Customer Reviews

Rachmaninov: Suite Nos. 1 & 2,Opp.5,17 / Symphonic Dances,Op.45

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

 

 

There aren't many recordings of Rachmaninov's piano suites, probably because few players can master this material. Well, Argerich and Rabinovich obviously have mastered it and they show what rewarding music this is. That Argerich is a natural in the music of Rachmaninov is a given. What is news is that her duo partner, the lesser-known Rabinovich, is a match for her both pianistically and temperamentally. Together, they bring an impetuous quality throughout and their fingers seem to fly over the keyboards in the faster numbers. For example, Valse, in the Second Suite, really sweeps the listener off his or her feet. Moreover, the recorded sound is state of the art, capturing a perfect balance between the pianos and the full range of the artists' tone color. I'm surprised nobody has reviewed this yet. It's really awe-inspiring.

Both of the suites recorded here are amazing. The playing is technically unparalleled, though at times I agree with the other reviewer that we sometimes miss emotional heart in some spots. I also own the Ashkenazy Previn set and it compliments this set well. The sound quality here is outstanding, in stark contrast to the older Ashkenazy set. To get the full picture of this music own both sets. Both get 5 stars for different reasons.

This is one of the two finest performances of these pieces in recent record. For that, it is perhaps the most overtly virtuosic of the lot, with Martha Argerich and Alexandre Rabinovitch (Ar/R) perfectly matched in skill and musical temperament.

The other finest performance of these pieces is the recording by Vladimir Ashkenazy and Andre Previn (As/P)(London/Decca 444 845-2), older than Ar/R by over 10 years for Op. 45 and by over 15 years for Op. 5 and Op. 17. While Ar/R play with the kind of breathtaking technique that keeps you on the edge of your seat, and certainly show great sympathy with the emotions aroused by this music, they sometimes either miss an important musical point or emphasize the point out of proportion to its place in the musical texture. It is the As/P recording (and at least one other recording of Op. 45 by a husband/wife team that is now out of print on Vox/Turnabout) that so well makes these points and reveals the shortcomings in Ar/R.

With Ar/R, there is noticably equal weight given to their parts by both performers almost all of the time. In a curious way, this emphasizes the virtuosity of both performers, and in so doing, one really does hear both performers as individuals, even though it is often difficult to know (without a score) who is playing what part. On the other hand, with As/P, each performer hands off the prominance of their part to the other (presumably according to the score), and they do it with such fluid and seamless ease that they leave two strong impressions: 1) the unity of their ensemble and 2) a powerful understanding of the structural and expressive points in the score, which they convey clearly. Basicly, As/P sound together like a single performer on one "grand" piano, where as Ar/R sound like two superbly matched and gifted performers on separate pianos, each matching the other in prominance and expressiveness, which does not necessarily accurately serve the score and its inherent beauty.

Let me emphasize that As/P peform flawlessly and with more than enough virtuosity to stir one's more exuberant emotions. But Ar/R really do take it to the limit, in terms of speed, dynamics, changes of speed and dynamics, and all combined with flawless accuracy with the notes. However, the total sound of Ar/R often loses some beautifully rendered harmonic and melodic counterpoint that As/P almost always reveal.

Certainly, Ar/R also benefit from more modern recording technology that gives their performances greater presence. However, the sound recording for As/P is still first rate for its time and certainly does not hide any of the musical nuance that they bring to their performances.

Frankly, I recommend both the present Argerich/Rabinovitch and the comparable Ashkenazy/Previn performances for their unique qualities, as they both hit a "chord" in their own way. However, you will listen depending on your goal. If you want to be swept off your feet and driven wild, Argerich/Rabinovitch is your choice of the moment. If you want a no less competent, yet more studied and deeply moving experience that lingers long after you hear it, your choice is clearly Ashkenazy/Previn.

Some of the pianism here is so painfully brutal that it made Rachmaninov's lush scores sound like the kind of torture music the police use in hostage situaitons to break down the criminals. Since Argerich is a well known anarchist, no doubt she instigated the violence, though Rabinovitch willingly collaborates. The worst offense is in the opening of the Symphonic Dances--if you can stand taht, you are home free.

I wish I could stand it, becasue every note of the playing in both Suites and the Symphonic Dances is so origianl and intense that it leaves the old standbys, Previn and Ashkenazy (Decca), in the shade. It's typical of Argerich to do this, finding new insights and spoiling them a bar later with incendiary assault. Her admirers love her for it. I cirnge when the bombs fall, so this isn't my ideal performance of these two-piano masterpieces. The recorded sound is clear but edgy, making the percussive playing that much more nerve-wracking.

I recall that the reviewer of this CD in Gramophone thought the performance was too driven but I would have to say that driven or not I like these performances of the piano suites and Symphonic Dances. I have a recording of the Piano Suite No. 2 with Cyril Smith and his wife but the recording is from the 1950's with sound that was not too clear. I do find that performances comparable with he Argerich/Rabinovitch recording.

The Piano Suite No 1 was written when Rachmaninov was 20 and was dedicated to Tchaikovsky. It consists of four brief movements each one prefaced by lines from the composer's favorite poems. The first movement, a Barcarolle, pays homage to Chopin; the second movement - La nuit...l'amour - the title from a Byron poem is an exquisite piece suggestive of bird song; the third movement with the suitable name Les lames (tears) is suffused by melancholy, and the final movement called Paques (Easter) is an exuberant picture of celebrating.

The Second Piano Suite was composed ten years later and shows Rachmaninov at the height of his compositional powers. The confident beginning of the suite is immediately striking for its energy and has a marvelous melodic follow as does the second movement Valse, which endlessly swirls. The third movement Romance has a warm melody that reminds one of the Second Piano Concert and as the longest movement is the emotional heart of the suite. The final movement is a Tarantella brimming with energy and requiring a sizable technique.

The Symphonic Dances (1940) is more familiar from the orchestral version but the two-piano version, first performed at the composer's home with Vladimir Horowitz, is quite a symphonic work in its own right. The piano score is colorful and richly ornamented and stands in its own rather than being a reduction of the orchestral score. I find that Martha Argerich and Alexandre Rabinovitch perform beautifully with percussive effects when they are needed; they do not missing the poetry either. The recording is well-balanced and is one of the discs I frequently play.

Considering such masterpieces as Rachmaninov's two Suites for two pianos, one truly wonders but even more regrets that so little has been composed for this near-perfect combination. Some reasons are rather obvious: it takes a lot more skill and effort to succeed at composing for two pianos rather than only one; many of the greatest piano composers were rather self-centered when it came to performing their own music--why sharing the stage with a rival when you can get all the attention for yourself; lastly, I believe fashion has played its part--for some reason, the double piano combination has never caught the attention of audiences as effectively as the single piano.

Out of last century's greatest pianists, Martha Argerich probably has done the most to promote the two-piano ensemble. Gladly, she keeps on doing so also in this century, most notable during the Lugano Festivals. Duo Piano Extravaganza (Philips Duo) probably is the most worthwhile two-piano collection currently available--boasting benchmark versions of Lutoslawski's brilliant Paganini Variations and Bartok's highly innovative Sonata for 2 Pianos and Percussion.

The above-mentioned Duo Piano Extravaganza collection also includes Rachmaninov's Second Suite, in partnership with Freire. However, the benchmark version is on this very disc, partnered with Rabinovitch, which notably scores over the previous version both in terms of virtuosity and above all in sheer excitement.

Now we are approaching the highpoint of this disc: it is actually one of the most exciting renditions of the two-piano format imaginable. If that is not enough, it also features the best-ever version of the most hauntingly beautiful of all original two-piano compositions, the First Suite in G minor ('Fantaisie-tableaux'). Do not be surprised if you find yourself in tears already during the first movement Barcarolle--sure, it is sentimental but who can deny it is also blatantly gorgeous?

Well, that should leave you with far more than only two reasons for instantly acquiring this uncommonly exciting disc. As to the sound, it is modern, digital and all that but unfortunately somewhat 'edgy', as Santa Fe listener rightly points out, which I believe may have to do with the fact that the pianists are slightly too closely observed by the Teldec engineers (which has been the case with numerous of their recordings made in the Berlin Teldec Studio--nowadays Teldex Studio Berlin).

Argerich and Rabinovitch play this richly ornamented music with great sparkle, color, drive, and clarity. The works themselves would seem ideal to listen to while indulging in caviar--rich, sensuous, and seriously frivolous.