Customer Reviews

Chopin: 26 Préludes, etc / Martha Argerich

5 star:		(7)
4 star:		(5)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(3)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

Every pianist knows the Chopin Preludes, which stand even among his rich output as a cycle of unusually outstanding beauty, variety and mastery of chromaticism. They are played badly by so many novices, and indifferently by so many aspirants, that it is easy to make them sound stale. But Argerich's version has stood aside from all of that hubbub. It has been controversial since the beginning, with her most ardent admirers balanced by some equally militant detractors.

Is Argerich really defiling Chopin, as so many might suggest? I don't think so. Actually, I think that she succeeds brilliantly in making these pieces seem like just what they were in their time - groundbreaking.

Chopin experienced the thrill of treading into unknown waters, exploring obscure and uncharted parts of the human psyche, and bringing it all up to the surface with the utmost concision. I cannot imagine how proud Chopin must have felt to have produced such a creation from his own pen. And it is extreme music - extremely rich, extremely stark, extremely happy, extremely sad, extremely advanced, extremely conservative. To Chopin's contemporaries, they seemed to come from nowhere, like a bolt of lightning. A soundscape as blindingly intense as the F-sharp minor Prelude still seems more like the music of another planet (to borrow a comment from Arrau about Debussy). Is it not appropriate, then, for Argerich to play them with the appropriate extremes of volume, of tempo, of warmth and coolness?

Yes, I'm biased. Yes, there are some wrong notes in the B-flat minor Prelude (which certainly don't detract from the seemingly infinite power displayed) and there a few other places where newer editions, the Jan Ekier in particular, have made Chopin's intentions more clear. But the combination of burning, passionate music and burning, passionate pianist is unmatched. When it stops thrilling me, then I'll know I'm dead.

Is Chopin a romantic, mercurial, tempestuous composer? For me, definitely. That's why Argerich's performance of the Preludes speaks to me in a way no other performance does. She is so natural and spontaneous that all other versions seem ponderous and staid. If you're looking primarily for "dignity" in Chopin, you should probably try someone else.

It's like emoting through the eye of a needle to attempt to render new content, new interpretive insight to these preludes. Every pianist in the world,almost literally has played, them, Well! any pianist you would care to listen to. Argerich makes these works her own. Chopin was a craftsman, a lapidarian diamond-cutter of deep pain and anxiety. Miniature form was Chopin's primary language,saying the most with the least,yet giving a sense of profound scope,mists of the symphonic,as the works seem to transcend their formal boundaries and themselves,as in the repetitive chordal E-minor,with a plaintive,unassuming lone voice where the work cadences in the center. Chopin does run out of creativity at times opting to finalize some of these works with an organ-like chordal ending.Or clique-ish like sequential chordal patterns as in the Db major where a dark cloud in C#-minor is placed over the B section. But Boulez once said, it is difficult to jump into the unknown with both feet. One foot at a time is preferable.

Argerich reveals a large emotive here,some of these preludes remain within a predetermined boundary, although roaring and shifting like a bull-at -the- gate gestures do abound in some as in the opening C-major. Listen to Kissin in the first prelude he displaces the rhythm of a simple broken chord. But Argerich can fly in the heavens as well in the G-major,etude-like for the left hand. Pollini is too clean and precise for the demeanor of these ,like the more exposed sentimentality,as in the G-major,or Ab major.In the dark ponderous Eb-minor here Argerich brings a nice shape,rather than an invitation for carnage. The G#-minor she lets loose the dance-like unrestrained fury. I lived with Argerich now for seven years playing these and I still always find some new content, I can't say that for Pollini. When Argerich knows when to shape and curtail her enragement,wonderful things happen. I've heard her self-indulged live Prokofiev,it wasn't a pretty site, more like an abbatoir.

There is dignity here,if that's what you crave, but also a sense of Chopin the unique experimentor of miniature forms,like cathedrals drawn on postcards,or the details of the figurines we place on top of mantles,or shadow boxes,mere mists of piano timbre,as the Eb-minor,or the F# minor. Kissin also finds in Chopin the realm of the rule breaker.

Most other versions are indeed "boring" by comparison to Ms. Argerich's. Again, however, Ms. Argerich's impulsive playing of Chopin necessarily lacks in some places a certain control. The Zayas account, on the other hand, is both interesting and controlled. It is with the Zayas recording in mind (Music & Arts 1006) that I judge this one to be worth only 4 stars.

When I find myself in an odd mood or I am simply bored with my music collection, I am often inspired to put this recording on. Argerich's performance of the Preludes always seems fresh and imaginative--as if when she recorded them, she sat down at the piano and improvised them on the spot.

On this disc, Argerich is delicate when she needs to be, intense when she needs to be, and always brings out lines and colors that I didn't know were there before. I never tire of hearing what music she makes out of these great miniatures.

Other reviews here more or less sum up this performance. It is emotive and 'fiery' in its interpretation. It is really a personal matter whether you prefer this or a more laid back approach. The recording has some low level hiss.

I got this recording only because: a) I teach "music appreciation" classes and needed a copy of the Op. 28 Preludes for my CD library, and b) since it's a re-release, it's fairly affordable.

Not knowing anything about Argerich other than knowing she was a well-known pianist, this performance was an eye-opener. Yes, she does play Chopin a little bit like it was Rachmaninoff (as another reviewer notes), but that doesn't make it a lousy performance. On the contrary, I found it interesting, even surprising. There is a lot of energy; some of the tempi of the faster Preludes are REALLY fast. But she doesn't sacrifice the notes -- they're all there.

I wouldn't interpret some of the Preludes the way she does here, assuming I had sufficient piano technique to pull it off (which I don't), but she knows what she wants, and goes after it. (And I wouldn't be surprised if Liszt's performances of these Preludes were very similar...)

So many raves. Makes me wonder. I admit, I'm a bit out of my element here, commenting on piano style and musicianship... Here goes, regardless...

I feel that the style of the composer is a bit lost in the maelstrom that is Argerich's tempestuous personal approach. It does blow one away, but many of these pieces require some capacity for understatement... Especially the all-too-deceptively simple 24th Prelude Op. 28: No. 4 e-minor. To me it sounds like she runs through it. As opposed to Arrau, or Biret or Moravec- where you can hear each pianist working with the composer's soul like marble...

I see it in here repeated often- this is Argerich, not Chopin... maybe that's not such a bad thing, it depends as much on the listener's mind as much as the performer's presentation... When I was younger I really loved this CD as well as her Debut Recital CD. I don't listen to them as much... Hmm...

Still, she plays with tenacity, precision, passion, and brilliance and clarity. I just don't feel that her style is so suited to these pieces. As one reviewer caustically remarked elsewhere, "This is Chopin, not rachmaninov." Indeed.

If you like your Chopin (seemingly) reckless and fiery then you should look no further.

I don't know why Argerich is so adored. Playing everything fast and loud doesn't constitute a great performance. I know the Chopin Preludes inside and out, and although Argerich has a nice intuition and a sense of passion, she pays little attention to the details and nuances that are so superb in Chopin. It seems that she was so eager to display technical mastery that the poetic sensibilities of the music are lost.

Argerich is probably one of the ten greatest pianists of the century, but not with Chopin's Preludes. She manages to strip every shred of dignity from this music. It's not boring, but Chopin should not be played as though it's Rachmaninoff. I'd recommend purchasing Moravec, Pires, Lortie, Cortot, Arrau, Pollini, Perlemuter, Rubinstein, or many other pianists, including Zayas ahead of this.