio Arrau (Philips), who is more faithful to the original text and responds best of all to the complex characteristics of this marvelous sonata. So, the recording included here is a nice dessert, but the main thing is definitely that wonderful Brahms which you just cannot afford to pass by. Certainly one of the finest documents of Richter's playing.

Unlike David Bryson, most mortals who have been fortunate enough to hear his concerts or recordings revel in the technical and interpretive brilliance of Richter's pianism. There is simply never an inauthentic note. Unlike many virtuosi, Richter would simply refuse to play a piece if he felt he could not add something new to the way it was being played. By contrast with the pedestrian and banal interpretations of the Appassionata by Brendel and Serkin, for example, Richter's simply glows from within. To have heard it is to have one's conceptions about the piece transformed. His intelligence and sincerity allow it to be heard as never before. (I cannot conceive how anyone would think this interpretation is "wrong," much less quote that great music critic Margaret Thatcher, unless he has some weird bias against beauty!) The Brahms concerto, moreover, is not only unified, as some reviewers have it, but lifted conceptually and aesthetically to a new level, above any other performance. Richter's ability to lose himself to the music makes him a remarkable interpreter of every composer he has ever played, regardless of age or style - whether Bach, Prokofiev, Chopin, Beethoven, Liszt, Schumann, Brahms, Moussorgsky, Scriabin, Rachmaninoff, Tchaikovsky or Mozart. Unlike Horowitz (of whom Richter aptly remarked that he had a great talent and a trivial mind), Richter does not infuse the music with his own romantic sensibilities, but brings out its immanent greatness and originality so that its potential is fully realized. This is the opposite of egotism, and the key to Richter's genius. The Richter/Leinsdorf Brahms Second and the Appassionata have no peer for sheer emotional power, intelligence, technical brilliance, structure and scope. The sound is also quite good, especially by comparison with many Richter recordings. Brahms would have loved this recording.

I had loved this recording from its appearance back in the 1960s. It was recorded during Richter's first tour of the US at a time when he wasn't very well known here. His tour changed that. I remember the buzz that ran through American music circles like an electric current at that time. I bought the recording then and immediately put it up there with my old Rubinstein and Schnabel recordings, and later the Gilels and Fleischer recordings. But when the change to CDs came (and I owned my first CD player in 1980, if you can imagine) I put it and my other LPs away and set about rebuilding my collection in the new format. Somehow I forgot about the Richter, never replacing it with a CD copy.

Only recently have I become reacquainted with this performance of the Brahms Second Concerto and I've fallen in love with it all over again. It's hard to describe how Richter mesmerizes with his playing, but he does - not always, but often enough that it begins to seem almost like a supernatural talent he has. One thing you always know is that every note is considered in context; there is never anything routine about his playing. And I'm convinced that he had a monumental musical intellect to go with his fantastic technique.

In this recording Leinsdorf is a very sensitive accompanist and the Chicago Symphony give him everything he asks for, especially Robert La Marchina, the superb cello soloist in the third movement; not long after this he left the CSO and became conductor of the Honolulu Symphony. Leinsdorf could be a maddening conductor, unduly fussy at times and at other times rather mechanical. I never quite figured him out, although occasionally his recordings soared. And this is one of those.

I was not familiar with Richter's Appassionata until this CD. It is certainly brilliant, even titanic, but just a bit mannered for my taste. I still prefer the classic Rubinstein recording, although I also like Goode, Kuerti, Gilels and others.

I would not hesitate to recommend this remastering. The sound if just fine. And that Brahms - oh my!

Scott Morrison

This is one recording of the Brahms' 2nd Piano Concerto which is a an absolute "must have". It possesses internal unity of structure which is what gives Richter's performance in this case (as well as in case of just about anything he ever played) its unique emotional and intellectual qualities. Add to it an incredible sound color, warmth and virtuosity and you get a definitive recording. Just like a previous reviewer, I am writing this because of a remark made by your editorial writer about Richter being an "egomaniac" because he wished to achieve a perfect interpretation and to that end practiced 10 hours a day. I'm not sure that pop-psychology lingo belongs in a review of a sound recording. In truth, Ricter did not, as mentioned before, practice 10 hours a day. But what if he did? Since when is it wrong for a musician to practice a lot? Or to try hitting only the right notes? Or to strive to get a grasp of a musical composition in its entirety? Is it making a performer less of an human if his interpretation shows that he actually thought about a piece and wishes to communicate to a listener what is important to him in that piece? Richter was indeed a genius and a virtuoso, but by all accounts, he actually was a decent human being. As an artist, he was a modest and a self-effacing one rather then an egomaniacal mega-star. As a music critic, maybe Mr Hurwitz should stick to music and leave psycho-babble to day-time talk shows.

I remain impressed with the Richter performances which are being re-released. This performance is even more remarkable since the conductor and soloist did not have the opportunity to rehearse. The result is simply the best recording of this work I have ever heard. Richter plays some of the most difficult passages ever written with clarity, ease and power. The orchestra playing is first rate. This is the one to have.

The editorial review here by David Hurwitz is in error when he states that Richter "was one of those virtuoso egomaniac genius types who was so insecure that he practiced something like 10 hours a day." Anyone who has seen the fascinating film "Richter the Enigma" knows that, by his own admission, Richter generally practiced 2-3 hours a day and even used a stopwatch to keep track. Richter did admit to a few exceptions, such as when he had to practice 12 hours daily just before his premiere of the Prokofiev 7th Piano Sonata (in order to quickly learn and master that extremely diificult piece). Perhaps that film's major revelation was just how amazingly modest and humble Richter was as both a man and a musician.

At least Hurwitz likes these performances, and we are thus spared one of the nasty & vituperative reviews that he writes frequently for classicstoday. There he called Barbirolli's Mahler 2nd the work of "a slob," and concluded a review of a Barbirolli BBC Legends CD with "I'm flushing this one down the Glorious John." Not to mention his callow analogy to a sexual encounter from an episode of "Sex and the City" in his negative review of Boult's Rachmaninov 3rd Symphony. Frankly, I didn't care for those recordings either, but such mean-spirited and tasteless notices do nothing but compromise Hurwitz's reputation as a "professional" music critic. And that's a shame, because many of his reviews are perceptive and highly insightful.

At any rate, this extremely well-transferred CD captures two of Richter's finest studio performances. The Brahms 2nd Piano Concerto is beautifully played, and the often unsympathetic Leinsdorf is here a wonderful partner. The Beethoven "Appassionata" was one of my earliest Richter recordings (on a budget Victola LP) and, while many of its details are rather mannered, I continue to be astonished by the tumultous, breathtaking virtuosity of the last mvt.

Alternatives? Richter also left a remarkable "live" Brahms 2nd with Georges Georgescu and a Bucharest ensemble that is even more spontaneous and poetic, if not as well played. That is on a Doremi CD, which also contains Richter's ONLY available recording of the Brahms Handel Variations. My other two favorite studio versions of the concerto are the Curzon/Knappertsbusch (a Decca LP that is now available on a Living Stage CD set) and the Backhaus/Schuricht (Decca). Just for the conducting, the older versions by Max Fiedler and Furtwangler are gorgeous, but the pianists (Elly Ney and Edwin Fischer, respectively) hit an awful lot of wrong notes.

There is also a superb Richter "live" Appassionata on Melodiya, coupled with 8 Bagatelles, the Pathetique, and the Fantasy for Piano, Chorus & Orchestra conducted by Sanderling (see my review). Other great Appassionatas include those by Rubinstein (RCA), Yves Nat (EMI) and Ernst Levy (Marston).

But for a combination of great playing AND great sound, this Richter CD is an essential purchase. [Update 8-2-07: For a lighter, more playful approach, with a superb cello soloist in the slow movement, the Rubinstein/Krips on RCA is another version worth serious consideration].

Jeff Lipscomb

This is a classic among classics. I love Richter's Brahms for the bold, majestic and passionate reading. But if you really want to split hairs, the people who love this recording still must listen to Gina Bachauer with Antal Dorati (on Chesky) and Wilhelm Backhaus with Karl Bohm (on Decca) to realize that Richter's version is not the last word. Take piano tone, Richter is no where near as full bodied as Backhaus. Even Backhaus's phrasing is superior. Taken at a slightly slower pace, Bohm's terrific conducting also add's to the excitement. just to prove my point, play the introduction of Richter's recording and play Backhaus. You'd have to be deaf not to notice the difference of phrasing and touch. The same can be said for Bachauer. The feminine touch is a huge asset to Brahms. Not nearly as masculine as Backhaus, nor too light, but instead, songful and precise. Not to mention, Doati's strings from the Royal Philharmonic sound better than what Leinsdorf or Bohm illicit from their respective orchestra's. Having said all this, you may think I don't enjoy Richter's recording, I do, but I feel that many listeners often place this recording so far up the charts, they are not aware there are some great recordings that sometime surpass the favorites. The Beethoven is another matter. That introduction is taken with such speed, strength and virtuosity, it's almost amazing that Richter can pull it off an convincingly as I do. After hearing Richter, it's really difficult to hear the others, despite some stiff competition from Backhaus (a great recording on Decca) and Horowitz (on Sony.) But this is just my opinion. You may like your Beethoven more gentle and not as aggressive. Yes, I agree that it's appropriate for some of the other sonatas, but Richter's version is the one to own.

I first heard this recording in the mid-1960's. I'd been listening to Richter on Russian recordings for several years (some Beethoven sonatas, the Tchaikovsky piano concerto, etc) and knew what a superb artist he was. Initially I was blown away by this recording. The first movement is extraordinary. Richter reimagines and recreates the piece, bringing spontaneity to his performance as only he could. My only point of comparison for such a strong recreation in the piano concerto repertoire, interestingly, is Ivo Pogarelich's reading of the first movement of Chopin's second piano concerto (Abbado conducting). There is a headlong quality, romantic and passionate and noble. Just astonishing.

The second movement is nearly as original, and nearly as good. The third and fourth movements are lovely and gorgeously played, and if it hadn't been for what Richter did in the first movement, they would be just fine. But somehow they seem ordinary after such an extraordinary beginning.

A word about Leinsdorf: he was at best a maddeningly inconsistent conductor. Here he provides good accompaniment to Richter, but he is still an accompanist in a piece which requires the orchestra to be an equal partner with the piano. I understand that at the end of his life Richter complained that he was unhappy with this recording and that Leinsdorf pushed the tempi. Whatever Richter's reasons for saying that may have been, I have a hard time believing that the choice of tempi, in the first two movements in particular, were not Richter's. His whole approach is so integrated, the phrasing and dynamics flow so perfectly from the tempi, that Richter either chose them himself or he responded incredibly to Leinsdorf's preferences.

The sound is fine. The Reinter-era Chicago Symphony plays well (although they play better for Reiner himself in his nearly contemporaneous recording of this same piece with Emil Gilels). 4 stars, not because the performance isn't fine, but only because it could have been so much more extraordinary.

I'm mainly reviewing this so I can comment on David Hurwitz's comment about Richter being an 'egomaniac' and practising 10 to 12 hours a day. Richter was a modest artist and anything but an egomaniac. And he actually practised exactly three hours a day (he kept a clock on the piano). In the excellent documentary "Richter: The Enigma" he takes issue with the claim that he practised as much as 12 hours a day. He did say that there had been occasions when he had to learn a piece on very short notice, and would practise obsessively.

This is THE Brahms 2, played by Richter at his best - his magnificently commanding virtuosity at its most smilingly joyous and confident, and Leinsdorf and the orchestra are on equally great form. The 1960 recording presents a realistic acoustic and balance, and the strings sound as they should - like a BODY of instruments, surpassing many a more modern recording. Orchestral tuttis are therefore thrillingly three-dimensional. Richter's big chordal passages are thrown off with tremendous aplomb. He was making his first appearances in the USA when this recording was made, and it surely captures the magic promised by the meeting of already legendary Russian virtuoso and great American orchestra. Perhaps it's this which gives the recording that indefinable feeling of rightness that characterises recordings we call classic or great. When orchestra and soloist usher in the hushed return of the opening horn theme midway through the first movement, time seems to stand still - its one of those sublime moments of truly great music-making that make you catch your breath. Here then is a recording of Brahms 2 with all the excitement of a live performance, yet technical security is taken for granted by all concerned so that they can focus on making music together. Other recordings of this concerto, notably the Gilels, are lauded as highly as or even higher than this one; I don't know why. The Gilels recording sounds harsh and the performance feels studio-bound by comparison. Richter and Leinsdorf breathe a freer air, their disc feels like a live performance caught on the wing. That you get a fabulous Appassionata thrown in just makes a great disc completely unmissable. UK readers, note: this performance is currently unavailable in Britain, but you will only pay the equivalent of a mid-price disc if you import it from the States.