Customer Reviews

Nicoḷ Paganini: 24 Capricci For Solo Violin Op. 1

5 star:		(6)
4 star:		(4)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

Basically,I agree with Dr.Francessco T. above, capprices are often wrongly judged by speed and kind of showy virtuosity. Also,remember that Paganini really NEVER gave their performance in public.

Accardo is a unique violinist in his understanding of Paganini.No other violinist in the world has never recorded practically everything that was preserved from Paganini's time.
I'm judging not only by technique, but the interpretation and tone!Just compare his and Gidon Kremer's recording of 4th concerto for instance....

Speaking of this recording of 24 capprici, I'll be trying to be objective. Accardo brings its interpretation in a rather artistic way,while Perlman plays it as "pure" technical exercises (I'll be comparing with Perlman, because I do think that no other violinist - not even Ricci,Mintz,Kaler,Markov...- really reaches the qualilies of Perlman and Accardo).As far as an interpretation (tone)is concerned,I would prefer Accardo,although Perlman sounds better in octaves.Comparing the technique(not the speed),Perlman is slightly firmer in grasping the strings,but not everywhere,in general I would say that both violinists are more or less technically equal(just compare 15,16 or some other cappr.-they are almost identical which proves the virtuosity of both violinists).Perlman left hands is really slightly firmer,but in contrast, Accardo does better with his right hand (maybe here Perlman's handicap is the reason), which produces him a kind of clearer and lighter staccatos,spiccatos,ricochets and other "acrobatic" technique.

Comparing all violinist I have ever heard,my top three compared purely by technique would be: 1)Heifetz 2) Perlman/Accardo 3)the rest

One more important thing - Accardo's recording by Deutsche Grammopohon is much more analytical and clearer than EMI did with Perlman (this some Perman's not-so-sure tones are perfectly hidden).

If you seek a really natural,concentrated version of Paganinis 24 cappr.with a singing tone,void of "cheap" virtuosity and effects,try this,that's it and it's worth it.If you want all this plus you prefer slightly more robust tone,take Perlman.

I was slightly dissapointed by this recording. Accardo is famous for his Paganini recordings and interpretations. . . his recording of the 6 violin concertos with Charles Dutoit only prove that claim. However, these caprices aren't what I expected. The technique is spotty and inconsistent, particularly with the chords and double-stops. Also, the intonation is pretty unreliable and the articulation is clumsy. For anyone buying a recording of these caprices, I would recommend the Kaler, Mintz, Ehnes, or Perlman recordings before considering the Accardo. For the Accardo fans out there, go buy his recording of Paganini's 6 violin concertos with Dutoit. Now here is where Accardo redeems himself as one of the greatest performers of Paganini.

The Accardo version, with its intonation/accuracy issues, is still, bottom line, the best in my opinion. I have the other recordigs noted in the previous reviews and I actually rank Midori's as 2nd in my book. Perlman's, to me, is very unsatisfying and sedate. I would rate Midori's higher, but Accardo has a little more spirit and understands the score's attempted musical meaning more while Midori seems to stick to the score to the point where she will break a phrase or accentuate the wrong note and have you wondering what she's thinking. Anyhoo, it's #1 in my humble opinion.

Paganini's masterwork is dedicated 'Alli Artisti', meaning the listeners, not the players. Paganini himself never gave public performance of his work. And rightly so. Frequently, their performance is mistakenly judged on brilliance of sound, speed, 'eclat', or artifact: public effect. It should not be so. Accardo' s performance is among the very few making justice to this masterwork. Technically it is perfect,clean,sober. Mastery of the instrument allows his intimate understanding of the music to emerge, and reach the listener. The hidden, 24-faceted gem is discreetly uncovered.

Recorded in Munich in 1977, this performance of Paganini's notorious 24 caprices is perfect, period. No other performance I've listened to -- and I think I've heard all the CD recordings, as my local public libraries stock tons of these -- comes even close. Being an Italian violinist, Accardo gives the perfect interpretation and tone. If you want just one recording of the 24 caprices, this is it.

I first bought this disc in 1992. I am very surprised that it is still in print - which means that people are still buying it widely (I bought my copy outside of the USA), and that is a good thing. This recording was made, after all, by the same violinist who played the 24 Caprices in Carnegie Hall on Paganini's violin!

Basically, all of the reviews of this disc, here and elsewhere, point out the shortcomings and things that Accardo should have gone back and re-recorded. Yes, there are some unsavory renderings of the passagework. But do they ruin the recording as a whole? No. I'm sure if the recording engineers had wanted to, they could have gone back and re-taken the parts that were bad. But if you take this CD as a live recital of the Caprices - which was probably Accardo's intent - it shows the listener two things. One, that some music (like most of what Paganini wrote) is difficult; and two, that difficult music can't always be played perfectly, even by a violinist who has won great acclaim for their technical prowess.

Accardo is known as a Paganini specialist. His playing is definitely not the most interesting, and it has been stated over and over, in so many words, that he is a "wimp" when it comes to tone. But would he have allowed this recording to be released if he didn't think it was any good? I doubt it.

Personally, I am glad this disc is still out there, because it does have a place of its own. It compliments about ten other recordings quite nicely...Michael Rabin and Midori, to name only two.

Salvatore Accardo's recording has a warmth to it missing from many later digital recordings by players of possibly greater technical proficiency, and I believe it will remain my favourite even when one day a robot is constructed that can play the 24 Caprices to 100% perfection. As a countryman of the composer, he seems to have had an emotional connection with these pieces lacking in other interpreters. Like any CD from 1991 though, you may have to adjust your stereo volume when playing this CD directly after a new one.

My favorite 24 caprices performer is Frank Peter Zimmermann.
Accardo's recording is near. Nice intonation, good quality sound and not crazy tempo.
But i still recommend Zimmermann or Midori. Maybe third is Accardo and Perlman.

Ricci and Rabin are faster but have some problems in the intonation and "no reverb sound" make it worst . (Listen to Rabin caprice 3 and will understand.)

Salvatore Accardo has a phenomenal technique but is not such a superlative interpretator. I think, though, this recording of the 24 Caprices of Paganini is a bit below his best efforts. I was impressed that he takes a faster tempo in the No. I than R. Ricci does in his 1947 remastered recording. I was generally pleased with this CD but was disappointed with his playing of the more colorful studies like No. IX in E major and No. XVII in E flat. I didn't really appreciate the mushy articulations in No. IX in the beginning as it is supposed to be played in a more spirited style with lighter staccato in the opening fanfare, which has the idiomatic 3rds, 5ths and 6ths. I was surprised to find such a sleepy approach to the famous No. XXIV, which climaxes the set. It lacked brilliance and seemed loggy. Overall I liked this CD but was disappointed with salient details.

I have to say this recording by Accardo is very dissapointing. Allthough there are a few bright spots in this recording, I believe that his bad spots outweigh his good ones. I bought this CD because I had heard that this was a masterfull interpretation and recording. Well, truth is, you do not have to get far in the CD to notice the glaring mistakes/wierd interpretation. Caprice No. 3 is a perfect example. I had heard that Accardo had splendid octave trilling. Not quite so. When the theme is stated an octave up, starting in measure 8, he starts out okay stating the octave theme an octave up. However, once he reaches the climax of the Sostenuto, he totally screws it up. First off, he plays an UGLY F-natural (keep in mind that we are in the key of E minor-which means one sharp, that sharped note being F), and secondly he "nails" the highest note...a half step above the written C-natural. Towards the end of the Sostenuto section...he seems really really shaky on the octave trills. On the good side, his presto was actually wonderful, perfectly in tune and in coordinance with the bowings, which kind of dumbfounded me not to mention because of the prior section I could not really fully enjoy this Caprice. Next, I want to share a discretion in interpretation I personally feel. Caprice 7, one of my favorites had a GORGEOUS middle section with suspention chords in the thematical rhythm. Accardo plays this section totally detached, separating every single chord from the next. Wait a minute, just by the way it's written you can tell it is supposed to flow. That really bugged me. One more really big mistake in interpretation really bugged me, unfortunately it's a big part of the Caprice. He opens Caprice 18 with lovely octave, perfectly in tune, however when he transitions to the Allegro assai section, he puts a wierd emphasis on the notes. He groups the first four notes together, and then groups the last three of the measure plus the adjacent note in the proceeding measure, making four. I can see this difference in interpretation but once again, I disagree with his interpretation, and actually play it myself in the style of Itzhak Perlman. To end on a good note however, Accardo Caprice 12 is the best I have heard, ever. Personally, I believe the recording of Michael Rabin is better than Accardo, so if you are looking for that CD to buy of these I would put Rabin in front of Accardo, but there is no question that Itzhak Perlman's recording is the benchmark for today's violinists. My top four recordings would go like this, (1) Itzhak Perlman, (2) Ilya Kaler (phoenominal, try the Ysaye recording as well, oh my goodness), (3) Michael Rabin, (4) Midori.